|
|
Holy Orders
Order is the appropriate
disposition of things equal and unequal, by giving each its proper
place (St. Aug., "De civ. Dei," XIX, xiii). Order primarily means a
relation. It is used to designate that on which the relation is
founded and thus generally means rank (St. Thom., "Suppl.", Q.
xxxiv, a.2, ad 4um). In this sense it was applied to clergy and
laity (St. Jer., "In Isaiam", XIX, 18; St. Greg. the Great,
"Moral.", XXXII, xx). The meaning was restricted later to the
hierarchy as a whole or to the various ranks of the clergy.
Tertullian
and some early writers had already used the word in that sense, but
generally with a qualifying adjective (Tertullian,
"De exhort. cast.", vii, ordo sacerdotalis, ordo ecclesiasticus; St.
Greg. of Tours, "Vit. patr.", X, i, ordo clericorum). Order is used
to signify not only the particular rank or general status of the
clergy, but also the outward action by which they are raised to that
status, and thus stands for ordination. It also indicates what
differentiates laity from clergy or the various ranks of the clergy,
and thus means spiritual power. The Sacrament of Order is the
sacrament by which grace and spiritual power for the discharge of
ecclesiastical offices are conferred.
Christ
founded His Church as a supernatural society, the
Kingdom of God.
In this society there must be the power of ruling; and also the
principles by which the members are to attain their supernatural
end, viz., supernatural truth, which is held by faith, and
supernatural grace by which man is formally elevated to the
supernatural order. Thus, besides the power of jurisdiction, the
Church has the power of teaching (magisterium) and the power
of conferring grace (power of order). This power of order was
committed by our Lord to His Apostles, who were to continue His work
and to be His earthly representatives. The Apostles received their
power from Christ: "as the Father hath sent me, I also send you"
(John, xx, 21). Christ possessed fullness of power in virtue of His
priesthood--of His office as Redeemer and Mediator. He merited the
grace which freed man from the bondage of sin, which grace is
applied to man mediately by the Sacrifice of the Eucharist and
immediately by the sacraments. He gave His Apostles the power to
offer the Sacrifice (Luke, xxii, 19), and dispense the sacraments
(Matt., xxviii, 18; John, xx, 22, 23); thus making them priests. It
is true that every
Christian
receives sanctifying grace which confers on him a priesthood. Even
as Israel under the Old dispensation was to
God "a
priestly kingdom" (Exod., xix, 4-6), thus under the New, all
Christians
are "a kingly priesthood" (I Pet., ii, 9); but now as then the
special and sacramental priesthood strengthens and perfects the
universal priesthood (cf. II Cor., iii, 3, 6; Rom., xv, 16).
SACRAMENT
OF ORDER
From
Scripture we learn that the Apostles appointed others by an external
rite (imposition of hands), conferring inward grace. The fact that
grace is ascribed immediately to the external rite, shows that
Christ must have thus ordained. The fact that cheirontonein,
cheirotonia, which meant electing by show of hands, had acquired
the technical meaning of ordination by imposition of hands before
the middle of the third century, shows that appointment to the
various orders was made by that external rite. We read of the
deacons, how the Apostles "praying, imposed hands upon them" (Acts,
vi, 6). In II Tim., i, 6 St. Paul reminds Timothy that he was made a
bishop by the imposition of St. Paul's hands (cf. I Tim., iv, 4),
and Timothy is exhorted to appoint presbyters by the same rite (I
Tim., v, 22; cf. Acts, xiii, 3; xiv, 22). In Clem., "Hom.", III,
lxxii, we read of the appointment of Zachæus as bishop by the
imposition of Peter's hands. The word is used in its technical
meaning by Clement of Alexandria ("Strom.", VI, xiii, cvi; cf.
"Const. Apost.", II, viii, 36). "A priest lays on hands, but does
not ordain" (cheirothetei ou cheirotonei) "Didasc. Syr.", IV;
III, 10, 11, 20; Cornelius, "Ad Fabianum" in Euseb., "Hist. Eccl.",
VI, xliii.
Grace was
attached to this external sign and conferred by it. "I admonish
thee, that thou stir up the
grace of God
which is in thee, through (dia) the imposition of my hands"
(II Tim., i, 6). The context clearly shows that there is question
here of a grace which enables Timothy to rightly discharge the
office imposed upon him, for St. Paul continues "God
hath not given us the spirit of fear: but of power, and of love, and
of sobriety." This grace is something permanent, as appears from the
words "that thou stir up the grace which is in thee"; we reach the
same conclusion from I Tim., iv, 14, where St. Paul says, "Neglect
not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy,
with (meta) imposition of hands of the priesthood." This text
shows that when St. Paul ordained Timothy, the presbyters also laid
their hands upon him, even as now the presbyters who assist at
ordination lay their hands on the candidate. St. Paul here exhorts
Timothy to teach and command, to be an example to all. To neglect
this would be to neglect the grace which is in him. This grace
therefore enables him to teach and command, to discharge his office
rightly. The grace then is not a charismatic gift, but a gift of the
Holy Spirit for the rightful discharge of official duties. The
Sacrament of Order has ever been recognized in the Church as such.
This is attested by the belief in a special priesthood (cf. St. John
Chrys., "De sacerdotio"; St. Greg. of Nyss., "Oratio in baptism.
Christi"), which requires a special ordination. St. Augustine,
speaking about baptism and order, says, "Each is a sacrament, and
each is given by a certain consecration, . . .If both are
sacraments, which no one doubts, how is the one not lost (by
defection from the Church) and the other lost?" (Contra. Epist.
Parmen., ii, 28-30). The Council of Trent says, "Whereas, by the
testimony of Scripture, by Apostolic tradition, and by the unanimous
consent of the Fathers, it is clear that grace is conferred by
sacred ordination, which is performed by words and outward signs, no
one ought to doubt that Order is truly and properly one of the Seven
Sacraments of Holy Church" (Sess. XXIII, c. iii, can. 3).
NUMBER OF
ORDERS
The Council
of Trent (Sess. XXIII, can. 3) defined that, besides the priesthood,
there are in the Church other orders, both major and minor (q.v.).
Though nothing has been defined with regard to the number of orders
it is usually given as seven: priests, deacons, subdeacons,
acolytes,
exorcists, readers, and doorkeepers. The priesthood is thus
counted as including bishops; if the latter be numbered separately
we have eight; and if we add first tonsure, which was at one time
regarded as an order, we have nine. We meet with different
numberings in different Churches, and it would seem that mystical
reasons influenced them to some extent (Martène, "De antiq. eccl.
rit.", I, viii, l, 1; Denzinger, "Rit. orient.", II, 155). The "Statuta
ecclesiæ antiqua" enumerate nine orders, adding psalmists and
counting bishops and priests separately. Others enumerate eight
orders, thus, e.g. the author of "De divin. offic.", 33, and St.
Dunstan's and the Jumièges pontificals (Martène I, viii, 11), the
latter not counting bishops, and adding cantor.
Innocent III,
"De sacro alt. minister.", I, i, counts six orders, as do also the
Irish canons, where acolytes were unknown. Besides the psalmista or
cantor, several other functionaries seem to have been recognized as
holding orders, e.g., fossarii (fossores) grave
diggers, hermeneutoe (interpreters), custodes martyrum
etc. Some consider them to have been real orders (Morin, "Comm. de
sacris eccl. ordin.", III, Ex. 11, 7); but it is more probable that
they were merely offices, generally committed to clerics (Benedict
XIV, "De syn, dioc.", VIII, ix, 7, 8). In the East there is
considerable variety of tradition regarding the number of orders.
The Greek Church acknowledges five, bishops, priests, deacons,
subdeacons, and readers. The same number is found in St. John
Damascene (Dial. contra manichæos, iii); in the ancient Greek Church
acolytes,
exorcists, and doorkeepers were probably considered only as
offices (cf. Denzinger, "Rit. orient.", I, 116).
In the Latin
Church a distinction is made between major and minor orders (q.v.).
In the East the subdiaconate is regarded as a minor order, and it
includes three of the other minor orders (porter,
exorcist,
acolyte). In the Latin Church the priesthood, diaconate, and
subdiaconate (q.v.) are the major, or sacred, orders, so-called
because they have immediate reference to what is consecrated (St.
Thom., "Suppl.", Q. xxxvii, a. 3). The hierarchical orders strictly
so-called are of divine origin (Conc. Trid., Sess. XXIII, can. 6).
We have seen that our Lord instituted a ministry in the persons of
His Apostles, who received fullness of authority and power. One of
the first exercises of this Apostolic power was the appointment of
others to help and succeed them. The Apostles did not confine their
labors to any particular Church, but, following the Divine command
to make disciples of all men, they were the missionaries of the
first generation. Others also are mentioned in Holy Scripture as
exercising an itinerant ministry, such as those who are in a wider
sense called Apostles (Rom., xvi, 7), or prophets, teachers, and
evangelists (Eph., iv, 11). Side by side with this itinerant
ministry provision is made for the ordinary ministrations by the
appointment of local ministers, to whom the duties of the ministry
passed entirely when the itinerant ministers disappeared (see
DEACON).
Besides
deacons others were appointed to the ministry, who are called
presbyteroi and episkopoi. There is no record of their
institution, but the names occur casually. Though some have
explained the appointment of the seventy-two disciples in Luke X, as
the institution of the presbyterate, it is generally agreed that
they had only a temporary appointment. We find presbyters in the
Mother Church at Jerusalem, receiving the gifts of the brethren of
Antioch. They appear in close connection with the Apostles, and the
Apostles and presbyters sent forth the decree which freed the
gentile converts from the burden of the Mosaic law (Acts, xv, 23).
In St. James (v, 14, 15) they appear as performing ritual actions,
and from St. Peter we learn that they are shepherds of the flock (I
Pet. v, 2). The bishops hold a position of authority (Phil., i; I
Tim., iii, 2; Tit., i, 7) and have been appointed shepherds by the
Holy Ghost (Acts, xx, 28). That the ministry of both was local
appears from Acts, xiv, 23, where we read that Paul and Barnabas
appointed presbyters in the various Churches which they founded
during their first missionary journey. It is shown also by the fact
that they had to shepherd the flock, wherein they have been
appointed, the presbyters have to shepherd the flock, that is
amongst them (I Pet., v, 2). Titus is left in Crete that he
might appoint presbyters in every city (kata eolin, Tit., i,
5; cf. Chrys., "Ad Tit., homil.", II, i).
We cannot
argue from the difference of names to the difference of official
position, because the names are to some extent interchangeable
(Acts, xx, 17, 28; Tit., i, 6, 7). The New Testament does not
clearly show the distinction between presbyters and bishops, and we
must examine its evidence in the light of later times. Toward the
end of the second century there is a universal and unquestioned
tradition, that bishops and their superior authority date from
Apostolic times (see HIERARCHY OF THE EARLY CHURCH). It throws much
light on the New-Testament evidence and we find that what appears
distinctly at the time of Ignatius can be traced through the
pastoral epistles of St. Paul, to the very beginning of the history
of the Mother Church at Jerusalem, where St. James, the brother of
the Lord, appears to occupy the position of bishop (Acts, xii, 17;
xv, 13; xxi, 18; Gal., ii, 9); Timothy and Titus possess full
episcopal authority, and were ever thus recognized in tradition (cf.
Tit., i, 5; I Tim., v, 19 and 22). No doubt there is much obscurity
in the New Testament, but this is accounted for by many reasons. The
monuments of tradition never give us the life of the Church in all
its fullness, and we cannot expect this fullness, with regard to the
internal organization of the Church existing in Apostolic times,
from the cursory references in the occasional writings of the New
Testament. The position of bishops would necessarily be much less
prominent than in later times. The supreme authority of the
Apostles, the great number of charismatically gifted persons, the
fact that various Churches were ruled by Apostolic delegates who
exercised episcopal authority under Apostolic direction, would
prevent that special prominence. The union between bishops and
presbyters was close, and the names remained interchangeable long
after the distinction between presbyters and bishops was commonly
recognized, e.g., in Iren., "Adv. hæres.", IV, xxvi, 2. Hence it
would seem that already, in the New Testament, we find, obscurely no
doubt, the same ministry which appeared so distinctly afterwards.
Which of
the Orders are Sacramental?
All agree
that there is but one Sacrament of Order, i.e., the totality of the
power conferred by the sacrament is contained in the supreme order,
whilst the others contain only part thereof (St. Thomas, "Supplem.",
Q. xxxvii, a. i, ad 2um). The sacramental character of the
priesthood has never been denied by anyone who admitted the
Sacrament of Order, and, though not explicitly defined, it follows
immediately from the statements of the Council of Trent. Thus (Sess.
XXIII, can. 2), "If any one saith that besides the priesthood there
are not in the Catholic Church other orders, both major and minor,
by which as by certain steps, advance is made to the priesthood, let
him be anathema."
In the fourth chapter of the same session, after declaring that the
Sacrament of Order imprints a character "which can neither be
effaced nor taken away; the holy synod with reason condemns the
opinion of those who assert that priests of the New Testament have
only a temporary power". The priesthood is therefore a sacrament.
With regard
to the episcopate the Council of Trent defines that bishops belong
to the divinely instituted hierarchy, that they are superior to
priests, and that they have the power of confirming and ordaining
which is proper to them (Sess. XXIII, c. iv, can. 6, 7). The
superiority of bishops is abundantly attested in Tradition, and we
have seen above that the distinction between priests and bishops is
of Apostolic origin. Most of the older scholastics were of opinion
that the episcopate is not a sacrament; this opinion finds able
defenders even now (e.g., Billot, "De sacramentis", II), though the
majority of theologians hold it is certain that a bishop's
ordination is a sacrament. With regard to the sacramental character
of the other orders see DEACONS; MINOR ORDERS; SUBDEACONS.
Matter and
Form
In the
question of the matter and form of this sacrament we must
distinguish between the three higher orders and the subdiaconate and
minor orders. The Church having instituted the latter, also
determines their matter and form. With regard to the former, the
received opinion maintains that the imposition of hands is the sole
matter. This has been undoubtedly used from the beginning; to it,
exclusively and directly, the conferring of grace is ascribed by St.
Paul and many Fathers and councils. The Latin Church used it
exclusively for nine or ten centuries, and the Greek Church to this
day knows no other matter. Many scholastic theologians have held
that the tradition of the instruments was the sole matter even for
the strictly hierarchical orders, but this position has long been
universally abandoned. Other scholastics held that both imposition
of hands and the tradition of the instruments constitute the matter
of the sacrament; this opinion still finds defenders. Appeal is made
to the Decree of Eugene IV to the Armenians, but the pope spoke "of
the integrating and accessory matter and form, which he wished
Armenians to add to the imposition of hands, long since in use
amongst them, that they might thus conform to the usage of the Latin
Church, and more firmly adhere to it, by uniformity of rites" (Bened.,
XIV, "De syn. dioc.", VIII, x, 8). The real foundation of the latter
opinion is the power of the Church with regard to the sacrament.
Christ, it is argued, instituted the Sacrament of Order by
instituting that in the Church there should be an external rite,
which would of its own nature signify and confer the priestly power
and corresponding grace. As Christ did not ordain His Apostles by
imposition of hands, it would seem that He left to the Church the
power of determining by which particular rite the power and grace
should be conferred. The Church's determination of the particular
rite would be the fulfilling of a condition required in order that
the Divine institution should take effect. The Church determined the
simple imposition of hands for the East and added, in the course of
time, the tradition of the instruments for the West--changing its
symbolical language according as circumstances of place or time
required.
The question
of the form of the sacrament naturally depends on that of the
matter. If the tradition of the instruments be taken as the total or
partial matter, the words which accompany it will be taken as the
form. If the simple imposition of hands be considered the sole
matter, the words which belong to it are the form. The form which
accompanies the imposition of hands contains the words "Accipe
spiritum sanctum", which in the ordination of priests, however, are
found with the second imposition of hands, towards the end of the
Mass, but these words are not found in the old rituals nor in the
Greek Euchology. Thus the form is not contained in these words, but
in the longer prayers accompanying the former imposition of hands,
substantially the same from the beginning. All that we have said
about the matter and form is speculative; in practice, whatever has
been prescribed by the Church must be followed, and the Church in
this, as in other sacraments, insists that anything omitted should
be supplied.
Effect of
the Sacrament
The first
effect of the sacrament is an increase of sanctifying grace. With
this, there is the sacramental grace which makes the recipient a fit
and holy minister in the discharge of his office. As the duties of
God's
ministers are manifold and onerous, it is in perfect accord with the
rulings of
God's Providence to confer a special grace on His ministers. The
dispensation of sacraments requires grace, and the rightful
discharge of sacred offices presupposes a special degree of
spiritual excellence. The external sacramental sign or the power of
the order can be received and may exist without this grace. Grace is
required for the worthy, not the valid, exercise of the power, which
is immediately and inseparably connected with the priestly
character. The principal effect of the sacrament is the character
(q.v.), a spiritual and indelible mark impressed upon the soul, by
which the recipient is distinguished from others, designated as a
minister of Christ, and deputed and empowered to perform certain
offices of Divine worship (Summa, III, Q. lxiii, a. 2). The
sacramental character of order distinguishes the ordained from the
laity. It gives the recipient in the diaconate, e.g., the power to
minister officially, in the priesthood, the power to offer the
Sacrifice and dispense the sacraments, in the episcopate the power
to ordain new priests and to confirm the faithful. The Council of
Trent defined the existence of a character (Sess. VII, can. 9). Its
existence is shown especially by the fact that ordination like
baptism, if ever valid, can never be repeated. Though there have
been controversies with regard to the conditions of the validity of
ordination, and different views were held at different times in
reference to them, "it has always been admitted that a valid
ordination cannot be repeated. Reordinations do not suppose the
negation of the inamissible character of Order--they presuppose an
anterior ordination which was null. There can be no doubt that
mistakes were made regarding the nullity of the first ordination,
but this error of fact leaves the doctrine of the initerability of
ordination untouched" (Saltet, "Les Réordinations", 392).
Minister
The ordinary
minister of the sacrament is the bishop, who alone has this power in
virtue of his ordination. Holy Scripture attributed the power to the
Apostles and their successors (Acts, vi, 6; xvi, 22; I Tim., v, 22;
II Tim., i, 6; Tit., i, 5), and the Fathers and councils ascribe the
power to the bishop exclusively. Con. Nic. I, can. 4, Apost. Const.
VIII, 28 "A bishop lays on hands, ordains. . .a presbyter lays on
hands, but does not ordain." A council held at Alexandria (340)
declared the orders conferred by Caluthus, a presbyter, null and
void (Athanas., "Apol. contra Arianos", ii). For the custom said to
have existed in the Church of Alexandria see EGYPT. Nor can
objection be raised from the fact that chorepiscopi are known
to have ordained priests, as there can be no doubt that some
chorepiscopi were in bishops' orders (Gillman, "Das Institut der
Chorbischöfe im Orient," Munich, 1903; Hefele-Leclercq, "Conciles",
II, 1197-1237). No one but a bishop can give any orders now without
a delegation from the pope, but a simple priest may be thus
authorized to confer minor orders and the subdiaconate. It is
generally denied that priests can confer priests' orders, and
history, certainly, records no instance of the exercise of such
extraordinary ministry. The diaconate cannot be conferred by a
simple priest, according to the majority of theologians. This is
sometimes questioned, as
Innocent VIII
is said to have granted the privilege to Cistercian abbots (1489),
but the genuineness of the concession is very doubtful. For lawful
ordination the bishop must be a Catholic, in communion with the
Holy See,
free from censures, and must observe the laws prescribed for
ordination. He cannot lawfully ordain any except his own subjects
without authorization (see below).
Subject
Every
baptized male can validly receive ordination. Though in former times
there were several semi-clerical ranks of women in the Church (see
DEACONESSES), they were not admitted to orders properly so called
and had no spiritual power. The first requisite for lawful
ordination is a Divine vocation; by which is understood the action
of God,
whereby He selects some to be His special ministers, endowing them
with the spiritual, mental, moral, and physical qualities required
for the fitting discharge of their order and inspiring them with a
sincere desire to enter the ecclesiastical state for
God's honor
and their own sanctification. The reality of this Divine call is
manifested in general by sanctity of life, right faith, knowledge
corresponding to the proper exercise of the order to which one is
raised, absence of physical defects, the age required by the canons
(see IRREGULARITY). Sometimes this call was manifested in an
extraordinary manner (Acts, i, 15; xiii, 2); in general, however,
the "calling" was made according to the laws of the Church founded
on the example of the Apostles. Though clergy and laity had a voice
in the election of the candidates, the ultimate and definite
determination rested with the bishops. The election of the
candidates by clergy and laity was in the nature of a testimony of
fitness, the bishop had to personally ascertain the candidates'
qualifications. A public inquiry was held regarding their faith and
moral character and the electors were consulted. Only such as were
personally known to the electing congregation, i.e., members of the
same Church, were chosen.
A specified
age was required, and, though there was some diversity in different
places, in general, for deacons the age was twenty-five or thirty,
for priests thirty or thirty-five, for bishops thirty-five or forty
or even fifty (Apost. Const., II, i). Nor was physical age deemed
sufficient, but there were prescribed specified periods of time,
during which the ordained should remain in a particular degree. The
different degrees were considered not merely as steps preparatory to
the priesthood, but as real church offices. In the beginning no such
periods, called interstices, were appointed, though the tendency to
orderly promotion is attested already in the pastoral Epistles (I
Tim., iii, 3, 16). The first rules were apparently made in the
fourth century. They seem to have been enforced by Siricius (385)
and somewhat modified by Zosimus (418), who decreed that the office
of reader or
exorcist should last till the candidate was twenty, or for five
years in case of those baptized as adults; four years were to be
spent as acolyte or subdeacon, five years as deacon. This was
modified by Pope Gelasius (492), according to whom a layman who had
been a monk might be ordained priest after one year, thus allowing
three months to elapse between each ordination, and a layman who had
not been a monk might be ordained priest after eighteen months. At
present the minor orders are generally conferred together on one
day.
The bishops,
who are the ministers of the sacrament ex officio, must inquire
about the birth, person, age, title, faith, and moral character of
the candidate. They must examine whether he is born of Catholic
parents, and is spiritually, intellectually, morally, and physically
fit for the exercise of the ministry. The age required by the canons
is for subdeacons twenty-one, for deacons twenty-two, and for
priests twenty-four years completed. The pope may dispense from any
irregularity and the bishops generally receive some power of
dispensation also with regard to age, not usually for subdeacons and
deacons, but for priests. Bishops can generally dispense for one
year, whilst the pope gives dispensation for over a year; a
dispensation for more than eighteen months is but very rarely
granted. For admission to minor orders, the testimony from the
parish priest or from the master of the school where the candidate
was educated--generally, therefore, the superior of the seminary--is
required. For major orders further inquiries must be made. The names
of the candidate must be published in the place of his birth and of
his domicile and the result of such inquiries are to be forwarded to
the bishop. No bishop may ordain those not belonging to his diocese
by reason of birth, domicile, benefice, or familiaritas,
without dimissorial letters from the candidate's bishop. Testimonial
letters are also required from all the bishops in whose dioceses the
candidate has resided for over six months, after the age of seven.
Transgression of this rule is punished by suspension latæ
sententiæ against the ordaining bishop. In recent years several
decisions insist on the strict interpretation of these rules.
Subdeacons and deacons should pass one full year in these orders and
they may then proceed to receive the priesthood. This is laid down
by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXIII, c.xi.), which did not
prescribe the time for minor orders. The bishop generally has the
power to dispense from these interstices, but it is absolutely
forbidden, unless a special indult be obtained, to receive two major
orders or the minor orders and the subdiaconate in one day.
For the
subdiaconate and the higher orders there is, moreover, required a
title, i.e., the right to receive maintenance from a determined
source. Again, the candidate must observe the interstices, or times
required to elapse between the reception of various orders; he must
also have received confirmation and the lower orders preceding the
one to which he is raised. This last requirement does not affect the
validity of the order conferred, as every order gives a distinct and
independent power. One exception is made by the majority of
theologians and canonists, who are of opinion that episcopal
consecration requires the previous reception of priest's orders for
its validity. Others, however, maintain that episcopal power
includes full priestly power, which is thus conferred by episcopal
consecration. They appeal to history and bring forward cases of
bishops who were consecrated without having previously received
priest's orders, and though most of the cases are somewhat doubtful
and can be explained on other grounds, it seems impossible to reject
them all. It is further to be remembered that scholastic theologians
mostly required the previous reception of priest's orders for valid
episcopal consecration, because they did not consider episcopacy an
order, a view which is now generally abandoned.
Obligations
For
obligations attached to holy Orders see
BREVIARY;
CELIBACY OF THE
CLERGY.
Ceremonies
of Ordination
From the
beginning the diaconate, priesthood, and episcopate were conferred
with special rites and ceremonies. Though in the course of time
there was considerable development and diversity in different parts
of the Church, the imposition of hands and prayer were always and
universally employed and date from Apostolic times (Acts, vi, 6;
xiii, 3; I Tim., iv, 14; II Tim., i, 6). In the early Roman Church
these sacred orders were conferred amid a great concourse of clergy
and people at a solemn station. The candidates, who had been
previously presented to the people, were summoned by name at the
beginning of the solemn Mass. They were placed in a conspicuous
position, and anyone objecting to a candidate was called upon to
state his objections without fear. Silence was regarded as approval.
Shortly before the Gospel, after the candidates were presented to
the pope, the entire congregation was invited to prayer. All
prostrating, the litanies were recited, the pope then imposed his
hands upon the head of each candidate and recited the Collect with a
prayer of consecration corresponding to the order conferred. The
Gallican Rite was somewhat more elaborate. Besides the ceremonies
used in the Roman Church, the people approving the candidates by
acclamation, the hands of the deacon and the head and hands of
priests and bishops were anointed with the
sign of the
Cross. After the seventh century the tradition of the
instruments of office was added,
alb and
stole to the deacon, stole and planeta to the priest, ring and staff
to the bishop. In the Eastern Church, after the presentation of the
candidate to the congregation and their shout of approval, "He is
worthy", the bishop imposed his hands upon the candidate and said
the consecrating prayer.
We now give a
short description of the ordination rite for priests as found in the
present Roman Pontifical. All the candidates should present
themselves in the church with tonsure and in clerical dress,
carrying the vestments of the order to which they are to be raised,
and lighted candles. They are all summoned by name, each candidate
answering "Adsum". When a general ordination takes place the tonsure
is given after the Introit or Kyrie, the minor orders after the
Gloria, subdiaconate after the Collect, the diaconate after the
Epistle, priesthood after Alleluia and Tract. After the Tract of the
Mass the archdeacon summons all who are to receive the priesthood.
The candidates, vested in
amice,
alb,
girdle, stole, and
maniple,
with folded
chasuble on left arm and a candle in their right hand, go
forward and kneel around the bishop. The latter inquires of the
archdeacon, who is here the representative of the Church as it were,
whether the candidates are worthy to be admitted to the priesthood.
The archdeacon answers in the affirmative and his testimony
represents the testimony of fitness given in ancient times by the
clergy and people. The bishop, then charging the congregation and
insisting upon the reasons why "the Fathers decreed that the people
also should be consulted", asks that, if anyone has anything to say
to the prejudice of the candidates, he should come forward and state
it.
The bishop
then instructs and admonishes the candidates as to the duties of
their new office. He kneels down in front of the altar; the
ordinandi lay themselves prostrate on the carpet, and the Litany
of the Saints is chanted or recited. On the conclusion of the
Litany, all arise, the candidates come forward, and kneel in pairs
before the bishop while he lays both hands on the head of each
candidate in silence. The same is done by all priests who are
present. Whilst bishop and priests keep their right hands extended,
the former alone recites a prayer, inviting all to pray to
God for a
blessing on the candidates. After this follows the Collect and then
the bishop says the Preface, towards the end of which occurs the
prayer, "Grant, we beseech Thee etc." The bishop then with
appropriate formulæ crosses the stole over the breast of each one
and vests him with the
chasuble.
This is arranged to hang down in front but is folded behind. Though
there is no mention of the stole in many of the most ancient
Pontificals, there can be no doubt of its antiquity. The vesting
with the
chasuble is also very ancient and found already in Mabillon "Ord.
VIII and IX." Afterwards the bishop recites a prayer calling down
God's
blessing on the newly-ordained. He then intones the "Veni Creator",
and whilst it is being sung by the choir he anoints the hands of
each with the oil of catechumens.
In England
the head also was anointed in ancient times. The anointing of the
hands, which in ancient times was done with chrism, or oil and
chrism, was not used by the Roman Church, said
Nicholas I
(A.D. 864), though it is generally found in all ancient ordinals. It
probably became a general practice in the ninth century and seems to
have been derived from the British Church (Haddan and Stubbs,
"Councils and Eccl. Documents", I, 141). The bishop then hands to
each the chalice, containing wine and water, with a paten and a host
upon it. This rite, with its corresponding formula, which as Hugo of
St. Victor says ("Sacr.", III, xii), signifies the power which has
already been received, is not found in the oldest rituals and
probably dates back not earlier than the ninth or tenth century.
When the bishop has finished the Offertory of the Mass, he seats
himself before the middle of the altar and each of those ordained
make an offering to him of a lighted candle. The newly-ordained
priests then repeat the Mass with him, all saying the words of
consecration simultaneously. Before the Communion the bishop gives
the kiss of peace to one of the newly-ordained. After the Communion
the priests again approach the bishop and say the Apostle's Creed.
The bishop laying his hands upon each says: "Receive ye the Holy
Ghost, whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them; and
whose sins you shall retain, they are retained." This imposition of
hands was introduced in the thirteenth century. The
chasuble is
then folded, the newly-ordained make a promise of obedience and
having received the kiss of peace, return to their place.
Time and
Place
During the
first centuries ordination took place whenever demanded by the needs
of the Church. The Roman pontiffs generally ordained in December (Amalarius,
"De offic.", II, i). Pope Gelasius (494) decreed that the ordination
of priests and deacons should be held at fixed times and days, viz.,
on the fasts of the fourth, seventh, and tenth months, also on the
fasts of the beginning and midweek (Passion Sunday) of
Lent and on
(holy) Saturday about sunset (Epist. ad ep. Luc., xi). This but
confirmed what Leo the Great laid down, for he seems to speak of
ordination on Ember Saturdays as an Apostolic tradition (Serm. 2, de
jejun. Pentec.) The ordination may take place either after sunset on
the Saturday or early on Sunday morning. The ordination to major
orders took place before the Gospel.
Minor orders
might be given at any day or hour. They were generally given after
holy communion. At present minor orders may be given on Sundays and
days of obligation (suppressed included) in the morning. For the
sacred orders, a privilege to ordain on other days than those
appointed by the canons, provided the ordination takes place on
Sunday or day of obligation (suppressed days included), is very
commonly given. Though it was always the rule that ordinations
should take place in public, in time of persecution they were
sometimes held in private buildings. The place of ordinations is the
church. Minor orders may be conferred in any place, but it is
understood that they are given in the church. The Pontifical directs
that ordinations to sacred orders must be held publicly in the
cathedral church in presence of the cathedral chapter, or if they be
held in some other place, the clergy should be present and the
principle church, as far as possible, must be made use of (cf. Conc.
Trid., Sess. XXIII, c. vii). (See SUBDEACON, DEACONS, HIERARCHY,
MINOR ORDERS, ALIMENTATION).
|
