PRIESTHOOD
414
PRIESTHOOD
sur Ge^ch. Israels (Berlin, 1SS3), tr. Bl.\ck and Menzies, (Edin-
burgh, 18S5) : Idem, Die Komposition des Hexateuchs u. der
oeschichtt. Bilcher des A. T. (2nd ed., Berlin, 1899); Fret, Tod.
SeelengUiube u. SeeletikuU im alten Israel (1898); Vogelstein,
Der Kampf zwischen Priestern u. Leviten seit den Tagen des
Ezechiel (Leipzig, 1899); Van Hoonacker, Les pritres el les
UvUes dans le livre d'Bzichiel in Rev. bibl. internal. (1899), 177
sqq.; American Journal of Theol. (1905), 76 sqq.; Kennet,
Origin of the Aaronite Priesthood in Journal of Theol. Studies
(Jan., 1905); Meyer, Die Israelilen u. ihre Nachbarstdmme (Leip-
zig, 1906).
C]^atholic works: — Hummelauer, Das vormosaische Prieslerlum in Israel (Freiburg, 1S99) ; Nikel, Wiederhersteltung des jud. Gemeinicesens nach dem babylon. Eiil (Freiburg, 1900); DoRX- STETter, Abraham: Studien aber die Anfdnge des hebr. Volkes (Freiburg, 1902); Zapletal, AUtestamenlliches (Freiburg. 1903); Nikel, Genesis u. Keilschriflforschung (Freiburg, 1903) ; Hoberg, Moses u. der Pentnteueh (Freiburg. 1905); Engelkemper, Hei- ligtum u. Opferstdth !i in in n Geaetzen des Pentateuch (Miinster, 1908); ScHUU!. Dnnp.llnrirhl,: im Pentateuch (Freiburg, 1908); Peters, Die jud. Gitifnult' n'n Elephantine-Syene u. ihr Tempel im o. Jahrh. v. Chrulus (Freiburg, 1910).
III. The Christian Priesthood. — In the New Testament bishops and priests are, according to Cathohc teaching, the sole bearers of the priesthood, the former enjoying the fullness of the priesthood {suitimus sacerdos s. primi ordinis), while the presby- ters are simple priests (simplex sacerdos s. secu7idi ordinis). The deacon, on the other hand, is a mere attendant of the priest, with no priestly powers. Omit- ting all special treatment of the bishop and the deacon, we here confine our attention primarily to the presbytcrate, since the term "priest" without qualification is now taken to signifj- the presbjler.
A. The Divine Institution of the Priesthood. — Ac- cording to the Protestant \'iew, there was in the primitive Christian Church no essential distinction between laity and clergy, no hierarchical differentia- tion of the orders (bishop, priest, deacon), no recog- nition of pope and bishops as the possessors of the highest power of jurisdiction over the Universal Church or over its several territorial divisions. On the contrary, the Church had at first a democratic constitution, in virtue of which the local churches selected their own heads and ministers, and imparted to these their inherent spiritual authority, just as in the modern republic the "sovereign people" confers upon its elected president and his officials administra- tive authority. The deeper foundation for this trans- mission of power IS to be sought in the primitive Christian idea of the universal priesthood, which ex- eludes the recognition of a special priesthood. Christ is the sole high-priest of the New Testament, just as His bloody death on the Cross is the sole sacrifice of Christianity. If all Christians without exception are priests in virtue of their baptism, an official priest- hood obtained by special ordination is just as inad- missible as the Catholic Sacrifice of the Mass. Not the material sacrifice of the Eucharist, consisting in the offering of (real) gifts, but only the purely spirit- ual sacrifice of prayer harmonizes with the spirit of Christianity. One is indeed forced to admit that the gradual corruption of Christianity began very early (end of first century), since it cannot be denied that Clement of Rome (Ep. ad Cor., xliv, 4), the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didache, xiv), and TertuUian (De bapt., xvii; "De pra?sc. ha^r.", xli; "De exhort. cast.", vii) recognize an official priesthood with the objective Sacrifice of the IMass. The corruption quickly spread throughout the whole East and West, and persisted unchecked during the Middle Ages, until the Reformation finally succeeded in restoring to Christianity its original purity. Then "the idea of the universal priesthood was revived; it appeared as the necessary consequence of the very nature of Christianity. . . . Since the whole idea of sacrifice was discarded, all danger of reversion to the beliefs once derived from it was removed " (" Itealency el. fiir prot. Theol.", XVI, Leipzig, 190.5, p. .W).
To these views we may answer briefly as follows. Catholic theologians do not deny that the double "hierarchy of order and jurisdiction" gradually devel-
oped from the germ already existing in the primitive
Church, just as the primacy of the pope of Rome and
especially the distinction of simple priests from the
bishops was recognized with increasing clearness as
time advanced (see Hierarchy). But the question
whether there was at the beginning a special priest-
hood in the Church is altogether distinct. If it is true
that "the reception of the idea of sacrifice led to the
idea of the ecclesiastical priesthood" (loc. cit., p. 48),
and that priesthood and sacrifice are reciprocal terms,
then the proof of the Divine origin of the Catholic
priesthood must be regarded as established, once it is
shown that the Eucharistic Sacrifice of the Mass is
coeval with the beginnings and the essence of Chris-
tianity. In proof of this we may appeal even to the
Old Testament. When the Prophet Isaias foresees the
entrance of pagans into the ]\Iessianic Kingdom, he
makes the calling of priests from the heathen (i. e.
the non-Jews) a special characteristic of the new
Church (Is., Ix-vi, 21): "And I will take of them to be
priests and Levites, saith the Lord". Now this non-
Jewish (Christian) priesthood in the future Messianic
Church presupposes a permanent sacrifice, namely
that "clean oblation", which from the rising of the
sun even to the going down is to be offered to the Lord
of hosts among the Gentiles (INIal., i, 11). The sac-
rifice of bread and wine offered by Melchisedech (cf.
Gen., xiv, 18 sqq.), the prototjpe of Christ (cf. Ps.
cix, 4; Heb., v, 5 sq.; vii, 1 sqq.), al.so refers prophet-
ically, not only to the Last Supper, but also to its
everlasting repetition in commemoration of the Sac-
rifice of the Cross (see Mass). Rightly, therefore, does
the Council of Trent emphasize the intimate connex-
ion between the Sacrifice of the Mass and the priest-
hood (Sess. XXIII, cap. i, in Denzinger, "Enchi-
ridion", 10th ed., 957): "Sacrifice and priesthood are
by Di\'ine ordinance so inseparable that the}' are found
together under all laws. Since therefore in the New
Testament the Catholic Church has received from the
Lord's institution the holy \isible sacrifice of the
Eucharist it must also be admitted that in the Church
there is a new, visible and external priesthood into
which the older priesthood has been changed. " Surely
this logic admits of no reply. It is, then, all the more
extraordinary that Harnack should seek the origin of
the hierarchical constitution of the Church, not in
Palestine, but in pagan Rome. Of the Catholic
Church he writes: "She continues ever to govern the
peoples; her popes lord it like Trajan and Marcus
Aurelius. To Romulus and Remus succeeded Peter
and Paul; to the proconsuls the archbishops and bish-
ops. To the legions correspond the hosts of priests
and monks; to the imperial bodyguard the Jesuits.
Even to the finest details, even to her judicial organ-
ization, nay even to her very vestments, the continued
influence of the ancient empire and of its institutions
may be traced" ("Das Wesen d. Christ entums",
Leipzig, 1902, p. 157). With the best of good will,
we can recognize in this description only a sample of
the writer's ingenuity, for an historical investigation
of the cited institutions would undoubtedly lead to
sources, beginnings, and motives entirely different
from the analogous conditions of the Empire of Rome.
But the Sacrifice of the Mass indicates only one
side of the priesthood; the other side is revealed in the
power of forgi\dng sin, for the exercise of which the
priesthood is just as necessary as it is for the power of
consecrating and sacrificing. Like the general power
to bind and to loose (cf. Matt., xvi, 19; x\iii, IS), the
power of remitting and retaining sins was solemnly
bestowed on the Church by Christ (cf. John, xx, 21
sqq.). Accordingly, the Cathohc priesthood has the
indisputable right to trace its origin in this respect also
to the Divine Founder of the Church. Both sides of
the priesthood were brought into prominence bj' the
Council of Trent (loc. cit., n. 961): "If any one shall
say that in the New Testament there is no visible and
