Territorial Jurisdiction in the Church:
Of Divine Right or a Matter of Ecclesiastical Law?
The Apostolic Model and Its Implications
in a Time of Vacancy of the Apostolic See
Table of contents
- Introduction
- The apostolic fields of the Apostles in the first century: absence of exclusive territorial divisions
2.1 Palestine and Syria
2.2 Asia Minor
2.3 Greece and the Aegean region
2.4 Rome and the West
2.5 Synthesis of shared fields of preaching
- Fundamental theological and canonical distinctions for episcopal jurisdiction
3.1 The apostolic model as foundation
3.2 Distinction between the power of order and the power of jurisdiction
3.3 Pontifical primacy of divine right and territorial organization of ecclesiastical law
3.4 The present crisis and the principle of supplied jurisdiction
- The role of the episcopal college in the government of the Church and the restoration of the primacy in the absence of cardinals
4.1 The universal character of the apostolic mission
4.2 Application to the successors of the Apostles
4.3 Possibility of an intervention of the Church in a case of extreme necessity
- Conclusion
- List of sources
1. Introduction
Apostolic preaching in the first century did not develop according to strictly defined and exclusive territories. The Twelve and the Apostle Paul often laboured in the same regions, sometimes simultaneously, sometimes successively. This article offers a historical synthesis of these overlapping apostolic fields, founded on Sacred Scripture and the primitive tradition of the Church. It demonstrates the unity and Catholic universality of the Church of Christ, which extends over the entire known world without exclusive division of territories.
Relying on this historical reality, the study examines whether territorial jurisdiction for bishops is essential by divine right or rather a secondary arrangement of ecclesiastical law. It draws consequences for the government of the Church in the present crisis. According to the sedevacantist thesis, founded on the traditional principle that public and notorious heresy entails the automatic loss of ecclesiastical office, the See of Peter has been vacant since Paul VI. This accords with the constant teaching of the Church before 1962 on the loss of the pontifical charge in the case of manifest heresy.
2. The apostolic fields of the Apostles in the first century: absence of exclusive territorial divisions
2.1 Palestine and Syria
Jerusalem constitutes the first centre of the Church. Peter, John and James the Less are established there according to the Acts of the Apostles, chapters 1 to 12. After the dispersion caused by the persecution, they remain the focal point of apostolic activity.
Antioch develops rapidly as a second centre. Paul and Barnabas work there intensively according to the Acts of the Apostles, chapters 11 to 13. Peter is also linked to Antioch by the Epistle to the Galatians, chapter 2, verse 11. This region therefore shows a clear overlap among several apostles, with Jerusalem and Antioch as junctions of the common preaching.
2.2 Asia Minor
Asia Minor is one of the most important shared missionary territories. Paul evangelizes there widely, notably at Ephesus, in Galatia and at Colossae, as described in his epistles and in the Acts. The Apostle John resides at Ephesus according to an uninterrupted tradition and exercises his apostolate there for a long period until his death (Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica, III, 1, 1; III, 31, 2–3; Jerome, De viris illustribus, IX). According to certain ancient traditions, Philip and Andrew are also associated with regions of Asia Minor (Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica, III, 31, 2–4; Gregory of Tours, Liber de miraculis beati Andreae apostoli, chapters 6–7, pp. 380–381). A network of overlapping apostolic presence is formed here, especially in the urban centres.
2.3 Greece and the Aegean region
Paul preaches in Macedonia and Greece, with important centres such as Philippi, Thessalonica, Athens and Corinth, as set forth in the Acts of the Apostles, chapters 16 to 18.
Ancient tradition places Andrew in Achaia, particularly at Patras, where he is said to have suffered martyrdom (Gregory of Tours, Liber de miraculis beati Andreae apostoli, chapter 21, p. 388, and chapter 36, p. 395). This region therefore constitutes a field of preaching shared between Paul and at least one apostle of the Twelve.
2.4 Rome and the West
Rome is the clearest example of a common apostolic field. Paul reaches Rome and preaches there for several years, as described in the Acts of the Apostles, chapter 28, verses 30–31. Peter is also linked to Rome by the unanimous tradition and is venerated there as a martyr (Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica, II, 25, 5–8; III, 1, 2; Jerome, De viris illustribus, I). This double presence gives Rome a unique position as a centre of common apostolic activity and as the see of the primacy of Peter.
2.5 Synthesis of shared fields of preaching
The principal domains of overlap are: Jerusalem and Palestine as the centre of origin; Antioch and Syria as missionary crossroads; Asia Minor as a shared field of labour of several apostles; Greece as the territory of Paul and Andrew; Rome as the common centre of Peter and Paul.
These data show a missionary network in which cooperation and succession are the norm, in conformity with the unity of the apostolic mission.
3. Fundamental theological and canonical distinctions for episcopal jurisdiction
3.1 The apostolic model as foundation
The preceding historical synthesis of the common apostolic fields of the Twelve and of Saint Paul reveals a fundamental reality of the primitive Church: the apostolic mission in the first century was not organized according to strictly delimited and exclusive territorial jurisdictions. The Apostles possessed and exercised a full pastoral authority while remaining highly mobile. Peter moved between Jerusalem, Antioch and finally Rome. Paul systematically traversed Asia Minor and Greece and reached Rome without being bound to a single fixed territory. The other apostles, according to the constant ecclesiastical tradition recorded by Eusebius of Caesarea in his Historia ecclesiastica (II, 25; III, 1; III, 31) and by Saint Jerome in the De viris illustribus (chapters I, II, V and IX), likewise exercised their ministry over vast regions without the modern concept of exclusive diocesan boundaries. This mobility reflects the essentially missionary and universal character of the apostolic mandate given by Christ in Matthew 28, 19: Go therefore and make disciples of all nations.
3.2 Distinction between the power of order and the power of jurisdiction
Catholic doctrine clearly distinguishes the power of order and the power of jurisdiction. The power of order, conferred by valid episcopal consecration, gives the fullness of the priesthood and the radical capacity to exercise sacramental and pastoral acts. The power of jurisdiction, on the other hand, is normally received by a legitimate canonical mission. The Code of Canon Law of 1917, canon 109, states with precision: Those who are admitted into the ecclesiastical hierarchy are not chosen by the consent or vocation of the people or of the secular power; but they are constituted in the degrees of the power of order by sacred ordination; in the supreme pontificate, by divine right itself, the condition of a legitimate election and of its acceptance being fulfilled; in the other degrees of jurisdiction, by canonical mission. The Council of Trent, session XXIII, doctrine on the sacrament of order, chapter IV, teaches that bishops are instituted by the Holy Ghost to govern the Church as successors of the Apostles, without however attributing to consecration alone the effective exercise of universal jurisdiction.
3.3 Pontifical primacy of divine right and territorial organization of ecclesiastical law
The primacy of the Roman Pontiff and of his successors is of divine institution, as solemnly defined by the First Vatican Council in Pastor aeternus, chapters I, II and III. The Roman Pontiff possesses a full, supreme, immediate and universal ordinary power over the entire Church. He can therefore assign territories to bishops and regulate their exercise of jurisdiction for the common good. Yet this administrative act remains an exercise of ecclesiastical government. The precise territorial delimitation of episcopal sees, the assignment of specific portions of the people of God to individual bishops with exclusion of the others, and the detailed organization of diocesan structures are matters of ecclesiastical law. These serve the good order of the Church but are not immutable divine precepts. The apostolic age itself serves as the first historical witness that strict territorial jurisdiction is not of divine right. Moreover, history shows that the popes have created, modified, merged, divided or suppressed thousands of dioceses, which would be impossible if territorial limits were of divine right.
3.4 The present crisis and the principle of supplied jurisdiction
Since the public and notorious heresy of Paul VI in 1964, the See of Peter is vacant. In this prolonged state of vacancy, the ordinary mechanisms for the conferral of territorial jurisdiction have been interrupted. Ecclesiastical laws, being human positive law in the Church, can be supplied by the Church herself in case of necessity according to the principle ecclesia supplet (cf. canon 209 of the Code of 1917 for jurisdiction of the external and internal forum in the determined cases, extended by analogy to the good of souls in an extraordinary situation). Every validly consecrated bishop, having received the fullness of the sacrament of order, possesses the radical capacity to receive and to exercise episcopal jurisdiction. In the absence of a reigning pope who can assign territories, each bishop must, in conscience and guided by the needs of souls, determine the field in which he will exercise his apostolic activity, without this liberty leading to anarchy, for the Church is governed by the Holy Ghost as it is said in the Acts of the Apostles 20, 28 and John 16, 13. The promises of Our Lord remain in force: I am with you all days even to the consummation of the world in Matthew 28, 20, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it in Matthew 16, 18. The dogma of the indefectibility of the Church guarantees that, even in the absence of a visible head, the Church continues to exist and to act in conformity with her divine constitution.
4. The role of the episcopal college in the government of the Church and the restoration of the primacy in the absence of cardinals
4.1 The universal character of the apostolic mission
The Apostles themselves, of whom the bishops are the successors as to the episcopate but not as to the extraordinary apostolic privileges, possessed and exercised a full and universal pastoral authority over the entire Church of Christ without any restriction to a particular territory (Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, book IV, chapters XXIII–XXV, pp. 520–523). This appears from the historical synthesis presented in chapter 2 and from the very nature of the apostolic mandate: Go therefore and make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28, 19). Their authority extended to the whole body of the faithful wherever the Gospel was preached. The Acts of the Apostles and the epistles of Saint Paul confirm this universal scope: the Twelve and Saint Paul moved freely, preached jointly and exercised a supreme pastoral power in every place they visited, always in union with the one visible head, Saint Peter.
4.2 Application to the successors of the Apostles
What was true of the Apostles as to radical capacity must, by the very nature of the episcopate, apply to their successors. Territorial limitation does not belong to the essence of the episcopate but pertains to ecclesiastical law; it is an act of papal administration which presupposes the existence of a reigning pontiff. The classical canonists confirm that the concrete determination of the diocesan territory pertains to ecclesiastical authority. Wernz-Vidal in Ius Canonicum (volume II, 3rd edition, Rome, 1943, no. 396, pp. 457–458, and no. 398, pp. 459–460) and Coronata in Institutiones Iuris Canonici (volume I, 3rd edition, Marietti, no. 304, pp. 355–356, and no. 306, p. 358) teach this explicitly. For centuries, apostolic vicars and missionary bishops have exercised without a fixed territorial diocese, proving that the episcopate does not intrinsically require a stable circumscription. In the absence of such a pontiff, the principle of supplied jurisdiction for the salvation of souls allows bishops to continue their apostolic ministry according to the concrete needs of souls and under the guidance of the Holy Ghost. The Council of Trent teaches that bishops are the successors of the Apostles and are placed by the Holy Ghost to govern the Church (session XXIII, doctrine on the sacrament of order, chapter IV), while the First Vatican Council defines that the primacy alone is the source of the supreme and universal power which can limit or direct the exercise of episcopal jurisdiction (Pastor aeternus, chapters I and III).
4.3 Possibility of an intervention of the Church in a case of extreme necessity
The ordinary right of election of the Roman Pontiff belongs to the college of cardinals by positive ecclesiastical law, as established by the Constitution Ubi periculum of the Second Council of Lyons in 1274 (constitution 2; see also the Third Lateran Council, canon 1, 1179). In the case of a prolonged vacancy and of the total impossibility of the cardinals to act, certain classical theologians, such as Cardinal Thomas de Vio Cajetan in his treatise De comparatione auctoritatis Papae et Concilii (edition V. M. I. Pollet, Rome, 1936, chapter XIII, no. 204, pp. 97–98; chapter XVI, no. 229, p. 107, and no. 231, p. 108), have envisaged that, by exception and in a supplied manner, this power may return to the universal Church herself, often understood as an imperfect general council or a representative assembly of bishops. This is not an innovation but an extraordinary recourse to the principle that the Church, in a time of extreme necessity, supplies what is required for her own unity and for the restoration of the visible head. The indefectibility of the Church and the assistance of the Holy Ghost guarantee that such an action, undertaken for the salvation of souls and the restoration of the primacy, remains in conformity with the divine will.
5. Conclusion
Precise territorial jurisdiction is not essential by divine right. It is a useful but secondary arrangement of ecclesiastical law which can be supplied or suspended in time of necessity, as the apostolic age itself demonstrates, reinforced by the teaching of the canonists and the history of missionary bishops. In the present crisis of the vacancy of the See since 1964, the Church returns in practice to the original missionary model of the Apostles, in which validly consecrated bishops exercise their ministry according to the needs of souls and under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, while awaiting the providential restoration of the visible head of the Church. This distinction between divine right and ecclesiastical law, joined to the principle of supplied jurisdiction, allows the Church to continue her mission without compromising her divine constitution.
6. List of sources
Sacred Scripture
Novum Testamentum Graece, Nestle-Aland, 28th edition, Stuttgart, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012, Greek.
Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam versionem, edition Robert Weber and Roger Gryson, 5th edition, Stuttgart, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2007, Latin.
Louis-Claude Fillion, Les Saints Évangiles. Traduction annotée et ornée de nombreuses gravures d’après les monuments anciens, 2nd edition revised and enlarged, Paris, Letouzey et Ané, 1896, French: Matthew 16, 18, pp. 54–55; Matthew 28, 20, p. 103.
Fathers of the Church
Eusebius of Caesarea, Historia ecclesiastica, in Eusebius Werke, volume II, Die Kirchengeschichte, edition Eduard Schwartz; Latin translation of Rufinus edited by Theodor Mommsen, Leipzig, J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1903–1909, Greek and Latin: books I–V, 1903; books VI–X and Martyrs of Palestine, 1908; introductions, tables and index, 1909.
Saint Jerome, Liber de viris illustribus, chapters I, II, V and IX, in J.-P. Migne, Patrologia Latina, volume XXIII, Paris, 1845, Latin.
Saint Gregory of Tours, Liber de miraculis beati Andreae apostoli, edition Max Bonnet, in Gregorii episcopi Turonensis miracula et opera minora, edition Bruno Krusch, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Merovingicarum, volume I, part 2, Hanover, Hahn, 1885, reprint 1969, Latin: chapters 6–7, pp. 380–381; chapter 21, p. 388; chapter 36, p. 395.
Conciliar documents
First Vatican Council, dogmatic constitution Pastor aeternus, 18 July 1870, chapters I–III; integral text in Denzinger-Schönmetzer, nos. 3050–3075, Latin.
Council of Trent, session XXIII, doctrine on the sacrament of order, chapter IV, 15 July 1563, Latin.
Third Lateran Council, canon 1, 1179; Second Council of Lyons, constitution 2, Ubi periculum, 1274, Latin.
Canon law
Codex Iuris Canonici, 1917, canons 109 and 209, Latin.
Theologians and canonists
Cardinal Thomas de Vio Cajetan, De comparatione auctoritatis Papae et Concilii cum Apologia eiusdem tractatus, edition V. M. I. Pollet, Scripta theologica, volume I, Rome, Institutum Angelicum, 1936, Latin: chapter XIII, no. 204, pp. 97–98; chapter XVI, no. 229, p. 107, and no. 231, p. 108.
Franciscus Xaverius Wernz and Petrus Vidal, Ius Canonicum ad Codicis normam exactum, volume II, De personis, 3rd edition revised by Philippus Aguirre, Rome, Gregorian University, 1943, Latin: no. 396, pp. 457–458; no. 398, pp. 459–460.
Matthaeus Conte a Coronata, Institutiones Iuris Canonici ad usum utriusque cleri et scholarum, volume I, Normae generales. De clericis. De religiosis. De laicis, 3rd edition enlarged and corrected, Marietti, preface of 10 July 1947, Latin: no. 304, pp. 355–356; no. 306, p. 358.
Saint Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, book IV, chapters XXII–XXV, in Disputationes de controversiis Christianae fidei adversus huius temporis haereticos, volume I, first Neapolitan edition, Naples, Josephus Giuliano, 1856, pp. 519–523, Latin.