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

1. The Greeks are evidently destitute of apostolicity of origin. For the Eastern churches, as autonomous societies independent of the Roman Church, did not exist before the eleventh century, and moreover they acquired an autonomous and independent existence by a mere and open defection from the Roman Catholic Church. Numerically, therefore, or as such, the Eastern churches are not apostolic, but are branches separated from the apostolic trunk. Hence much less does apostolicity of succession belong to them. Branches cut off from the trunk wither, and members separated from the body lose their organic life. Thus the Greek bishops, although they materially occupy the ancient sees, formally no longer possess a legitimate mission, inasmuch as they are members separated from that body of bishops to whom the apostles left the power of ruling the Church.

2. The Protestants even more evidently did not exist before the sixteenth century, but began to be then by a rebellion made against the Roman Catholic Church, which they contended had fallen away from the apostles. But whether the mother Church was apostolic or not, it profits the contumacious daughter nothing. For if the mother was not apostolic, a fortiori the contumacious daughter did not inherit apostolicity; if, however, the mother was apostolic, the contumacious daughter lost apostolicity.¹ In brief: the Protestants, who took their origin by means of rebellion many centuries after the apostles, cannot have an apostolic origin. There is no reason why we should speak of apostolicity of succession. For, except the Anglicans, the Protestants rejected the whole episcopate; the Anglican bishops, however, for the same reason as the Greek bishops, do not have apostolic succession.²

Finally, both the Greeks and the Protestants, by mere separation from the Roman Pontiff, repudiated and repudiate all apostolicity. For communion with the Roman Pontiff is the supreme criterion of apostolicity, and therefore this communion alone with the Roman See of Peter is an altogether sufficient criterion of the true Church of Christ.

It is evident, therefore, that the Roman Catholic Church alone is the true Church of Christ, since to it alone belong the notes of unity, holiness, catholicity, apostolicity, and since finally it alone shines with the supreme and ultimate criterion: namely, communion with the visible vicar of Christ. Whence Catholics, adhering to the pope with the strictest bond, justly address the pope with S. Hieronymus: "I, following no one as first except Christ, am united in communion with Your Beatitude, that is, with the chair of Peter. I know the Church built upon that rock. Whoever eats the Lamb outside this house is profane. If anyone is not in the ark of Noe, he will perish while the flood reigns ... Whoever does not gather with you, scatters ... I meanwhile cry out: whoever is joined to the chair of Peter is mine."³