Question I

GRATIAN. PART I. That a bishop is permitted to appoint a successor for himself is inferred from the words of Pope Zacharias, by which he permitted the Archbishop of Mainz to establish a helper for himself who, after he had died, would succeed to the fullness of power. § 1. Likewise from the words of Pope Symmachus, who says, “If the Pope's passing occurs unexpectedly, so that he cannot determine beforehand concerning the election of his successor,” it appears that bishops can appoint successors for themselves. § 2. Likewise the same is proved by the example of blessed Peter, who appointed blessed Clement as his successor. Hence John III writes to the Bishops of Germany and Gaul, [sole letter, c. 2]:

If Peter, the prince of the apostles, took Linus and Cletus to himself as helpers, he nevertheless delivered to them neither the power of the pontificate nor the rule of binding and loosing, but delivered it to his successor Clement, who merited to hold after him the apostolic see and the pontifical power handed over to him by blessed Peter. But Linus and Cletus ministered in external matters; Peter, the prince of the apostles, devoted himself to the word and prayer.

Hence Clement himself, in the letter sent to James of Jerusalem, writes among other things that Peter, while still living, elected Clement as bishop: “In those very days in which Simon Peter foresaw the end of his life, suddenly rising after taking my hand, in the ears of the whole church he brought forth these words: I ordain this Clement as bishop for you, to whom alone I hand over the chair of my preaching and teaching, whom beyond the others I have found to worship God, love men, be chaste, devoted to the pursuits of learning, sober, kind, just, patient, and one who knows how to bear the injuries even of some of those who are instructed in the word of God.”] GRATIAN. But in the Council of Antioch this is altogether prohibited from being done, in which [c. 23] the following statute is read:

We decree that a bishop is not permitted to establish another as successor for himself, even if he reaches the end of life. But if anything of this kind has been done, let an appointment of this kind be void. Let ecclesiastical law be preserved, which contains that it ought to be done in no other way except with a synod and the judgment of the bishops and the election of the clergy, who after the death of the one resting have the power to elect and promote him who shall have been found worthy.

Likewise from the Council of Pope Martin, [c. 8]. Let a bishop not be permitted before the end of his life to establish another as successor in his place. But if anyone has attempted to usurp this power, such an appointment will be void. Therefore, it ought not to be done otherwise than with the counsel and judgment of the bishops, who after the departure of the predecessor have the power to elect one worthy.

Likewise Pope Hilary, [in the Roman Synod, c. 5]. Many priests established at the boundary of death are said to substitute others in their own place by designating their names, evidently so that a lawful election is not awaited but the favor of the deceased is held as the consent of the people. Judge how grave this is. It was acclaimed by all: Let this presumption never occur. The things which are God's cannot be given by man.

Likewise Jerome, [on Titus, c. 1]. Moses, the friend of God, to whom God spoke face to face, could certainly have made his own sons successors to his principate and left his own dignity to his posterity; but Joshua, a stranger from another tribe, is chosen, so that we might know that principate over peoples is to be granted not to blood but to life. And now we see that very many make this thing a benefice, so that they seek to erect as pillars in the church not those whom they know can profit the church more, but those whom they themselves love, or by whose services they have been won over, or for whom one of their superiors has asked, and—to keep silent about worse things—those who obtained by gifts that they be made clerics.

Likewise Pope Innocent II, [in the Roman Council, c. 16]. By apostolic authority we prohibit anyone from having power to claim or presume to demand churches and prebends, provostships, chaplaincies, or any ecclesiastical offices by hereditary right. But if any wicked person or one guilty of ambition presumes to attempt this, he will be punished with the due penalty and will lack the things sought. GRATIAN. By all these authorities bishops are prohibited from appointing successors for themselves. But it is one thing to deliberate with the brothers concerning the election of one's successor, and another to seek for oneself by testament, as though an heir to one's own dignity. The former is permitted to be done, but the latter is utterly prohibited. But that deed of blessed Peter can validly be taken as an argument by those who substitute for themselves such persons as the successor blessed Peter sought for himself. But because office began to be granted not to life but to blood, and each began to seek for himself as successors to the episcopate persons who would be found either hateful to the peoples or needing to be taught by the congregation, it was established by the sacred canons that no one seek a successor for himself in his office, but that by the election of the people one be sought who worthily serves their utility, who seeks their utility and not his own gains, who wishes to raise up seed for Christ and not to gather riches for himself. One who has despised doing this is rightly rejected by the church. Hence Augustine in the book against the Manichaeans, [book XXXII, c. 10]:

PART II. Of old a brother was commanded to take the wife of his brother who had died before him, so that he might raise up offspring not for himself but for him, and what was born from her might be called by his name. But if he refused, he was accustomed to be unshod on one foot and spat upon in the face. Now every preacher of the Gospel ought so to labor in the church that he raises up seed for his dead brother, that is, for Christ, who died for us, and what has been raised up receives His name. But one who, having been elected by the church, has refused the ministry of evangelizing is worthily and deservedly despised by the church itself. For one who benefits both himself and the church is well understood to be shod on both feet. Hence this: “How beautiful are the feet of those who announce good things.” But one who flees the care of gaining others has borne in himself, fulfilled and not merely figured, the reproach of that unshod man.

Likewise Gregory in the Register, [book VI, letter 5, to Bishop Cyriacus]. In your writings you relate that you greatly sought repose, but through this you show that you have fittingly come to pastoral solicitude, because, just as a position of governance is to be denied to those desiring it, so it is to be offered to those fleeing it. And as it is written: “Nor does anyone take honor to himself, but he who is called by the Lord, as Aaron was,” and again the same distinguished preacher says: “If one died for all, therefore all died; and Christ died for all, so that those who live may now live not for themselves but for Him who died for them and rose again,” and it is said to the shepherd of holy Church: “Simon, son of John, do you love me? Feed my sheep.” From these words it is gathered that if one who is capable refuses to feed the sheep of almighty God, he shows that he loves the supreme shepherd not at all. For if the only-begotten Son of the Father went forth from the Father's secret place into our public realm to fulfill the utility of all, what are we going to say if we prefer our secret place to the utility of our neighbors? § 1. Repose, therefore, is both to be sought by us from the heart and yet sometimes to be postponed for the gain of many. For just as we ought to flee occupation with our whole desire, so, if there is no one to preach, it is necessary to undertake the burden of occupation with a willing shoulder. We are taught this from the action of two prophets, one of whom attempted to avoid the office of preaching and the other sought it. For Jeremiah answered the Lord who was sending him, saying: “Ah, ah, ah, Lord God, I do not know how to speak, because I am a boy.” And when almighty God sought a person to preach, saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Isaiah voluntarily offered himself, saying: “Behold, I; send me.” Behold, an outwardly different voice proceeded from each, but it did not emanate from a different source of love. For there are two precepts of charity, love of God and love of neighbor. Therefore Isaiah, desiring through the active life to benefit his neighbors, seeks the office of preaching. But Jeremiah, through the contemplative life desiring to adhere continually to the love of the Creator, objects that he ought not to be sent to preach. What one laudably sought, therefore, the other laudably feared; the latter, lest by speaking he lose the gains of silent contemplation, the former, lest by keeping silent he suffer the losses of zealous work. But in both this must be subtly observed: that the one who refused did not fully resist, and the one who wished to be sent saw himself first purified by the coal of the altar, lest either anyone not purified dare to approach the sacred mysteries or one whom heavenly grace chooses proudly object under the appearance of humility.

The same in the Moralia, [book XXXV, c. 13, on Job 42]. It must above all be known that sometimes obedience, if it possesses something from its own inclination, is nothing; sometimes, if it possesses nothing from its own inclination, it is minimal. For when success in this world is commanded, when a higher position is ordered, one who obeys in order to receive these things empties for himself the virtue of obedience if he pants for these things from his own inclination. For one who serves the desire of his own ambition in order to receive the prosperous things of this life does not direct himself under obedience. Again, when contempt of the world is commanded, when reproaches and insults are ordered to be acquired, unless the mind seeks them from itself, it diminishes for itself the merit of obedience, since it descends unwillingly and reluctantly to those things which are despised in this life. And a little above: § 1. Obedience is rightly preferred to sacrifices, because through sacrifices the flesh of another is slain, but through obedience one's own will. Contrary to this, disobedience is shown to be the sin of divination. From its opposite, therefore, it is better shown what should be thought of its praise. For if “to resist is as the sin of divination, and to refuse to acquiesce is as the crime of idolatry,” obedience alone possesses the merit of faith, without which everyone is proved to be unfaithful even if he appears to be faithful.

Likewise Augustine, [book XIX of The City of God, c. 19]. “One who desires the episcopate desires a good work.” He wished to explain what the episcopate is, because it is the name of a work, not of an honor. For the word is Greek and is derived from the fact that one who is placed over others superintends those over whom he is placed, namely by exercising care for them; for skopos is attention. Therefore, if we wished, we could say in Latin that bishops are “superintendents,” so that he may understand that one who loves to preside, not to benefit, is not a bishop. Accordingly, no one is prohibited from the pursuit of knowing the truth, which pertains to praiseworthy leisure. But a higher position, without which a people cannot be governed, although it is held and administered as is fitting, is nevertheless sought indecently. Therefore the charity of truth seeks holy leisure; the necessity of charity undertakes just business. If no one imposes this burden, one must be free for perceiving and contemplating the truth; but if it is imposed, it must be undertaken because of the necessity of charity. Yet not even then is the delight of truth to be abandoned altogether, lest that sweetness be withdrawn and just necessity become oppressive.

Likewise Peter. PART III. It is fitting that one who teaches and instructs untrained souls be such that he can adapt himself according to the capacity of those learning and direct the order of his words according to the capacity of the hearer. Therefore he ought above all to be learned and taught, irreproachable, mature, fearful, just as you yourselves have proved this Clement will be after me.

Likewise from the same. Clement, since you have wished to preside over all, help individuals as you are able and relieve individuals, for you bear the burden and solicitude of individuals.

Likewise Jerome, [on Titus, c. 1]. “One who despises you despises me.” From this it is manifest that those who, after despising the law of the Apostle, have wished to confer an ecclesiastical rank on someone not for merits but from favor act against Christ, who through His Apostle subsequently explained what kind of person is to be established as priest in the church.

Likewise Jerome in the book of Leviticus. Therefore, although the Lord had commanded concerning the appointment of a prince, and the Lord had chosen him, nevertheless the synagogue too is summoned. For the presence of the people is also required in ordaining a priest, so that all may know and be certain that he who is more excellent than all the people, who is more learned, who is holier, who is more eminent in every virtue, is elected to the priesthood, and this with the people standing by, lest afterward any reconsideration remain for anyone, or any scruple. This, moreover, is what the Apostle too commands in the ordination of a priest, saying: “But he must also have good testimony from those who are outside.” Yet I see something more in what it says: “because Moses summoned the whole synagogue,” that is, to gather all the powers of the mind and assemble the virtues into one, so that, when there is discourse concerning the priestly sacraments, all the powers of the mind may be vigilant and intent, nothing of wisdom, nothing of knowledge, nothing of diligence may be lacking in them, but the whole multitude of the senses may be present, the whole assembly of holy thoughts may be present, so that, examining within the sanctuary of his heart what the pontiff is, what the anointing is, and what his vestments are, he may be able to perceive it.

Likewise from the book of Numbers. If therefore so great and such a man as Moses does not permit his own judgment concerning the election of a prince of the people and the appointment of a successor, who will there be who dares—either from the congregation, which is often accustomed to be moved by acclamations, perhaps roused toward favor or for a price, or even from among the priests themselves—who will there be who judges himself suitable for this, unless it be one to whom it is revealed by the Lord as he prays and asks? As God also says to Moses: “Take to yourself Joshua the son of Nun, a man who has the Spirit of God in himself, and you shall lay your hands upon him, and you shall set him before Eleazar the priest; and give commands to him in the sight of the whole synagogue, and command concerning him before them, and you shall give your glory upon him, so that the sons of Israel may hear him.” You hear the ordination of the prince of the people described so manifestly that it scarcely needs exposition. Here there is no acclamation of the people, no account of blood relationship, no regard had for kinship. Let an inheritance of fields and estates be left to relatives. Let the governance of the people be handed over to him whom God has chosen, namely, such a man who has—as you have heard written—the Spirit of God in himself, and before whose sight the precepts of God are, and who is very well known and familiar to Moses, that is, in whom there is clarity of the law and knowledge, so that the sons of Israel may be able to hear him.

Likewise Gregory to the citizens of Naples, [book VIII, letter 40]. It is neither new nor blameworthy for the votes of the people to be divided into two parties in electing a bishop; but it is grave when, in cases of this kind, the election comes not from judgment but from favor alone. GRATIAN. But when the governance of the people is ordered to be handed over to one whom God chooses, it is given to be understood that it is sometimes handed over to some whom God has not chosen.

Hence Jerome:

PART IV. Perhaps we say something boldly, but we say what is written. A prince of the people and judge of the church is not always given by the judgment of God, but as our merits demand. If our deeds are evil and we work malicious things in the sight of God, princes are given to us according to our heart. And I shall prove this to you from the Scriptures. For hear what the Lord says: “They made a king for themselves, and not through me; a prince, and not through my counsel.” And this appears to have been said concerning that Saul whom the Lord Himself had indeed chosen and commanded to be made king. But because he had been chosen not according to the will of God but according to the merit of a sinful people, He denies that he was appointed with His will or counsel. Therefore, let us understand that something of this kind is also done in the churches: that in accordance with merits, either a ruler of the church powerful in word and deed is bestowed by God, or, if the people does what is malignant in the sight of the Lord, such a judge of the church is given under whom the people suffers hunger and thirst—not hunger for bread nor thirst for water, but hunger for hearing the word of God.

Likewise Augustine, [tractate XLVI on John 10]. There are certain rulers in the church of whom the apostle Paul says: “Seeking their own things, not the things of Jesus Christ.” What is “seeking their own things”? Not loving Christ freely, not seeking God for God's sake, pursuing temporal advantages, panting after gains, seeking honors from men. When these things are loved by a ruler and God is served for this reason, whoever is such is a hireling; let him not count himself among the sons. GRATIAN. Therefore those who are set over others are not always understood to be better than the rest. Hence Jerome, [on Titus, c. 1]:

This must be inferred against those who are puffed up concerning the episcopate and think that they have obtained not a stewardship of Christ but an empire: that whoever have been ordained bishops are not immediately better than all those who have not been, and they should not regard themselves as the more approved because they themselves have been elected. But if the sins of sons prevent a just man from the episcopate, how much more will each man, considering himself and knowing that the powerful will powerfully suffer torments, withdraw himself from this, not so much an honor as a burden, and not hesitate to occupy the place of others who are more worthy?

Likewise from the same, [on Titus, c. 2]. For what kind of edification will there be for a disciple if he understands himself to be greater than his teacher? Hence not only bishops, priests, and deacons ought greatly to take care that they surpass in conduct and speech the whole people over whom they preside, but also the lower rank—exorcists, readers, sacristans, acolytes, and absolutely all who serve the house of God—because it greatly destroys the church of Christ for laymen to be better than clerics.

The same, [on Titus, c. 1]. I fear that, just as the queen of the south, coming from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, will judge the men of her time, and the men of Nineveh, having done penance at the preaching of Jonah, will condemn those who despised a savior greater even than Jonah, so very many among the peoples may judge bishops who withdraw themselves from ecclesiastical rank and do not exercise the things which befit a bishop.

Likewise Ambrose in his rebuke to the people, [sermon 83]. But why do I rebuke you, when you can convict me with one statement? For I am convicted when in this respect I see the clerics to be more negligent than you. For how can I correct sons when I cannot amend brothers? Or with what confidence shall I become angry with laymen when I am silenced before my associates by the shame of modesty? But I, brothers, do not speak concerning all; there are certainly some who are devoted, and there are also others who are negligent. But I name no one: let his own conscience address each.

Likewise Bede on Matthew. Nor should we judge it sufficient for our salvation if we are equal in faith or deeds to crowds of the negligent or of any unlearned persons, since one rule of believing and living alike has been prescribed for them in the sacred writings. GRATIAN. Therefore, lest, as was said above, someone seek such successors for himself in his own office, bishops are prohibited from establishing another as successor for themselves and substituting another in their own place by designating names.