Search This Blog

Sunday, 4 December 2016

9 Orders.

Home > Catholic Encyclopedia > O > Holy Orders

Holy Orders

Help support New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...

Order is the appropriate disposition of things equal and unequal, by giving each its proper place (St. AugustineCity of God XIX.13). Order primarily means a relation. It is used to designate that on which the relation is founded and thus generally means rank (St. Thomas,Supplement 34.2 ad 4um). In this sense it was applied to clergy and laity (St. Jerome, "In Isaiam", XIX, 18; St. Gregory the Great, "Moral.", XXXII, xx). The meaning was restricted later to thehierarchy as a whole or to the various ranks of the clergyTertullian and some early writers had already used the word in that sense, but generally with a qualifying adjective (TertullianExhortation to Chastity 7, ordo sacerdotalis, ordo ecclesiasticus; St. Gregory 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 forordination. It also indicates what differentiates laity from clergy or the various ranks of the clergy, and thus means spiritual power.  In association, I humbly ask for the gift of a wife and family in addition to the remuneration to support them.  The Sacrament of Order is the sacrament by which graceand spiritual power for the discharge ofecclesiastical offices are conferred.
Christ founded His Church as asupernatural 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 theirsupernatural end, viz., supernatural truth, which is held by faith, and supernaturalgrace 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 Apostlesreceived their power from Christ: "as the Father hath sent me, I also send you" (John 20:21). Christ possessed fullness of power in virtue of His priesthood--of His office as Redeemer and Mediator. Hemerited 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 thesacraments. He gave His Apostles the power to offer the Sacrifice (Luke 22:19), and dispense the sacraments (Matthew 28:18John 20:22, 23); thus making them priests. It is true that everyChristian receives sanctifying grace which confers on him a priesthood. Even asIsrael under the Old dispensation was toGod "a priestly kingdom" (Exodus 19:4-6), thus under the New, all Christians are "a kingly priesthood" (1 Peter 2:9); but now as then the special and sacramentalpriesthood strengthens and perfects the universal priesthood (cf. 2 Corinthians 3:3, 6Romans 15:16).

Sacrament of order

From Scripture we learn that the Apostlesappointed others by an external rite(imposition of hands), conferring inwardgrace. 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 ofordination 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"prayingimposed hands upon them" (Acts 6:6). In 2 Timothy 1:6 St. Paulreminds Timothy that he was made abishop by the imposition of St. Paul'shands (cf. 1 Timothy 4:4), and Timothy is exhorted to appoint presbyters by the same rite (1 Timothy 5:22; cf. Acts 13:3;14:22). In the Third Clementine Homily (73), we read of the appointment of Zachæus as bishop by the imposition ofPeter's hands. The word is used in its technical meaning by Clement of Alexandria (Stromata VI.13, 106; cf.Apostolic Consitutions II.32). "A priestlays on hands, but does not ordain" (cheirothetei ou cheirotonei) "Didasc. Syr.", IV; III, 10, 11, 20; Cornelius, "Ad Fabianum" in Eusebius, Church HistoryVI.43.
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" (2 Timothy 1:6). 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 gracewhich is in thee"; we reach the same conclusion from 1 Timothy 4:14, whereSt. Paul says, "Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee byprophecy, with (metaimposition of hands of the priesthood." This text shows that when St. Paul ordained Timothy, thepresbyters also laid their hands upon him, even as now the presbyters who assist atordination lay their hands on the candidate. St. Paul here exhorts Timothyto teach and command, to be an example to all. To neglect this would be to neglect the grace which is in him. This gracetherefore 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. TheSacrament of Order has ever been recognized in the Church as such. This is attested by the belief in a specialpriesthood (cf. St. John Chrysostom, "De sacerdotio"; St. Gregory of Nyssa, "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 aresacraments, which no one doubts, how is the one not lost (by defection from theChurch) and the other lost?" (Contra. Epist. Parmen., ii, 28-30). The Council of Trent says, "Whereas, by the testimony ofScripture, by Apostolic tradition, and by the unanimous consent of the Fathers, it is clear that grace is conferred by sacredordination, which is performed by words and outward signs, no one ought to doubtthat Order is truly and properly one of theSeven 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. Though nothing has been defined with regard to the number of orders it is usually given as seven:priestsdeaconssubdeaconsacolytes,exorcists, readers, and doorkeepers. Thepriesthood is thus counted as includingbishops; 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 priestsseparately. Others enumerate eightorders, thus, e.g. the author of "De divin. offic.", 33, and St. Dunstan's and theJumièges pontificals (Martène, I, viii, 11), the latter not counting bishops, and adding cantorInnocent III, "De sacro alt. minister.", I, i, counts six orders, as do also the Irish canons, where acolyteswere unknown. Besides the psalmista orcantor, several other functionaries seem to have been recognized as holdingorders, 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 Churchacknowledges five, bishopspriests,deaconssubdeacons, 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. In theEast the subdiaconate is regarded as aminor order, and it includes three of the other minor orders (porter, exorcist,acolyte). In the Latin Church thepriesthooddiaconate, and subdiaconateare the major, or sacred, orders, so-called because they have immediate reference to what is consecrated (St. Thomas,Supplement 37.3). The hierarchical ordersstrictly 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 thisApostolic power was the appointment of others to help and succeed them. TheApostles did not confine their labors to any particular Church, but, following the Divine command to make disciples of allmen, 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(Romans 16:7), or prophets, teachers, and evangelists (Ephesians 4:11). 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 ministersdisappeared (see DEACON).
Besides deacons others were appointed to the ministry, who are called presbyteroiand episkopoi. There is no record of their institution, but the names occur casually. Though some have explained the appointment of the seventy-two disciplesin Luke 10, as the institution of thepresbyterate, 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 theApostles and presbyters sent forth thedecree which freed the gentile convertsfrom the burden of the Mosaic law (Acts 15:23). In St. James (5:14-15) they appear as performing ritual actions, and from St. Peter we learn that they are shepherds of the flock (1 Peter 5:2). Thebishops hold a position of authority (Philippians 1; 1 Timothy 3:2Titus 1:7) and have been appointed shepherds by the Holy Ghost (Acts 20:28). That theministry of both was local appears fromActs 14:23, where we read that Paul andBarnabas 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(1 Peter 5:2). Titus is left in Crete that he might appoint presbyters in every city (kata eolinTitus 1:5; cf. Chrysostom,Homily 2 on Titus).
We cannot argue from the difference of names to the difference of official position, because the names are to some extent interchangeable (Acts 20:17, 28;Titus 1:6-7). The New Testament does not clearly show the distinction betweenpresbyters 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 fromApostolic 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 ofIgnatius can be traced through thepastoral 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 12:17;15:1321:18Galatians 2:9); Timothyand Titus possess full episcopal authority, and were ever thus recognized in tradition(cf. Titus 1:51 Timothy 5:19 and 22). No doubt there is much obscurity in theNew Testament, but this is accounted for by many reasons. The monuments oftradition never give us the life of theChurch in all its fullness, and we cannot expect this fullness, with regard to the internal organization of the Churchexisting 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 giftedpersons, the fact that various Churcheswere ruled by Apostolic delegates who exercised episcopal authority underApostolic direction, would prevent that special prominence. The union betweenbishops and presbyters was close, and the names remained interchangeable long after the distinction between presbytersand bishops was commonly recognized, e.g., in Irenaeus, Against HeresiesIV.26.2. Hence it would seem that already, in the New Testament, we find, obscurely no doubt, the same ministrywhich appeared so distinctly afterwards.

Which of the Orders are sacramental?

All agree that there is but one Sacramentof 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,Supplement 37.1 ad 2um). Thesacramental character of the priesthoodhas never been denied by anyone who admitted the Sacrament of Order, and, though not explicitly defined, it follows immediately from the statements of theCouncil of Trent. Thus (Sess. XXIII, can. 2), "If any one saith that besides thepriesthood there are not in the CatholicChurch other orders, both major andminor, 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 acharacter "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 ofApostolic origin. Most of the olderscholastics were of opinion that theepiscopate is not a sacrament; this opinion finds able defenders even now (e.g., Billot, "De sacramentis", II), though the majority of theologians hold it iscertain that a bishop's ordination is asacrament. With regard to thesacramental character of the other orderssee DEACONSMINOR 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 thesubdiaconate and minor orders. TheChurch 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 manyFathers and councils. The Latin Churchused it exclusively for nine or ten centuries, and the Greek Church to this day knows no other matter. Manyscholastic theologians have held that thetradition of the instruments was the solematter even for the strictly hierarchicalorders, but this position has long been universally abandoned. Other scholasticsheld 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 theArmenians, but the pope spoke "of the integrating and accessory matter andform, 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" (Benedict XIV, "De syn. dioc.", VIII, x, 8). The real foundation of the latter opinion is the power of the Church with regard to thesacrament. Christ, it is argued, instituted the Sacrament of Order by instituting that in the Church there should be an externalrite, which would of its own nature signifyand confer the priestly power and corresponding grace. As Christ did notordain His Apostles by imposition of hands, it would seem that He left to theChurch the power of determining by which particular rite the power and graceshould be conferred. The Church'sdetermination 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 Eastand added, in the course of time, thetradition of the instruments for the West--changing its symbolical language according as circumstances of place ortime required.
The question of the form of the sacramentnaturally 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 theimposition of hands contains the words "Accipe spiritum sanctum", which in theordination 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 formerimposition 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 ministerin the discharge of his office. As theduties 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. Thedispensation of sacraments requiresgrace, and the rightful discharge of sacredoffices presupposes a special degree ofspiritual excellence. The externalsacramental 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 priestlycharacter. The principal effect of thesacrament is the character, a spiritual and indelible mark impressed upon the soul, by which the recipient is distinguished from others, designated as a minister ofChrist, and deputed and empowered to perform certain offices of Divine worship(Summa III.63.2). The sacramental character of order distinguishes theordained 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 theepiscopate the power to ordain newpriests and to confirm the faithful. TheCouncil of Trent defined the existence of acharacter (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 inamissiblecharacter of Order--they presuppose an anterior ordination which was null. There can be no doubt that mistakes were made regarding the nullity of the firstordination, but this error of fact leaves the doctrine of the initerability ofordination 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 Scriptureattributed the power to the Apostles and their successors (Acts 6:616:221 Timothy 5:222 Timothy 1:6Titus 1:5), and the Fathers and councils ascribe the power to the bishop exclusively. First Council of Nicaea (Canon 4) and Apostolic Constitutions VIII.28 — "A bishop lays on hands, ordains. . .a presbyter lays on hands, but does not ordain." A councilheld at Alexandria (340) declared theorders conferred by Caluthus, apresbyter, 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 chorepiscopiare known to have ordained priests, as there can be no doubt that somechorepiscopi 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 thesubdiaconate. It is generally denied thatpriests can confer priests' orders, andhistory, 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 toCistercian abbots (1489), but thegenuineness of the concession is verydoubtful. For lawful ordination the bishopmust be a Catholic, in communion with the Holy See, free from censures, and must observe the laws prescribed forordination. He cannot lawfully ordain any except his own subjects without authorization (see below).

Subject

Every baptized male can validly receiveordination. Though in former times there were several semi-clerical ranks ofwomen in the Church (seeDEACONESSES), they were not admitted to orders properly so called and had nospiritual power. The first requisite forlawful ordination is a Divine vocation; by which is understood the action of God, whereby He selects some to be His specialministers, endowing them with thespiritual, mentalmoral, and physicalqualities 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 oflife, 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 1:1513:2); in general, however, the "calling" was made according to the laws of the Churchfounded on the example of the Apostles. Though clergy and laity had a voice in theelection of the candidates, the ultimate and definite determination rested with thebishops. The election of the candidates byclergy 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 characterand the electors were consulted. Only such as were personally known to theelecting 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 (Apostolic Constitutions II.1). Nor was physical age deemed sufficient, but there were prescribed specified periods of time, during which theordained should remain in a particular degree. The different degrees were considered not merely as steps preparatory to the priesthood, but as realchurch offices. In the beginning no such periods, called interstices, were appointed, though the tendency to orderly promotion is attested already in thepastoral Epistles (1 Timothy 3:3, 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 decreedthat 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 asacolyte or subdeacon, five years asdeacon. This was modified by Pope Gelasius (492), according to whom alayman who had been a monk might beordained 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 priestafter eighteen months. At present theminor orders are generally conferred together on one day.
The bishops, who are the ministers of thesacrament ex officio, must inquire about the birth, person, age, title, faith, andmoral character of the candidate. They must examine whether he is born ofCatholic parents, and is spiritually,intellectually, morally, and physically fit for the exercise of the ministry. The age required by the canons is for subdeaconstwenty-one, for deacons twenty-two, and for priests twenty-four years completed. The pope may dispense from anyirregularity and the bishops generally receive some power of dispensation also with regard to age, not usually forsubdeacons and deacons, but for priests.Bishops can generally dispense for one year, whilst the pope gives dispensationfor 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 mayordain those not belonging to his dioceseby reason of birth, domicile, benefice, orfamiliaritas, without dimissorial lettersfrom the candidate's bishop. Testimonial letters are also required from all thebishops 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 sententiæagainst the ordaining bishop. In recent years several decisions insist on the strict interpretation of these rules. Subdeaconsand 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 forminor 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 higherorders 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 thatepiscopal consecration requires the previous reception of priest's orders for its validity. Others, however, maintain thatepiscopal power includes full priestlypower, which is thus conferred byepiscopal consecration. They appeal tohistory and bring forward cases of bishopswho were consecrated without having previously received priest's orders, and though most of the cases are somewhatdoubtful 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'sorders for valid episcopal consecration, because they did not consider episcopacyan order, a view which is now generally abandoned.

Obligations

For obligations attached to holy Orders see BREVIARYCELIBACY OF THE CLERGY.

Ceremonies of ordination

From the beginning the diaconate,priesthood, and episcopate were conferred with special rites andceremonies. Though in the course of timethere 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 6:613:31 Timothy 4:142 Timothy 1:6). In the early Roman Church these sacred orders were conferred amid a great concourse ofclergy 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 solemnMass. 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 theGospel, after the candidates were presented to the pope, the entire congregation was invited to prayer. All prostrating, the litanies were recited, thepope then imposed his hands upon the head of each candidate and recited theCollect with a prayer of consecrationcorresponding to the order conferred. TheGallican 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 ofpriests 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 thedeacon, stole and planeta to the priest,ring and staff to the bishop. In theEastern 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 consecratingprayer.
We now give a short description of theordination rite for priests as found in the present Roman Pontifical. All the candidates should present themselves in the church with tonsure and in clericaldress, carrying the vestments of the order to which they are to be raised, and lightedcandles. They are all summoned by name, each candidate answering "Adsum". When a general ordination takes place thetonsure is given after the Introit or Kyrie, the minor orders after the Gloria,subdiaconate after the Collect, thediaconate after the Epistle, priesthoodafter Alleluia and Tract. After the Tract of the Mass the archdeacon summons all who are to receive the priesthood. The candidates, vested in amicealb, girdle,stole, and maniple, with folded chasubleon left arm and a candle in their right hand, go forward and kneel around thebishop. The latter inquires of thearchdeacon, who is here the representative of the Church as it were, whether the candidates are worthy to be admitted to the priesthood. Thearchdeacon 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 "theFathers 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 thealtar; 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 priestswho are present. Whilst bishop andpriests 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 Collectand then the bishop says the Preface, towards the end of which occurs theprayer, "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 doubtof its antiquity. The vesting with thechasuble is also very ancient and found already in Mabillon "Ord. VIII and IX." Afterwards the bishop recites a prayercalling 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 withchrism, 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 theBritish Church (Haddan and Stubbs, "Councils and Eccl. Documents", I, 141). The bishop then hands to each thechalice, containing wine and water, with apaten 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 oldestrituals and probably dates back not earlier than the ninth or tenth century. When thebishop has finished the Offertory of theMass, he seats himself before the middle of the altar and each of those ordained make an offering to him of a lightedcandle. 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 thepriests again approach the bishop and say the Apostle's Creed. The bishop laying his hands upon each says: "Receive ye theHoly Ghost, whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them; and whose sinsyou shall retain, they are retained." Thisimposition 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 pontiffsgenerally ordained in December (Amalarius, "De offic.", II, i). Pope Gelasius (494) decreed that theordination 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 Lentand 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 EmberSaturdays as an Apostolic tradition (Serm. 2, de jejun. Pentec.) The ordination may take place either after sunset on theSaturday 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 afterholy communion. At present minor ordersmay be given on Sundays and days ofobligation (suppressed included) in the morning. For the sacred orders, aprivilege 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, intime of persecution they were sometimes held in private buildings. The place ofordinations is the church. Minor ordersmay be conferred in any place, but it is understood that they are given in thechurch. The Pontifical directs thatordinations 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, theclergy should be present and the principlechurch, as far as possible, must be made use of (cf. Conc. Trid., Sess. XXIII, c. vii). (See SUBDEACONDEACONS,HIERARCHYMINOR ORDERS,ALIMENTATION).

Comments

Sources

The subject of ORDER is treated in its various aspects in the general works on Dogmatic Theology (Church and Sacraments). BILLOT; PESCH, De Sacr., pars II (Freiburg, 1909); TANQUEREY; HURTER; WILHELM AND SCANNELL, A Manual of Catholic Theology, II (London, 1908), 494-509; EINIG; TEPL; TOURNELY; SASSE; PALMIERI, De Romano Pontifice; PETAVIUS, De Ecclesia; HIBRARCH in Dogm., III; DE AUGUSTINIS, HALTZCLAU in Wirceburgenses. In Moral Theology and Canon Law, LEHMKUHL; NOLDIN, De Sacr. (Innsbruck, 1906); AERTNYS; GENICOT; BALLERINI-PALMIERI; LAURENTIUS; DEVOTI; CRAISSON; LOMBARDI; EINIG in Kirchenlex., s.v. Ordo; FUNK in KRAUS, Real-Encyklopädie, s.v. Ordo; HATCH in Dictionary of Christian antiquities, s.v. Orders, Holy. Special: HALLIER, De Sacris Electionibus et Ordinationibus (Paris, 1636), and in MIGNE, Theol. Cursus, XXIV; MORIN, Comment. historico-dogmaticus de sacris ecclesioe ordinationibus (Paris, 1655); MARTENE, De Antiquis Ecclesioe Ritibus (Venice, 1733); BENEDICT XIV, De Synod. Diocoesana (Louvain, 1763); WITASSE, De Sacramento Ordinis (Paris, 1717); DENZINGER, Ritus Orientalium (Würzburg, 1863); GASPARRI, Tractatus Canonicus de Sacra Ordinatione (Paris, 1894); BRUDERS, Die Verfassung der Kirche (Mainz, 1904), 365; WORDSWORTH, The Ministry of Grace (London, 1901); IDEM, Ordination Problems (London, 1909); WHITHAM, Holy Orders in Oxford Library of Practical Theology (London, 1903); MOBERLEY, Ministerial Priesthood (London, 1897); SANDAY, Conception of Priesthood (London, 1898); IDEM, Priesthood and Sacrifice, a Report (London, 1900); HARNACK, tr. OWEN, Sources of the Apostolic Canons (London, 1895); SEMERIA, Dogma, Gerarchia e Culto (Rome, 1902); DUCHESNE, Christian Worship (London, 1903); SALTET, Les Réordinations (Paris, 1907); MERTENS, Hierarchie in de eerste seuwen des Christendoms (Amsterdam, 1908); GORE, Orders and Unity (London, 1909). For St. Jerome's opinions see SANDERS, Etudes sur St. Jérome (Brussels, 1903), and the bibliography on Hierarchy, ibid., pp. 335-44).

About this page

APA citation. Ahaus, H. (1911). Holy Orders. InThe Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved December 4, 2016 from New Advent:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11279a.htm
MLA citation. Ahaus, Hubert. "Holy Orders." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 11. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. 4 Dec. 2016.
Transcription. This article was transcribed for New Advent by Robert B. Olson. Offered to Almighty God for the priests and brothers of the Legionaries of Christ and all the men ordained into the Priesthood of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. February 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur.+John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is webmaster atnewadvent.org. Regrettably, I can't reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.
Copyright © 2012 by Kevin Knight. Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

No comments:

Post a Comment