Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 4.djvu/147

 COLLEGE

11.3

COLLEGE

power of order and jurisdiction is the same in the Apostles and in their successors, but, whereas the Apostles received it from the Divine Founder Himself, the bishops receive it through the channel of other bishops. Immediate commission implies, in the mis- sionarj', the power to produce, at first hand, creden- tials to prove that he is the envoy of God by doing works which God alone can work. Hence the f/i<jr- isma, or gift, of miracles granted to the Apostles, but withheld from the generality of their successors whose mission is sufficiently accredited through their connex- ion with the original .\postolate.

(2) Another prerogative of the Apostles is the' uni- versality of their mi.ssion. They were sent to esta- blish the Church wherever men in need of salvation were to be found. Their field of action had no limits but those of their own convenience and choice, at least if we take them collectively; directions by the chief Apostle are not excluded, for on them may have depended the good order and the success of their work.

(.3) A third Apostolic prerogative is the plenitude of power. As planters of the Church the Apostles required and possessed the power to speak with full authority in their own name, without appealing to higher authorities; also the power to found and or- ganize local churches, to appoint and consecrate bishops and to invest them with jurisdiction. The limit to their powers in this respect was: not to undo the work already done by their colleagues. Such power, if needed, could have been exercised only by the head of the Church.

(4) A fourth privilege of the Apostles is their per- sonal infallibility in preaching the Ciospel. Their successors in the hierarchy owe what infallibility they pos.sess to the Divine assistance watching, with un- failing care, over the magisterium, or teacliing office, as a whole, and over its head; the Apostles received, each personally, the Holy Ghost, Who revealed to them all the truth they had to preach. This Pente- costal gift was necessarj- in order to establish each particular church on the solid foundation of unshak- able truth.

The prerogatives of the Apostles as founders of the Church were, of course, personal; they were not to be transmitted to their successors because to these they were not necessary. What was passed on is the ordi- nary function of teaching, ruling, ministering, i. e. the powers of order and jurisdiction. The .\postolate was an extraordinarj- and only temporarj- form of the episcopate; it was superseded by an ordinary and permanent hierarchy as soon as its constitutional work was done. There is, however, one Apostle who has a successor of equal powers in the Roman poni iff. Above the prerogatives of his colleagues ISt. Peter had the unique distinction of being the prinrif)leof the Church's unity and cohesion. As the Church has to endure to the end of time, so has the unifying and preserving office of St. Peter. Without such a prin- ciple, witliout a head, the body of the Bride of Christ would be no better than a disjointed congeries of members, unworthy of the Divine Bridegroom. In fact the connexion of the Church with Christ and the Apostles would be loosened and weakened to the breaking-point. The history of Churches separated from Rome affords abundant proof of this statement. In the Roman pontiffs, then, the Apo.stolate is still living and acting. Hence from the earliest times the office of the pope has been honoured «nth the title of Apostolatc, a.s continuing the functions of the Apos- tles; the Roman See has, in the same order of ideas, been styled the Apostolic See, and the reigning pope, in the Sliddle Ages, u.sed to be addressed Aposlnhlii.i vester and Apnslolicus. In the Litany of the Saints we pniy: "That Thou wouldst vouchsafe to preserve our apostolic prelate [domnnm nostrum apoxlolicum] and all orders of the Church in lioly religion." IV.— 8

The difference between the Apostolatc of St. Peter and that of his successors bears on two points only:

(1) St. Peter was chosen and appointed directly by Our Lord; the pope receives the same Divine appoint- ment through the channel of men; the electors desig- nate the person on whom God bestows the office.

(2) The papal infallibility also differs from that of St. Peter. The pope is only infallible w-hen, in the full exercise of his authority, ex cathedra, he defines a doc- trine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church. His infallibility rests on the Divine assistance, on the permanent presence of Christ in the Church. The infallibility of St. Peter and the -Apos- tles rested on their being tilled and penetrated by the light of the indwelling Holy Spirit of truth. The charix7na of working miracles, granted to the Apostles, is not continued in the popes. If it was necessary to con\'ince the first believers that the hand of God was laying the foundations of the Cliurch, it ceases to be so when the strength, the beauty, and the vastness of the structure proclaims to the world that none but the Father in Heaven could have erected it for the good of His children.

ScHEEBEN, Manual nf Cnlholic Thcologu, tr. Wilhelm and SCANNELL (London, 1906), 1, 8, 9, 11.

J. Wilhelm.

College de France, The, was founded in the interest of higher education by Francis I. He had planned the erection of this college as far back as 1517, but not until 1.5.30, and then under the inspira- tion of Bade and Jean du Bellay, did he realize his idea. As the L'niversity of Paris taught neither Hebrew nor Greek, he established chairs of these two languages, and secured for them the best teachers obtainable, Paradisi and Guidacerio Vatable for Hebrew, and Peter Danes and Jacques Toussaint for Greek. Their salaries were paid from the king's coffers, and they were to receive students gratuitously, a ruling which caused great rivalry on the part of the professors of the L^niversity of Paris, who de- pended on tuition fees. The professors of the college were accused before Parliament by Noel Beda, on the plea that the 'S'ulgate would lose its authority since Hebrew and Greek were taught publicly. G. de Marcillac defended the "Royal Lectors", as they were called, and won their case. Later on they were accused of a leaning towards Calvinism, and the Parliament forbade them to read or interpret any of the Sacred Books in Hebrew or Greek; how- ever, the protection of the king prevented the execu- tion of the sentence.

In 1534 a chair of Latin eloquence was added to the college. The succeeding kings favoured the college. During the Revolution the courses were unmolested; the Convention evpn raised the salaries, by decree, from one and two thousand francs to three thousand. The College de France was first ruled by the Grand Aumonier de France, who appointed the professors until 1661, when it became a part of the University of Paris, from which it was afterwards separated for a time, and finally reaffiliated in 1766. In 1744 the king himself took it under his direct authority. In 1795 the minister of the interior was in charge; in 1831 the minister of public works; in 1832 the minister of public instruction, who has retained the charge to the present day. It is inde- pendent of the university, and administered by its own faculty. The college has been known by differ- ent names: in 1534 it was called the "("ollege of the Three Languages"; under Louis XIII, the "College Royal"; during the Revolution, the "College Na- tional"; Napoleon called it the "College Impdrial", and under the Restoration, it bore the name of "College Royal". Through the munificence of kings and governments the college grew steadily. In 1545 Francis added to the three chairs of Ian-