There is scarcely a mention of priesthood in the New
Testament.
Nor is the phenomenon of priesthood evident in the practices
of the early church.
How then, asks Garry Wills, did the priesthood
become so central to Christianity, and particularly to the Roman
Catholic Church, and why is there such an attachment to its continuation
in a religion that began without it?
Wills is a Pulitzer Prize-winning author who,
over many decades, has brought his impressive command of history to bear
on some of the most fundamental claims of Christianity.
In his new book
he brings his acknowledged erudition to bear on the institution of the
priesthood, arguing not only that it has no biblical basis but, more
importantly, that, notwithstanding its doubtful heritage, it has played a
seminal role in the construction and maintenance of many of the core
beliefs of Christianity.
Without priesthood, Wills claims, there would
be no belief in apostolic succession, or in transubstantiation (the
belief that the communion bread and wine actually becomes the body and
blood of Christ), or in the sacrificial interpretation of the Mass.
Wills describes the early Christian community
as “a priestless movement” that was essentially egalitarian.
The only
reference of any significance to the priesthood in the New Testament
comes in the Letter to the Hebrews, a letter that was traditionally
attributed to St Paul but that has long been acknowledged to be of
unknown provenance.
The writer of the letter describes Jesus as a priest
in the line of Melchizedek (a Caananite king referred to in the Book of
Genesis) and over the centuries, from this idiosyncratic text, the
church began to construct an account of priestly power which implied
that the priesthood was established by Jesus and that his apostles could
also be understood in priestly terms.
This, Wills insists, is quite
simply false. It has no historical basis.
Over the centuries the priesthood acquired a
status and power that is at odds with the vision of the early church.
Wills analyses the acquisition of this power, arguing persuasively that
the critical factor in the establishment of the power of the priestly
class has been the claim that, in the Eucharist, priests have the power
to transform the bread and wine into the actual body and blood of
Christ.
As Wills notes, nothing else a priest does matches this power.
It is here that Wills’s position is at its most original and insightful.
Through his expert reading of key theological texts he demonstrates how
this assertion gained ascendency in the history of Catholicism. The
most definitive articulation of the priest’s apparent ability to
transform the bread and wine into the actual body and blood came only in
the 16th century, and is thus a late development in Catholicism.
In the background, however, was Thomas Aquinas,
with his Aristotelian philosophy of substance and accident, which
provided the conceptual apparatus for the claim. Historians and
theologians have long acknowledged that the official Roman Catholic
doctrine of transubstantiation is a construct of the
Counter-Reformation.
It sought to impose, once and for all, a literal
interpretation on an idea that, for most of the history up until then,
was understood in symbolic terms. It drew heavily on the great
theologian of the middle ages, Aquinas, to further develop a narrative
which claimed that Jesus instituted the Eucharist as a sacrificial meal
at the last supper, and that, in an act of unbroken succession, all
priests continue to do this when they celebrate the Eucharist.
Wills
reminds his readers, however, that there is another equally compelling
tradition of interpretation, exemplified especially by St Augustine and
Martin Luther, which denied this claim.
According to Wills, in the early church, “there were
no priests and no priestly services; there was no re-enactment of Jesus’
Last Supper; no ‘sacrifice of the Mass’; no consecration of bread and
wine; nothing that resembled what priests now claim to do”.
There is no
doubt that, when taken together, such claims appear to be radical.
However, much of the historical and theological analysis on which Wills
builds his thesis is uncontroversial among scholars.
What is
controversial is the question he poses in light of his conclusion that
Jesus did not institute the Eucharist in any way that resembles how it
was subsequently developed by the church.
He asks whether there is any
point in persisting with what he regards as a failed tradition when
there is ample evidence that Catholicism does not need the institution
of the priesthood at all.
He criticises those who argue for the
ordination of women or men in married or gay relationships, suggesting
that the most honest position would be one that seeks the abolition of
priesthood entirely.
Wills is clear in this that his target is not
the 400,000 individual priests, many of whom, he acknowledges, make a
significant contribution to the lives of countless millions worldwide.
Rather, his focus is on the institution, which, he argues, has a flimsy
biblical heritage and a dubious theological justification and is an
impediment to the development of a more egalitarian Christianity.
Running throughout the text, moreover, is an
argument about the necessity of reform in the church.
For Wills, the
first and necessary step in any meaningful reform process is the
repudiation of the sacrificial interpretation of the Eucharist and a
return to an understanding that is more consonant with the biblical
texts and the practice of the early church.
Not only would this restore
the Eucharist to its original meaning as a thanksgiving meal, it would
also have the effect of requiring the church to confront the exclusivism
and hierarchicalism that have been embedded in its structures through
the institution of the priesthood. He also sees this as a first step
towards genuinely reciprocal relationships with other Christian
denominations and other religious traditions.
One hopes that Wills’s argument will be
seriously considered, though Wills himself regards this as unlikely. His
passion for reform of a church to which he is deeply committed is
palpable.
However, one can see how this may be missed or misunderstood
in the context of such a searing criticism of one of its central
institutions. His task is a worthy one, namely to bring the institution
of the priesthood under the gaze of historical and theological scrutiny.
Moreover, it stands in a long line of critical investigations that
focus on the ways in which certain teachings, institutions and practices
have come to be embedded in the Catholic tradition.
Through his erudite
scholarship and his compelling argumentation Wills has made an
important contribution to this field of study and, in the process, has
written a book that is thoroughly absorbing and engaging.