Hierarchical Submission
Moral Necessity of Hierarchical Submission
in the Catholic Church in Times of Prolonged Vacancy
of the Apostolic See
Table of Contents:
I. Introduction
II. Doctrinal Foundations of Hierarchical Submission
III. Moral Duty of the Faithful: Submission to a True Catholic Priest
IV. Moral Duty of Priests: Submission to a True Catholic Bishop
V. Condemnation of Vagantism and Autocephaly
V.1. Remaining All Alone Is an Error Condemned by the Church
V.2. Condemnation of Vagantism by the Council of Trent
V.2.1. Prohibition of Marriages of Vagants
V.2.2. Obligation of Attachment to a Church for Ordination
V.2.3. Exclusion from Sacred Orders without Means of Subsistence
V.2.4. Obligation of Residence for Prelates and Clerics
VI. Doctrinal implications and context
VII. Conclusion
I. Introduction
The Catholic doctrine teaches with certainty that the Church, founded by Our Lord Jesus-Christ, is a perfect, hierarchical and visible society, ordered to the salvation of souls. Every society requires an authority to direct its members towards its proper end, without which it would become a shapeless mass, contradicting its essential nature.
This truth is affirmed by the constant magisterium of the Church before 1963, as in the “Summa Theologica” of St Thomas Aquinas (I-II, q. 106, a. 4): « L’état de ce monde peut subir deux sortes de changements : 1° Un changement de loi. En ce sens, aucun autre état ne doit succéder à celui de la loi nouvelle. Celle-ci a déjà elle-même succédé à la loi ancienne comme un état plus parfait succède à un état moins parfait ; mais aucun autre état de la vie présente ne peut être plus parfait que celui de la loi nouvelle… Ainsi ne peut-il y avoir dans la vie présente d’état plus parfait que celui de la loi nouvelle ». The state which is theirs must therefore last until the end of the world.
And in the “sed contra” of the same article, he cites St John Chrysostom: “Notre Seigneur a dit : “je vous le dis, cette génération ne passera pas que tout cela ne soit arrivé” (Mt 24, 34). Saint Jean Chrysostome voit dans “cette génération” celle des fidèles du Christ. L’état qui est le leur doit donc durer jusqu’à la fin du monde.”
Yet we have had no popes since the public heresy of Paul VI.
See the chapter on “heresy”, for example Saint Robert Bellarmine teaches in unison: « Manifestus haereticus ipso facto desinit esse membrum Ecclesiae; et ideo non potest esse caput Ecclesiae. »
“A manifest heretic ipso facto ceases to be a member of the Church; therefore he cannot be its head.” (De Romano Pontifice, lib. II, cap. XXX).
In these times of prolonged vacancy of the Apostolic See, which has lasted since the public heresy manifested in Lumen Gentium in 1964, the Church subsists indefectibly through supplied jurisdiction (see chapter on supplied jurisdiction).
However, this suppléance does not dispense the faithful and the clerics from their moral duty of submission to the remaining visible hierarchy. On the contrary, it requires it, for remaining isolated – whether as a faithful without a priest, or as a priest without a bishop – constitutes a grave error, condemned by the Church under the names of vagantism or autocephaly. This text sets forth this certain truth, founded on Scripture, Tradition and Catholic moral theology before 1963.
II. Doctrinal Foundations of Hierarchical Submission
The Church is a hierarchical society by divine institution. In the Gospel according to Saint Matthew, chapter XVI, verse 18: “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” This promise guarantees not only indefectibility, but also the perpetuity of a visible authority.
This promise guarantees that the Church will never be overcome by error or corruption. We have seen that in times of vacancy of the Roman See, it is the bishops who are in charge of keeping the deposit of the Faith (see the chapters on infallibility and indefectibility).
The Council of Trent, session XXIII, canon 6 and 7, declares:
“Canon 6. If anyone says that there is not in the Catholic Church a hierarchy established by divine ordinance, which consists of bishops, priests and ministers, let him be anathema.
“Canon 7. If anyone says that bishops are not superior to priests; or that they have not the power of confirming and ordaining; or that the power which they possess is common to them with priests; or that orders conferred by them, without the consent or vocation of the people or of the secular power, are invalid… let him be anathema.”
Since the Church cannot disappear (cf. introduction above), in times of crisis, supplied jurisdiction maintains this indispensable structure.
For example, as confession is necessary for salvation, the Church, which cannot fail in what is necessary, supplies the defect of jurisdiction, whenever the faithful has no possibility of accessing a duly approved confessor.
This suppléance, anchored in canon 209 of the Code of Canon Law of 1917, extends by analogy to government (cf. chapter on supplied jurisdiction): the faithful bishops exercise a devolved authority to govern the priests, and these to sanctify the faithful.
The cardinal Louis Billot confirms this necessity for the Church: « Ecclesia est societas divina et humana, a Christo Domino immediate instituta ad hominum salutem; atque, sicut omnis societas perfecta, indiget potestate regiminis. » Translation: “The Church is a divine and human society, instituted immediately by the Lord Christ for the salvation of men; and, as every perfect society, it needs a power of government.” (Tractatus de Ecclesia Christi, tome I, quaestio I, thesis I).
Saint Thomas
(Summa Th. I, q. 96, a.4) teaches: “But the social life of a multitude could not exist without a director who seeks the common good.”
This affirmation is fully in conformity with the official teaching of the Church, as expressed in authorised documents which take up or inspire the notion of perfect society:
Leo XIII, in Satis Cognitum (n. 5), describes the Church as a visible and indissoluble society, instituted by Christ for salvation, with an organic unity necessitating a supreme government: “Thus Jesus Christ has called all men without exception, those who existed in his time, and those who were to exist in the future, to follow Him as head and as Saviour, not only each separately, but all together, united by such an association of persons and hearts, that from this multitude should result a single people legitimately constituted in society: a people truly united by the community of faith, of end, of means appropriate to the end, a people submitted to one and the same power…”
This explicitly implies the necessity of a power of government to maintain this perfect society united against schisms.
The Vatican Council I, via Dei Filius (chap. 3, p. 11), affirms that the Church, as depository of revelation, is endowed by God with all the means for its salvific mission, including an authority of teaching to all its members: “We conjure by the bowels of Jesus Christ all the faithful of Christ, especially those who are at their head or who are charged with teaching, and, by the authority of this same God, Our Saviour, We command them to bring all their zeal and all their care to ward off and to eliminate from the holy Church these errors and to propagate the very pure light of the faith.”
Pius XII, in Mystici Corporis Christi (n. 14), insists on the Church as visible mystical body, with “the necessary means”, for every body or corporation needs a government to exist and function: “…the same reason has prompted the divine Redeemer to wish, on the one hand, that the grouping of men founded by him should be a perfect society in its kind and provided with all the juridical and social elements, to perpetuate on earth the salutary work of the Redemption; and, on the other hand, that this society should be enriched by the Holy Spirit, to attain the same end, with supernatural gifts and benefits.” This confirms the human and divine dimension of the Church, and its perfection in means for salvation.
III. Moral Duty of the Faithful: Submission to a True Catholic Priest
Every faithful is bound, under pain of grave sin, to submit to a validly ordained priest of good doctrine. This obligation flows from the salvific nature of the Church. In prolonged vacancy, the faithful priests, provided with supplied jurisdiction, ensure the sacraments and teaching. Remaining isolated, without recourse to a priest, deprives the soul of the ordinary means of salvation and contradicts the promise of Christ: “Behold, I am with you all days even to the consummation of the world” (Matthew XXVIII, 20). Without the means of salvation, they will not be able to attain the end, the goal of their life, heaven. Without appropriate means, no goal attained. Of course Holy Providence can give extraordinary graces to the faithful to attain their destiny, but this is on condition that they do not have access to the ordinary means of salvation, which are the sacraments, sacramentals and the liturgy of priests. If they have the misfortune to refuse the ordinary means at their disposal, God will not give them extraordinary means. One must not tempt the Good God.
Indefectibility requires that the Church always subsist as a visible and hierarchical society. Leo XIII, in Satis Cognitum (29 June 1896), affirms: “The Apostles are destined by Christ to preach the doctrine of the Gospel to us. Christ was sent by God. Christ therefore from God, and the Apostles from Christ, and both according to the will of God… Preaching therefore the word through the regions and cities, when they had tested in the Spirit the first fruits of their doctrine, they constituted bishops and deacons for the faithful… They constituted and ordained them, so that, when they themselves had passed away, other proven men should bear their ministry.” This implies that the peoples must receive their doctrine and submit docilely to their authority.
IV. Moral Duty of Priests: Submission to a True Catholic Bishop
Every priest must submit to a validly ordained and consecrated bishop, of good doctrine. Saint Ignatius of Antioch teaches exactly: « Cum episcopo obediatis tanquam Jesu Christo, manifestum est quod non secundum homines vivitis, sed secundum Jesum Christum… et presbyterio obediatis tanquam apostolis Jesu Christi. » Translation: “It is fitting therefore to glorify in all ways Jesus Christ, who has glorified you, so that gathered in the same submission, submitted to the bishop and to the presbyterium, you may be sanctified in all things.” (Letter to the Trallians, 2).
In times of sedevacancy, devolution transfers authority to the faithful bishops, who exercise a supplied jurisdiction to teach, sanctify and govern the faithful, as explained in the chapter on jurisdiction (Jurisdiction in general and in the Church, p. 2). A priest refusing this submission becomes a “vagant”, deprived of visible legitimacy.
V. Condemnation of Vagantism and Autocephaly
V.1. Remaining all alone is an error condemned by the Church. Vagantism and autocephaly constitute a practical schism. Saint Thomas Aquinas defines schism exactly: « Schisma est separatio ab unitate Ecclesiae. » Translation: “Schism is a separation from the unity of the Church.” (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 39, a. 1).
The Church remains indefectible, governed invisibly by Christ and visibly by his faithful ministers, while awaiting that He grant to his Church the grace of a legitimate Pontiff. Refusing this visibility by isolation denies indefectibility as a hierarchical society and contradicts the divine promise.
V.2. Condemnation of vagantism by the Council of Trent
The Council of Trent (1545-1563), convoked to reform the Catholic Church in response to the abuses prevailing before the Protestant Reformation, explicitly condemns vagantism (or clerical vagabondage), that is, the wandering of clerics without stable attachment to a church or diocese, without fixed residence and without legitimate exercise of their ministry. This phenomenon was a source of scandals, favouring immorality, clandestine marriages and the absence of episcopal supervision. The Council, in several reformatory sessions, imposes strict measures to attach clerics to an ecclesiastical community (incardination), to require residence and to punish delinquents. These decrees are inspired by ancient canons (such as those of Chalcedon) and aim to restore discipline, unity and the holiness of the clergy, by virtue of apostolic authority. Here are the direct textual proofs, drawn from the conciliar acts.
V.2.1. Prohibition of marriages of vagants (Session XXIV, Decree on the reform of marriage, Chapter VII)
The Council specifically targets vagants (vagabonds without fixed domicile), often clerics or lay errants, who contracted multiple and illicit marriages. It exhorts to prudence and imposes sanctions to prevent these abuses:
“There are many persons who are vagants, having no fixed domicile; and, being of a debauched character, they, after having abandoned their first wife, marry another, and very often several in different places, during the life of the first. The holy Synod, desirous to obviate this disorder, gives this paternal admonition to all whom it concerns, not to admit too readily this class of vagants to marriage; and it also exhorts the civil magistrates to punish severely such persons. But it commands the parish priests not to assist at the marriages of such persons, unless they have first made a careful inquiry, and, having reported the circumstance to the Ordinary, obtained permission from him to do so.”1
This measure illustrates the condemnation of vagantism as a factor of moral and sacramental corruption. The parish priests are bound to obtain the authorisation of the bishop, and the secular authorities are called to cooperate, underlining the gravity of the evil.
V.2.2. Obligation of attachment to a church for ordination (Session XXIII, Decree on the reform, Chapter XVI)
A fundamental decree against vagantism prohibits the ordination of clerics without stable link to a church or pious place, to avoid that they “wander without any certain domicile”. Any departure without permission entails interdiction from sacred orders:
“Whereas no one ought to be ordained, who, in the judgment of his own bishop, is not useful or necessary for his churches, the holy Synod, adhering to what has been prescribed in the sixth canon of the Council of Chalcedon, ordains that no one for the future shall be ordained who is not attached to that church, or pious place, for the need or utility of which he is promoted, where he may discharge his duties, and cannot wander without any certain domicile. And if he shall quit that place without consulting the bishop, he shall be interdicted from the exercise of his sacred orders. Furthermore, no cleric who is a stranger shall be admitted by any bishop to celebrate the divine mysteries, and to administer the sacraments, unless he have letters commendatory from his own ordinary.”
This text, taken up in the doctrine of incardination, renders vagantism incompatible with the clerical state. The Catholic Encyclopedia confirms that these decrees require a just cause for any excardination (detachment), under pain of nullity and sanctions.
V.2.3. Exclusion from sacred orders without means of subsistence (Session XXI, Decree on the reform, Chapter II)
To prevent the ordination of potentially vagabond clerics (who beg or exercise sordid trades), the Council requires a stable possession of an ecclesiastical benefice or sufficient patrimony. Any resignation without guarantee of subsistence is null:
“Whereas it does not become those who are enrolled in the divine ministry to beg, or to exercise a sordid trade, to the dishonour of their order; and whereas it is well known that many, and in many places, are admitted to sacred orders almost without any selection; who, by various artifices and pretences, pretend to have an ecclesiastical benefice, or even sufficient means; the holy Synod ordains that, for the future, no secular cleric, though otherwise competent as regards morals, knowledge, and age, shall be promoted to sacred orders, unless it be first legitimately certain that he is in the peaceful possession of an ecclesiastical benefice sufficient for his honest subsistence: and he shall not be able to resign that benefice, without mention that he was promoted under that title; nor shall that resignation be received, unless it be certain that he can live conveniently from other resources; and any resignation made otherwise shall be null.”
This targets false errant clerics, renewing the penalties of ancient canons against non-residents and vagabonds.
V.2.4. Obligation of residence for prelates and clerics (Session VI, Decree on the reform, Chapter I)
The Council extends the condemnation to non-residence, an institutionalised form of vagantism among bishops and superiors, with increasing penalties (loss of revenues, interdiction, report to the Pope):
“And yet, as there are found at this time some – which is greatly to be deplored – who, even forgetting their own salvation, and preferring earthly things to heavenly, and human to divine, wander through various courts, or, having abandoned their flock, and neglected the care of the sheep committed to them, occupy themselves with the solicitudes of temporal affairs; it has seemed good to the sacred and holy Synod to renew, as by virtue of the present decree it does renew, the ancient canons promulgated against non-residents, which (canons) have, through the disorders of the times and of men, almost fallen into desuetude; and furthermore, for the more fixed residence of the same, and for the reformation of morals in the church, it has seemed good to ordain and decree in the manner following: If any one, by whatever dignity, degree and preeminence distinguished, shall, for six months together, absent himself from his own diocese, all legitimate impediments or just and reasonable causes ceasing, from a patriarchal, primatial, metropolitan or cathedral church, under whatsoever title, cause, name or right committed to him, he shall ipso jure incur the penalty of the loss of a fourth part of the fruits of one year, to be applied, by a superior ecclesiastical, to the fabric of the church and to the poor of the place.”
The prolonged absences entail severe sanctions, up to deprivation of charge by the Pope, to force pastoral stability.
VI. Doctrinal implications and context
These decrees are not isolated: they are inscribed in the reform in head and members of the Council, aiming to purge the Church of abuses (as denounced by the Protestants) and to affirm its visible and hierarchical character, founded on the Gospel (Mt 28:18-20; Acts 20:28). Vagantism is seen as a betrayal of the apostolic mission, favouring heresy and scandal. The Catholic Encyclopedia synthesises that, for Trent, excardination (liberation from a diocese) requires a just cause and a new link, under pain of interdiction.
These rules have influenced subsequent Canon Law (e.g.: CIC 1917, canons 108-112), confirming their perennial condemnation.
In sum, the Council of Trent formally condemns vagantism as a grave disorder, by prohibitions, obligations and cumulative penalties, to ensure the holiness and efficacy of the ecclesiastical ministry. These texts remain a normative reference in the Catholic tradition.
VII. Conclusion
In these times of vacant see, Catholic moral theology imposes with certainty submission: the faithful to a valid and orthodox priest, the priests to a valid and orthodox bishop. This hierarchy, maintained by supplied jurisdiction, ensures the salvation promised by Christ. Remaining isolated is a grave moral error, condemned as vagantism or autocephaly.
May all adhere to this certain truth, for the glory of God and the salvation of souls.
I humbly submit this text to the definitive judgement of the Catholic Church.
AMDG
Your servant in Jesus and Mary.