Sect. 275The Different OrdersThe Different Orders

The so-called canons of the Fourth Council of Carthage mention eight different grades of Order: Bishop, Priest, Deacon, Sub-deacon, Acolyte, Exorcist. Lector, and Ostiarius (door-keeper). In connection with these, a word must be said on the ecclesiastical Tonsure.

According to the learned Père Morin, the cutting of the hair, as a distinct rite of initiation into the clerical state, does not date farther back than the end of the seventh century. Before this, however, it formed part of the ceremony of conferring the lowest of the Orders, as it does at the present day in the Eastern Churches. For the history and the various forms of the Tonsure, see Chardon, Part i. ch. 3. The Orders themselves are divided into Major (Sub-diaconate, Diaconate, and Priesthood, including the Episcopate), and Minor (Ostiarius, Lector, Exorcist, and Acolyte). “If any one shall say that, besides the priesthood, there are not in the Catholic Church other orders, both major (majores) and minor … let him be anathema” (Council of Trent, sess. xxiii. can. 2).

I. “Whereas the ministry of so holy a priesthood is a Divine thing, to the end that it might be exercised in a more worthy manner and with greater veneration, it was suitable that in the most well-ordered settlement of the Church there should be several and diverse orders of ministers, to minister to the priesthood by virtue of their office; orders so distributed as that those already marked with the clerical tonsure should ascend through the lesser to the greater orders” (Council of Trent, sess. xxiii. ch. 2). Whether these Minor Orders are part of the sacrament, the Council does not say. The mediæval theologians, as a rule, hold the affirmative (St. Thom., Suppl., q. 37, a. 2); at the present time the negative opinion is more common. That Christ instituted them cannot easily be proved; and, besides, the Eastern Church, at least in modern times, recognizes only one of them, viz. Lector. A bishop is the ordinary minister of them; but by the consent of the Sovereign Pontiff, a simple priest can confer them. “Henceforth,” says the Council of Trent (sess. xxiii., De Ref., cap. 10), “it shall not be lawful for abbots or for any other persons whatsoever … to confer the tonsure or minor orders on any one who is not a Regular subject to them.” The Council therefore recognizes that these orders can be given by others than bishops. The rites by which they are conferred at the present day are almost exactly as described in the canons of the Fourth Council of Carthage, and consist of handing the various instruments with appropriate accompanying words.

II. In treating of the Sacred or Major Orders, we are at once confronted with the difficulty as to the position of the Sub-diaconate, which in the East is considered as a Minor Order.

I. The office of a Sub-deacon, as the name implies, is to assist the Deacon at the altar: to prepare the chalice and paten, to read the Epistle, to pour the water into the wine intended for the sacrifice, and to wash the sacred linen. The bishop confers the Order by handing to the recipient the empty chalice and paten, and saying to him, “See what ministry is delivered to thee: Wherefore I admonish thee that thou so conduct thyself as to be able to please God.” Then the various vestments are placed upon him, and the book of the Epistles handed to him—all of which ceremonies are accompanied with appropriate words. This order is very ancient in the Church. St. Cornelius, who became Pope in the year 251, says, in his letter to Fabius of Antioch, that there were in his day sub-deacons in the Church of Rome; and St. Cyprian, who died in 258, himself ordained Optatus sub-deacon (hypodiaconum). The rite of ordination is described in the fifth canon of the Fourth Council of Carthage. The Council of Trent (sess. xxiii.), in its second chapter, says, “The sub-diaconate is classed among the greater orders by the Fathers and Councils.” Nevertheless, according to Chardon, it was not so classed as late as the end of the eleventh century (see Hist. des Sacram., Pt. i. ch. 1, and the authorities there cited). Even if the Sub-diaconate is now looked upon as a sacred order (as indeed it must be, at least in the West, after the decision of Trent), it does not follow that it is necessarily a sacrament; for the Council, in enumerating the various members of the hierarchy, speaks only of “bishops, priests, and ministers,” thereby leaving the question an open one. St. Thomas holds it to be both sacred and a sacrament (Suppl., q. 37, a. 3). In the Eastern Church it is still reckoned as a minor order. The ordinary minister is a bishop; nevertheless, there are many instances of priests conferring the sub-diaconate, e.g. chorepiscopi and various abbots. See the Synod of Meaux, A.D. 845, can. 44; and Pius V.’s Bull, denying the right to the Abbot of Prémontré, but admitting that the Abbot of Cîteaux enjoyed it.

2. The word “deacon” (διάκονος) means a minister or servant; but it has come to have a technical ecclesiastical meaning, and is now used to indicate one of the Sacred Orders of the Church. The functions of a deacon are to serve the priest at the altar, to sing the Gospel, to preach, and to baptize. The Order is conferred by the bishop imposing hands upon the recipient, and pronouncing appropriate prayers. The formula at present found in the Roman Pontifical, Receive the Holy Ghost, etc., is not older than the twelfth century. The diaconate is certainly a sacrament, for it is an efficacious outward sign (laying on of hands and prayer), of inward grace (the Holy Ghost Himself, Who is conferred by it). The Council of Trent condemns those who assert that “vainly therefore do the bishops say, Receive ye the Holy Ghost” (sess. xxiii. can. 4); and that “in the Catholic Church there is not a hierarchy by Divine ordination instituted, consisting of bishops, priests, and ministers” (can. 6). Hence deacons, at least, must be members of this divinely constituted hierarchy; and in this belief both the Eastern and Western Churches are agreed. The “seven” chosen in Acts 6 are generally recognized as the first “deacons.” They were ordained by the Apostles, who “praying, imposed hands upon them.” Although originally chosen for “serving tables,” we find them preaching and baptizing; and St. Paul requires deacons to “hold the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience” (1 Tim. 3:9). St. Ignatius speaks of deacons as “ministers of the mysteries of Jesus Christ,” “for they are not ministers (διάκονοι) of meat and drink, but servants of the Church of God” (Ad Trall., 2). See also St. Clement, 1 Ad Cor., 42; St. Ignatius, Ad Magnes., 2; Tertullian, Præscr., c. 41, De Bapt., c. 17; St. Augustine, Ep. 21, ad Valer., 1. To the objection that the order was instituted by the Apostles, and not by Christ, we may reply, with St. Ignatius (Ad Smyrn., 8), that Christ left the powers of the sacrament of Order to the Apostles to be transmitted by them entirely or in various degrees, and that they accordingly conferred upon “the seven” only a portion of these powers.

3. According to the Roman Pontifical, the functions of a Priest are “to offer (sacrifice), to bless, to preside (pnæesse), to preach, and to baptize.” He has also the power of forgiving sins, and is the ordinary minister of Extreme Unction, in addition to the sacraments mentioned. The precise nature of his powers can be best studied by comparing them with those of a Bishop.

4. The functions of a Bishop are thus set forth by the Roman Pontifical: “A Bishop should judge, expound (interpretari), consecrate, ordain, offer, baptize, and confirm.” According to the Council of Trent, “Bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the Apostles, principally belong to the hierarchical order; they are placed, as the same Apostle [St. Paul] says, by the Holy Ghost, to rule the Church of God (Acts 20:28); they are superior to priests; they administer the sacrament of Confirmation; ordain the ministers of the Church; and they can perform very many other things, over which functions others of an inferior order have no power” (sess. xxiii. ch. 4, and can. 7).

(a) Although there are plausible grounds for holding that “bishop” and “presbyter” are synonymous in the New Testament, yet we have clear traces of a real distinction recognized between them in Apostolic times. St. James the Less was beyond doubt Bishop of Jerusalem, as is clear from the relations of St. Peter and St. Paul with him (Acts 12:17; 15:13 sqq.; 21:18; Gal. 1:19), and from the belief universally existing as early as the middle of the second century. Moreover, St. Paul gives Titus (1:5) power to ordain presbyters; and to Timothy (1 Tim. 5:19) he lays down instructions regarding the judgment of presbyters. Hence both Timothy and Titus were superior in office to these presbyters. An argument may also be drawn from the Apocalypse (1–3), where the “Angels of the Churches” are plainly those officials to whom the care of each of these Churches or dioceses has been entrusted; in other words, they are the bishops of these dioceses.

(b) The Fathers in sub-apostolic times insist on the distinction between the office of bishop and the office of presbyter. St. Polycarp, the disciple of St. John, writes as a bishop, and distinguishes himself from his presbyters. “I exhort you,” says St. Ignatius (Ad Magnes., n. 6), “that ye study to do all things in a Divine unanimity—the bishop holding presidency in the place of God; and the presbyters in the place of the Apostles; and the deacons most dear to me entrusted with the service of Jesus Christ.… Be ye made one with the bishop, and with those who preside for a pattern and lesson of incorruption.” See also Ad Trall., nn. 2, 3, 7; Ad Philad., n. 7; Ad Smyrn., n. 8; Ad Polycarp, n. 6. St. Irenæus, speaking of Acts 20:17 sqq., says, “For at Miletus, having convoked the bishops and the presbyters,” etc.—thereby showing that he does not recognize the two as synonymous. “The degrees in the Church on earth of bishops, presbyters, deacons, are, in my opinion, imitations of the angelic glory, and of that dispensation which is said in Scripture to await all who, walking in the steps of the Apostles, live in perfect righteousness according to the Gospel” (Clem. Alex., Strom., lib. vi. n. 13). See also Tertullian, De Bapt., n. 17; Origen, De Oratione, n. 28; Hom. ii., in Numer., n. 1, and many other places; St. Hippolytus, De Charism. We say nothing of later Fathers, for by the fourth century it is admitted as a settled maxim that bishops only could ordain; and Epiphanius goes so far as to say of Aerius, the presbyterian, “His doctrines were, beyond all human conception, replete with madness” (Adv. Hæres., 75).

Whether the Episcopate is a distinct order, or only an extension of the priesthood, has long been a disputed point among theologians. The Fathers seem to look upon it as a distinct order; but most of the great mediæval doctors are of the contrary opinion (Albertus Magnus, Alexander of Hales, St. Bonaventure, St. Thomas, in their commentaries on the fourth book of the Sent., dist. xxiv.). The Council of Trent refrained from coming to any decision on the question. The canons and decrees on the hierarchy, however, point in the direction of the earlier view; and hence this opinion has once more become the prevailing one. See Perrone, Præl. Theol., De Ordine, cap. ii. n. 78.

On the relation of the bishops to the Sovereign Pontiff, see supra, p. 336, and also Vol. I. p. 38.

On the whole of this chapter see St. Thomas, Supp. qq. xxxiv.–xl.; Chardon, Hist. des Sacrements; Morin, De Sacris Ecclesiæ Ordinationibus; De Augustinis, De Re Sacramentaria, lib. iv.; Turmel, Hist. de la Théol. Positive, pp. 155, 250, 344, 466; Billot, De Ecclesiæ Sacramenlis, tom. ii.; Ballerini, Opus Théol. Morale, vol. v.; Card. Gasparri, De Sacra Ordinatione; Atzberger, Handbuch der Katholischen Dogmatik, iv. p. 749.