I wish I had the wit and wisdom to sort out this business of "ontological seal" so that we might be able to discuss the problem of priestly ordination: "Whether ordination makes a man a being of higher status", and what this might mean in practice. Confusion seems to arise from the use of the term "ontological" but when I start there I get bogged down in words and meanings that are not familiar to most.
So let's start with the things we might agree on. The soul, for example. Wikipedia gives a fair survey of different ideas of soul in different religions and philosophies. Nothing I read there would make me feel we need a new definition in our religion. From Wiki: "The soul is the purported immaterial aspect or essence of a living being. It is typically believed to be immortal and to exist apart from the material world", and
"The Bible teaches that upon death, souls are immediately welcomed into heaven, having received forgiveness of sins through accepting Christ as Savior. Believers experience death as a transition where they depart their physical bodies to dwell in God's presence. While the soul is united with God at death, the physical body remains in the grave, awaiting resurrection. At the time of the resurrection, the body will be raised, perfected, and reunited with the soul. This fully restored, glorified unity of body and spirit will then exist eternally in the renewed creation described in Revelation 21–22." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul )
For our purposes that is probably enough. It's pretty much how we've thought of 'soul' from the start. Augustine was the first to suggest that Baptism left a mark on the soul. He liked it to the brand soldiers used to get to discourage deserting. We might liken it to a tattoo that gang members get to show off their belonging. The seal imprinted by baptism was indelible, to show that the person belonged to God and, even if they had renounced their faith under persecution, when they returned they would not need to be baptised again. Actually that amounts to an acknowledgement that God is faithful in her commitment to one who has accepted baptism.
During the great explosion of scholarship in the Middle Ages the question arose as to what else this 'seal' or 'character', branded on the soul in the three sacraments, Baptism, Confirmation and Orders, might do in each case, other than just being proof of belonging much like a membership card or passport.
At this stage it's clear we are in the realm of theory and speculation, like the development of hypotheses in our modern scientific method. While some elements get to be incorporated into formal church teaching from time to time, most remain simply theological theories.
So to get the present teaching of the church on the 'sacramental seal or character', it is easiest to look at the Catechism (1992) but for convenience I'll copy in a few numbers here.
An indelible spiritual mark . . .
1272 Incorporated into Christ by Baptism, the person baptized is configured to Christ. Baptism seals the Christian with the indelible spiritual mark (character) of his belonging to Christ. No sin can erase this mark, even if sin prevents Baptism from bearing the fruits of salvation.83 Given once for all, Baptism cannot be repeated.
1273 Incorporated into the Church by Baptism, the faithful have received the sacramental character that consecrates them for Christian religious worship.84 The baptismal seal enables and commits Christians to serve God by a vital participation in the holy liturgy of the Church and to exercise their baptismal priesthood by the witness of holy lives and practical charity.85
1274 The Holy Spirit has marked us with the seal of the Lord ("Dominicus character") "for the day of redemption."86 "Baptism indeed is the seal of eternal life."87 The faithful Christian who has "kept the seal" until the end, remaining faithful to the demands of his Baptism, will be able to depart this life "marked with the sign of faith,"88 with his baptismal faith, in expectation of the blessed vision of God - the consummation of faith - and in the hope of resurrection.
You might notice the concern here is to say what it does rather than what it is. In particular, note that the Catechism has nothing to say about an 'ontological' seal. The key ideas is that it enables one to worship God through the Church's liturgy and to exercise a priestly function of witness.
The baptismal seal enables and commits Christians to serve God by a vital participation in the holy liturgy of the Church and to exercise their baptismal priesthood by the witness of holy lives and practical charity. (See No. 1273)
So much for the baptism seal. What does the Catechism say about the ordination seal? It's a bit long, but the prayers of ordination deserve to be meditated on when we pray for our leaders.
VII. The Effects of the Sacrament of Holy Orders
The indelible character
1581 This sacrament configures the recipient to Christ by a special grace of the Holy Spirit, so that he may serve as Christ's instrument for his Church. By ordination one is enabled to act as a representative of Christ, Head of the Church, in his triple office of priest, prophet, and king.
1582 As in the case of Baptism and Confirmation this share in Christ's office is granted once for all. the sacrament of Holy Orders, like the other two, confers an indelible spiritual character and cannot be repeated or conferred temporarily.74
1583 It is true that someone validly ordained can, for a just reason, be discharged from the obligations and functions linked to ordination, or can be forbidden to exercise them; but he cannot become a layman again in the strict sense,75 because the character imprinted by ordination is for ever. the vocation and mission received on the day of his ordination mark him permanently.
1584 Since it is ultimately Christ who acts and effects salvation through the ordained minister, the unworthiness of the latter does not prevent Christ from acting.76 St. Augustine states this forcefully:
As for the proud minister, he is to be ranked with the devil. Christ's gift is not thereby profaned: what flows through him keeps its purity, and what passes through him remains dear and reaches the fertile earth.... the spiritual power of the sacrament is indeed comparable to light: those to be enlightened receive it in its purity, and if it should pass through defiled beings, it is not itself defiled.77
The grace of the Holy Spirit
1585 The grace of the Holy Spirit proper to this sacrament is configuration to Christ as Priest, Teacher, and Pastor, of whom the ordained is made a minister.
1586 For the bishop, this is first of all a grace of strength (“the governing spirit": Prayer of Episcopal Consecration in the Latin rite):78 The grace to guide and defend his Church with strength and prudence as a father and pastor, with gratuitous love for all and a preferential love for the poor, the sick, and the needy. This grace impels him to proclaim the Gospel to all, to be the model for his flock, to go before it on the way of sanctification by identifying himself in the Eucharist with Christ the priest and victim, not fearing to give his life for his sheep:
Father, you know all hearts.
You have chosen your servant for the office of bishop.
May he be a shepherd to your holy flock,
and a high priest blameless in your sight,
ministering to you night and day;
may he always gain the blessing of your favor
and offer the gifts of your holy Church.
Through the Spirit who gives the grace of high priesthood grant him the power
to forgive sins as you have commanded
to assign ministries as you have decreed
and to loose from every bond by the authority which you
gave to your apostles. May he be pleasing to you by his gentleness and purity of heart,
presenting a fragrant offering to you,
through Jesus Christ, your Son....79
1587 The spiritual gift conferred by presbyteral ordination is expressed by this prayer of the Byzantine Rite. the bishop, while laying on his hand, says among other things:
Lord, fill with the gift of the Holy Spirit
him whom you have deigned to raise to the rank of the priesthood,
that he may be worthy to stand without reproach before your altar
to proclaim the Gospel of your kingdom,
to fulfill the ministry of your word of truth,
to offer you spiritual gifts and sacrifices,
to renew your people by the bath of rebirth;
so that he may go out to meet our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, your only Son,
on the day of his second coming,
and may receive from your vast goodness
the recompense for a faithful administration of his order.80
1588 With regard to deacons, "strengthened by sacramental grace they are dedicated to the People of God, in conjunction with the bishop and his body of priests, in the service (diakonia) of the liturgy, of the Gospel, and of works of charity."81
1589 Before the grandeur of the priestly grace and office, the holy doctors felt an urgent call to conversion in order to conform their whole lives to him whose sacrament had made them ministers. Thus St. Gregory of Nazianzus, as a very young priest, exclaimed:
We must begin by purifying ourselves before purifying others; we must be instructed to be able to instruct, become light to illuminate, draw close to God to bring him close to others, be sanctified to sanctify, lead by the hand and counsel prudently. I know whose ministers we are, where we find ourselves and to where we strive. I know God's greatness and man's weakness, but also his potential. [Who then is the priest? He is] the defender of truth, who stands with angels, gives glory with archangels, causes sacrifices to rise to the altar on high, shares Christ's priesthood, refashions creation, restores it in God's image, recreates it for the world on high and, even greater, is divinized and divinizes.82
and the holy Cure of Ars: "The priest continues the work of redemption on earth.... If we really understood the priest on earth, we would die not of fright but of love.... the Priesthood is the love of the heart of Jesus."83
Note, 1581 This sacrament configures the recipient to Christ by a special grace of the Holy Spirit, so that he may serve as Christ's instrument for his Church. By ordination one is enabled to act as a representative of Christ, Head of the Church, in his triple office of priest, prophet, and king.
'Configures', 'to serve as an instrument', 'enabled to act as a representative of Christ.' None of these changes the 'ontological being' of the man any more than being sworn in as Prime Minister makes you some kind of super human. In fact they are more like our legal entitlements than some kind of alchemy worked on the soul. Paul called himself an ambassador of Christ.
Finally, back to the ontological bug. It is generally thought this is an idea coming from Thomas Aquinas. I want to point ut that Aquinas would never have thought of the 'character' as changing the essence of the man. In III Q. 63 Art. 4, he asks "
Whether the character be subjected [imprinted] in the powers of the soul?
And replies: As stated above (Article 3), a character is a kind of seal by which the soul is marked, so that it may receive, or bestow on others, things pertaining to Divine worship. Now the Divine worship consists in certain actions: and the powers of the soul are properly ordained to actions, just as the essence is ordained to existence. Therefore a character is subjected not in the essence of the soul, but in its power.
I would like to see this word 'ontological' expunged from our vocabulary. We are not a school of philosophy, so a word at home in a particular branch of philosophy - 'Ontology' - has no place here. If anyone wants to talk about Ontology that's okay by me, so long as we follow the rules and not settle for sharing weird and wonderful ideas.
Hi Harry, I'm not sure what you are blowing the whistle on, but from the passages you quote from John and myself, I suspect it must be for our breaching our own rule to write in language suitable for ordinary conversation. Clearly I'm being reported and stand now before the tribunal to give an account of my actions.
As a matter of fact it was your post "Massive Ontological Change Query" https://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=252956 that made me feel I had to get more involved in this. At first I held back because I'm not a theologian. I've done the 4-year course at University level, and no further. However theologians are thin on the ground among us, it seems, so perhaps I should have a go at sorting out what to me is a massive misunderstanding, one that's gone viral even among Protestant ministers.
I'm sure every priest at ordination is deeply impressed with the enormity of what it means to be given authority in the community to speak in the person of Jesus, to teach, to preside at Eucharist, to break the bread in memory of him, reciting those memorial, consecratory words. I certainly was, and I accepted, with awe, the new level of respect I was treated to, a constant reminder that people were in some sense (often enough some weird sense) seeing Christ in me. One does one's best to keep feet on ground and to allow one's sense of inadequacy develop into some kind of humility. At a young age, it ain't easy.
However, our issue is that apparently some priests have been told they are changed in their very being. I don't know where such an idea came from, but certainly not from Church teaching. Perhaps it was retreat masters exaggerating a little. Perhaps it was people taking St John Vianney too seriously. Perhaps it was, as John says, a way of seeing the priest and bishop that was common and widespread among the people. I can only say, it never occurred to me, nor did I imagine that others had that idea about me. My mother had serious reservations, as she had about all priests, although her enormous respect for the priesthood led her to start every letter to me with "Dear Reverend Father ..." That takes some beating, aye!
Now I must ask leave to offer a short summary of the problem with this "ontological change" thing. I'll try not to test the patience of readers too much - though I seriously doubt that most of our readers would find anything beyond them in what either John or I have written so far. We - women included - are not a dumb bunch by any means.
Why is it inconceivable that a priest would be "ontologically" changed at ordination?
The main issue is that a change in your very being would produce another kind of being. John speaks of superman. But central to the teaching about the Incarnation is that Jesus had to be both God and man if he is to be the bridge between God and Humanity. He could not be Superman or he would not be representative of us. In fact his death would be a lie, a mockery of God and us. Conversely if the priest is a superman he cannot represent Christ, he cannot act "in persona Christi" because Christ was not a superman. End of story.
Am I still an Ontologically-changed man - and if so am I currently reduced to being human /humanised? you ask in that earlier post.
Clearly you are pretty normal. You barrack for Richmond, for God's sake! But it we are not "ontologically" changed, what's all the fuss about? There are two levels to look at: first the serious matter of some sort of "character" imprinted in the soul at baptism, confirmation and ordination. And secondly, the role of priests in the community.
For the origin of this idea we have to go back to Augustine (4th cent). As a bishop in North Africa he was asked if you denied the faith under persecution did you lose your baptism so that to rejoin the community in worship you had to be baptised all over again. It's a fair question and one still current today in other fields. Augustine worked through the meaning of baptism - of being made a child of God, and saw that God would never abandon his child even if the child denied his Father under pressure.
So Augustine concluded that baptism is permanent. He thought there might be some kind of seal imprinted on the soul to show it belonged to God, like the brand burnt into the arm of a soldier to make deserting a dangerous risk. He could be recognised anywhere. Over time the same idea was applied to Confirmation and Ordination.
What is this seal or "character" impressed on the soul? It is like a badge, a sign of rank. There's no doubt that the leadership of any group is a kind of rank, whether you're an officer in the army, a member of the Board of Directors, a teacher, captain of the footy team, etc. And of course rank is recognised as a certain dignity and with certain obligations. The priest is entitled to be respected as a leader, teacher, presider of Eucharist, minister of Sacraments, etc. He is obliged to carry those responsibilities willingly and fulfill those duties properly.
The question now becomes: Are we still marked with that seal, and if so what does it mean to us? A/. As a seal of God's fidelity it is permanent . God does not retract his favour or withdraw his love from anyone. And in my opinion the obligations seal imposed by the seal both enable us and oblige us still to teach and care for people according to our circumstances. If everyone, every lay person, has by baptism a priestly role which cannot be negated, so an ordained minister is still enabled and obliged to carry on according to his circumstances.
Naturally our circumstances as mere laymen are very limited, but in teaching, encouraging, caring for others we may have more opportunity than the busy parish priest. Certainly in offering constructive criticism to the Church we have more freedom than the pries t engaged in official ministry. We might also have a clearer view from outside than we had when inside the clerical team.