It was my great fortune to have been sent to the Eternal City to complete my theological preparation for Ordination at both the Pontifical Gregorian University (administered by the Jesuits) and the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Urbe (under the direction of the Dominicans).
At the time, I could never have appreciated the wisdom of the scholars who shared their profound knowledge and insights with us.
Memories of those days often fill my mind as I read of developments within the Church today.
One such memory comes to mind as I recall what a Professor of Church History at the Angelicum would often say concerning the way in which the governance of the Church underwent a fundamental shift from a synodal (regional) to an imperial (centralized curial) model.
“Learn this and never forget,” he would instruct us, “the Church did not conquer Rome. Rome conquered the Church.”
He challenged us to confront and accept the fact that, when the Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan in 313 recognizing and granting official status to the Christian Faith as the religion of the Empire, he succeeded in co-opting the authority and ministry of the successors of the Apostles, the Bishops.
From the Pentecost event onward, the Apostles and their successors had exercised their discretion and authority over the local churches entrusted to their care and made their own decisions about what constituted liturgical practices and ritualistic practices in their areas.
Up until the end of the Third Century, for example, some Bishops celebrated Easter on the actual date of Passover, while others observed it on the Sunday following that date.
The eventual final decision regarding a uniform date for the celebration of Easter would not be made until after the legalization of Christianity (A.D. 313) by the Roman Emperor Constantine.
Originally, Saints were regionally proclaimed and venerated. The first Martyrs, venerated by Christians because they died rather than give up their faith, were recognized as Saints in their local, their regional churches.
Only later, did they become part of the wider groups of holy men and women recognized as Saints as the Bishop of Rome began to claim a primacy of authority (in the imperial style of the Emperors) over his brother-Bishops.
The first case of a Pope canonizing a local saint took place just before the year A.D. 1000.
A new era in the history of Church governance had begun.
During the 11th Century, a succession of reform-minded Popes brought in more centralization.
By the 12th century, it was the Bishop of Rome who canonized saints and established their place in the Roman Martyrology. It was the Pope who decreed the Order of the Mass, the language (Latin) in which it would be celebrated, as well as the rituals and gestures which were to be observed in the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy.
This exercise of Papal governance would progress toward stricter demands for uniformity in belief and practice through the later Middle Ages.
By the end of the Medieval Period, a whole system of Papal bureaucracy, the Curia (modeled on that of the Roman Empire) would be employed by the Popes to assist in the governance of the Church. The Curia would be financed by a detailed structure of fees and donations.
The Eastern Church resisted the Bishops of Rome claim of supreme Apostolic authority and continued to minister to the People of God along the lines of and in the style of Jesus Himself and the Apostles. Their resistance became more aggressive resulting in the Great Schism in 1054.
In the West, resistance to the Bishop of Rome’s claim to universal authority became increasingly vocal in the 14th and 15th centuries. These outcries reached a critical stage and finally exploded in the Reformation in the early 16th century.
In response to these Protestant challenges to Roman authority, Pope Paul III convened the Council of Trent, which decimated the authority of local Bishops over their churches and placed Roman governance at the center of Christendom in the West.
Trent demanded uniformity and conformity to the authority of the Supreme Apostolic authority decreed to be exercised only and fully by the Bishop of Rome, the Pope. Any diversity between what the Pope mandated or required was understood to be an act of infidelity to Christ Himself.
And so, Trent transformed the Church into a mega-monolithic structure of rules and ordinances the observance of which constituted one's faith commitment to Christ.
The formulas of Christian Faith, the process of catechesis, the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy were uniformly and universally celebrated throughout the world according to the dictates of the Bishop of Rome alone.
The Curia enjoyed jurisdiction over local Bishops in all matters pertaining to the proclamation of the faith and the governance of local churches.
A now-infamous phrase was born: "Roma locuta est, causa finita est" (When Rome has spoken the issue is closed)!
This was the Church in which I myself was formed and in which I ministered as a Priest.
The Catholic Church was understood to be a religious monarchy. The Pope was at the top of the kingdom, then the Cardinals, Bishops, Priests and Religious on descending levels of expertise and authority. The laity constituted formed the largest, and lowest, layer with no voice or power whatsoever. All authority flowed from the top down.
Pope John XXIII, elected in 1958, realized that this static, heavily bureaucratic structure weighed heavily upon the dynamic energy required to profess the Christian Gospel. He decided that profound changes would be necessary in order for the Church to engage an increasingly complex world.
Thus, the Second Vatican Council convened, an assembly of Roman Catholic bishops (and their expert advisers) meant to reform the manner in which the Church fulfilled its pastoral ministry in the modern world.
Observers from many other Christian churches and denominations participated and offered their counsel and advice.
The Council's greatest effect would be to re-emphasize the role and authority of local Bishops – in the manner of the Early Church.
It would fall to Pope Paul VI, who presided over the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council, to oversee the implementation of the Council reforms.
However, Paul VI’s successors, Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, took a more conservative and reactionary approach to the Council, discouraging many of its reforms, seeking to reestablish the centralized authority of the Bishop of Rome over local Bishops and their churches.
We are now seeing, in the Pontificate of Pope Francis, a determined effort to restore the authority and role of Bishops who by way of synodal governance exercised through their regional Conferences once again enjoy the pastoral discretion and authority which is rightfully theirs.
Pope Francis, in a return to Vatican II’s vision of reconnecting to the modern Church, has sought to reestablish the Church’s ancient roots of local Episcopal authority which provided for legitimate variations and adaptations in matters of administration and authority.
Whether or not the Holy Father succeeds in his effort, whether or not the conservative reactionaries (many of whom are totally ignorant of Church history) continue to resist and are success in placing hurdles and obstacles in the way of Pope Francis will constitute the history of the Church which for now remains hidden in the future.
Needless to say, the Pope is calling Bishops to take back the Episcopal authority that was once theirs in the mission of enlightening souls with the Gospel of the Lord Jesus and sanctifying them with His Sacraments.
No comments:
Post a Comment