Q&A
Question: How can Catholics claim to have "Apostolic succession"? A Protestant friend told me that Jesus offered the final sacrifice on the Cross, eliminating the need for a priesthood like that of the Old Testament. He says that all Christians are priests in the sense of offering a sacrifice of praise to God, that the clergy should be elected by the congregation, and that the Catholic priesthood didn't develop until the middle ages. Answer: The sacrifices commanded by God in the Old Testament were imperfect and numerous. One can envision a "river of blood" flowing from the Temple in Jerusalem as people came and had the priests offer the various sacrifices prescribed in the Law of Moses. The Sacrifice of New Law, on the other hand, was perfect and offered only once, with our Lord serving both as priest and victim on the Cross. As St. Paul tells us, "Christ appeared as high priest of the good things to come, entering once and for all through the greater and more perfect tabernacle ... by virtue of His own blood having obtained eternal redemption.... once for all at the end of the ages, He has appeared for the destruction of sin by the sacrifice of Himself ... Christ was offered once to take away the sins of many.... we have been sanctified by the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."2 Nonetheless, our Lord desired that His people be able to participate in His perfect sacrifice, even as the Jewish people of old participated in the offering their imperfect victims. For this reason, at the Passover sacrifice offered on the night before He died, He united His Apostles with Himself in His priesthood: "This is My body.... This is My blood of the new covenant, which is being shed for many unto the forgiveness of sins.... Do This in remembrance of Me."3 In an unbloody manner, they would make the sacrifice of the Lamb of God on the Cross present in time and place by acting in His place as He did at the Last Supper -- and until the end of time, God's people would be able to share in that sacrifice, consuming the oblation of Christ's body and blood under the appearances of bread and wine. He had promised His body and blood to the multitude a year earlier. That He was speaking literally is seen in His refusal to recall those who departed because they doubted His ability to do this.4 And at the Last Supper, the power to consecrate was given to those in the Upper Room. Likewise, the power to forgive sins or not, was given to these same men -- the power to apply the fruit of the Sacrifice which they would renew in place of our Lord -- the authority to forgive individuals, drawn from the sacrificial forgiveness of the sins of many. This same special class of men was also to be called upon to anoint the sick, so that they might be made well and their sins forgiven.5 We see too that the priestly power over the Sacraments extended to Confirmation. As an ordained deacon, Philip was able to preach, exorcize, and baptize, yet his converts in Samaria were not confirmed until the arrival of Peter and John.6 For our purposes, St. Luke is unfortunately vague as to the exact manner in which the Apostles shared their priestly powers with their successors. The Apostles, of course, were bishops, and Luke mentions their decision to create the lesser order of deacons, but it is unclear whether or not the Apostles ordained any men to the intermediate order of priests, or whether this was left to their successors. Together with the minor orders, this distinction may have come in post-Apostolic times. The laying on of hands is mentioned a few times, but this is also the method of Confirmation. Still, there is no question that some men are set apart from the other Christians and given varying shares of the apostolic powers; Matthias, for example, to replace Judas as bishop, and the seven original deacons including Stephen and Philip.7 Over the centuries the ceremony of ordination would vary: imposition of one hand for deacons, or two for priests and bishops, or perhaps the handing over of the sacrificial vessels (with bread and wine for the priest, without for the subdeacon) -- but it was always something to designate that an individual had received power from one already possessing it; clear to all concerned that a man had been set apart to continue in the place of Christ. While the ceremonies of ordination have developed over the centuries, the reality of Apostolic Succession was acknowledged in the earliest times. The Catholic Encyclopedia has an almost satirical piece pointing to the error in your friend's idea that it began only in the allegedly "degenerating" Christianity of the middle ages:
"On the Lord's day, after you have come together, break bread and offer the Eucharist, having first confessed your offenses so your sacrifice may be pure. Let no one who has a quarrel with his neighbor join you lest your sacrifice be defiled."14 NOTES:
1. Malachias i: 11
2. Epistle to the Hebrews ix: 11-12, 26-27; x: 10.
3. Matthew xvi: 28; Luke xxii: 14-20; 1 Corinthians xi: 23-30..
4. John vi. Especially v. 57 and 67.
5. James v: 13-15.
6. Acts viii: 14-18.
7. Acts i: 15-26; vi: 5-6.
8. The Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. "Priesthood."
9. Malachias i: 11
10. Isaias lxvi: 18, 21.
11. Psalm cix: 3, 4.
12. Genesis xiv: 17-20; Hebrews v-xiii.
13. Brevarium Romanum, Matins, 30 November.
14. Didache (c. 70-90 A.D.).
|