An Apology for the Religious Orders

 CONTENTS

 INTRODUCTION

 Part I

 CHAPTER I

 CHAPTER II

 CHAPTER III

 CHAPTER IV

 CHAPTER V

 CHAPTER VI

 CHAPTER VII

 CHAPTER VIII

 CHAPTER IX

 CHAPTER X

 CHAPTER XI

 CHAPTER XII

 CHAPTER XIII

 CHAPTER XIV

 CHAPTER XV

 CHAPTER XVI

 CHAPTER XVII

 CHAPTER XVIII

 CHAPTER XIX

 CHAPTER XX

 CHAPTER XXI

 CHAPTER XXII

 CHAPTER XXIII

 CHAPTER XXIV

 CHAPTER XXV

 CHAPTER XXVI

 Part II

 CHAPTER I

 CHAPTER II

 CHAPTER III

 CHAPTER IV

 CHAPTER V

 CHAPTER VI

 CHAPTER VII

 CHAPTER VIII

 CHAPTER IX

 CHAPTER X

 CHAPTER XI

 CHAPTER XII

 CHAPTER XIII

 CHAPTER XIV

 CHAPTER XV

 CHAPTER XVI

 CHAPTER I

 CHAPTER II

 CHAPTER III

 CHAPTER IV

 CHAPTER V

 CHAPTER VI

 CHAPTER VII

 CHAPTER VIII

 CHAPTER IX

 CHAPTER X

 CHAPTER XI

 CHAPTER XII

 CHAPTER XIII

 CHAPTER XIV

 CHAPTER XV

 CHAPTER XVI

 CHAPTER XVII

 CHAPTER XVIII

 CHAPTER XIX

 CHAPTER XX

 CHAPTER XXI

 CHAPTER XXII

 CHAPTER XXIII

 CHAPTER XXIV

 CHAPTER XXV

 CHAPTER XXVI

CHAPTER XVII

THE EPISCOPAL OFFICE IS MORE SACRED THAN IS THE RELIGIOUS LIFE

To one who has not duly considered the subject, the religious state might appear to be more sublime than the episcopal office. For the love of God, to the perfection of which religious dedicate their lives, far surpasses the love of our neighbour to which the pontifical state is devoted; just as the contemplative life, in which religious are engaged, is nobler than the active life, to which bishops are ordained. Dionysius (VI. Cap. Eccles. Hierarch.)

says that, "Some persons call religious servants, and others call them monks, on account of their pure service and ministry to God, and by reason of their simple undivided life which lifts them by holy contemplation of those things which are unseen, to a godlike oneness and to perfection pleasing to the Lord." Again the episcopal office may appear to fall short of perfection, because bishops are allowed to possess money, notwithstanding the words of Our Lord, "If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell what thou hast, and give to the poor" (Matt. xix. 21).

             But this way of thinking is not in accordance with truth. Dionysius says (V. Cap. Eccles. Hierarch.) that the "duty of bishops is to produce perfection," and elsewhere (Cap. VI.), he says, that "the life of monks is a state of the perfect." Now it is evident that greater perfection is needed in order to make others perfect than is required in a state which in itself is perfect; just as it is better to do something than to be something, and just as a cause is more powerful than its effect. Hence, the episcopal state is one of greater perfection, than is that of any religious order.

             This conclusion is still more clearly established, if we consider the obligations attached to the episcopal office, and those belonging to the religious life. Religious are bound to renounce material possessions, to observe chastity, and to live in obedience. But the duties of bishops are far more onerous and difficult of fulfilment. For they, as we have seen, are obliged to lay down their lives for their flocks. Hence the obligation of a bishop is much weightier than is that of a religious.

             Bishops are further bound by the same obligations as those imposed upon religious. For, as it is their duty to feed their flocks, not only by word and example, but likewise by temporal assistance, they are obliged, if need arise, to distribute their worldly goods among those committed to their care. St. Peter was three times commanded by our Lord to feed His sheep. The exhortation sank into his mind, and he recalls it in his epistle, saying, "Feed the flock of God which is among you" (1 St. Peter v. 2). St. Gregory, likewise, speaking as though in the person of bishops, says: "We ought in charity to distribute our goods among our sheep . . . for how shall he who will not of his temporal substance minister unto his flock, be ready for its sake to sacrifice his life?"

             Bishops, likewise, are bound to live in chastity. For it is only meet that they who are to preach purity to others, should themselves lead spotless lives. Hence Dionysius (III. Cap. Coelest. Hierarch.) says that from the abundance of their own chastity, they must impart purity to others.

             Religious, by their vow of obedience, bind themselves to submit to one superior; but a bishop constitutes himself the servant of all of whom he undertakes the care. He is bound to imitate the example of St. Paul, who tells us that he sought not that which was profitable to himself but to many, that they might be saved (1 Cor. x. 33). Again the Apostle says of himself, "For whereas I was free unto all, I made myself the servant of all" (1 Cor. ix. 19). "For we preach not ourselves, but Jesus Christ Our Lord; and ourselves your servants through Jesus" (2 Cor. iv. 5). Hence it is the custom for the Sovereign Pontiff to subscribe himself as "the servant of the servants of God." We must conclude, then, that the episcopal office is a condition of higher perfection than is the religious life.

             Dionysius, again, writes (VI. Cap. Eccles. Hierarch.), "The monastic state is not intended to lead others forward, but is ordained for its own sake, and remains on its own peculiar and sacred basis." Bishops, on the other hand, are under the obligation of guiding others to God. St. Gregory, writing on the book of Ezechiel, says that, "no sacrifice is more acceptable to God than is zeal for souls." These words clearly point out that the episcopal is, of all states, the most perfect. This conclusion is further proved by the custom of the church, which, when a religious is appointed to a bishopric, releases him from obedience to the superiors of his order. For this could not be done, were not the episcopal state one of greater perfection than the religious. In acting thus the Church of God obeys the counsel of St. Paul, "Be ye therefore zealous for the better gifts" (1 Cor. xii. 31).