Apologeticae sive Theologiae Fundamentalis, Tomus II (Pars Altera): Demonstratio Catholica

Apostolicity in general consists in this: that the Church of all times remains one and the same with the Church of the apostles. This identity pertains both to origin, to succession, and to doctrine. Apostolicity of doctrine, however, although it is a property of the Church, is nevertheless not one of its notes, since the Church is made known not through doctrine, but doctrine through the Church.¹ Apostolicity of origin and succession, moreover, is at once a property and a note of the true Church.

Consequently, we speak of this twofold apostolicity.

That Church has an apostolic origin which was founded by the apostles. This indeed does not prevent that Church, as a universal society of the faithful, from containing very many particular churches which have arisen recently. Nay, particular churches could at first be founded either immediately by some one of the apostles or mediately through a disciple or successor of the apostles. Provided, therefore, that all and each of the parts of the Church are connected with the apostles either immediately or mediately, the whole Church is rightly called apostolic in origin. Now the necessity and the criterion of apostolic origin are to be shown.

1. The necessity of the apostolic origin of the Church of Christ does not need an elaborate proof. For although Christ is the proper author of the Church, nevertheless He founded it through the apostles, placed the apostles as its first teachers and rulers, and after His departure from the earth committed the Church to the apostles to be propagated and cared for. Therefore that Church which is not apostolic in origin is not the Church of Christ. Whence Paul also says that the faithful are built "upon the foundation of the apostles",¹ and the evangelist John describes the Church as a city having "twelve foundations, and in them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb".² Likewise Tertullian: "The apostles … founded churches in every city, from which the other churches from then on borrowed the shoot of faith and the seeds of doctrine, and borrow them daily, that they may become churches. And by this very fact they themselves will be reckoned apostolic, as the offspring of apostolic churches. Every kind must be judged by its origin. And so those churches, so many and so great, are that one first Church from the apostles, from which all [come]. Thus all are first and all are apostolic, while all prove the one unity."³ Likewise St. Jerome warns that "one must remain in that Church which, founded by the apostles, endures even to this day".⁴ Then he adds: "From this very fact, that [the heretics] were instituted later, they show themselves to be those whom the apostle declared would come", namely deceivers. Therefore the true Church is necessarily apostolic in origin. But it is asked by what criterion one may distinguish the apostolic Church from the non-apostolic at first sight.

2. The criterion of apostolic origin is union with blessed Peter and his successor. For Christ built the whole Church upon Peter and his successors in the primacy as upon a foundation, by which all particular churches of all times receive firmness and unity. Whence already the apostles had to gather the particular churches, which they themselves founded immediately, around the Petrine center and insert them into the head of the whole Church. All the more, those particular churches which, in the course of time, were founded everywhere through disciples and successors of the apostles must remain intimately united with Peter and his successors. Therefore churches which are not organically united to the primatial see do not shine with apostolicity of origin, even if they bear the name of some apostle on their front; whereas churches which cultivate communion with the primatial see are truly apostolic, however recently they may have arisen. Apostolic origin is possessed by that universal Church alone, whole and entire, whose head and center is the primatial see of Peter.

That Church enjoys apostolic succession which the apostles continuously govern in their successors, or whose pastors have been substituted for the apostles in a never-interrupted series and by legitimate commission. It is said: in a never-interrupted series, namely because, once the connection with the apostles has at some time been interrupted, the apostolic power of governing the Church does not revive again. It is added: by legitimate commission, because the merely material occupation of a pastoral see does not suffice, but a formal transmission of apostolic power is required, made by him who has this power and is able to commit it. For apostolic succession understood in this way, its necessity and its criterion must again be demonstrated.

1. Necessity of apostolic succession. Christ laid down the law of apostolic succession by that very fact that He decreed that the pastoral office handed to the apostles should perdure in their successors. For it is evident that it cannot perdure except by apostolic succession. Whence the apostles communicated the hierarchical governance of the churches to others by election and the imposition of hands, and prescribed the same law of a never-interrupted and legitimate succession to be observed also by their disciples, as we have seen elsewhere.¹ The most ancient Fathers always insist on apostolic succession and use it as a mark of the true Church against heretics. St. Irenaeus writes in this sense: "It is necessary to obey the presbyters who are in the Church, those who have succession from the apostles, as we have shown, who together with the succession of the episcopate have received the sure charism of truth according to the good pleasure of the Father; but the rest, who stand apart from the principal succession and gather in whatever place, are to be held as suspects, either as heretics and of evil mind, or as schismatics, elated and self-pleasing … But all these have fallen from the truth."² Tertullian urges the heretics: "Let them therefore produce the origins of their churches, let them unfold the order of their bishops, running down by succession from the beginning in such a way that that first bishop had as author and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men, who nevertheless persevered with the apostles. For in this way the apostolic churches report their registers."³ St. Cyprian declares: "Novatian is not in the Church, nor can he be counted a bishop, who, despising the evangelical and apostolic tradition, succeeding no one, has arisen from himself."⁴ By the apostolic succession of pastors, therefore, the true Church is denoted. It remains that we establish the criterion by which today the apostolic succession of pastors can be discerned.

2. The criterion of apostolic succession is again the connection with the successor of Peter in the primatial see. Theoretically, indeed, the apostolic succession of the individual churches can be demonstrated in a twofold way, namely, either by enumerating all the bishops who have presided over those churches in a never-interrupted and legitimate series from the apostolic age, or by simply appealing to the apostolic succession of the Roman Church, into which the other churches are organically inserted. In practice, however, we can proceed only by this latter way, as St. Irenaeus already showed. For, speaking of the apostolicity of doctrine, to be discerned from apostolic succession, he says: "It is possible for all who wish to see the truth to contemplate the tradition of the apostles manifested in the whole world in every church. And we can count up those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors down to us … But since it is very long … to enumerate the successions of all the churches, pointing to that greatest and most ancient and known to all church, founded and constituted at Rome by the two most glorious apostles Peter and Paul, and indicating the tradition which it has from the apostles and the faith announced to men, coming down to us through the successions of bishops, we confound all those who in any way … gather otherwise than is fitting. For to this church, on account of its more powerful principality, it is necessary that every church, that is, the faithful who are from everywhere, agree, in which always, by those who are from everywhere, the tradition which is from the apostles has been preserved … By this ordination and succession, the tradition which is from the apostles in the church and the proclamation of the truth has come down to us. And this is the fullest demonstration, that one and the same life-giving faith has been preserved in the church from the apostles until now and handed on in the truth."⁵

But if already in the second century Irenaeus judged that one must appeal to the apostolic succession of the Roman Church alone, how much more in the twentieth century? For today it is not only "very long to enumerate the successions of all the churches", but rather this is altogether impossible. For apart from the Roman, no other church any longer enjoys immediately apostolic succession. Whence the other churches can be proved apostolic by the Roman see alone.⁶ The never-interrupted and legitimate succession of the Roman bishops from the apostles down to us, however, is historically easy to know in such a way that it is conceded by all. And since the Roman Church is the center and head of all the churches, all bishops who are sent by the Roman successor of Peter and communicate with him are joined to the apostolic college instituted by Christ. Therefore, since the ultimate criterion both of the origin and of the apostolic succession is the connection with Peter and his successor, it must simply be said that that Church is apostolic whose head and center is the see of Peter. Whence most truly St. Ambrose: "Where Peter is, there is the Church."⁷