Holy Orders — The Priesthood; The Diaconate

Section 2: The Priesthood

The priesthood, like the episcopate, is a distinct order, superior to the diaconate and instituted by Christ; and the rite of ordination to the priesthood is a true Sacrament.

Thesis I: The priesthood is a distinct order, divinely instituted, and superior to the diaconate by the power of consecration and absolution. This proposition is de fide.

Proof. The Council of Trent defines: “If anyone saith that in the Catholic Church there is not a hierarchy, instituted by divine ordination, consisting of bishops, priests, and ministers, let him be anathema.”¹ And again: “If anyone saith that there is not in the New Testament a visible and external priesthood, or that there is not any power of consecrating and offering the true Body and Blood of the Lord and of forgiving and retaining sins, … let him be anathema.”²

The distinction between the priesthood and the episcopate, and the superiority of the former over the diaconate, follows from what has been said of the prerogatives of bishops.³

That there is a priesthood distinct from the episcopate is attested by St. Ignatius of Antioch, as we have seen.⁴ That this distinction does not appear in the earlier Patristic writings is owing to the fact that presbyteros was used interchangeably with episkopos.⁵ In view of the law of historic continuity it is safe to assume, however, that an institution which was fully developed at the beginning of the second century, in principle existed already in the first. Consequently, the priesthood dates from the first century of the Christian era, and because of the powers with which it is endowed, can have been instituted by none other than our Divine Lord Himself.

Presbyteros as a technical term to designate the intermediary stage between bishop and deacon, had passed through a process of development already at the time of St. Ignatius. The stages of this process were probably as follows: “In itself the name presbyteroi designated the presiding officers in general; but long before this signification became generally accepted, popular usage had coined the name diakonoi for the lowest class of church officials. For these the faithful first required a clear designation because they were in close contact with them every day. Thus, after this new name had become current, the presbyteroi were divided into diakonoi and non-diakonoi. The latter were then called episkopoi or poimenes. When at the close of the Apostolic age (67–110), this terminology proved inadequate, the word episkopos, which, in contradistinction to presbyteroi, was generally employed in the singular number, became the technical term for the chief shepherd of a diocese; the middle class continued to be called poimenes or presbyteroi. The circumstance that presbyteroi was a technical term among Jews and pagans, helped to give this word the preference over others still in use for the aforesaid middle class of officials and thus to make it the terminus technicus for this class.”⁶

Thesis II: Ordination to the priesthood is a true Sacrament. This also is de fide.

Proof. The sacramentality of sacerdotal ordination, though never expressly defined as an article of faith, is guaranteed by the ordinary teaching office of the Church.

a) The Messianic priesthood prefigured in the Old Testament⁷ is realized in the New. Christ commissioned His Apostles and their successors to offer the Eucharistic sacrifice and to forgive sins. From the beginning of the Christian era to the present day, priests as well as bishops have been ordained for both these functions (consecration and absolution). It follows that ordination to the priesthood possesses a character which can be imprinted only by a true Sacrament.

b) Ecclesiastical Tradition up to St. Cyprian, Tertullian, and St. Ignatius of Antioch confirms the existence of priests as a class distinct from and superior to the deacons.

Some of the later Fathers, notably St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Chrysostom, St. Jerome, and St. Augustine, expressly designate the ordination rite for priests as a Sacrament and put it on a level with Baptism.⁸ Moreover, with the sole exception of the Protestants, all Christian sects regard ordination to the priesthood as a Sacrament. They cannot have invented this belief; it must have come to them from the Catholic Church, to which they all at one time belonged.

c) The two arguments just given from Scripture and Tradition may be strengthened by a third, drawn from the teaching of Trent. The Council defines that “Order, or sacred ordination, is truly and properly a Sacrament instituted by Christ.”⁹ Now, one may without heresy (though not without error) doubt the sacramental character of the ordination rite for bishops and deacons. If the ordination rite for priests were not a true Sacrament, there would be no certainty of faith that a Sacrament of Holy Orders exists.

“Hence,” concludes Benedict XIV,¹⁰ “all theologians infer that it must be received as of divine faith that at least ordination to the priesthood is truly and properly a Sacrament. For in order that the aforesaid universal definition [of Trent] be true, it must necessarily include at least the foremost order, i.e., the priesthood.”

Furthermore, the ordination rite for priests, according to all existing formularies, communicates the Holy Ghost. Now the Council of Trent pronounces anathema against those who deny that the Holy Ghost is given in sacred ordination when the bishop says, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost.”¹¹ This means that the invisible rite is accompanied by and produces invisible grace.¹² Consequently, ordination to the priesthood is a true Sacrament.

Finally, the Council solemnly defines that “a character is imprinted by that ordination,” and that “he who has once been a priest cannot again become a layman.”¹³ The imprinting of a character is a specifically sacramental effect. Hence ordination to the priesthood must be a true Sacrament.

The Church acts upon this belief in praxi when she refuses to deprive excommunicated or suspended priests of the power of consecration. Neither can she deprive any priest of that other sacerdotal power of forgiving sins, though she can and often does make its exercise invalid by withdrawing the necessary jurisdiction.

Section 3: The Diaconate

Deacons (diaconi), in the technical sense of the term, are men who minister to bishops and priests in the discharge of their official duties.¹⁴ Their functions, according to the Roman Pontifical, are “to serve at the altar, to baptize, and to preach.”¹⁵

The Catholic teaching on the diaconate may be set forth in two theses, as follows:

Thesis I: The diaconate is a distinct order instituted by Christ, and the lowest among the three hierarchical orders. Both propositions are of faith.

Proof. In inculcating the divine institution of a hierarchy “consisting of bishops, priests, and ministers,”¹⁶ the Tridentine Council by the latter term undoubtedly meant to include deacons.

That the diaconate is subordinate to the episcopate and the priesthood follows from the fact that the deacons “minister to the priesthood by virtue of their office.”¹⁷

a) The origin of the diaconate is described as follows in the Acts of the Apostles: “In those days, the number of disciples increasing, there arose a murmuring of the Greeks against the Hebrews, for that their widows were neglected in the daily ministrations. Then the twelve calling together the multitude of the disciples, said: It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business… . And they chose Stephen, … and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas… . These they set before the Apostles; and they praying, imposed hands upon them.”¹⁸ The table service in ancient times was intimately connected with the service of the altar.¹⁹ Moreover, we see these seven deacons, especially Stephen and Philip, preaching the Gospel,²⁰ baptizing,²¹ and ministering at divine worship.²²

But does not the passage quoted prove that the diaconate is an Apostolic rather than a divine institution? This question can best be answered by saying that an office that is always mentioned as organically connected with the priesthood,²³ and conferred by the imposition of hands,²⁴ must be of divine institution.

b) The Scriptural argument is strengthened by Tradition. The diaconate has always been sharply distinguished from the priesthood, more sharply, in fact, than the episcopate.

St. Clement of Rome, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, which was composed A.D. 96, when St. John the Evangelist was still alive, says: “The Apostles have received the message which they gave us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ was sent by God: hence Christ by God, and the Apostles by Christ — these things are well ordained according to the will of God… . The Apostles ordained the first among their converts after examining their spirit, to be bishops and deacons. Nor is this anything new. For Sacred Scripture says: ‘I will constitute their bishops in justice and their deacons in faith.’ We need not wonder that those to whom this office has been entrusted by God in Christ, have ordained those aforementioned.”²⁵

St. Ignatius of Antioch (d. 117), speaking of the divine constitution of the Church, says that it cannot exist without deacons. “Likewise let all respect the deacons as Jesus Christ, and also the bishop, who is the type of the Father, and the presbyters as the council of God and the college of the Apostles. Without these [three] the name of ‘Church’ is not given.”²⁶

St. Polycarp (d. 166) says: “The deacons must be blameless before His righteousness, as the servants of God and Christ, and not of man.”²⁷

Bishops, priests, and deacons form as it were an inseparable triad also in later Patristic documents. Thus Clement of Alexandria (d. 217) says of the ecclesiastical hierarchy: “In the Church there is a gradation of bishops, priests, and deacons, which is, I believe, an imitation of the glory of the angels.”²⁸ Origen (d. 254), who was a simple priest, says of himself: “More is demanded of me than of the deacon; more of the deacon than of the layman; but he who occupies the citadel of the whole Church [i.e., the bishop] must give an account of the whole Church.”²⁹

Among Latin writers Tertullian³⁰ and St. Optatus of Mileve expressed themselves in similar words. Optatus (d. after 384), deploring the defection of so many Christians during the persecution of Diocletian, distinctly mentions deacons, priests, and bishops among the apostates.³¹

Thesis II: The ordination to the diaconate is a true Sacrament. This proposition, which is upheld by all Catholic theologians with the exception of Durandus³² and Cajetan, is regarded as an article of faith by Vasquez. Cardinal Bellarmine contents himself with calling it “valde probabilis.”³³ We prefer to characterize it as “sententia certa,” with a firm basis in Scripture and Tradition.

a) Sacred Scripture, in speaking of the laying on of hands in the case of St. Stephen and his associates,³⁴ does not say that the rite bestowed grace. However, in view of the high moral demands made by St. Paul upon the newly created deacons,³⁵ it is safe to assume that the ceremony was accompanied by sacramental effects.

This probability becomes a certainty in the light of Tradition, which regards the ordination of the seven as the first ordination of deacons and a true Sacrament. “Behold, the sacred writer does not speak superfluously,” says St. Chrysostom, “for he does not say in what manner, but simply that they were ordained by prayer. For this is ordination. The hand of a man is imposed, but God effects the whole, and His hand it is which touches the head of the candidate to be ordained.”³⁶

b) According to all extant rituals the Holy Ghost is communicated when the bishop lays his hands upon a candidate to make him a deacon.

The Pseudo-Apostolic Constitutions direct the bishop, when ordaining a deacon, to pray: “Almighty God, … turn Thy face towards this Thy servant, chosen to serve in the ministry of the diaconate, and fill him with the Holy Spirit and with power, as Thou didst fill Stephen.”³⁷ According to the Sacramentary of Pope St. Gregory the Great the bishop says: “Send down upon him, we beseech Thee, O Lord, the Holy Ghost, that he may thereby be strengthened in the faithful discharge of the work of Thy ministry, through the bestowal of Thy sevenfold graces.”³⁸

In the Greek Church the bishop prays: “O Lord, our God, … pour out the grace which Thou didst grant to Stephen, Thy protomartyr, the first called by Thee for the discharge of this ministry… . Fill this Thy servant, whom Thou wishest to undertake the office of deacon, by the communication of Thy holy and life-giving Spirit, with all faith, charity, and holiness.”³⁹

Many similar texts have been collected by Martène⁴⁰ and Denzinger.⁴¹ All without exception connect the grace of the Holy Ghost with the imposition of hands in the ordination for the diaconate. Now the Council of Trent declares⁴² that a rite in which the bishop says, “Receive the Holy Ghost,” cannot be in vain. Consequently, the ordination rite for the diaconate communicates the Holy Ghost, and is a true Sacrament.⁴³

Let it not be objected that the delivery of the book of Gospels is the “matter” of the diaconate, and that no such book existed at the time of the Apostles.⁴⁴ If this objection proves anything, it proves that the matter of ordination cannot consist in the traditio libri evangeliorum. We do not assert that it does, but hold with the majority of theologians that the matter of the Sacrament consists in the impositio manuum.

Another objection has been drawn from the fact that an ancient rite for the administration of minor orders and the blessing of deaconesses, as found in some rituals, contains an invocation of the Holy Ghost.⁴⁵ However, this rite was never in general use, is of post-Apostolic origin, and was abrogated in course of time. Hence it must have been of purely ecclesiastical institution. The Church, as we have learnt, can neither institute nor abrogate Sacraments.