Bishop Richard J. Sklba
	Herald of Hope Herald of Hope is a weekly column started by former Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland in the Catholic Herald and written by the bishops of the Milwaukee Archdiocese. • past columns

Second of two parts. Part one appeared in the Catholic Herald, Dec. 12, 2002.

Now we welcome the beginning of a new "year of salvation"... (anno salutes 2003, as it would have been called at least since the early Middle Ages) ... and I'm still thinking about the discussions which dominated our December meeting of the national Lutheran-Catholic dialogue team in Charleston, S.C.

The topic committed to us by our respective church authorities, as you may recall from my initial report last month, concerns the mystery of salvation. In particular our task for the past four years has been to study the manner in which God's gift of salvation is shared within the church community and mediated by ordained ministry.

These men and women scholars have been meticulous in their study, respectful in their questions, and profoundly honest in their recognition of the woundedness we all share in this contemporary divided Church of Christ. Each gathering sends me home with an ever deeper awe for the faithful scholarship exercised by these representative theologians as a vocation in service to the church.

The specific issues which we are studying in this (10th) round of that dialogue begin with the New Testament itself, as all explorations of our faith must. It may well be that, at least at this moment in history with all the controversies and heartaches of our churches, the question of the distinction between priests and bishops is a very minor concern. Still, some problems and debates have very long shadows. Indulge me while I try to explain our question.

When Paul wrote to the Philippians, for example, he greeted their "bishops/overseers and deacons/ ministers" (1:1) without any mention of their "presbyters/elders." Moreover, elsewhere, when Paul was leaving Asia Minor, the book of the Acts of the Apostles reports that he gathered the "presbyters/elders" of the Christian community in Ephesus, and admonished them to "keep watch over yourselves and over the whole flock of which the Holy Spirit has appointed you bishops/overseers" (20:28).

Historians today find it almost impossible to determine precisely what may have been the early Christian distinction between priests and bishops. Saint Jerome, that irascible biblical genius of the late fourth century "of salvation," was convinced that there was only a difference in responsibility and authority.

In the 16th century "of salvation," the Council of Trent deliberately did not resolve the theological disputes of earlier centuries which were judged still open questions. In particular, the decrees and condemnations of that Council were often not even directed against the German Lutherans who were considered faithful in so many issues of truly Catholic doctrine and pastoral care.

The specific question for this round of our ecumenical dialogue, then, revolves around whether an ordination of a priest performed by another priest is automatically and completely invalid in the eyes of the Catholic tradition. In particular, was such an ordination in the 16th century "of salvation" judged utterly impossible by the Catholic bishops and theologians of that time?

Church historians remind us that several medieval popes gave explicit permission to individual non-bishop abbots to ordain priests in their own monasteries: Boniface IX (in the year of salvation 1400), Martin V (in the year of salvation 1427), and Innocent VIII (in the year of salvation 1489). We still have copies of those decrees, thanks to the archivists of the Vatican Library.

Classic Catholic manual theologians such as Ludwig Ott, whose summaries were used worldwide in seminary training, maintained right to the final 34th edition of his work (1934) that a priest with proper delegation and authorization from the church could administer both the sacrament of confirmation and of ordination. Most of us have forgotten such theological speculations from our seminary training.

It never dawned on me as a young priest that devoted Protestant theologians might question the validity of my own Catholic ordination on the grounds that priests of the late Middle Ages seemed to pay such scant attention to the proclamation of the Gospel. Nor did I ever realize that a similar hesitation might have been in the minds of neighboring Lutheran clergy over the centuries.

Forgive me for launching out into such theological technicalities, but these are very serious questions. Salvation from sin and death is of utmost importance, and precisely how that gift is shared with individuals within the church and outside of it is a critical matter. Perhaps winter in Wisconsin is a suitable time to ponder these issues.

The church's International Dialogue, composed of theologians appointed by John Paul II and the World Lutheran Federation, is studying the question of what enables a church to call itself "apostolic." Is continuity in doctrine equally as important as the tradition of imposing hands to signify the abiding gift of the Holy Spirit? What makes any ministry valid and effective? Is "valid" the wrong word to use when describing sacramental signs which can truly signify divine realities to a greater or lesser degree?

A respectful return to the questions and convictions of the 16th century of salvation may yet enable us to find reconciliation after all these years. Is it possible that the year 2017 of salvation, which will be the 500th anniversary of Luther's posting of the 95 theses, might be a moment for such reconciliation and reunion? Only our cooperation with the Lord's grace and our common submission to his truth can show us the path that leads into God's future. Accepting such proposals is obviously the work of the whole church, not merely a dozen theologians of good will. We certainly have much to consider and to bring to our prayer this year.