I Thessalonians 5:16-18

Here is a compilation of various resources for Catholics and other Christians to begin digging into the perennial beliefs regarding the historicity of the creation story laid out in the First Book of Moses. A lot of this was originally sourced by Gideon Lazar but I have tweaked some things and added imbedded links to all of the works cited. This is not a finished product and will continue to be a work in progress. I hope that people find this interesting and helpful.

Fathers and Doctors of the Church

Saint Theophilus of Antioch

Letter to Autocylus, Book II Chapters 10-32 (x)

The Catholic Church holds a distinction between potestas ordinis (power of ordination) and potestas iurisdictionis (power of jurisdiction). The former applies to all ministers who have received valid orders, conferred once an permanently, the latter applies only to those with valid orders who also have granted or delegated authority of governance by the Church. Most sacraments only require potestas ordini in order to be confected validly. If a minister was to perform these without permission they would be illicit but they would still be valid. The two exceptions to this are Reconciliation and Matrimony.

Reconciliation:

Saint Thomas argues that during confession the priest acts as a judge and the absolution functions as a judge’s sentence over a subject; meaning that the judge must have legitimate authority over the subject in question. In the Supplementum Q19-20 he lays out in depth that the requirement for valid absolution is both potestas ordini and potesta iurisdictionis. This is because Christ conferred the power of orders collectively upon the apostles but singularly the power of jurisdiction and governance to Peter, from which the rest of the Church’s ministers receive through the ecclesial hierarchy from him. This is echoed in CIC 966, 969, and 976.

Matrimony:

The Church teaches, particularly in the Latin Rite, that in the sacrament of matrimony the sacrament is conferred not by the minister as such but by the recipients themselves. The minister serves as a witness (and judge) over the matter and form of the sacrament on behalf of the Church. Thus the judge/witness must have power of jurisdiction/governance in order for the sacrament to be valid. This is the teaching of Trent in Temetsi and of the CIC 1057. It can also be read in the CCC 1623.

Why this is not Donatism:

The Donatists held that the sacraments in their entirety were not only dependent on matter and form but also on the interior holiness of the minister. Now this is impossible for multiple reasons but it can clearly be seen that what we’re talking about here has nothing to do with the sanctity of the minister. I may be holier than X priest but I still do not have either powers necessary to confer any sacrament. Similarly, a priest with potestas iurisdictionis may be an evil person in his interior life but he still can validly confer any and all sacraments. That the Church does not express Donatism can clearly be seen in the issues of various rogue bishop lines conferring illicit orders around the world (particularly the Thuc line and the sedevacantists after V2). Obviously it would be very helpful and convenient for the Church to declare these ordinations invalid but She cannot because that would be in conflict with her perennial teaching.