 |
 |
 |
|
|
|---|
|
 |
| Body |
| Speak! |
| Action |
| Support |
| HOME |
by Paul Wess
Excerpted from his book EINMÜTIG. Gemeinsam
entscheiden in Gemeinde und Kirche, Thaur in Austria 1998.
The essence of the ministerial priesthood within the common priesthood
and the reasons for grouping it under three categories
As the common priesthood of all believers according to the New Testament
also forms the basis for the ministerial priesthood, the latter, therefore, can
only exist in the Church within the common priesthood. The difference must be
given by a secondary (consecutive) characteristic element. Such a difference
results from the necessity of grouping the Church in Congregations and Local
Churches because they must be incorporated into the whole Church by connecting
members functioning as signs and instruments for their community with the whole
Church and, in this way, with Jesus Christ. This applies to all the various
spheres of Church life and Her activities. The ministerial priests and bishops
do not embody or personify Jesus Christ as against the Congregation or the
Local Church in a permanent priority. It is rather that their status of being
ordained indicates that the Church has Her leader in Jesus Christ. It is,
therefore, their reserved duty to lead and conduct the rites of the sacraments
which are of relevance to the whole Church and which promise Salvation in Jesus
Christ. The ministerial priests do not bestow sacraments, they are rather the
servants of the sacraments by asking God in the name of the Church – and
thereby according to the order of Christ – to grant us His Salvation
through the Holy Spirit. Viewing the ministerial priesthood in this way, one
can equally categorise the deaconry as a specific order of it because the
deacons are meant to care for the authentic proclamation of the Word and for
certain sacraments which they have to administer in the name of the whole
Church. To be able to do so they have to be given the necessary
authorization.
2. The difference between internal Church guidance and the
ministerial priesthood (even if they are carried out by one and the same
person)
Internal leadership in a Congregation, Local Church, resp. the whole
Church, can and must be distinguished from the ministerial priesthood (even
when the two functions are held by one and the same person):
- since the office of the Apostles as seen in the New Testament - first
and foremost among the Twelve, and furthermore among all members of the
original easterly community and also St. Paul – did not consist in
leadership (even though some of them had been given this function) but rather
consisted in being „witnesses of His resurrection" (Acts 1,22). This
fundamental function of the Apostles being witnesses, cannot be renewed. They
could, therefore, not appoint any successors in the actual sense of the word to
carry on this same function. They, however, appointed some members in the new
Congregations or Local Churches to deliver and interpret the Word, which they
had received from the Apostles, in order to take care of the koinonia within
the whole Church. Even if the Apostles understandably passed on this duty to
the leaders or the elders, it is not identical with the duty of internal
guidance within the existing Congregations and Local Churches;
- since it would mean that the own responsibility of the Congregations
and Local Churches was not taken seriously if an internal leader was placed
upon them;
- since the leaders themselves do not pass on their office to their
successors by means of an ordination; this procedure would seem reasonable if
the purpose of ordination were to be the passing on of power of internal
guidance;
- since the Church herself - in case of abbesses, of superiors also in
male lay-orders and at times of insufficient numbers of priests, where
lay(wo)men have been put in charge of the internal guidance of Congregations
– separates the office of internal guidance from that of the ministerial
priests (something which requires the mutual co-operation among the two
officials).
- since there is no ordination necessary for becoming Pope, even though
it ought to exist and form an own stage of the ministerial priesthood, if the
essence of this priesthood were the competence for internal guidance;
- since a suffragan bishop, a curate and a deacon function as
ministerial priests, but as a matter of fact do not have any leadership role
(suffragan bishops cannot be taken as a counter-argument because they are
leaders only in fictitious dioceses).
3. The mutual connections between the theology of the
ministerial priesthood and the existence of Congregations composed of mutually
obliged believers
According to the New Testament concept, the ministerial priest does not
represent Christ, but the Congregation itself represents Him being the body of
Christ just as the Church as a whole. This presupposes that there are
Congregations of mutually obliged believers who have attained maturity in their
faith, in a manner that such people should not previously have to be led to the
faith by a ministerial priest who functions as their head and substitute for
the mature Congregation as a whole. Baptism and confirmation at the age of
children do not suffice in any way for it. That is why the understanding of the
ministerial priesthood, as presented above, can become reality only, when
Congregations come into existence complying with the demand for unanimity in
their interior and with the whole Church and in this way with Jesus Christ.
This will, on the one hand, help to fulfil the call of the
„Kirchenvolks-Begehren" for a fraternal Church (as laid down in Mt 23,8
squ), on the other hand, it is a counter-demand on the members of the Church.
Both sides involved in this conflict must give up the fiction that all the
baptised are believing Christians and must rather get in the tedious task of
renewing the Church through the formation of appropriate Congregations and
– in reciprocal relationship – through the introduction of a renewal
of baptism with a personal faith-decision after a post-baptismal catechumenate.
It is only in this way that the fundamental nature of the common priesthood, in
whose service the ministerial priesthood is at work, will become clear.
The ministerial priesthood within the structure of the
Church
According to Vatican II:
The Church as an egalitarian community exists only at
each of the levels given above, not among all believers.
The cohesion is
given through a hierarchical rule on behalf of Christ or God (pyramidal
structure).
The ministerial priesthood and the office of internal government
within the whole Church, local churches and congregations are identified
.
Ministerial priests represent Christ or God (according to CatCC 1589
Priests are deified deifiers).
According to the New Testament (Mt 23,8f):
The Church as a universally binding community of all
believers [seen from above ].
Cohesion through unanimity (office-bearers
functions as its sign and instrument) under God’s rule.
The office of
internal government is not necessarily linked up with the ministerial
priesthood [who are presented as little dots in the sketch above].
The
ministerial priests function as the authentic connecting members between the
congregations and the whole Church and through her with Jesus Christ.
Dr. Paul Weß,
A-6020 Innsbruck
References:
Paul Weß, Ihr alle seid Geschwister. Gemeinde
und Priester. Mainz 1983.
Paul Weß, Gemeindekirche – Ort des
Glaubens. Die Praxis als Fundament und als Konsequenz der Theologie. Graz
1989, 661–668.
Paul Weß, ‘Repräsentant Christi oder
Repräsentant der Gemeinschaft mit Christus? Überlegungen zum
Amtsverständnis des Priesters.’ In: Heiliger Dienst 45 (1991)
67–74; abgedruckt in Paul Weß, Und behaltet das Gute.
Beiträge zur Praxis und Theorie des Glaubens. Mit einem Geleitwort von
Kardinal Franz König. Thaur 1996, 279–286.
Paul Weß, Die Stellung der Gemeinde in der
Meßfeier. Überlegungen zu AEM Nr. 62. In: Bewahren und
Erneuern. Studien zur Meßliturgie Festschrift Hans Bernhard Meyer.
Hg. R. Meßner – E. Nagel – R. Pacik. Innsbruck 1995
(Innsbrucker theol. Studien 42), 336–350; abgedruckt in Paul
Weß, Und behaltet das Gute (above), 161–177.
Paul Weß, Einmütig. Gemeinsam entscheiden
in Gemeinde und Kirche. Thaur 1998, 313–506.
Paul Weß, ‘Das Taufversprechen nachholen. Ein
Diskussionsanstoß’. In: Gottesdienst 32 (1998) 12f.
Join our Women Priests' Mailing List
for occasional newsletters:
An email will be immediately sent to you
requesting your confirmation.
Please, credit this document
as published by www.womenpriests.org!