Holy Orders Chapter I §2: Matter and Form

§2: Matter and Form

SECTION i. The Matter. — In trying to ascertain what constitutes the matter of this Sacrament, we must make a distinction between the three major orders on the one hand, and the subdiaconate and minor orders on the other. We are here concerned only with the so-called major or sacred orders (the episcopate, the priesthood, and the diaconate), because the others, as we shall see presently, are not sacramental. In the Orient the Sacrament of Holy Orders is conferred solely by the imposition of hands (manuum impositio), whereas in the Latin Church the delivery of the instruments (traditio instrument torum) forms an important part of the ordination rite. The question arises: Which of these two ceremonies constitutes the matter of the Sacrament? There has been a celebrated controversy on this subject. a) St. Bonaventure,1 Peter Soto,* Morinus, Goar, Martene, Tournely, Perrone, Franzelin, Schwetz, Oswald, Pesch, Tepe, and the majority l Comment, in Sent, IV, diat 24. > D* Instil* Sactrd., led. 5, p. «, irt i, qu. 4. 6a of present-day theologians hold that the imposition of hands is the sole matter of the Sacrament. The arguments in favor of this view are very strong, not to say conclusive. o) As we have seen,8 Holy Scripture ascribes the conferring of grace exclusively to the imposition of hands. We cannot reasonably assume that the Bible omits to mention the rite which constitutes the essential matter of the Sacrament, insisting on something entirely non-essential.4 Moreover, the rite of ordination is undoubtedly older than the Book of the Gospels, which plays so important a part in the ” traditio instrumentorum.” P) The Fathers and the Church councils held during the first nine centuries do not mention the ” traditio instrumentorum/’ but merely speak of the ” itnpositio manus” (x^tporovia, xcif>o0cata),5 as does the Council of Trent.* This silence cannot be explained by the Discipline of the Secret. y) The delivery of the instruments is not mentioned in any ritual composed before A. D. 900.7 The early Scholastics speak of it as a merely declarative and consequently non-essential ceremony.8 Hence the rite cannot have been introduced earlier than the tenth century and must be of ecclesiastical institution. May it not be possible that the Church received from 3 V. supra, Sect i. 8 Thus Hugh of St . Victor (+ 4 Cfr. 2 Tim. I, 6. about 1141) says of the rite of ors See the testimonies collected by dination to the priesthood: “AcPesch, PraeUct. Dogma*., Vol. VII, cipiunt et calicem cum vmo et 3rd e

Christ the power to determine the specific matter of this Sacrament, but failed to exercise that power until the tenth century ? We answer that this hypothesis is incompatible with the teaching of the Tridentine Council,9 and, moreover, intrinsically improbable, because we can not reasonably assume that the Church degraded the original rite instituted by the Apostles to the rank of a non-essential ceremony and in its place adopted an entirely new one.10 8) Our fourth and final argument is that the Greek Church has always employed the impositio manuum as the sole rite of ordination from the beginning to the present day. Nor was the Greek teaching or practice on this head ever denied or challenged in the course of the many debates held at Florence, 1274, and at Lyons, 1439, with a view to reunite the two churches. De Lugo maintained 11 that both rites — the imposition of hands and the giving of the instruments — constitute the matter of the Sacrament, the one for the East, the other for the West. This view was approved by Cardinal Franzelin12 and recommended by Msgr. Gutberlet.13 But it seems to us incompatible with the Catholic doctrine of the unity and immutability of the Sacraments. The Church has never claimed the right to change either the matter or the form of any Sacrament.14 If the impositio manuum constitutes the sole matter of the Sacrament, it -follows that the traditio instrument torum is a non-essential ceremony added by the Church and that the subdiaconate and the four minor orders, in • Seas. VII, can. x ; cfr. Pohle- 12 De Sacram. in Genere, 4th ed., Preuss, The Sacraments, Vol. I, pp. pp. 47 sq., Rome 1888. xoi sqq. 18 See the Innsbruck Zeitschrift 10 Cfr. Benedict XIV, De Synod. fZr kath. Theologie, 1901, pp. 621 Dioeces., VIII, 10, 10. sqq. 11 De Sacram. in Genere, disp. 2, 14 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, The Sacra* sect. 5, n. 85 sqq. • ments, Vol. I, pp. 107 sqq. which there is no imposition of hands, are not sacramental rites. b) The view held by Dominicus Soto, Capreolus, Gregory of Valentia,15 Gonet, Estius, and many other Scholastic theologians, that the delivery of the instruments constitutes the matter of the Sacrament, whereas the imposition of hands is accidental and merely a matter of integrity (materia inte grans), may now be considered obsolete. The advocates of this theory derived their main argument from the Decretum pro Armenis of Pope Eugene IV, which says: “The sixth Sacrament is Order, of which the matter is that by the giving of which Order is conferred, as the priesthood by the giving of the chalice with the wine and the paten with the bread; the diaconate by handing [to the ordinand] the Book of the Gospels; the subdiaconate by the giving of the empty chalice with an empty paten resting upon it,” etc.16 But the Decretum pro Armenis (drawn almost literally from St. Thomas’ Opusculum de Fidei Articulis et Septem Sacramentis) , while it possesses very high authority, is not an ex-cathedra decision, but merely a papal instruction issued for the purpose of effecting conformity between the Armenian and the Roman rites. Hence its characteristic reference to the Roman Ritual, 15 De Ord., disp. 9, qu. 1. cum pane p’orrectionem; diaconatus ie Deer, pro Armen. (Denzinger- veto per libri evangeliorum daBannwart, n. 701): ” Sextum sa- tionem; sub diaconatus vero per calicramentum est ordinis, cuius materia cis vacui cum patena vacua superest illud, per cuius traditionem con* posita traditionem; et similiter de fertur ordo, stent presbyteratus tra- olUs,” etc ditur per calicis cum vino et patenae which expressly prescribes the imposition of hands, a practice that had long been in use among the Armenians.17 Benedict XIV correctly estimates the import of the Deereturn for our purpose when he says : ” It is therefore necessary to admit that Pope Eugene spoke of the integrating and accessory matter and form [of the Sacrament] , which he desired the Armenians to add to the imposition of hands long employed by them, in order that they might conform themselves to the custom of the Latin Church.” 18 In the light of this interpretation it is easy to refute Dollinger’s specious contention that the Decretum pro Armenis, because of its false teaching on the subject of Holy Orders, furnishes an argument against the infallibility of the Pope.19 c) Bellarmine, De Lugo, HalHer, Vasquez, Maldonatus, Ledesma, Billuart, Berti, Gotti, and others hold that the imposition of hands and the delivery of the instruments conjointly constitute the matter of the Sacrament. This view has found two eminent modern defenders in Cardinal Billot 20 and Msgr. Gutberlet.21 Assuming that Christ, in instituting the Sacrament of Holy Orders, determined its matter and form only in a generic way, leaving the specific determination to the 17 Et sic de aliorum ordinum formis, prout in Pontificali Romano late continetur. (Denzinger-Bannwart, /. c.) 18 De Synod. Dioeces., VIII, xo, 8: ” Necesse est igitur fateri Engenium locutum esse de materia et forma integrante et accessoria, quam optavit ab Armenis super ad di manuum impositioni iam diu ab Wis adhibitae, ut Ecclesiae latinae moribus se occommodarent.” 19 Dollinger, Der Papst und das Condi, new edition under the title, Das Papsttum, by J. Friedrich, Munich 1892. 20 De Sacram., Vol II, 4th ed., thes. 30. 21 In Heinrich-Gutberlet, Dogmas. Theologte, Vol. X, pp. 288 sqq. Church, the writers of this group describe the traditio instrumentorum as a palpable sign of the grace conferred by the impositio manuum, and therefore as a co-essential factor forming a moral whole with the impositio. The author of the Supplementum to the Summa Theologica 22 says that when a man is ordained to the priesthood, the imposition of hands symbolizes and bestows the power of absolution, while the delivery of the instruments (chalice and paten) symbolizes and bestows the power of consecration. If we examine this theory in the light of the arguments adduced above under a), we find that it is not well founded. The Bible, the Fathers, the councils, and the ancient liturgies all agree that the imposition of hands alone is essential to the Sacrament of Holy Orders. As, however, the pars tutior must always be followed in the administration of the Sacraments, the Church in her ordinations strictly carries out the ceremony of the delivery of instruments. 2. The Form. — The difference of opinion existing with regard to the matter of Holy Orders quite naturally involves a similar difference in regard to its form. If the imposition of hands constitutes the sole matter of the Sacrament, the form must be sought in the accompanying prayer. The sacred anointment which the Church uses in ordaining bishops and priests is an ancient ceremony, described by Pope St. Leo the Great, but it does not form part of the essential matter of the Sacrament and there22 Supplementum, qu. 37, art. 5* 68 HOLY ORDERS fore does not affect its form, though it is well to remember that the Tridentine Council pronounced anathema against those who despise this beautiful rite.28 a) In ordaining a priest to the episcopacy, the consecrating bishop and his two assistants place the Book of the Gospels upon his neck and shoulders, touch his head with their hands, and together pronounce the words: ” Accipe Spiritum sanctum/* Then the consecrator alone recites the following prayer : ” Propitiare, Domine, supplicationibus nostris et inclinato super hunc famulum tuum cornu gratiae sacerdotalis benedictiofiis tuae in eum infunde virtutem/’ Here we have two separate and distinct prayers, — one imperative in form, the other precatory. Church historians tell us that the imperative form, ” Accipe Spiritum sanctum/’ which is likewise employed in the ordination of priests and deacons, is of comparatively recent origin and does not occur in the ancient rituals of the Latin or the euchologia of the Greek Church.24 Hence it is reasonable to conclude that the second prayer, which is recited by the consecrating bishop alone, embodies the sacramental form of episcopal ordination. This does not derogate from the Tridentine canon which declares : ” If anyone saith that, by sacred ordination, the Holy Ghost is not given, and that vainly therefore do the bishops say, ‘Receive ye the Holy Ghost,’ … let him be anathema.” 25 For to say that the Holy Ghost is given in the rite of ordination is not tantamount to saying that He is imparted through this particular set of words. In the second prayer the phrase ” cornu gratiae sacerdotalis ” also signifies the power of the Holy Ghost. 28 Sess. XXIII, can. 5. 24 Martene, De Antiquis Ecclesiae Rxtibus, Vol. II, pp. 21, 27. 25 Sess. XXIII, can. 4 s ” Si quis dixerit, per sacram ordination em non dari Spiritum Sanctum ac proinde frustra episcopos dicer e: ‘Accipe Spiritum Sanctum’ …; anathema sit.” ( Den zinger-Bann wart, n. 964.) MATTER AND FORM 69 The same argument applies to the two other hierarchical orders, — the priesthood and the diaconate. b) There is, however, some difficulty in regard to the former, since the rite of ordination to the priesthood contains no less than three distinct impositions. First the bishop silently lays both hands on the head of the ordinand. The same is done by all the priests who are present. Then bishop and priests together extend their right hands, while the former prays : ” Oremus, fratres carissimi, Deum Patrem omnipotentem, ut super hunc famulum suum, quern ad presbyteriimunus elegit, caelestia dona multiplied et, quod eius dignatione suscipit, ipsins consequatur auxilio. Per Christum Dominum nostrum, Amen. — Exaudi nos, quaesumus, Domine Deus noster, et super hunc famulum tuum benedictionem sancti Spiritus et gratiae sacerdotalis infunde virtutem.” This part of the ceremony is known as manuum extensio or xecporovta. After Communion, the bishop imposes his hands upon the candidate for the third time and says : ” Accipe Spiritum Sanctum, quorum remiseris peccata, remittuntur eis, et quorum retinueris, retenta sunt*9 This is the impositio manuum proper, or x€LP°0€

7o HOLY ORDERS manuum extensio, or x^oTovta, conceived as a continuation of the physical contact embodied in the first.26 If this rite constitutes the matter, then the accompanying words of the bishop must constitute the form of the Sacrament. We would not, however, entirely reject the opinion of those who hold that all three of these ceremonies, being intrinsically connected with one another and together constituting one moral act, with their accompanying prayers (as partial forms) are essential to the validity of the Sacrament.27 c) The ordination rite for the diacpnate contains only one imposition of hands, and consequently the sacramental form must be contained in the prayer ” Domine sancte Pater omnipotens,” which accompanies this ceremony. It is not likely that the form is in the words * Accipe Spiritum Sanctum ad robur et ad resist endum didbolo* etc., because this phrase, as Martene has shown, is ” hardly four hundred years old.” 28 The ordination rite for the subdiaconate contains no impositio manuum, but merely a traditio instrument orum, and consequently cannot claim to be sacramental.29 This applies a fortiori to the four minor orders. 3. Anglican Orders. — The question regarding the validity of Anglican Orders gave rise to a long controversy, which was definitively decided by Leo XIII in his dogmatic Bull “Apostolicae curae” of Sept. 13, 1896. 26 Cfr. Greg IX Decret., 1. I, tit. 28 On the rite of ordination for 1 6, cap. 3: ” Presbyter et diaconus deacons see Gihr, Die hi. Sakraquum ordinantur, manus impost- mente der kath. Kirche, Vol. II, and Honem tactu corporal* recipiunt.* ed., pp. 319 sqq. 27 Cfr. Ballerini. Opus Theol. 29 Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 153: Moral., ed. Palmieri, Vol. V» 3rd ed., * Sub diaconus quum ordinatur, quia pp. 716 sq., Pratt 1900. manus impositionem uou accipit, paMATTER AND FORM 71 The decision against the validity of these orders rests, not on the historic fact that William Barlow, who consecrated Dr. Matthew Parker, the first Anglican archbishop of Canterbury, at Lambeth on Dec. 7, 1559, was not a validly consecrated bishop, but on the dogmatic fact that the Edwardine rite of ordination, drawn up in 1549, had purposely altered the sacramental form of Holy Orders so as to exclude the intention of bestowing the power of consecration and absolution. This perversion, together with the manifest lack of a proper intention, deprives the rite of its sacramental effect80 ” It is clear,” says St. Thomas, ” that if any substantial part of the sacramental form be suppressed, the essential sense of the words is destroyed, and consequently the Sacrament becomes invalid.” 8X This principle explains the custom existing long before the Leonine decision (practically since 1554) of conditionally reordaining converted Anglican clergymen. The orders conferred under the Edwardine Ordinal were declared null and void by Paul VI as early as I555-82 tenant de episcopi manu accipiat va- Ordinations Anglicanes, Paris 1894; euam et caKcem vacuum.” S. F. Smith, S. J., The Bull on AnSOCfr. Pohle-Preuss, The Sacra- glican Orders, London 1897; Idem, ments, Vol. I, pp. no sq. in the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. I, 81 Summa Theol., III, qu. 60, art pp. 491-498; S. Brandi, S. J., Delle 8: ” Manifestum est autem quod si Ordinasioni Anglicane, 4th ed., Rome diminuatur aliquid eorum quae sunt 1908; (cfr. Am. Eccl. Review, XVI, de substantia format sacrament alis, 1897); Von Hackelberg-Landau, Die tollitur debitus sensus verborum, et an glik anise hen Weihen und ihre neuideo non perHcitur sacramentum.” este Apologie, Graz 1897; J. Sou82 On the question of Anglican ben, Nouvelle Thiologie Dogmatique, Orders see A. Boudiahon, Sur Us Vol. VIII, pp. 77 sqq., Paris 1905.