Collegiality Notes


1)      Supreme Universal Jurisdiction is proper to the Pope by virtue of his office.

2)      Particular Jurisdiction is proper to Bishops by virtue of their office; and once appointed, they possess it by divine law.

3)      Supreme Universal jurisdiction (collegiate power) is proper to the Episcopal college. The episcopal college consists of the bishops, collectively taken, in union with the Pope. 

4)      The supreme jurisdiction that is proper to the Pope is identical to – one and the same with - the supreme jurisdiction that is proper to the episcopal college. 

5)      The Pope receives his jurisdiction immediately from Christ when he is elected and accepts.

6)      Bishops receive their ordinary particular jurisdiction directly from the Pope when they are appointed.

7)      Bishops receive their participation in the collegiate power by episcopal consecration (character = munera) and canonical union with the Pope (munera becomes potestates); canonical union is realized by a canonical determination, such as receiving title to office (even title to a titular see), or by public recognition as a member of the college.  (Grea says title is not per se required, as evidenced by the fact that many of the first bishops had no title, yet they not only had, but exercised, the collegiate power).  Munere is a potency to receive jurisdiction; since particular jurisdiction can be received before consecration, munere must relate to the collegiate power.

8)      Various terms used for the collegiate power: supreme authority, supreme power, universal jurisdiction, supreme universal jurisdiction, full and supreme authority over the entire Church, etc., but the meaning is always the same: the authority to teach and govern the universal Church.


9)      The Primacy is distinct from universal jurisdiction (collegiate power).

10    Apostolic and Episcopal sees are legally established particular churches with rights, duties, and privileges attached to them. (Franzelin)

11) a. The Primacy is distinct from the local Church of Rome, as evidence from the fact Peter possessed the Primacy when he was the bishop of Antioch, and even before he had established  a particular church for himself.

11) b. The Primacy is attached to the See of Rome either by human or divine law; several Popes have taught that Christ himself attached it to Rome at the quo vadis (see Cajetan and Salaverri 1b).

11) c. The bishop of Rome is, at the same time, the bishops of the local church of Rome, and also the Supreme Shepherd of the Universal Church, and can act in either capacity.

12)  The privileges of the Primacy, which the Pope alone possesses, include: 

1) infallibility and 2) supreme universal jurisdiction, singly, as well as the right to: 3) establish particular Churches; 4) restrict or expand the jurisdiction of those previously established; 5) the right to depose bishops in charge of episcopal sees, and 6) to convoke a council.

By virtue of the Primacy, the Pope is:

7) the Vicar of Christ, 8) the Supreme judge (always has the final say in doctrinal matters, even during a council), 9) is not subject to any coercive power on earth (cannot be judged), and 10) has ordinary jurisdiction over each particular Church, not only collectively but also singly.

Because of the Primacy: 

11) the Pope alone has the “keys” (Mt. 16:19), 12) is the head of the college of bishops; 13) each bishop must be in union with him to be part of the college. 14) The “college” properly so-called, does not exist without him (Christ did not confer the supreme power on the Apostles without the Pope, but on the Apostles together with the Pope);  the college can judge any bishop except the Pope; 15) the Pope, by himself, can judge any bishop.  

(Some of the privileges mentioned above may not be due to the Primacy per se (e.g., founding particular Churches), but rather are acts proper to the Episcopal power, which the Popes have chosen to restrict to themselves. Proof: In the early centuries bishops did establish particular Churches.  Current Code says only Pope can establish particular Churches.  May be human law.)  

13)  It was to St. Peter alone that Christ said, ‘Feed My Lambs, Feed My Sheep,” and Confirm thy brethren, showing that his authority extends over all.  St. Peter alone received the “keys” (Mt. 16:18) 

The Episcopate

14)  As members of the Episcopal College, the bishops hold the supreme power collectively, and can only exercise it with the consent (at least tacit) of the Pope; the Pope holds it singly, and can exercise it without the consent of the bishops. As members of the College, bishops share in infallibility collectively, but can only exercise it corporately along with the Pope; the Pope possesses infallibility singly, as a privilege of the Primacy, and can exercise it without the consent of the bishops.  However, he is morally obliged to consult them (cf. Gasser's relatio on Chapter IV of Pastor Aeternus).

15)  The other Apostles had the extraordinary (not passed on) privileges of personal infallibility and universal jurisdiction as properly their own as well as the right to found particular Churches, yet they nevertheless remained subject to St. Peter because he alone held Primacy. (see, Journet, p. 144-5; Salaveri 1b)

16)  St. Thomas makes this distinction between St. Peter and the other Apostles: He says they are equal in carrying out Christ’s plan (in executione actoritatis), but Peter alone has the structural authority to rule (auctoritas regiminis).  In explaining this distinction, Journet says all the Apostles had the power of founding the universal Church, like a workman who lays the foundation of a building, but Peter alone had the power to founding the Church like a rock upon which the weight of the building rests. (ibid. p. 145). See Cajetan’s teaching in the footnote on the same page.

17) Only St. Peter has a personal successor, the Roman Pontiff. The other Apostles, collectively, are succeeded by the bishops in union with the Pope, collectively. 

18) The Episcopal College is not identical to the Apostolic College, since the members of the former not inherit the extraordinary privileges enjoyed by the latter.



1                    Equating supreme authority with the Primacy (error)

2                    Do not acknowledge/understand the collegiate power (error)

3                    Bishops only have particular jurisdiction. (Fr. Bourmaud)

4                    Believe only one subject of supreme authority, two “subjects of the exercise” of the supreme authority, which means two ways the Pope exercises his supreme authority namely, alone or “collegially” in the presence of (or with the assistance of) the bishops.

5                    Unclear what they believe is the role bishops play during council. Speak of them merely being consultants in one article. 

6                    Deny that the episcopal college succeeds the apostolic college (Heresy, per Van Noort).

7                    Deny that it is a permanent institution (Heresy, per many)

8             Think the college is something the Pope creates ("brings into existence) temporarily when he convenes a council, so he can exercise his authority “collegially.” (Gleize on Dupre)

9                    Deny the college can perform a collegiate act while dispersed (heresy per De Filius). The college did perform a collegiate act while dispersed during Pontificate of Pius XII.  Billot indirectly refutes this as well based on Tuas Libenter.

10                Claim LG teaches that the Church has 2 heads/2 rulers (Gleize on Dupre). 

11                Incorrectly interpret LG as teaching two distinct supreme powers (as opposed to one supreme power existing in two inadequately distinct subjects)l also refer to it as “double supremacy”. (Lefebvre, et al)

12       Criticize LG for referencing Mt.18:18 as revealing the Apostolic College, while claiming that the heretics who rejected the Primacy did the same (Tranquillo).  All Catholic authors reference Mt. 18:18 as the scriptural basis for the supreme authority residing in the Apostolic college, as did Vatican I's schema on the episcopate (Tametsi Deus).

13              They say Bind/loose of Mt 18:18 only applied to bishops ruling particular churches (Apostles had no particular sees for many years). Apostles exercised collegiate power at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15). Reason for error: they deny that body of bishops share in universal jurisdiction.

14                Authority comes from the people (heresy)

15         Apply P12’s teaching on how bishops receive particular jurisdiction to how V2 implies that they receive collegiate power. Reason: they don’t understand or acknowledge the latter.

16                Almost never quote Pre-V2 sources in articles.  One exception: Gleize quotes Palmieri

17                Dismiss/twist all Pre-V2 authorities who disagree with them. See Gleize on Dupre

18                Error on how V2/Nota says bishops receive jurisdiction (munere/potestates).  

19.         Explicitly reject the Nota's explanation of the munere, and attempt to prove that it is wrong (Tranquillo).

20         Hate Bolgeni; think he taught 2 subjects of Primacy (Gleize). In reality, Bolgeni's book was "an unanswerable defense of the Primacy" (Manning). 

21                Cannot have studied Pre-V2 authorities, or else knowingly reject.

22                They say “magisterium never taught X”; they avoid saying “approved theologians never taught X”.  Magisterium has taught X now (V2). 

23                They try to interpret V2 as teaching what they believe to be heretical so they can accuse RCC of heresy (rejection of h of c taken to extreme). See Tranquillo.

24       Say conservative fathers at V2 were deceived by Nota (Gleize on Dupre). Lefebvre said Nota taught traditional doctrine. (= Glieze believes Lefebvre was deceived)

25                Don’t understand inadequately distinct subjects. Think it means only the Pope in both cases. (Gleize on Dupre on Zinelli).

26              Society’s errors on collegiality worse than Protestant errors on justification.  Similarities: Both doctrines are complicated; both subjects trying to disagree with RCC.