What Is Dominican Priesthood?
by Thomas P. Rausch

Winter 199, Vol.42 No.4, pp. 323-339

Thomas P. Rausch, S.J., is professor and chair of Theological Studies at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. He is a member the U.S. Catholic/Southern Baptist Conversation and serves on the Theological Commission and the Ecumenical Commission of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles and co-chairs the Los Angeles Catholic/Evangelical dialogue.

The church needs a priesthood more prophetic than cultic in its orientation.

HOW should priesthood in the Dominican Order be understood? Dominican priesthood is the priesthood of an apostolic religious order and should be understood as such. But as John O'Malley has argued in a recent article, the traditional categories used to describe religious priesthood are inadequate and lead to a confusion harmful to religious life. Though the confusion is deeply rooted, O'Malley sees it still present in Second Vatican Council's decree on priests, Presbyterorum Ordinis, a document which assumes that all priests are presiding over local communities of the faithful and exercising a primarily sacramental ministry, in hierarchical union with the bishops. (1)

The problem that O'Malley has singled out is that the model chosen as paradigmatic of priesthood is that of the diocesan clergy. But priesthood in the church admits a variety of types and forms. The priesthood of a parish priest or pastor is very different from that of a monk or a religious priest belonging to an apostolic order. This is especially true of the kind of priesthood St. Dominic intended for those who joined him in his ministry and became part of his community.

The Catholic understanding of priesthood combines into one office two religious roles which the history of religion has seen as conceptually distinct, that of priest or cult official and that of prophet. (2) The priestly role is one of presiding over the ritual expression of a community's religious experience. In this way, the priest leads the community in addressing itself to God. The prophet is the one through whom God's word is addressed to the community.

This conceptual distinction of roles has been useful for purposes of religious study and description, though it may overlook a deeper coincidence in the biblical tradition on an existential level. But in the Christian tradition, from the time of the early Christian prophets and teachers, the cultic has been rooted in the prophetic. Those who came to be called priests (the English word is derived from the Latin presbyter) preside at the Eucharist because they have instructed the community through the word and exercised a presiding role within it. In terms of Catholic theology, they have been authorized to preach in the name of the church. Thus the church's pastoral office cannot be reduced to a purely cultic function.

Yet as Michael Buckley has suggested, the actual way priesthood is lived out in the concrete life of the church has sometimes tended more toward a cultic expression of priesthood and at other times tended more toward a prophetic expression of priesthood.

In an article prepared for scholastics preparing for ordination in the Society of Jesus, Buckley sketched the differences between a cultic and a prophetic priesthood. A cultic priesthood is characterized by an emphasis on sacramental ministry and the liturgical prayer of the choral office. It describes the responsibility of the ordained monk whose life is devoted to the opus Dei, the cathedral canon who has responsibility for the liturgical and sacramental ministry of a major church, as well as the parish pastor or priest who presides over the liturgical and sacramental life of a local congregation.


A prophetic priesthood is a priesthood given to the ministry of the word in its fullest sense. It is primarily kerygmatic rather than liturgical, although it does not exclude the liturgical. Unlike priests whose ministry is focused on the leadership of stable local communities, those exercising a prophetic priesthood must be available for mission. In Buckley's words:

A prophetic priesthood, one which was concerned to speak out the word of God in any way that it could be heard, assimilated, and incarnated within the social life of human beings, a priesthood which spoke with the religious experience of human beings and -- as did the prophets of the Old Testament -- coupled this care for authentic belief with a concern for those in social misery: the ministry of the word, the ministries of interiority, the ministry to social misery. (3)

For Buckley, the Society of Jesus is characterized by such a prophetic priesthood. The Jesuits, as a clerical order, represented a new form of the ancient presbyterium; they were a group of priests with a primarily prophetic mission.

Ignatius' community was unique for its time, because it was established without the obligation of the choral office. Because Ignatius wanted Jesuits to be mobile, with the availability symbolized by the fourth vow of special obedience to the pope for mission, certain ministries were originally excluded. In the words of the constitutions:

Because the members of the Society ought to be ready at any hour to go to some or other parts of the world where they may be sent by the sovereign pontiff or their own superiors, they ought not to take a curacy of souls, and still less ought they to take charge of religious women or any other women whatever to be their confessors regularly or to direct them. (4)

Though Jesuit spirituality was profoundly eucharistic, Ignatius did not insist that each Jesuit celebrate daily, nor did he do so himself. But Jesuits were to attend Mass daily. In the Jesuit tradition, until concelebration became common, a Jesuit on the day of his last vows generally did not say Mass, but attended and received Communion from the one receiving his vows.


This prophetic priesthood we have been considering has much in common with the mid-twelfth century evangelical movement known as the vita apostolica. It could just as easily describe how Dominic understood the priesthood to which he and his companions were called. But I wonder if priesthood within the subsequent Dominican tradition, as in other orders, has not developed in a more cultic direction.

The Second Vatican Council called the different religious communities in the church to a renewal of their religious lives on the basis of two principles: first, "a continuous return to the sources of all Christian life and to the original inspiration behind a given community," and second, "an adjustment of the community to the changed conditions of the times."(5) Like other religious orders, the Dominicans have made great efforts toward carrying out the Council's mandate.

But their effort to articulate the inspiration behind their community is complicated by the need to move from the rather different positions of friars and nuns in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries to a contemporary appreciation of the full participation of each in the charism of what is now often referred to as the Dominican family.

The debate has been lively. Edward Schillebeeckx has characterized the Dominican charism in terms of Dominic's openness to the vita apostolica; he founded an order able to combine the spiritual heritage of the past with an adaptation to new religious needs. (6) According to Leonard Boyle, Honorius, III established the Dominicans in 1217 as an "Order of Preachers-in-General," adding to the preaching mission four years later a general mission of hearing confessions. (7) Simon Tugwell, in a seminal study, The Way of the Preacher, identified it as the gratia praedicationis, the grace of preaching. (8) Jeremy Miller, apparently sensing that Tugwell's emphasis on preaching, particularly verbal proclamation, was not sufficiently inclusive of the variety of Dominicans, women and men, as well as their works, both artistic and intellectual, argued for a broader approach. He outlined the Dominican "leitmotif" as veritas, first contemplated, then communicated; he summarized the Dominican charism as a principle of adventurousness.(9) Some have offered the suggestion that the Order "would do better to begin thinking of a charism for friars, another for nuns, etc."(10) But this has been rejected by general chapters of the order. (11)

Whatever should be said about the charism of the Dominican family in the life of the contemporary church, our focus here is much more restricted: What kind of priesthood did Dominic envision for his companions and how is priesthood understood in his community today?

Unlike the movement which became the Franciscan first order, the Dominican first order was clerical from the beginning. Dominic was a priest, a cathedral canon, but a rather untypical one. What was formative for him was his itinerant ministry with his bishop, Diego of Osma, in their struggle against the Albigensians in southern France. The Dominican order grew out of the group of missionaries who joined Dominic. Influenced by the vita apostolica, they lived an itinerant life, owning only what they could carry with them, and begging for their support, an for the sake of the proclamation of the Gospel.

Simon Tugwell relays a story, originally told by an early Dominican preacher. When Dominic requested that Pope Innocent III recognize his new community as an Order of Preachers (Ordo Praedicatorum), the pope wondered to himself why this man wanted to found an order consisting entirely of bishops. The pope was confused because it was still assumed that bishops were the only official preachers. (12) Whether the story is true or not, it is particularly instructive. Preaching in the thirteenth century was not seen as the ordinary role of priests; they assisted the bishop by carrying out a sacramental ministry in local churches, but the bishop was the official preacher. Priests were primarily cultic ministers.


But Dominic, in identifying his largely clerical community as an order of preachers, was opting for a prophetic priesthood, in the sense in which we used the term earlier. The ministry of his followers was not to be modeled on that of the regular clergy who had authority over local communities as well as financial claims upon them. The priesthood he intended was something new, a specifically active or apostolic form of clerical religious life focused on a preaching ministry. The preaching mission given his order by Honorius III in 1217 was unprecedented, as was the general mission of hearing confessions entrusted to the order in 1221. The preaching mission was derived from the exempt character of the order's priests as evangelical assistants to the bishops and the pope, rather than from the responsibility of bishops and pastors to preach or to see that sermons were preached in their churches.

At the same time, Dominican priestly life was to be rooted in liturgy and contemplation. But since the traditional form of such a communal life, even for canons was essentially monastic, there was a monastic dimension to Dominican life from the beginning, although mitigated by Dominic's emphasis on the priority of preaching. The tension between a cultic and a prophetic priesthood can be seen here, in the emphasis on a preaching ministry rooted in the contemplative, liturgical life of the community. But the cultic was subordinated to the prophetic.

Dominic had adopted for the members of his community the apostolic life, based on Luke 10. What was needed was clear preaching of the Gospel. Their structures and lifestyle, including their emphasis on poverty, developed from the pragmatic task to be done. Everything was subordinated to this. The nuns and lay brothers apparently shared in this task by providing a material and spiritual base for the preachers. But they too ministered the word by sharing their own interior life. Catherine of Siena is reported to have told her confessor repeatedly that her greatest consolation was talking about God with others. (13)

Dominican spirituality followed from the mission. Because of the community's apostolic orientation, regular observance was always secondary. Dominic sent his followers far and wide, to preach and later to study. The constitutions were understood as human law, not binding under pain of sin. Superiors could give dispensations from traditional monastic observances, including choir, which interfered with preaching or study. Though the order had to struggle in its early days to defend its preaching ministry, separated from the responsibilities of pastoring local communities, it won the right to be acknowledged as an order of preachers, just as Dominic intended it to be.


However, a number of factors in subsequent Dominican history had the effect of changing this originally prophetic or kerygmatic priesthood into a more cultic one. They include a gradual 'monastification' of the order, an increasing responsibility for stable local communities, the dominance of the theology of Aquinas, and the triumph of the private Mass. We will consider briefly each of these factors.

1. MONASTIFICATION Founded as an apostolic community, the Dominicans combined elements of the monastic and canonical past with the new evangelical movement of the late twelfth century. The mission of the community determined its lifestyle and spirituality. But the process of institutionalization that the community went through in the several generations that followed Dominic's gave it an increasingly monastic character.

Schillebeeckx, who acknowledges the formative heritage of the earlier tradition, still speaks of the "dangerous recollection of the monastic and canonical past" (242). Tugwell, in The Way of the Preacher, notes that the growing body of legislation treated a Dominican house, originally known as a praedicatio or "preaching community," as a religious community which prepared a person for preaching through a religious formation (82-83). But this was to return to the monastic image of the bowl which must first be filled through contemplation, rather than the funnel which immediately channels the grace received. Miller correctly interprets Tugwell's book as a caution against this monastic interpretation of the Dominican charism (244-245).

Much of this institutionalization took place during the administration of Humbert of Romans, who became the fifth master general of the order in 1254. Humbert's influence in defining the order is second only to that of Dominic. Humbert also insisted on preaching as the apostolic end of the order. His legislation helped to stabilize the community and organize its religious life, but there was the inevitable loss of the creative dynamism of the early days. He gave the Dominicans a liturgy that was simplified and streamlined, well adapted for a community with a worldwide apostolic mission, but it was still built around the choral office and so remained conventual or monastic. Three hundred years later Ignatius went further when he established an apostolic community without the obligation of choir. The Dominican liturgical rite, distinct from the Roman ritual, reflected monastic usages. Maintained until after the Second Vatican Council, it also contributed to a more cultic understanding of priesthood.

2. RESPONSIBILITY FOR LOCAL COMMUNITIES Not well versed in the history of the Dominican order, I put this forward rather tentatively. Dominic intended his community to be a highly mobile group of preachers; they were not to be tied down to traditional ministries. Thus he "left his Order, at least at first with a definite instinct against the official cure of souls."(14) According to Humbert, preaching was to take precedence over other spiritual exercises, including the Mass, confessions, the celebration of the sacraments and the Divine Office.(15) But from the beginning the order found itself with responsibility for local communities.

In the thirteenth century, the order resisted taking on pastoral responsibility for religious women; the general chapter of 1228 specifically forbade it. But under Humbert this changed; he drew up a uniform set of constitutions for convents of women who wanted to be incorporated into the order, thus establishing the legislation which would enable Dominican priests to serve as chaplains to Dominican nuns. (16)

Other pastoral commitments which tied Dominicans to congregations and communities were added as well. They built and staffed large churches, especially designed for preaching. It would be interesting to know what percentage of Dominican priests today are involved in pastoral care of parishes. The situation today has been compounded by the shortage of priests in the contemporary church which necessitates the involvement of more and more religious priests in a ministry which is pre-dominantly cultic and sacramental. But this is an emergency situation which runs the risk of endangering an order's particular charism.

The Dominicans can no more be criticized for taking on the care for those drawn to them by their zeal or entrusted to them by pastoral need than can the Jesuits for becoming involved in the work of education. But both of these developments represent commitments not intended originally by their founders. What is significant for our interest here is that the growing responsibility for local communities, with the sacramental ministries it entailed, meant that the originally prophetic priesthood of the order was becoming increasingly cultic in its contours as it was lived out.

3. DOMINANCE OF THOMISM It is ironic that the man who was to become the theologian par excellence of the "Order of Preachers" does not mention preaching in defining priesthood. Like other medieval theologians, Thomas defined priesthood in terms of sacramental power. Behind this concept ties the distinction between the power of ordination and the power of jurisdiction, developed by the canon lawyers in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. This emphasis on the "sacred power" (sacra potestas) of the priest stressed his cultic role rather than his relation to a particular ecclesial community: (17) According to Thomas,

the power of orders is established for the dispensation of the sacraments .... [and] is principally ordered to consecrating the body of Christ and dispensing it to the faithful, and to cleansing the faithful from their sins. (18)

Aquinas did not ignore the ministry of preaching; he treats it along with confession and study in his articles on religious life in the Summa Theologiae.(19) He assumes that preaching is the responsibility of orders like his own, although subject to the authority of the pope and respectful of the bishop's authority in his diocese.

But his failure to mention preaching in the context of the priesthood was to have unfortunate consequences in the subsequent history of Roman Catholic theology. His theology of the priesthood was confirmed by the Council of Trent and through the subsequent manualist tradition was passed down to our own time. Those preparing for the Catholic priesthood prior to the Second Vatican Council learned their theology from these manuals. Unlike the Reformation traditions which focused on the pastoral office as a preaching office (Predigtamt) or ministry (Dienst), Roman Catholic theology continued to focus on the priesthood in terms of the sacred power the priest possessed which enabled him to consecrate or "confect" the Eucharist. The priest was thus a sacred person, exercising a cultic priesthood. (20)

That Thomas' own order was negatively affected by this inadequate theology of priesthood seems clear. The order had linked preaching with being a Dominican from the beginning, but it did not explicitly link it to priesthood in its legislation until 1571. (21) It would seem that the Dominican theology of preaching was better developed than its theology of the ordained ministry.

4. THE TRIUMPH OF THE PRIVATE MASS Nowhere is the cultic concept of priesthood more clearly seen than in the practice of celebrating mass without a congregation. Schillebeeckx traces the origin of the private mass to the practice of the veneration of relics in the sixth century, a practice requiring the presence of a priest who would read the mass at the altar containing the reliquary. By the ninth century, private masses and votive masses for particular intentions had become well established. (22)

Besides reemphasizing the medieval theology which understood the priesthood in terms of the power of consecration, the Council of Trent in its canons on the Mass reaffirmed that the Mass was a propitiatory sacrifice offered for the living and the dead (DS. 1753). Contrary to the Reformation view, the priest in Catholic theology remained a sacred person who offered in persona Christi the church's sacrifice, with or without a congregation.

The Dominican Constitutions point to the conventual Mass as the center of the community liturgy. (23) As in many communities with a monastic orientation, Dominicans prior to the Second Vatican Council who participated in the conventual mass would also celebrate another mass, often a private one. There is nothing uniquely Dominican about this; for many religious priests, living in large communities, private mass had long been the norm. One effect of this practice, certainly of long standing in the life of the church, was to reinforce a cultic understanding of priesthood, for it was in these quiet moments, early in the morning, that many religious priests found their own priesthood most fully expressed.

But it is interesting to note that the absolutely private mass, without even the presence of a server, was forbidden by church law until after the Second Vatican Council. (24) This fact is an interesting one, seldom adverted to. It suggests that somewhere deep in the subconsciousness of the church, the recognition that the Eucharist was the church's communal worship, not the private prayer of a priest, still perdured. Yet for many religious priests today, the absolutely private mass has become the rule.


It is not my intention here to attempt to suggest to Dominican priests what their ministries should be. Many clerical religious institutes whose priesthood is conceived prophetically are questioning today the forms which their own ministry should take.

Today there is an increasing emphasis on the ordained minister as liturgical leader of a local community. The phenomenal growth of the of the comunidades ecclesiales de base or base Christian communities in Latin America and elsewhere has raised the question of ordaining the lay leaders who pastor them. (25) There is a prophetic dimension to the ministry of these grassroots community leaders, who proclaim the word to their communities and help them find consensus on its implications. On the other hand, the fact that their ministry is localized within a particular community and entails a pastoral care and liturgical/sacramental leadership not unlike that of most parish priests means that their ministry, precisely as community leaders, has a strongly cultic and administrative character.

There is still a need in the church for a priesthood more prophetic than cultic in its orientation. It might be worthwhile to attempt to sketch the contours of such a priesthood. A prophetic priesthood would be an evangelical or kerygmatic priesthood. Structured by the requirements of preaching the word, it might involve some of the following:

1. MOBILITY Preaching the Gospel wherever Christ needs to be proclaimed requires mobility. There are certain similarities in this regard between the Dominican and Jesuit Orders at the periods of their origins because of their orientation to an apostolic life. Dominic succeeded in realizing for the first time "a way in which the itinerant non-territorial, priestly apostolate could be institutionalized." (26) The Formula of the Institute for the Society of Jesus describes the Jesuit vocation as a willingness

to go without subterfuge or excuse, as far as in us lies, to whatsoever provinces they may choose to send us -- whether they are pleased to send us among the Turks or any other infidels, even those who live in the regions called the Indies, or any heretics whatever, or schismatics, or any of the faithful.(27)

Jerome Nadal, Ignatius's secretary, described the Society of Jesus as most itself when on the move, so that "the whole world becomes its house." (28)

Today both orders have lost much of their mobility because of their commitments to established works. Their founders did not originally intend them to be tied to places, institutions, dioceses, or countries. Even less should they be wedded to a particular social class or culture. A prophetic priesthood needs to be free to go where there is need.

2. EVANGELIZATION A priesthood structured by a commitment to the word of God is essentially evangelical. Unfortunately the Catholic Church today has largely given up the work of evangelization to Protestant evangelicals. In the United States the Catholic Church has hardly begun to address the challenge of evangelization in an affluent and secular culture. What Mary Catherine Hilkert has said about the directions preaching the Gospel should take for Dominicans today applies equally to other communities with a prophetic charism: "The growing strength of fundamentalism, the political power being exerted by the new right in religion, and the vast areas of this country which are classified as 'unchurched' all call for a response on the part of an order founded specifically for the proclamation of the gospel." (29)

Hilkert's parallel between the United States today and France at the time of Dominic is very much to the point. The Catholic Church both in the U.S. and in Latin America is losing millions of Hispanics to evangelical and pentecostal churches. When challenged about "'proselytizing" or "sheep stealing," evangelical representatives have responded, with considerable truth, that these Hispanic Catholics "have been sacramentalized but not evangelized."

But Catholic representatives could equally well respond that these evangelical and pentecostal churches too often offer an individualistic and privatized Christianity which is not the full Gospel. Part of Dominic's genius was his ability to find a place for the evangelical movement of his day within the church. A prophetic priesthood could serve Catholicism in a similar way today. The church needs effective evangelization, one able to combine a faith both personal and ecclesial with a concern for justice. The need for this among Hispanic Catholics is particularly acute.

3. SOCIAL JUSTICE The church in the late twentieth century has become increasingly aware of the social dimensions of the Gospel and its proclamation. The 1971 Synod of Bishops stated explicitly: "Activity on behalf of justice is a constitutive dimension of the preaching of the gospel." (30) In the renewal of religious life which followed the Second Vatican Council, a considerable number of religious communities have sought to make a commitment to justice and solidarity with the poor an intrinsic part of their mission. That commitment should also characterize a community whose priesthood is prophetic in orientation. Furthermore, working for justice is one particularly significant way that non-ordained members of a community can share with the ordained in expressing in their own ministries the community's charism for preaching or in its prophetic priesthood.

4. THE INTELLECTUAL LIFE In spite of the fact that neither Dominic nor Ignatius foresaw the commitment to the intellectual life which would come to characterize their communities, both communities became involved in higher education and scholarship even within their founders' lifetimes. In both cases, this involvement was a direct result of their efforts to provide a quality education for their own junior members. Dominic sent his students to the two great universities of Europe, Paris and Bologna, and Ignatius set up houses or "colleges" at the better universities of his day for his scholastics. In each case, the lectures they provided soon drew other students who sought to study in these convents or houses.

The constitutions of both orders reflect the high value their founders placed on solid intellectual formation. Dominic provided dispensations from community observances for the sake of study as well as preaching. Ignatius saw the development of any human talent or gift as useful for the sake of the order's mission. Because of this, his order became synonymous with a lengthy intellectual formation. By the time of his death in 1556, the number of Jesuit colleges had already grown to forty-six.

A community whose priesthood is prophetic in orientation can neglect the intellectual life only at the expense of its ministry of the word. If the Gospel is to penetrate and illumine a complex, technological culture such as our own, it will take minds which are not just highly trained, but insightful and cultivated. This demands an emphasis on higher education and a commitment to the intellectual life. The alternative is a non-dialogical fundamentalism. A prophetic priesthood cannot afford to neglect the intellectual life, even for the sake of its commitment to social justice. Particularly in this area, anti-intellectualism can easily lead to an ideological blindness which is destructive of genuine reconciliation.


The church's ministerial office can admit of variations and subdivisions in its Organization. Given the shortage of priests in the church today and the growing need for local community leaders able to celebrate the Eucharist, the church of the future will probably see more forms of priesthood, rather than fewer.

The religious orders, both monastic and apostolic, with their own forms of priesthood, will continue to enrich the church with their witness and their ministries. But the Gospel must be proclaimed and interpreted, not just in the context of parishes and local communities, but to the church itself, to the complex cultures in which it lives, and to those on society's margins. Though no one can predict the future, it seems clear that there will continue to be a need for congregations exercising a prophetic priesthood, evangelical in orientation, free to move where needed, skilled at bringing the word of God to bear in the full range of human endeavors. Such is the priesthood envisioned by St. Dominic.


1. John W. O'Malley, "Priesthood, Ministry, and Religious Life: Some Historical and Historiographical Considerations," Theological Studies 49 (1988), 223-224.

2. Karl Rahner, "Priestly Existence," Theological Investigations Vol. III (Baltimore: Helicon Press, 1967), 239-262.

3. Michael J. Buckley, "Jesuit Priesthood: Its Meaning and Commitments," Studies in the Spirituality of Jesuits 8 (1976), 150.

4. Ignatius, Constitutions, 588; see The Constitutions of the Society of Jesus, trans. by George E. Ganss (St. Louis: Institute of Jesuit Sources, 1970), 262-263.

5. Perfectae caritatis, no 2, in Walter M. Abbott, (ed.) The Documents of Vatican II (New York: America Press, 1966), 468.

6. Edward Schillebeeckx, "Dominican Spirituality," in his God Among Us (New York: Crossroad, 1983), 236-238.

7. Leonard E. Boyle, The Setting of the Summa Theologiae of Saint Thomas (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1982), 1.

8. Simon Tugwell, The Way of the Preacher (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1979), 36.

9. Jeremy Miller, "Tugwell's Way of the Preacher and a Proposal for Another Way," in Jeremy Miller and Simon Tugwell, "What Is the Dominican Charism: An Exchange of Views," Spirituality Today 34 (1982), 251.

10. See Leonard P. Hindsley, "Dominican Spirituality: Bowel or Funnel?", Dominican Ashram 3 (1984), 139.

11. Mary Catherine Hilkert, "The Dominican Charism: A Living Tradition of Grace," Spirituality Today 38 (1986), 158.

12. Simon Tugwell, "Introduction," in his Early Dominicans (New York: Paulist Press, 1982), 14.

13. Tugwell, Way of the Preacher, 23.

14. Tugwell, 17.

15. See Tugwell, Ways of Imperfection (Springfield, IL: Templegate, 1985), 140.

16. See Edward Tracy Brett, Humbert of Roman: His Life and Views of Thirteenth-Century Society (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1984).

17. See Edward Schillebeeckx, The Church with a Human Face (New York: Crossroad, 1985), 190-193.

18. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles, Bk. 4, chaps. 74, 75 (New York: Image Books, 1957); 287,289.

19. Summa Theologiae, II-II, 188, 4, 5.

20. Cf. Thomas P. Rausch, "Priesthood Today: From Sacral to Ministerial Model," Irish Theological Quarterly 55 (1990), 206-214.

21. Tugwell, The Way of the Preacher, 71.

22. Edward Schillebeeckx, The Church with a Human Face, 151-161.

23. Book of Constitutions and Ordinations of the Order of Friars Preachers (Rome: General Curia, 1984), 59. 1, p. 43.

24. Cf. Thomas P. Rausch, S.J., "Is the Private Mass Traditional?" Worship 64 (1990), 237-242.

25. See Leonardo Boff, Ecclesiogenesis: the Base Communities Reinvent the Church (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1986), 63.

26. Tugwell, The Way of the Preacher, 19.

27. Ignatius, Constitutions, 4; Ganss, p. 68.

28. Cited by John O'Malley, "To Travel to Any Part of the World: Jeronimo Nadel and the Jesuit Vocation," Studies in the Spirituality of Jesuits 16 (1984), 7.

29. Mary Catherine Hilkert, "The Dominican Charism," 155.

30. "Justice in the World," Statement of the 1971 Synod of Bishops (Washington: USCC, 1972), 34.