Holy Orders

448. Definition. Order is a sacrament by which, through the imposition of the hand and the words of the bishop, spiritual power is conferred and at the same time grace for duly carrying out sacred duties.

a. The name of order is taken in a twofold sense, active and passive. Actively it signifies that sacred action through which spiritual power is conferred, and in this sense it is also called ordination. Passively it can signify two things: first, the effect produced by ordination, namely sacred power; then also the company of those who in the Church are furnished with this sacred power and constitute the hierarchy or hierarchical order.

b. The proposed definition sets forth only the order which is a sacrament; but by usage received from all, under the name of orders there are comprehended also orders which are not sacraments. St. Thomas proposes a definition which sets forth all orders, both sacramental and non-sacramental: "A certain seal of the Church, an ecclesiastical rite, by which spiritual power is handed over to the one ordained."²

c. The spiritual power which is conferred in ordination is indeed manifold, but the principal one is the power of confecting and administering the sacraments, among which the Eucharist is preeminent. To this power several others are added, such as the power of consecrating, blessing, etc. All orders and their manifold power are in some way referred to the Eucharist, either so that it can be confected and distributed, or so that the faithful may be duly prepared for receiving it.³

¹ St. Thomas, Supplementum, q. 34-40; St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 734-830; Sporer-Bierbaum, Theologia sacram. III, tract. 7, n. 197-337; Coninck, De sacramentis II, disp. 20; Gasparri, De sacra ordinatione (Parisiis: Delhome, 1893); Ballerini-Palmieri, Opus theolog. moral., 3rd ed., V, n. 882 ss.; Chr. Pesch, Praelectiones dogmaticae VII, De sacramento ordinis, n. 383-678; Fr. Wieland, Die genetische Entwicklung der sog. Ordines minores in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten, 7th Supplement-Heft of the Roman Quarterly (Freiburg: Herder, 1897); Gutberlet, "Der sakramentale Ritus der Priesterweihe," Zeitschrift fur k. Theologie 1901, p. 621 ff.; Rett, Fragen uber Materie, Form und Spender der Sakramente, Weidenauer Studien, Bd. 4, p. 273; Van Rossum, De essentia sacramenti ordinis (Friburgi: Herder, 1914).

² Supplementum, q. 34, a. 2.

³ St. Thomas, q. 37, a. 2.

449. Number of Orders. In the Latin Church seven orders are numbered: the ostiariate, lectorate, exorcistate, acolyte, subdiaconate, diaconate, and priesthood, which is twofold: the lesser priesthood, which is called the presbyterate, and the greater priesthood, which is called the episcopate. The four prior orders are called minor orders; the others are called greater and sacred. Tonsure is premised to orders.

a. In the Greek Church now before the presbyterate only the diaconate, subdiaconate, and lectorate are conferred, of which the two latter are considered minor orders. If a cleric who received minor orders in an oriental rite is going to receive sacred orders in the Latin rite, he must first receive the omitted orders, Cn. 1004.

b. The greater orders are called sacred both because their acts are concerned with consecrated matter, the presbyterate and diaconate with the body and blood of Christ, the subdiaconate with consecrated vessels; and because annexed to them is the obligation of preserving celibacy and of reciting the divine office.

c. All orders, from the unity of the end to which they are referred, constitute only one sacrament, since all are ordered to the one sacrament and sacrifice of the Eucharist.

THE priesthood of the New Law is not a mere office and bare ministry of preaching the Gospel: Our Lord instituted it and gave it the power of offering the sacrifice of his Body and Blood and of forgiving sins.¹1 This power is conferred on priests by the sacrament of Orders, which also gives the grace to those who are rightly ordained to perform their sacred functions worthily. Those functions are various, and partly by divine institution, partly by ecclesiastical, they have been divided and assigned to separate grades of a spiritual hierarchy. The perfection of the priesthood and the whole of its powers reside in the episcopate; some portion of what bishops possess is communicated to the inferior ranks of the clergy by a special rite for each grade. Thus Orders is one sacrament, but the different ranks of the clergy participate in it in different degrees, or in other words, there are several Orders. There are three major or sacred Orders, to which by ecclesiastical law is annexed a solemn vow of chastity, and there are four minor Orders. The sacred Orders are the priesthood, the diaconate, and the subdiaconate; by the minor Orders are ordained acolytes, exorcists, lectors, and door-keepers.

It is a moot point among theologians whether all these Orders are sacraments or not; more probably only the episcopate, priesthood, and diaconate are sacraments and of immediate divine institution, the rest being of ecclesiastical institution. Those Orders which are sacraments impress a character on the soul.

The first tonsure, by which a lay person is made a cleric, is certainly of ecclesiastical institution and is not a sacrament.

¹ Trent, sess. xxili, c. I.

The matter of the minor Orders is the handing to the cleric the symbols of the office to which he is ordained, and the words which accompany this act constitute the form. There is a controversy whether the handing to the subdeacon of an empty chalice with the paten alone, or also the giving to him of the book of epistles, is the matter of the subdiaconate, and similarly with regard to the form. It is also a matter of controversy whether the imposition of hands alone is the matter of the diaconate, priesthood, and episcopate, or the handing to the ordinand the symbols of his office, or whether both together constitute the matter. There is the same difference of opinion with regard to the form, but these questions belong to dogmatic theology.

In practice, the rite prescribed for ordination in the Pontifical must be observed, and if anything be omitted which even probably belongs to the essence of the sacrament, the whole must be repeated again, at least conditionally. Thus, if in the ordination of a priest the chalice with wine and the paten were not handed to the ordinand to touch while the bishop pronounced the appropriate form of words, the whole ordination would have to be repeated before one thus ordained could be allowed to say Mass. Similarly, if the imposition of hands is omitted which precedes and accompanies the prayer and preface which are said by the bishop and which contain the form, the whole rite must be repeated. On the contrary, if the third imposition of hands which accompanies the prayer, “ Receive the Holy Ghost, etc.,” is omitted, this portion of the rite alone need be supplied afterward, as it is certain that it only belongs to the integrity of the sacrament, not to its essence.

Although previous reception of the priesthood is more probably necessary for the valid ordination of a bishop, the inferior Orders do not seem necessary for the valid ordination to the priesthood.

Whether three co-consecrators are necessary for the validity of an episcopal consecration is disputed, but at least the Pope can give faculties to have only one consecrating bishop.

The functions of those who are in minor Orders, with the exception of exorcists, may, according to modern discipline, be exercised by laymen,

THE ordinary minister of Orders is a bishop, who is the only valid minister of the episcopate and priesthood. A priest may receive delegated authority from the Pope to confer minor Orders, and the subdiaconate, and probably also the diaconate. Thus Abbots have power to give minor Order to their own subjects, and Cardinals, if they be priests, may give them to clerics belonging to their titular churches in Rome.

Ecclesiastical law requires that Orders be received only from one’s own bishop, or from another bishop with his leave, which is granted by giving the subject dismissorial letters.

The Code bids a bishop ordain his own subjects unless he is prevented by some good reason.

One’s own bishop, as far as Orders are concerned, is only the bishop of the diocese in which the ordinand has a domicile, together with origin therein, or simply a domicile without origin; but in this latter case the ordinand ought to affirm on oath his intention perpetually to remain in the diocese, unless there is question of promoting a cleric to Orders who has already been incardinated in the diocese by the first tonsure, or of promoting a student who is destined for the service of another diocese in accordance with Canon 969, sec. 2, or of promoting a professed religious, of whom there is question in Canon 964, n. 4 (Can. 956).

By the common law, regulars must be ordained by the bishop in whose diocese their convent is situated, but some have a special privilege of giving dismissorials to their members for ordination by any bishop who is in union with the Holy See. Whenever a bishop holds an ordination outside his own diocese he requires the leave of the bishop of the place to exercise pontifical functions,

To be able to receive Orders validly, the subject must be of the male sex and baptized (Can. 968). It has always been understood in the Church that women cannot receive Christian Orders. Moreover, an adult must have at least an habitual and express intention to receive ordination (unless indeed he is an imbecile and has never had the use of reason).

Many qualities and conditions are requisite for the lawful reception of Orders about which something must here be said; the fuller treatment of this matter belongs to canon law.

As we saw when treating of the clerical state, one who aspires to Orders must be of good life and must be called by God.

At least the Orders which are sacraments should be received in the state of grace, and Canon 1001 prescribes that before receiving the first tonsure and minor Orders the ordinand should devote at least three whole days to spiritual exercises, and before receiving sacred Orders he should devote at least six whole days to them.

In order that one may be lawfully ordained Canon 974 requires: (1) The reception of the sacrament of Confirmation; (2) moral conduct agreeably to the Order to be received; (3) the canonical age; (4) the required knowledge; (5) the reception of the lower Orders; (6) the observance of the interstices; (7) a canonical title if there is question of major Orders.

The subdiaconate may not be conferred before the completion of the twenty-first year of age, the diaconate before the completion of the twenty-second, and the priesthood before the completion of the twenty-fourth (Can. 975).

No one, whether secular or religious, is to receive the first tonsure before beginning his course of theology (Can. 976).

The subdiaconate may not be given except at the end of the third year of the course of theology, the diaconate only at the beginning of the fourth year, and the priesthood only after the middle of the fourth year (Can. 976, sec. 2).

Orders should be conferred by degrees, so that ordinations leaps and bounds are altogether prohibited (Can. 977).

Canon 978 prescribes that the interstices are to be observed, and during them those who have been promoted should exercise themselves in the Orders received according to the directions of the bishop.

The interstices between the first tonsure and the Order of door-keepers and between the minor Orders are left to the prudent judgement of the bishop; one year should elapse between the Order of acolytes and the subdiaconate; three months between the subdiaconate and the diaconate.

Without special leave of the Roman Pontiff minor Orders may never be given with the subdiaconate or two sacred Orders on one and the same day, and any custom to the contrary is reprobated; it is also forbidden to give the first tonsure together with one of the minor Orders, or all the minor Orders at once.

A bishop must have completed his thirtieth year.

By common law sacred Orders should be conferred during Mass on the Saturdays in Ember Week, or before Passion Sunday, or before Easter Sunday. For grave reason a bishop can confer them on any Sunday or holiday of obligation.

The first tonsure may be conferred on any day and at any time; minor Orders on Sundays and on doubles, in the morning (Can. 1006).

Those who receive sacred Orders must communicate in the Mass of ordination (Can. 1005).

The Church does not wish her clergy to have to beg or to exercise some unbecoming trade in order to gain a livelihood, so she requires that to be admitted to sacred Orders a cleric must have a title, as it is called, or a certain guarantee of decent support. Various titles are recognized by ecclesiastical law, such as a benefice, pension, patrimony, poverty for religious, a common table, the Mission, and others. If a cleric already ordained loses the title of his ordination he should find another, unless in the bishop’s judgement his decent support is otherwise provided for (Can. 980).

Before ordination regulars must be solemnly professed, unless they have a special privilege by which simple profession suffices.

After ordination a priest pays homage to the bishop and solemnly promises obedience to his ordinary. He undertakes no new burden by this promise; he simply binds himself anew to pay canonical obedience to the bishop in all matters subject to his authority; and a secular priest obliges himself not to leave the diocese for which he was ordained without the leave of his bishop.

(St. Thomas, Supplement, q. 34-40; St. Alphonsus, Theologia Moralis, lib. VI, n. 734-830; Homo Apostolicus, tr. 17.)¹

¹ Cf. Benedict XIV, De Synodo dioecesana, lib. 8, c. 9-11 and lib. 12, c. 3 and 4; Many, De sacra ordinatione; Gasparri, De sacra ordinatione; Wernz-Vidal, Ius canonicum, t. V; Pesch, Praelectiones dogmaticae de Ordine.

I. By the institution of Christ there exists in the Church a twofold state, namely that of clerics and that of lay persons. Now "those who have been assigned to the divine ministries by at least the first tonsure are called clerics" (canon 108, § 1).

II. Clerics "are not all in the same grade, but among them there is a sacred hierarchy in which some are subordinated to others" (canon 108, § 2). The aforesaid hierarchy is called the hierarchy of Order.¹

III. The distinct grades of the hierarchy of Order are counted as eight from the Council of Trent,² namely Porter, Lector, Exorcist, Acolyte, Subdiaconate, Diaconate, Presbyterate, and Episcopate.³

1. "Porter is the order by which there is conferred upon someone a special power of opening and closing the door of the church, and of admitting the worthy and excluding the unworthy" (St. Alphonsus, VI, 735).

2. "Lector is the order by which there is conferred upon someone a special power of reading psalms and lessons from the pulpit in church, and of catechizing or instructing the people in matters of faith" (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).

3. "Exorcist is the order by which there is conferred upon someone a special power of casting out demons" (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).

4. "Acolyte is the order by which there is conferred upon someone a special power of serving the subdeacon in solemn Mass, by lighting candles, preparing and handing to him the cruets of wine and water" (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).

5. "Subdiaconate is the order by which there is conferred upon someone the power of serving the deacon in solemn Mass and solemnly chanting the Epistle" (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).

6. "Diaconate is the order by which there is conferred upon someone a special power of immediately assisting the presbyter in solemn Mass and solemnly chanting the Gospel" (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).

7. "Presbyterate is the order by which there is conferred upon someone a special power of consecrating the Body and Blood of Christ, and also of absolving from sins and feeding subjects by work and doctrine" (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).

8. "Episcopate is the order by which there is conferred upon someone a special power of confirming the faithful and ordaining the ministers of the sacraments, taking 'ministers' more broadly, that is, not only for those who confect the sacraments, but also for those who minister by office to those confecting them, and also of consecrating things pertaining to divine worship" (St. Alphonsus, VI, 735).

a) Tonsure is not an order, but a preparation for them, or "it is a solemn ecclesiastical rite, consisting in a slight cutting of the hair with certain words, celebrated by a suitable minister, signifying by the institution of the Church that a baptized male is transferred from the lay state into the lot of the Lord and the clerical state" (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).

b) Episcopate and Presbyterate are often designated by the one name of Priesthood; hence Bishops are called priests of the first order, presbyters priests of the second order. Therefore many enumerate only seven orders. Now the priesthood, which, as was said, includes Episcopate and Presbyterate, the Diaconate, and the Subdiaconate are called major or sacred Orders; the others are called minor Orders.

c) "In the following canons," so says canon 949, "by the name of major or sacred orders are understood presbyterate, diaconate, subdiaconate; but by the name of minor orders, acolytate, exorcistate, lectorate, porterate." And canon 950 says: "In law the words 'to ordain,' 'order,' 'ordination,' 'sacred ordination,' comprehend besides episcopal consecration the orders enumerated in canon 949 and the first tonsure itself, unless something else is drawn from the nature of the matter or from the context of the words."

IV. Episcopate, Presbyterate, and Diaconate are of divine institution. But the Episcopate by divine law is a grade distinct from the Presbyterate and superior to it.⁴ Subdiaconate and the minor orders do not seem to be of divine institution.

1. That the Episcopate and Presbyterate, together with the office of certain ministers, are of divine institution, the Council of Trent defined in these words: "If anyone says that in the Catholic Church there is not a hierarchy instituted by divine ordination, which consists of Bishops, Presbyters, and Ministers, let him be anathema."⁵ Canon 108, § 3 agrees.

2. That Bishops are superior to presbyters, the Council of Trent likewise teaches, although it does not expressly say "by divine law": "If anyone says that Bishops are not superior to Presbyters, or that they do not have the power of confirming and ordaining, or that the power which they have is common to them with Presbyters, let him be anathema."⁶

3. That the minor orders are not of divine institution is proved especially from this, that in the most ancient documents, where the different grades of the Hierarchy are discussed, only Episcopate, Presbyterate, and Diaconate are enumerated.⁷

With these things premised, we shall speak first of Order considered in itself, then of its ministration, then of the reception of Order, and finally of certain matters which regard both ministration and reception.

¹ The ecclesiastical hierarchy taken generally is: the body of clerics who, according to various grades, enjoy sacred power in the Church. It is distinguished into the hierarchy of Order and the hierarchy of Jurisdiction, according as the sacred power concerns the ministry of divine worship, for example the dispensation of the sacraments, etc., or the governance of the faithful.

² Session 23, canons 2 and 4.

³ Among the Greeks only four Orders are conferred: two major, namely Priesthood and Diaconate, and two minor, namely Subdiaconate and Lectorate. But the Maronites have the order of Cantorate, to which tonsure is attached; and the Armenians have four minor orders just as the Latins do.

⁴ Bishops are superior to presbyters both by reason of teaching and governance and by reason of Order. The first is proved in the treatise on the Church; the second is discussed here.

⁵ Session 23, canon 6.

⁶ Session 23, canon 7.

⁷ Gasparri, De sacra ordinatione, n. 41.

There will also be discussion of the essence of Orders which are not sacraments.

I. The essence, or matter and form, of Orders which are not numbered among the sacraments. 1. The matter of the minor Orders, according to the opinion of all, is the handing over of the instruments;¹ the form is the words which accompany the respective handing over.

2. The matter of the Subdiaconate² according to some is the handing over of the empty chalice with the paten, while the form is the correlative words; according to others, the handing over of the chalice with the paten and of the book of Epistles, and the form the respective words; according to a very few, finally, all the things prescribed in the ordination constitute the matter and form.

Corollary I. According to the more common opinion, to the handing over of the instruments there must correspond for validity an acceptance made by physical contact, so that moral acceptance, for example by a nod, does not suffice. The reason is that the word "touching," which the Pontifical uses, designates physical touch. Nevertheless, it does not obstruct validity that the acceptance is made by a hand covered with a glove.

Corollary II. Once the almost morally certain opinion is admitted which does not hold the minor Orders to be sacraments and teaches that they are of ecclesiastical institution - once, I say, this opinion is admitted - the Supreme Pontiff can sanate in the root all defects, even substantial ones. There are also those who think that they are certainly validly conferred if the essentials have been observed according to a probable interpretation, since the Church is considered to supply insofar as there is need. But these things cannot practically be applied to the Subdiaconate, since the opinion which denies the character of a sacrament to that Order is indeed very probable, but still is not certain.

¹ In the Greek Church, imposition of hands is performed outside the church.

² The source note marker is attached to the Subdiaconate heading; the surrounding note text gives no further substantive detail beyond the preceding observation.

II. The essence, or matter and form, of Orders which are sacraments.

1. Matter and form of the Diaconate. In the ordination of a Deacon: 1. "The Pontiff, extending his right hand, places it upon the head of each one to be ordained, ... saying to each: Receive the Holy Spirit, for strength, and for resisting the devil and his temptations, in the Name of the Lord."¹ 2. The Pontiff continues, holding his right hand extended, even to the end of the Preface: "Send forth upon them, we ask, O Lord, the Holy Spirit," etc. 3. Lastly, he hands to all the book of the Gospels, saying: "Receive," etc. Now:

a) The matter of the Diaconate according to some is only the imposition of the right hand; according to others it is only the handing over of the instruments; according to still others it is each ceremony (St. Alphonsus, VI, 748, 737).

Corollary. In order that the matter be indubitable, the last opinion must be followed. In addition, in the imposition of the hand, physical touch is required, at least so that every doubt be forestalled, although mediated touch suffices, for example through a hand wrapped in a glove or over the small cap of the ordinand.²

b) The form of the Diaconate according to some consists only in the words "Receive the Holy Spirit," etc., which the Bishop pronounces while imposing the right hand on each; according to others it is only the preface or eucharistic prayer; according to others it is the words "Receive power," which the Bishop pronounces while handing to all the book of the Gospels; according to still others it is both the words "Receive the Holy Spirit," the preface, and the words "Receive power" (St. Alphonsus, VI, 748, 737).

Corollary. In order that the form be indubitable, the last opinion must be followed. In addition, if the Diaconate has been doubtfully validly conferred, provision should be made for convalidation (cf. n. 594).

¹ Roman Pontifical, p. 41.

² Holy Office, June 22, 1892.

2. Matter and form of the Presbyterate. In the ordination of a Presbyter: 1. The Bishop "at the same time imposes both hands upon the head of each one to be ordained successively, saying nothing. The same is done after him by all the Priests who are present." This is called by many the first imposition. 2. Then "both the Pontiff and the priests hold their right hands extended over them"; this extension is called by many the second imposition, but it should rather be called a continuation of the first. While the Pontiff holds his hand extended, he says: "Let us pray, dearest brethren," etc. Afterwards "the Pontiff, having laid aside the miter, turned toward the altar, says: Let us pray. And the ministers: Let us bend the knees. Response: Arise. And immediately, turned toward the ordinands, he says: Hear us, we ask," etc. Then, with hands extended before the breast, he says the Preface. 3. The Pontiff "hands to each one successively the chalice with wine and water and the paten placed over it with the host, and they, the ordinands, receive it between the index and middle fingers, and touch the cup of the chalice and the paten at the same time, the Pontiff saying to each: Receive the power to offer Sacrifice to God and to celebrate Masses, both for the living and for the dead, in the Name of the Lord." 4. Finally, he places both hands upon the heads of the ordinands, saying: "Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained."² This is called the last imposition. Now:

a) The matter of the Presbyterate according to some is only the imposition of hands upon each; according to others, only the extension of the hand toward all; according to others, the imposition of hands upon each and the extension of the hand, which extension is regarded as a continuation of the first imposition, so that both constitute one imposition; according to others, only the handing over of the instruments; according to others, both the imposition of hands upon each, the extension of the hand, and the handing over of the instruments; others hold that the power of sacrificing is conferred in the handing over of the instruments, and the power of absolving in the last imposition of hands (St. Alphonsus, VI, 749). Now:

a) It is most probable that the imposition of hands alone is the matter of the Presbyterate; this opinion Cardinal van Rossum solidly proves.³ Nevertheless, as we said, it is further disputed whether the imposition of hands upon each alone, or the subsequent extension of the hand, or both, constitutes the matter.

b) Those who hold also either the handing over of the instruments alone as matter, more commonly require physical touch of those instruments, although mediated touch, or touch performed by a veiled hand, suffices (St. Alphonsus, VI, 742, 743). Three things must be touched: the chalice, the paten, and the host; and, so that all anxiety be forestalled, care must be taken that each be touched. Nevertheless, for validity these suffice: 1. the touch of the chalice and host, the paten not being touched;⁴ 2. the touch of the chalice and paten, the host not being touched⁵ (St. Alphonsus, VI, 751, 752). Almost the same seems to have to be said of the touch of the paten and host.⁶ It is more doubted: 1. whether the touch of the chalice alone, or of the paten alone, or of the host alone suffices; 2. whether the chalice and paten must be consecrated; 3. whether the paten and chalice without host and wine suffice⁷ (St. Alphonsus, VI, 750).

b) The form of the Presbyterate consists in the words which correspond to the matter; but in designating the form, authors differ according to the diversity of the matter which they admit. Of those who hold only the imposition of hands as the matter, some place the form in the words alone which are said during the extension of the hand which follows the imposition of hands upon each, in other words, in the prayer "Let us pray, brethren," etc.; others in the prayer "Hear us," etc. alone; others in the Preface alone; others in the prayer "Hear us," etc. and the Preface; others in the prayer "Let us pray, brethren," etc., and the prayer "Hear us," etc. and the Preface.

Corollary. In order that the Presbyterate be conferred certainly validly, there are required: 1. imposition of hands upon each; 2. extension of the hand toward all together with the exhortation "Let us pray, brethren," the prayer "Hear us," and the following Preface; 3. handing over of the consecrated chalice and paten with bread and wine, together with the accompanying words; 4. physical touch of the chalice, paten, and host, or at least of the chalice and host, or of the chalice and paten; 5. imposition of hands at the end of Mass with the words "Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins," etc.

¹ Cf. G. Cardinal van Rossum, De essentia sacramenti Ordinis.

² Roman Pontifical.

³ De essentia sacramenti Ordinis, p. 62 sq.

⁴ Holy Office, July 25, 1866; November 22, 1871; June 9, 1875; July 22, 1892.

⁵ Holy Office, responses just cited.

⁶ Holy Office, March 17, 1897; cf. Sacred Congregation of Rites, December 3, 1661, n. 1221.

⁷ Sacred Congregation of the Council, February 11, 1708; Holy Office, July 6, 1898; January 11, 1899.

3. Matter and form of the Episcopate. In the ordination of a Bishop: 1. The Consecrator, with the assisting Bishops helping, places the open book of the Gospels upon the neck and shoulders of the one to be consecrated, saying nothing. 2. The Consecrator and the assisting Bishops touch the head of the one to be consecrated with both hands, saying: "Receive the Holy Spirit." When this has been done, the Consecrator, standing, with the miter laid aside, says: "Be propitious, O Lord," etc. 3. The Consecrator, with hands extended before the breast, says the Preface. 4. The Consecrator hands the closed book of the Gospel to the consecrated one, saying: "Receive the Gospel," etc.

a) The matter of the Episcopate according to some is only the imposition of the hands of the Consecrator; according to others, only the imposition of the three Bishops; according to others, the imposition of hands and of the book of the Gospels upon the neck and shoulders of the one to be consecrated;¹ according to a very few, besides the things enumerated, the handing over of the book of the Gospels is also required.

b) The form of the Episcopate according to very many is only the preface said or sung by the consecrating Bishop; according to others it consists in the words of the Consecrator alone pronounced in the imposition of hands, namely "Receive the Holy Spirit"; according to others, the same words pronounced by the three Bishops; according to others, the words cited and the prayer "Be propitious," etc.; according to others, the cited words, the prayer "Be propitious," etc., and the following Preface; according to a very few, even the words pronounced in the handing over of the book pertain to the form.

Corollary. In order that the Episcopate be conferred certainly validly, all things are required which with some probability are said to pertain to the matter or form.

¹ Roman Pontifical. In the imposition of the book the Consecrator says nothing; but those who hold it to be partial matter refer also to the imposition of the book the words to be pronounced in the imposition of hands.

The effects of the sacrament of Order are:

I. Sanctifying grace: in itself second grace, accidentally first grace (n. 6).

II. Sacramental grace, which consists in this: that the sanctifying grace which the sacrament of Order confers is both directed to this, that the ordained lead a life congruent with their state and faithfully fulfill the ministries annexed to it, and gives a right to actual graces to be obtained in order to those effects.

III. Character. 1. The existence of character is clear from what was said in n. 8. But from the fact that character is imprinted through the sacrament of Order, it is deduced that through all Orders which are sacraments, and therefore through Diaconate, Presbyterate, and Episcopate, character is imprinted. It is disputed, however, whether those individual Orders imprint a distinct character, or only one character, which is enlarged through the following Orders.

2. The effect of the character is that a man receives the power of confecting and administering sacred things and is deputed to them. Nevertheless, character and power do not differ in reality, but consist in the same real quality. But what kind of power is conferred by the individual Orders is sufficiently clear from what was said in n. 588.

Following the Code, we shall treat first of those things which must precede sacred ordination, then of the rites and ceremonies, next of the time and place of sacred ordination, and finally of the notation and testimony of ordination performed.

(Summa Theologica, Supplement, qq. 34-68.)

The first five Sacraments arc necessary for the spiritual welfare of individuals, the remaining two, which are the subject of this Article, are needful, not for each person, but for the Church as a body. A member of the Church may save his soul though he remains outside the priesthood and the married state, but the spiritual good of the Church itself requires both Orders and Matrimony. Without Orders the Church would be deprived of her rulers, teachers and ministers of divine things; without Matrimony the family would lack that sacramental protection which is so important for the Christian home and the right rearing of members of society.

"The S. C.... does not intend to call into doubt the value of a sacred Ordination because in it the ordaining Bishop did not hold his hands extended also through the interval which intervenes between the first and second imposition of hands." S. R. C. in the Syriensis, 14 June 1873. Gardell. n. 5557.

"1. Whether, in the Ordination of a Presbyter, both the Pontiff and the Priests who are present ought first to impose both hands upon the head of each ordinand, and after this imposition has been completed by all, then to elevate the right hands and hold them extended over them while the Pontiff standing with miter alone says the Prayer, as some explain the prescription of the Roman Pontifical concerning this matter; or rather, as is done at Rome in the Lateran Archbasilica, both the Pontiff and the Priests who stand by, scarcely after the imposition of both hands has been made, immediately extend the right hands and hold them thus extended until the Bishop has completed the prayer? 2. In giving Communion to newly-ordained Presbyters, ought the formula Corpus, etc., to be employed, or rather ought it to be omitted? Resp. To the 1st, negatively to the first part, affirmatively to the second. To the 2nd, as in the preceding." S. R. C. 31 Aug. 1872.

"According to Canon Law, in the Ordination of a Presbyter and Deacon, the imposition of hands ought to be done by bodily touch; but if that had been omitted, what had been omitted by error would have to be supplied cautiously. But it is doubted: 1. Whether, if the imposition of hands was made without bodily touch, the imposition of hands by bodily touch ought to be supplied? 2. Insofar as affirmatively, whether public rumor and the bad reputation which would thence come upon the Ordaining Bishop, especially in these regions, would be a sufficient reason for abstaining from an imposition of hands of this kind repeated with bodily touch? 3. If bodily touch ought to be supplied, whether the words should be repeated which are uttered at the same time by the Bishop with the imposition of hands, especially in the Ordination of a Deacon, in which the words, Receive the Holy Spirit, etc., seem to many to be the form of the Sacrament? 4. Whether that bodily touch can be supplied privately, when Orders of this kind are not conferred? Resp. To the 1st, affirmatively. To the 2nd, negatively. To the 3rd, affirmatively. To the 4th, affirmatively, and secretly in the action of Mass, and even outside the times of a general Ordination." Holy Office, 19 Aug. 1851, to the Apostolic Vicar of Western Cochinchina.

"While in the S. R. C. the doubts exhibited in the name of Your Amplitude were being weighed... and already two Theologian Consultors had been requested to give their vote concerning the validity of the Ordination of a certain Presbyter, in which the form of conferring the power of remitting or retaining sins was incautiously vitiated, certain news arrived from the General Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition, under the day 27 May 1840, that an entirely similar case had been discussed and decided.... Therefore, communicating to Your Amplitude word for word the resolution then issued, as follows, namely:

On Wednesday, 17 May 1840..., the prayers of the Dominicans of Bologna having been proposed, in which they set forth that their Religious N. N., while he was receiving the Ordination of a Presbyter from the Reverend Father Lord Bishop, had been warned that he himself had disturbed the form attached to the final imposition of hands, by saying: Whose sins you shall remit are retained, and whose you shall retain are remitted; likewise, the acts of the Episcopal Curia having been proposed for establishing the truth of the things set forth, together with the vote of one of the Lords Consultors, which had been distributed by hand; likewise, the suffrages of the Lord Consultors having been proposed, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Lords said: Under condition, in a private oratory, at any time of the year, let there be supplied by any Bishop vested according to custom the third imposition of hands and the respective form: Receive the Holy Spirit, not however repeating the accidental ceremonies previously employed....

By force of the faculties specially granted to Us by the same Most Holy Lord Pope Gregory XVI, we concede that those things which are lacking to the stated Ordination, or were vitiated, be altogether supplied, according to the lines of the remembered Decree of the Sacred Universal Inquisition, on any day of the year, by any Bishop vested according to custom as in Ordination, and making the Sacred Rite in his private oratory, the stated Presbyter standing by, likewise vested in priestly vestments; and thus let the third imposition of hands and the respective form be supplied: Receive the Holy Spirit, without the accidental ceremonies which were previously employed having to be repeated." S. R. C. 22 May 1841, to the Bishop of Viviers.

In the Ordination of a Presbyter the Bishop pronounced the form thus in the third imposition of hands:

Receive the Holy Spirit: whose sins you shall remit are retained for them, and whose you shall retain are retained. What is to be done? Resp. "Secretly and under condition, at any time of the year, let the third imposition of hands and the respective form be supplied as a precaution by any Bishop having communion with the Holy See, vested according to custom: Receive the Holy Spirit, etc.; as regards the past, let him acquiesce." Holy Office, 4 March 1874.

"From the Pontifical, Subdeacons and Presbyters ought successively to touch the chalice and paten in their Ordination. Is it enough that they touch them simultaneously and not each one successively, and that over two, or three, or four simultaneously touching the matter, the form be pronounced, while the Pontifical says: Receive? Resp. Affirmatively as regards Subdeacons, negatively as regards Presbyters; since, according to the Rubric of the Pontifical, in the Ordination of Subdeacons, over two or three simultaneously touching with the right hand the chalice with the paten, the form can be pronounced by the Bishop: See whose ministry is handed over to you, etc. But in the Ordination of Presbyters, to each one the chalice with wine and water and the paten with the host are to be handed, and to each one the formula is to be repeated in the singular: Receive power, etc." S. R. C. 11 March 1820. Cf. Gardell. n. 4565.

".... We received Your Amplitude's Letter.... concerning the omission of the handing over of the book of the Gospels, which happened inconsiderately in the most recent general Ordination in promoting certain Subdeacons to the Order of the Diaconate.... Therefore the Congregation, in its own judgment and that of the Consultors, responds that if Your Amplitude prudently judges that the delay of time which intervened between the Ordination of these Subdeacons as Deacons and the supplying of the defect was not so great that the moral conjunction of the form with the handing over of the matter is deservedly judged broken off, you can leave those thus Ordained in their good faith as regards the past, and declare them absolved from any suspension for the future, insofar as they can freely exercise the office of their Order publicly with a safe conscience, if no other impediment stands in the way, according to the reason of their state. But if you doubt whether there was so great an interval of time and of diverse operations, and such a variety, that that gap between the Ordination and the supplying of the defect can be joined by no interpretation of approved Authors, then again, if with the handing over of the book of the Gospels previously omitted you at the same time pronounced the form, know that you can acquiesce, and thus also dismiss those Ordained, acquiescing in the exercise of their Orders. But if you handed over only the partial matter of the book of the Gospels without the form, it will be safer if, cautiously and secretly, at an opportune time, you supply the defect for those thus Ordained, by repeating the handing over of the matter together with the pronouncement of its form. In this case, if the time of the next future Ordination constituted by Canon for a supplement of this kind, that is, the statutory time for conferring Orders from chap. Presbyter, On the Sacrament, not to be repeated, cannot be awaited, either because of danger of scandal, or because of other causes and circumstances of no slight moment, which Your Amplitude will have well known, and no other impediment stands in the way, you will be able to dispense from the interstices, and on any next feast prudently and secretly supply the aforesaid defect. As regards secular Clerics, concerning whom, as is set forth in the case, it is doubted whether the same omission happened, Your Amplitude will be able to take care according to your prudence that those thus Ordained become known, which does not seem so difficult if you go through the catalog which you will certainly have with you of the Subdeacons raised to the Diaconate in that Ordination, and cause those upon whom suspicion of this kind can fall to be cautiously and secretly questioned concerning a doubt of this kind. Therefore if you find any to whom the same omission happened, you will perform the same thing which was said above concerning the two Religious; and if you find that they have exercised the Order of Diaconate in good faith until now, absolve them from censures insofar as there is need, if nothing else stands in the way, and declare them safe in conscience for the ministry and office of the same Order to be exercised in the future insofar as there is need, that is, for ministering piously and faithfully in the received office of the Diaconate." S. R. C. 16 June 1857, to the Bishop of Turin. Cf. Gardell. n. 4813.

"Brother F. A. of this Order... approached the Bishop of Senigallia to receive the sacred Order of Subdiaconate; in the act of its conferral he indeed touched the chalice and paten, but not the book of Epistles, from inadvertence of the Assistant.... Resp. It is to be supplied by the Bishop, even privately." S. C. C. 10 Jan. 1711, of the Order of Capuchins.

"Whether the instrument called the Bugia with candle, serving Bishops for the book, can be the matter of the Order of Acolytes, in place of the Candlestick or candle-bearer? Resp. Negatively." S. R. C. 8 June 1709.

"1. In the Ordination of an Ostiary, the Pontifical prescribes that the Archdeacon hand to those ordained the ropes of the bells, making them ring the bells. It is asked whether insistence is to be made on the plurality of bells, or whether one bell suffices where several are not had? 2. Some Churches, such as my Cathedral, do not have a tower joined with the church itself, but one distant from it by several paces. It is asked whether the newly ordained Ostiaries ought to go out outside the church and through the open go to the tower to ring the bells hanging there, or whether it suffices to shake the little bells of the altar at the doors of the church? 3. What is to be done if no bell is present in the case of the aforesaid Ordination? Will little bells suffice? 4. In the Ordination of a Lector, the Pontifical enjoins that the Pontiff hand to all the codex from which they are to read. It is asked what is understood by codex: whether a volume of Sacred Scripture, or a Missal, or a Ritual? 5. In the same Ordination of a Lector, the exhortation of the Pontiff, a little from the beginning, contains these words: For a Lector ought to read those things which (or to him who) preaches. It is asked whether also the particle or, written in red color, and the two words added below, to him who, are to be pronounced? Resp. To the 1st, negatively to the first part, affirmatively to the second. To the 2nd, negatively to the first part, affirmatively to the second. To the 3rd, affirmatively. To the 4th, in the case, that the codex is a Missal, Breviary, or volume of Sacred Scripture. To the 5th, that the Bishop can say in the case either, For a Lector ought to read those things which he preaches, or, For a Lector ought to read to him who preaches." S. R. C. 27 Sept. 1873.

"You ought to know that in the ordination of Clerics to the office of Ostiary, keys are indeed to be employed, but they need not be the keys of the church, so that you will be able to use any key whatever." S. C. de P. F. 23 March 1844, to the Apostolic Vicar of Cochinchina.

"In Ordination the Pontiff hands to the Ostiaries the keys of the Church. 1. In an oratory or church which has only one key, is this one key sufficient for the remote matter of Ostiariate? 2. Ought the Ostiaries individually to touch the keys successively? Is it enough that they touch simultaneously and not successively, and that over two, or three, or four simultaneously touching the matter, the form of Ordination be pronounced? Resp. To the 1st: although one key can be sufficient matter for the Ordination of an Ostiary, nevertheless the Rubric is to be observed, which commands that keys are to be handed over; whether they are silver, or iron, or wooden, provided they are suitable for opening, they constitute the remote matter of this Order. To the 2nd, affirmatively to both parts, provided that those who are simultaneously ordained Ostiaries touch the keys with the right hand while the Bishop pronounces the formula." S. R. C. 11 March 1820.

"When the Ostiary, the Archdeacon accompanying, closes and opens the doors of the church, ought he to close and open also with a key, especially if at the doors of the Oratory where the Order is conferred there is no key? Resp. It is not strictly necessary." S. R. C. 12 Nov. 1831, Marsorum.

"The Regular Superiors to whom it pertains can concede dimissorial letters of this kind to the professed, namely those of simple vows in Orders in which solemn vows are emitted, only for first Tonsure and minor Orders, yet with those things observed which are to be observed by law, and especially those things which have been prescribed by the Apostolic See concerning Ordinations of Regulars." S. C. concerning the state of Regulars, 12 June 1858.

"Can Novices after emitting simple vows before the emission of solemn ones be promoted to sacred Orders under title of poverty, notwithstanding the Constitution of St. Pius V, 12 Nov. 1568? Resp. Negatively as regards Sacred Orders." Same S. C. 20 Jan. 1860. Bizzarri, Collection, p. 859, ed. 1885.

"If the professed of simple vows have been loosed from the vows emitted, whether through dismissal from the Order or through Apostolic dispensation, let the Bishop conduct himself with them as he ought to conduct himself with the rest of his diocesans." S. C. concerning the state of Regulars, 2 Jan. 1860.

"1. Whether and how the Bishop of Treviso can admit the students of the Institute of Priests a charitate, having simple vows, on the attestation of the Superior of the house declaring that those students are enrolled in the same house; or whether rather dimissorial and testimonial letters of the Bishop of origin or domicile are necessary, according to the form of the Constitution of Innocent XII which begins Speculatores. 2. Whether and how the same ought to be said as regards students already promoted to tonsure or to some order? 3. Whether and how, notwithstanding the promise of obedience made to the Bishop in sacred Ordination, it is lawful for the Superiors of the Institute to transfer the same students into another province, without leave being sought from the said Bishop? 4. Whether in the case of departure from the Institute through dismissal or dispensation, the same students are subjected to the jurisdiction of the Bishop of the diocese in which the house to which they were enrolled is situated, or rather to that Bishop to whom they were subject before they were enrolled in the Institute? Resp. To the 1st, negatively to the first part, affirmatively to the second. To the 2nd, affirmatively in all things. To the 3rd, that the Provincial Superior can freely use the faculty of transferring students of the province according to the Constitutions approved by the Holy See. To the 4th, negatively to the first part, affirmatively to the second." S. C. EE. and RR. 6 May 1864. Bizzarri, Collection, p. 706 ff., ed. 1885.

"The question was being raised whether those are to be rebaptized under condition who are to be promoted to Minor or sacred Orders, and who exhibit no document or testimony of Baptism conferred upon them, both because of lack of books, and because of the frailty of memory, or because parents, sponsors, etc., have died, or a doubt arises whether they were validly baptized by less-instructed Catechists or other Christians. Concerning this matter it is well for Your Amplitude to know that, as regards the first part of the doubt, namely the defect of testimony, it has always been rescripted negatively, both by the S. C. and by the Supreme Inquisition, whenever questions of this kind were proposed, the common opinion being brought forward, namely that those who were born from Christian parents and educated by them in Christian manner are altogether to be presumed to have been baptized. But it is lawful to adhere to a presumption of this kind also in the other case, or when there is doubt concerning the sufficient instruction of Catechists or Christians who baptized the Cleric, for administering the Sacrament. For unless the reason for doubting is very strong, which would produce moral certitude in this or that particular case, one must stand for the validity of Baptism, nor adhere to a chance suspicion, by which either the faithful, in a matter so familiar in China, and much more Catechists, to whose deputation Apostolic Vicars proceed so cautiously, would be judged less instructed. Otherwise, indeed, and if negative doubts are admitted, a place would be made for ambiguities in any case whatsoever and without end." S. C. de P. F. 30 Sept. 1848, to the Apostolic Vicar of Western Cochinchina.

"Those to be promoted to minor orders should have a good testimony from the Parish Priest and from the master of the school in which they are educated. But those who are to be taken up to the individual major orders shall approach the Bishop for a month before ordination; he shall commit to the Parish Priest or to another, to whom it will seem more expedient, that, the names and desire of those who wish to be promoted having been publicly proposed in the Church, concerning the birth, age, morals, and life of those to be ordained, from faith worthy persons he should inquire diligently; and testimonial letters, containing the inquiry itself that has been made, he should transmit to the Bishop himself as soon as possible." Council of Trent, sess. 23, ch. 5, de R.

1. Since it is altogether indecorous and wholly alien to the dignity of clerics who are constituted in sacred Orders, that they themselves should be compelled either from begged supports or from sordid gain to obtain for themselves those things which are necessary for livelihood, no one is ignorant that from the most ancient times provision was made that whoever were to be promoted in the Church of God to sacred Orders should be provided with a suitable and perpetual sustenance. Indeed formerly no one was ordained unless he was ascribed to a certain Church, to which he was perpetually attached, so that from it he might have that by which he could sustain life honorably (Council of Chalcedon, canon 6). But in later times the title of Ordination was introduced, namely that by which sufficient provision might be made for the livelihood of clerics. The necessity of this was first sanctioned for the ordination of Deacons and Presbyters, then by Innocent III was extended also to Subdeacons (Third Lateran Council, canon 5); and those things which the Synod of Trent (sess. 21, de R., ch. 2) constituted concerning this matter are known to all. Its most wholesome prescriptions, neglected in some places with the progress of time, Innocent XI of holy memory, by encyclical letters given to all Bishops through the Sacred Congregation of the Council on 13 May 1679, gravely commanded to be observed.

2. Now a twofold title is distinguished, namely ecclesiastical and patrimonial. This latter, to which Alexander III seems to have given occasion, in chap. 4, On prebends; Thomassinus, On the old and new discipline of the Church, part 2, book 1, ch. 9, n. 2, and which began to come into use around the end of the thirteenth century, obtains when the one to be ordained is furnished with such certain, stable, and fruitful goods, coming from elsewhere than from the Church, which are judged, by the judgment of the Bishop, sufficient for his suitable sustenance. To the aforesaid is added the title of pension, which not only must suffice for suitable food of the cleric, but must also be perpetual. And these two titles are to be judged extraordinary, and are admitted as if by dispensation, namely if the Bishop shall have judged, for the necessity or convenience of the Church, that someone is thus to be ordained (Council of Trent, loc. cit.; and Benedict XIV, Ecclesiastical Institution 26, nn. 1, 3).

3. But the ecclesiastical title is subdivided into beneficial and that of poverty; to these certain other species, as it were subsidiary and extraordinary, must be added, namely the title of common table, and of service of a Church, of Mission, of sufficiency, and of College. But the title of benefice is the perpetual right of receiving fruits from the goods of the Church on account of some spiritual office constituted by ecclesiastical authority; and this ought to be called the ordinary and principal title of sacred Ordination (Fagnanus on chap. 4, On prebends, n. 24).

4. But the title of poverty is placed in religious profession, by force of which those who have emitted solemn vows in an approved Religion have all things in common, from the revenues of goods if that Religion itself possesses any, or from the pious largesses of the faithful, which they need for sustaining life. But the title which they call of common table touches those clerics who, living in the discipline of common life after the manner of Religious, either pronounce no vows, or only simple ones, and therefore are permitted to go out from or be dismissed from the religious house and return to the world. For the title of poverty does not pertain to them, as is deduced from the Constitution Romanus Pontifex (the day before the Ides of October 1568) of St. Pius V. But from these clerics only those can be promoted to sacred Orders under the title of common table whose Congregations or Institutes have been increased by the Apostolic See with a special privilege for this.

5. The title of service of a Church, which was formerly ordinary, as was noted above, and afterwards became extraordinary, is sometimes conceded to those who, since they lack an ecclesiastical benefice or pension, or do not possess patrimonial and other goods, are ordained on this law, that they be assigned to some Church, from whose service and from alms to be bestowed by pious Christians they can be sustained, and from the same Church they can never at any time be removed, nor can they themselves withdraw, unless provision has otherwise been made for them. It is established that Sixtus V of holy memory indulged the Patriarch of Venice that he might confer sacred Orders upon his clerics under this title (Campanile, Diverse matters of canon law, rubr. 8, ch. 4, n. 14; and Garcias, On Benefices, part 2, ch. 16, n. 96).

6. Finally, the title of Mission, concerning which the discourse here chiefly is, the titles of sufficiency and College being passed over, which, since they occur rarely, it will be enough merely to mention, is customarily employed when another legitimate title is not at hand for those who desire to be initiated into major Orders, that they may devote themselves to the service of Apostolic Missions. But this often happens in places of Missions, in which the condition of things is such that the common law of the Church concerning those things which regard the title prerequisite for sacred Ordination cannot be observed exactly. But those who have been ordained under a title of this kind obtain the necessities of life from the apostolic ministry in the Mission to which they were assigned.

7. But it is established that Ordinaries cannot impart the gifts of the most sacred Ordinations to clerics under the title of Mission unless they are furnished with a special indult of the Holy See; for the matter concerns an extraordinary title, which has been employed beyond common law. This indult indeed is customarily conceded to Superiors of Missions or Colleges or Congregations which serve Missions, either for a certain time or for a fixed number of cases. But let Superiors remember that it must be used sparingly by them; for not all without selection are to be initiated into sacred Orders under the title of Mission who seem disposed to enter upon the course of Missions. For if according to the admonition of St. Paul hands are to be imposed quickly on no one, this is especially valid when the discourse is about those who are assumed into the arduous work of the apostolic ministry. Wherefore this title is to be employed only in favor of those who, by disposition of soul and docility, rectitude of intention, aptitude of mind, progress in sacred studies, integrity of morals, and contempt of worldly things, give hope that they will be strenuous preachers of the Gospel; concerning this the conscience of the same Superiors is strictly burdened.

8. No otherwise than the Alumni of Pontifical Colleges, all those who desire to be enrolled among sacred ministers under the title of Mission are first bound to emit an oath, by which they promise that they will give perpetual labor to the Mission to which they are destined or will be destined. This indeed the Holy See has constantly been accustomed to require from those who wish to enjoy this title, that it might consult for the service of the Missions at whose expense they are supported. To this Instruction there is subjoined the Form of that Oath, long since approved and received by use, and the Sacred Congregation altogether commands that it be used by all, so that uniformity may be preserved in this matter.

9. It is not necessary that he who is to be elevated to the most sacred Orders under this title actually be in the Mission, but it suffices that he be prepared to undertake Missions when and how Superiors shall have judged that he must be sent and shall order him to go.

10. By force of the oath taken, those who have been ordained under this title are forbidden to enter Religion without leave of the Holy See; for it is reserved to its judgment, after the report of the Ordinary whom it will concern, to judge whether the necessity of the Missions to whose service they are assigned allows this. Namely, public good must excel private good, by that reasoning by which it has been conceded to some Orders that it is not lawful for their Religious to pass to a stricter one without license of their Superiors.

11. As other titles, so also this one concerning which there is question can be lost according to canonical sanctions, and be taken away by Ordinaries, yet with the consent of the Sacred Congregation, whose part it is to release those thus ordained from the bond of the oath taken. But if the title generally has been lost, or even the title of Mission, and another is not substituted for it, the Priest does not on that account remain suspended; but Ordinaries are bound to compel those ordained to the substitution of another title, as has been provided by the sacred Canons. This Sacred Congregation declared this in the general Meetings of 1 September 1856.

12. Likewise regular Priests who have pronounced solemn vows, and by Apostolic indulgence are permitted to live in the world, or who have issued simple vows and have gone out from their Congregations or Institutes, lest they be compelled to beg with disgrace to their own grade, are obliged to provide for themselves concerning a canonical title; but in places of Missions they are bound at least to prove that they have at hand the means by which they may provide, as is fitting, for their own sustenance.

13. Those who have ascended to ecclesiastical Orders under the title of some certain Mission, when they have dismissed the office of Missionary, without doubt lose their title and must provide themselves with another. But if they are deputed to the service of another Mission, so that they may assume the title of this Mission, there will be need of a new concession of the Holy See; for the faculty, if the Ordinary of that Mission has obtained any, of ordaining clerics under the remembered title does not avail them.

14. Let Ordinaries in Missions use the work also of those Priests who were admitted to sacred Orders under other titles, with those things observed which are to be observed by law; for they themselves cannot constrain them to substitute the title of Mission. Indeed the Sacred Congregation exhorts Ordinaries that, as far as can be done, other legitimate titles also be introduced for sacred Ordination.

15. Finally the Sacred Congregation, observing that it can greatly conduce to the increase of Missions if those who have been educated in Colleges or Seminaries of either Clergy, soon to be preachers of the Gospel, or who were promoted to Orders under the title of Mission, call to mind from time to time the oath by which they bound themselves to cooperate with God unto the salvation of souls, exhorts them that each year, on the anniversary day of the oath taken, they take care to repeat it, seriously meditating on the divine goodness toward themselves, which constituted them ministers of the Word for announcing the wonders of his virtue and power; what an unfading crown of glory has been prepared for them in heaven if they have fulfilled their office holily; and, on the contrary, how strict a judgment remains if by their negligence or sluggishness, which God forbid, anyone happens to perish. But that they may perform this more promptly and readily, let them know that Pius VI of holy memory, in the audience of 7 May 1775, imparted to each one of them a plenary indulgence, applicable also to souls detained in Purgatory and to be valid for perpetual times, not only when they shall first have emitted the aforesaid oath, but also when they shall have renewed it on the already fixed day, provided that in either case they do not omit to cleanse their conscience by the sacrament of Penance, and receive eucharistic Communion or celebrate the sacrifice of Mass." Instruction of the S. C. de P. F., 27 Apr. 1871. Cf. Wolfgang Mühlbauer, Decreta Authentica, v. Title of Ordination; Acta S. Sed. Vol. 4, p. 554 ff.; Vol. 5, p. 113 ff.; Vol. 12, p. 569 ff.

I, N., son of N., of the Diocese or Vicariate N., promise and swear that after I shall have been promoted to sacred Orders, I will enter no Religion, Society, or regular Congregation without special license of the Apostolic See or of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, nor will I emit profession in any of them.

Likewise I vow and swear that in this Diocese or Vicariate, or, according to this other mode those who have not yet been assigned to any Mission ought to swear, in the Mission to which it shall please the Holy See or the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide to destine me, I will perpetually spend my labor and work in administering divine things under every kind of direction and jurisdiction of the Reverend Father Lord Ordinary for the time being, for the salvation of souls; which I will also perform if, with the license of the aforesaid Apostolic See, I shall have entered a Religion, Society, or regular Congregation and shall have emitted profession in any of them.

Likewise I vow and swear that I understand the aforesaid oath and its obligation, and will observe it. So may God help me, and these holy Gospels of God.

What is order? - Order can be taken in two ways: for ordination, or that action by which sacred power is conferred, and for the order itself, or sacred power, the effect of ordination. "The name of order," says St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 34, a. 2 ad 4, "is taken in two ways. For sometimes it signifies the relation itself; and thus it is both in the inferior and in the superior..., and thus it is not taken here. But sometimes it is taken for the grade itself which makes order taken in the first way. And because the notion of order is found where first something superior to another occurs, therefore here an eminent grade by spiritual power is named order." - Order, or ordination, is a sacrament of the New Law by which spiritual power is handed on in relation to the Eucharist, and grace is conferred for duly undertaking ecclesiastical duties. But order, the effect of the sacrament, is the aforesaid spiritual power which is bestowed on the ordained. The orders indeed are various, but through all there is a tendency toward priesthood, and therefore toward the ministry of the altar. Therefore there is one power of all, a part of which is bestowed on each, and from all there is had one sacrament. "For the whole fullness of this sacrament is in one order, namely priesthood, but in the others there is a certain participation of order... And therefore all orders are one sacrament." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 1 ad 2. - Trent, sess. 23, C. 2, 3, c. 2, 3; Decree Lamentabili, July 3, 1907, prop. 49, 50, 54, 55; L. 744, 745; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 34, a. 1-3; q. 35, a. 2; q. 36, a. 3; q. 37, a. 1; E. M.

What is the effect of this sacrament? - Sanctifying grace; sacramental grace for duly undertaking the sacred mystery; the impression of character. Trent, sess. 23, C. 3, 4, c. 4; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 35, a. 1, 2. But character is impressed not only in the priesthood, St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 5; q. 38, a. 1 ad 1; but also in the diaconate, St. Thomas, ib. ad 5; in the subdiaconate, St. Thomas, q. 38, a. 1 ad 2; in the acolytate, St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 5 ad 5; q. 38, a. 1 ad 2; and in the other minor orders, but by no means in first tonsure, St. Thomas, q. 40, a. 2 ad 2. But cf. 880. According to St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 40, a. 5 ad 2, a new character is not impressed in the episcopate; but it is more commonly asserted that a distinct character is also impressed in the episcopate. Cf. 878. Roman Pontifical, de Ordin. confer.; Roman Catechism 34; L. 378.

How many orders are there; what is their division; what sort of institution do they have? - In the Latin Church there are seven: Ostiariate, Lectorate, Exorcistate, Acolytate, Subdiaconate, Diaconate, Priesthood, which is distinguished into Presbyterate and Episcopate. "The multitude of orders," says St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 1, "was introduced in the Church for three reasons..., for commending the wisdom of God..., for relieving human infirmity..., that a broader way of advancing might be given to men." But the sacrament of order is ordered to the sacrament of the Eucharist, which is the sacrament of sacraments. "And therefore the distinction of orders is to be taken according to relation to the Eucharist." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 2. Whence suitably only seven orders are recounted. For indeed "the power of order is either for consecration of the Eucharist itself, or for some ministry ordered to this sacrament of the Eucharist. If in the first way, thus it is the order of priests... But the cooperation of ministers is either in order to the sacrament itself, or in order to those receiving. If in the first way, thus it is threefold: 1. for there is the ministry by which the minister cooperates with the priest in the sacrament itself as regards distribution, but not as regards consecration..., and this pertains to the deacon...; 2. there is the ministry ordered to preparing the matter of the sacrament in the sacred vessels of the sacrament itself, and this pertains to subdeacons...; 3. there is the ministry ordered to presenting the matter of the sacrament, and this belongs to the acolyte... The ministry ordered to the preparation of recipients cannot be except over the unclean, because those who are clean are already fit for receiving the sacraments. But there is a threefold kind of unclean persons... For some are altogether unbelievers not wishing to believe, and these must be kept entirely even from the sight of divine things and the assembly of the faithful; and this pertains to doorkeepers. But some are willing to believe but not yet instructed, namely catechumens; and for their instruction the order of lectors is ordained. Therefore the first rudiments of the doctrine of faith, namely the Old Testament, are committed to them to be read. But some are instructed faithful, yet having an impediment from the power of the devil, namely energumens; and for this ministry there is the order of exorcists." St. Thomas, l.c. - "In the primitive Church, because of the fewness of ministers, all lower ministries were committed to deacons... Nevertheless all the aforesaid powers were present, but implicitly in the one power of the deacon. But afterward divine worship was enlarged, and the Church handed on explicitly in different orders what it had implicitly in one order." St. Thomas, l.c. ad 2; Trent, sess. 23, C. 2, ib. C. 17, de Ref.

In the Greek Church for many centuries there have been only four orders, namely Presbyterate, Diaconate, Subdiaconate, Lectorate. The duties of doorkeeper and acolyte are attributed partly to the lector, partly to the subdeacon. But the Greeks do not have the exorcistate as a true order. Benedict XIV, Constitution Etsi pastoralis, May 26, 1742, § 7, n. 7. But whether formerly they had more is disputed by the learned. Cf. Theology of Wurzburg, n. 54.

The seven orders are divided in the Latin Church so that the first four are called minor and non-sacred orders, the latter three major and sacred, because the former approach more remotely, the latter more closely, to the Eucharist, the end of all orders. Trent, sess. 23, C. 2, c. 2. - Now an order can be denominated sacred according to a certain common reason, and in this way all orders are sacred, as those which speak not of a profane or secular power, but of a sacred or ecclesiastical power. It can also be denominated sacred properly, insofar as it signifies a certain special prerogative not fitting to all orders. If sacred order is taken in this way, it has a threefold acceptance. 1. By reason of the power itself conferred through ordination, and thus an order is called sacred insofar as it bestows spiritual power of serving more closely in the sacrifice of the altar. In this sense priesthood, diaconate, and subdiaconate always seem to have been sacred orders. For Trent, sess. 23, C. 2, says that the names and proper ministries of each of the seven orders have been in use from the very beginning of the Church; and ibid. C. 17, de Ref., that the functions of holy orders from the diaconate to the ostiariate have been laudably received in the Church from the times of the Apostles. 2. By reason of the solemn vow of chastity annexed to the order, and in this sense the subdiaconate was not always a sacred order. 3. By reason of the hierarchy of prelacy or principality, and in this way only priests and deacons are placed by the Fathers in sacred order, since clerics of the other orders do not preside over the people, but only minister to priests and deacons. Trent, sess. 23, C. 4, c. 6; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 3; 4, d. 24, q. 2, a. 1, qc. 3 ad 1, ad 5; Wurzburg, n. 66, 68, 69.

As the subdiaconate was not always held as a sacred order, so it also was not always held as a major order in a special sense, as is clear from C. A multis 9, de Aetat., etc., praeficiend., where Innocent III, in the year 1207, from the fact that the subdiaconate was now numbered among the sacred orders by reason of chastity to be observed, established "that a subdeacon can freely be elected as Bishop, just as a deacon or priest." Hence the subdiaconate, which before was counted among the minor orders for this reason, that he could not freely be elected as Bishop, began to be numbered among the major ones. Freely; since before, except for cause of utility, and then also except by permission of the Metropolitan or Roman Pontiff, the election could not be held. Further, if it was already numbered among sacred orders in the time of Gregory and Urban II, in the year 1091, as is clear from the cited C. A multis, and from C. Miramur 7, de Serv. non ordinand., it was also absolutely counted among the major orders, "because they also ministered at the altars." And indeed the Council of Trent, sess. 23, C. 3, says: "subdiaconate is referred to the major orders by the Fathers and sacred Councils." From C. Non oportet 26, Dist. 23; C. Nullus 4, Dist. 60, subdeacons did not have permission of entering the Sacrarium and touching the Vessels of the Lord; namely the sacrarium in which, after the mysteries had been completed, the Eucharist was replaced by deacons, and the sacred vessels placed on the altar at the time of sacrifice, or containing the Body and Blood of Christ. Cf. Wurzburg, n. 70.

As regards the institution of the aforesaid orders inferior to the priesthood, it is certain by faith: that the institution of ministers as such, insofar as under this name come those who serve the priesthood, abstracting from the diverse grades which can be found in them, is of divine right; for this is expressly defined in Trent, sess. 23, C. 2, c. 6. But that the institution of the individual orders which we have enumerated is disjunctively either of simply or immediately divine right, or at least of mediately divine right, namely from power divinely granted to the Church: this is evidently had from c. 2. - But that each was immediately instituted by Christ the Lord is not agreed among authors as regards the subdiaconate and the minor orders. Yet an affirmative response can be given with great probability from c. 6 of Trent compared with c. 2 and de Ref., C. 17. - Benedict XIV, de Syn., l. 8, c. 10; E. M.

What are the individual orders; what are the offices of each? - Ostiariate is an order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of opening and closing the door of the church, and of admitting the worthy and excluding the unworthy. "And therefore it must be said that he receives power so that he can do this from office; although it can also be done by others, but not from office.

And so it is in all the acts of minor orders, that they can licitly be done by others, although they do not have any office for this, just as Mass can also be said in a house not consecrated, although the consecration of a church is ordered to this, that Mass be said in it." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 4 ad 4. Besides, it belongs to the doorkeeper to strike the cymbal and bell for calling the people to church; to open the book for him who preaches; to assist at the sacrifice of the Mass, taking care lest anyone approach the sacred altar nearer than is fitting and interrupt the priest doing the divine thing; to guard the keys of the Temple, the door, and the things which are within the church. Roman Pontifical, de Ordin. ostiar.; Roman Catechism 15.

Lectorate is an order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of reading from the pulpit in church the books of the New and Old Testament, but especially those which are accustomed to be read during the nocturnal psalmody. It also belongs to him to hand on to the faithful the first rudiments of the Christian Religion, but not to preach. Besides, it belongs to the lector to bless bread and all new fruits. But today these blessings are performed by priests alone. Roman Pontifical, de Ordin. lect.; Roman Catechism 16; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 36, a. 2 ad 3; q. 37, a. 4 ad 8.

Exorcistate is an order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of casting out demons from energumens, whether baptized persons or catechumens, St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 4 ad 8. Nevertheless the faculty of exorcizing is reserved only to priests, who can use it only by permission of the Ordinary. And priests can use it also as regards possessed infidels. S. C. de P. F., Sept. 11, 1779, Collectanea, n. 1980; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 4 ad 8. It also belongs to the exorcist to say to the people that whoever is not communicating should give place, and to pour water in the ministry. Roman Pontifical, de Ordin. exorc.; Roman Catechism 17.

Acolytate is an order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of lighting the lights of the church and of preparing and presenting for the Eucharist the cruets of wine and water. Therefore his duty is to minister to the priest himself in private Mass, and in solemn Mass to attend upon and assist the greater ministers, subdeacons and deacons, in the ministry of the altar. Besides, he carries and keeps the lights when the sacrifice of the Mass is celebrated, but especially when the Gospel is read, from which he is called by another name, candle-bearer. "The acolyte serves the deacon by carrying the candle before him to the Gospel, and the cruet by which he serves the subdeacon." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 38, a. 1 ad 2. "The more principal act of the acolyte is that by which he ministers with the cruet, than that by which he ministers with the candlestick." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 5 ad 6; a. 4 ad 6, 7, 8. Roman Pontifical, de Ord. acol.; Roman Catechism 18.

Subdiaconate is an order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of serving the deacon in solemn Mass and solemnly chanting the Epistle. St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 4 ad 3, ad 4, ad 6; a. 5 ad 5; q. 38, a. 1 ad 2. For he must prepare the sacred linens, vessels, bread, and wine necessary for the use of the sacrifice; offer the chalice and paten to the deacon for the use of the sacrifice; provide water to the Bishop and priest when they wash their hands in the sacrifice of the Mass. As a witness he assists at the sacred rite; and he prevents the priest doing sacred things from being disturbed by anyone. It also belongs to him to wash the palls, corporals, and purificators, and to carry the cross in processions. The principal act of the subdeacon consists "in this, that he cooperates concerning the matter of the sacrament." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 38, a. 1 ad 2; Roman Pontifical, de Ordin. subd.; Roman Catechism 19. - "In a case of necessity, provided no other is present, a cleric who is not a subdeacon can perform the office of subdeacon in solemn Mass." S. R. C., July 22, 1848, ad 4, Floren. Nevertheless he cannot wear the maniple. S. R. C., July 17, 1894, Dubior., ad 7.

Diaconate is an order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of immediately assisting the priest in solemn Mass and solemnly chanting the Gospel. Its more principal act is over the Body of Christ contained in the vessel. "Whence it does not belong to him to touch the Body of Christ, but to carry the Body on the paten and dispense the Blood with the chalice." The secondary act is solemnly to chant the Gospel. St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 5 ad 5; a. 4 ad 3, ad 4, ad 6; q. 38, a. 1 ad 2. It also belongs to the deacon, from commission, to preach, baptize, and distribute Communion. But whether a deacon, in order to preach at some time, needs the special permission of the Bishop, or whether the permission of the pastor or rector of the church suffices, seems to have to be determined from particular statutes or custom. - "It pertains to him to follow the Bishop perpetually, to guard him when preaching, and to be present to him and to the priest doing sacred things or administering other sacraments, and to read the Gospel in the sacrifice of the Mass. Formerly he often stirred up the souls of the faithful so that they would attend to sacred things; he also ministered the Blood of the Lord in those Churches in which that custom existed, that the faithful would receive the Eucharist under both species. Besides, the dispensation of ecclesiastical goods was committed to the deacon, that he might supply to each person what was necessary for living. - It also pertains to the deacon, as the eye of the Bishop, to investigate who in the city pass their life piously and religiously, and who otherwise; who come to the sacrifice and sermon at stated times, and who again do not come... He must also recite the names of catechumens, and set before the Bishop those who are to be initiated by the sacrament of order. - Besides, if the Bishop and priest are absent, it is lawful for him to explain the Gospel, but not from a higher place, so that it may be understood that this is not his proper duty." Roman Catechism 20; Roman Pontifical, de Ordin. diac.

Presbyterate or priesthood is an order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of consecrating the Body and Blood of Christ, and also of remitting and retaining sins. From the former comes his principal act; from the latter his secondary act. St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 4 ad 8; a. 5 c. ad 2. - "And because someone is made in proximate disposition to the Eucharist by this, that he is cleansed from sins, therefore the proper minister of all the sacraments which are instituted principally for the cleansing of sins is the priest, namely of baptism, penance, and extreme unction." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 4 ad 1. - It also belongs to the priest to effect various blessings, and to feed the people of the Christian faithful by word and example. Trent, sess. 23, C. 1, c. 1; Roman Pontifical, de Ordin. presb.; Roman Catechism 25.

Episcopate is an order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of confirming the faithful and ordaining ministers of the sacraments, and also of consecrating things pertaining to divine worship. Ministers of the sacraments, in the broader sense, namely not only those who confect the sacraments, but also those who from office minister to those confecting them. To Bishops it also belongs to govern the Church of God. Trent, sess. 23, C. 4, c. 6, 7; Roman Pontifical, de Consecr. episc.; L. 736, 747, 805; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 2.

Note: "Since the consecration which is done in the sacrament of order is ordered to the sacrament of the Eucharist, that is the principal act of each order according to which it is more proximately ordered to the sacrament of the Eucharist. And according to this also one order is more eminent than another, according as one act is more proximately ordered to the aforesaid sacrament. But because many things are ordered to the sacrament of the Eucharist as to the most worthy thing, therefore it is not unfitting that, besides the principal act, one order also have many acts, and so many more as it is more eminent, because the higher a power is, the more things it extends itself to." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 4.

Is episcopate an order distinct from presbyterate? - "St. Thomas, St. Bonaventure, and others deny, who say that it is an extension of the order of presbyterate. But Bellarmine, Tournely, etc., more commonly affirm, both because in it a distinct character is handed on, and a special power toward the Eucharist, namely of constituting the ministers of this sacrament; and because the order of episcopate is conferred through imposition of hands, and through the form, Receive the Holy Spirit, etc. Nor is it valid to say that if episcopate were a distinct order, a Bishop could at least validly be ordained, although he were not a priest; for the response is that this is required by divine ordination, just as it is required that one be baptized who wishes to be confirmed or ordained." L. 378. - According to the first opinion of St.

Thomas, just as in the ordination of a priest, in the last imposition of the hand and through the words, Receive the Holy Spirit, etc., there would not be a new distinct order, a new distinct sacrament, a new distinct character; so episcopate and priesthood are not two orders in number, but one order in number, nor two sacraments in number, but one sacrament in number. Whence by the ordination of a Bishop the priestly power is extended, which is the principal one, and thus also the priestly character is extended, which is the principal one; and therefore not so much is a new character conferred, as a certain perfection and extension of the priestly character, since the one power is completive and perfective of the other. - Benedict XIV, Constitution In postremo, § 10, 17; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 40, a. 5; q. 35, a. 1 compared with q. 38, a. 1 and Lesson 3 on 2 Timothy; Sylvester Maurus, Opus Theologicum, t. 3, q. 265, n. 29.

What is first tonsure and how is it conferred? - First tonsure is not an order, except broadly, but only a disposition to orders, by which someone becomes a cleric, namely is transferred from the lay state into the lot of the Lord, and is deputed to divine worship; and becomes capable of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, an ecclesiastical benefice, and clerical privileges. Trent, sess. 23, C. 2, ibid. C. 6 de Ref. - But it is conferred by the cutting of the hair or of an assumed head of hair, S. R. C., Sept. 25, 1846, n. 2919, and by the words, The Lord is my portion, etc., and also by the handing over of the surplice through a suitable minister, from the institution of the Church. Each one, when he is tonsured, says: The Lord is my portion, etc.; these words "let even the Bishop pronounce according to custom." S. R. C., Nov. 12, 1831, Marsor., ad 3. - L. 734, 735; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 40, a. 2; Roman Pontifical, de Cler. fac.; Roman Catechism, n. 13, 14.

Are the individual orders sacraments? - That the presbyterate is a sacrament is openly clear from Trent, can. 1, 2, 3, 6, taken together. - As regards the diaconate and episcopate, this is drawn from the same Trent; since from c. 6 there is had the divine institution of Bishops and ministers, and therefore at least of deacons; but from c. 4 there is had that grace is annexed to the conferral of episcopate and diaconate. For those words, Receive the Holy Spirit, which from Trent are truly significative and collative of grace, the Bishop pronounces not only in the ordination of a priest, but also in the ordination of a deacon and in the consecration of a Bishop.

Finally, that the subdiaconate very probably, and the minor orders also, are each more probably sacraments, is deduced from the Florentine Decree for the Armenians, where all orders are equally recounted under the sacrament of order; matter and form of the sacrament are assigned for all, and the minister of the same sacrament of order is indicated, ordinary and extraordinary; this extraordinary minister can be affirmed only of the minor orders and subdiaconate. A similar argument can be made from Trent; for C. 3 and c. 3 say indefinitely that order or sacred ordination is a sacrament. Besides, in the obvious and natural sense in the aforesaid C. 3 and c. 3 there is question of order or sacred ordination, about which discussion was had in C. 1 and 2, c. 1 and 2. But there is question there of order insofar as it comprehends not only presbyterate, but also the other orders. Cf. also can. 6 and chap. 2 and 4 together. Moreover this is confirmed from the character which is impressed both in subdiaconate and in minor orders according to what is deduced from the Roman Pontifical, de Ordin. confer., and Roman Catechism, n. 34. - Benedict XIV, de Syn., l. 8, c. 9. Cf. here n. 892.

St. Alphonsus 736, 737, 755 holds it probable that all orders are sacraments; but more probable that only presbyterate and diaconate are sacraments; and very probably that episcopate also is a true sacrament distinct from presbyterate. But St. Thomas clearly teaches, Suppl., q. 37, a. 2 ad 1 and a. 3, that they are sacraments. "Whence since character is a sign distinguishing from others, it is necessary that character be impressed in all orders; of which this also is a sign, that they remain perpetually and are never repeated. And this is the third opinion, which is more common"; Suppl., q. 35, a. 2.

What is the matter of ordination? - It is various for the various orders. - In minor orders the matter is only the handing over of the instruments; namely the instruments are the remote matter, the handing over of the same the proximate matter. Therefore it is necessary that the ordaining one present them to the one to be ordained, and that the one to be ordained receive or touch them with the hand, as the practice of the Church and the words of the form suggest. St. Thomas, III, q. 34, a. 5 ad 3. Further, the instruments of ostiariate consist in the keys of the Church; yet it suffices for validity to use any keys whatever apt for opening, and even one. The instruments of Lectorate are the codex of Sacred Readings, i.e., the Missal, Breviary, or Volume of Sacred Scripture, or book of the Scriptures; of Exorcistate, the book of Exorcisms, or the Ritual which contains exorcisms, in place of which the Pontifical or Missal can be handed over; of Acolytate, empty cruets, or at least one empty cruet, and, more probably, a candlestick with an extinguished candle. In place of the candlestick there cannot be a hand-candle or palmatory. S. R. C. 2194 ad 4, 4035 ad 5, 3315 ad 5; Roman Pontifical.

The matter of major orders is, in subdiaconate, only the handing over of the instruments, namely of the empty chalice with the empty paten placed upon it, both by precept and, probably, by necessity of the sacrament, consecrated, and, more probably, of the book of Epistles, i.e., the Missal, or of Sacred Scripture both of the New and Old Testament; in diaconate, the imposition of the right hand, and, more probably, also the book of the Gospels; in presbyterate, the imposition of hands and the chalice with wine, and the paten placed upon it with a host, and therefore to be handed over together because of the unity of the sacrifice. But which is essential, whether the handing over of the instruments alone, from the Florentine Decree for the Armenians, or the imposition of hands alone, which alone the Greek Church uses, or both, which the Latin Church uses, is disputed. Hence St. Alphonsus 741 says it is more probable that a Latin is validly ordained by the matter assigned to the Greeks, namely by the imposition of hands alone, and conversely; but probably invalidly. Therefore in practice the altogether safer opinion is to be chosen. Finally, the matter of episcopate is the imposition of hands and, probably, the imposition of the book of Gospels. 1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6; Council of Carthage, can. 2; Roman Pontifical, de Consecr. episc. But the handing over of the book of Gospels does not seem essential; for when the book is handed to the elect, he is already called consecrated in the Pontifical. - Trent, sess. 23, C. 3, c. 4; Florence, Decree for the Armenians; Roman Pontifical; L. 739, 745-749; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 34, a. 5; q. 37, a. 2, 4, 5; q. 38, a. 1 ad 1, ad 2; Theology of Wurzburg 108; Benedict XIV, de Syn., l. 8, c. 10; E. M.

What is the form of order? - As concerning the matter in major orders, so concerning the form of the sacrament the doctors do not agree among themselves. In Episcopate the words of the form are: Receive the Holy Spirit. There are those who add the prayers which follow in the manner of a Preface as if determining the aforesaid words toward episcopal consecration. Cf. n. 883, 4. For the various matter which is assigned in presbyterate, some consequently wish the form to consist in the words which are recited by the Bishop in the imposition of hands, others in the words which the Bishop pronounces in the handing over of the instruments, others in both words. In diaconate the words are: Receive the Holy Spirit, etc. Receive the power, etc. - In subdiaconate the words are: See, etc. Receive, etc. - But the words in the other orders are those which accompany the handing over of the instruments from the Roman Pontifical. In Ostiariate the words are: Thus act, etc. In Lectorate, in Exorcistate, in Acolytate the words are: Receive, etc. - St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 34, a. 4; E. M.

Note: "In conferring sacred Orders it is required that by the same Bishop who pronounces the form, the matter be handed over, because, since such is the usage of the Church, thus Christ is judged to have instituted it: so St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 38, a. 1 ad 2.... But he teaches otherwise in the conferral of minor orders. - If orders are conferred by a Bishop, but with another celebrating Mass for him, the ordination will be valid, but illicit, as the Sacred Congregation declared in the year 1715 before Clement XI, and Innocent XIII confirmed in the Congregation held Feb. 5, 1722." L. 744; Benedict XIV, de Syn., l. 8, c. 11, n. 7.

In the ordination of subdeacons, over two or three touching with the right hand the chalice with the paten, the form can be pronounced by the Bishop: See, etc. But in the ordination of priests the chalice with wine and water and the paten with the host must be handed to each, and the form must be repeated for each in the singular. Roman Pontifical, de Ordin. Presb.

Authors are not lacking who hold that the form of the diaconate, in the imposition of the hand, is not those words: Receive the Holy Spirit, etc., but the following prayer: Send forth upon them, we ask, O Lord, etc., which, while the Bishop pronounces it, he holds his right hand extended. Pesch, de Ordine, n. 630, 631, holds this opinion; I. Jorget, in the Dictionnaire de Theologie Catholique, v. Diacres. And Gasparri, de Ordine, Paris, 1894, n. 1044, 1049, holds that the form is the eucharistic prayer in the manner of a preface, in the middle of which now the imposition of the hand is made, which in the ancient liturgy preceded the simple prayer and the eucharistic prayer. But the common opinion, founded on the Council of Trent, sess. 23, de Ord., can. 4, holds that those words, Receive the power, etc., are the form, since they are not said by the Bishop in vain, and consequently the Holy Spirit is then given, that is, "then the sacrament is confected and its grace is conferred." St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 749.

In the ordination of the presbyterate the Bishop imposes hands three times: 1. when he imposes hands with physical touch, saying nothing; 2. when together with the priests he extends his hand over those to be initiated and pours forth the prayers: Let us pray, dearly beloved brothers, etc., which are the form; nor are there lacking those who hold that the form also is, or rather is, the prayer Hear us, etc., with the following Preface; 3. when after Communion he says: Receive the Holy Spirit, etc. Further, the necessary imposition of hands is not the first, as is certain among all, says St. Liguori 748, but either the second, when the Bishop extends hands with the priests, or the third, or both.

Those who contend that only the imposition of hands is the matter of the presbyterate take their argument from the Greeks, who are ordained by the imposition of hands alone; and they stand for the second imposition of hands, for after it and before the third imposition of hands, the ordained already consecrate the Eucharist together with the Bishop. And they say that by it there is also handed on at the same time power over the real and mystical Body of Christ, namely over the Eucharist to be confected and over sins to be absolved. Those who stand for the handing over of the instruments and the imposition of hands argue from the Florentine Decree for the Armenians, and from Trent, sess. 23, c. 4, and the ancient and constant practice of the Church as regards the imposition of hands. According to this opinion, by the handing over of the instruments there is handed on power over the real Body of Christ, and by the third imposition of hands there is handed on power over the mystical Body of Christ.

Hence there is another opinion, and it is to be held at least practically and consequently, that both the second and third imposition of hands together with the handing over of the instruments are the necessary matter of this sacrament. But the variety of the Latin and Greek Church is explained from the fact that Christ instituted the matter and form of this sacrament in general, and left to the Church the power of determining it in species, and of changing it for just causes, provided it uses things and words expressing that handing on of power, the effect of this sacrament. By the second imposition of hands together with the handing over of the instruments, power over the real Body of Christ is handed on; but by the third, power over the mystical Body of Christ is handed on, and each can be considered after the manner of one moral thing, as namely one imposition of hands, morally speaking, distributed into two parts.

Indeed the first imposition of hands also, and indeed with physical touch, seems necessary, and to constitute still one imposition of hands together with the second. The reason is that if the form is lacking in the first imposition of hands, bodily touch is lacking in the second imposition of hands. But if it is said that the first imposition of hands constitutes, together with the second imposition of hands, which is the continuation of the former, one imposition of hands, then every difficulty vanishes, and each is had: bodily touch and form. But each imposition of hands must precede the handing over of the instruments. Holy Office, May 3, 1899; July 4, 1900; Aug. 22, 1900; Monit. Ecclesiast., vol. 11, p. 148; vol. 12, p. 193, p. 291. For the form Receive the power, which accompanies the handing over of the instruments, completes the preceding imposition of hands with the prayer which accompanies it. Therefore it can well be said that by the first and second imposition of hands together with the handing over of the instruments, power over the physical Body of Christ is conferred; but by the third imposition of hands there is conferred on the priest power over the mystical body of Christ. "The Lord gave the disciples priestly power, as regards the principal act, before the Passion at the Supper... But after the Resurrection he gave them priestly power as regards the secondary act, which is to bind and loose." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 5 ad 2. But physical touch suffices, even mediated, if, for example, the head of the ordinand is covered by a skullcap. Holy Office, June 22, 1890.

There are those who, relying on the Leonine Sacramentary of about the sixth century, hold that the form in the presbyterate is the prayer Hear us and the following Preface. Therefore, whether "in the ordination of a priest the extension of the hand both of the Bishop and of the priests prescribed by the Pontifical must be made not only within these words: Let us pray, dearly beloved brothers, up to Let us bend the knees; but also after the genuflection within the Prayer which begins: Hear us, up to the Preface, so that the genuflection only interrupts, but does not make that extension cease? Resp. In the ordination of priests the practice of the Roman Church is to be observed, which imposes hands on the ordinands only in the first prayer: LET US PRAY, DEARLY BELOVED BROTHERS." S. R. C., Feb. 18, 1843, Anicien.

Amen, which the Pontifical prescribes to be answered in the handing over either of matter or of sacred vestments in ordination, is to be said by the ordinand himself according to custom. S. R. C., Nov. 12, 1831, Marsor., ad 6.

A Bishop cannot be validly ordained except by another Bishop. But several things concur for such ordination in this order: namely the imposition of the book of Gospels over the neck and shoulders of the ordained, and the imposition of hands of three Bishops with the form corresponding to each: Receive the Holy Spirit. And these are essential. But the aforesaid words pronounced absolutely are referred only to episcopal consecration. Therefore the following prayers up to the anointing of the head do not seem also to be required, so that the aforesaid form may be restricted to episcopal consecration. But there follows the anointing of the head or crown of the ordained, the anointing of the hands of the ordained, after which the elect is called consecrated in the Pontifical. Then there is had the handing over of the staff, ring, and book of Gospels. Roman Pontifical; Wurzburg 108. - The consecration of a Bishop is valid if the imposition of the book is made not before, but after the imposition of hands. Holy Office, July 30, 1901. Likewise it is valid without the anointing of the head and hands, although this is not to be omitted. Trent, sess. 13, de Sacr. ord., c. 5; sess. 7, de Sacr. in gen., c. 13. "But whether the assistance of three Bishops is required for validity outside the case of necessity? It is certain 1. that this is required by necessity of precept from Nicaea I, c. 4, and from Carthage II, c. 7. It seems certain 2. that, from the commission of the Pontiff in a case of necessity, ordination is validly done by one Bishop... But to the question some say that three are altogether required... for thus Pope Damasus wrote in Epistle 4 against the Chorepiscopi: For that they are not Bishops who are ordained by fewer than three Bishops is evident to all. Others nevertheless deny... The reason is that in the Roman Pontifical only one of the Bishops is called consecrator, but the others assistants; for in other sacraments only one minister is required... Each opinion is probable, whence in practice the first must altogether be followed." L. 755; Brief of Pius IV, Aug. 11, 1562; Brief of Leo XIII Trans oceanum, Apr. 18, 1897; Holy Office, March 13, 1669; A. S. S., vol. 25, p. 580; vol. 29, p. 661; Collectanea S. C. de P. F., n. 1207, 1208; Authentic Decrees of the S. R. C., n. 186; Benedict XIV, Constitution Qua sollicitudine, Feb. 21, 1725; de Syn., l. 13, c. 13; Kenrick, tr. 20, n. 12.

If in the ordination of a subdeacon and deacon the handing over of the book of Gospels and the book of Epistles has been omitted, it is to be supplied. If in the ordination of a priest the third imposition of hands has been omitted, it is likewise to be supplied. The reason is that although these rites are essential, they are nevertheless only integrally essential, i.e., for integrating the power already handed on as regards the secondary act. Therefore they must indeed be supplied, but the whole ordination must not be repeated. - If the handing over of the chalice and paten has been omitted in the ordination of a subdeacon, the imposition of the hand in the ordination of a deacon, the first or second imposition of hands or the handing over of the instruments in the ordination of a priest, the whole ordination of the priest and deacon is to be repeated under condition, and that of the subdeacon absolutely. The reason is that, as regards the ordination of a priest, probably the essential matter is the imposition of hands alone; probably the handing over of the instruments alone; probably both, according to the various opinions. As regards the ordination of a deacon, probably the essential matter is the imposition of the hand; probably the handing over of the book of Gospels; probably both, again according to the various opinions. But as regards the ordination of a subdeacon, the essential matter is either only the handing over of the chalice and paten, or that together with the handing over of the book of Epistles. Cf. St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 37, a. 2, 4, 5; L. 746 ff. But by this essential matter power is conferred for the principal act; and therefore, when it is lacking, the whole ordination is to be repeated; and when it is doubtful, the ordination is to be repeated under condition. - E. M.; Collectanea S. C. de P. F., n. 1431.

Is physical contact with the instruments required for the validity of ordination? - Resp. In the affirmative according to the more common and more probable opinion, altogether to be held in practice. "But Escobar, n. 184, rightly says that it suffices for validity that the matter be touched with one hand. And likewise rightly with the common opinion the same Escobar, l.c., and Palao, p. 4, n. 20, etc., judge that mediated touch suffices, namely if the chalice, paten, or book is touched through some veil or glove; for one who touches thus is said in everyone's sense truly to touch." L. 743; La-Croix 2155. "The very words of the form," says St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 34, a. 5 ad 3, "seem to show that touch of the matter is of the essence of the sacrament, because it is said: Receive this or that." For moral contact a Response of the S. R. C., Dec. 3, 1661, Galliar., is brought forward: "To the scruple of Brother Ephrem Chasteau... namely that he had not touched the chalice by physical touch in his ordination to the presbyterate." For the Sacred Congregation responded: "That he could continue celebration of the Most Holy Sacrifice without any scruple, and with a conscience altogether safe." But in this Decision no mention is made of the paten, and besides there is question of a scruple. E. M.

Is the ordination of a priest valid who received the paten with the host, but the chalice without wine and water? - There are theologians who judge the value of such an ordination to be at least speculatively probable. But the opposite seems more probable; for the power for offering the sacrifice, which includes the offering of each species, is one and indivisible. Therefore power cannot be handed on for consecrating one species without power for consecrating the other. But in the case, power cannot be handed on for consecrating the species of wine, since this is lacking. Therefore. Hence such an ordination is altogether to be repeated under condition, as Cardinal de Lugo affirms that it was in fact repeated when a case of this kind occurred, Resp. Mor., l. 1, d. 30, and as it was repeated from the Decision of the Holy Office, Jan. 11, 1899; as also it was repeated in a case of defect of the host from the decision of the same Holy Office, July 6, 1898; Jan. 17, 1900. Ferraris, supplement, v. Ordo, Ordinatio, n. 6; Monit. Eccles., vol. 11, p. 329; A. S. S., vol. 32, p. 557. And it would also have to be repeated under condition if in the chalice the water had been mixed with wine in equal quantity, as was also resolved by the S. C. de Sacram., Nov. 6, 1910. - L. 750; E. M.

Is one validly ordained who immediately touches only the chalice, but not the paten? - The first opinion affirms, because the chalice and paten then morally make one thing. The second opinion denies, because in the Roman Pontifical the touch of both chalice and paten is prescribed; and likewise because then the touch of the paten would be moral rather than physical. St. Alphonsus 753 says that the first opinion is more probable, but that the second opinion is not improbable, "and therefore is to be held in practice; for which reason such a cleric is to be reordained under condition." - S. C. C., May 28, 1796, decreed that the ordination should be repeated entirely under condition for a priest who touched only the paten placed over the chalice, but not the chalice itself. The Holy Office, March 17, 1897, declared valid the ordination of a priest who touched the paten with the host, but did not touch the chalice, although he attempted to touch it with his finger; and on March 8, 1895, of a priest who doubted whether he had touched the chalice. But, as is clear, there was question of mere scruple. Monit. Eccles., vol. 16, p. 374. - E. M.

Is one validly ordained who touches the host but not the paten; and who touches the chalice and paten but not the host? - Resp. To the first: in the affirmative with the common opinion, which seems most probable from St. Alphonsus 751. The reason is that the host and wine are the substantial matter of order, by which power over the Body of Christ is principally signified, and the chalice and paten are used from the precept of the Church for decency alone. Besides, by touching the host he already at least mediately touches the paten, and mediated physical touch certainly suffices. Therefore practically one can well acquiesce. Holy Office, July 22, 1892. - To the second: also in the affirmative, with the common and truer opinion. The reason is 1. because then the host is touched through the paten; but immediate touch of the host is not prescribed by the Church, but only of the paten, as is clear from the Pontifical; 2. because wine in the chalice is never touched immediately; therefore neither is it required that the host be touched immediately. This opinion from the same holy Doctor 752 can well be called morally certain. Therefore again practically one can acquiesce. Holy Office, Jan. 17, 1900. - La-Croix 2152, 2153; Collectanea S. C. de P. F., n. 2178; E. M.

Is the ordination of a priest valid who did not touch the chalice and paten while the form was being pronounced, but immediately after? - Resp. In the affirmative; the reason is that although physical union is not had, nevertheless moral union is had; but while moral union stands, the whole reason of the sacramental sign subsists. This is confirmed from the common authority of theologians; for although the opposite opinion has some authors for itself, nevertheless it is now so commonly abandoned that it seems to lack every probability. Likewise the ordination is valid if someone physically touches the paten with the host and then the chalice, or conversely, while the form lasts, as can easily happen while someone attempts to touch both; and also if by this attempt he lifts the paten from the chalice. Cf. 322; Holy Office, March 17, 1897; Jan. 17, 1900; D'Annibale, ed. 3, p. 3, n. 253; Busembaum 757; de Lugo, Resp. Mor., l. 1, d. 33; E. M.

Is he validly ordained to whom in subdiaconate there was given not an empty chalice, but one full of wine and water? - That ordination is probably valid. For although the chalice was full of wine and water, nevertheless from the intention of the ordaining Bishop ordaining him to the subdiaconate, it was sufficiently limited so that only the chalice according to itself was given, as contradistinguished from any content whatever. Therefore the chalice, although full, as subject to that intention and handed on in that way, still signified the diminution of power which the subdeacon receives in his ordination, which an empty chalice signifies better. Therefore from the defect of emptiness one cannot certainly argue a defect of valid ordination, but only illicit ordination, if that defect culpably happened. Lugo, Resp. Mor., l. 1, d. 30, n. 5; E. M.

Whether and how must defects committed in ordination be supplied? - If the defect is concerning accidentals, e.g., if the anointing of the hands of the priest to be initiated was lacking, then it must be supplied as soon as possible by the same Bishop, if this can be done, otherwise by another, and supplied secretly if it was hidden, to avoid scandal and disturbance of others. If one thus ordained would not take care that a defect of this kind be supplied, or before the supplying would minister in the order received, he would sin gravely or lightly according as the defect is grave or light. Nevertheless, if instead of oil of catechumens, in the anointing of the hands, oil of the sick was used, nothing is to be repeated. Holy Office, July 22, 1874. If the Bishop alone imposed hands, the imposition of hands of the priests will not have to be supplied. S. C. de P. F., Aug. 6, 1840, C. n. 1195.

If the defect is concerning essentials, namely concerning matter and form, the defect must altogether be supplied under grave obligation. If the sacrament consists of a double matter and form, as in the ordination of priesthood, according at least to the probable opinion of several, then if the defect is in the preceding part, namely in the handing over of the chalice and paten, or in the second imposition of hands, certainly the whole sacrament is to be repeated, because power over the mystical Body of Christ is founded on power over the real Body of Christ; but otherwise if the defect is in the posterior part, namely in the last imposition of hands, because the power toward the true Body of Christ has already been handed on independently of the subsequent part. And thus also in the ordination of a deacon, if the presentation of the book of Gospels has been omitted, it is to be supplied. Cf. 883.

But the Salmanticenses, c. 2, n. 32, say that this indeed is to be held in the ordination of presbyterate and episcopate, but not of other orders; because in them, if there is probability for the validity of the received order, it is not required to supply the defect, since in the priesthood afterward to be received all their power is received. But this is not to be admitted, at least practically. For C. Presbyter, de Sacram. non iterand., speaking of the ordination of deacons, the Pontiff says that if the imposition of hands has been omitted, it is altogether to be repeated, although it is probable that the handing over of the book alone is of the essence. And when doubt occurs about the validity of the other orders also, it is prescribed that they again be conferred under condition. S. C. C., Aug. 3, 1724, etc.

St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 35, a. 2, says these things: "It must be said that it is not of the necessity of superior orders that someone first have minor orders, because the powers are distinct, and one, as regards its own nature, does not require another in the same subject. And therefore even in the primitive Church some were ordained priests who had not first received inferior orders; and nevertheless they could do all things which the inferior orders can, because the inferior power is comprehended in the superior power, as sense in intellect and a duchy in a kingdom. But afterward by the constitution of the Church it was determined that one should not thrust himself into the greater orders who had not first humbled himself in lesser offices. And from this it is that those who are ordained by leap according to the canons, C. Tuae litterae, de Cler. per salt. promoto, are not reordained, but that which had been omitted from the preceding orders is conferred on them."

From the aforesaid C. Tuae Litterae, a priest who by leap was made priest from subdeacon is commanded to be ordained deacon. And, while doubt stood about the ordination of a certain priest to the diaconate, the Holy Office defined on Jan. 20, 1875 and Jan. 26, 1898, that this ordination was to be repeated under condition in that priest. Likewise, while doubt stood about the ordination of subdiaconate, diaconate, and presbyterate, the same Holy Office decreed on Aug. 1, 1697, that all these were to be repeated under condition. - Canon Sollicitudo 1, D. 52; Benedict XIV, Constitution Etsi pastoralis, May 26, 1742, § 7, n. 7; Constitution Pastor bonus, Apr. 13, 1744, § 18; Suarez, de Censur., d. 31, s. 1, n. 53.

A defect concerning the validity of the sacrament is to be supplied at the time established by the Church from the cited C. Presbyter. But it must be said otherwise if there were an accidental defect. But Tamburini, l. 7, c. 5, § 2, n. 13; La-Croix 2200, and others probably say that if an order is repeated under condition because of doubt alone, or some ceremony, it can be repeated on any day and by any Bishop. And when doubts of this kind occur, it is in fact customary to grant that the repetition of ordination under condition can be made by any Catholic Bishop, secretly, at any time of the year, and in a private chapel. - L. 757-759; La-Croix 2220 ff.; Lugo, Resp. Mor., l. 1, d. 30, n. 2; E. M.

Does one lacking an order licitly and validly exercise the acts of the order? - "One lacking the order of priesthood or episcopate would invalidly exercise their duties. But those lacking other orders exercise them licitly, if the orders are minor; illicitly if they are major. Hence a cleric sins gravely who without order solemnly exercises the office of deacon or subdeacon, and incurs by the very fact irregularity and excommunication, but this latter ferendae sententiae from C. 1 and 2, de Cleric. non ordin. min." L. 754.

Who is the minister of order? - In Trent, sess. 23, c. 7, it is defined that Bishops alone are ordinary ministers of the sacrament of order. A Bishop only elected and confirmed, although he can provide permission to subjects that they be ordained by another Bishop, nevertheless cannot ordain unless he is also consecrated. But a consecrated Bishop, even if he has been degraded and has renounced the episcopate, can validly ordain. L. 761; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 38, a. 1.

The Supreme Pontiff can provide to a simple priest the faculty of conferring tonsure and minor orders. And this faculty was in fact formerly granted to Cardinal priests toward clerics of their title, and, from the common law now in force, to regular Abbots truly nullius or exempt, with miter and ring, blessed by a Bishop; who nevertheless cannot use it except with Regulars subject to themselves, and more probably also novices. Trent, sess. 23, C. 10, de Ref.; S. C. C., June 26, 1655; Benedict XIV, de Syn., l. 2, c. 11; Suarez, de Rel., t. 4, l. 2, c. 29; Bizzarri, Collect., ed. 1885, p. 138; Honorante, Prax., p. 7.

Yet they commonly deny this concerning the presbyterate, as concerning a most excellent ministry, which must be imparted only by a Prince of the Church having supreme faculty, as a Bishop is. St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 38, a. 1.

Therefore the question is about diaconate and subdiaconate; some affirm, others deny, but others probably deny concerning diaconate, whose ministry is immediately ordered to touching the Body of Christ, by distributing it to the faithful, while they affirm concerning subdiaconate, because its duty does not have so immediate a relation to the Body of Christ. Nor does St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 38, a. 1 ad 3, seem to oppose this doctrine. There the holy Doctor excludes major orders which have always been held in the Church as sacred, as is inferred from his words, since he speaks of orders which have immediate relation to the Body of Christ. But it is known that the order of subdiaconate was not counted among the sacred orders except in the eleventh century by Urban II, as is had in C. A multis, de aetate et qualitate praefic.; nor does the subdiaconate have an immediate relation to the Body of Christ, as St. Thomas speaks; for only priests can confect the Eucharist, and only deacons can carry or minister it. - L. 760-766; Giraldi, p. 1, s. 105; Langonius, de Bulla Innocentiana; E. M.

Those who affirm concerning diaconate rest chiefly on the Constitution Exposuit, Apr. 9, 1489, by which Innocent VIII grants to the Abbot General of the Cistercian Order and to the Abbots of four monasteries of the same order the faculty of conferring on their religious subjects the Orders of subdiaconate and diaconate. But the authenticity of such a concession is not certainly established.

Can any Bishop licitly confer orders? - For licitly conferring and receiving orders it is required that the one to be initiated, even with first tonsure, be ordained by his own Bishop, or by another, but with his permission. Therefore a Bishop cannot licitly ordain except subjects, either by reason of origin, or by reason of domicile, or by reason of benefice, or by reason of familiarity, and indeed by reason of the necessity of dioceses. C. Cum nullus 3, de Temporum ordin. in 6; C. Eos qui 2, e.t.; Trent, sess. 23, C. 3, 8, 9, de Ref.; Pius X, Encyclical Letter to the Bishops of Italy, July 28, 1906; L. 760, 769, 771.

By reason of origin, if namely they were born in his diocese. But one who is born somewhere by chance must be ordained by the Bishop of the domicile of his father, unless the father afterward contracted domicile there where the one to be initiated was born; or by the Bishop of the place where the father was born, if the father at the time of the birth of the son had domicile nowhere. But if the son is illegitimate and not legitimated, the domicile of the mother is attended to. But exposed infants whose parents are unknown are judged natives of the place in which they were exposed. Finally, neophytes are judged natives of the place in which they were baptized. Paul III, Constitution Cupientes, March 31, 1542. But no account is taken of baptism under condition. Kenrick, tr. 20, n. 15. - Honorante, Praxis Secr. Urb. Vic., c. 1, note 9; Schmalzgrueber, l. 1, p. 3, tit. 11, n. 37, 38; Giraldi, p. 2, s. 96; L. 760, 770, 772, 773.

By reason of domicile, only he is to be judged a subject as regards orders who comes somewhere with the intention of remaining there perpetually, and proves this intention either by habitation of ten years, or by building a house with the carrying over of the greater part of his goods, while remaining there at the same time for some notable time; and he must swear that he then has this intention. Innocent XII, Constitution Speculatores, Nov. 4, 1694; L. 760, 770, 773, 778; Lucidi, Visit. sacr. lim., c. 2, n. 88, 91.

From the more recent Decree of the S. C. C., July 20, 1898, a cleric legitimately excardinated in perpetuity from his own diocese by legitimate document, and legitimately incardinated in another diocese, namely by written document, with the oath prescribed by Innocent XII having been taken, and in perpetuity, and with suitable documents having first been obtained from the dismissing Bishop concerning birth, morals, and studies, can indeed be promoted to orders by the Ordinary of the new diocese.

Likewise a layman can obtain letters from his own Ordinary, by force of which, dismissed from his own diocese, as an extra-diocesan he can become proper to a benevolent receiving Bishop, and by this title be promoted by him to clerical tonsure and to sacred orders, provided however that: 1. Dismissal by his own Bishop is granted from a just cause, in writing, and for a determined diocese; 2. Acceptance is made, with the rules established for incardinating clerics observed, and with the Decree Vetuit, Dec. 22, 1905, also observed as regards pupils dismissed from seminaries; 3. The oath is taken according to the path of the Constitution Speculatores before clerical tonsure. S. C. C., Nov. 24, 1906.

By reason of benefice, it does not suffice that someone is immediately going to receive a benefice from some Bishop, so that he can be ordained by him or receive first tonsure; but it is required that the benefice actually be possessed, and of itself suffice for suitable sustenance without the supplement of patrimony. One who has a benefice in two dioceses can be ordained in either. C. Cum nullus, de Temp. ord. in 6; L. 760, 770, 774, 776, 777.

By reason of familiarity, so that a Bishop, but not merely a titular Bishop, can ordain someone, it is required that for three years he has maintained him with himself in his actual service, and that within a month he confer on him a benefice sufficient for suitable sustenance, so namely that the one to be ordained, when the familiarity ceases, may have from which he can live. Therefore it matters little in what diocese the benefice is placed; and, if the one to be ordained has a benefice or patrimony, this obligation of conferring a benefice on him ceases. Nor does it matter that he does not dwell in the buildings of the Bishop, provided he lives in the place where the Bishop is or nearby. - Trent, sess. 14, C. 2, de Ref.; sess. 23, C. 9, de Ref.; Innocent XII, Constitution Speculatores; L. 760, 770, 778, 780; Giraldi, p. 1, s. 97.

The one to be ordained can choose whichever he wishes among these various Bishops, and then vary in each order. But he who is chosen cannot ordain him without testimonial letters of the Bishop of origin, of domicile, and of that place in which perhaps someone has stayed at that age and for so long a time, namely about six months morally continuous, that he could have contracted a canonical impediment. L. 789. But if there is question of those to be promoted who were formerly assigned to military service, testimonial letters are necessary as often as they have stayed in some diocese at least for a trimester morally continuous. S. C. C., Sept. 9, 1893; Jan. 26, 1895; June 25, 1904; S. C. Disc. Reg., Nov. 27, 1892. And if they cannot obtain the aforesaid testimonial letters from the Ordinaries of places, then, after faculty of the Holy See has first been obtained, they are to be admitted to taking a supplementary oath for the time in which they were assigned to military service. Holy Office, March 12, 1896. Testimonial letters; namely not given generally, but for receiving orders; and therefore they must bear witness concerning the requisites for receiving orders, concerning birth, age, morals, and the absence of any canonical impediment. Those to be ordained by the Bishop of benefice, if they are going to return to their own diocese, must be examined by the Bishop of domicile before the granting of testimonial letters. Trent, sess. 23, C. 8, de Ref.; Innocent XIII, Constitution Apostolici ministerii, § 5; Benedict XIII, Constitution In supremo; S. C. C., Aug. 8, 1733.

It is grave to confer orders or tonsure on the subject of another without express consent, or without dimissorial letters of his Bishop, Trent, sess. 7, C. 10, 11, de Ref.; sess. 14, C. 2, de Ref.; sess. 23, C. 10, de Ref., or of his vicar general when the Bishop is acting for a long time in remote places, C. 3, de Temp. ordin. in 6, or of the capitular vicar after a year of vacancy, or within the year, but only on those constrained by reason of a benefice already received or to be received; i.e., either already obtained, or if they have been elected to it. Cf. Trent, sess. 21, C. 2, de Ref.; Lucidi, C. 2, n. 72. A neighboring Bishop can also ordain the subject of another if his own Bishop has been declared suspended by public sentence. C. Eos qui 2, de Tempor. ordinat. in 6. - A Bishop is bound by himself to confer orders on his own subjects; yet when a just cause intervenes, of sickness or another similar cause, e.g., absence, it is lawful for him to dismiss them to another Bishop. But the cause why the proper Bishop does not ordain must be expressed in the dimissorial letters. Trent, sess. 7, C. 11, de Ref.; sess. 23, C. 3. But they can be given to any Catholic Bishop, S. C. C., March 16, 1624, except to one who has renounced the episcopate, if he has yielded both the place and the dignity, C. 1, de Ordin. ab Episcopo, qui renuunt. And if they have been given by name to one in favor of the one to be ordained, it is open to him, with that one passed over, to approach another. L. 788. But they are had as in the manner of a grace made; therefore they do not expire when the right of the one giving is resolved, L. 787, nor are they suspended when he is suspended, unless they were given for a definite time or were revoked. - Lugo, Resp. Mor., l. 1, d. 32; E. M.

The praised Decree Vetuit of the S. C. C., Dec. 22, 1905, His Holiness Pius X established and decreed: "1. That in the future no local Ordinary admit into his Seminary a subject of another diocese, whether cleric or layman, unless he has first asked by secret letters from the proper Bishop of the petitioner and has learned whether this man was formerly dismissed from his Seminary. But if this is established, omitting judgment about the causes or determination whether the other Bishop acted justly or unjustly, let him bar entrance into his Seminary to the one asking. "2. But those who were admitted in good faith, because they kept silent that they had previously lived in another seminary and afterward were dismissed from it, as soon as this condition of theirs is known, are to be admonished to depart. But if they wish to remain, and this is permitted to them by the Ordinary, by that very fact they remain ascribed to this diocese, with the canonical rules for their incardination and ordination nevertheless observed; but once advanced to the priesthood, they are prohibited from returning to the diocese from whose Seminary they were dismissed and from having a stable domicile there. "3. Likewise, since almost a similar reason holds, those who, dismissed from Seminaries, enter some religious institute, if they leave it after they have been initiated in sacred orders, are forbidden to return to the diocese from whose Seminary they were dismissed. "4. But those dismissed from some religious Institute are not to be admitted into a Seminary unless the Bishop has first, by secret letters, sought information from the moderators of the same Institute about the morals, character, and ability of those dismissed, and it is established that there is nothing in them which is less suitable to the priestly state. Cf. here n. 279 bis. "Finally let Bishops remember that it is not lawful for them, in their own name, to impose hands on anyone who is not subject to them in that way and by one of those titles which are established in the Constitution Speculatores of Innocent XII and in the decree of the S. C. of the Council which begins A primis, on July 20, 1898. And likewise no one can be ordained who is not useful or necessary for the church or pious place for which he is assumed, according to the prescriptions of the holy Council of Trent in chap. 16, Sess. 23, de reform."

What of Regulars? - The things which precede, with special indult excluded, have place also in pious Congregations in which only simple vows are pronounced. S. C. EE. et RR., May 6, 1864; A. S. S., vol. 1, p. 366. Yet they are to be proposed by their own moderators. Leo XIII, Bull Conditae, § VI.

But Regulars of solemn vows from C. Cum nullus 3, § fin., de Temp. ord. in 6, must receive orders from the Bishop in whose diocese the monastery is where they are then staying. The Sacred Congregation by mandate of Clement VIII decreed that if that Bishop does not have an ordination, then the superior can give dimissorials to his subjects to any other Bishop whatever; nevertheless it is there prescribed to Regulars that they not deliberately defer the ordinations of their subjects to that time when the diocesan Bishop is not going to have an ordination or is going to be absent. And Benedict XIV established that if the diocesan Bishop is absent or is not going to have an ordination at the next legitimate established time, a religious cannot be ordained by another unless he shows an attestation of the vicar general, chancellor, or secretary of the same Bishop; otherwise both the one ordaining and the one thus ordained incur the censures and penalties which they incur who are ordained by some Bishop without dimissorials. Likewise he established that such a Regular must be examined by the ordaining Bishop; and that privileges of some Order, e.g., of the Society of Jesus, Gregory XIII, Sept. 22, 1582, that its religious be ordained by any Bishop, must be by name, not by communication. When the See is vacant, "within a year the Chapter can well grant permission to Regulars bringing dimissorials of their superiors, that they be ordained by some Bishop." L. 788. Yet a Bishop can ordain religious without formal examination by acquiescing in the testimony of their prelates, but he can also well examine them if he wishes, unless they have a special privilege. Benedict XIV, Constitution Impositi nobis, Feb. 27, 1747; Kenrick, tr. 20, n. 26. "Whoever in the City, whether from the secular clergy or from the regular, will be initiated in sacred orders, all without anyone excepted, every contrary privilege having been extinguished, shall undergo the test of doctrine in the Curia of Our Cardinal Vicar." Pius X, Motu Proprio Sacros. Trid. Syn., July 16, 1905.

From the aforesaid Motu Proprio of Pius X Sacros. Trid. Syn., July 16, 1905, "whoever from the number of ordinands shall have obtained a degree in Theology in some Pontifical University is decreed exempt from undergoing the test about theological matter." "By Motu Proprio we will and command that in Italy and the Islands subject to Italian dominion, all Religious, whether belonging to Institutes of simple vows or to those of solemn vows, are not to be promoted to sacred Orders before they have been proved suitable by the Bishop of the place through a diligent examination of doctrine; with any contrary privilege removed for this effect alone, even one worthy of most special and individual mention, and with any contrary custom abrogated, even centenary and immemorial, which we also prohibit from being introduced in the future." Pius X, March 19, 1906. This privilege of receiving orders without previous examination, exclusively proper to the Society of Jesus, therefore was revoked for Italy. - Constitution Pium of Gregory XIII; Constitution Quantum of Paul V.

Regulars of religious orders in which solemn vows are emitted, during the triennium of simple vows, can be ordained by the Ordinary of the place; yet during that triennium after the novitiate and before solemn profession, it is not lawful to grant them dimissorials except for first tonsure and minor orders. S. C. super Stat. Regul., June 12, 1858; S. C. EE. et RR., Jan. 20, 1860; A. S. S., vol. 1, p. 358 ff.

Whether novices are to be ordained by the Bishop of the place of novitiate, or by the Bishop of origin or domicile? - Suarez and Henriquez hold that they are to be ordained by the Bishop of origin or domicile. Sanchez and Delbene judge that they can well be ordained by the Bishop of the place where the novitiate is. "Each opinion is probable..., provided the novice has already remained in the novitiate for a notable time; and takes an oath there of remaining perpetually, insofar as it is in him." L. 765. - Benedict XIII, Constitution In suprema, Sept. 23, 1724; Benedict XIV, Constitution Impositi nobis, 1747, Inst. 23, n. 8; L. 768, 788, 792; A. S. S., vol. 23, p. 629 ff.; E. M.

Can a Bishop confer orders, or at least first tonsure, on his own subjects outside the diocese? - Resp. In the negative as regards orders, unless by permission of the Ordinary of the place. As regards tonsure, the first opinion denies, because from Trent it is forbidden to Bishops to exercise pontificals in another's diocese without permission of its Ordinary. And to confer first tonsure is a pontifical function. The second opinion affirms, because, since it is the more common and more probable opinion among theologians that tonsure is not an order, therefore it can well and customarily be conferred privately without pontifical insignia, for which permission of the Bishop of the place is not required. L. 256.

What is required for validly receiving orders? - For validly receiving ordination it is required and suffices that one be a baptized male. Therefore a woman is incapable of orders, and a hermaphrodite in whom the female sex prevails, and likewise one not baptized. On the contrary, infants, the perpetually insane, the blind, the mute, those deprived of hands, etc., are validly ordained, although by natural law they are irregular. Yet St. Thomas says that boys before the use of reason cannot validly receive the episcopate. - C. Tuae litterae, un., de Cler. per salt. prom.; Benedict XIV, Constitution Eo quamvis, § 20; L. 781, 782; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 35, a. 3; q. 39, a. 1, 2; Lugo, Resp. Mor., l. 1, d. 31; E. M.

What is required for the licit reception of orders? - There is required 1. divine vocation, the state of grace, since order is a sacrament of the living, and probity of life. Cf. 166, 168. "Since in any order," says St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 36, a. 1, "someone is constituted a leader of others in divine things, one who approaches orders with consciousness of mortal sin sins mortally as presumptuous. And therefore holiness of life is required for order by necessity of precept, but not by necessity of the sacrament. Hence if an evil man is ordained, nevertheless he has order, though with sin... The ordained must shine with a good conscience as regards God, and with good reputation as regards men." For through the sacred ministry they are made mediators between God and the people. Hence consequently one promoting the unworthy sins gravely, "especially since this turns to the detriment of the Church and of divine honor." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 36, a. 4.

Therefore spiritual exercises are altogether suitably put before the reception of orders; and they are in fact prescribed for clerics to be assumed to sacred orders in Italy and the adjacent islands. Innocent XI, Oct. 9, 1682; Clement XI, Feb. 1, 1710; Ferraris, Bibl., v. Exerc. spirit.; Benedict XIV, Not. 104. - And, so that there may be proof of this probity of life, the names of those who are to be assumed to individual major orders are to be proposed publicly in the Church; and those who are promoted to minor orders must obtain good testimony from the pastor and from the teacher of the school in which they are educated. Besides, the Bishop is bound to investigate the morals of those to be ordained and the other qualities required in them. Trent, sess. 23, C. 5, 7, de Ref.; sess. 22, C. 2, de Ref.; sess. 24, C. 1, de Ref.; E. M.

From the Norms of the S. C. EE. et RR. for Italy, Jan. 18, 1908, immediately before ordination those to be ordained must make spiritual exercises for ten days before major orders, for five before minor orders. - From the aforesaid Norms the Bishop must seek information from pastors and from Superiors of Institutes in which they stayed before they entered the Seminary, then from members of the Tridentine Commission, from the Rector and from the Professors of the seminary. If the pupils are extra-diocesan, the Bishop will send their petitions, together with his own judgment concerning ordination, to their Ordinary, who will either dispatch dimissorial letters or summon the pupils for sacred ordination after he has taken suitable information, as was said above. - Cf. here n. 893 at the end. Decree Vetuit.

There is required 2. that the one to be ordained not be a neophyte, servant or slave, mutilated in some member, of notable infamy, or such as would impede the execution of the order, a hermaphrodite, illegitimately born, a homicide, infamous, or irregular in any way, suspended, excommunicated. - 1 Tim. 3:6; L. 782, 784; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 39, a. 3, 6; E. M.

When can a married man be initiated in sacred orders? - It is certain that without the permission of the wife it is not lawful for a married man to receive sacred orders, nor even first tonsure. C. Nullus, ult., de Temp. ord. in 6; Extravag. Antiquae, de Voto. But a married man can licitly be promoted to sacred orders if from a just cause he has made perpetual divorce from his wife, from the sentence of a judge, C. Agathosa, caus. 27, q. 2, or from permission of the wife, provided she herself vows chastity, C. Coniugatus 5, de Convers. coniugat., and provided the permission is express and altogether spontaneous, C. Consuluit, e.t.

But more truly the wife is not bound to profess Religion, C. Coniugatus cited, unless the husband is assumed to the episcopate, for then the wife must altogether enter Religion, C. Sane 6, de Convers. coniug.; and likewise unless the husband became a religious, and the wife was young or suspected of incontinence, C. Cum sis 4, e.t. - But does the woman of this man promoted to sacred orders, if she emitted a simple vow of chastity, validly contract marriage after the death of the husband? The first opinion denies, from C. Quia sunt 10, D. 28, where it is said of such a marriage: Those who have been joined badly are to be separated. The second opinion affirms; for although separation of the aforesaid spouses is prescribed as a penalty for the crime admitted, nevertheless it is not declared that the marriage is null. - L. 812, 826, 969; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 53, a. 4; Schmalzgrueber, l. 3, t. 32, n. 19 ff.; Benedict XIV, de Syn., l. 13, c. 12, n. 7 ff.

There is required 3. an intention of being clerical, Trent, sess. 23, C. 4, de Ref. It is certain and common that he who receives major orders and does not intend to receive the priesthood does not sin gravely, Trent, ib.; and it is probable that there is no sin, because by no law is it prescribed to ascend to superior orders. C. Is qui, de Fil. presb. in 6. - But he would sin who would receive first tonsure or minor orders with the intention of escaping the lay forum, and afterward, when fear of lay judgment had ceased, of returning to the world, Trent, ib. - L. 783, 785; Sanchez, tr. 9, c. 2, n. 88; E. M.

There is required 4. that he be confirmed. Trent, sess. 23, C. 4, de Ref. But is this required under grave precept? Some affirm, others judge that this is not of precept, but of counsel, others commonly and more probably say that it is required under light obligation because of light disorder. L. 786. "By congruity," says St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 34, a. 4, "the character of order presupposes the character of confirmation, and not by necessity." Nevertheless the S. C. C., Sept. 27, 1601, declared that one initiated in first tonsure and minor orders before confirmation was received had been "badly promoted, had acquired a benefice less legitimately, and needed a new provision, nor could he ascend to sacred orders unless with a previous dispensation of the Apostolic See." Benedict XIV, Constitution Eo quamvis tempore, § 19.

There is required 5. that, besides testimonial letters, cf. 893, he have dimissorial letters of his own Bishop, if he is ordained not by his own Bishop but by another, when a just cause stands. Trent, sess. 14, C. 1, 2, de Ref.; L. 787, 789. Exempt Regulars must have dimissorials from their Prelates, namely Generals or Provincials. For by these letters the Bishop or Prelate, by force of his jurisdiction, deputes or asks another to confer orders on his subject. L. 788; E. M.

Poles cannot be ordained in Italy without authentic testimonial letters of their own Ordinary; and they cannot be recommended to Bishops of North America without permission of the S. C. de Prop. Fide. S. C. de Prop. Fide, May 2, 1898.

There is required 6. an examination of suitable knowledge, according to the order which is received. The Bishop is bound by himself or through others to examine those to be ordained, although he sends them to another Bishop to be ordained, unless from elsewhere he is certain of their suitability. Reg. 31, Iur. in 6; Trent, sess. 6, C. 11, de Ref.; sess. 14, C. 3, de Ref.; sess. 23, C. 3, 7, 12, 14, de Ref.; L. 790, 792. If those to be ordained were sent to a foreign Bishop, if by another Bishop, the one ordaining can examine them again; if by a Regular Prelate, he must examine them again. S. C. C., Jan. 16, 1595; L. 787; Lucidi, n. 75 ff.; Benedict XIV, Not. 23, n. 8. - Cf. here 894.

From Trent, sess. 23, CC. 4, 5, 11, 13, 14, 15, de Ref., for first tonsure it is required that they know the rudiments of faith, likewise reading and writing; for minor orders, that they at least understand the Latin language; for subdiaconate and diaconate, that they be "instructed in letters and in those things which pertain to exercising the order"; for priesthood, that "after diligent examination has preceded, they be approved as suitable for teaching the people those things which it is necessary for all to know for salvation, and for ministering the sacraments." Therefore those to be ordained priests must know those things which pertain to the sacrifice, to the Communion and Viaticum of the faithful, to baptism, and to extreme unction, of which they are ministers. But concerning the sacrament of penance, so much knowledge is not required as in a confessor, but they must at least have some knowledge concerning the more obvious matters for cases of necessity in which they are bound to receive Confessions. L. 791; St. Thomas, 4, dist. 23, q. 1, a. 3, q. 2. Yet the Bishop is not prohibited from requiring greater knowledge from his subjects than is assigned by Trent. L. 792. Those who have professed a Religion of merely contemplative life are to be treated more benignly. L. 791; St. Thomas, loc. cit., ad 1. On the contrary, greater knowledge is required in priests who are to have the care of souls, since "such knowledge is required in him who is to be promoted to orders... more or less, according as his office extends to more or fewer things." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 36, a. 2. Far greater knowledge still is required in Bishops. For "it belongs to the higher priests, namely Bishops, to know even those things which can cause difficulty, and so much the more as they are placed in a higher grade." St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 36, a. 2. As regards the knowledge required in a Bishop, cf. 203. "Those professed both of solemn vows and of simple vows are not to be admitted by local Ordinaries to sacred orders, unless, besides the other things established by law, they present testimonial letters that they have devoted at least one year to sacred theology, if there is question of the subdiaconate; at least two years, if of the diaconate; and as regards the priesthood, at least three years, with the regular course of other studies having first been completed." S. C. EE. et RR., Nov. 4, 1892. Cf. here 894, 909.

Moreover, a fourth year is afterward to be added: the years must be complete, truly academic, and truly scholastic; and a regular course of other studies imports studies duly completed, both philosophical, together with other accessory disciplines, and of humane letters for five years, of which at least four years, besides primary instruction, must be completed before entrance into the novitiate.

Superiors, in testimonial letters, must expressly declare and attest the following: 1. as regards the theological curriculum, that the candidate, from such a year, month, and day, to such a year, month, and day, and in such a school, duly applied himself to the theological studies necessary for the sacred Order to which he is presented, and in the final trial or examination was found suitable; 2. as regards the lower studies to be put before the same curriculum: a) that the same candidate, after the studies of primary instruction were duly completed, completed in full the studies of humane letters in such a school, and for so many academic or scholastic years, having successfully passed the final trial; b) that the aforesaid candidate, after the studies of humane letters were rightly completed, completed in full the philosophical curriculum in such a school, and for so many academic or scholastic years, and successfully passed the final trial. S. C. de Relig., Sept. 7, 1902.

From the Norms of the S. C. EE. et RR. for Italy, no one, although he has the prescribed age, can be promoted to the subdiaconate before he has devoted himself to theology in the third year; to the diaconate before Easter of the fourth year of theological study; and to the priesthood before the end of the same year. Cf. 909. For the effect of sacred ordination, the years of studies must be complete, namely, the course of nine months must have been completed, and the final trial successfully passed. S. C. Cons., March 24, 1911.

Those who are prone to the errors of modernism are to be excluded from sacred orders. The oath is to be taken according to the Motu Proprio Sacrorum Antistitum, and it is enough that it be made before the order of subdiaconate. But the Ordinary, from a necessary or useful cause, can require it also before each of the other orders. S. C. Cons., March 24, 1911.

Pius X, in the Letter to the Italian Bishops, July 28, 1906, says that Bishops must promote, as the Tridentine prescribes, according to the necessity of the dioceses, selecting only those who are truly suitable.

There is required 7. that one be ordained through the due intervals of times. It is more probably lawful to confer first tonsure with some minor order, since first tonsure is not an order; Rome excepted. Lucidi, C. 2, n. 119. Between one minor order and another some time is required, which was not determined by Trent, sess. 23, C. 11, de Ref.; and in this the Bishop can well dispense, if from some cause something else seems expedient to him. From minor orders to the subdiaconate there is required under grave obligation the space of one year, unless necessity or the utility of the Church, in the judgment of the Bishop, demands otherwise. Trent, ibid., of the Church to which the cleric is ascribed. From the subdiaconate to the diaconate the space of a year is also required; nevertheless, for dispensing with this, any reasonable cause suffices, in the judgment of the Bishop. Trent, sess. 23, C. 13. From the diaconate to the priesthood there is required at least the space of a year, unless, on account of the utility and necessity of the Church, something else should seem good to the Bishop. Trent, sess. 23, C. 14. These words the S. C. C. declared are to be understood disjunctively, so that even utility alone is sufficient, in the judgment of the Bishop. But it is much more grave to receive two sacred orders on one and the same day, Trent, sess. 23, C. 13, or minor orders together with the subdiaconate, as is shown by common custom itself. Cf. C. Cum 2, C. Innotuit 3, de Eo qui furtive; L. 775, 780, 789, de Priv. 59; A. S. S., vol. 25, p. 587; E. M. "The remission of intervals, for the causes expressed by the Council, belongs to the ordaining Bishop as regards Regulars receiving orders from him, but not to Regular Superiors. The Bishop himself, nevertheless, concerning the causes for remission, is bound to give credence and deference to the testimony of the Regular Superior." S. C. C., Sept. 12, 1603; Benedict XIV, Inst. 57, n. 1.

Leo XII granted to the Society of Jesus the privilege of receiving orders without any observance of intervals. Brief Plura inter, July 11, 1826. Clement VIII granted to the Congregation of St. John the Evangelist in Lusitania the same dispensation from intervals. Ferraris, v. Interstitia, n. 14-16. Cf. here n. 906.

There is required 8. under grave obligation, that first tonsure be received before minor orders, and the lower order before the higher. C. Tuae, un., de Cler. per salt. ord. But if someone were to receive the episcopate before the priesthood, he would receive even that invalidly. L. 793; Trent, sess. 23, de Ref., C. 11; Pius VI, Bull Auctorem fidei, n. 51.

There is required 9. that one be ordained at the due time. Major orders can be conferred only on the Saturdays of Ember days, on the Saturday before Passion Sunday, and on Holy Saturday; and under grave obligation they are to be conferred within Mass. From a just cause the one ordaining is permitted to defer part of the ordination to the following Sunday, with the fast of Saturday continued by him and by those to be ordained. C. Litteras 13, C. Dilectus 15, de Temp. ord.

Minor orders can be given on any feast of precept, in the present, or before the reduction, if they are conferred on one or two, or even several, provided a general ordination does not seem to be taking place. Pont. Rom.; C. De eo 3, e.t.; S. R. C., March 16, 1833. Minor orders can also be conferred publicly on Wednesday before the Saturday of general ordination, and also on Friday of the general ordination of Ember days, provided there is custom, which Palaus, Salm., Barbosa, with others, testify has already been received. It is fitting to confer them in Mass; and they ought to be conferred before noon, Pont. Rom.; S. R. C., Nov. 12, 1831, Marsor., ad 1, unless there is an immemorial contrary custom. S. C. C., April 13, 1720. The consecration of a Bishop can take place on any Sunday, C. Ordinationes 1, 5, C. Quod die, Dist. 75, and on the birthdays of the Apostles, or, by special indult of the Supreme Pontiff, on other feasts of precept, even suppressed ones; and at the third hour of the day. Pont. Rom.; S. R. C., April 4, 1913. First tonsure can be conferred on any day and hour, even in the evening. "I. Since the Evangelists are equated with the Apostles in liturgical matters, it is asked whether episcopal consecration can take place on the birthdays of St. Luke and St. Mark? II. Whether it can take place on the feast of St. Barnabas the Apostle? III. Whether a special indult of the Supreme Pontiff is required for episcopal consecration to be carried out on festive days within the week a) which are still of precept and therefore are equated with Sundays, b) or also which were formerly of precept, that is, on suppressed feasts? Resp. To I and II: In the negative. To III: In the affirmative to both." S. R. C., April 4, 1913; A. A. S., vol. 5, p. 186.

Regulars can, by license of their prelates, be ordained outside the times by force of the privilege granted to them by Gregory XIII, Clement VIII, Urban VIII, and Benedict XIII. Conc. Rom., t. 5, C. 2; Benedict XIV, Notif. 23, n. 5. Outside the times, namely, on a Sunday or festive day of precept; of precept before the reduction. S. C. C., Jan. 15, 1689; S. R. C., March 16, 1833, Clarom. Cf. Benedict XIV, Const. Impositi nobis, § 12.

The Society of Jesus specifically has in this matter a privilege which Benedict XIV, loc. cit., affirms does not avail for others to whom it was not directly granted: that, without their students being bound to receive orders from the diocesan Bishop, they can be sent to any Catholic Bishop; likewise, that they can receive sacred orders outside the times and without observing the intervals, even on three continuous Sundays or feast days. L. 794, 797; Lugo, Resp. Mor., l. 1, d. 34; Benedict XIV, de Syn., l. 8, c. 11, n. 3-7, Notif. 23; Honorante, Prax. Secr., cap. 12. Cf. vol. 1, n. 275; E. M.

The Premonstratensians also have the privilege that they may be ordained outside the times, and on three festive days even continuous, by any Catholic prelate. Benedict XIII, Jan. 24, 1730.

A Bishop enjoying an indult to confer orders outside the times and without observing the intervals can use it also toward subjects of others who have dimissorial letters from their Ordinaries. S. C. de Sacram., Aug. 13, 1909.

Can Regulars, when they are ordained outside the times, be ordained on any double feast, even if it is not of precept? There are two opinions. The first affirms, because Alexander VI, speaking of those to be initiated through this privilege, said that they could be ordained on three Sundays or doubles. The second opinion denies, because Gregory XIII, speaking of this same privilege, said on Sundays and festive days. St. Alph., 797, says: "This second opinion is safer, and seems more probable; but I do not dare to reject the first, and I say that one must stand by custom, which is the best interpreter of laws." Now custom stands for the second opinion, which is also favored by S. C. C., Jan. 15, 1689. But when the faculty is given of conferring sacred orders on festive days, they can also be conferred on abrogated feasts. S. R. C., Nov. 12, 1831, Marsor., ad 1; March 16, 1833, n. 2705.

But unless there is a special indult that orders may be received on festive days even continuous, orders outside the times are to be conferred on festive days not continuous, but interposed. S. O., March 5, 1712, C. n. 1187.

There is required 10. the due place. From Trent, sess. 23, C. 8, sacred orders are to be conferred in the Cathedral church; or, if they are conferred in another place, in the worthier church of the place, as far as can be done. But from S. C. C., Nov. 20, 1594, if the ordination is not general, the Bishop can have it anywhere, even in his private chapel. Orders, however, cannot be conferred outside the diocese without permission of the Ordinary of the place, and then the Bishop can ordain both subjects of others and his own subjects. Trent, sess. 6, C. 5; L. 798. First tonsure and minor orders can be conferred in any place whatever, Pont. Rom. The consecration of a Bishop, apart from an indult and outside the Roman Curia, is to be celebrated in the church to which the Bishop is promoted, or in the province, if this can conveniently be done. Trent, sess. 23, c. 2, de Ref.

There is required 11. the due age. For first tonsure it is required that the one to be initiated be endowed with the use of reason, and therefore be at least seven years old. Benedict XIV, Const. Inter sollicitas, 1745, § 19. For minor orders no age is assigned in the law; nevertheless they are usually conferred from the seventh to the fourteenth year. Benedict XIV, ibid. For the subdiaconate the twenty-second year is established, for the diaconate the twenty-third year, and for the priesthood the twenty-fifth year. Trent, sess. 23, C. 13, de Ref. But it suffices that the prescribed year has begun. Trent, sess. 24, C. 12, de Ref. For the episcopate the thirtieth year completed is required, and the same is said for the Cardinalate, although by concession of Sixtus V, Const. Postquam, 1586, Cardinal Deacons can be of the age of twenty-two years. For beneficiaries, however, the fourteenth year is required from Trent, sess. 23, C. 6, de Ref. But, if the benefice is one with cure, the twenty-fifth year is required, at least begun. Trent, sess. 24, C. 12. For a canonry in Cathedrals the twenty-second year begun is required. Trent, sess. 22, C. 4. But for a penitentiary the fortieth year is required. Trent, sess. 24, C. 8, de Ref. In collegiate churches, however, the fourteenth year suffices, since nothing has been established for this in the law. "It is certain, moreover, that Bishops can in no way dispense in age." L. 800. L. 783, 799, 800; St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 39, a. 2; E. M.

Dispensation is given by the Supreme Pontiff. For the subdiaconate it is never dispensed; rarely for the diaconate; frequently for the priesthood, up to one year and a half and some days.

From the Norms of the S. C. EE. et RR., Jan. 18, 1908, for Italy, first tonsure is conferred on pupils who attend the propaedeutic course, minor orders on those who are in the first two years of theology, the subdiaconate on those who have completed the third year of theology, although they have the age prescribed by the Council of Trent, the diaconate not before Easter of the fourth year of theology, the priesthood not before the end of the same fourth year. Cf. here n. 903.

There is required 12. that one exercise the order previously received in the church to which he has been ascribed, according to Trent, sess. 23, C. 11, 13, 14, de Ref. But Salm., C. 4, n. 74, think this is not of grave precept, since the words of the Council are more consultative than preceptive. L. 801.

There is required 13. according as the Pontifical prescribes, that those to be ordained receive the Eucharist; but this is not under mortal sin, as La-Croix says, 1225. Indeed, those to be initiated to minor orders are not bound to communicate even under light obligation. Priests, however, are more truly bound to communicate under mortal sin, since they truly celebrate with the Bishop. St. Thomas, III, q. 32, a. 2; L. 301.

There is required 14. as regards receiving sacred orders, a title of honest support, Trent, sess. 21, C. 2; otherwise the Bishop ordaining or granting dimissorials is himself bound to support the one ordained in sacred orders until that man has a title. C. Cum secundum, de Praeb.; C. Recepimus, de Aetate et qualit. ordin. The ordinary, ecclesiastical title of support can be either poverty or a benefice sufficient for support, according to the synodal assessment of his diocese. By the title of poverty only solemnly professed Regulars are ordained, but not novices. St. Pius V, Const. Romanus Pontifex. For when the solemn vow of poverty has been emitted, there is a certain hope of support from the goods of the community. Leo XIII, Bull Conditae, § VI. The Passionists are excepted. The religious of the Society of Jesus are excepted, who can be ordained after simple vows; and if afterward they are dismissed from religion, the Society is by no means bound to support them. As regards the title of benefice, it is required that the benefice already be possessed peacefully. In the name of a benefice someone can also be ordained under the title of perpetual coadjutorship, or of daily distributions, or of chaplaincy, or of pension, or of perpetual prestimony; but Mass stipends by no means suffice for a title, since they are uncertain. "But he cannot resign that benefice unless mention is made that he was promoted under the title of that benefice; nor is that resignation to be admitted unless it is established that he can live suitably from elsewhere." Trent, sess. 21, C. 3, de Ref.

Besides the ecclesiastical title of benefice and of poverty, there is also the patrimonial title, which is extraordinary, namely, of patrimony or pension. As regards the title of patrimony, not all can be ordained under this title, but only those whom the Bishop judges are to be assumed for the necessity or convenience of his churches. Trent, sess. 21, C. 2, de Ref. Cf. 904. The patrimony must be constituted in legal form, upon a certain and immovable thing, and of its nature fruitful, or quasi-immovable, as in public bonds, S. C. C., June 29, 1704, peacefully possessed, and not burdened by debt or mortgage. By pension, however, a perpetual revenue suffices, even one redeemable, provided that, if it is redeemed, it is applied to the purchase of another revenue or of lands. It also suffices if someone, from his revenues, donates by instrument so many annual gold coins as are sufficient for support.

It suffices that some Count or Community obligate its goods for supporting the cleric. The title of one's own industry does not suffice. Patrimony cannot be renounced without the Bishop's permission, even after the attainment of a benefice sufficient for support. The Bishop's permission, however, suffices if someone either obtains a sufficient ecclesiastical benefice, or from elsewhere has that from which he can live. Trent, loc. cit.; L. 813-824; Benedict XIV, Notif. 26.

There are other extraordinary titles, for which a particular Indult of the Apostolic See is needed. As regards Regulars, there is the title of the common table, namely, for those Regulars who either pronounce no vows, or only simple vows. For secular clerics there is also the title of service of the church, and the title of mission. Collect. S. C. de P. F., n. 1179 ff.; E. M., Suppl. alter., p. 4 ff. They cannot depart from the church and from the mission, and they are supported by the alms of the faithful.

The alumni of the American College of Louvain, clerics of the United States of North America, who by force of the Pontifical Indult of Jan. 2, 1909, are promoted to sacred orders under the title of service of the church, are bound to issue a written promise that they will serve their own diocese faithfully. S. C. Cons., July 29, 1909.

A title can indeed be lost, but then another must absolutely be substituted for the lost title. And Regulars of solemn or simple vows constituted in sacred orders, expelled or dismissed, remain perpetually suspended, "until provision is made for them in another way by the Holy See; and, moreover, they have found a benevolent Bishop to receive them, and have provided for themselves an ecclesiastical patrimony." But those who have voluntarily obtained dismissal, or have been dispensed from simple vows, or are free from them because the time of temporary vows has elapsed, "are not to leave the cloister until they have found a benevolent Bishop to receive them, and have provided for themselves an ecclesiastical patrimony; otherwise they remain suspended from the exercise of the orders received." Decree Auctis admodum, S. C. EE. et RR., Nov. 4, 1892. E. M.

To dispense from the title of sacred ordination belongs to the S. C. C. S. C. Cons., Feb. 27, 1909.

“Chapter 1. On the Institution of the Priesthood of the New Law.—Sacrifice and priesthood are so joined together by the ordinance of God that both have existed in every law. Since, therefore, in the New Testament the Catholic Church has received from the institution of the Lord the holy visible Sacrifice of the Eucharist, it must also be confessed that in it there is a new, visible, and external priesthood into which the old has been translated. Sacred Scripture shows, and the tradition of the Catholic Church has always taught, that this priesthood was instituted by the same Lord our Savior, and that to the Apostles and their successors in the priesthood was handed down the power of consecrating, offering, and administering His Body and Blood, and also of remitting and retaining sins.

“Chapter 2. On the Seven Orders.—But since the ministry of so holy a priesthood is a divine thing, it was fitting, so that it might be exercised more worthily and with greater veneration, that in the most orderly arrangement of the Church there should be several and diverse orders of ministers who would serve the priesthood by virtue of their office, so distributed that those already marked with the clerical tonsure would ascend through the minor to the major orders. For Sacred Scripture makes open mention not only of priests but also of deacons, and teaches in the gravest words the things which are especially to be attended to in their ordination. And from the very beginning of the Church the names of the following Orders, and the proper ministries of each of them—namely, subdeacon, acolyte, exorcist, lector, and porter—are known to have been in use, although not in equal degree. For the subdiaconate is numbered among the major orders by the Fathers and sacred Councils, in which we also read very frequently of the other inferior orders.

“Chapter 3. That Holy Orders Is Truly a Sacrament.—Since it is clear from the testimony of Scripture, Apostolic tradition, and the unanimous consent of the Fathers that grace is conferred through sacred ordination, which is performed by words and outward signs, no one ought to doubt that Holy Orders is truly and properly one of the seven sacraments of holy Church. For the Apostle says: ‘I admonish you to stir up the grace of God which is in you through the imposition of my hands; for God has not given us the spirit of fear, but of power and love and sobriety.’

“Chapter 4. On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy and Ordination.—But since in the Sacrament of Holy Orders, as also in Baptism and Confirmation, a character is imprinted which can neither be effaced nor taken away, the holy Synod rightly condemns the opinion of those who assert that the priests of the New Testament have only a temporary power, and that those once rightly ordained can again be made laymen if they do not exercise the ministry of the word of God. But if anyone affirms that all Christians indiscriminately are priests of the New Testament, or that all are endowed with equal spiritual power among themselves, he appears to do nothing other than confound the ecclesiastical hierarchy, which is ‘as an army set in array,’ just as if, contrary to the doctrine of blessed Paul, all were apostles, all prophets, all evangelists, all pastors, all teachers. Therefore, the sacred and holy Synod declares that, besides the other ecclesiastical grades, the bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the Apostles, belong principally to this hierarchical order; that they have been placed, as the same Apostle says, by the Holy Spirit to govern the Church of God; and that they are superior to priests and can confer the Sacrament of Confirmation, ordain the ministers of the Church, and perform many other things, of whose functions the others of inferior order have no power. The sacred and holy Synod teaches, moreover, that in the ordination of bishops, priests, and the other orders, neither the consent nor the authority of the people or of any secular power or magistrate is so required that without it the ordination is invalid. Rather, it decrees that those who, called and instituted only by the people or by a secular power and magistrate, ascend to exercise these ministries, and those who take them upon themselves by their own temerity, are all to be regarded not as ministers of the Church but as thieves and robbers who have not entered by the door. These are the things which it has seemed good to the sacred Synod to teach the faithful of Christ in general concerning the Sacrament of Holy Orders. But it has determined to condemn the contrary doctrines by certain and proper canons, in the manner which follows, so that all, with the aid of Christ, using the rule of faith, may more easily recognize and retain Catholic truth amid the darkness of so many errors.

“Canon 1. If anyone shall say that in the New Testament there is no visible and external priesthood, or that there is no power of consecrating and offering the true Body and Blood of the Lord and of remitting and retaining sins, but only an office and bare ministry of preaching the Gospel; or that those who do not preach are not priests at all: let him be anathema.

“Canon 2. If anyone shall say that, besides the priesthood, there are not in the Catholic Church other orders, both major and minor, through which, as by certain steps, one advances toward the priesthood: let him be anathema.

“Canon 3. If anyone shall say that Holy Orders, or sacred ordination, is not truly and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord; or that it is a certain human invention devised by men unskilled in ecclesiastical affairs; or that it is only a certain rite of choosing ministers of the word of God and of the sacraments: let him be anathema.

“Canon 4. If anyone shall say that through sacred ordination the Holy Spirit is not given, and that therefore the bishops say in vain, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit’; or that through it a character is not imprinted; or that one who has once been a priest can become a layman again: let him be anathema.

“Canon 5. If anyone shall say that the sacred anointing which the Church uses in holy ordination is not only not required, but is to be contemned and is pernicious; and likewise the other ceremonies of Holy Orders: let him be anathema.

“Canon 6. If anyone shall say that in the Catholic Church there is no hierarchy instituted by divine ordinance, which consists of bishops, priests, and ministers: let him be anathema.

“Canon 7. If anyone shall say that bishops are not superior to priests; or that they do not have the power of confirming and ordaining; or that the power which they have is common to them with priests; or that orders conferred by them without the consent or calling of the people or of the secular power are invalid; or that those who have neither been rightly ordained nor sent by ecclesiastical and canonical authority, but come from elsewhere, are lawful ministers of the word and of the sacraments: let him be anathema.

“Canon 8. If anyone shall say that bishops who are assumed by authority of the Roman Pontiff are not lawful and true bishops, but a human invention: let him be anathema.”

“Canon 2. When a bishop is ordained, let two bishops place and hold the book of the Gospels over his head and neck; and while one pours the blessing over him, let all the remaining bishops who are present touch his head with their hands.

“Canon 3. When a priest is ordained, while the bishop blesses him and holds his hand over his head, let all the priests who are present also hold their hands beside the hand of the bishop over his head.

“Canon 4. When a deacon is ordained, let the bishop alone who blesses him place his hand over his head, because he is consecrated not to the priesthood but to the ministry.

“Canon 5. When a subdeacon is ordained, since he does not receive the imposition of the hand, let him receive an empty paten and an empty chalice from the hand of the bishop. But from the hand of the archdeacon let him receive a cruet with water, a linen cloth, and a hand towel.

“Canon 6. When an acolyte is ordained, let him indeed be taught by the bishop how he ought to conduct himself in his office. But let him receive from the archdeacon a candlestick with a candle, so that he may know that he is assigned to lighting the lamps of the church; “and let him also receive an empty cruet for supplying wine for the Eucharist of the Blood of Christ.

“Canon 7. When an exorcist is ordained, he receives from the hand of the bishop a book in which the exorcisms are written, the bishop saying to him: ‘Receive and commit these to memory, and have the power of imposing hands upon one possessed, whether baptized or a catechumen.’

“Canon 8. When a lector is ordained, let the bishop address the people concerning him, indicating his faith, life, and character. After this, while the people look on, let him hand him the book from which he is to read, saying to him: ‘Receive and be a reader of the word of God, destined, if you fulfill your office faithfully and profitably, to have a portion with those who have ministered the word of God.’

“Canon 9. When a porter is ordained, after he has been instructed by the archdeacon how he ought to conduct himself in the house of God, at the direction of the archdeacon let the bishop hand him the keys of the church from the altar, saying: ‘Act in such a way as one who will render an account to God for those things which are unlocked by these keys.’

“Canon 10. A psalmist, that is, a cantor, can, without the knowledge of the bishop and by the command of a priest alone, undertake the office of singing, the priest saying to him: ‘See that what you sing with your mouth you believe in your heart, and what you believe in your heart you prove by your works.’”

Alexander VII, Brief Onerosa Pastoralis, 4 February 1664, confers the faculty of consecrating a bishop without the assistance of two bishops. Clement X grants the same in the Brief Personam tuam, 30 March 1675.

“According to the Roman Pontifical, in episcopal consecration, ‘the Consecrator, having received the book of the Gospels, with the assisting bishops helping him, places it open, saying nothing, upon the neck and shoulders of the elect.’ This rite, however, must be performed before the imposition of the bishops’ hands and the pronouncement of the words, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit,’ so that when the bishops impose hands and pronounce the cited words, the book of the Gospels is already upon the shoulders of the elect.

“But in the consecration of Titius, this rite of placing the book of the Gospels upon the shoulders of the elect was performed later, namely, after the cantors began the hymn Veni Creator, but before the anointing of the head. For only then, when the master of ceremonies noticed the defect, did the consecrating bishop place the open book of the Gospels upon the shoulders of the elect and proceed to the remaining things, namely, the anointing of the head, etc. Hence, when the three bishops imposed hands, saying, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit,’ the book of the Gospels was not upon the shoulders of the elect.—Response. Let him be at peace.” Holy Office, 30 July 1901; M. E., vol. 13, p. 486.

“The Sacred Congregation ... does not intend to call into doubt the validity of a sacred ordination because in it the ordaining bishop did not keep his hands extended also during the interval which comes between the first and second imposition of hands.” Sacred Congregation of Rites, 14 June 1873, Syren.

“The doubt proposed by you concerning the validity of ordinations conferred upon certain priests by the bishop of that diocese, with his hands no longer extended over their heads—namely, the second imposition of hands was not entirely omitted, but merely was not continued—while he pronounced the prayer Let us pray ..., as prescribed in the Roman Ritual, was recalled for examination by the Most Eminent Fathers, together with me, the Inquisitors General; as regards the ordinations already performed in the aforesaid manner, they decreed: ‘They are to be left undisturbed.’” Holy Office, 12 September 1877. “When the priest N. N. was ordained a priest, the bishop did not hold his hand raised over the ordinands while he said the words Let us pray, dearest brethren, etc.; but when he was warned of this he raised it and held it raised for some time. He did this, however, when the said prayer had already been completed, and it is not known whether, during the time he held his hand raised, he repeated the sacramental words in a low voice.—Response. Let him be at peace.” Holy Office, 14 December 1898.

“In the ordination of priests, Bishop N. N. omitted the extension of his right hand over the head of the ordinands when he began the prayer Let us pray, dearest brethren, etc., as contained in the Pontifical.

“When reminded by the assisting subdeacon, he afterwards extended his hand. The petitioner bishop does not know, however, whether he began the aforesaid prayer anew or merely completed the prayer already begun.

“It seems probable to him that he began the prayer anew, because the petitioner declares himself to be very anxious; nevertheless, the assisting deacon and subdeacon cannot give certain testimony about this matter.—Response. Let him be at peace.” Holy Office, 30 November 1898.

“In the first months of my episcopal ministry, I held the first ordination of four priests of my diocese. During the sacred rite, after making with the presbyterate the first imposition of hands upon those being ordained to the priesthood, I continued the prayer Let us pray, dearest brethren, without further extending my right hand, as is prescribed, and this through inadvertence. I humbly ask for a declaration whether I must repeat the ordination conditionally, or whether it is to be left undisturbed.

“Response. If, after physically touching the heads of the ordinands, the bishop had his hand extended over the ordinands, at least immediately before the recitation of Let us pray, etc., the ordination is certainly valid, as in the Decree of the Holy Office of Wednesday, 12 September 1877. But if that extension of the hand was not made even immediately before the recitation of Let us pray, etc., the ordination is to be repeated secretly and conditionally, on any day, after consultation with His Holiness, so that, as a precaution, he may also supply from the treasury of the Church for the Masses celebrated up to the present.” Holy Office, 30 November 1898.

“The Most Illustrious Bishop N., in the priestly ordination of Titius and Caius, performed all the rites, both essential and accidental, altogether correctly, with perhaps one exception. For none of those present, nor the ordaining bishop himself, remembers whether he performed the second imposition of hands, namely, that which accompanies the words Let us pray, dearest brethren, etc., and which is to be performed together with all the priests assisting at the same time. One of the aforesaid priests certainly did this, but the others, I know not by what circumstance, certainly omitted it; and very probably—indeed almost certainly—the bishop himself did also; he omitted, namely, the second imposition of the hand altogether. It is established, however, that the bishop performed the first imposition, namely, by touching the head of each ordinand, and afterwards pronounced the words Let us pray, dearest brethren and duly performed all the other things. Titius and Caius appear to have no doubt concerning the validity of their ordination; but their Superior is troubled by scruples in a matter of such importance, and humbly asks: 1. Is the ordination of Titius and Caius to be regarded as valid, and is anything to be supplied?—2. If it is to be repeated, whether the whole or only a part; whether by the same bishop or by any Catholic bishop; whether publicly or secretly?

“Response. The Sacred Penitentiary, having maturely considered the things set forth, first declares that the ordination thus received by each petitioner is to be repeated conditionally and secretly. Therefore, the same Sacred Penitentiary grants to you, the confessor beloved in Christ respectively chosen by the petitioners, the faculty, if matters are thus, after hearing their sacramental confessions, by Apostolic authority on this occasion to absolve the petitioners in the customary form of the Church from censures and ecclesiastical penalties, if they incurred any on account of the foregoing, and from the faults committed thereby; and mercifully, by the same Apostolic authority, to dispense them from irregularity, if they contracted any from violation of the said censures and from the foregoing, so that, notwithstanding that and the other things aforesaid, they may lawfully minister in their orders, even in the ministry of the altar, but only after they have received anew the sacred order of the priesthood from any Catholic prelate by virtue of the Letters of the annexed Brief, and not otherwise; and kindly, by express Apostolic authority, to remit to them the Masses hitherto celebrated in this manner, the Sacred Penitentiary itself supplying their defect from the treasury of the Church. A suitable salutary penance is to be enjoined upon them, as also that in the meantime they abstain from celebrating until the ordination has been repeated as above, and the other things required by law are to be enjoined. For the forum of conscience and in sacramental confession only. Given at Rome in the Sacred Penitentiary, 31 March 1888.”

“After the ordaining bishop had imposed both hands upon each of the ordinands, through an involuntary distraction he did not then extend his right hand over all the ordinands—or at most extended it somewhat for a moment, as one of those ordained affirmed he had seen, though he now does not remember with certainty. Rather, he immediately arranged the Pontifical book with his right hand; and while reciting the exhortation Let us pray, brethren, etc., he held the same book with both hands, so that, although materially he had his arms and hands extended, he in no way had the appearance of a man extending his right hand over them. Several noticed this defect, yet no one warned the bishop about it.—Response. Since it is not established that the hands were extended even for a moment, the sacred ordination is to be repeated privately and conditionally, even outside the appointed times; and His Holiness is to be consulted, that he may deign to heal and supply from the treasury of the Church for the acts perhaps invalidly performed, and especially for the defect of the Masses, all things whatsoever to the contrary notwithstanding.” Holy Office, 19 July 1899.

“In the ordination of the priest B., through mere forgetfulness, the imposition of hands by the assisting priests was omitted. Moreover, the bishop does not remember—and neither do the others present—whether he held his hands raised over the head of the ordinand during the second imposition, when the prayer Let us pray, dearest brethren, etc., was recited.—Response. Let the priest B. be ordained secretly and conditionally on any day, even a ferial day, after the faculty has been obtained from His Holiness.” Holy Office, 17 March 1897.

“1. In the ordination of a priest, must both the Pontiff and the priests who are present first impose both hands upon the head of each ordinand and, after this imposition has been completed by all, then raise their right hands and hold them extended over the ordinands while the Pontiff, standing with the miter, alone says the prayer, as some explain the prescription of the Roman Pontifical concerning this matter? Or rather, as is done at Rome in the Lateran Archbasilica, immediately after the imposition of both hands, do both the Pontiff and the priests present at once extend their right hands and hold them thus extended until the bishop “has completed the prayer?—2. In giving Communion to the newly ordained priests, must the formula The Body, etc., be employed, or rather must it be omitted?—Response. To the first: Negative to the first part; affirmative to the second.—To the second: As in the preceding, that is, negative to the first part; affirmative to the second.” Sacred Congregation of Rites, 31 August 1872, Siren.

“When a priest and a deacon are ordained, they receive the imposition of hands with physical contact, according to the rite introduced by the Apostles. But if this has been omitted, the ordination is not to be repeated in any respect; rather, at the appointed time for conferring orders of this kind, what was omitted through error is cautiously to be supplied. The suspension of the hands, however, ought to be made when the prayer is poured forth over the head of the ordinand.” Chapter Presbyter, final chapter, On Sacraments Not to Be Repeated.

“In the ordination of a priest, the first imposition of hands was performed, but without physical contact upon the head of the ordinand by the bishop and the assisting priests.—Response. The ordination is to be repeated in its entirety, conditionally and secretly, on any day, after consultation with His Holiness, so that, insofar as there is need, he may supply from the treasury of the Church for the Masses celebrated.” Holy Office, 4 July 1900.

“According to canon law, in the ordination of a priest and a deacon, the imposition of hands must be made with physical contact. If this had been omitted, that which had been omitted through error would have to be cautiously supplied. But it is doubted: 1. If the imposition of hands was made without physical contact, must the imposition of hands with physical contact be supplied?—2. Insofar as the response is affirmative, would public rumor and the bad reputation which would thereby arise for the ordaining bishop, especially in these regions, be sufficient reason for abstaining from a repeated imposition of hands with physical contact?—3. If physical contact must be supplied, must the words which are pronounced by the bishop together with the imposition of hands also be repeated, especially in the ordination of a deacon, in which the words Receive the Holy Spirit, etc., seem to many to be the form of the sacrament?—4. Can that physical contact be supplied privately when orders of this kind are not being conferred?—Response. To the first: Affirmative.—To the second: Negative.—To the third: Affirmative.—To the fourth: Affirmative, and secretly in the course of Mass, and even outside the times of a general ordination.” Holy Office, 19 August 1851, Apostolic Vicariate of Western Cochinchina.

“In the ordination of 9 June 1900, in which Titius was promoted to the priesthood, both the first and the second imposition of hands were omitted by the ordaining bishop and the assisting priests, although the prayer Let us pray, dearest brethren, etc., had been recited. Then, when the Communicantes of the Canon of the Mass was reached, the master of ceremonies noticed the omission; and the bishop, having been advised of it, judged it opportune to defer the aforesaid impositions until after Communion. Then, precisely before the words of the Pontifical I shall no longer call you servants, etc., both impositions of hands were supplied by the ordaining bishop and by the assisting priests, while at the same time the whole and only the prayer Let us pray, dearest brethren, etc., was repeated. After this, the rite was resumed at the words I shall no longer call you servants and continued to the end.—Response. The ordination is to be repeated in its entirety, conditionally and secretly, on any day, after consultation with His Holiness, so that, insofar as there is need, he may supply from the treasury of the Church for the Masses celebrated in the case.” Holy Office, 22 August 1900.

1. "Titius, when he approached to receive the priesthood, was prohibited by the master of ceremonies, little skilled in his office, from touching the chalice and paten while the bishop was pronouncing those words of the form: Receive power, etc.; but immediately after the whole form had been pronounced, he was ordered to touch. Afterward he doubted about the value and security of his ordination, and whether he could or ought to be ordained again under condition.

"I said in the aforesaid Case that Titius could rest in the first ordination without any repetition, even conditional; nevertheless he would not sin if, for the greater quiet of his soul, he were ordained again under condition, which also the bishop could licitly do in his favor ... Because the opinion teaching that the first ordination is not valid, although it has on its side some ancient authors, nevertheless is now so deserted that it seems antiquated and to lack every probability ... yet it seems probable, at least through extrinsic principles, that it can be repeated under condition. For Cajetan, Scotus, Richardus, Navarrus, and Zambranus denied the value of the first ordination." Thus Lugo, Resp. Mor., l. 1, d. 33, nn. 3, 5.

But if the ordination in the Case is held as certainly valid, and therefore safely not to be repeated, it is not understood how someone can at the same time hold some opinion as destitute of every intrinsic probability, and yet hold it as probable by extrinsic probability, so that nevertheless, in the Case, ordination can licitly be repeated. "For neither," as Lugo himself has in the place cited, n. 4, "does it suffice for a moral doubt of ordination that some authors have said it is not valid, if nevertheless it is established that they said this without sufficient foundation." This indeed the same Lugo demonstrates in this way, asserting at the same time that in fact the ordination of Titius had been held as valid, and that no bishop could be induced to repeat it. "The common opinion of theologians," he says in the place cited, n. 1, "does not require mathematical simultaneity, but moral simultaneity between the matter and form of the sacrament ... Nor does the contrary opinion seem to have probability, since there is not a sufficient foundation for requiring that mathematical simultaneity; indeed, in the conferral of the diaconate and subdiaconate this is not in fact observed, but the form having been pronounced by the bishop in the plural number for all those to be ordained, each one successively touches the book or instruments. Why therefore could the same not be done in the conferral of the priesthood, so that the bishop would say to all: Receive power, etc., and afterward each would successively touch the matter; or, if perhaps the number of those to be ordained were large, the bishop would repeat the same form three or four times with interrupted delays, lest the pronouncement of the form be too distant from the contact of the matter? I know that sometime some bishop did this thus, and, if I remember well, Fr. Luisius ab Alcazar narrated to me that he had in fact been ordained priest in this way, nor could the bishop be brought to repeat the form under condition and present the matter, constantly asserting that this was demanded without any foundation at all. Wherefore, in the Case brought to us, the same would have to be said a fortiori, in which a much greater simultaneity intervened, and therefore many bishops, asked by the same Titius to ordain him again under condition, constantly refused this, not daring, on account of that very slight scruple, to repeat sacred ordination even under condition."

Nor likewise is it understood what Lugo also has in nn. 3 and 5 to demonstrate his assertion, namely that it can well be that the opinion denying the value of the ordination is not probable, and at the same time that the opinion affirming the obligation of repetition is probable: "for they are diverse questions." They are indeed diverse questions, but so connected that if the value of the ordination is truly morally certain, as in the Case, then consequently the ordination cannot be repeated; for the obligation, morally certain, of not repeating the ordination follows from its morally certain value. Baptism itself cannot be repeated unless its value is positively doubtful. I. M. 888.

2. Adulphus is afflicted with great anxiety, because in his priestly ordination with one hand indeed he touched the chalice and paten with the host, but with the other hand he also touched the paten with the host, but the chalice only with the nail of the middle finger. Wherefore he urgently asks that he be ordained again, at least under condition.

It is asked: What is to be said to the Case?

R. Adulphus ought to be altogether at peace, and neither ought nor can he be ordained again, even under condition. For he was altogether validly ordained, since the touch of the paten and chalice was certainly not lacking, and indeed such as is prescribed by the Roman Pontifical. Just as he who touches with a finger truly touches with the hand, so also he who touches with a nail truly touches with the finger; and if he touches with the nail, he certainly touches. Besides, he who, through the medium of a glove, struck another with the hand and assaulted him with blows, would certainly touch him. Therefore a fortiori he truly touches who touches through the medium of the nail. Moreover, since Adulphus with one hand perfectly touched the instruments, with the other perfectly touched the host with the paten, and has a scruple only with regard to the touch, through the medium of the nail, of the chalice with the other hand, there can be no doubt about his valid ordination. Let La-Croix, n. 2155, be heard: "If the ordinand touches the matter with only one hand, or only one finger, Sanchez, etc., rightly teach that this suffices for the value of the ordination, because he who touches with one hand is said simply to touch, indeed even if with the nail alone of the hand, as Lugo and Gobat have; for, if with the nail alone you were to tear the face of another, certainly you would be said to have touched him. A further reason is that we ought not to say that something is required for the essence of the sacrament, when without it the form of the sacrament is preserved; and the authority of Scripture or of the Church does not compel us to require such a thing." St. Alphonsus 743 has the same: "Escobar rightly says that it suffices for validity that the matter be touched with one hand. And likewise Escobar, etc., with the common opinion, rightly judge that mediate touch suffices, namely if the chalice, paten, or book is touched through some veil or glove; for he who touches in this way is said in the sense of all truly to touch." Cf. Coll. S. C. de P. F., n. 1205.

3. 1.º "Fr. N. N., positively doubting whether in his ordination he physically touched the paten, although he is certain that he touched the host, asked for his own quiet: what must be done in this Case?

R. Let him acquiesce. S. O., July 2, 1892; Collect. S. C. de P. F., n. 2178.

2.º "Caius, a priest ... touched only the paten together with the host placed upon the chalice, but not the chalice, although he strove to reach it with his finger.

R. Let the petitioner acquiesce." S. O., March 17, 1897.

3.º "Gaspar, a priest ... there being four or five ordinands, and all crowding to touch the instruments, remembers that he had first touched them, but nevertheless in the act in which the formula was being pronounced, although he hurried to touch them again, he did not succeed in doing it, having been impeded by the hands of the others.

R. Let the petitioner acquiesce." S. O., March 17, 1897.

4.º "Sempronius ... not having used the index and middle fingers in touching the instruments, but the index fingers and thumbs, first touched the cup of the chalice; but then, when the bishop was pronouncing the formula, touched only the paten with the host placed upon the chalice.

R. Let the petitioner acquiesce." S. O., March 17, 1897.

5.º "Those ordained to the orders of subdiaconate, diaconate, and priesthood by Bishop A., the matter of the said orders not having been presented by him, are to be ordained again under condition and singly to the said orders, the form prescribed in the Roman Pontifical being observed." S. O., Aug. 1, 1697; M. E., vol. 9, part 2, p. 217. - E. M. 884 ff.

4. "A certain bishop, when he wished to confer the order of diaconate on a certain subdeacon, in carrying out his ordination indeed suspended his right hand, and at a very small distance, over his head, without nevertheless touching the aforesaid head bodily. Not very long afterward he promoted the same cleric to the priestly order. - Whether, to repair the defect of the aforesaid ordination, the whole ordination of the diaconate must be repeated under condition in that priest?

R. Affirmatively." S. O., Jan. 20, 1875; M. E., place cited, p. 231.

5. In the priestly ordination of Pancratius, the first imposition of hands by the bishop and by the other assisting priests was omitted. Indeed, the bishop and the other priests, while the Oremus, fratres carissimi, etc., was being recited by the bishop, all omitted the extension of the right hand over the ordinand. Immediately when the bishop completed the aforesaid prayer, having been admonished about the omission of the imposition of the hand, he supplied it by imposing hands upon his head. - Was the ordination of Pancratius valid?

R. The aforesaid ordination can be called into doubt from the fact that the second imposition of the hand, or extension, was omitted, which also according to the common opinion is held as necessary for ordination. Wherefore, although the first imposition of hands was validly supplied, because, made immediately after the form, it was now morally joined with it, nevertheless it alone does not suffice. Yet, considering the common doctrine of theologians concerning the first and the second imposition of hands, the ordination is more truly valid in the Case. For therefore the first and second imposition of hands are commonly required, because in the first there is had bodily touch, which is lacking in the second, and in the second there is had the form, which is lacking in the first. Wherefore the second imposition of the hand is only the continuation of the first, namely for having the moral union of the first imposition of the hand with the form; hence in the concrete there is only one continued imposition of hands. If therefore immediately after the form the imposition of hands was supplied by bodily touch, the ordination must be called valid. I. M. 883; M. E., vol. 12, p. 375. Immediately after the form. For if, for example, the aforesaid imposition of hands were supplied after the handing over of the instruments and when the Canon of the Mass had already begun, the ordination would have to be repeated entirely under condition. S. O., Aug. 22, 1900; A. S. S., vol. 33, p. 224 ff.

1. "In the year 1790 a certain young Frenchman, born from the diocese of Nantes, entered Tonkin; he seems suitable to receive orders and intends to devote himself to the Tonkin Mission. But in doubt whether dimissorial letters can be obtained from the bishop of his native diocese, it is asked whether it is not lawful for apostolic vicars to ordain, without dimissorial letters, those whose Ordinaries are so distant that recourse to them is most difficult, especially after the ordinands of whom there is question have dwelt for at least three years under the jurisdiction of the apostolic vicars and have been supported at their expense, as of their family?

R. It is not lawful, but it can be permitted to the apostolic vicar of Tonkin, in the Case of the young Frenchman from the diocese of Nantes, considering the circumstances, to enroll him in the clerical militia and promote him to orders without the dimissorial letters of his Ordinary, if no impediment exists and insofar as he is found suitable. - The Most Holy approved." S. C. de P. F., Jan. 18, 1793; A. S. S., vol. 25, p. 577.

2. Benedictus, a monk of the Benedictine Congregation, received first tonsure and minor orders from the abbot of his monastery. But Benedictus is greatly afflicted, doubting about the validity of such ordination, since the abbot of the monastery, although he was legitimately elected in chapter, nevertheless did not receive the blessing.

It is asked: What is to be said to the Case?

R. Abbots indeed can confer first tonsure and minor orders on their regular subjects, as is established from the Council of Trent, sess. 23, c. 10, de R. But, "so that they can use this power, they must not only be constituted in the order of priesthood, but they must besides obtain the blessing from the bishop, unless perhaps the bishop, being requested a third time with humility and devotion, as is fitting, should refuse to bless them, according to the text in c. Statuimus, de Suppl. neglig. praelator., or unless they are supported by some other peculiar privilege, by which power is made for them, even without receiving the office of blessing, to perform all things which belong to abbots, in some way consecrated by the blessing of the bishop."

Thus Benedict XIV, de Syn., l. 2, c. 11, n. 9. Therefore, if the abbot of the monastery in the Case did not receive the blessing because the bishop, having been requested, refused to give it, Benedictus was surely validly initiated by first tonsure and minor orders, as is had from the aforesaid c. 1, de Suppl. neglig. praelat. Nor indeed "can it be doubted that the Pope can concede this, because that blessing does not imprint character, nor is it from the institution of Christ so that it should be considered necessary for this concession; therefore, just as the Pope can commit Confirmation to a simple priest without some previous blessing, so also ordination; and thus for that Case in fact he committed it." Suarez, de Relig., tom. 4, l. 2, c. 29, n. 16. Indeed for that Case it is said in the aforesaid Decretal that it is lawful for abbots to bless their own monks and to exercise other things which pertain to an office of this sort. But if the abbot of the monastery in the Case did not receive the blessing because he omitted to ask for it, or because he is a triennial abbot, who is not blessed since he is not perpetual, and the blessing is, as it were, perpetual and indelible, then the difficulty is greater. "Some," says Suarez in the place cited, n. 17, "affirm this from privileges conceded to the Cistercian family in Spain." But the same Suarez affirms it, as is to be seen both in this n. 17 and in n. 25 and n. 28. And as is clearly affirmed in the aforesaid nn. 17 and 25, and deduced from n. 28, Suarez affirms this generally not only about Cistercian abbots, but about all abbots who, namely, possess the true office and dignity of abbot. Mention of the same privileges is also had apud Diana, coordinated ed., tom. 2, tr. 5, resol. 81. But Benedict XIV denies it, as clearly appears from the text cited above and from Quaest. Canon. 373, unless namely there is a special privilege. Decisions of the S. C. C. surely seem to require blessing or privilege. For the S. C. C. constantly affirms that abbots of this sort can indeed confer first tonsure and minor orders on their regular subjects if they are solemnly blessed and priests; or those to whom a privilege has been conceded by the Apostolic See that they can do all things which blessed abbots can do. Cf. Benedict XIV, Quaest. Can., cited. Wherefore it must be concluded that Benedictus illicitly and invalidly received first tonsure and minor orders, if the abbot of the monastery did not have the aforesaid privilege.

1. Antonius, a regular prelate, thinks that all regulars can be ordained outside the times. Hence he earnestly asks the Ordinary to be willing to confer orders outside the times on his subjects. The Ordinary refuses; but Antonius insists, asserting that this is a privilege common to all regulars, which was not abrogated by the Council of Trent; and was newly conceded to the Hierosolymitan Order by the Bull Circumspecta of Pius IV, without any clause of incommunicability. It was besides recognized by the Roman Council, since c. 2, title 5, says: "We decree that regulars, without a new Apostolic Indult, can safely be ordained outside the times." Finally, it was admitted by the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars in the Decision of June 25, 1730, and of July 18, 1732. Cf. Bizzarri, Collect., ed. 1885, pp. 341, 343. But the Ordinary replies that this privilege is proper only to the Society of Jesus, and is incommunicable to other Orders from the Bull Pium et utile of Gregory XIII. This, moreover, is confirmed from the practice prevailing at Rome, where only members of the Society enjoy this privilege.

It is asked: What is to be said to the Case?

R. Benedict XIV, Notif. 23, n. 3 ff., has these things concerning the present question: "Since the Sacred Council of Trent at sess. 23, c. 8 determined that sacred ordinations are to be celebrated at the times established by law, from this it follows that it derogated from the privileges which religious orders could have had previously, that their religious be ordained outside the times; all the more because Pontiff Pius IV, in his Bull 94, at t. 2 of the Bullarium, in which he confirms the Sacred Council of Trent, says that privileges contrary to what was established in it are understood to have ceased and to be annulled and reduced to the terms of the same ...

"And since We had the honor of serving for many years as Secretary of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, We did not have occasion to see admitted by it any privilege other than that of the Fathers of the Society of Jesus, and not indeed that conceded to it by Paul III, of which there is speech in his Constitution 48, § 19, t. I of the Bullarium, because it was prior to the Council; but rather that of Gregory XIII, posterior to the said Council and inserted in his Constitution 77 at t. 2 of the Bullarium, which privilege was afterward confirmed by Paul V, as is seen in the Bullarium of the said Religion, and also by Innocent XII, who, having established some rules concerning particular indults of extra tempora, naming Regulars, solemnly declared, at the request of the Religious of the Society, that he had never intended to bring any prejudice to the privilege conceded to them by Gregory XIII, as can be seen in a paper printed at Rome in his Pontificate and reprinted apud La-Croix, l. 6, n. 2194, without this particular privilege being able to be extended to the other Regular Orders, which participate in the privileges of the said Society, since Gregory XIII, in § 4 of the cited Bull, determined that this privilege not pass to others who participate, or were going to participate, in the privileges of the Jesuit Fathers: Moreover we altogether prohibit the communication of the present grace to be made in the future in any way to all others, even those who share abundantly and will be able to share their privileges with the same Society ...

"And although in the last Roman Council, held under the Holy Memory of Benedict XIII, at title 5, c. 2, it is thus read: But as regards regulars having privileges from the Supreme Pontiffs, whether expressly or conceded by way of communication, namely of receiving sacred orders outside the times, since the privileges themselves persist in their force, and it is not established that derogation has been made from them, we therefore decree that these same regulars, without a new Apostolic Indult, can safely be ordained outside the times; nevertheless, since in the said chapter it is not read: whether expressly or by way of communication conceded before the Council of Trent, from this it follows that one cannot say that the controversy was decided by force of the Roman Council; the reason mentioned above always remaining in its force, namely that derogation was made by the Council of Trent, in the place mentioned, from prior privileges. Nor should this reason be judged either subtle or unsubstantial; for in consequence of the same, today at Rome none are admitted to the privilege of extra tempora except only the Fathers of the Society, who had it after the Council of Trent ... and no other regular now appears at Rome to be ordained extra tempora without having dispatched his particular indult."

From these things it sufficiently appears that the reasons of the regular prelate are not altogether demonstrative; but the assertion and reason of the Ordinary are sufficiently sustained. Yet the opinion of the regular prelate is not lacking every probability, and therefore the Ordinary, if he wishes, can acquiesce to him, although he does not seem to be bound. Let Honorante, Prax. Secr., c. 12, be heard: "But whether the ancient privileges conceded by the Apostolic See to Regulars, of receiving orders outside the times, were revoked by the Council of Trent, sess. 23, c. 8: several doctors affirm it ... Several doctors also have come to the contrary opinion ... But it must be asserted that each assertion of the doctors departing into diverse opinions is an opinion, but not a certain sentence, as Passerinus, distinguished member of the Order of Preachers, well observes ... And although in the Roman Council the following Decree exists: 'But as regards Regulars having privileges from the Supreme Pontiffs, whether expressly or conceded by way of communication, namely of receiving sacred orders outside the times, since the privileges themselves persist in their force, and it is not established that derogation has been made from them, we therefore decree that the same regulars, without a new Apostolic Indult, can safely be ordained outside the times'; title 5, c. 2. Nevertheless, since in the said chapter it is not read: whether expressly or by way of communication conceded before the Council of Trent, it cannot be said that the controversy was decided by the Roman Council, since the same reason always persists in its force, namely that derogation was made by the Council of Trent, in the cited place, from antecedent privileges. Finally Benedict XIV, Const. Impositi, Sept. 27, 1747, declared that privileges of this sort favor only those regulars to whom, after Trent, they had been conceded by name and directly, but not by communication ...

"And in fact, in the Secretariat of the Tribunal, even before the said Constitution issued, from the beginning of the Pontificate of the holy memory of Clement XII up to these times, no other privilege concerning extra tempora was admitted, except only that conceded to the brothers of St. Paul the First Hermit of the Hungarian Province, studying in the City by force of the Decree of the S. C. de P. F., Sept. 26, 1718; and the privilege conceded to the Fathers of the Society of Jesus, not indeed that conceded by Paul III, since it issued before the Council, but that of Gregory XIII after the Council, which afterward was confirmed by Paul V and by Innocent XII; nor can it be extended to other regular orders which participate in the privileges of the said Society.

"But this must not here be passed over, that to the Friars Minor of the Observance dwelling in parts of the West Indies the aforesaid privilege was conceded after the Council by Urban VIII in the Constitution Cum sicut."

St. Alphonsus, de Privil., n. 115, treats the question: "Whether religious can be ordained outside the times." And he responds: "Vasquez, Lezana, etc., deny it; for they say that although Gregory conceded this to the Jesuits, nevertheless he prohibited communication. But today it is no longer to be called into doubt that they can, both from the many privileges conceded to other Religions and from the Declaration lately made by Benedict XIII in the Roman Council, title 5, c. 2, in which it was established that such privileges persist in their force and that it is not established that derogation had been made from them." And in l. 6, n. 797, the same Holy Doctor moves the question and says: "Vasquez, etc., deny it. But Laymann with Marchant, etc., more truly affirm it. The reason is that after Gregory XIII, Clement VIII absolutely conceded this privilege to all mendicants, and Urban VIII conceded it to the Order of Discalced of the Most Holy Trinity. And most recently Benedict XIII, apud Benedict XIV, Not. 23, n. 5, in the Roman Council, title 5, c. 2, confirmed this privilege."

Yet doubt is truly present in this matter. Whence D'Annibale, n. 294, note 2, says: "Sacred orders can be conferred on religious of the Society of Jesus on any feast days of precept by privilege conceded to them by Gregory XIII. Whether also on other religious is disputed; and so the matter is left to the judgment of the bishop, and, if he is unwilling to ordain, it is not lawful to approach another bishop. Clement VIII, March 15, 1569; Benedict XIV, Not. 23." And in reality Benedict XIV himself, accommodating regulars, admits in the place cited that he often conferred sacred orders on them outside the times.

But it must be noted in the last place that although the Roman Council, in the place cited, does not expressly say that the privileges of regulars persist in their force, whether expressly or by way of communication conceded before the Council, nevertheless it speaks absolutely and indefinitely. Moreover, if those privileges conceded before the Council have been abrogated, what finally are those privileges, whether expressly or BY WAY OF COMMUNICATION conceded, which persist in their force and from which derogation has not been made? Besides, the Council speaks of privileges persisting in their force and from which it is established that derogation has not been made, namely by the Council of Trent; and surely in the cited sess. 23, c. 8 no clause derogating from privileges is found.

But the established resolution is confirmed from the S. C. of Bishops and Regulars, which on July 18, 1732, replied: "that the bishop can, but is not bound" to ordain regulars outside the times, although the same Sacred Congregation openly admits in its Decision of July 13, 1730, that the privilege of ordination outside the times is in its force. Bizzarri, Collect., 1885, pp. 342, 344.

2. "A certain regular, lacking the privilege that he can be ordained by any Catholic prelate, exhibits to an outside bishop attestations of the Ordinary in whose diocese there exists the convent where the regular dwells, by which it is declared that the Ordinary himself does not hold ordination outside the established times. Hence it is asked: 1.º Whether, according to the Constitution Impositi of Benedict XIV, Feb. 27, 1746, the outside bishop can, outside the times established by the canons, ordain the regular lacking the aforesaid privilege in the Case? And insofar as affirmatively: 2.º Whether the attestation of the diocesan Ordinary suffices, as in the Case; or whether there is required an attestation by which it is declared that the bishop of the place where the regular dwells will not hold ordination at the established times?

R. To the 1st. Affirmatively. To the 2nd. The attestation that the bishop will not have ordination at the next legitimate time is required." S. C. C., Aug. 18, 1888.

We must treat: first, of the nature and division of Order; second, of its matter and form; third, of its Minister; fourth, of the subject of Order.

1140. To complete those things which we have said in the dogmatic Treatise On Order, there remain to be set forth the practical questions concerning the minister and subject of Order, and also concerning irregularities.

Concerning the Minister:

On the proper Bishop as regards ordination.

On the rules to be observed for licit ordination.

Concerning the Subject:

On vocation to the priestly state.

On dimissorial and testimonial letters.

On the age of those to be ordained.

On the title of ordination.

On the obligations imposed in ordination.

Concerning Irregularities:

On irregularities in general.

On irregularities from defect.

On irregularities from delict.

On the cessation of irregularities.

Art. I. On the Legitimate Minister of Order.

1141. For the validity of ordination: a) the ordinary minister is every and only consecrated bishop; b) the extraordinary minister is he who, although he lacks episcopal character, has received from law or from the Apostolic See, by indult, the power of conferring some orders¹.

¹ Codex, c. 951, 957.

For the liceity of ordination: a) for the Episcopate, the only minister is the Roman Pontiff, or a bishop by pontifical mandate²; b) for the other orders: 1) as regards a cleric ordained by the Roman Pontiff, the minister is he who obtained from the Holy See the faculty of ordaining³; 2) as regards seculars, it is the proper bishop by himself, or through another who has obtained legitimate dimissorial letters⁴; 3) as regards privileged religious, regularly it is the bishop of the diocese in which is situated the religious house to whose family the one to be ordained belongs⁵.

² Codex, c. 953.

³ Codex, c. 952.

⁴ Codex, c. 955.

⁵ Codex, c. 965.

That an ordination may be licit, 1° it must be conferred by the proper Bishop, or with his license; 2° and indeed with the canonical rules observed.

I. On The Proper Bishop.

1142. The Supreme Pontiff is the proper Bishop of the whole Church, and therefore he can confer orders not only validly but also licitly everywhere on earth, whether by himself or through a delegate. - But a Bishop cannot by proper right confer orders except upon his subjects: "Let each one be ordained by his proper Bishop or with legitimate dimissorial letters of the same."¹

¹ Codex, c. 955, § 1.

Now "the proper Bishop, with respect to the ordination of seculars, is only the Bishop of the diocese in which the one to be promoted has domicile together with origin, or simple domicile without origin; but in this latter case the one to be promoted must confirm by oath his intention of remaining perpetually in the diocese, unless it is a question of promoting to orders a cleric who by first tonsure has already been incardinated in the diocese, or of promoting an alumnus who is destined to the service of another diocese... or of promoting a professed religious."²

² Codex, c. 956. - Codex, c. 90, § 1.

1143. From this canon the proper Bishop, as regards ordination, is he in whose diocese the one to be ordained has canonical domicile, which is acquired by residence in the diocese either joined with the intention of remaining there perpetually, if nothing calls one away from there, or prolonged to a completed decade.

1144. If domicile is joined with origin, it is plainly sufficient; but if without origin, an oath is required by which the one to be promoted manifests the intention of remaining perpetually in the diocese. From canon 93, § 1, a minor retains the domicile of him to whose power he is subject, e.g., of his parents. But if these lack canonical domicile, whether familial or acquired, because, e.g., they have resided nowhere for ten years or with the intention of remaining, minors in age cannot receive even first tonsure until, having become majors, they establish for themselves a domicile in some diocese; for this two things are required: residence in some diocese, and the intention of remaining there perpetually. - Therefore they can enter the seminary of the diocese into which they intend to be incorporated, and reside there with the intention of remaining perpetually in the diocese, and emit the oath with the license and approbation of the Bishop of this diocese.

1145. Moreover, by reason of incardination, he becomes a subject of the Bishop who, duly dismissed from his own diocese, has been canonically incardinated in the diocese of this Bishop¹. But when first tonsure has been received, a cleric is so incardinated in the diocese to which he belongs that he cannot depart except according to the norm of Law. (Can. 111-117.)

¹ Codex, c. 956, 969.

1146. "A Vicar and Prefect Apostolic, an Abbot or Prelate nullius, if they possess episcopal character, are equated with a diocesan Bishop in what pertains to ordination. If they lack episcopal character, they can nevertheless in their own territory confer first tonsure and minor orders both upon their own secular subjects... and upon others who exhibit the dimissorial letters required by law; ordination performed by the same persons outside these limits is invalid."²

² Codex, c. 957.

1147. "A regular Abbot of government, even without nullius territory, can confer first tonsure and minor orders, provided that the one to be promoted is subject to him by force of profession at least simple, and that he himself is a priest and has legitimately received the abbatial blessing."³

³ Codex, c. 964.

II. On The Canonical Rules Established For Licit Ordination.

1148. Orders must be conferred: 1° by grades, not by leap; 2° with the interstices observed; 3° in the proper time and place; 4° after a previous examination.

1149. 1° On ordination through the several grades⁴. (a) According to the sacred canons, the one to be ordained must not receive a superior order with an inferior order passed over, or he cannot be ordained by leap: "Orders are to be conferred by grades in such wise that ordinations by leap are altogether prohibited."⁵ For it is altogether fitting that no one ascend to higher things unless first he has been exercised in lower things. Although tonsure is not an order, nevertheless it is permitted to no one to receive orders unless first he has been initiated by first tonsure, because this is the preamble and preparation for orders.

⁴ Decretal., lib. V, tit. XXIV, cap. unic.; Codex, c. 977; Canonists on this title; Icard, II, n. 325-326; Gasparri, n. 495-499.

⁵ Codex, c. 977.

(b) Yet orders received by leap are valid, except perhaps the episcopate. For the several orders are complete in themselves, and produce their effects independently of the others; indeed the presbyterate eminently contains in itself and confers all the faculties and graces conferred in the diaconate, subdiaconate, and minor orders. - It was said except the episcopate, about which there is controversy among theologians; some contend that the episcopate is not an order distinct from the presbyterate, but only its complement, and therefore is not validly received unless the presbyterate has first been received; but others hold that the episcopate is a distinct order, in which the sacerdotal order is eminently contained, and that it is established from ancient documents that sometimes this order was conferred while the other orders were passed over. In practice, however, every order passed over must be conferred.

(c) A Bishop gravely sins knowingly conferring a superior order while an inferior one has been passed over. A cleric knowingly promoted by leap not only sins gravely, but is prohibited from ministering in the order irregularly received and from ascending to a higher one. (Codex, c. 2374.)

1150. 2° On interstices. According to Trent¹, interstices between the various orders must be observed, so that "those promoted may exercise themselves in the orders received, according to the prescription of the Bishop,"² and, while they ascend from grade to grade, merit of life and greater doctrine may increase in them with age. "The interstices between first tonsure and the ostiariate, or between the several minor orders, are entrusted to the prudent judgment of the Bishop; but the acolyte is not to be promoted to the subdiaconate, the subdeacon to the diaconate, the deacon to the presbyterate, before the acolyte has spent at least one year, the subdeacon and deacon at least three months, each in his own order, unless the necessity or utility of the Church, in the judgment of the Bishop, requires otherwise.

¹ Trident., sess. XXIII, cap. 11, 13, 14, de Reformat.

² Codex, c. 978, § 1.

"Never, however, unless by peculiar license of the Roman Pontiff, are minor orders to be conferred with the subdiaconate, or two sacred orders on one and the same day, any contrary custom being reprobated; indeed neither is it permitted to confer first tonsure together with any one of the minor orders, nor all minor orders at the same time."³

³ Codex, c. 978, § 2, 3.

1151. 3° On the time and place of ordination. (A) On the time: "Episcopal consecration must be conferred within the solemnities of Masses, on the Lord's day or on the natal day of the Apostles. Ordinations in sacred orders are to be celebrated within the solemnities of Masses on the Saturdays of the Four Times, on the Saturday before Passion Sunday, and on Holy Saturday. Nevertheless, if a grave cause intervenes, the Bishop can have them also on any Lord's day or feast of precept. First tonsure can be conferred on any day and hour; minor orders on individual Lord's days and double feasts, yet in the morning."¹

¹ Codex, c. 1006.

1152. (B) On the place of ordination: (a) "A Bishop outside his own territory, without the license of the Ordinary, cannot confer Orders in the conferral of which pontificals are exercised,"² saving nevertheless the privilege of Cardinals who have the faculty "of performing pontificals with throne and baldachin in all churches outside the City, the Ordinary having been forewarned, if the church is cathedral."³

² Codex, c. 1008.

³ Codex, c. 239, 15°.

1153. (b) "General ordinations are to be celebrated publicly in the Cathedral church, with the canons of the church having been called and present; but if in another place of the diocese, the clergy of the place being present, the more worthy church, as far as can be done, is to be approached. However, the Bishop is not prohibited, when a just cause persuades, from having particular ordinations also in other churches and likewise in the oratory of the episcopal house or of the Seminary or of a religious house. First tonsure and minor orders can be conferred also in private oratories."⁴

⁴ Codex, c. 1009.

1154. 4° On the previous examination. (a) Anyone to be promoted, whether secular or religious, must undergo a previous and diligent examination concerning the very order to be received. (b) One to be promoted to sacred orders is to be examined also in other tractations of sacred theology designated by the Bishop. (c) Regularly, the local Ordinary who ordains by his own right or gives dimissorial letters receives this examination. (d) The names of those to be promoted to the several sacred orders are to be publicly announced in the parochial church of each candidate, and indeed on a feast day of precept during the solemnities of Masses or on another day and hour at which a greater frequency of people is had in the church. (e) All the faithful are held by the obligation of revealing to the Ordinary or pastor before the sacred ordination any impediments to sacred orders, if they know any. (f) But the Ordinary can prescribe other inquiries, according to his prudence and conscience¹.

¹ Codex, can. 996-1000.

1155. Corollary. From this it follows that a Bishop is held to repel the unworthy from sacred orders. So that he may be able to do this more efficaciously, the Codex permits the Bishop (or religious Superior) "to forbid his clerics, for any cause whatever, even an occult one, even extrajudicially, ascent to orders, saving the right of recourse..."²

² Codex, c. 970.

Art. II. On The Subject of Ordination.

1156. Preliminary notes. (A) For receiving orders validly, it is required that one be: (a) of the male sex, since women have always been prohibited from sacred orders in the Church; (b) baptized, since baptism is the gate of all the sacraments; (c) that in adults there be at least a habitual expressed intention of receiving order, since no adult can contract the grave obligations of priesthood without an explicit will.

From the Codex, c. 214, "A cleric who, compelled by grave fear, received a sacred order and afterward, when the fear had been removed, did not ratify the same ordination at least tacitly by exercise of the order, willing nevertheless by such an act to subject himself to clerical obligations, is to be reduced to the lay state, the coercion and defect of ratification having been legitimately proved, by sentence of the judge, without any obligations of celibacy and of the canonical hours. - But coercion and defect of ratification must be proved according to the norm of cc. 1993-1998."

As regards him, however, who received sacred orders before the legitimate age, these things seem to be said: if he does not have the age of discretion when a major order is conferred upon him, and afterward, when he has arrived at the suitable age so that according to the laws of the Church he can emit a solemn vow, namely at the twenty-first year, he has not ratified the ordination, he is reduced to the lay state without the obligation of celibacy by the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments; this can be extended to those who after the use of reason, but before puberty, received a sacred order, indeed perhaps to those who in good faith were ordained before the canonical age³.

³ Maroto, Institutiones Juris Canonici, 1921, I, n. 736.

(B) But for the licit reception of orders, many conditions are required: (a) the state of grace, since Order is a sacrament of the living; (b) the reception of Confirmation: "Let those who have not received the sacrament of Confirmation not be initiated with first tonsure,"¹ more probably under only a light obligation, according to St. Alphonsus (n. 786); (c) immunity from censures and irregularities; (d) congruent morals; (e) due knowledge. There are other conditions concerning which one must speak a little more fully: 1° divine vocation; 2° dimissorial and testimonial letters; 3° canonical age; 4° title of ordination. 5° We shall add a few things on the obligations imposed in ordination itself.

¹ Trident., sess. XXIII, cap. 4 de Reformat.

I. On Vocation To The Clerical State.

1157. 1° Its notion and necessity. (A) Priestly vocation can be considered on the part of God, and on the part of the Church. - On the part of God it can be defined: an act of supernatural Providence, by which God disposes some before others to be called to the priesthood through the Church and adorns them with congruent gifts for laudably undertaking the offices of the priesthood.

² Hallier, op. cit., col. 357-396; Habert, De Ordine, IIIa Pars, cap. 1; St. Alphons., n. 802-803; Icard, II, n. 316-319; Gasparri, n. 110-119; Tronson, Meditations ecclesiastiques, 3rd Medit.

(a) It is an act of supernatural Providence; for if God directs all beings, but especially rational creatures, to their proper end, He cares maximally and especially for those whom He foreknows will be future ministers of the Church, since on their manner of acting depend not only their own salvation, but also the good of the Church and of souls. And indeed, since the priestly state is a supernatural dignity and tends to a supernatural end, clerical vocation pertains to supernatural Providence.

(b) By which God disposes some before others to be called through the Church; for not all are destined to the priesthood, but only those whom God from eternity, out of His goodness and free will, without any foreseen merit, selects in His mind for this priestly office.

(c) And adorns them with congruent gifts... For since God is wise and provident, for those whom He chooses for the sublime and arduous offices of the priesthood, He prepared from eternity all the gifts necessary for undertaking these offices worthily and laudably, whether natural, such as an apt body and mind, or supernatural, such as the gift of continence, zeal for souls, and other virtues, without which one called would not be suitable for the sacred ministries. - Yet this vocation does not take away human liberty, but only helps and perfects it; just as therefore man can resist divine grace, so likewise he is able to reject the divine vocation and the means divinely prepared for following it, by so acting that he renders himself unworthy or incapable for priestly offices: then he is said to lose his vocation, not indeed in the sense that God revokes the eternal decree by which he had been pre-elected to the priesthood, but because He deservedly repels from clerical dignity those who now are neither worthy nor suitable. Hence also those who by acting badly have lost their vocation can often recover it by sincere conversion and perseverance in the practice of virtues.

But on the part of the Church, vocation is an act of supernatural jurisdiction, by which ecclesiastical Superiors select and assume those whom they judge suitable and divinely called to the clerical state. For since they bear the place of God on earth, they are able to investigate and authentically interpret His decrees in relation to the vocation of ministers of the Church.

1158. (B) Divine vocation is necessary for licitly receiving orders and for duly undertaking their offices.

It is established by Scripture: (a) by Christ's manner of acting: for He Himself with special care called to Himself disciples whom He destined for the special office of sanctifying men: "Come after me, and I will make you become fishers of men"¹; then among the disciples He chose certain ones whom He also named apostles²; and at the Last Supper He openly declared His mind to the twelve apostles, saying: "You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and appointed you that you should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain."³ From this it is inferred that those who are deputed to the office of preaching the Gospel are to be chosen not by themselves, but by Christ Himself; for they themselves must be sent by Christ, just as Christ also was sent by the Father⁴.

¹ Matt., IV, 19.

² Luc., VI, 13; Matt., X, 2-4; Marc., III, 13-19.

³ Joan., XV, 16.

⁴ Joan., XX, 21.

(b) By the manner of acting and speaking of the Apostles: for when they wished to choose one from the disciples in place of Judas, they appointed two, Joseph and Matthias, and praying they said: "Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all, show which one of these two Thou hast chosen, to receive the place of this ministry and apostleship."⁵ Likewise, when Saul and Barnabas were consecrated to the apostolic ministry, they were designated by the Holy Spirit Himself: "And as they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas, for the work unto which I have taken them."⁶

⁵ Act., I, 24-25.

⁶ Act., XIII, 2.

(c) By the open declaration of the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews: for he, treating expressly of the priesthood of the New Law, says: "Neither doth any man take the honor to himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron was. So also Christ did not glorify himself, that he might be made a high priest; but he that said unto him: Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."¹ This proposition, since it denies universally, suffers no exception. In truth, if any exception could be admitted, surely it would be for Christ, who was full of grace and truth, and in whom all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge were hidden; but now, with the Apostle as witness, Christ did not glorify Himself, i.e., He did not ambitiously seek or usurp the dignity and glory of the priesthood, but was raised to it by the Father. Therefore divine vocation is required.

¹ Hebr., V, 4-5.

(d) From the Codex, cc. 1353 and 1363, it is established implicitly, but clearly: "and let them foster in them the seed of divine vocation."

1159. It is confirmed by theological reason. (a) In the Treatise On the Church it has been proved that no one has the power of teaching and ruling in spiritual matters, unless he has been sent by God, through the mediation of those who are successors of the Apostles: for they, and indeed they alone, rejoice in the power of teaching and ruling. But those who, not called by God nor chosen by ecclesiastical Superiors, thrust themselves into the sacred ministry, surely cannot be said to be sent by God; they have not entered the sheepfold through the door, but elsewhere; since Christ Himself is the door, and if anyone has not entered through Him, i.e., not having been called by Him, he is a thief and a robber. But a thief comes only to steal and to slaughter and to destroy²; or, in other words, he who is not called by God is not only guilty of usurpation, like a thief and robber, but also becomes for others a cause of spiritual ruin.

² Read the whole parable of the good shepherd, Joan., X, 1-18.

(b) Divine Providence governs and moderates all things sweetly and strongly, especially in the supernatural order, and distributes offices, dignities, and grades of honors according to the counsel of His wisdom; yet in such a way that to whomever some office is given, to the same likewise are conferred graces, virtues, and gifts so that he may be able duly to fulfill the offices of the state. If therefore someone is divinely chosen for the priesthood, by that very fact there are prepared for him graces and gifts by which he can laudably undertake clerical offices. But if he is in no way called by God, on the one hand he must fulfill many offices, and indeed much more arduous than those which are incumbent upon the faithful, under penalty of mortal sin; and on the other hand, he lacks those special graces which are morally necessary for duly exercising offices of this kind, and which are conferred, by God's general law, only upon those who are legitimately called.

(c) This is more easily understood if the principal offices of a priest are briefly reviewed: for he is a mediator between God and men, offering prayers and sacrifices to God for the Christian people, and dispensing the divine sacraments; but no one can assume the parts of a mediator unless he is admitted by the parties whose interest is involved; no one can be a mediator before God unless first he is made acceptable to Him; no one can dispense divine mysteries unless he has been divinely chosen. - Moreover, the priest is as it were a divine herald, and performs an embassy for Christ, as though God were exhorting through him¹; but no one can announce the word of God as having power unless he receives authority from God, no one can be a divine legate unless he is deputed by Christ Himself. And so concerning the other offices.

¹ II Cor., V, 20.

1160. 2° Signs of divine vocation. Here there is no question of extraordinary signs, by which God manifests His will in a preternatural way; but of ordinary signs, by which the divine decree can become known to a prudent man. Now these are three: suitability for the sacred ministry; right intention, or a supernatural desire of receiving the priesthood for that end for which it was instituted by Christ; election by ecclesiastical superiors regularly made. The reason is that, when God chooses a man for some office, He makes him suitable so that he can fulfill the offices attached to it; and at the same time by grace He moves him to embrace this office for the end instituted by Christ; and when there is question of the clerical state, for which election is required, He so bends the minds of superiors that they choose those called.

1161. (A) Suitability consists in this, that one, both on the part of body and on the part of soul, be immune from vices which render him incapable for ecclesiastical offices, and at the same time furnished with those gifts which are necessary for duly undertaking them.

Now among vices, some are congenital or so deeply rooted that they can scarcely be corrected, and therefore render someone unfit for priestly offices. Such are: (a) a dull and leaden mind, in no way suitable for acquiring ecclesiastical knowledge; or a lack of rectitude of judgment, which often harms more than ignorance; (b) a rustic and fierce disposition, given to contentions and quarrels, which will drive away rather than attract the sheep of the flock, and will sow discords; (c) a light and unstable disposition, which, by the very fact that it turns with every breeze, will not be able for long to bear the burdens of the priesthood, which are perpetual and require constancy; (d) a soft and idle disposition, which lacks the fortitude and patience necessary for overcoming difficulties often occurring in the sacred ministry; (e) an irascible and drunken disposition; for, as Habert says¹, "irascibility and fondness for wine must sometimes be referred in part to vices of nature, and can scarcely be completely scraped away."

¹ Habert, l. cit., § III.

But there are other vices which indeed render someone unworthy of sacred orders as long as they persevere, but, because they can be corrected, as being voluntary, they do not bar him perpetually from the priesthood; such are sins against chastity and the other virtues; namely, those who have committed them must be tested for so long as is necessary that there be a founded hope that they are not going to relapse into the same vices; but the length and nature of the probation depend on many circumstances, which it would be too long to explain².

² Cf. St. Alphons., lib. VI, n. 63-77; Vindic. Alphons., p. 778-785.

Nor does immunity from vices suffice, but sanctity of life is required; according to St. Thomas, for the ministry of the altar³ "greater interior sanctity is required than even the religious state requires"; according to St. Alphonsus (n. 803), the Bishop, before he confers sacred orders, must become certain "not only that the one to be initiated has not been evil, namely, that he has not been quarrelsome, has not given scandal by frequenting games, depraved conversations, etc., but also that he leads a spiritual life, is assiduous in churches, frequents the sacraments and prayer, lives separated from seculars, associates with well-mannered companions, applies himself to study, uses modest dress, etc." - Nor let it be said that clerics adorned with such virtues are not found in sufficient number; for "God never so deserts His Church that suitable ministers sufficient for the necessity of the people are not found, if the worthy were promoted and the unworthy repelled"⁴; besides, "it is better to have fewer ministers, but good and useful, than more who are going to avail for nothing."⁵

³ St. Thom., 2. 2., q. 184, a. 8.

⁴ St. Thom., Supplem., q. 36, a. 4 ad 2.

⁵ Benedict XIV, Bull Ubi primum.

1162. (B) Moreover, RIGHT INTENTION is required, which does not necessarily consist in a certain sensible aspiration of the subject, but in a supernatural and deliberate will of receiving the priesthood as it was instituted by Christ¹.

¹ This intention, although sincere and deliberate, does not exclude a certain reluctance arising from humility, from the burdens of the priesthood, or from another cause, which besides will often be overcome by divine grace and by the pious exhortations of a confessor.

This intention must be supernatural:

(a) By reason of the object, i.e., it must be concerned with the offices of the priesthood insofar as they can promote the glory of God and the salvation of souls. Hence those who desire to receive sacred orders because they ambit temporal advantages, gain, honors, a quiet life, etc., in no way show that they are called by God. On the contrary, if someone approaches sacred orders because he desires to offer the sacrifice of the Mass, to minister the sacraments, to catechize little ones, to visit the sick, etc., insofar as all these things tend to the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful, he exhibits signs of divine vocation.

(b) By reason of the motive, which primarily and principally must be a serious and efficacious will of praying, laboring, and spending oneself for God and the salvation of souls, according to that saying of the Apostle: "For I seek not the things that are yours, but you... But I most gladly will spend and be spent myself for your souls, although loving you more, I be loved less."² Therefore those lack divine vocation who receive the priesthood for this end alone, that they may live more richly and conveniently; or that they may be esteemed more highly, or be able to preside. - But if someone ambits the priestly state both on account of the sanctification of souls and on account of temporal advantages, the vocation will be divine if the former intention prevails; but the one to be ordained must strive gradually to shake off ignoble ends; and surely his vocation will be the more certain the freer he is from every thought of earthly things. - But the zeal for souls by which he is moved must be efficacious, i.e., not exist in imagination alone, but be manifested by works, namely by prayers, labors, and acts of the virtues offered to God for the sanctification of the neighbor, the conversion of sinners, heretics, and infidels.

² II Cor., XII, 14-15.

(c) By reason of the mode; since God is accustomed to work sweetly and strongly at the same time, this intention of receiving the priesthood must be sweet, disturbing the peace of the soul in no way, prepared to obey Superiors, and therefore free from vain anxieties; and strong, i.e., efficaciously moving the one to be ordained to acquire ecclesiastical virtues and assiduously to cultivate theological knowledge; and also constant; for if it is only fleeting, it seems to be a sign of passing fervor rather than of divine vocation, which of itself is permanent.

Let the candidate not deceive himself; it is necessary that he seek counsel from a wise confessor, to whom he will open the hidden things of his heart concerning his internal aptitude and intention, and who will judge the matter according to the laws concerning the discernment of spirits; for he would act imprudently who received orders by his own judgment.

1163. (C) Election by ecclesiastical Superiors regularly made. For no one has any right to ordination antecedently to the free election of the bishop, who, whether by himself or through delegates, such as the directors of a Seminary, authentically judges concerning the suitability of candidates, whether absolute or relative to his own diocese, and chooses those whom he judges will be useful to his diocese. But this canonical election does not create divine vocation, nor aptitude or right intention, but supposes all these things already to be in the candidate¹.

¹ This doctrine is thus proposed by the special Commission of Cardinals in the decree of June 20, 1912, approved by Pius X (A. A. S., IV, 485), where it is declared that "no one ever has any right to ordination antecedently to the free election of the bishop... nothing more is required in the ordinand, in order that he be duly called by the bishop, than right intention together with suitability, placed in those gifts of grace and nature, and proved by that probity of life and sufficiency of doctrine, which give founded hope that he will be able rightly to undertake the offices of the priesthood and holily to observe its obligations..."

But what if the spiritual moderator and the Bishop doubt concerning someone's vocation? Since for first tonsure and minor orders a probable vocation suffices, the one to be ordained can receive these, and meanwhile scrutinize the will of God better. But when there is question of sacred orders, "let the bishop confer sacred orders on no one unless from positive arguments he is morally certain of his canonical suitability..."² - Moreover, so that he may more efficaciously be able to remove the unworthy from sacred orders, he can for any cause whatever, even an occult one, even extrajudicially, forbid ascent to orders, saving the right of recourse³.

² Codex, c. 973, § 3.

³ Codex, c. 970.

1164. 3° Obligation of following a clerical vocation. (A) When extraordinary signs of vocation are present, and indeed certain ones, or when there intervenes a positive precept of the Supreme Pontiff, after mature consideration of the matter, there is an obligation under grave sin of embracing the priestly state: for in this case the will of God is so certainly manifested that it is truly imperative. St. Thomas teaches this¹ in relation to the episcopate, and the reason which he brings forth also holds as regards the presbyterate: "Just as it pertains to an inordination of the will that someone by his own movement be borne toward this, that he be placed over the governance of others, so also it pertains to an inordination of the will that someone, wholly against the injunction of a superior, finally refuse the aforesaid office of governance, on account of two things: first indeed, because this is repugnant to charity toward neighbors, to whose utility someone ought to expose himself according to place and time...; secondly, because this is repugnant to humility, by which someone subjects himself to the commands of superiors." - But a Bishop ought to command the reception of orders absolutely to no one, unless a grave necessity of the Church urges, for which he cannot provide otherwise.

¹ St. Thom., 2. 2. q. 185, a. 2.

(B) When there are only common signs of vocation, and no mandate of Superiors is had, Christian prudence indeed counsels that one obey the judgment of superiors, but no strict obligation under grave sin is given. For the Sacred Penitentiary², August 27, 1829, declared that a cleric was not to be compelled to receive sacred orders who, although chosen by his superiors and judged by his confessor worthy of the sacred ministry, refused to obey their admonitions, because of humility or fear of dangers. The reason is that no one is held under grave sin to embrace a state to which the practice of the evangelical counsels is annexed, unless the will of God imposing this obligation is clearly established; but, when only the ordinary signs of divine vocation are posited, the absolute will of God is indeed prudently, but not certainly, established.

² Ap. Icard, n. 319; Gasparri, n. 114.

(C) He sins gravely who receives sacred orders when he is conscious that he is not divinely called, or approaches rashly without due investigation, or with grave doubt concerning vocation: for he does injury to God and to the Church, and exposes himself and the souls to be committed to him to the danger of spiritual ruin, as is established from what has been said concerning the necessity of vocation. Yet he must not despair of his own salvation; but, penance for his sins having been performed, by prayers and by the exercise of clerical virtues let him ceaselessly ask from God further helps of grace; let him strive with all his strength duly to satisfy his obligations; and God, who wills that no one perish, even one guilty of the gravest sin, provided he is penitent, will supply to him graces by which, helped, he can fulfill his offices and make himself saved.

II. On Dimissorial And Testimonial Letters.

1165. 1° Dimissorial letters are those by which the proper Ordinary¹ delegates another to ordain his subjects. Once given, they do not expire by the death of the one granting them; but while the matter is still intact, they can be revoked or limited not only by the one granting them, but also by his successor².

¹ Cf. Codex, c. 958.

² Codex, c. 963.

1166. 2° On testimonial letters. (A) Notion. Testimonial letters properly so called regard canonical impediments³. Letters of this kind must be given by the Ordinary himself or by the religious Superior; hence, if a cleric has completed studies outside the diocese, the testimony of the rector of the Seminary, or of the priest to whom the candidate had been commended outside the seminary, concerning the good morals of the same candidate, does not suffice, nor the testimony of baptism and confirmation for one to be promoted to first tonsure, nor the testimony of the last ordination, nor the testimony concerning completed studies⁴.

³ Codex, c. 993, 4°.

⁴ Codex, c. 993.

1167. (B) Necessity. (a) The general rule is that testimonial letters must be obtained from the Ordinary of that place in which the one to be ordained has resided for so much time that he could have contracted a canonical impediment there. Now the time "in which the one to be promoted could have contracted a canonical impediment is, regularly, for soldiers three months, for others six months after puberty; but the ordaining Bishop according to his prudence can require testimonial letters even on account of a shorter time of residence, and on account of time which preceded puberty."⁵

⁵ Codex, c. 994.

1168. (b) "If the local Ordinary, neither by himself nor by others, does not know the one to be promoted sufficiently, so that he can testify that during the time in which he resided in his territory he contracted no canonical impediment, or if the one to be promoted has wandered through so many dioceses that it becomes impossible or too difficult to seek all testimonial letters, let the Ordinary provide at least through a supplementary oath to be furnished by the one to be promoted."⁶

⁶ Codex, c. 994, § 2.

From the Codex: those incur by the law itself suspension for one year from the conferral of orders, reserved to the Apostolic See, 1° who have ordained an alien subject without dimissorial letters of the Ordinary himself; 2° who have ordained their own subject without testimonials in the cases enumerated above¹.

¹ Codex, c. 2373.

III. On The Age Of Those To Be Ordained.

1169. (A) According to the Codex, (a) let no one be promoted to first tonsure before the theological course has been begun².

² Codex, c. 976.

(b) As regards sacred orders, these things are established in the Codex: "Let the subdiaconate not be conferred before the twenty-first year has been completed; the diaconate before the twenty-second has been completed; the presbyterate before the twenty-fourth has been completed."³

³ Codex, c. 975.

(c) That someone may be held suitable for the Episcopate, he must, among other qualities, have been born at least thirty years⁴.

⁴ Codex, c. 331.

1170. (B) The Roman Pontiff alone can by his own power dispense from a defect of age. For the subdiaconate a dispensation is never granted; for the diaconate, rarely; for the presbyterate, easily, if only thirteen months are lacking; rarely, and not unless for a grave cause, if eighteen or twenty months are lacking to the legitimate age.

IV. On The Title Required For Ordination.

1171. 1° Notion and origin. The title required for ordination is called the caution by which provision is made for a cleric concerning sufficient and perpetual support; lest otherwise, with disgrace of the order, he be forced to beg or to exercise sordid gain.

In the earliest times no one was ordained unless he was ascribed to a certain church, to which he would be perpetually attached, so that from it he might have that from which he could honestly sustain life; whence clerics were said to be of the title of such or such a church, just as today Cardinals also are named to the title of some church. Yet sometimes clerics were ordained who were ascribed to no church, and they were called wandering or acephalous. But when these increased to the disgrace of the ecclesiastical state, the Third Lateran Council established that priests or deacons ordained without title should be supported at the expense of the Bishops, until they were ascribed to some church; Innocent III extended this to subdeacons. - But Trent determined the matter more explicitly, establishing that the ordinary title of ordination was a benefice, and that from the title of patrimony or pension there were not to be admitted except those whom the Bishop judged necessary or useful to his church. Title is required for sacred orders, but not for minor orders.

1172. 2° The various titles of ordination¹. A double title is distinguished: ecclesiastical and patrimonial.

¹ We take the exposition of titles of this kind principally from the cited instruction of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide.

(A) The ecclesiastical title is manifold: of benefice, of poverty, of common table, of service of the church, of mission.

(a) The title of benefice is the perpetual right of perceiving fruits from goods of the Church on account of some spiritual office constituted by ecclesiastical authority. That someone may be ordained under this title, he must actually and peacefully possess the benefice, and from the same perceive income sufficient for honest support, according to the rate determined in each diocese. But he cannot resign this benefice unless mention has been made that he was promoted under the title of that benefice; nor must that resignation be admitted unless it is established that he can live conveniently from elsewhere, so that a resignation otherwise made is null².

² Trident., sess. XXI, cap. 2 de Reformat. - Codex, c. 979.

(b) The title of poverty is placed in religious profession, by force of which those who have emitted solemn vows in an approved Religion have in common, either from the income of goods, if the Religion itself possesses any, or from the pious largesses of the faithful, all things which they need for sustaining life³. Therefore that title does not belong to those who have emitted simple vows, except the Jesuits, who by force of a special privilege, after three simple vows have been emitted, can be promoted to sacred orders. Indeed "he incurs by the law itself suspension for a year from the conferral of orders, who has promoted someone to major orders without a canonical title..."⁴

³ Codex, c. 982, § 1.

⁴ Codex, c. 2373, 3°.

(c) The title of common table belongs to religious who have emitted perpetual simple vows⁵.

⁵ Codex, c. 982, § 2.

(d) The title of service of the church, and in places subject to the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, the title of mission, by which the above-mentioned titles can be supplied, in such a way, however, that the one to be ordained, an oath having been interposed, devotes himself perpetually to the service of the diocese or mission⁶.

⁶ Codex, c. 981.

1173. The title of mission cannot be used except by special indult of the Holy See, "and only in favor of those who, by disposition of soul and docility, rectitude of intention, aptitude of mind, progress in sacred studies, integrity of morals, and contempt of worldly things, give hope that they will be vigorous heralds of the Gospel; concerning which the conscience of their superiors is strictly burdened."¹

¹ Cited Instruction of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, n. 7.

All those who wish to be ordained under title of mission are held first to emit an oath, by which they pledge that they will give perpetual work to the mission to which they have been or will be destined. Hence those who have emitted this oath cannot pass from one diocese to another without license of the Holy See; this, however, for England and the United States of America has been so moderated that it is permitted, within the same ecclesiastical province, to pass into another diocese, with the consent of each Ordinary². - Likewise, without license of the Holy See, they cannot enter any Religion or regular Congregation³.

² Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, August 18, 1885 and November 30, 1885, ap. Collect. P. F., n. 1181-1182.

³ This is the formula of the oath to be furnished by those who are ordained under title of mission: - I N., son of N. and N., of the diocese N., promise, and swear, that after I shall have been promoted to Sacred Orders, I will enter no Religion, Society, or regular Congregation, without special license of the Apostolic See or of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, nor will I emit profession in any of them.

I likewise vow and swear that in this diocese or vicariate, or in the mission to which it shall please the Holy See or the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide that I be destined, I will perpetually spend my labor and work in administering divine things, under the whole direction and jurisdiction of the Right Reverend Lord Ordinary for the time being, for the salvation of souls; which I will also furnish if, with the license of the aforesaid Apostolic See, I shall have entered a Religion, Society, or regular Congregation, and shall have emitted profession in any of them.

Likewise I vow and swear that I understand the aforesaid oath and its obligation, and that I will observe it. So help me God and these Holy Gospels of God.

N.B. Those who emit this oath can gain a plenary indulgence applicable to the departed not only the first time, but in individual years if they renew it on the anniversary day of the furnished oath.

1174. (B) The patrimonial title is that which consists in goods certain, stable, and fruitful, yet not ecclesiastical, which in the judgment of the Bishop suffice for the congruent support of the cleric⁴. Similar to this is the title of pension, i.e., the right to an income, to be paid by some lay or ecclesiastical person or by a community, and founded upon stable goods, which suffices for honest support.

⁴ Codex, c. 979.

(a) It is not necessary that the goods from which a patrimony or pension is constituted be immovable, provided that as regards certainty of fruits they are equated with immovables; hence, according to Gasparri, n. 606, the title of ordination can be constituted from public funds (rente publique, State bonds). These goods can be situated in another diocese. - But something uncertain does not suffice, such as hope of a future succession, a facultative pension, movable goods which can easily perish, or goods burdened by mortgages.

(b) Trent forbids (l. cit.) that a patrimony or pension can be alienated, extinguished, or remitted without the license of the Bishop, until the clerics ordained under this title have obtained a sufficient ecclesiastical benefice, or have from elsewhere that from which they can live.

(c) Those who obtain a patrimony or pension cannot be ordained unless, in the judgment of the Bishop, the necessity or utility of the Church requires it.

V. On The Obligations Imposed In Ordination Itself.

1175. In the Treatise On The Obligations Of The Various States we treat of the offices of clerics; here, however, it is helpful to set forth the obligations imposed by the Bishop in ordination itself.

¹ Pontif. Rom., De ordinat. presbyteri, near the end; St. Alphons., n. 829; Hilar. Sexten, p. 620; Ephemerides Liturgicae, Rome, XI, 1897, pp. 313, 370 sq.

Before the last Gospel, the Ordaining Bishop addresses those ordained with these words: "Let each of those promoted to first tonsure, or to the four minor orders, say once the seven penitential psalms, with the litanies, versicles, and prayers."² - For the subdiaconate or diaconate, the nocturn of such a day. - But those ordained to the presbyterate, after your first Mass, say three other Masses, namely one of the Holy Spirit, another of Blessed Mary ever Virgin, a third for the Faithful Departed, and pray also for me to almighty God."

² Here there is question of the litanies of the Saints, with the versicles and prayers which follow them.

(a) It is not established that the obligation of reciting those prayers is under sin; some hold that it binds under grave sin, because the matter is grave; others under light sin; others say that this is an obligation of decency, but not under sin. Whatever the case, those ordained who are not wholly lacking in a sense of gratitude and religion will never omit these prayers.

(b) "For the Nocturn of such a day is to be understood the ferial nocturn, or the first of the Feast, or of the Sunday in the Psalter, according as the ordination was held on a feria, feast, or Sunday."³ Nevertheless the ordaining Bishop has the right of enjoining another besides the nocturn of the day which the Pontifical designates¹. Under the name of nocturn come the antiphons and psalms, but not the invitatory Venite, nor, more probably, the lessons². - If the Bishop has recited only the words of the Pontifical "the nocturn of such a day," those ordained cannot choose the nocturn which pleases them, but are held to the ferial nocturn of the day of ordination.

³ Sacred Congregation of Rites, June 27, 1899, n. 4042 ed. nov.

¹ Ibid. ad 2. - More distinctly also in the decree of August 11, 1860 it is said: "The words of the Pontifical, the nocturn of such a day, are understood of the single ferial nocturn, or of the first of Sunday, as in the Psalter, i.e., of twelve psalms with their antiphons of the time, which the ordaining Bishop can designate, either of the day itself on which he has ordination, or of another according to his judgment."

² Ephem. Liturg., l. c., p. 318.

(c) New priests are not held to apply the three prescribed Masses to the intention of the Bishop; therefore they can receive a stipend for them. Nor are they to be said before the rubrics permit the celebration of a votive Mass; indeed, for a just cause, it is permitted to defer them further.

Art. III. On Irregularities.

1176. Candidates can be barred from orders both on account of censures³ and on account of irregularities, concerning which one must now treat.

³ Codex, cc. 2260, 2175, 2279, § 2, n. 5.

I. On Irregularities In General.

1177. 1° Notion. (a) In the Codex irregularities properly so called, which of themselves are perpetual, are distinguished from simple impediments which are not perpetual and do not bar from orders except as long as they endure.

(b) Irregularity properly so called is an impediment of itself perpetual, or an incapacity prohibiting someone from receiving or exercising orders⁴, established by canonical law on account of reverence for the divine ministry.

⁴ Codex, c. 968.

1178. 2° Species. (a) By reason of the cause, irregularity is either from defect or from delict: the former arises from some natural vice by which someone is incapable of receiving or exercising orders; the latter arises from personal fault, which is unbecoming to the priestly ministry. Hence the former is not a penalty, nor does it suppose a proper delict, and therefore it is incurred even by the unknowing; the latter, although it is not a penalty, is contracted after the manner of a penalty, and supposes fault.

(b) By reason of effects, irregularity is total, when it excludes from every order and office of order; partial, when it prohibits only from some order or from some function of the sacred ministry: thus a priest who without fault lacks a thumb is excluded from the celebration of Mass, but not from hearing confessions.

1179. 3° On the subject of irregularity and impediment. (A) All those males who are subject to ecclesiastical law can contract irregularity or impediment. Hence those not yet baptized, and boys before the completed seventh year¹, are not the subject of irregularity, because they are not bound by the laws of the Church.

¹ Codex, c. 986.

(B) Irregularities and impediments can be multiplied "from diverse causes of the same, but not from repetition of the same cause, unless it is a question of irregularity from voluntary homicide."² When dispensation is sought, each is to be indicated³.

² Codex, c. 989.

³ Codex, c. 991.

(C) That irregularities and impediments be contracted, certain conditions are required: (a) that they be certain; for if there is grave and prudent doubt concerning their existence, strictly speaking they are not incurred, whether it is a question of a doubt of law or of a doubt of fact; for odious things are to be restricted. - Yet in practice it is better to seek a dispensation for caution.

(b) That the action on account of which they are contracted be external and consummated in its species; and besides gravely culpable, if it arises from delict: for although they are not penalties, they are incurred after the manner of a penalty latae sententiae.

The Sacrament of Holy Orders (sacramentum ordinis) confers special graces as well as rights and prerogatives. It likewise imposes certain vocational duties and assigns to the recipient a permanent place in the ecclesiastical hierarchy (ordo). By means of this Sacrament the Catholic Church preserves and propagates the priesthood, to which are entrusted the ordinary preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments.¹ From the nature of this Sacrament flow the following duties for clerics in particular and the faithful in general.

¹ Matt. XXVIII, 18 sqq.; John XX, 21 sqq.; 1 Cor. IV, 1 sq.

The candidate for Holy Orders must first of all have a true vocation for the clerical state. "They are said to be called by God," says the Roman Catechism, "who are called by the lawful ministers of the Church" ² (external vocation).

² Cat. Rom., P. II, c. 7, qu. 3. J. Coppin, La Vocation, Bruxelles 1903, pp. 427 sqq.; A. Mulders, La Vocation au Sacerdoce, Bruges 1925; Vermeersch-Kempf, Relig. and ECcles. Vocation, St. Louis 1925.

The candidate must, secondly, be actuated by pure motives in choosing the clerical state; that is to say, he must desire to promote the glory of God and cooperate in the salvation of souls, to the exclusion of all worldly motives, such as ambition, greed, a desire to rule, etc. Only of those who embrace the ecclesiastical state at the call of God and for the purpose of serving Him can it be truly said that they "enter the Church by the door." "He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way [for the sake of gain or advancement], the same is a thief and a robber/' and commits a sacrilege.³

³ John VIII, 49 sq.; X, 10; XVII, 4; Eph. IV, 11 sqq.; 2 Tim. II, 10; 1 Pet. V, 1 sqq. —Cat. Rom., P. II, c. 7, qu. 4.

The candidate for Holy Orders must, third, be properly prepared for the dignity and holiness of the priesthood. The required preparation is twofold, intellectual and moral. The intellectual preparation as a rule is provided by the seminary, and consists in acquiring the knowledge and mental attainments necessary for the performance of clerical duties. The moral preparation is partly mediate and partly immediate. The mediate preparation for the priesthood consists in acquiring the virtues necessary for its fruitful exercise by prayer, obedience, purity, mortification, etc. The immediate preparation consists in the performance of certain prescribed exercises, —a spiritual retreat, receiving the Sacraments of Penance and the Holy Eucharist, etc.⁴ Moral and mental fitness, as well as an ardent love for the ecclesiastical state constitute what may be styled internal vocation.

⁴ St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, Suppl., qu. 36, art. 1-2. —Cat. Rom., P. II, c. 7, qu. 26 sq.

It goes without saying that the canonical conditions prescribed for the reception of major Orders must be conscientiously complied with.⁵

⁵ Jos. Laurentius, S.J., Inst. Iuris Eccles., 2nd ed., pp. 47 sqq.

2. DUTIES OF THE FAITHFUL WITH REGARD TO THIS SACRAMENT. —Every Catholic is personally interested in a worthy and competent priesthood, and hence all are in duty bound to cooperate with the Church in providing this necessary instrument for the salvation of souls. The laity can do this, first, by following Christ's advice to ask God to send competent laborers into His vineyard. ⁶ Prayers to this effect should be said especially on ember days. Second, by contributing to the erection and support of seminaries, by aiding poor students, by inducing their sons to enter the service of the Church, or at least not preventing them from entering that service when they show signs of a true vocation. Third, by upholding the dignity of the priesthood, respecting their pastors,⁷ protecting them against insult, providing for their wants, —in fine, by honoring and supporting the priesthood in spite of the physical and moral defects of its representatives.

⁶ Matt. IX, 36-38.

⁷ Ecclus. VII, 31 sqq.; Gal. IV, 14 sqq.; 1 Thess. V, 12-13; 1 Tim. V, 17. —S. Greg. VII. Registr., I. VIII, epist. 21: "If we are commanded to honor carnal fathers and mothers, how much more spiritual ones?" (Migne, P. L., CXLVIII, 601).

"None but those who love scandal," says Bishop Linsenmann, "will contribute to the fall of a weak priest and then abandon him to his fate. By honoring its priests a congregation not only gives proof of its high character, but lends them moral support, and in return receives moral support from them." ⁸ To the unfaithful or renegade priest, on the other hand, may be applied the French proverb: " Men profit by treason, but despise the traitor." ⁹ Don Bosco advises Catholics to be silent rather than speak ill of a priest St. Vincent de Paul says: " Consider the matter as we will, brethren, we can contribute to no higher cause than the training of a worthy priesthood." ¹⁰ The duties of those who have received Holy Orders are treated in “Special Morals.”¹¹

⁸ Linsenmann, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, p. 240.

⁹ "On profite de la trahison, et l’on déteste le traître."

¹⁰ Cfr. J. Gretser, S.J., Maecenas Studiosorum Pauperum, Augsburg 1620.

¹¹ See Exposition of Christian Doctrine by a Seminary Professor, Vol. III.—J. Kinane, "Clerical Obligations" (under the new Code of Canon Law), in the Irish Eccles. Record, Fifth Series, Vol. XI, No. 606, pp. 468 sqq.

READINGS. —Pohle-Preuss, The Sacraments, Vol. IV, pp. 52 sqq. —Th. Slater, S.J., A Compendium of Moral Theology, Vol. II, pp. 241 sqq. —H. Noldin, S.J., Summa Theologiae Moralis, Vol. III, 11th ed., pp. 541 sqq. —S. Woywod, O.F.M., in the Eccles. Review, Vol. LIX, No. 2, pp. 157 sqq.

(cc. 948-1011)

Utility. - These things commonly come into use chiefly for priests: that they may possess a right account of priestly vocation; that they may know accurately with what documents and letters those to be ordained must be furnished; that they may not be ignorant of the things which impede the exercise of order; and, by the help of certain rules, that they may forestall and calm scruples concerning valid ordination.

— 1. Suspension ipso iure and indefinitely, reserved to the Holy See, punishes the consecrating bishop, the bishops or priests assisting (in place of bishops), and the one consecrated without apostolic mandate (c. 2370); clerics who knowingly have been promoted to orders through simony (c. 2371); those who presume to receive orders from one excommunicated or suspended or interdicted, after a declaratory or condemnatory sentence, or from a notorious apostate, heretic, or schismatic (c. 2372). These are graver delicts.

2. For a year from the conferral of orders, by the fact itself, they are suspended, with the suspension reserved to the Holy See: a) those who have ordained another's subject without the dismissorial letters of the proper Ordinary; b) those who have ordained their own subject without the testimonial letters due from cc. 993, 3 and 994; c) those who have promoted someone to major orders without canonical title, against the prescription of c. 974, §1, n. 7; d) those who, saving legitimate privilege, have promoted a religious belonging to a family which is outside the territory of the ordaining minister, even with dismissorial letters of his proper Superior, unless it has been proved that the case occurs which is excepted by canon 966 (c. 2373). These are less grave delicts.

3. All are said to be suspect of heresy, even those increased by episcopal dignity, who knowingly have promoted to orders through simony or have been promoted (c. 2371).

4. He is suspended by the fact itself from the order received who has maliciously approached orders without letters or with false dismissorial letters, or before the canonical age, or by leap (c. 2374). These are graver delicts in the ordained man.

5. He is declared to be punished with grave penalties who has maliciously approached orders without testimonial letters or while held by some censure, irregularity, or other impediment (c. 2374).

N.B. 1. He who in good faith has received orders from one excommunicated or suspended or interdicted after a declaratory or condemnatory sentence, or from a notorious apostate, heretic, or schismatic, lacks the exercise of order until he is dispensed (c. 2372).

2. Concerning irregularity because of an order badly exercised, it was said above in n. 711.

— I. Doubts concerning the value of ordination, even for religious, pertain to the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments. Matters which must remain occult can be referred to the Sacred Penitentiary, with the name withheld. Doctrinal points are defined by the Holy Office.

II. A libellus for impugning the value of ordination or its obligations is likewise sent to the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, or, if it is a question of a vitiated rite, to the Holy Office. The Sacred Congregation either remits the cause to the diocesan tribunal, or itself settles the question in the disciplinary line.

III. Various penal sanctions, chiefly of suspension, are borne against those badly ordaining or badly receiving orders. And until he is dispensed, he lacks the exercise of order who in good faith has received orders from one excommunicated, or suspended or interdicted after a declaratory or condemnatory sentence, or from a notorious apostate, heretic, or schismatic.

1. On the distinction of the various grades, already in the third century, in the letter of Pope St. Cornelius concerning the schism of Novatian, to Bishop Fabius of Antioch, the major and minor orders are enumerated thus: "Therefore did that defender of the Gospel not know that there ought to be one bishop in a Catholic church, in which nevertheless he knew (for how could he have been ignorant of it?) that there were forty-six presbyters; seven deacons and as many subdeacons; forty-two acolytes; fifty-two exorcists and readers with doorkeepers; finally widows, with the sick and needy, more than fifteen hundred" (Euseb., Hist. eccl., VI, 43, 11). To each region of the City there were assigned one deacon, one subdeacon, and, as it seems, six acolytes.

Those eight grades are found in not a few churches of the first centuries; but in the East, acolytes, exorcists, and doorkeepers do not seem to have obtained a place in the clergy.

Since they did not wish to exceed the septenary number of deacons, of apostolic origin, subdeacons were constituted, to whom was committed the care of the sepulchers of martyrs, relics, sacred vessels, linens, and liturgical vestments. In sacred offices the subdeacons received the offerings and offered to the archdeacon the water to be poured into the chalice.

The first grade of minor order is that of acolytes, who, since from the beginning of the fifth century they had a part to fulfill in the Eucharistic office, especially in the rather complex rite of breaking, in pontifical Masses, the Eucharistic bread, can themselves be called helpers of the deacons. They also carried into the various parishes of the City the Fermentum, that is, a particle of the bread consecrated in the Mass of the Pope.

In antiquity, however, the lectorate excels, which existed in the second century. In great number, and sometimes gathered into schools, lectors prepared themselves for ecclesiastical ministries. Gradually, however, the readings were no longer committed to them; and in the eighth century the epistle began to be read by the subdeacon. At Rome the school of lectors gradually passed into the school of cantors, traces of which exist from the seventh century.

Exorcists were first faithful persons endowed with a special charism of expelling demons. When they were constituted in an ecclesiastical grade, the discipline of energumens was committed to them.

Concerning the doorkeepers, who watched over the doors of the Church, there is little discussion in the sources.

Concerning tonsure, cf. the things said above, n. 28. Only in the tenth century was tonsure the mode of enrolling men among clerics.

II. Concerning the minister of ordinations, we observe that already by the fourth canon of the Council of Nicaea (325) it is prescribed that several bishops be present at episcopal consecration; and that already in the eighth century there are found traces of privileges of abbots conferring first tonsure and minor orders.

III. Concerning the age of those to be ordained. The ancient discipline was more severe, so that it required thirty or thirty-five years for the priesthood, twenty-five for deacons. Adhering to the vestiges of his predecessors, Pope Zosimus decreed that adolescent lectors could be promoted to a higher grade only in the twentieth year of age. Then for four years they had to remain acolytes and subdeacons, and for five years deacons.

IV. Ordination by leap is prohibited in the thirteenth canon of the Council of Sardica (fourth century); yet less attention was paid to some omitted minor orders, especially the doorkeepership.

V. Days of ordinations. Since in Acts of the Apostles, c. 13, v. 2, 3, they imposed hands upon Barnabas and Paul while fasting, it was natural to appoint fasting days for ordinations. Ordinations in the first centuries, as the Liber Pontificalis reports to us (narrating the deeds of the Pontiffs), had customarily been done in the month of December. Gelasius (492-496) mentions the four times and the Saturday before Passion Sunday as days of ordination of priests and deacons; Pelagius (555-561) invites a deacon named Latinus that he be ordained priest at Rome on Holy Saturday. Thus the present days have been alleged. Alexander III (1159-1181) himself first decreed that the subdiaconate be conferred on the same days.

The consecration of bishops was already done on a Sunday in the fifth century. Since deacons and presbyters were ordained on Saturday in the celebration of the vigil, it was quite consonant with the nature of things that the ceremony, prolonged until Sunday morning, should be completed by the consecration of bishops. In the tenth century the feasts of the Apostles were added.

That ordinations were done within the solemnities of Mass is witnessed by the most ancient liturgical books, for example, the Leonine Sacramentary.

VI. Historical matters concerning the rites. In the various ordinations the Roman rite and the Gallican rite are mixed, though in an unequal ratio.

1. Tonsure. Today: a) the bishop invites prayer for those who are "about to lay down the hair of their heads" (Oremus, Fratres dilectissimi); b) he confers tonsure while the one being tonsured says "The Lord is my portion, etc." and the choir sings Psalm 15 (Conserva me Domine); c) he prays over those tonsured (Praesta quaesumus); d) Psalm 23 is sung: Domini est terra; e) a new prayer is made for those tonsured (Adesto Domine); f) the surplice is imposed (Induat te Dominus); g) a third time prayer is made for those tonsured (Omnipotens); h) there is a final exhortation, in which the bishop warns those tonsured that they have been enrolled into the clergy.

Now, in the supplements which, in the Frankish Empire, Alcuin added to the Sacramentary which Adrian I had sent to Charlemagne, and which is called Gregorian, there are found (pp. 181, 182, ed. Wilson) the formulas: Oremus Fratres; Dominus pars; Praesta, omnipotens Deus; Adesto Domine: these are the more ancient parts of the ceremonies.

For the formula Omnipotens, the third prayer for those tonsured, is found only in the tenth century; the chant of Psalms 15 and 23 and the imposition of the surplice, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries; the formula Induat te finally in the fifteenth century.

2. The composition of the four minor orders is the same. Those to be ordained are ordered to approach and are called by name. The Pontiff explains and inculcates the office of the new grade. The instruments are handed over; a prayer is recited over those enrolled (Deus Patrum... Oremus Fratres... Deus Patrum... Domine sancte); finally, by another prayer of blessing introduced through Oremus, Flectamus genua, and which is said without the miter (Domine sancte), the ceremony is concluded. To the acolyte, however, two other prayers are added.

In the ancient Roman liturgical books no ceremony occurs for the ordination of doorkeepers, lectors, and exorcists, which was not performed solemnly. As to acolytes, in a pontifical Mass the one to be ordained presented himself to the celebrant, during Communion, holding a sack in which the Eucharistic bread to be broken was to be placed. The Pontiff blessed the candidate, saying: "Through the intercession of the blessed and glorious ever Virgin Mary and of the blessed Apostle Peter, may the Lord save and guard and protect thee."

Gallican documents, the Statuta ecclesiae antiqua of the sixth century, the Missale Francorum of the end of the seventh century or the beginning of the eighth, and the Pontifical of Egbert of York (732-766), contain the greater part of the rites and formulas which are used today in these ordinations.

3. Concerning the subdiaconate. The ordination is composed in the same way as for the minor orders, except that the litanies and another exhortation of the bishop were added.

In the ancient Roman rite, the Pontiff, during Communion, presented an empty chalice to the one to be ordained, and blessed him with the formula also used for acolytes.

Mention also, as it seems, was made of the title of the subdeacon, that is, of the Roman parish to which he was ascribed. The Gelasian Sacramentary (p. 22) contains this formula: "With the help of the Lord God and our Savior Jesus Christ, we have chosen into the order of deacon or presbyter that subdeacon or deacon from that title (sic)."

Besides that handing over of the chalice and the designation of the title, most of the rites and formulas by which subdeacons were ordained are Gallican. They are found in the Statuta ecclesiae antiqua and in the Missale Francorum. More recent, however, are the handing over of the maniple and tunicle, and especially of the amice and book.

4. Concerning the diaconate and presbyterate: a) In the Gelasian Sacramentary (ed. Wilson, pp. 22-30) the Roman rite is indicated to us thus. Soon the future ordination is announced by the Pope: "With the help of the Lord God, etc... we have chosen... that man. If anyone has anything against these men for God and on account of God, let him come out with confidence and speak. Yet let him be mindful of his own Communion." On Saturday, in the Mass of the vigil, the ordination properly such was done.

In those to be ordained deacons there was an invitation to pray (Oremus dilectissimi...), which are the beginning of the present prayer: Oremus fratres carissimi as far as "may preserve the gifts." Then the litanies; then the imposition of hands upon the head of each; then the prayer Deus collator, which is found in the Leonine Sacramentary (ed. Feltoe, p. 120), but today has not been preserved; and the Eucharistic prayer beginning from Vere dignum est, almost the present preface, which the Pontiff interrupts today to place his hand on the head of each, saying: "Receive the Holy Spirit unto strength, etc."; finally, the embrace.

In those to be ordained priests the process was the same, but with diverse formulas (Oremus fratres dilectissimi and Oremus carissimi of the present liturgy), and the present Vere dignum.

In the Gallican rite the ordination itself began as now in the Roman rite, with the interrogation made to the people concerning the manner of life of the candidate. The people answered: "He is worthy." There followed the invitation to pray: Commune votum (which prayer has been preserved in the ordination of deacons); a prayer said with extended hands (Domine Sancte, Pater fidei), which is now recited at the end of the ceremony. In that rite also the ceremonies were the same for priests and for deacons; but the allocution for presenting the elect has been preserved (Quoniam, fratres, ecclesiae navis); the prayer which the Pontiff said by extending his hand, together with all the presbyters, upon the head of those to be ordained (Deus, sanctificationum omnium auctor) is now found after the handing over of the chasuble. Finally there was the anointing of the hands with the present formula, except for the beginning: "Let these hands be consecrated." Here again is discerned the mixture of the ancient Roman usage and the ancient Gallican usage. For the rest, in the sixth or seventh century the handing over of the instruments was introduced, concerning which the ancient sacramentaries are silent.

5. Episcopate. Formerly there was the same general process which was used for deacons and presbyters: examination; invitation to pray; litanies; imposition of hands with a twofold prayer (collect and Eucharistic prayer). Although it was of great moment, it is not that Roman examination, but the Gallican one, which has been received into the present Pontifical. The ancient one, however, has been preserved in the third part of the Pontifical, under the title "Concerning the evening scrutiny," etc. The imposition of the miter and gloves is rather recent; more ancient is the handing over of the book of the Gospels, the pastoral staff, and the anointing.

E. DE M., S.I.

Literature. Besides the authors cited above who treat of all the sacraments, the following may be consulted: Gasparri, De sacra ordinatione, 2 vols., Paris, 1883; Many, De sacra ordinatione, Paris, 1904; Wernz, Ius Decretalium II, Rome, 1906; Cardinal van Rossum, De essentia sacramenti ordinis disquisitio historico-theologica, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1914.

Preliminary note. Since the treatise on the sacrament of Order pertains for the greater part either to Dogmatic Theology or to ecclesiastical law, we speak here only very briefly: 1. of the nature of this sacrament; 2. of its minister; 3. of its subject.

1884. After we have treated of the five Sacraments which are ordered to the spiritual life of the private man, it remains that we discuss the two others which were instituted for the advantage of religious society. - And first we shall discuss ORDER, on which, as the Roman Catechism says, all the other Sacraments so depend "that without it they partly can in no way be confected and administered, and partly would seem to lack solemn ceremony and indeed religious rite and worship."

We shall treat: 1. of the nature of Order; 2. of the Minister; 3. of the Subject of Order; 4. of Irregularities, or of the impediments of receiving Order or of Order received.

It must be spoken: 1. of the notion of Order; 2. of the effects of this Sacrament; 3. of the matter and form by which it is constituted.

1885. I. DEFINITION. Order, generally, is the apt disposition of things among themselves and to some end.

Order, specifically, considered in relation to our scope, is taken in two ways: 1. passively, for a certain grade, or state of men, who by some consecration are deputed to the divine ministry in the Church of Christ; in which respect it is not a Sacrament, but something permanent; 2. actively, for the sacred rite itself through which a man is enrolled into this sort of state and dignity of the divine ministry: in which sense it is something transitory, and is commonly defined: "A certain seal of the Church, by which spiritual power is handed over to the Ordained, in order to the Eucharist...."¹ So defined, Order comprehends also the lower grades or minor Orders, which, more probably, are not instituted by Christ the Lord, but only by the Church.

But more exactly Order, insofar as instituted by Christ the Lord, can be defined: "A Sacrament of the New Law, by which there is handed over the power of consecrating, offering, and ministering the Body and Blood of Christ, and also of remitting sins, or of serving the priest from office."

From Trent, sess. 13, cap. 1 and 2.

1886. II. DISTINCTION OF ORDERS. It is of faith that there are MANY Orders in the Church, as Trent defines, sess. 23, can. 2: "If anyone shall say that, besides the priesthood, there are not in the Catholic Church other Orders, both major and minor, through which, as through certain grades, one tends to the priesthood: let him be anathema."

SEVEN ORDERS are counted in the Latin Church, namely: four minor ones: Ostiariate, Lectorate, Exorcistate, and Acolythate; three major ones: Subdiaconate, Diaconate, Priesthood or Presbyterate. The three latter are also called sacred, both because they immediately concur in confecting or ministering the Eucharist, and chiefly because they have annexed the obligation of perpetual chastity, by which the Ordained are consecrated to God.²

The distinction of Orders, according to D. Thomas,³ is taken according to relation to the EUCHARIST, insofar as it is confected, distributed, and received. - Hence, either the matter is of consecrating the Eucharist, and for this the Priesthood is given; or of distributing it, and in this the Deacon cooperates with the priest; or in preparing the sacred vessels, that the matter may be received in them, which pertains to the Subdeacon; or of presenting the matter itself, and this pertains to the Acolyte. - But as regards the recipients, these ought to be clean: therefore the unclean are to be kept away. Of these there is a THREEFOLD genus: some are those who do not wish to receive the Faith, as Infidels, to whom the church is to be closed, and this pertains to the Doorkeepers; others, who indeed have received the faith, but are not yet sufficiently instructed, such as Catechumens, and to these Lectors are given; others, who indeed sufficiently abound in doctrine, but are detained by the demon, as Energumens, and to these Exorcists are deputed.

Tonsure and Episcopate do not hinder the sevenfold number of Orders. - For Tonsure is not an Order, but a disposition to Orders, as is clear from Trent, sess. 23, cap. 2. But Episcopate is the complement of Presbyterate, since Priesthood is subdivided into Presbyterate and Episcopate.⁴

1887. III. TRUTH OF THE SACRAMENT. Order, or sacred Ordination, is a true and properly so-called SACRAMENT of the New Law. For it has the three things which constitute a Sacrament, namely: 1. a sensible sign through the imposition of hands with the words joined to it, from Acts of the Apostles, c. 6, 6: "And praying, they imposed hands upon them"; 2. the promise of grace, from 1 Tim. 4, 14: "Do not neglect the grace... which was given to you with the imposition of the hands of the presbytery"; 3. the institution of Christ, from Eph. 4, 11: "He gave some... Apostles... and others pastors and doctors... unto the work of ministry"; and from Luke 22, 19: "Do this in commemoration of me": by which words the priesthood was openly instituted. It is confirmed from Trent, sess. 23, can. 3: "If anyone shall say that Order or sacred Ordination is not truly and properly a Sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord: let him be anathema."⁵

1888. Questions. Q. 1. Whether the individual seven Orders are Sacraments?

Resp. 1. It is of faith that the PRESBYTERATE is a Sacrament, because at least concerning it those things are verified which we have said of Order in general, and those words of Trent (sess. 23, can. 4): "If anyone shall say that through sacred Ordination the Holy Spirit is not given, and therefore that the Bishops say in vain: Receive the Holy Spirit, or that through it a character is not imprinted: let him be anathema."

Resp. 2. It is certain, although not of faith, that the DIACONATE is a Sacrament; because in it are found the essentials required for a Sacrament, namely a certain matter, which is the imposition of hands, and a form with the promise of grace, in these words: Receive the Holy Spirit, etc. - It is established besides from Trent, sess. 23, can. 6: "If anyone shall say that in the Catholic Church there is not a hierarchy instituted by divine ordination, which consists of Bishops, Presbyters, and ministers (who are at least deacons): let him be anathema."

Resp. 3. "That the other Orders, namely the SUBDIACONATE and the FOUR MINOR ORDERS, are still Sacraments, is sufficiently probable, from D. Thomas, since to each Order a matter and form seem to have been assigned.... Nevertheless, it is more probable that they are not Sacraments; because in them matter is lacking, namely the imposition of hands, which (as we shall soon say) is more probably the sole matter of Order; and the form is also lacking which expresses the production of grace, since in the conferral of the aforesaid Orders no mention is made of grace, but only of the power which is handed over."⁶ Add to these things that in the Greek Church the minor Orders are not found, except the Lectorate. - And hence it follows that those who are promoted to Orders lower than the diaconate with consciousness of mortal sin cannot be condemned of certain sacrilege. Make an exception as regards the Eucharist, which they receive in the Ordination itself.

Q. 2. Whether the EPISCOPATE is a Sacrament distinct from the Presbyterate?

Resp. 1. It is of faith that the Episcopate was instituted by Christ the Lord, and that through it Bishops are made, by divine right, superiors to presbyters: as is established from Trent, sess. 23, can. 6 and 7. - 2. Yet it is not of faith that it is a Sacrament distinct from the Presbyterate; for D. Thomas and not a few others deny this, who teach that the Episcopate is an extension or complement of the presbyterate: led, namely, by this reason, that through the Episcopate no broader and more sublime power of consecrating and offering is conferred. Hence, they say, it is not required that a new character be imprinted, but it is sufficient that the character of priesthood be perfected and extended to other offices: almost in the way in which, in the Ordination of a presbyter, the sacerdotal power through the final imposition of hands is extended to the power of remitting and retaining sins. But very more probably and most commonly, others teach with Bellarmine that the Episcopate is a Sacrament distinct from the Presbyterate, and that in it a special character is imprinted; both because it is conferred through the imposition of hands and through the form: Receive the Holy Spirit; and especially because through it a special power is handed over, not only as regards various sacred functions, but also as regards the Eucharist itself, namely the power of constituting the ministers of this Sacrament.⁷

Q. 3. Whether and how the various Orders constitute only ONE SACRAMENT?

Resp. "They constitute only one Sacrament from unity of end, since the individual Orders are ordered to confecting the one Sacrifice of the Mass; and all (in the opinion of St. Thomas) are supposed to have been instituted by Christ in those words: 'Do this in commemoration of me.' For in the Order of Priesthood the others are either contained eminently, as are the inferior Orders, or consequently with respect to the Episcopate."⁸

We shall treat: 1. of the effects of this Sacrament, in general; 2. of the power and offices of the individual Orders, in particular.

1889. I. The effects of Order, AS REGARDS THE ORDAINED HIMSELF, are the following three:⁹

1. The conferral of GRACE, both habitual and sacramental, according to what was said concerning the Sacraments in general (n. 1394-1396). - This grace, whose excellence is to be judged from the sublimity of the ministry,¹⁰ is imparted only to those who worthily receive the Sacrament.

2. The imprinting of an indelible CHARACTER, on account of which no Order can be repeated. It is established from Trent (sess. 23, can. 4). All who validly receive the Sacrament are marked with this character.

3. The conferral of the POWER of exercising the functions of the Order which is received. - This power is concerned with spiritual things, and first of all with the real body of Christ, or with the Most Holy Eucharist, with some preeminence; and it is conferred on all who validly receive the Sacrament; indeed also on those who are promoted only to the Subdiaconate or to minor Orders, although, more probably, they do not receive a character. Nor are helps of grace lacking to these, granted by reason of the prayers of the Church.

1890. II. The effect of Order, AS REGARDS THE CHURCH, is the permanence in it of the divinely instituted hierarchy. - For thus Trent speaks (sess. 23, can. 6): "If anyone shall say that in the Catholic Church there is not a hierarchy instituted by divine ordination, which consists of Bishops, presbyters, and ministers: let him be anathema." From these words it is openly gathered that the Sacrament of Order (as the Roman Catechism notes) chiefly regards the utility of the Church and its beauty.¹

What, you will ask, is the DIFFERENCE between the power of ORDER and the power of JURISDICTION?

Resp. A threefold difference chiefly can be assigned. - The FIRST arises from the manner in which each power is ACQUIRED; for the power of Order is conferred through sacred Ordination; but the power of jurisdiction is transmitted through mission, which is defined: "The legitimate assignment of subjects, or legitimate deputation for exercising a spiritual office." - The SECOND is had from the OBJECT or END of each power: Order, or ministry, sanctifies men through rites; but the power of jurisdiction rules and directs them through magisterium and discipline. - The THIRD difference is taken from the manner in which each power INHERES IN THE SUBJECT: the power of Order inheres immutably; hence Bishops and Priests always and everywhere validly do those things which are duly performed by the force of Order alone; but jurisdiction, since it is conferred from the mission of the Church, can be limited or entirely taken away, and therefore acts of jurisdiction can be made null by a Superior. - Add that one power is able to stand without the other, as is clear in a Bishop instituted, who, although not yet consecrated, obtains jurisdiction over his diocese; while a titular Bishop has the power of Order without jurisdiction, at least proper jurisdiction.²

1891. I. The Order of EPISCOPATE confers on a presbyter the power of confirming, ordaining, judging concerning the Faith, and consecrating things pertaining to divine worship.

The OFFICES of a Bishop annexed to the power of Order are the following: Administration of Order and Confirmation; likewise consecration of altars and churches, of oil of the sick, of catechumens and chrism, of chalices and patens, of Kings and Queens; veilings of Nuns, and the major or solemn blessing. - The offices annexed to the power of jurisdiction will be briefly explained in Part IV (cf. n. 2250 and following).

1892. II. The Order of PRESBYTERATE confers on a deacon the power of consecrating the Body and Blood of Christ, of remitting and retaining sins, and of feeding subjects by work and doctrine.³ It is established from Trent, l. c., can. 1. - See in what words the Offices of a presbyter are described in the Pontifical: "It belongs to a Priest to offer, to bless, to preside, to preach, to baptize" (see also n. 2266 and following).

1893. III. The Order of DIACONATE confers on a subdeacon the power of immediately assisting the priest in solemn Mass, by extending to him the paten with the host, and the chalice with wine, and of chanting the Gospel, and of preaching.⁴ The Diaconate pertains to the divinely instituted hierarchy, as is established from what was said at n. 1888; for under the name of ministers at least deacons are comprehended. Their OFFICES, besides those already commemorated, are the following: 1. To baptize solemnly, but only with permission of the pastor and in grave necessity; for a deacon who, without commission, even in a case of necessity, baptizes solemnly, incurs irregularity (cf. n. 1462). - 2. To minister the Eucharist; but neither is this licit to them unless from commission, and in a case of grave necessity: such as if the priest is lacking to the people approaching Communion; otherwise he would be irregular. 3. To carry the pyx or monstrance with the Eucharist. - 4. To wash Corporals, in default of a subdeacon.⁵

1894. IV. The Order of SUBDIACONATE confers on the ordained the power of serving the deacon in solemn Mass and solemnly chanting the Epistle.

The OFFICES of subdeacons, besides the most grave obligation of reciting the divine Office daily and of observing perpetual chastity, can be stated briefly thus: 1. To minister to the deacon at the altar; to prepare wine, bread, linens, etc., for the Sacrifice; to chant the Epistle with the maniple in solemn Mass; to carry the chalice and paten to the altar; to pour water into the chalice; to hold the paten elevated; to carry the peace to the choir. 2. In processions to carry the cross; to wash corporals and purificators: as is prescribed in the Roman Pontifical.⁶

If a subdeacon is lacking for solemn Mass, Superiors can, if necessity exists, permit that a cleric marked only with minor Orders be substituted for him, to chant the Epistle, but without the maniple (thus from the decree of the S. R. C. on July 5, 1698, ad 18).⁷ For if he intended to exercise the proper office of a Subdeacon, he would incur irregularity⁸ (cf. n. 1943).

1895. V. The Order of ACOLYTHATE confers on a cleric the power of carrying cruets to the altar, and of lighting candlesticks and lights on it. (From the ROMAN PONTIFICAL.) - "The OFFICE of an Acolyte is to prepare the ampullae of wine and water for the Sacrifice of the Mass, and to extend them to the Subdeacon; to carry candles to the same Sacrifice and to minister to it: whence he is also called candle-bearer."⁹

1896. VI. The Order of EXORCISTATE confers on a cleric the power of expelling demons from the possessed, lest they impede them from Communion (FROM THE ROMAN PONTIFICAL.) The OFFICE of an Exorcist is to impose hands over those vexed by unclean spirits, for adjuring and casting them out; likewise for exorcizing catechumens.¹⁰ "But in order that an exorcist be able to exorcize solemnly, there is required also the conferral of jurisdiction, or permission of the Bishop. Yet this is not by common law, but by a particular precept of Bishops prohibiting exorcism without their permission. - It was said solemnly, since any one of the faithful can privately command demons, that they not harm, nor impede the faithful from sacred actions"¹¹ (cf. n. 622).

1897. VII. The Order of LECTORATE confers on a cleric the power of reading the sacred Scriptures in church (From the ROMAN PONTIFICAL.) - The OFFICE of a Lector is: 1. To chant Lessons and read sacred Scriptures outside Mass (for in Mass it is the office of the Subdeacon); 2. to catechize, or to teach catechumens the rudiments of faith; 3. to bless bread and all new fruits. Thus the ROMAN PONTIFICAL.¹²

1898. VIII. The Order of OSTIARIATE assigns to a cleric the power of opening, closing, and guarding the church. (From the ROMAN PONTIFICAL.) - To his office moreover it belongs to ring bells, to admit the worthy into the church, to expel the unworthy, namely infidels, heretics, and the excommunicated.¹³

1899. IT IS ASKED. What are the effects of TONSURE?

Resp. Tonsure, although it is not an Order, nor confers any power, nevertheless by the institution of the Church obtains manifold effects and precious privileges, namely: 1. The tonsured man is transferred to the clerical state. And hence it is why the hairs themselves are cut off, and indeed in the manner of a crown, by which the royal dignity of those who have been called into the lot of the Lord is splendidly expressed. - 2. Clothed with a surplice, he can intervene in choir for singing the divine Offices. 3. He acquires the privilege of forum, by which he is exempted from the jurisdiction of the lay forum. 4. He also acquires the privilege of the canon, so that those injuriously striking him incur excommunication reserved to the Pope, if the striking is grave; but to the Bishop, if light. 5. The tonsured man becomes capable of an ecclesiastical benefice, provided he has 14 years. 6. He becomes capable of every ecclesiastical jurisdiction, for conferring benefices, bringing censures, and judging spiritual causes. - 7. He becomes proximately apt to receive Orders. For although one not yet tonsured is validly ordained, nevertheless he receives Orders illicitly, and sins gravely against the precept of Trent (sess. 23, cap. 1).¹⁴

Here we shall PRE-NOTE two things: - The first is that the controversy which is moved concerning the form and matter of Order pertains least of all to practice, since in the administration of the Sacraments the safer part must necessarily be chosen. - The other is that the minor Orders and Subdiaconate, which the more probable opinion denies to be Sacraments, on account of a certain analogy with the Sacraments, likewise consist of matter and form. These things having been pre-noted, we say:

1900. I. Of the Orders which more probably are not Sacraments, the REMOTE MATTER is the instruments, but the PROXIMATE matter is the handing over of these instruments; and the FORM is the words which the Bishop pronounces in the handing over of the instruments.¹⁵ Thus commonly. - Hence:

1. A DOORKEEPER is ordained in the handing over of the keys of the church. If several are ordained, it is not required that individuals succeed one another in touching the keys; it suffices that the touch be made by twos or fours jointly, provided it be done with the right hand, at the time when the Bishop pronounces the formula. Thus the S. R. C., March 11, 1820.¹⁶ But if keys of a Church or Oratory are lacking, the Ordainer can use any key whatsoever. (S. Congr. de Prop. F. to the Apostolic Vicar of Cochin-China, March 23, 1844.)¹⁷

2. A LECTOR is ordained by the handing over of the book of prophecies and epistles. If in place of the book of epistles or lectionary a Bible or Breviary were handed over, the Ordination would be not only valid, but also licit; otherwise, if another book were handed over.¹⁸

3. An EXORCIST is ordained by the handing over of the book of exorcisms.

4. An ACOLYTE is ordained by the handing over of empty ampullae, or at least of one, and of a candlestick with an extinguished candle; because it is his part to prepare the light and the wine and water for Mass. But the character (if any is imprinted) is imprinted in the handing over of the cruets, because in this latter handing over the more principal power is conferred.¹⁹

5. A SUBDEACON is ordained both by the handing over of an empty chalice with an empty paten placed upon it, and by the handing over of the book of Epistles.

Among the Greeks, the imposition of hands is had for the matter of the subdiaconate; yet they deny that the Sacrament is conferred by that imposition.²⁰

1901. II. Of the Orders which are certainly Sacraments, the ESSENTIAL MATTER, according to the more probable opinion, is the imposition of hands alone; but the FORM is the words which accompany the imposition of hands. But the handing over of the instruments is ACCIDENTAL matter, although integral. - This opinion is proved: 1. from those texts of Scripture which commemorate that both deacons and Bishops and presbyters were ordained through the imposition of hands; 2. from the Fourth Council of Carthage, where it is said: "When a deacon is ordained, the Bishop alone shall place his hands over his head"; and from Trent (sess. 14, cap. 3, on Extreme Unction), where it is declared that the ministers of Extreme Unction are priests duly ordained through the imposition of the hands of the presbytery. Add that the handing over of instruments was not introduced before the eighth or ninth century. Therefore, if priests in the first centuries were validly ordained through the imposition of hands alone, it follows that Ordination essentially consists in the imposition of hands.²¹

Yet neither are the two contrary opinions improbable: of which one teaches that the matter of the diaconate, as also of the inferior Orders, consists in the handing over of the instruments alone, but the form in the accompanying words; while the other opinion contends that both the handing over of the instruments and the imposition of hands are required for the essence of the diaconate, with the corresponding form.²²

Therefore, FOR PRACTICE, according to the safer opinion which must be held:

1. The MATTER of the Diaconate is both the imposition of the hands of the Bishop over the head of each one of the Ordinands, and the handing over of the book of Gospels; and its FORM is the accompanying words.

2. The MATTER of the Presbyterate likewise is twofold, namely the handing over of the chalice with wine and water, and of the paten with bread placed upon it, and then the imposition of hands. But in the Ordination of presbyters this is threefold: the first, when the Bishop extends both hands over the head of each Ordinand, saying nothing; the second, when together with the presbyters he holds the right hand extended over the Ordinands, pronouncing these words: "Let us pray, most dear brethren, etc."; the third finally, when after Communion he again imposes both hands on the head of each, saying: "Receive the Holy Spirit, etc." Hence it is asked, which of these three impositions is the essential matter? And we respond: It is certain that the first is not essential, since no form corresponds to it. But neither is the third imposition essential, according to the common opinion, both because it was not in use among the Latins through the first twelve centuries, and because it supposes them already consecrated priests, since they have already consecrated the Eucharist with the Bishop.

It remains therefore to be said that the second imposition (which is properly that of the presbytery) is the essential matter.¹

3. The necessary MATTER of the Episcopate is certainly the imposition of the hands of the consecrating Bishop, to whom two other Bishops assist, or in a case of necessity, two priests, by dispensation of the Apostolic See. - Probably there is also required for validity the imposition of the book of Gospels over the head and shoulders of the Ordinand, with the accompanying words. - Indeed, according to several, there also pertain to the essential rite both the anointing of chrism on the head, and the handing over of the pastoral staff and ring. This must be held in practice, although it is little probable.²

1902. It is to be noted, says St. Alphonsus, that in conferring sacred Orders there is required: 1. that the matter be handed over by the same Bishop who pronounces the form. But D. Thomas teaches that it is otherwise in the conferral of minor Orders.³ There is required 2. that the chalice and paten which are handed over either to the subdeacon or to the presbyter be consecrated, although many say that this is only of precept.⁴ In the Ordination of a presbyter there is required 3. that together with the chalice and paten both species of bread and wine be handed over at the same time, to express the power over the whole Sacrifice.⁵ There is required 4. that the cup of the chalice and the paten be touched at the same time; although it is commonly taught that it is not absolutely required that the host be touched immediately, just as neither is the wine ever touched immediately.⁶

Likewise, in the judgment of St. Alphonsus,⁷ for complete security physical contact of the instruments is required, and therefore moral contact of them does not suffice. And from this it follows that the Ordination of a priest who touched only the paten or only the chalice is sufficiently doubtful, and that, on account of such doubt, it must be repeated under condition.⁸ Yet mediated contact suffices, namely if the chalice or the book is touched by means of some veil or glove: for he who thus touches, in the sense of all, is truly said to touch.⁹

As regards the UNION of form and matter, the Holy Doctor furthermore notes that it is not required that the contact of the instruments be made from the beginning of the pronouncing of the form even to the end; but that it suffices if it is made before the form is terminated, or after it has been begun.¹⁰

1903. IT IS ASKED. Whether, how, and at what time defects committed in Ordination are to be SUPPLIED?

Resp. 1. GRAVE defects, certainly or probably committed, are to be supplied. Indeed, anxiety alone, arisen from a positive doubt, is a sufficient cause for repeating under condition the Ordination of a deacon, presbyter, and Bishop. - But empty doubts or true scruples are to be despised: for Bishops and other officials so watch over sacred Ordination, that moral certitude concerning its validity is always had, unless something positive stands in the contrary.¹¹

2. As regards the MANNER of correcting errors, one must distinguish: - "If the defect is concerning the essentials, namely concerning the matter and form, the Ordination must altogether be repeated; and indeed the whole, if the defect, or doubt concerning it, is concerned with the handing over of the first power over the real body of Christ; but if it is concerned with the second power concerning the mystical body, only the second must be repeated. But if the defect is concerning accidentals, then, if it is of a light thing, for instance if the Ordained did not say the Canon, such a ceremony or a similar one need not be repeated; but if in a grave thing, for example if the anointing of hands was lacking, or if the new priest did not pronounce the words (i.e., the whole form) of consecration with the Bishop, then the defect must be supplied as soon as possible, and by the same Bishop, if it can be done; otherwise the Ordained would sin gravely by neglecting this, or by ministering in the Order."¹² Yet a hidden defect is to be supplied secretly, to avoid scandal and the disturbance of others.

3. As regards the TIME in which defects are to be supplied, the Holy Doctor has these things:¹³ "If they are defects concerning accidentals, they can probably be supplied at any time. But if concerning essentials, the Salmanticenses say the same with others; but from the more probable and more common opinion, they are to be supplied at the stated times of Ordinations, as is gathered from cap. Presbyter, de Sacr. non iterand.; unless the matter concerns only a doubt of the validity of the Ordination, as several Doctors probably opine." Thus, for example, from the Response of the Congregation of the Holy Office, August 19, 1851, if bodily touch of the instruments was lacking in the Ordination of a deacon, it must be supplied; but it can be supplied "privately and secretly in the action of Mass, and even outside the times of general Ordination."¹⁴

Moreover, this also is to be noted, that those things which depend on the institution of the Church, for example in the conferral of tonsure or of minor Orders, can likewise be supplied by the will of the Church.¹⁵

In the minister some things are required that he confer Orders VALIDLY; others, that he confer them LICITLY.

1904. Besides intention (concerning which in the Treatise on the Sacraments in general, n. 1412), conceded power is required in the minister of sacred Ordination. Wherefore these things are established.

Principles. I. A consecrated Bishop is the ORDINARY minister of the Sacrament of Order. It is of faith, and is established both from the Decree of Eugenius IV to the Armenians and from Trent (sess. 23, can. 7), and from the constant tradition of the Church. Nor does it hinder the validity of Ordination that the Bishop is heretical, degraded, simoniacal, censured, or irregular; provided all substantial things are observed.¹⁶

Hence "Ordinations of the Lutherans are had as null, on account of defect both of character in the one ordaining, and of the form instituted by Christ. Thus likewise Anglican Ordinations are certainly doubtful, indeed far more probably invalid. Otherwise one must hold both concerning Greek schismatics, and concerning the Jansenists in Holland."¹⁷

1905. II. A simple priest can, as EXTRAORDINARY minister, confer by commission of the Supreme Pontiff tonsure and the four minor Orders. - It is established both from various Councils, and from privileges conceded by law or by the Holy See.¹⁸

Hence regular Abbots can, from Trent (sess. 23, cap. 10, de reform.), validly and licitly confer minor Orders and tonsure on their subject Religious. - But on others, even their secular subjects being excluded, they can no longer licitly confer them; indeed, neither validly, as is evinced from various Responses of the S. C. of the Council issued after Benedict XIV, unless there is some special concession for the particular case.¹⁹

1906. Questions. Q. 1. Whether the Supreme Pontiff can grant to a SIMPLE PRIEST the faculty of conferring SACRED Orders?

Resp. The common opinion denies that a simple priest can ever confer the presbyterate. Whether he can confer the subdiaconate, indeed even the diaconate, by commission of the Supreme Pontiff, is controverted. Some affirm, others deny; others finally, and indeed probably, deny concerning the diaconate and affirm concerning the subdiaconate, because this Order does not have, as the diaconate does, an immediate relation to the Body of Christ, nor was it always counted among the sacred Orders.²⁰

Q. 2. Whether for the validity of episcopal Ordination the assistance of THREE BISHOPS is required?

Resp. 1. It is certain that an Ordination is valid which, with permission of the Apostolic See, on account of necessity, has been performed by only one Bishop, two (or even no) presbyters assisting. - It is established from the practice both of the present Church, and also of the Apostles.²¹

2. It is more probable that such an Ordination, even performed without permission of the Holy See, is valid, although illicit: for Benedict XIV reports that some particular case was decided by Clement XI in this sense,²² yet he adds that the aforesaid question was not defined by this decision. - Hence, since the opinion which denies the validity of such an Ordination is still probable, St. Alphonsus teaches that the Ordination is to be repeated under condition.²³

1907. The minister, in order that he ordain LICITLY, ought to have ordinary or delegated jurisdiction over the Ordinand.²⁴ "Each one," says Trent (sess. 23, cap. 8, de ref.), "is to be ordained by his own Bishop." - Now then,

I. A Bishop can have ORDINARY jurisdiction over the Ordinand by a FOURFOLD TITLE: namely, by title of origin, domicile, benefice, and triennial familiarity. It is established from the Bull Speculatores of Innocent XII, issued in the year 1694;²⁵ by which the following things also were established:

1. That someone be licitly ordained by reason of ORIGIN, it is required that he was naturally born from the diocese of the one ordaining. Nor indeed does it suffice if by a chance case he was born there, for example on the occasion of the parents' commerce, legation, office, journey, business, or other temporal stay, even if long-lasting. For then the chance birth is not attended to, but the place of the domicile of the father; in which also the son is censured by law to have been born, and from which he is called native.²⁶ - But if the Ordinand is an illegitimate son, the domicile of the mother is attended to;²⁷ if he is an exposed son, the place in which he was exposed;²⁸ if a baptized infidel, the place in which he was baptized. Thus from the Constitution Cupientes of Paul III, § 3.²⁹

2. That someone be licitly ordained by reason of DOMICILE, there is strictly required either ten years' habitation, or the transfer of the greater part of goods into that place, and besides a notable, although only successive, residence in the same place; and in either case there ought to be added an oath concerning the intention of remaining there perpetually³⁰ (cf. n. 203). - Hence, adolescents who complete the curriculum of studies in the seminary of another diocese, since they do not have the intention of remaining there perpetually, are to be ordained by their own Bishop, but with testimonials of the Bishop of the place in which they have devoted themselves to studies.³¹ Thus the S. C. C. on July 11, 1840.³² Moreover, as regards the right of ordination, it is free to a son under paternal power, although he is not his own master, provided he is adult, to establish his domicile wherever he shall have wished.³³ If someone has two domiciles, he can be ordained by the Bishop of either domicile.³⁴ - But quasi-domicile never suffices.

3. That someone (already tonsured) be ordained licitly by reason of BENEFICE, there is required: 1) that he be in peaceful possession of some ecclesiastical Benefice, whether this Benefice is residential or not, although the whole consists in distributions, indeed although it is removable on the part of the one provided. A perpetual coadjutorship suffices (that is, with future succession), provided the coadjutor has the right of receiving from it a congruous prebend: likewise, a perpetual commendam, namely one which gives full administration of an ecclesiastical Benefice.³⁵ - But the title of Masses does not suffice, nor a pension, although perpetual and ecclesiastical, nor a lay chaplaincy; because they are not true Benefices. There is required 2) that the Benefice, burdens being deducted, by itself (i.e., without addition of patrimony), suffice, according to the synodal tax or the custom of the region, for congruous sustenance of life. Yet it is left to the judgment and conscience of the Bishop to establish whether the burdens of Masses are to be deducted or not; as is established from the Response of the S. C. of the Council, on July 17, 1723.³⁶

But if someone has several Benefices in diverse dioceses, he can be ordained by any Bishop of those dioceses, provided the conditions stated above are present. Thus commonly.³⁷ (See other things at n. 1922.)

4. That someone be ordained licitly by reason of FAMILIARITY, there is required: 1) that the Bishop has retained him in his actual service, through a morally whole triennium, and has fed him at his own expense; although the triennium was begun before his promotion to the Episcopate. - 2) That the Bishop actually confer on him an ecclesiastical Benefice sufficient for sustenance, any fraud ceasing, at least within the term of one month from the day of the Ordination made.

But by the name of familiars of a Bishop are understood all who serve the Bishop (not now titular, but residing in his own See) and live at his expense, even if they do not dwell in his buildings; provided they live in the place where the Bishop is, or nearby. - Indeed, by the name of familiars are understood the very servants of the servants, provided fraud is absent: which would be present if the Bishop permitted his familiars to have other servants under themselves, so that he could ordain them; and provided all are fed at his expense: for then all, in reality, are reputed as servants of the Bishop.³⁸

1908. II. A foreign Bishop obtains DELEGATED jurisdiction from DIMISSORIAL LETTERS legitimately granted. Dimissorial letters differ from testimonial letters in this, that in the latter there is given only an attestation concerning the birth, age, morals, and doctrine of the Ordinand, who is exhibited as worthy, to whom Orders may be conferred; but through the former there is given, together with the aforesaid attestation, consent and permission, so that the subject can be ordained by a foreign Bishop (cf. n. 1363).

Now, dimissorial letters are LEGITIMATELY granted: 1) by the Supreme Pontiff for the whole Church; 2) by a Legate a latere or an apostolic Nuncio, for his province; 3) by the proper Bishop of the Ordinands, although not yet consecrated, or absent from the diocese; 4) by the Vicar general, provided he has a special mandate, or the Bishop is so far distant from his own diocese that he could not be approached except after the journey of one day;¹ 5) by the capitular Vicar, or Chapter, after one year of vacancy for all subjects; but within the year for laymen alone to be initiated with first tonsure,² or for clerics alone who are said to be constrained (arctati), namely to receive Orders, on account of a Benefice requiring personal service (cf. n. 1369); 6) by a regular Prelate, i.e., the General or Provincial; or if a monastery is not subject to these, by the local Prelate, for his respective subjects.

1909. But concerning these things we NOTE: 1. Regularly, the Bishop is bound to ordain his subjects by himself. But if a just cause brings an impediment to him, let him dismiss them to another Bishop to be ordained only after they have been approved and examined, as was decreed in Trent (sess. 23, cap. 3, de ref.).

2. Permission granted to someone, that he be ordained by a foreign Bishop, does not expire by the death or removal of the one granting it, unless it is revoked by the successor.³

3. With dimissorials there is not understood to be granted to the foreign Bishop the faculty of dispensing the Ordinand over irregularity, or other canonical impediments. But on one dismissed for the Subdiaconate, minor Orders can be conferred, and also Confirmation itself, because the lesser is included in the greater.⁴

4. From the declaration of the S. C. of the Council, January 16, 1595, it is in the discretion of the Bishop to examine those dismissed to him, although they had already been examined; which nevertheless it is not fitting to do without cause. - But to a foreign Bishop, who is summoned to fulfill the place of the Diocesan, it is not licit to subject the Ordinands to examination. He will nevertheless be able to abstain from Ordination, if a just cause occurs to him. Thus from the decision of the S. C. C., August 22, 1721.⁵

1910. IT IS ASKED. By whom are REGULARS to be ordained?

Resp. A special privilege being set aside, after Trent, granted by name, Regulars are to be ordained by the Bishop of the place where they dwell as of the family.⁶

Wherefore it must be NOTED: 1. By the name of Regulars also Novices come, provided they have already passed a notable time in the novitiate, and promise with an oath that they will remain perpetually in the monastery, as far as lies in them. But they can also be ordained by the Bishop of origin.⁷

2. If the diocesan Bishop is absent, or is not about to have Ordinations at the next legitimate time, or even if the See is vacant, it is lawful for regular Prelates to send subjects to any Bishop whatever.⁸

3. Regular Prelates must always give dimissorials to their subjects not only to a foreign Bishop, but also to the proper Bishop. If they are given to a foreign Bishop, there must be inserted in them the authentic testimony of the Vicar or Secretary of the proper Bishop, concerning the cause on account of which he does not ordain.⁹ But Regulars do not need this testimony, to whom the faculty has been granted of receiving Orders from any Catholic Bishop whatever¹⁰ (see other things n. 1925, at the end).

Note. The other things required in the Minister, which regard the mode of Ordination, see nn. 1901 and 1902.

1911. The SUBJECT of Order is a male and baptized man, who, if he is an adult, must have at least a habitual intention of receiving the Sacrament.¹¹ These things are required for VALID reception of Order, as is established from what was said concerning Sacraments in general, nn. 1433 and 1434. See besides, as to the Episcopate, n. 1924, 1.

But for the LICIT reception of Order, CONDITIONS of a threefold kind are required. The first kind embraces those things which are intrinsic to the Ordinand, or regard his soul, namely divine vocation, the intention of becoming a cleric, competent knowledge, and probity of life.¹² The second kind embraces many extrinsic things, which are required of the Ordinand, such as immunity from censure and irregularity, canonical age, Confirmation, the exercise of the Order received, and title of sustenance. The third kind finally regards the very mode of Ordination, such as Ordination by degrees, interstices, time, place, reception of the Eucharist, and the legitimate Bishop, who at the same time ordains and celebrates Mass. - Each point is to be weighed accurately.

Besides the STATE OF GRACE, which is necessary for receiving the Sacrament of Order,

1912. I. DIVINE VOCATION is required in the Ordinand, as is established from Heb. 5:4: "Nor does anyone take the honor to himself, but he who is called by God, as Aaron." And from John 15:16: "You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." The sublimity of Order, the holiness of the office, and the gravity of the burden plainly demand this divine vocation for themselves (cf. n. 2142).

The principal SIGNS of divine vocation are, says St. Alphonsus:¹³ 1. suitable knowledge; 2. probity of life (concerning which matters we must soon treat); 3. right intention or the desire of devoting oneself to the divine glory and the salvation of souls. But the signs from which it becomes known that someone is not called are, among others: a certain deformity of body, infamy, a habit of sinning, especially against chastity, natural levity, weariness of piety, sloth, a worldly disposition.¹⁴ "He who, without vocation explored from such signs, thrusts himself into the sacred ministry, certainly cannot be excused from grave presumption...; and since here he exposes himself to great danger of damnation, I do not know how he is excused from grave fault.¹⁵ - And those Bishops commit themselves to this danger of salvation so much the more, who promote those not called to sacred Orders, according to that saying of the Apostle (1 Tim. 5:22): "Do not impose hands quickly on anyone, nor communicate in the sins of others." Nor therefore is it to be wondered at, that in canon law it is prescribed, and expressly in can. Nullus, dist. 24: "that no one be ordained, unless he shall have been approved."¹⁶

1913. II. From Trent (sess. 23, cap. 4, de ref.) there is required an INTENTION OF BECOMING A CLERIC, i.e., of ascending to higher Orders: namely, if someone accepts a Benefice, to which offices of a higher Order are annexed; otherwise the Council requires in the Ordinand only the intention of remaining in the clerical state.¹⁷ "Let not those be initiated with first tonsure," it says, "of whom there is not a probable conjecture that they have chosen this kind of life not by fraud for fleeing secular judgment, but so that they may render faithful worship to God."

Hence: 1. He who receives minor Orders or first tonsure for the end that he may decline the lay forum, having in mind to return to secular life, sins; and indeed, according to the more probable opinion, mortally, insofar as he acts in fraud or gravely defrauds the Church, by abusing its sacred ministries for temporal ends. Yet another probable opinion "says that he does not sin mortally, because from Trent someone is then understood to commit fraud, when he receives Orders so that he may escape some secular judgment already begun, and this indeed will be mortal; otherwise it will be only venial by reason of the disordering of the end intended by the Church.¹⁸"

2. He who, after receiving minor Orders, takes a wife, speaking in itself, does not sin gravely; indeed not even lightly, if he does this from a just cause. - We said speaking in itself; for one who, being certain of his clerical vocation, withdraws from it in order to enjoy the world, can scarcely be judged to be established in a good state of soul.¹⁹

Note. Concerning a Cleric ordained by force or fear, see n. 1434.

1914. III. COMPETENT knowledge is required. From the Council of Trent (loc. cit.) it is required for those to be initiated to tonsure "that they have been taught the rudiments of faith and know how to read and write." For those to be initiated to minor Orders, "that they understand the Latin language." For subdeacons and deacons, "that they be instructed in letters, and in those things which pertain to exercising the Order." Finally, for those to be initiated to the priesthood, "that, after a diligent examination has preceded, they be approved as suitable to teach the people those things which it is necessary for all to know unto salvation, and to administer the Sacraments" (cf. n. 1787). But what is required for a Bishop, see among the Canonists.

To what has been said THREE things are still to be added, namely: 1. The Bishop is bound, unless he is certain from another source concerning the knowledge of the Ordinands, to examine his own subjects, "having called to himself for this purpose expert and suitable men," as Trent speaks (sess. 23, cap. 7). - 2. All who possess the degree of knowledge required by Trent, the Bishop can ordain with a safe conscience. Yet it is licit to require greater knowledge from his own subjects; and this, in present times, is laudably required in many places. - 3. The common opinion holds that less knowledge is required in Regulars devoted to the contemplative life, because they are ordained only for the service of choir and altar. Nevertheless, it must be said otherwise if Regulars are to be deputed to all priestly offices, as is commonly done today.²⁰

1915. IV. PROBITY OF LIFE is required, by which namely the cleric, existing faithful to the divine vocation, may furnish a certain pledge of future perseverance. Hence Trent (sess. 23, cap. 12): "Let Bishops know that only the worthy are to be assumed to these Orders, and those whose approved life is old age." And St. Thomas: "Not any sort of goodness suffices, but excellent goodness is required." Hence the Apostle (1 Tim. 3:6) prohibits neophytes from being ordained, that is, as the same Angelic Doctor explains, those who are neophytes not only in age, but also those who are neophytes in perfection.

From positive law, especially from Trent, sess. 23, caps. 5 and 7, de ref., and from the Pontifical, THREE SCRUTINIES must be sent before sacred Ordination. - The first is made by the pastor or by another appointed by the Bishop; and for this a proclamation must be made both in the parish of origin and in the parish of habitation of the Ordinand, if they are different. The second scrutiny is instituted by the Bishop himself with certain examiners, on Wednesday, or a few days, before Ordination: to this end, namely, that "he diligently investigate and examine the birth, person, age, instruction, morals, doctrine, and faith of the Ordinands." - The third scrutiny is made in the very Ordination (namely of deacons and presbyters) through those words of the Bishop: do you know that they are worthy? - These today are, together with the attestation itself of the archdeacon, a mere ceremony (cf. n. 1917). See more among the Canonists.²¹

1916. Questions. Q. 1. What must be done by the Bishop, that he sufficiently prove Candidates for sacred Orders?

Resp. St. Alphonsus:²² "For this proof, to be sought out by the Bishop, it does not indeed suffice that he himself knows nothing evil concerning the Ordinand; but he must become certain concerning his positive probity, according to the sublimity of the grade to which he pants to ascend, as Suarez, Sanchez, the Salmanticenses, etc., commonly say with St. Thomas... On which matter, Bishops in seeking this proof ought not to be content with the simple attestation of pastors, who, led by human respects, easily indulge clerics in granting attestations of this kind; but besides, after secret information has been taken from others worthy of trust, they must become certain, not only that the one to be initiated has not been evil, namely that he has not been quarrelsome, has not given scandal by frequenting games, depraved conversations, etc.; but also that he is positively good, that is, that he leads a spiritual life, is assiduous in churches, frequents the Sacraments and prayer, devotes himself to study, etc. Someone will say: If this were observed, ministers would indeed be lacking in the Church. Benedict XIV rightly responds to this: It is better to have fewer ministers, but upright and useful, than many who will be of no value."

Q. 2. What must be done by a Confessor with a cleric habituated in a base vice?

Resp. 1. An Ordinand²³ who is habituated in the base vice of lust (or of drunkenness²⁴), although he is disposed for the Sacrament of Penance, by that very fact is not yet disposed to receive sacred Order; but for some time he must devote effort to rooting out the depraved habit. The reason is, because, that someone ascend to the dignity of sacred Order, the simple and actual state of grace does not suffice; but there is also required surpassing and habitual goodness, which, according to the common law, is not acquired immediately. - But if one habituated in a base vice wished to ascend to sacred Order immediately, without experiment of amendment, that man, as rash, would also render himself unworthy of sacramental absolution.

Resp. 2. If nevertheless the penitent were endowed by God with such compunction, which would free him from his former frailty (which can rarely be supposed), and he firmly resolved to avoid sins and occasions, and to use efficacious remedies, so that he could lead a life worthy of a priest, he could be absolved, although he wished to receive Order immediately. But indeed, in this case also, for one wishing to be ordained immediately, it is more advisable that absolution be deferred, so that he may be better proved by an experiment of time; provided that from the delay there is not to be feared a proximate danger of infamy.¹

Q. 3. Whether a cleric, who has been judged worthy of some Order, can be compelled to receive it?

Resp. Neg., in itself, according to the decision of the S. PENITENTIARY (August 27, 1829), which responded that a cleric is not to be compelled, who, although chosen by his Superiors and judged worthy by his confessor for the sacred ministry, refuses to obey their admonitions, by reason of humility, or fear of dangers; nor did it judge that a deacon was to be compelled to receive the Order of the presbyterate, even if he is chosen by Superiors as most apt, and is judged worthy by his confessor.² - But except: 1. if it is judged that the absolute will of God intervenes through extraordinary signs, either exteriorly, or interiorly in the intimate state of the soul, manifested to the Ordinand; 2. if there is present a grave necessity of the Church, for which otherwise provision cannot be made.

Note. Innocent XI, through the S. C. OF BISHOPS AND REGULARS, October 9, 1682, commanded the Archbishop of Milan and all the Bishops of Italy and the adjacent islands, that individual Clerics, about to receive Orders both minor and major, should devote themselves for ten continuous days to SPIRITUAL EXERCISES. Nevertheless, from introduced custom, for sacred Orders alone, ten whole days are required (cf. n. 1367).³

From the Tridentine law there are REQUIRED in the Ordinand:

1917. I. IMMUNITY FROM CENSURE AND IRREGULARITY. - The one to be ordained must be immune from censure and irregularity; for censure deprives of participation in the goods of the Church; and irregularity induces incapacity for Order: therefore each impedes Ordinations.

And hence it is why the Bishop, from the prescription of the Pontifical, before the Ordination has begun, commands, under penalty of excommunication, that no one bound by either impediment approach; just as neither one enrolled, or not approved, or a foreigner, protesting that he does not wish to ordain unworthy persons of this sort. If nonetheless someone of this kind should approach, his Ordination would have to be judged valid; because the aforesaid things today pertain to mere rite, or are customarily prefaced only for terror: whence it cannot be supposed that the Bishop truly wished to bind his intention to such a protestation, unless the contrary is positively established.⁴ "For the Bishop," says Benedict XIV⁵ with Navarre, Gobat, and Lugo, "lest he become guilty of grave sin, is bound to have the absolute intention of conferring Order on the man present, when he imposes hands."⁶

We must treat 1° of the nature and division; 2° of the matter and form; 3° of the minister; 4° of the subject of Order.

1513. - By the name of Order here is understood a grade of Clerics consecrated for special ecclesiastical Offices.

Order is defined: a Sacrament of the new law by which spiritual power is handed over, and grace is conferred for duly undertaking ecclesiastical functions.

1514. Things to be established. - I. Order is a true Sacrament of the new law, properly so called. - See the arguments among the Dogmaticians.

II. Seven Orders are numbered, namely, Presbyterate, Diaconate, Subdiaconate, Acolythate, Exorcistate, Lectorate, and Ostiariate. The first three are called Major or even Sacred; the others Minor. - See the arguments among the Dogmaticians.

1515. Questions. - Quaer. 1° What is the nature and property of these Orders?

Resp. 1° Ostiariate is the Order by which there is conferred a special power of opening or closing the door of the Church, of admitting the worthy, and of excluding the unworthy.

2° Lectorate is the Order by which a special power is handed over of reading psalms and lessons from the pulpit in the Church, and of catechizing the people, or instructing them in matters of Faith.

3° Exorcistate is the Order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of casting out demons through exorcisms instituted by the Church.

Nevertheless today the faculty of exorcizing is reserved to Priests alone, who can use it only with the license of the Ordinary (n. 376).

4° Acolythate is the Order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of serving the Subdeacon during the solemnities of Mass, of lighting candles, and of preparing and presenting the cruets of wine and water.

5° Subdiaconate is the Order by which there is conferred on someone a special power of serving the Deacon in solemn Mass, and of chanting the Epistle with solemn rite.

6° Diaconate is the Order by which there is conferred a special power of immediately assisting the Presbyter in solemn Mass, of chanting the Gospel during solemnities, of preaching, of solemnly baptizing, and of dispensing the Most Holy Eucharist. But whether the Deacon, in order to preach at any time, needs the special license of the Bishop, or whether the license of the Pastor or Rector of the Church suffices, seems to have to be defined from particular statutes or custom. Cf. n. 1257. II. 1287. III.

7° Presbyterate is the Order by which there is conferred a special power of consecrating the Body and Blood of Christ in the celebration of Mass, of absolving from sins, and of feeding subjects by work and doctrine.

To these add Episcopate and First Tonsure, of which the former is the complement of Priesthood itself, but the latter is not an Order, but a disposition to Orders, by which someone is enrolled as a Cleric.

Quaer. 2° Whether Diaconate is a Sacrament?

Resp. Affirmatively, according to the common and certain opinion. - See the Dogmaticians.

Quaer. 3° Whether Subdiaconate also is a Sacrament?

Resp. It is disputed; the more probable OPINION denies. For both the matter of the Sacrament of Order is lacking, namely imposition of hands, and also its form; for in the form of Subdiaconate the conferral of grace is not expressed, but only of spiritual power. Nor does Subdiaconate seem to be numbered among the Major Orders from divine institution, but only ecclesiastical, since among the Greeks it is not held as a Sacred Order.¹

Say the same concerning the Minor Orders.²

1516. - Matter and form are various for the various Orders.

I. As regards the Minor Orders, by reason of matter, the Ostiary is ordained by the handing over of the keys of the Church; the Lector by the handing over of the book of lessons; the Exorcist by the handing over of the book of exorcisms; the Acolyte by the handing over of empty cruets, or at least of one, and of a candlestick with an extinguished candle, because it belongs to him to prepare light, wine, and water for Mass. - The form proper to these Orders is contained in the words which the Bishop uses while he hands over the instruments themselves. (32) p. 422.

II. As regards Subdiaconate, among the Greeks the imposition of hands is judged as the matter. Among the Latins it is disputed. According to some, the handing over of the empty chalice with the empty paten is its only proximate matter. But others contend that the handing over of the book of Epistles is likewise the essential matter of this Order. - But the form is contained in these words: See whose ministry, etc.; according to the opinion requiring also the handing over of the book of Epistles, the form corresponding to this handing over must be added.

III. As regards Diaconate, the matter is established as twofold, namely the imposition of the right hand of the Bishop, and the handing over of the book of Gospels. Whether each of these is necessary, or only one, is in controversy. Some Theologians judge only the imposition of hands necessary; others, only the handing over of the book; others finally, each. But as regards practice, this last opinion, as the safer one, is to be held. - Consequently the form also is held as twofold. That which is added to the former matter is this: Receive the Holy Spirit for strength, and for resisting the devil and his temptations. In the name of the Lord. - That which accompanies the latter matter is of this kind: Receive the power of reading the Gospel in the Church of God, both for the living and for the dead. In the name of the Lord.

IV. As regards Presbyterate, its matter among the Greeks is placed in the sole imposition of hands; but among the Latins it is twofold, at least by precept, namely the imposition of the hands of the Bishop, and the handing over of the chalice with wine, and of the paten with the host placed upon it. But it is disputed among Theologians what is the essential matter. More probably it consists in the second imposition of hands alone, which is made by the Bishop with the assisting Presbyters.

The form also varies according to the diversity of matter; wherefore concerning it likewise there is dispute. Hence the form which corresponds to the handing over of the instruments is this: Receive the power of offering Sacrifice to God, and of celebrating Masses, both for the living and for the dead. In the name of the Lord. But the form proper to the imposition of hands is the prayer itself which the Bishop recites while he imposes hands upon those to be ordained a second time, or together with the priests.

1517. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Whether physical touch of the instruments is required?

Resp. St. Alphonsus says that there is given a twofold probable opinion, and consequently that the safer one must be followed in practice. There are some who think the negative opinion safe, on account of a twofold Response of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, the one on December 3, 1661, the other on January 21, 1863. The former sounds thus: "To the scruple of Brother Ephrem Chasteau, pro-agent of the French Recollects, namely that he did not touch with physical touch the chalice in his ordination to the Presbyterate; - the Sacred Congregation responded: That he can continue the celebration of the Most Holy Sacrifice without any scruple, and with altogether safe conscience." The latter response, which is not found in the Collection of Gardellini, is said by the patrons of the negative opinion to be altogether similar to the former both as to the case and as to the response. But from these it is in no way lawful to conclude that the negative opinion is safe. For, as the anonymous annotator of Gury, Roman ed. 1873, rightly notices, "although the doubt concerning the validity of ordination when someone omitted to touch the chalice, even if he touched the paten, is not identical with the proposed general doubt: whether physical touch of the instruments is required; nevertheless, even supposing a connection of each doubt, here it would be necessary to know whether the Sacred Congregation responded concerning a doubt of law, or rather concerning a doubt of fact, since it often happens that responses of this kind regard not questions of law, but a particular case. But that the cited resolution of the Sacred Congregation is to be received in this latter sense is suggested by the mention of scruple which occurs there; for if there had been a question of law, to bring forward a doubt of this kind, on account of the opposed opinions of Theologians, by the name of scruple, would seem alien from the practice of the Sacred Congregation." (33) p. 422.

For the rest, no reasonable and founded scruple can exist in one ordained. For in practice Bishops are accustomed to proceed in such a way that in a matter of such great moment they always hold the safer way. Besides, upon so many Ministers and Officials is incumbent the duty of watching over the rite to be observed in Ordination, so that moral certitude is had that all things were rightly and validly done.

Quaer. 2° Whether the handing over of each species is necessarily required?

Resp. Affirmatively, more probably, because by the handing over of one species the power over the whole Sacrifice is not handed over. - St. Alphonsus.

Quaer. 3° Whether he is validly ordained who touches the host but not the paten; and who touches the chalice and paten, but not the host?

Resp. to the 1st. Affirmatively, with the common opinion, which seems most probable. The reason is that the host and wine are the substantial matter of Order, by which principally the power over the Body of Christ is signified, and only for the sake of fittingness from the precept of the Church are chalice and paten used. Nevertheless in practice the safer part is to be followed.

Resp. to the 2nd. Also affirmatively with the common and truer opinion, says St. Alphonsus. The reason is 1° because then the host is touched by means of the paten; but immediate touch of the host is not prescribed by the Church, but only of the paten, as is clear from the Pontifical; 2° because the wine in the chalice is never touched immediately: therefore neither is it required that the host be touched immediately. For the rest, the one to be ordained must take care that he touch the chalice, the paten, and at the same time the host, and thus he will remove himself from every scruple.

Notes near nn. 1516-1517, matter and form of Order and physical touch (printed p. 209).

1 L. VI. 749. | 2 Ib. 739 sq. | 3 Ib. 743. | 4 Gardell. 2143. Vol. I. p. 364.

Notes near n. 1517, touch of instruments and species (printed p. 210).

1 P. II. n. 702. (1). (*). Cf. Vindic. p. 358. 2a Ed. T. I. p. 439 sq. | 2 L. VI. 750. | 3 Ib. 751.

1518. Principles. - I. Only a Bishop is the ordinary Minister of the Sacrament of Order. - See the arguments among the Dogmaticians.

II. A simple priest, when the Supreme Pontiff commits it, can be the extraordinary Minister of Tonsure and the four Minor Orders, and probably also of Subdiaconate, and according to others also of Diaconate.

It is proved as regards Tonsure and Minors from Councils, especially from Trent, where it is said: "It is not lawful for Abbots and any others whatsoever, however exempt and privileged, hereafter ... to confer Tonsure or Minor Orders upon anyone who is not a regular subject to them." Therefore Trent supposes that they can confer those Orders upon their Religious. - As regards Subdiaconate, see St. Alphonsus.

III. A Bishop can licitly ordain only his own subjects, which the Doctors commonly understand also concerning Tonsure.

But others he cannot licitly ordain without the faculty of their Bishop. - It is drawn from Trent.

1519. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Who is judged to be the proper Bishop of the one to be ordained?

Resp. A Bishop can be proper by a fourfold title, namely the title of nativity, domicile, benefice, and familiarity; concerning which, as regards these Provinces, the following must be noted:

1° Since now among us there is no benefice in the strict name, only the titles of nativity or origin and domicile are to be attended to, not of benefice nor of familiarity; for by the title of familiarity no one can be ordained unless also a benefice is at once, i.e. within a month, conferred upon him.

2° Concerning the title of nativity or origin, the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore has these things: "The place of origin is called the city, town, or village where someone was naturally born, namely where the father has true domicile. But if he is born elsewhere per accidens, for example on the occasion of a journey, embassy, trade, or any other temporal delay, then birth of this kind, being fortuitous, must by no means be attended to, but only the true and natural origin of the father. But if the father has remained in a foreign place where the son is born for so long and with such intention that he has there contracted domicile by law, then not the origin of the father but the domicile must be attended to for the ordination of the son. In the newly baptized, converted from heresy or infidelity, the place of origin is judged to be that in which they receive Baptism. For thus it was established by Paul III; and thus the practice of the Roman Curia holds itself." - But if the son is illegitimate, the origin of the mother is attended to; if exposed, the place in which he was exposed.

3° Concerning the title of domicile, the same Council notes these things: "A subject ... by reason of domicile, for the effect of receiving Orders, is judged to be only he who, although he was born elsewhere, nevertheless has established it stably in some place, either by residence of ten years, or by transferring to that place the greater part of his goods with furnished houses, and by dwelling there for a notable time, and moreover affirms by oath that he has the intention of remaining. From this it is clear that several things are required by positive law for constituting domicile properly so called for those to be Ordained than for those about to receive the other Sacraments. If someone has two domiciles, he will be able to seek Orders from the Bishop of either place, because each is held in place of his own Bishop."

4° "By a foreign Bishop," i.e. in our provinces neither of origin nor of domicile, "no one can be ordained unless he brings with himself the dimissorial letters of his own Bishop." Therefore dispensation from requiring these must be obtained from the Holy See in the case in which there would be question of a European to be ordained, lacking domicile here, and to whom "by the laws of his fatherland it is forbidden that a Bishop, without permission of the civil government, give the faculty of departing."

5° Testimonial letters are also sometimes required, although someone is ordained by the Bishop either of origin or of domicile, and indeed:

a) If someone is to be promoted to further Orders who was assumed to clerical Tonsure, or even to Minor Orders, by another Bishop, by whatever title this one was proper. For this one, if he is ordained by the Bishop of domicile, is held to show to him the testimonials of the Bishop of origin; but the testimonials of the Bishop of domicile if he is ordained by the Bishop of origin.

b) Whoever, whether not yet a cleric, or already promoted to Minors or Tonsure by another Bishop, by whatever title, "has departed from the place of his own origin," situated, for example, in Europe, or in another diocese of these Provinces, "is held to offer testimonial letters of the Ordinary of his origin to the ordaining Bishop," although proper by reason of domicile, or otherwise certain concerning the morals of the one to be ordained. "Nor does it matter whether the one to be ordained departed from the place of origin at that age in which he could have been bound by a canonical impediment, or before, when because of defect of years he could not be subject to an impediment of this kind."

c) "If someone has drawn out a delay for so great a space of time in that place in which he was born not naturally, but per accidens, that he could have contracted some canonical impediment there, then he is held also to show testimonial letters from the Ordinary of that place to the Bishop ordaining." Besides these things the Council established:

d) "That Bishops, and their examiners, ... from all, besides the other requisites, should require also testimonial letters, to be subscribed by the Rectors or Superiors of Colleges and Seminaries" where they were students, "in which it may be disclosed what kind of work they gave to studies; and also by Pastors or priests of proved life of other places in which they spent some notable time."¹

Quaer. 2° Who can grant dimissorial letters?

Resp. 1° Only the Bishop of the one to be ordained, provided he has taken possession, although not yet consecrated and although existing in a foreign diocese, the See not being vacant, can give dimissorial letters, whether by himself or through his Vicars General, if he acts in remote places or has conferred that power on them. For it belongs to the Bishop alone to govern the diocese and to confer Orders by ordinary right.²

Resp. 2° But when the See is vacant, the Chapter indeed has the faculty of conceding dimissorial letters, but not within a year from the day of vacancy, unless someone is constrained to receive Orders within that year on account of a benefice requiring personal service. - Thus from Trent.³

The dimissorial letters which the Chapter, the See being vacant, is prohibited from giving within a year from the day of vacancy, the Administrator also is prohibited from giving, who among us is in the place of the Chapter, or rather of the Capitular Vicar; but since in our Provinces there can be no question of those constrained to benefices, Kenrick thinks that the Administrator can give dimissorial letters even within a year from the day of vacancy, if necessity of providing for the care of souls presses.⁴

Quaer. 3° By what Bishop are Regulars to be ordained?

Resp. By the Bishop in whose diocese is the monastery where they are then dwelling. Except if after Trent they have obtained a special privilege, that they can be ordained by any Bishop whatsoever. But that privilege is not acquired by communication.⁵

If nevertheless the Bishop either is absent or will not have an ordination at the next time established by law, or, according to Lucidi T. I. n. 107, the Episcopal See is vacant, the Superior, dimissorials having been handed over, will be able to send subjects to be ordained by any Bishop whatsoever, provided only they show to this Bishop the testimony of the Vicar General, or Chancellor, or Secretary of the proper Bishop, and provided moreover the concession of dimissorials is not by design deferred to a time in which the diocesan Bishop either is going to be absent or will have no ordinations. The one ordaining can examine those to be ordained; he ought not to. - But these things, prescinding from a special privilege, are valid only as regards those Regulars who emit solemn vows, and those professed.¹

But in the ordination of Regulars, the disposition of the Roman Pontifical is to be observed as regards the formula: Do you promise obedience to your Ordinary, etc.²

Quaer. 4° What Mass is to be said by the Bishop in the general conferral of Orders, when on the Saturdays of the Four Times, or before Passion Sunday, some feast occurs: namely, of the feria, or indeed of the feast?

Resp. Of the feria. - Thus the Sacred Congregation of Rites has declared many times.

Notes near nn. 1518-1519, minister of Order and the proper Bishop (printed p. 210).

1 L. VI. 752. | 2 Sess. 23. c. 10. Ref. | 3 L. VI. 762. Cf. De Ang. T. I. p. 200, and Zeits. für Th. 1880. p. 527. | 4 L. VI. 769. | 5 Sess. 23. c. 8. Ref.

Notes near n. 1519, title of nativity, domicile, and familiarity (printed p. 211).

1 Sess. 23. c. 9. Ref. C. Speculatores. Innoc. XII. | 2 a. 317. | 3 C. Speculatores. Innoc. XII. | 4 C. Cupientes. | 5 Ib. | 6 a. 318. | 7 Honorante. Prax. Sacr. Trib. Urb. Vicarii, Rome, 1762. p. 21. Pauli III C. Cupientes, which Constitution of Paul afterward Clement XI confirmed and enlarged by C. Propagandae.

Notes near n. 1519, testimonial letters for ordination (printed p. 211).

1 Conc. Pl. Balt. II. a. 319. | 2 Kenr. Tr. XX. 15. | 3 Conc. Pl. Balt. II. a. 320. | 4 Ib. a. 321. | 5 Ib.

Notes near n. 1519, dimissorial letters and Regulars to be ordained (printed p. 212).

1 Conc. Pl. Balt. II. a. 322. | 2 L. VI. 787. | 3 Sess. 7. c. 10. Ref. S. Alph. L. VI. 788. | 4 Tr. XX. 21. | 5 L. VI. 768.

Notes near n. 1519, Regular ordination formula and Mass of ordination (printed p. 212).

1 L. VI. 768. 768. Acta, Vol. I. p. 358 sq. Anal. Jur. Pont. Ser. 2, Col. 2818. Ser. 7; Col. 744 sq. Craisson. Man. n. 2045. 2690. 7°. | 2 S. R. C. 22 Jul. 1848 in Gandav.

1520. Principles. - I. The subject of Order is only a baptized male.

The first reason is because women, by divine institution, are altogether incapable of any Order whatever. This is clear from Sacred Scripture.³ It is proved also from the perpetual practice of the Church, and from the unanimous consent of the Fathers and of all the Doctors.

The second reason is clear. For no one before receiving Baptism is able to receive any other Sacrament whatever.

But a baptized little boy, not yet possessed of reason, would indeed be ordained validly, but illicitly.

1521. - II. In order that someone may duly receive Orders, the following conditions are required:

1° That he be bound by no irregularity, suspension, excommunication, or interdict.

2° That he have attained the age required by the Sacred Canons.

3° That he present fitting knowledge, proved by an examination.¹

4° That, in the cases set forth in n. 1519. q. 1°, he show either testimonial or dimissorial letters.

5° That he be ordained at the due time, and with the due interstices interposed.

6° That positive probity of life have divine vocation also as its companion.

7° That ordination be made by grades, namely that a higher Order not be received before a lower, and indeed under mortal sin; nevertheless an ordination otherwise received would be valid, if you except the Episcopate, which prerequires Priesthood.²

8° That those to be ordained receive the Holy Eucharist; which statute of the Roman Pontifical more truly binds presbyters under mortal sin, deacons and subdeacons under light sin; but for those to be initiated to Minors it is judged to be of counsel alone.³

9° That, if there is question of Regulars, those things be observed which were said above n. 1195. C). 5° and n. 1519. q. 3°, and which will be said n. 1522 under 2°. - Regulars have besides the privilege that they can be ordained outside the times.⁴

10° That, if there is question of a married man remaining in the world, he cannot licitly be promoted to any Order, not even to Tonsure, except with the express and spontaneous consent of his consort.⁵ Except: a) if on account of the wife's adultery a legitimate divorce has been made, and indeed juridically, if the crime is not notorious;⁶ b) if, on account of heresy or apostasy from the Faith on her part, the judge has decreed perpetual separation (but today perpetual separation scarcely is accustomed to be permitted); likewise generally c) if the man has converted himself to the Catholic Faith, the wife remaining in infidelity. - But among us such a married man would be ordained most imprudently, unless first a sentence of divorce had been obtained from the civil judge.

But is it required besides that the wife enter Religion, and in the same solemnly profess?

Resp. 1° Negatively, generally, but the perpetual vow of chastity suffices.

Resp. 2° Affirmatively, if either the wife were young and the man became a religious, or the man were assumed to the Episcopate.

Resp. 3° Neither a vow nor entrance into Religion is required if the wife committed the crime of adultery.

11° That the names of secular clerics who are to be assumed to Sacred Orders be recited in the Church of the parish to which they belong.² But this custom does not obtain among us, says Kenrick.³

12° That the Order received be exercised before one ascends to a higher one.⁴ Nevertheless, as to precept, without a strict mandate of the Bishop, it is not certain, especially as regards Minors, whose exercise has almost become obsolete.⁵

13° That there be the intention of clericating, i.e. the will of permanently devoting oneself to the clerical state.⁶

Notes near n. 1520, subject of the Sacrament of Order (printed p. 212).

3 I Cor. 14. 34. I Tim. 2. II. 12.

Notes near n. 1521, conditions for receiving Orders (printed p. 213).

1 Conc. Pl. Balt. II. a. 316. | 2 L. VI. 793. | 3 Ib. 801. | 4 S. Alph. de Priv. n. 115, 116. | 5 L. VI. 812. | 6 Ib. 969.

Notes near n. 1522, title of support for Subdeacon (printed p. 213).

1 L. VI. 969. | 2 Trid. Sess. 23. c. 5. Ref. | 3 Tr. XX. 33. | 4 Trid. Sess. 23. c. 11. 13. 17. Ref. | 5 L. VI. 801. | 6 Ib. 785. | 7 Instr. cit. n. 2. | 8 Ib. n. 3. | 9 Ib. n. 14.

1522. - For one to be ordained Subdeacon there is required besides a title of honorable support,¹ lest, namely, clerics constituted in Sacred Orders be compelled, either from begged subsidies or from sordid gain, to procure for themselves with dishonor to Sacred Order those things which are necessary for living. It is useful in this matter to hand down a synopsis of the Instruction which the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide issued for Mission places on April 27, 1871.

1° "A twofold title is distinguished: namely the ecclesiastical and the patrimonial. This latter ... obtains when the one to be ordained is furnished with such goods, certain, stable, and fruitful, coming from elsewhere than from the Church, which in the judgment of the Bishop are judged to suffice for his fitting support."⁷ - "The ecclesiastical ... title is subdivided into the benefice-title and the title of poverty, to which certain other species, as it were subsidiary and extraordinary, must be added, namely the titles of the Common Table, and of Service of the Church, Mission, Sufficiency, and College."⁸ - The titles of Benefice, Service of the Church, Sufficiency, and College being passed over, since they do not occur among us, and the title of Patrimony already having been explained above, which can also be used among us,⁹ it remains that we treat of the title of Poverty, and of the Common Table, and also of the title of Mission.

2° "The title of Poverty ... is placed in religious profession, by force of which those who have emitted solemn vows in an approved Religion have all things in common, from the revenues of goods, if the Religion itself possesses any, or from the pious offerings of the faithful, of which they have need for sustaining life. But what they call the title of the Common Table touches those clerics who, dwelling after the manner of Religious in the discipline of common life, pronounce either no vows, or only simple vows, and accordingly are permitted to go out or to be dismissed from the religious house, and to return to the world. For the title of poverty does not pertain to them, as is gathered from the Constitution Romanus Pontifex of St. Pius V, on the day before the Ides of October, 1568. But of these clerics those only can be promoted to Sacred Orders under the title of the Common Table whose Congregations or Institutes have been enriched by the Apostolic See with a special privilege for this." Therefore religious of Orders in which solemn vows are emitted cannot, without a special indult, be promoted to Sacred Orders under the title of poverty so long as they are bound only by simple vows, according to the norm of the Decree of Pius IX (see n. 1187). This is clear also from the Response of the Sacred Congregation of Regulars, January 20, 1866, to the Archbishop of Mexico.

3° "The title of Mission ... is accustomed to be used ... for those who ... devote themselves to the service of Apostolic Missions ... in places ... in which the condition of things is such that the common law of the Church concerning those things which regard the title prerequired for Sacred Ordination cannot be observed to the letter. But those who have been ordained under a title of this kind obtain from the apostolic ministry in the Mission to which they have been assigned the things necessary for life."² - In order that someone can be ordained under this title, there is required:

a) A special indult granted by the Holy See to the Ordinary (regularly either for a certain time, or for a fixed number of cases), the conscience of the same being strictly burdened, that it be used "only in favor of those who, by disposition and docility of soul, rectitude of intention, aptitude of mind, progress in sacred studies, integrity of morals, and contempt of worldly things, give hope that they will be strenuous heralds of the Gospel."¹ - An indult of this kind was granted by the Supreme Pontiff to the several Bishops of these Provinces on January 24, 1868, for the term assigned to each of them for the exercise of the other faculties (p. LXX. sq.).²

b) An oath³ [p. LXXIII. note 2 and n. 374. 8°. See several declarations concerning its sense T. I. p. 473 (κ)]. To those emitting it, and likewise to those repeating it on the anniversary day, Pius VI, in an audience of May 7, 1775, granted a plenary indulgence, applicable to the departed, provided in both cases they have confessed and been refreshed by Holy Communion.⁴

4° Just as other titles, so also this one, of which there is question, can be lost according to canonical sanctions, and be taken away by Ordinaries, with the consent, however, of the Sacred Congregation, to which it belongs to release those so ordained from the bond of the oath offered.⁵ "But if, the title generally having been lost, or even the title of Mission, another is not substituted for it, the priest does not for that reason remain suspended; but Ordinaries are held to compel those ordained to the substitution of another title, just as provision has been made by the sacred Canons. This Sacred Congregation declared this in the general meetings of September 1, 1856."⁶

"Likewise regular priests who have pronounced solemn vows, and by Apostolic indulgence are permitted to live in the world, or who have issued simple vows and have departed from their Congregations or Institutes, lest they be compelled to beg with dishonor to their proper grade, are bound to provide for themselves concerning a canonical title; but in places of Missions they are bound at least to prove that means are at hand for them by which they may provide for their own support, as is fitting."⁷

"Those who have ascended to ecclesiastical Orders under the title of some certain Mission, when they have dismissed the office of Missionary, without doubt lose their title, and must provide themselves with another; but if they are deputed to the service of another Mission, in order that they may assume the title of this Mission, a new concession of the Holy See will be necessary; for neither does the faculty, if any has been obtained by the Ordinary of that Mission, of ordaining clerics under the mentioned title, suffice for them."⁸ See also Past.-Bl. für N. Amer.⁹

Notes near n. 1522, title of Mission and canonical title (printed p. 214).

1 Instr. cit. n. 4. | 2 Ib. n. 6. | 3 Instr. cit. n. 7. Conc. Pl. Balt. II. a. 89. | 4 Conc. Pl. Balt. II. a. 323. note 1. | 5 Instr. cit. n. 8. | 6 Ib. n. 15. | 7 Cf. nevertheless Conc. Pl. Balt. II. n. 90. | 8 Ib. n. 11. | 9 Instr. cit. n. 12.

1523. Questions. - Quaer. 1° What knowledge is required in candidates to be promoted to Orders?

Resp. 1° Of those to be initiated to Minors, it is required that they at least understand the Latin speech; 2° of those to be initiated to Subdiaconate and Diaconate, it is required that they be learned in letters, and in those things which pertain to exercising the Order; 3° finally, of those to be initiated to Priesthood, it is required that they be found fit to teach the people those things which are necessary for salvation to all, and to minister the Sacraments. - Trent.³ But the end of the Council, which indicates the lowest limits of knowledge, is to keep the unlettered away from Orders, without its being prohibited to the Bishop to require from those to be ordained a richer knowledge, which deservedly is now required everywhere.⁴

Quaer. 2° What age is required for receiving Orders?

Resp. 1° For receiving Tonsure it is required that the one to be initiated possess the use of reason, namely that he be at least seven years old. - Trent.⁵ 2° As regards Minors, no age is assigned in Canon Law. 3° Of Subdeacons is required the twenty-second year of age. 4° Of Deacons, the twenty-third. 5° Of Priests, the twenty-fifth. 6° But for the Episcopate the thirtieth year is required. It is gathered from Trent.⁶ But it suffices that the indicated year have been begun, with the exception, however, of the Episcopate and Tonsure.⁷ But dispensation as regards age is reserved to the Supreme Pontiff.⁸ For the faculties usually granted to our Bishops in this matter, see p. LXX. n. 3, and p. LXXII. n. 3.

Quaer. 3° At what time and place can Orders be conferred?

Resp. 1° Tonsure can be conferred on any day, hour, and place (even outside the proper diocese of the one ordaining). - Thus from the Roman Pontifical.

Resp. 2° Minors can be conferred anywhere, but in the proper diocese of the one ordaining,¹ on single Sundays or double Feasts of precept, even suppressed,² provided they are conferred in the morning. - See the Roman Pontifical. But this is to be understood of an ordination which is not general; since a general ordination must be made on those days on which Major Orders can be conferred, unless custom permits this on Wednesday or Friday before the general ordination.³

Resp. 3° Major Orders by law, and under grave obligation, are to be conferred during the celebration of Mass: 1° on the Saturday of each of the Four Times; 2° on the Saturday before Passion Sunday; 3° on Holy Saturday.³ But by dispensation obtained from the Pope (for the granting of which a faculty has been conceded to our Bishops. See p. LXX. n. 1), they can also be conferred outside the times, namely on other Sundays or Feasts of precept, even suppressed. - But whether with a dispensation of this kind Orders, whether Minors or Majors, can be conferred on doubles which are not, nor have been, of precept, is controverted. To St. Alphonsus the opinion denying is more probable,⁴ and the Sacred Congregation of the Council followed it in the Caesaraugustana, January 15, 1689.⁵

"But to the Bishops of the Federated Provinces," says Kenrick,⁶ "it is indulged that they confer Orders outside the times; wherefore it seems lawful for them to confer them on any day whatever, at the equal judgment of the Bishop." - But in what sense these words of the most illustrious Kenrick are to be understood is not sufficiently clear. If as interpretive of the privilege, as seems to be concluded from the context (see the cited place), we do not acquiesce in the opinion of the most learned man; for neither, according to St. Alphonsus, is any difference to be admitted between the privilege of conferring or receiving Orders on three feast days and the privilege of ordaining outside the times, as also seems to be clear from the Decree of Innocent XII dated December 14, 1693,⁸ and from several concessions which may be seen in the Bullarium of the Congregation de Propaganda Fide,⁹ and is clearly evident from the declaration in Caesaraugustana above. - But if Kenrick wished to testify only concerning the custom of the Federated States, we admit, with St. Alphonsus, that that custom can be legitimate.¹ - The indult is to be read before the conferral of Sacred Orders. Pontifical.

Addendum and Corrigendum. - The opinion of St. Alphonsus concerning the sense of the indult for conferring Orders outside the times is confirmed by the Response of the Sacred Congregation of Rites of the same day, 18 May 1883, in the Marionopolitana. "Doubt II. Whether the faculty of conferring Sacred Orders outside the times, by force of art. 1, Form. I., generally granted to missionary Bishops, is limited, unless there is a very special indult, to those days alone on which by common law it is lawful to confer Minor Orders, namely feast days of precept, even those abrogated in favor of the faithful? Or whether it extends to all individual days of the year, or at least to all on which an Office of double rite is recited?" The Sacred Congregation responded: "Affirmatively to the first part: negatively to the second."

Note besides concerning the same privilege: a) outside the case of contrary custom or indult, Orders to be conferred must be on separated days. L. VI. 796; b) a Bishop cannot use the favor of another's subject unless he is fortified with an indult for this. (γ) p. 393.

It is not lawful without reasonable cause to perform general ordinations of Sacred Orders outside the Cathedral, or, in another place of the diocese, outside the more worthy church.

Quaer. 4° What is to be said about interstices?

Resp. 1° Between the Minors certain interstices are to be observed, unless something else seem more expedient to the Bishop. - Thus from Trent.³ - But the time is not determined. In many places by custom the four Minors are conferred on the same day.

Resp. 2° As regards Majors, this was established by Trent:⁴ between the last of the Minors received and Subdiaconate, one year must intervene, computed not mathematically, but ecclesiastically, e.g. from the Four Times of one year to the Four Times of the following year; unless necessity or the utility of the Church, in the judgment of the Bishop, demand otherwise. Say the same between Subdiaconate and Diaconate, unless for any reasonable cause whatever something else seem good to the Bishop. The same also is to be said between Diaconate and Presbyterate, unless the Bishop determine otherwise on account of the notable and certain utility of his own Church. But to our Bishops a fuller power as regards this is conceded. See p. LXX. n. 1.⁵

But he would sin gravely who on the same day, besides the four Minors, also received Subdiaconate, unless a contrary custom excuse, which is to be proved by the Bishop.⁶

Note. - Dispensation in the interstices can be given by the Bishop also to Regulars duly dismissed to him, but not to subjects of another diocese, to whom it must be conceded by their own Ordinary, mention of it having been made in the dimissorials. - Craisson, Manuale.¹

Quaer. 5° Does a Cleric sin who, initiated in Minors, takes a wife?

Resp. Speaking in itself, it is certain that he does not sin gravely, indeed not even lightly, if he does this on account of a just cause, e.g. to end enmities, or temptations of the flesh, or to come to the aid of a poor woman, etc.; otherwise he will not be excused from venial sin.² - I said: speaking in itself; for it is greatly to be feared, says St. Alphonsus, lest he be in a bad state who, certain of his vocation to the ecclesiastical state, withdraws from it in order to enjoy the world.

Quaer. 6° Is it required that the one to be ordained be confirmed?

Resp. Trent³ has these words: "Let those not be initiated with first tonsure who have not received the Sacrament of Confirmation." But it is disputed whether these words are of precept, or only of counsel: "Commonly," says St. Alphonsus,⁴ "they say that Confirmation is not required in one to be ordained under grave obligation, but is indeed required under light obligation; because, although the words of Trent rather indicate fittingness than precept, nevertheless he who acts contrary in this matter is not excused from at least a light disorder."

Quaer. 7° Does he sin who receives some Order without the intention of ascending to higher ones?

Resp. 1° He does not sin gravely, even if he receives Major Orders and does not intend to receive Priesthood. - Thus St. Alphonsus, who says that this is certain and common.⁵

Resp. 2° Nor probably does he in itself sin venially, because by no law is it prescribed to anyone that he ascend to higher Orders, unless someone accept a benefice requiring Priesthood or Sacred Order.⁶

See nevertheless what was said concerning those ordained under the title of Mission, n. 374. 8°.

Quaer. 8° Whether and how does an ordained man sin who omits the recitation of the prayers which after ordination are imposed by the Bishop by way of penance?

Resp. The Theologians do not agree on this. For some say that he sins gravely, because the matter of the precept is grave. Others hold that he does not sin at all, because the Bishop does not impose a precept. Finally others judge that omission of this kind at least is not mortal, since this is not certain concerning it, and indeed this opinion is probable to St. Alphonsus.¹

As regards these prayers, this Declaration of the Sacred Congregation of Rites is had:² "The words of the Roman Pontifical: The Nocturn of such a day, understand of the single Nocturn in the ferial office, or of the first of Sunday, as in the Psalter, that is, of twelve Psalms with their antiphons of the time, which the ordaining Bishop can designate, either of the very day on which he has the ordination, or of another, according to his judgment." - But when the Bishop expresses nothing other than what the words of the Pontifical relate, the Nocturn of the feria is to be said, which corresponds to that day on which the ordination was made.

Quaer. 9° Whether or how are newly ordained priests held to read the three Masses prescribed by the Bishop?

Resp. 1° They are not held to apply them according to the intention of the Bishop, and therefore can receive a stipend for them.³

Resp. 2° Probably the obligation to say them at least is not grave; nor are they to be said before non-impeded days arrive, since they must be votive Masses.⁴

Quaer. 10° What should newly ordained priests, celebrating with the Bishop, especially observe as regards the pronunciation of the form of Consecration?

Resp. 1° That, as far as can be done, they finish the form together with the Bishop; 2° that they have the intention of consecrating only when they have finished the form at the same time with the Bishop; 3° that in the Consecration of the Chalice they intend also not to consecrate, if perchance they did not consecrate the bread.⁵ Practically, on account of the easy disturbance of those to be ordained, it will be best that one of the assisting ministers form the intention of which under 2° and 3°, and that those to be ordained be forewarned simply to conform their own to this.

Quaer. 11° To what are priests held by force of the obedience which they promised to the Bishop in ordination?

Resp. Benedict XIV explains thus (in the Epistle Ea quo dilectus, January 14, 1747): "We acknowledge that a Presbyter, by the force of this promise, is bound by this law, among others, as a strict one, that he cannot depart from the service of the Church to which he has been assigned without the license of the Bishop." (34) p. 422.

Quaer. 12° Can priests, or even Pastors, embrace the religious state when the Bishop refuses?

Resp. See n. 1158.

Quaer. 13° Is absolution to be granted to a Cleric habituated in an occult shameful vice, who wishes to ascend to Sacred Orders, without a previous experiment of continence?

Resp. Negatively, even though he has been sincerely converted to the Lord, and therefore can be absolved at once. And so he will not be able to receive Sacred Order unless he has given some time to work at extirpating the depraved habit. But if he persist in wishing to receive Sacred Order, St. Alphonsus does not judge him disposed for absolution, because he violates the law of the Church in a grave matter. He excepts only the case in which God grants the penitent an extraordinary grace of compunction, which renders him so proved that he himself can at once receive Sacred Order without being proved by the experience of time. But even in this case, for one wishing to be ordained at once, it is more prudent that absolution be deferred, so that he may be more firmly proved by the experience of time, provided there is not reason to fear, from the delay, a proximate danger of infamy. The same concerning a drunkard.

Notes near n. 1523, knowledge, age, time, and place for Orders (printed p. 215).

1 Instr. cit. n. 13. | 2 16th year, p. 108. | 3 Sess. 23. c. 4 sq. Ref. | 4 L. VI. 792. Adv. 2. | 5 Sess. 23. c. 4. Ref. | 6 Ib. c. 12. Ref. | 7 L. VI. 799. | 8 Ib. 800. | 9 Ib. 798.

Notes near n. 1523, ordination days and the indult outside the times (printed p. 216).

1 L. VI. 798. | 2 S. R. C. 12 Nov. 1831 in Mars. 16 Mar. 1833 in Claremont, etc. | 3 L. VI. 794. | 4 Ib. 797. Dub. 4. de Priv. n. 116. | 5 Apud Lucidi, de visit. T. I. p. 180. | 6 Tr. XX. 34. | 7 De Priv. n. 116. | 8 Bull. Rom. Ed. Taur. T. XX. p. 587. § 5. | 9 App. 1. p. 175 and 305.

Notes near n. 1523, interstices and separated days for Orders (printed p. 217).

1 L. VI. 797. Dub. 4. | 2 Herdt, Pr. Pont. T. III. n. 355. | 3 Sess. 23. c. 11. Ref. | 4 Ib. c. 11. 13. 14. Ref. | 5 Ex. Ord. 44. L. VI. 795. | 6 L. VI. 796.

Notes near n. 1523, confirmation and intention for higher Orders (printed p. 218).

1 n. 2036, 2037. | 2 L. VI. 785. | 3 Sess. 23. c. 4. Ref. | 4 L. VI. 785. | 5 L. VI. 785. | 6 Ib. 785.

Notes near n. 1523, imposed prayers, Masses, and obedience after ordination (printed p. 218).

1 Ex. Ord. 91. | 2 11 Aug. 1860 in Granat. | 3 L. VI. 829. | 4 Ex. Ord. 91. S. R. C. 11 Apr. 1840 in Barchin. | 5 Ex. Ord. n. 232.

Notes near n. 1524, clerical vocation from Scripture (printed p. 218).

1 L. VI. 823. Cf. Conc. Pl. Balt. II. a. 108, 109. | 2 L. VI. 63-77. Concerning the drunkard n. 67. § Prob. 3. Cf. Vind. p. 778. Ed. 2a. T. II. p. 433. | 3 Hebr. 5. 4. | 4 Act. 1. 24. | 5 Joan. 10. 1. | 6 Ib. 15. 16.

Notes near n. 1524, signs of clerical vocation (printed p. 219).

1 Luc. 10. 2. | 2 23. 21. | 3 L. VI. 802. | 4 L. VI. 73. 802. | 5 I Tim. 5. 22. | 6 Dist. 24. c. 2. | 7 L. VI. 803.

1524. - I. The necessity of divine vocation is proved first of all from Sacred Scripture: Nor does anyone take the honor to himself, but he who is called by God, as Aaron was.³ - Hence the Apostles, in order that they might substitute another Apostle into the place of Judas the traitor, prayed thus to God: Thou, Lord, show whom thou hast chosen.⁴ Christ Himself said: He who does not enter by the door into the sheepfold is a thief and a robber; but he who enters by the door is the Shepherd of the sheep.⁵ - Again: You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.⁶ - Again: Pray ye the Lord of the harvest, that he send laborers into his harvest.¹ Therefore those who have not been called by God intrude themselves, and they themselves are those concerning whom the Lord says through Jeremiah: I was not sending the prophets, and they themselves were running.²

II. The chief signs of divine vocation to the ecclesiastical state are the following: fitting knowledge; probity of life; right intention, or the desire of devoting oneself to the divine glory and the salvation of souls.⁴

He who, without vocation explored from such signs, intrudes himself into the sacred ministry, or wishes to be enrolled in the Sacred Militia principally on account of human ends, as if he were going to live without care when he has arrived at cures, cannot be excused from great presumption and from grave fault, since he exposes himself to great danger of damnation. But Bishops commit themselves to greater danger who promote to Sacred Orders those not called, from that word of the Apostle: Impose hands quickly on no one, nor communicate in the sins of others.⁵ Hence in Canon Law it is prescribed that no one be ordained unless he has been proved.⁶

Quaer. What must be done by the Bishop, in order that he may sufficiently prove candidates for Sacred Orders?

Resp. Thus St. Alphonsus:² "For this proof to be sought by the Bishop, it is not enough that he himself know nothing evil about the one to be ordained, but he must be made certain concerning his positive probity, according to the sublimity of the grade to which he strives to ascend. ... In this matter Bishops in seeking this proof ought not to be content with the simple attestation of Pastors, who, led by human considerations, easily indulge Clerics in granting attestations of this kind, lest they draw upon themselves their hatred and that of their relatives; but besides, from others worthy of trust, by taking secret information, they must be made certain not only that the one to be initiated is not evil, ... but also that he is positively good, namely that he lives a spiritual life, is assiduous in the Churches, frequents the Sacraments and prayer, lives separated from secular persons, is accompanied by well-mannered companions, devotes himself to study, uses modest dress, etc."

S. Th., Suppl., q. 34, a. 1 and 2.

709. The sixth sacrament is Order. - The five preceding sacraments are ordered to the necessities of the supernatural life of individual faithful; the last two immediately regard the good of the supernatural society, namely, of the Church of God. For a society must both be ordered and governed by superiors, and be perpetuated by propagation. For this the last two sacraments were instituted: Order and Matrimony, of which the first contributes more immediately to supernatural life, since it is given to those who must initiate others into sacred things and communicate supernatural life, while the other provides natural life to children afterward to be educated and sanctified unto the honor of God.

710. Order is taken in several ways:

a) Primarily it is the mutual bearing itself, or relation, of prior and posterior, of superior and inferior, by which they are referred to one another, and which for this reason is in the inferior as much as in the superior: namely, wherever there is something prior and posterior, there must be some order either according to place, or according to time, or according to origin, or according to power or office, and so forth. Whence Augustine, De Civ. Dei, l. IX, c. 13, n. 1: Order is an arrangement assigning to equal and unequal things their own places. In the present treatise order is not taken in this sense.

b) Secondly, it is the grade itself or state which makes this order, or causes the said relation, and "because the notion of order, as it is a relation, is found where first something superior to another occurs, therefore this eminent grade through power is named order" (a. 2, ad 4), namely, a power of pre-eminence, or also the group of those who are adorned with this dignity. Thus they speak of the order of nobles, knights, soldiers, judges, advocates, clerics, religious, etc.

Hence in ecclesiastical speech the spiritual and sacred power itself, by excellence, is called order. And because it embraces several different grades subordinated one to another according to a certain hierarchy,¹ order is hierarchical.

¹ Hierarchy etymologically is sacred principality; yet by received usage it means the distinction and subordination of grades: sacred power distinguished by grades.

c) In a transferred sense, from the effect to the cause, it is the external rite itself, or ceremonial action, by which a grade of power is conferred upon someone, and which properly is sacred ordination itself.

Now the order of sacred power is a sacrament. By this name, as is clear from what has been said, there principally comes the interior abiding power itself rather than the external rite or passing action: "the interior character itself is essentially and principally the very sacrament of Order" (a. 2, ad 1); "and therefore character, which is a spiritual power, is placed in the definition of Order" (ad 2).

711. The sacrament of Order is defined: A sacrament of the New Law by which, through a sacred rite from a competent minister, spiritual power is handed over and grace is conferred for offering sacrifice and rightly fulfilling other sacred offices.

In this definition there are indicated: the external sign, - the minister, - the twofold effect: character or sacred power, and grace; - and the end: sacrifice and other offices to be exercised and rightly fulfilled. The subject is indicated implicitly; the sign and minister rather indeterminately, since concerning these there can be diversity both in opinion and even in reality.

More briefly the Master of the Sentences says: A certain sign of the Church by which spiritual power is handed over to the one ordained; where he places two things, namely, the exterior sign: a certain sign; and the interior effect: by which spiritual power is handed over (a. 2).

The sacrament is designated by various names: by reason of the external sign, imposition of the hand, χειροτονία; by reason of the principal power: priesthood (priesterschap); by reason of the different grade: sacrament of hierarchy; by reason of the effect: consecration of priests and ministers.

712. Division of the treatise. - The treatise is divided into five questions:

1. On the sacrament of Order itself: a) on its institution; b) on its constitutive parts.

2. On the effects of Order.

3. On the different Orders.

4. On the minister of Order.

5. On the subject of Order.²

² On Order there can usefully be consulted: St. Thomas, in Suppl., q. 34-40; Billuart, Billot, Hugon, Tanquerey, Pesch, Diekamp, Van Noort-Verhaar among the dogmaticians; Morinus, Historical and Dogmatic Commentary on Sacred Ordinations; Gasparri, Canonical Treatise on Sacred Ordination; Many, Lectures on Sacred Ordination; Coppens, The Imposition of Hands and the Connected Rites; Tixeront, Order and Ordinations; Van Rossum, On the Essence of the Sacrament of Order; Perinelle, The Doctrine of St. Thomas on the Sacrament of Order, in Rev. des Sc., Phil. et Theol. 1930; Tymczak, Disputed Questions on Order; A. Janssens, On Holy Ordinations: I. Bishops and Priests; II. Diaconate, Subdiaconate and Minor Orders; Dict. de Theol., Galtier in the article Imposition of Hands, and Michel in the article Order; St. Alphonsus and recent manuals of moral theology.

There is added an appendix on irregularities.

Whether marriages of this sort are held illicit for all, and because of their special malice those who have contracted them are prohibited from the clergy, or whether such men are kept from it only because of the propriety of the clerical order, just as bigamists are kept away, is not evident of itself from this canon. Yet if you consider other canons either of the same or of a very near age, you will easily understand to what this one tends. Cf. Canon LXI of Elvira below.

Canon I. It has seemed good that after this synod no one ... from among bigamists or husbands of women whose marriage has been interrupted (that is, of widows) can be ordained a cleric. Nor must it be asked whether, initiated in the divine sacraments or Gentiles, they have stained themselves with this necessity of an unhappy lot, since the form of the divine precept is chaste.

Decree VIII. He reproves bigamists advanced to the diaconate and Priesthood.

Canon I. It pleased the council concerning bigamists or husbands of women whose marriage has been interrupted that, although the statutes of the fathers have decreed otherwise, those who have been ordained up to this time, compassion having been had, retain only the name of the presbyterate or diaconate; but such deacons are not to presume the office of a presbyter in consecrating and ministering.

Chapter I. We command bigamous presbyters and deacons, and husbands of widows or repudiated women, to be separated, and, after penance has been completed, to return to their order. And those who are unwilling to dismiss illicit marriages ought to be degraded according to the institutes of the canon. But we command the separated women to be returned to their parents; and because they were not legitimate, if they wish, let it be lawful for them to be married.

Since the women are said not to be legitimate, it is clear that the discourse is about those who were accepted after orders had been received. Therefore, calling them bigamous, the Fathers are dealing with those presbyters and deacons who entered marriage twice and establish that at least the second marriage after ordination is no marriage; but concerning the first they decree something economically in chapter III. Cf. what we shall say under chapter III.

Concerning Irregularities. §1. It is lawful for Ordinaries by themselves or through another to dispense their subjects from all irregularities arising from an occult delict, except that of which in can. 985, n. 4, or another brought to the judicial forum (Can. 990).

Order from the institution of Christ distinguishes clerics from laymen in the Church for the rule of the faithful and the ministry of divine worship (Can. 948).

I. Order can be defined: A sacrament of the New Law by which spiritual power is handed on, and grace is conferred for duly carrying out ecclesiastical duties; or, with St. Alphonsus after St. Thomas: "A certain seal of the Church, by which spiritual power is bestowed upon the ordained." - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 735. - Lehmkuhl, n. 584.

II. Order is truly and properly so called a sacrament of the New Law. It is established from the Council of Trent, sess. 23, can. 3, where it is thus read: "If anyone shall have said that Order ... is not truly and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord ... let him be anathema." - Cf. De Augustinis, Thesis 1, p. 7.

III. Seven Orders are numbered, namely the Presbyterate, Diaconate, Subdiaconate, Acolythate, Exorcistate, Lectorate, and Ostiariate. This is deduced from many Councils, especially from Trent, sess. 23, ch. 2, where after it had openly been said that speech is made in Sacred Letters about priests and deacons, it is added: "From the very beginning of the Church, the names of the following Orders and the proper ministries of each of them, namely of Subdeacon, Acolyte, Exorcist, Lector, and Ostiary, are known to have been in use." - Likewise, in can. 2, it is said: "If anyone shall have said that, besides the priesthood, there are not in the Catholic Church other Orders, both major and minor, through which, as through certain grades, one tends toward the priesthood, let him be anathema."

In the canons which follow, by the name of major or sacred orders are understood the presbyterate, diaconate, and subdiaconate; but by the name of minor orders are understood the acolythate, exorcistate, lectorate, and ostiariate (Can. 949).

In law the words: to ordain, order, ordination, sacred ordination, comprehend, besides episcopal consecration, the orders enumerated in can. 949 and the first tonsure itself, unless something else is drawn from the nature of the thing or from the context of the words (Can. 950). - Cf. De Augustinis, Thesis 2, p. 22.

IV. What spiritual power is annexed to each Order is indicated in the following:

1°. The Ostiariate is an Order by which there is conferred a special power of opening or closing the door of the church, of admitting the worthy, and excluding the unworthy.

2°. The Lectorate is an Order by which there is handed on a special power of reading psalms and lessons from the pulpit in church, and of catechizing or instructing the people in the things of faith.

3°. The Exorcistate is an Order by which there is conferred a special power of casting out demons through exorcisms instituted by the Church. - Nevertheless, today, for forestalling abuses, the faculty of exorcizing is reserved to presbyters alone, who can use it only by permission of the Ordinary.

4°. The Acolythate is an Order by which there is conferred a special power of serving the subdeacon during the solemnities of Mass, of lighting candles, and of preparing and presenting the cruets of wine and water.

5°. The Subdiaconate is an Order by which there is conferred a special power of serving the deacon in solemn Mass and of chanting the Epistle by solemn rite.

6°. The Diaconate is an Order by which there is conferred a special power of assisting the presbyter immediately in solemn Mass, of chanting the Gospel during the solemnities, of preaching and solemnly baptizing, if nevertheless a just cause intervenes. But that a deacon, so that he may preach at some time, needs the special permission of the Bishop, or the permission of the Superior in a clerical religion, is established from canons 1337, 1338, 1342.

7°. The Presbyterate is an Order by which there is conferred a special power of consecrating the Body and Blood of Christ in the celebration of Mass, of absolving from sins, and of feeding subjects by work and doctrine.

To these add the Episcopate and first tonsure, of which the former is the complement of the priesthood itself, but the latter is not an Order, but a disposition toward Orders, by which someone is named a cleric.

I say. The matter and form of the sacrament of Order is varied according to the various Orders. But what in this matter is certain among theologians, or even more probable, is contained in the following:

I. As regards the minor Orders, the matter for the Ostiariate is the handing over of the keys of the church; indeed, according to the Response of the S. C. de Propaganda Fide to the Vicar Apostolic of Cochin-China, 22 March 1844, it is not required that they be the keys of the church; and according to another Response of the S. R. C., given on the day 11 March 1820, one key would suffice for validity. For the Lectorate, the matter is the handing over of the book of lessons; for the Exorcistate, the handing over of the book of exorcisms; and for the Acolythate, the handing over of the empty cruets, or at least of one, and of a candlestick with an extinguished candle. But the form proper to these Orders is contained in the words which the Bishop uses while he hands over the instruments themselves. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 745.

II. As regards the Subdiaconate, among the Greeks the imposition of hands is reckoned as the matter; but among Latins it is controverted. According to some, the handing over of an empty chalice with an empty paten is its sole proximate matter. But others contend that the handing over of the book of Epistles is likewise essential matter of this Order. Consequently the form, according to the first, is contained only in these words: "See whose ministry is handed on to you; therefore I admonish you that you so exhibit yourselves that you may be able to please God"; according to the latter, the words by which the Bishop hands over the book of Epistles also would be required. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 746.

III. As regards the Diaconate, a twofold matter is established, namely the imposition of the right hand of the Bishop and the handing over of the book of Gospels. Whether each of these, or only one, is necessary is in controversy. Some theologians reckon only the imposition of hands, others only the handing over of the book, and still others both as necessary. But as regards practice, this last opinion, as being safer, is to be held. Consequently a twofold form also is had. That which is added to the prior matter is this: "Receive the Holy Spirit, for strength, and for resisting the devil and his temptations. In the name of the Lord." - That which accompanies the latter matter is of this sort: "Receive [or: Receive, you all] the power of reading the Gospel in the Church of God, both for the living and for the dead. In the name of the Lord." - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 748.

IV. As regards the Presbyterate, its matter among the Greeks is situated in the imposition of hands alone; among the Latins it is greatly controverted, and there are three opinions. The first holds that the matter is the handing over of the instruments alone; but the form is the words which the Bishop pronounces in handing over the instruments, namely: "Receive the power of offering sacrifice to God, and of celebrating Masses both for the living and for the dead. In the name of the Lord." - The other opinion, besides the handing over of the instruments, by which only the power of sacrificing would be received, requires also that imposition of hands by which power over the mystical body is handed on through the words: "Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained." - Finally the third opinion, which is more probable, holds that both the power of sacrificing and of absolving are handed on through the second imposition of hands, which is made by the Bishop together with the assisting presbyters, and consequently that this alone is the essential matter; but that the form is the prayer which the Bishop then says. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 749. - De Augustinis, Thesis 7, p. 91.

Question 1. Whether physical touch of the instruments is required?

Resp. According to St. Alphonsus the affirmative opinion is probable and consequently in practice to be held as safer. - To some the negative opinion had seemed safe on account of a response given by the S. R. C. to a certain French Religious by the name of Ephrem Chasteau, but that response proves nothing; for in the proposed Doubt it was indeed said that the Religious Ephrem Chasteau had not touched the chalice, but no mention was made about physical touch of the paten. Besides, it could be said that the S. Congregation wished in some particular case to resolve a doubt of fact for removing a scruple, but not to decide a question of law. It must also be added that the C. S. O. on 19 August 1851 said that the imposition of hands in the ordination of a presbyter was to be supplied if it had been made without bodily touch. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 743. - Baller. note (a), p. 666. - Konings, n. 1517.

Therefore, practically speaking, the one to be ordained must physically touch the instruments and proceed cautiously, but not entangle himself in scruples and anxieties, since for these there is generally no reasonable foundation. For in practice Bishops are accustomed to proceed in such a way that in a matter of such moment they always hold the safer way. Besides, the duty of watching over the rite to be observed in Ordination falls upon so many Ministers and Officials that moral certitude is had that all things were done rightly and validly.

Question 2. Whether the handing over of each species is necessarily required?

Resp. Affirmatively, more probably, because through the handing over of one species power over the whole Sacrifice is not handed on. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 750.

Question 3. Whether he is validly ordained who touches the host, but not the paten; and he who touches the chalice and paten, but not the host?

Resp. Affirmatively to the first, with the common opinion, which seems most probable; and the reason is because the host and wine are the substantial matter of Order, by which principally power over the body of Christ is signified; and the chalice and paten are used from the precept of the Church for the sake of decency alone. Affirmatively also must be answered to the second, with the common and truer opinion, as St. Alphonsus says. The reason is both because then the host is touched by means of the paten, but immediate touch of the host is not prescribed by the Church, but only of the paten, as is clear from the Pontifical; and because wine in the chalice is never touched immediately: therefore neither is it required that the host be touched immediately. Moreover, in practice the safer part is to be held, and care is to be taken that the one to be ordained touch the chalice, the paten, and at the same time the host; and thus he will free himself from every scruple. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 752. - Lehmkuhl, n. 591.

I say 1°. The ordinary minister of sacred ordination is a consecrated Bishop; the extraordinary minister is one who, although he lacks the episcopal character, has received from law or from the Apostolic See by a peculiar indult the power of conferring some orders (Can. 951).

It is established from many Councils, especially from the Florentine and Tridentine. For the Florentine in the Decree of Union says: "The ordinary Minister of this sacrament [of Order] is a Bishop"; and the Tridentine, sess. 23, can. 7, thus establishes: "If anyone shall have said that Bishops are not superior to presbyters, or do not have the power of confirming and ordaining, or that the power which they have is common to them with presbyters ... let him be anathema." - He is called ordinary because a simple priest, the Supreme Pontiff committing it, can be the extraordinary Minister of tonsure and of the four minor Orders. This is established from the Council of Trent, sess. 23, ch. 10, on Reform.

As regards the ordination of religious:

1°. A regular Abbot of rule, although without nullius territory, can confer first tonsure and minor orders, provided the one to be promoted is subject to him by force of profession at least simple, but he himself is a presbyter and has legitimately received the abbatial blessing. Outside these limits, the ordination conferred by the same, any contrary privilege being revoked, is invalid, unless the one ordaining is powerful with episcopal character (Can. 964). - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 762.

I say 2°. Only the proper Bishop, or another Bishop but from an express faculty received from the proper Bishop, can licitly ordain. It is established from Canon 955:

§ 1. Let each one be ordained by his own Bishop or with the legitimate dimissorial letters of the same.

§ 2. The proper Bishop, not impeded by a just cause, is to ordain his own subjects personally himself; but without apostolic indult he cannot licitly ordain a subject of an eastern rite (Can. 955).

Question 1. Who is considered the proper Bishop of the one to be ordained?

Resp. The proper Bishop, as regards the ordination of seculars, is only the Bishop of the diocese in which the one to be promoted has domicile together with origin, or simple domicile without origin; but in this second case the one to be promoted must confirm by oath his intention of remaining perpetually in the diocese, unless there is question of a cleric to be promoted to orders who has already been incardinated into the diocese through first tonsure, or of promoting an alumnus who is destined to the service of another diocese according to the norm of can. 969, § 2, or of promoting a professed religious, concerning whom in can. 964, n. 4 (Can. 956).

§ 1. The Vicar and Apostolic Prefect, an Abbot or Prelate nullius, if they are powerful with episcopal character, are equated to a diocesan Bishop as regards ordination.

§ 2. If they lack episcopal character, they nevertheless can, in their own territory and only while their office lasts, confer first tonsure and minor orders both upon their own secular subjects according to the norm of can. 956, and upon others who exhibit the dimissorial letters required by law; ordination performed by the same outside these limits is invalid (Can. 957).¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1094, n. 27.

Question 2. By whom are dimissorial letters for secular clerics to be granted? By whom for religious?

Resp. § 1. Dimissorial letters for seculars can be given, as long as they retain jurisdiction in the territory:

1°. The proper Bishop, after he has legitimately taken possession of his diocese according to the norm of can. 334, § 3, although not yet consecrated;

2°. The Vicar General, yet by special mandate of the Bishop;

3°. With the consent of the Chapter, the Capitular Vicar after a year from the vacant see; but within the year only to those constrained by reason of a benefice received or to be received, or by reason of some certain office for which, on account of the necessity of the diocese, provision must be made without delay;

4°. A Vicar and Apostolic Prefect, an Abbot or Prelate nullius, although they lack episcopal character, even for major orders (Can. 958).

As regards the ordination of religious: ...

2°. Exempt religious can licitly be ordained by no Bishop without the dimissorial letters of their own major Superior;

3°. Superiors can grant dimissorial letters to professed members of simple vows, concerning whom in can. 574, only for first tonsure and minor orders;

4°. The ordination of all other alumni of any religion is governed by the law of seculars, any indult granted to Superiors of giving dimissorial letters to major orders for professed members from temporary vows being revoked (Can. 964).

Question 3. To whom can dimissorial letters be sent for secular clerics? To whom must they be sent for religious clerics?

Resp. 1°. The letters can be sent to any Bishop having communion with the Apostolic See, with only this exception, apart from an apostolic indult: a bishop of a rite diverse from the rite of the one to be ordained. - Cf. Can. 961.

2°. A religious Superior must send the letters to the Bishop of the diocese in which the house of the one to be promoted is situated. Cf. Can. 965. Nor can he send them to another bishop unless the diocesan Bishop has given permission, or is of another rite, or is absent, or is not going to have an ordination at the next legitimate time, or when the one ruling a vacant diocese is not marked with episcopal character; which things must be made known to the bishop about to ordain from the authentic testimony of the diocesan curia. - Cf. Can. 966. Religious superiors must beware lest in fraud of the law they send the subject elsewhere or grant letters only when the bishop is going to be absent or is not going to have ordinations. Cf. Can. 967. See the penalties in Canon 2410.

Question 4. Whether besides dimissorial letters testimonial letters are required?

Resp. Affirmatively, as is established in the following canons.

Seculars to be promoted, or religious who, as regards ordination, are governed by the law of seculars, are to bring:

1°. Testimony of the last ordination or, if there is question of first tonsure, of Baptism and Confirmation received;

2°. Testimony concerning studies completed, required for the individual orders according to the norm of can. 976;

3°. Testimony of the rector of the Seminary, or of the priest to whom the candidate outside the Seminary has been commended, concerning the good morals of the same candidate;

4°. Testimonial letters of the Ordinary of the place in which the one to be promoted has stayed for so much time that he could have contracted a canonical impediment there;

5°. Testimonial letters of the religious major Superior, if the one to be promoted has been enrolled in some religion (Can. 993).

§ 1. The time in which the one to be promoted could have contracted a canonical impediment is, regularly, for soldiers three months, for others six months after puberty; but the ordaining Bishop according to his prudence can require testimonial letters even because of a shorter time of stay, and also because of time which preceded puberty.

§ 2. If the Ordinary of the place neither by himself nor through others knows the one to be promoted sufficiently, so that he can testify that during the time in which he stayed in his territory he contracted no canonical impediment, or if the one to be promoted has wandered through so many dioceses that it becomes impossible or too difficult to seek all testimonial letters, let the Ordinary provide at least through a supplementary oath to be furnished by the one to be promoted.

§ 3. If after testimonial letters have been obtained and before the ordination has been completed, the one to be promoted again has stayed in the same territory for the aforesaid space of time, new testimonial letters of the Ordinary of the place are necessary (Can. 994).

§ 1. A religious Superior also in his dimissorial letters must testify not only that the one to be promoted has emitted religious profession and is of the family of a religious house subject to him, but also concerning the studies completed and concerning the other things required by law.

§ 2. The Bishop, after receiving these dimissorial letters, does not need other testimonial letters (Can. 995).

Question 5. What is the effect of these letters?

Resp. After legitimate dimissorial letters have been received, the Bishop can ordain another's subject, provided he cannot rightly doubt the genuine faith of them, with the prescription of 944, § 3, preserved. - Cf. Can. 962. Although the letters can be limited or revoked by the one granting them or by his successor, once granted they are not extinguished when the right of the giver is dissolved. - Cf. Can. 963.

I say 1°. Only a baptized male validly receives sacred ordination ... (Can. 968, § 1, as below).

For women by divine institution are altogether incapable of any Order, both from Sacred Letters, especially I Timothy ii, 11 and 12; and I Corinthians xiv, 34; and from the perpetual practice of the Church and the unanimous consent of the Fathers and of all Doctors. It is required besides that the one to be ordained be baptized, because since Baptism is the gate of the Church, no sacrament can be validly received when it has not been received. Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 781 and following.

I say 2°. § 1. Only a baptized male validly receives sacred ordination; but licitly, one who, according to the norm of the sacred canons, is endowed with the due qualities in the judgment of his proper Ordinary, and is held by no irregularity or other impediment.

§ 2. Those who are held by an irregularity or other impediment, although arising after ordination even without their own fault, are prohibited from exercising the orders received (Can. 968).

§ 1. That someone may licitly be ordained, there are required:

1°. Sacred confirmation received;

2°. Morals congruent with the order to be received;

3°. Canonical age;

4°. Due knowledge;

5°. Reception of the inferior orders;

6°. Observance of interstices;

7°. A canonical title, if there is question of major orders.

§ 2. As regards episcopal consecration, let the prescription of can. 331 be observed (Can. 974).

"A twofold vocation is customarily distinguished: one ordinary, which is made by God, or by God's institution, through the consent and cooperation of those men whom it concerns; in this way a Pastor is called from the consent of the Bishop, a Bishop from the consent of the Pontiff; the other extraordinary, which is made immediately by God; in this way Moses, the Prophets, and the Apostles were called." - Becanus, Controv. l. 1, c. 12, n. 4. "As regards their ordinary vocation (he is speaking about priests and bishops), almost the same things must be considered in it which are considered in the vocation of the Ministers of the Mosaic law: 1. Election or designation of a certain person. 2. Purification. 3. Consecration or Ordination. 4. Application to the use of the Ministry. Election is not made through natural propagation ... but through the vote and consent of the clergy, whose part it is to choose suitable persons for the Ecclesiastical Ministry. In this way ... the Bishop or his Vicar chooses Priests and Pastors for his diocese. Purification, if we precisely consider the divine law of the New Testament, is not necessarily external and ceremonial, as it was in the Mosaic law, but internal and spiritual; it consists especially in purity of soul, in probity of life, in doctrine of faith, and in other virtues which are required in the Ministers of the Church ... If we consider Ecclesiastical law, certain external purifications are required ... tonsure, etc. Consecration or Ordination must be made by a Bishop through imposition of hands. Mission is also made by the Ministers of the Church ... for example, subjects are assigned." Ibid., nn. 24 and following.

Who, therefore, are those whom the Ministers of the Church choose? "The things which you have heard from me through many witnesses, commend these to faithful men who will be suitable also to teach others." II Timothy ii, 2. Therefore suitability must especially be considered in candidates. This natural and supernatural suitability is always necessary; it surely includes right intention in the subject himself concerning the choosing of his state. God could make known to anyone by revelation the state to be chosen by him. But since he has not done this, it is incumbent upon each one, according to the rules approved by reason itself and by the Church, freely to choose a state. The ordinary manner has already been described in the election of the state of religious life. The one about to choose wishes to increase the glory of God in the better manner in which he can; he knows that of himself he can do nothing; he wishes to gain souls for Christ; God will give grace; no natural impediments are present, or at least none difficult to overcome; he has a good, pious, strong character, sufficient knowledge; meanwhile he prays to God, whom reason dictates to him he will please if he becomes a priest: "I shall become one," he says: "I shall choose this life." He chooses securely as far as is from himself; but the whole matter does not depend upon himself. He does not have a right to ordination, although he has every suitability: "Since no one ought to be ordained who, in the judgment of his Bishop, is not useful or necessary to his churches, the holy synod, adhering to the footsteps of the sixth canon of the Council of Chalcedon, has established that no one in the future be ordained who is not assigned to that Church or pious place for whose necessity or utility he is taken up, where he may perform his duties, nor wander with uncertain seats." Council of Trent, sess. 23, c. 16. The priesthood pertains to the Ministry of the New Law; vocation to it pertains to those whom it concerns, that is, Bishops. It is theirs to choose suitable men, namely those who possess all the gifts of nature and grace by which they give hope that they will work with fruit in the vineyard of the Lord. These, when fitting studies have been finished, hear these words in ordination: "Until now you are free; it is lawful for you, according to your judgment, to pass over to secular vows. If it pleases you to persevere in the holy purpose, in the name of the Lord approach hither." Therefore vocation to the priesthood is election by God, through the Bishop, to priestly work. Thus the Catechism of Pius X: "Can each one enter Orders according to his own judgment? No one can enter Orders according to his own judgment, but he must be called by God through his own Bishop, that is, he must have the vocation with the virtues and with the aptitudes for the sacred ministry required by them." Catechismo, P. III, n. 403.

Behold the letter of Cardinal Merry del Val handing down the judgment of the Commission of Cardinals given 20 June 1912: "That the work of the distinguished man, Canon Joseph Lahitton, whose title is La Vocation Sacerdotale, is in no way to be reproved; indeed, insofar as it asserts: 1°. That no one ever has a right to ordination antecedently to the free election of the Bishop; 2°. That the condition which must be attended to on the part of the one to be ordained, and which is called priestly vocation, by no means consists, at least necessarily and by ordinary law, in some internal aspiration of the subject, or invitations of the Holy Spirit toward entering the priesthood; 3°. But on the contrary, that nothing more is required in the one to be ordained, so that he may rightly be called by the Bishop, than a right intention together with suitability placed in those gifts of grace and nature, and proved through probity of life and sufficiency of doctrine, which make founded hope that he will be able rightly to fulfill the duties of the priesthood and holy to observe its obligations: is to be excellently praised." Acta Apost. Sedis: v. 4, p. 485. 2 July 1912.

This is the notion of priestly vocation properly so called; and it must altogether be distinguished from the rather usual notion of vocation accepted in a broader sense, of which a brilliant example is had in the same fascicle of the same Commentary, A. A. S. v. 4, p. 493, in the Circular Letters of the S. C. Consistorial concerning the Seminaries of Italy; various ordinances are given, among which is found also this one, n. 2: "Besides, the promiscuous mixing of students who are not called and of others who are called to the Ecclesiastical state always turns out fatal to these latter, and according to what experience has already demonstrated, causes the ruin of many vocations." Again by the S. Congregation of Bishops and Regulars concerning the same Seminaries, it is commended to the Rector at art. 30 that he watch over the sincerity and evolution of the priestly vocation of the students (18 January 1908), and at art. 86. - Cf. Leo XIII, 8 Sept. 1899. Pius IX, Cum Romani, 28 June 1853. Gregory XIII, Quoniam divinae, speaks about young men from England "who, led by the divine Spirit, will offer themselves," etc. 9 January 1580, and very many other places. - Cf. Lahitton, La Vocation Sacerdotale.

I say 3°. For licitly receiving the Subdiaconate there is required besides a title of honest support. But if after the Subdiaconate has been received the title perishes, one cannot ascend to a superior Order without a new title. It is established from the Council of Trent, sess. 21, ch. 2, on Reform. - Cf. Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, n. 323.

I say 4°. § 1. Let no one from among seculars be ordained who in the judgment of his proper Bishop is not necessary or useful to the churches of the diocese.

§ 2. Nevertheless a Bishop is not prohibited from promoting his own subject, who in the future, after previous legitimate excardination and incardination, is destined for the service of another diocese (Can. 969).

The clear reason of the prohibition is in this, lest those enrolled in the divine ministry beg, to the disgrace of the Order, or exercise some sordid gain: Council of Trent, sess. 21, c. 2; or lest being idle they entangle themselves in a secular manner of living and in worldly affairs. S. C. de Propaganda Fide, August 1827.

Question 1. How many kinds of title of honest support are distinguished?

Resp. § 1. For secular clerics the canonical title is the title of benefice; and this being lacking, of patrimony or of pension.

§ 2. This title must be both truly secure for the whole life of the ordained and truly sufficient for his fitting support, according to norms to be given by Ordinaries for the diverse necessities and circumstances of places and times (Can. 979).

§ 1. If not even one of the titles concerning which in can. 979, § 1, is at hand, it can be supplied by the title of service of the diocese, and, in places subject to the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, by the title of mission, yet in such a way that the one to be ordained, with an oath interposed, devotes himself perpetually to the service of the diocese or mission, under the authority of the Ordinary of the place for the time being.

§ 2. The Ordinary must confer upon the presbyter whom he has promoted by the title of service of the church or of mission a benefice or office or subsidy sufficient for his fitting support (Can. 981).

§ 1. For regulars the canonical title is solemn religious profession, or the title, as it is called, of poverty.

§ 2. For religious of perpetual simple vows it is the title of common table, of the Congregation, or of another similar thing, according to the norm of the constitutions.

§ 3. Other religious, also as regards the title of ordination, are governed by the law of seculars (Can. 982).

Question 2. At what stage of studies are Orders licitly conferred?

Resp. § 1. No one, whether secular or religious, is to be promoted to first tonsure before the theological course has been begun.

§ 2. The prescription of can. 975 standing firm, the subdiaconate is not to be conferred except at the end of the third year of the theological course; the diaconate, except after the fourth year has begun; the presbyterate, except after the midpoint of the same fourth year.

§ 3. The theological course must have been completed not privately, but in schools instituted for this according to the plan of studies determined by can. 1365 (Can. 976).

The cited canon reads thus: § 1. Let students apply themselves to rational philosophy with related disciplines for at least a full biennium. § 2. The theological course is to be contained within at least a full quadriennium, and, besides dogmatic and moral theology, must especially include the study of Sacred Scripture, ecclesiastical history, canon law, liturgy, sacred eloquence, and ecclesiastical chant. § 3. Let there also be lessons on pastoral theology, with practical exercises added, especially concerning the manner of handing on the catechism to children or others, of hearing confessions, of visiting the sick, and of assisting the dying.

Question 3. What age is required for receiving Orders?

Resp. The subdiaconate is not to be conferred before the twenty-first year has been completed; the diaconate before the twenty-second has been completed; the presbyterate before the twenty-fourth has been completed (Can. 975).

A year is not assigned for receiving tonsure and minors, but the time is sufficiently clearly determined, as is clear from canon 976, § 1.

Question 4. At what time can Orders be conferred?

Resp. It must be distinguished thus:

§ 1. Episcopal consecration must be conferred within the solemnities of Masses, on a Sunday or on the birthday of the Apostles.

§ 2. Ordinations in sacred orders are to be celebrated within the solemnities of Masses on the Saturdays of the Ember Days, on the Saturday before Passion Sunday, and on Holy Saturday.

§ 3. Yet when a grave cause intervenes, the Bishop can have them also on any Sunday or feast of precept.

§ 4. First tonsure can be conferred on any day and hour; minor orders on individual Sundays and double feasts, yet in the morning.

§ 5. A custom contrary to the times of ordinations prescribed in the preceding paragraphs is reproved; and these are to be observed also when a Bishop of the Latin rite ordains, from apostolic indult, a cleric of an eastern rite, or the contrary (Can. 1006).

As often as an ordination is to be repeated or some rite supplied, whether absolutely or under condition, this can be done even outside the times and secretly (Can. 1007).

Question 5. What interstices are to be observed between the individual Orders?

Resp. § 1. In ordinations let the intervals of times be observed in which those promoted may exercise themselves in the orders received, according to the prescription of the Bishop.

§ 2. The interstices between first tonsure and the ostiariate, or between the individual minor orders, are committed to the prudent judgment of the Bishop; but an acolyte is not to be promoted to the subdiaconate, nor a subdeacon to the diaconate, nor a deacon to the presbyterate before the acolyte has spent at least one year, and the subdeacon and deacon each at least three months, in his own order, unless the necessity or utility of the Church, in the judgment of the Bishop, demands otherwise.

§ 3. Never, however, unless by peculiar permission of the Roman Pontiff, are minor orders with the subdiaconate, or two sacred orders, to be conferred on one and the same day, any contrary custom being reproved; indeed, neither is it lawful to confer first tonsure together with any one of the minor orders, nor all the minor orders together at once (Can. 978).

Question 6. Whether a cleric sins who, initiated in minors, marries?

Resp. Speaking of itself, it is certain that he does not sin gravely, indeed not even lightly if he does this for a just cause, for example, for quieting enmities or temptations of the flesh, for assisting a poor woman, etc. - Cf. Can. 132, § 2; 973, § 2.

Question 7. Whether it is required that the one to be ordained be confirmed?

Resp. Affirmatively, as is established from can. 974, § 1, 1; 993, 1.

Question 8. Whether he sins who receives some order without the intention of ascending to higher orders?

Resp. He sins gravely, for it is prohibited to a Bishop to ordain such a one, nor is it the mind of the Church that he be ordained.

§ 1. First tonsure and orders are to be conferred only upon those who have the purpose of ascending to the presbyterate, and whom it is deservedly lawful to conjecture will sometime be worthy presbyters.

§ 2. Nevertheless, one ordained who refuses to receive higher orders can neither be compelled by the Bishop to receive them, nor be prohibited from the exercise of the orders received, unless he is held by a canonical impediment or some other grave cause, in the judgment of the Bishop, stands in the way.

§ 3. Let the Bishop confer sacred orders on no one unless from positive arguments he is morally certain concerning his canonical suitability; otherwise he not only sins most gravely, but also commits himself to the danger of communicating in the sins of others (Can. 973).

Question 9. Whether, or how, does an ordained man sin who omits the recitation of the prayers which after ordination are imposed by the Bishop in the manner of penance?

Resp. Theologians do not agree about this: for some say that he sins gravely, because the matter of the precept is grave; others hold that he does not sin at all, because the Bishop does not impose a precept; and still others reckon that an omission of this sort indeed is not free of fault, but does not exceed venial fault. This last opinion seems more probable. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 829.

As regards these prayers, the S. C. of Rites has this, 27 June 1899: "By the Nocturn of such a day is to be understood the ferial nocturn, or the first of the Feast, or of the Sunday in the psalter, according as the Ordination was held on a feria, feast, or Sunday." Nor is it required that to this Nocturn the psalm Venite, exsultemus, the hymn, and the lessons be added, but the psalms with the respective antiphons pertaining to such a Nocturn suffice. S. C. R., 10 July 1903.

Question 10. Whether, or how, are new priests held to read the three Masses prescribed by the Bishop?

Resp. They are not held to apply them to the intention of the Bishop, and consequently they can accept a stipend for them. Nor does a grave obligation of celebrating those Masses appear; nor must they be said before non-impeded days arrive, since the Masses must be votive. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 829.

Question 11. To what are priests held by force of the obedience which they promise to the Bishop in ordination?

Resp. Benedict XIV explains this obligation thus: "We acknowledge that by force of a promise of this sort the presbyter is held bound by this law among others, that he cannot depart from the service of the church to which he has been assigned without the permission of the Bishop." - This nevertheless cannot and ought not impede priests, even if they have care of souls, from being able to embrace the religious state, as something more perfect, even when the Bishop refuses, as is established from the Declarations of the same Benedict XIV. - The Baltimore Fathers in the Second Plenary Council agree; after they had established and declared that any priest who was ordained among us or duly coopted is bound to remain in the diocese for which he was ordained or coopted, they add: "Moreover by these statutes we do not wish to prevent those things from having to be observed which Benedict XIV lucidly teaches concerning priests who wish to pass over to some religious Order." - Except, nevertheless, those priests who, having been ordained under the title of the American Mission, promised by oath that they would enter no Religion, Society, or regular Congregation without special permission of the Apostolic See. Nor should you object that this oath is invalid as being opposed to a better good; for answer is made by the words of the Instruction of the S. Congregation de Propaganda Fide, n. 10: "It is necessary that the public good excel the private, namely by that reason by which it has been granted to some Orders that it is not lawful for their religious to pass over to a stricter one without the permission of their superiors." - Cf. Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, Appendix, pp. 204 and following. - Cf. altogether Can. 542, n. 1, 2.

Question 12. What is established concerning the examination previous to ordination to be undergone?

Resp. § 1. Every one to be promoted, whether secular or religious, must undergo a previous and diligent examination concerning the very order to be received.

§ 2. But those to be promoted to sacred orders are to make trial in other treatises also of sacred theology.

§ 3. It belongs to the Bishops to establish by what method, before which examiners, and in which treatises of sacred theology those to be promoted must make trial (Can. 996).

§ 1. This examination, whether for secular clerics or for religious, is received by the Ordinary of the place who ordains by his own right or gives dimissorial letters; who nevertheless can also, from a just cause, commit it to the Bishop about to ordain, who is willing to take up that burden.

§ 2. The Bishop ordaining another's subject, whether secular or religious, with legitimate dimissorial letters by which it is asserted that the candidate was examined according to the norm of § 1 and found suitable, can acquiesce in this attestation, but is not held to do so; and if according to his conscience he judges that the candidate is not suitable, let him not promote him (Can. 997).¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1090, n. 16.

Irregularity is a perpetual impediment to this, that someone be enrolled among the clergy, or that he receive Orders or exercise those received. Irregularity is alienation from the rule; rule in Greek is called canon; canon formerly meant the catalogue of clerics who were enrolled under some Title (Church) and were called canons; irregulars with us anciently were those alien from the canon.

Irregularity therefore signifies a prohibiting impediment by which someone is prevented from being enrolled among the clergy, warding him off from Order or from its exercise; it signifies a perpetual impediment, namely one which is judged such that it does not cease by the fact itself, but which is removed only by legitimate power. And in this respect perpetuity is to be held as the essential character of irregularity; on the contrary, things which cease naturally by the course of time, by study, etc., are not, nor are they to be held as, irregularities properly so called. Therefore temporal irregularity is excluded. Irregularity derives its origin from defect or from delict, because that impediment, stain-note, arises on account of some defect, for instance, some defect of body, or on account of some delict, for instance apostasy from the faith.

I say. No irregularity is ever incurred unless it is expressed in canon law.

Thus in the new Code it is clearly declared:

No perpetual impediment which comes under the name of irregularity, whether it is from defect or from delict, is contracted, except what shall have been expressed in the canons which follow (Can. 983).

And therefore the things which are named in canons 984, 985 alone come under the name of irregularities. However many other things there may be which by natural or divine law prohibit one from the clergy, unless they are found expressed in the new Code, they are not irregularities.

They are irregular from defect:

1°. The illegitimate, whether the illegitimacy is public or occult, unless they have been legitimated or have professed solemn vows;

2°. Those defective in body who, safely because of weakness, or decently because of deformity, cannot discharge the ministry of the altar. Yet for impeding the exercise of an order legitimately received, a graver defect is required; nor because of this defect are acts prohibited which can be duly placed;

3°. Those who are epileptics or insane or possessed by a demon, or have been so; but if after Orders have been received they have become such, and it is certain that they are now free, the Ordinary can again permit his subjects the exercise of the orders received;

4°. Bigamists, namely those who successively contracted two or more valid marriages;

5°. Those who are marked by infamy of law;

6°. A judge who bore a sentence of death;

7°. Those who have undertaken the office of executioner, and their voluntary and immediate ministers in the execution of a capital sentence (Can. 984).

1°. Legitimate children are children conceived or born from a valid or putative marriage, unless to the parents, on account of solemn profession or a sacred order received, the use of a marriage previously contracted was prohibited at the time of conception. Illegitimate children are children conceived and born from fornication, adultery, incest, or sacrilegious intercourse between parents to whom at the time of conception the use of marriage was prohibited on account of solemn religious profession or sacred order.

They are legitimated: 1°. by subsequent marriage, provided the parents were able to enter marriage between themselves at the time of conception or pregnancy or birth; 2°. by decree of the prince. - Cf. Can. 1116.

2°. Those defective in body are those who, because of a defect of body, cannot perform the functions of the altar either safely because of weakness or decently because of deformity. Concerning this defect note that a graver one is required for impeding the exercise of an Order received, and not all functions of the order are prohibited. To this defect are reduced any defects, and only those, which have as a consequence either weakness, so that the functions of Order cannot be exercised safely, or deformity, so that they cannot be exercised decently, without scandal. Truly the canon itself explains the matter.

This irregularity is incurred under a twofold head: 1°. if someone is unfit for the exercise of Order; 2°. if he brings notable horror to others, or presents indecency.

Hence the following are held irregular: 1°. the mutilated, those wearing a wooden leg, those unable to use the hand, thumb, or index finger; 2°. the blind, totally lacking sight or so becoming blind that they cannot read in the Missal; 3°. the deaf, who hear nothing, so that in no way can they hear the voice of the minister responding; 4°. the mute or stammering, who cannot pronounce whole words, or cannot except with great difficulty, so that they move the laughter or contempt of those standing by; 5°. the lame, who cannot present themselves at the altar without a staff; 6°. those lacking a nose, or having one enormously distorted, lowered, or extended; 7°. the monstrous, for example, those having an enormous hump, which induces great deformity, etc. - Cf. St. Alph., nn. 403 and following.

Question. Whether one who lacks one eye is irregular?

Resp. Negatively, if he lacks only the right eye, because it is less necessary for the celebration of Mass, provided no notable deformity is born from it. But it must be said otherwise if he lacks the left eye, which is called the eye of the canon, because it is necessary for reading the canon of the Mass. Except, unless he can read the canon with the right eye without deformity. But this is to be subjected to the judgment of the Bishop. - Cf. St. Alphons., n. 404.¹

3°. Epileptics; see the Canon, n. 3.

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1087, n. 5.

4°. Bigamists: this irregularity has now become simple by force of this canon; it arises from the fact that someone successively and validly entered two or more marriages, because in bigamy the perfect signification of the indissoluble union of one Christ with one Church is lacking. This irregularity is called from defect of Sacrament; in the second valid marriage, or third, the perfect signification of that great sacrament, concerning which St. Paul to Ephes. V. 32, is lacking. True bigamy, and it alone, constitutes irregularity. A bigamist is not said to have sinned, "but to have lost the norm of the sacrament necessary not for the merit of life but for the seal of ecclesiastical ordination." C. 2, D. XXVI.

5°. Those who are marked by infamy of law are irregular. That infamy of law is that which is established in cases expressed by law. But cases, latae sententiae, are:

He who has cast away the consecrated species or carried them away or retained them for an evil end is, by the fact itself, infamous (Can. 2320).

He who has violated the corpses or tombs of the dead for theft or another evil end is, by the fact itself, infamous (Can. 2328).

He who has laid violent hands upon the person of the Roman Pontiff is infamous by the law itself (Can. 2343, § 1).

The duelers themselves and those who are called their seconds are besides infamous by the fact itself (Can. 2351, § 1).

Bigamists, that is, those who, with the conjugal bond standing in the way, have attempted another marriage, even only civil, as they say, are by the fact itself infamous (Can. 2356).

Laymen legitimately condemned for delicts against the sixth with minors below the age of sixteen years committed, or for rape, sodomy, incest, pandering, are by the fact itself infamous (Can. 2357).

Infamy of law ferendae sententiae:

All apostates from the Christian faith and all and each heretics or schismatics, unless having been warned they have come to their senses, are to be declared infamous (Can. 2314, § 1, n. 2).

Clerics, if they have admitted a delict against the sixth precept of the decalogue with minors below the age of sixteen years, or have practiced adultery, rape, bestiality, sodomy, pandering, incest with blood-relatives or relatives by affinity in the first degree, are to be declared infamous (Can. 2359, § 2).

Infamy of law ceases only by dispensation granted by the Apostolic See (Can. 2295).

6°. A judge who bore a sentence of death; those who have undertaken the office of executioner, and their voluntary and immediate ministers in the execution of a capital sentence. Christ Our Lord taught meekness both by words and by example; clerics ought to imitate it. Therefore the Church abhors a judgment of blood, and on account of defect of gentleness makes irregular: judges who bore a judgment of death; those taking up the office of executioner; voluntary and immediate ministers of the execution of a capital sentence voluntarily involving themselves in this execution, but not others. And therefore this irregularity also is much restricted.

They are irregular from delict:

1°. Apostates from the faith, heretics, schismatics;

2°. Those who, except in a case of extreme necessity, have allowed baptism to be conferred upon themselves in any way by acatholics;

3°. Those who have dared to attempt marriage or to place only a civil act, either themselves bound by a matrimonial bond or sacred order or religious vows, even simple and temporary, or with a woman bound by the same vows or joined by a valid marriage;

4°. Those who have perpetrated voluntary homicide or procured the abortion of a human fetus, the effect having followed, and all cooperating;

5°. Those who have mutilated themselves or others, or have attempted to take life from themselves;

6°. Clerics exercising the medical or surgical art forbidden to them, if death follows from it;

7°. Those who place an act of order reserved to clerics constituted in sacred order, either lacking that order, or being prohibited from its exercise by a canonical penalty, whether personal, medicinal or vindicative, or local (Can. 985).

These delicts do not beget irregularity unless they have been grave sins, perpetrated after baptism, with the prescription of can. 985, n. 2 saved, and likewise external, whether public or occult (Can. 986).

1°. Apostasy from the faith is total defection from the Christian faith; heresy is the voluntary error of some Christian against some truth of faith; schism is voluntary withdrawal from the unity of the Church and from obedience to the Head, the Roman Pontiff.

2°. Irregularity from bad reception of Baptism arises. Voluntary acceptance of Baptism from an apostate, heretic, schismatic, or infidel outside a case of necessity is understood; it is said: if he knew, that is, if knowingly he permitted himself to be baptized by any one of these outside a case of extreme necessity, then he is irregular.

3°. They contract irregularity:

Paul, married, attempting marriage with Martha, unmarried, or with Bertha, married, or with Titina, bound even by temporary vows.

Paul, a religious from solemn vows, attempting marriage with Martha, unmarried, or with Margaret, a religious bound by vows;

Paul, a subdeacon or deacon or priest, attempting marriage with Martha, unmarried, or Marthina, a religious;

Paul, unmarried, attempting marriage with a nun bound by solemn vow;

Paul, professed from temporary vows, attempting marriage with Martha, a nun bound by solemn vow;

John, a professed member of the Society of Jesus from perpetual simple vows, attempting marriage with Bertha, unmarried, or professed from vows whether solemn or simple temporary.

By like reason those who have dared to place only a civil act contract irregularity according to the adjuncts of this canon n. 3.

4°. It arises from homicide and procurement of abortion:

In this irregularity there seem altogether to be included all homicides properly and strictly so called, all procuring abortion, all cooperators who truly incur the guilt of homicide. Therefore those killing by physical act; those procuring abortion by a physical act, the effect having followed; those incurring by a moral act the guilt of homicide or of abortion, the effect having followed; those cooperating efficaciously.

Nor are they irregular who kill someone in the just defense of themselves or of another person, the moderation of blameless defense having been observed.

5°. To mutilate is to cut off a member of the body which has a proper and distinct office: foot, hand, eye, tongue, the breast of a woman. To perpetrate suicide, that is, to attempt to take life from oneself. Therefore those who have mutilated either themselves or others, or have attempted to take life from themselves, become irregular.

Vasectomy is certainly grave damaging of a man, for it deprives him of an immense good; and therefore it is a grave lesion. According to many it is grave mutilation in the technical sense, for it is a cutting-off of a member, although not an excision; it renders the vessels useless for their end. But others say that it is not certainly established concerning irregularity, because the member is not cut out, which is required for irregularity.

One emasculated is not irregular if this has happened to him on account of necessity, or an injury exercised upon him, or on account of defect of nature in birth; otherwise if without necessity he asked this to be done in himself.

Alexander VII condemned the following.

I. It is not against justice not to confer ecclesiastical benefices gratis: because a collator conferring those ecclesiastical benefices, money intervening, does not exact it for the collation of the benefice, but as it were for a temporal emolument which he was not bound to confer upon you. This is the 22nd.

II. That opinion is probable which says that a kiss had for the sake of the carnal and sensible delight which arises from the kiss is only venial, the danger of further consent and of pollution being excluded. This is the 40th.

Innocent XI proscribed the following.

III. The work of marriage exercised for pleasure alone is utterly free from all fault and venial defect. This is the 9th.

IV. To give a temporal thing for a spiritual is not simony, when the temporal is not given as a price, but only as a motive for conferring or effecting the spiritual; or even when the temporal is only a gratuitous compensation for the spiritual, or contrariwise. This is the 45th.

V. And this also has place, even if the temporal be the principal motive of giving the spiritual; nay, even if it be the end of the spiritual thing itself, so that it be esteemed of more worth than the spiritual thing. This is the 46th.

VI. When the Council of Trent said that those communicating in others' sins sin mortally, who promote to churches any others than those whom they have themselves judged worthier and more useful to the Church, the Council either first seems by this to wish to signify by "worthier" nothing else than the worthiness of those to be elected, the comparative being taken for the positive; or secondly, by a less proper locution it sets down "worthier," that it may exclude the unworthy, but not the worthy; or lastly it speaks thirdly, when there is a competition. This is the 47th.

VII. Copulation with a married woman, her husband consenting, is not adultery; and so it suffices in confession to say that one has fornicated. This is the 50th.

I had determined to transcribe no lax opinions concerning matrimony, because they are so foul and horrid that they can scarcely be read without scandal. But because the heretics reproach us that many shameful things are defended by Catholic casuists — and chiefly the impious Peter Bayle exaggerates several of the things which Thomas Sánchez teaches in this kind — therefore I shall transcribe a few, that I may stop the mouths of the calumniating heretics, and that they may understand that the paradoxes of the laxity of certain casuists are by no means approved by the graver theologians.

I. Fr. Claude La Croix, Book 3, part 2, no. 1000: “Gobat, no. 10, thinks that in Germany it is lawful in monasteries to sell wine and bread through servants: for this is not properly to keep a tavern or to trade, but to sell one's own to passers-by.”

II. The Fathers of Salamanca, tract 19, chapter 1, point 4, no. 55: “It must therefore be said that it is necessary to the contract of buying and selling that the delivery of money, or of another temporal thing, be made from a will of giving it as a price, or of commensurating it with the spiritual thing and esteeming it at so much, so that it be through an onerous contract. This depraved will nevertheless being excluded, if a temporal thing be given with the mind of obtaining a spiritual thing, not as an onerous price but gratis, or out of gratitude or benevolence, even with the imposition of some antidoral obligation, no simony is committed — whether the gift be conferred before the collation of the spiritual thing, or after it, or at the same time with it.”

III. The same Salmanticenses in the same place, no. 56: “If someone should resign a benefice into the hands of a prelate, or in favour of another, but with this mind, hope, and intention that the other out of gratitude and antidoral obligation should correspond with presents, gifts, and services — otherwise not being about to resign without such hope; but neither intending to oblige him by another obligation besides the antidoral, nor by another onerous agreement, or convention intervening, by which he intends rigorously to oblige him — it will not be simony.”

IV. The same Salmanticenses in the same place: “The same is of him who resigns a benefice into the hand of a prelate, or in favour of another, with this hope and intention that another fatter one be conferred upon him by the bishop, otherwise not being about to resign; if he does not intend to leave the superior bound by another obligation besides the antidoral. The same is in like cases. Valentia, § 3; Soto, article 2; Rodríguez, chapter 58; Palaus, point 4; Suárez; Ugolinus; Sánchez; Diana; Lessius; Layman in the place cited; who also add that this is true even if he express the said hope in words or in writing to the superior: because what it is lawful to desire, it is lawful also to express in words; and because it is lawful to ask from another that which he is held to by natural obligation.”

V. The same Salmanticenses in the same place, chapter 2, point 7, no. 49: “Hence also it is made honourable that monasteries of noble nuns exact a fatter dowry and a greater sum for entrance and sustenance: because the more celebrated the monasteries are, the greater expenses they have, and a greater sum is assigned as dowry for entrance.”

VI. The same Salmanticenses in the same place, no. 50: “For the rest, if besides the dowry of sustenance the nuns should receive or ask more, either because the entrant is less noble, or deformed, or of some other infamy, they can scarcely be excused from simony, says Sánchez, Book 3, chapter 3, doubt 11, no. 7; which we judge true, unless perchance (N.B.) some detriment thence befall the monastery, either in honour or in other temporal things: because this can lawfully be compensated by an increase of the dowry; just as in matrimony we said above that an equality of nobility, or of another thing, between spouses is compensated by an increment of the assigned dowry.”

VII. The same Salmanticenses in the same place: “Hence there is freed from simony that which frequently happens among our nuns, namely that in order that a twenty-first be received — which among us is called la veinte y una — a greater dowry is exacted; or that two or three sisters be received in the same monastery, in which case a greater sum is required, unless they be adorned with other surpassing qualities; and that widows be admitted, it is exacted also that the dowry be increased. For in the former case it is intended to render entrance difficult: because from the most holy virgin our mother St. Teresa our nuns have it that only twenty be made, and so forth. … In the other two cases for the same reason a greater dowry is exacted, that such entrance may be more difficult, and so forth.”

VIII. The same Salmanticenses in the same place, no. 51: “If a monastery, even a most wealthy one, should exact by agreement money from those to be received for their sustenance, it commits simony neither by divine nor by positive right.”

IX. Fr. Nicholas Mazzotta, tract 3, disputation 5, chapter 3, page 253: “But if you give something to an intercessor, whether mediate or immediate, not indeed for the intercession, but for the labour, for ceasing gain, for emerging loss, for the expenditure of time, and so forth, in going and returning, it is not simony, because these are something temporal altogether extrinsic.” So La Croix, no. 91, and others commonly.

X. The Fathers of Salamanca, tract 19, chapter 4, point 5, no. 22: “He who buys a benefice does not do an injustice, but suffers it: for he ought to have received gratis that which, a price being given, he receives; he sins only against religion, the transgression of which does not oblige to restitution. Nor does he who confers the benefice sin against justice, or by divine right make the collation invalid.”

XI. Fr. Thomas Tamburini, Book 8, chapter 4, § 4, no. 5: “I assert secondly that all benefices — whether greater, as a cardinalate and a bishopric, or lesser, as a canonry and a chaplaincy; whether having the care of souls, as an abbacy and a parish, or not having it, as the aforesaid canonry and chaplaincy, and the other benefices which are named simple — abstracting from those which are given in competition (of which presently at no. 14) — I assert, I say, that it is enough for avoiding mortal sin if they be conferred upon the worthy and fit, although the worthier or the most worthy be passed over.”

XII. Fr. Filliucci, tract 41, in the Appendix, chapter 4, no. 18: “I say fifthly that the opinion which reckons it enough to elect the worthy to benefices which are not given in competition is probable from Trent, session 7, chapter 5 On Reformation, saying: Let them be conferred upon the worthy; and from the universal estimation in the creation of beneficiaries, cardinals, bishops, abbots, and so forth, who, if they be held among the worthy, the elector is praised and the election is not blamed: but it would not commonly be praised, if it were evil and a mortal sin.”

XIII. Fr. Tamburini in the place cited, no. 8: “Since immediately before the Council seems to be content with the worthy, either first it seems by this to wish to signify by "worthier" nothing else than the worthiness of those to be elected, the comparative being taken for the positive; or secondly by a less proper locution it sets down "worthier," that it may exclude the unworthy … or lastly it speaks thirdly, when there is a competition.”

XIV. Fr. Thomas Sánchez, Book 2, disputation 15, no. 5: “It is probable that a dispensation of the Pontiff in a ratified marriage granted without a just cause is valid. … And the reason is because it is probable that the indissolubility of such a marriage is of human right.”

XV. The Salmanticenses, tract 9, chapter 1, point 6, no. 85: “Betrothals make kisses and embraces lawful between the betrothed.”

XVI. Fr. Thomas Sánchez, Book 3, disputation 18, no. 19: “Some limit this opinion, unless they should go to those places in fraud of the decree of Trent, that there they might be able freely to be joined in matrimony without a parish priest and witnesses: for then, they say, it is invalid. … For the rest this limitation displeases me, and I believe that, even if they should go thither with the end that they might be able freely to contract without a parish priest and witnesses, the marriage is ratified. First: for he who uses his own right cannot be said to commit fraud, so that for that reason the effect be hindered.”

XVII. The same Sánchez in the place cited, disputation 38, no. 3: “I conclude thirdly. It is a venial fault to omit those words (I join you together, and so forth). … It is proved: because the matter is not grave, since those words are not the form of the sacrament, nor pertain to a solemnity of great moment, nor include a mystery of great signification. Moreover because, although Trent uses preceptive words, yet under that precept there is contained not only that the parish priest bring forth those words, but other things of great moment, namely that the banns be sent before, and that the marriage be celebrated before the parish priest and witnesses, that he have a register, and so forth.”

XVIII. Fr. Viva, question 4, article 4, no. 6: “The blessing of nuptials does not seem to be a grave matter, nor greatly conducing to the progress of matrimony. For the nuptial blessing is not a sacrament, but a certain sacramental, nor of so great moment as the sacramentals which are sent before Baptism. But although it is not free from venial fault simply to omit it without any cause against the use and custom of the Church, nevertheless it is probable that there is no fault, from a just cause — namely by reason of a forbidden season, in Advent or Lent — to consummate the marriage before the blessing of the Church, since it seems to be a counsel, not a precept, to send it before.”

XIX. The Fathers of Salamanca, tract 9, chapter 19, point 5, no. 41: “Whence almost all the Doctors of our opinion infer, and Sánchez, Book 8, disputation 25, from no. 12, and Palaus in the place just cited testify that it is inferred from it, that if such a dispensation be remitted to the bishop, and he, before he despatch it, should question the contracting parties whether an incestuous copulation has been had between them, they can themselves deny it, even if he question with an oath exacted: and because such a questioning is superfluous, and juridically in such a matter he does not question, they are not bound to answer according to it; and they can assert that there was no copulation between them, and, lest they contravene the truth, retain in mind, lest we tell it to you. Nay, even if in the rescript of the Pontiff there come that clause, Unless copulation has been had between them — because it is understood of public, not of secret copulation.”

XX. Fr. Patrick Sporer, part 4, chapter 1, section 1, no. 428: “It is one thing to consent and take complacency in a copulation thought of as present, and an actual venereal delight from such copulation thought of and actual in the sensitive appetite and in the venereal parts consequent thereupon; which to the betrothed de futuro, and to widows regarding the past, is mortally unlawful, and is lawful to spouses alone. It is another thing to consent and take complacency in a copulation thought of as future, and in the venereal delight to follow at some time from such future copulation; which to the betrothed is not unlawful. For since from the betrothal itself contracted, and as it were by an inchoate right, such copulation and delight is to be at some time in the future, they ought not to be saddened by it or to turn away from it; but they can lawfully consent to it, take complacency in it, or rejoice over it, since it is nothing else than to rejoice over the hope of a future good, which hope is present and lawful. So with very many Sánchez, Diana, and so forth.”

XXI. Fr. Thomas Sánchez, Book 1, disputation 2, no. 5: “According to the common opinion embraces and kisses between the betrothed de futuro are lawful, on the ground that betrothals are a certain beginning of matrimony, and consequently grant a right of using the pleasure of matrimonial copulation. Therefore through betrothals a right in the body is acquired, otherwise no use of it would be granted; and consequently he who violates this right by fornication will be guilty of an injustice committed through fornication, necessarily to be opened in confession.” And this opinion is very probable.

XXII. The Salmanticenses, tract 9, chapter 15, point 6, no. 91: “Whether between the betrothed de futuro kisses, embraces, touches, amatory words, and so forth are lawful, outside the danger of pollution? It is answered that if such acts be done for the capturing of pleasure, they will be venial sins. … But if for a sign of love, there will be no sin, provided the betrothals between them be absolute and not conditioned. … The reason is because, just as betrothals are a certain inchoation of matrimony, so also those acts are lawful in that state which are in some manner an inchoation and beginning of copulation. Sánchez, Book 9, disputation 46; Aversa; Diana; Bonacina; Azor.”

XXIII. Tamburini, Book 7, chapter 5, no. 61, page 193 in my copy: “To the betrothed de futuro it is very probably lawful without sin to have certain signs of love, such as kisses, touches, modest looks, and amatory conversations — even on account of the delight residing in them, but without danger of pollution, or of consent to it, or to copulation; but by no means immodest ones. So Thomas Sánchez. … I find one excuse for betrothed persons exercising these unchaste actions with a foreseen but not intended danger of pollution, and without danger of consent to it. For if he were in an occasion in which he would be held UNMANNERLY if he abstained from them, he could usurp them: because there is already present a reasonable excuse.”

XXIV. Fr. George Gobat, tract 10, no. 641: “It is certain among all Doctors that kisses, touches, and embraces not immodest are lawfully done between the betrothed, when they are done according to the custom of the country as a sign of benevolence, for conciliating and fostering mutual love in order to matrimony. So speaks Perez. And indeed for the aforesaid end these acts are lawful, although there be present a danger of pollution, provided there be no danger of consent to venereal delight.”

XXV. Fr. Thomas Sánchez, Book 9, disputation 46, no. 48: “Kisses and embraces and other touches not immodest are excused from mortal fault between the betrothed de futuro by reason of the contract of betrothals entered upon between them. The reason is, because just as matrimony itself makes copulation honourable, so betrothals, which are a certain beginning of matrimony, ought to make honourable touches of this kind, which are a certain inchoation of copulation: chiefly because thus love is the more fostered in order to matrimony (no. 49). And this conclusion is true … although the betrothed intend that delight which arises from those embraces and kisses. Because betrothals, which are the beginning of matrimony, excuse from mortal sin this delight, which is an inchoation of copulation; and it would otherwise altogether be a mortal fault.”

XXVI. Fr. Gobat, tract 10, no. 672: “Sánchez in the place cited, no. 49, uses the name of sensitive delight, but by this he certainly understands venereal delight, as is plain. I confess nevertheless that it not rarely happens that a confessor is compelled in practice to suppose the opinion of Sánchez, unless he wish to dismiss such betrothed persons without absolution, as being those to whom he will with difficulty persuade that those embraces, kisses, and so forth are mortal, or, acknowledging them to be mortal, that they should form a purpose of amending themselves.”

XXVII. The Salmanticenses, tract 9, chapter 5, point 4, no. 41: “Which is true, adds Sánchez, no. 7, with Aversa and Navarrus, even before the marriage contracted, if he should see invincible ignorance and should not believe that he will acquiesce in his admonition, but with a wounded conscience would contract; or that she who would contract in good faith would with great difficulty and with scandal withdraw from such a marriage. Prudently therefore let the confessor then keep silence — nay, he is bound to keep silence, says Sánchez, no. 7, even if the ignorance be of divine right, for the same reason.”

XXVIII. Fr. Claude La Croix with Gobat goes further, Book 6, part 3, no. 541: “Although it be foreseen that the admonition will profit, yet if it be conjoined with a most grave inconvenience of the other party — for example of the proximate one — the confessor is not bound to admonish, but can permit them in good faith. So Gobat, chapter 2, no. 57; and again no. 3, Sporer.”

XXIX. Fr. George Gobat, tract 7, no. 315: “What is a confessor to do if he sees a penitent from invincible ignorance obnoxious, for example, to softness, whose gravity being taught he will scarcely abstain from on account of a depraved habit? By these words that question was proposed and applied to this peculiar vice, when it could be to several. But I answered from writings, in that title, chapter 57, no. 61; and, rightly considering the circumstances of that penitent, if it be altogether judged that the admonition will profit nothing at all, but that, the grave crime being known by him to be committed, he will nevertheless perpetrate it more rarely than he did when ignorant of its baseness — THE MANIFESTATION OF THE TRUTH IS TO BE DISSEMBLED BEFORE GOD.”

XXX. The same Gobat in the same place, no. 317: “And indeed more than once I have learned that certain men who are inculpably ignorant of the malice of this outrage sin mortally. Therefore, practically speaking, the question is not so much of him who will plainly never omit that sin on account of its known baseness, as of him alone who will scarcely omit it, or, as they say, will scarcely abstain from it, who now and then, even if most rarely, will abstain: whence — alas for the grief! — confessors groan that they know several of this most foul and at the same time most fetid bran. Concerning this also I reckon that opinion of St. Augustine on Morals is to be understood. For an admonition does not so much profit which would only hinder six, eight, or ten formally mortal sins, but will cause two hundred, three hundred, likewise mortal.”

XXXI. Fr. Claude La Croix, Book 6, part 3, no. 299: “He who probably thinks a marriage to be valid lawfully asks the debt: both because there is possession for it, and also because someone can here use a probable opinion. … Aversa adds that this holds even if the opinion for invalidity were MORE PROBABLE; and this is conformable to what is said in Book 1, no. 268, concerning the lawful use of a probable opinion.”

Caius, recently converted to the Catholic faith and often obliged to give to heretical friends a reason for the faith, asks a confessor what answer must be given to a difficulty recently proposed against the Apostolic Bull. For someone wrote as follows in the Contemporary Review, Dec. 1896: “The theological argument is very nebulous. Its defenders are not sure of its meaning. As every one knows, the English ordinations are declared invalid on account of defective form and intention. A French writer has shown that the defect of intention is inferred from the use of a defective form. But English critics of the Bull have shown that what is lacking in our form is lacking also in other forms which are recognized as valid by the Roman Church; indeed in the ancient Roman form itself. Father Bernard Vaughan replies hotly that the fault is attributed not to the form in itself, but to the employment of the form in a new and defective sense. That is to say, the defect of form results from a defective intention. The two arguments combined will make an excellent circle.” P. 796. Hence it is asked:

1. What is a sacrament, and what is essentially required for its validity?

2. What kind of change suffices to invalidate the matter or form of a sacrament?

3. How does the Bull Of Apostolic Care demonstrate that Anglican ordinations are invalid?

4. What answer must briefly be given to Caius?

1. What is a sacrament and what is essential to its validity?

A sacrament is an outward sign of inward grace ordained by Christ for the sanctification and salvation of our souls. Three things are necessary for the validity of a sacrament: the matter, the form, and the minister who makes the sacrament with the intention of doing what the Church does.¹

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. ii, 21.

2. What sort of a change is sufficient to invalidate the matter or form of a sacrament?

If a substantial change be made in the matter or form of a sacrament, the sacrament is destroyed. The matter will be substantially changed if in the estimation of ordinary men it is no longer the same, but something else. The form will be substantially changed if the sense is no longer the same.²

2 Ibid., 22.

3. How does the Bull Apostolicae curae show that Anglican ordinations are invalid?

By appealing to precedent and by showing that the form and intention expressed in the Anglican Ordinal are essentially defective. From the time of the legation of Cardinal Pole to England, Orders conferred according to the Anglican Ordinal have always been considered invalid by Rome; all references to the power of consecrating the Eucharist and offering up the Sacrifice of the Mass were excised from the ordination rite, thus showing a want of intention to ordain true priests.

4. A brief answer to Caius. The theological argument of the Bull is clear, and Catholics have no difficulty about its meaning. The defect of intention is not inferred from the defective form, but it is clearly expressed in the changes made in the form for the purpose of cutting out all references to a sacrificing priesthood, which the reformers rejected. There is a great difference between a form which has been altered with the intention of excluding all express references to a sacrificing priesthood, and a form which has not been so altered. The Bull shows that the Anglican Ordinal belongs to the first class, and that thus it has been rendered invalid, whatever might be said of its sufficiency in itself. From this it is clear what the Bull means by defective form and intention, and that it does not argue in a circle.

Titius, the Rector of a mission, when during a political disturbance he did not receive the stipend due to him, deserted the mission of which he was in charge, because no one is bound to work without pay, although his confessor opposed him, saying that innocent sheep ought not to be handed over to the wolf by the shepherd. Then the Bishop, after taking useless pains to make Titius return to the mission, in virtue of holy obedience ordered a priest who did not have the care of souls to act in place of the fleeing Rector; but he too refused to obey. Hence it is asked:

1. Do secular priests have a right to receive support?

2. Can one with the care of souls abandon residence because he does not receive the stipend due to him?

3. What is the force of the Apostolic oath commonly pronounced by priests of England?

4. What is to be said of the priests in the case?

The case was proposed in the Diocese of Northampton, 1901?

1. Have secular priests a right to their decent support?

Yes, the Church forbids any one to be promoted to sacred Orders without a title, i.e., a provision for his decent support. If a bishop culpably ordains a priest without a title, the bishop is bound to provide for his support until he can provide for himself.¹

1 will answer in the words of Gasparri: “ But, having received the priesthood, a priest is so incardinated in the diocese to which he belongs that he cannot depart without the permission, or without the letters, as they say, of excardination of his Bishop. The Bishop can deny permission to depart, provided that he assigns a suitable support to the priest. But if the Bishop both denies permission and cannot or will not assign a suitable support, the priest cannot on that account depart by his own will, but has recourse to the Sacred Congregation. The Bishop can recall one departing without his permission or that of the Sacred Congregation, even by censures, even if the priest had obtained a residential benefice in another diocese. This doctrine is most certain, and the Sacred Congregation has handed it down rather often.” (De Sac. Ordin., n. 860).

2. Can one who has the cure of souls abandon his charge because he does not receive the pension which is due to him?

3. What is the force of the Mission oath commonly taken by English priests?

By the terms of the Mission oath the cleric swears that he will not enter into any Religious Order after he is promoted to sacred Orders without special leave of the Holy See. He further swears that he will work for the salvation of souls in the diocese for which he is ordained, under the authority of the bishop. The formula of the oath is given in Concilia Westmon., p. 385.

4. The case. Titius should not have abandoned his post. He should have applied to the bishop whose duty it was to try to make provision for the decent support of Titius, and if this could not be done, to remove him to another post. Even if the bishop improperly refused to do anything for him, Titius should not have left the place, but should have appealed to Rome. The other priest on being ordered by his bishop to fill the vacancy was bound to obey, and he sinned in not obeying; but he also had a claim on the diocese for his decent support if he had no other title.

2 Gasparri, De Sacra Ordin., n. 612.

John is a seminarian in minor orders. His home is in a country. parish where there are two priests. The pastor asks John to act as subdeacon at the solemn Mass on Christmas Day. If John does not act, it will be impossible to have a solemn Mass. It is desirable that John should act. Is there any canonical prohibition, forbidding John, in these circumstances, to act as subdeacon? And if he acts as such, does he become irregular?

Answer. The general law of the Church forbids a cleric, under pain of incurring irregularity, to exercise solemnly, a sacred order that he has not received. The law reads thus: “A cleric who knowingly and solemnly exercises a sacred order which he does not possess becomes irregular.” In the first place it must be observed that the canon is directed against clerics, i. e., one must be at least a tonsured clerk, to fall under the canon. Therefore a layman, who, pretending to be a priest, should say Mass, or hear Confessions, would not incur any irregularity by such acts, although he would sin very grievously. Neither would a layman, even though he were a seminarian and wore the clerical garb, become irregular by acting as deacon or subdeacon at a solemn Mass. One must be at least tonsured to be affected by this canon. The next thing to be observed is that irregularity is incurred only when a cleric exercises a sacred order, which he has not received. Since the discipline of the Church to-day allows laymen to exercise solemnly the minor orders, clerics do not become irregular for exercising them. The irregularity begins with the solemn exercise of the subdeaconate by a minor cleric. The other terms of the canon that require an explanation are:

1. Scienter, i. e., the cleric must know that he has not the sacred order, which he is now exercising, and moreover he must be aware of the irregularity. If he be ignorant of the irregularity, he does not sin grievously, and therefore does not incur the censure.

2. Sollemniter. When do canonists consider a cleric to have solemnly exercised a sacred order? If the act which the cleric exercises, is never exercised, except by those who have received the order, then it is always done sollemniter. For instance, since Extreme Unction is never administered except by an ordained priest, a cleric not in priest’s orders, who would attempt to anoint the dying, would necessarily act solemnly and become irregular. In like manner also a priest, who would administer Confirmation, would of necessity, be acting solemnly, and would become irregular. But if the order which the cleric exercises, is sometimes exercised by others than those who have received it, v. g. one in minor orders may sometimes act as subdeacon at a solemn Mass, then a cleric is said to exercise solemnly a sacred order, which he has not received if he exercises the act exactly like those do who have received the order and if he wears the distinctive ornament of the sacred order. Thus the distinctive ornament of a subdeacon is the maniple, and of the deacon the stole. If a clerk in minor orders acts as subdeacon at a solemn Mass and wears the maniple, he becomes irregular. If he omits the maniple, he does not incur any irregularity. Neither does a subdeacon become irregular for acting as a deacon at a solemn Mass, if he omits the stole, because the wearing of the stole renders the act a solemn exercise of the order and brings it under the canon.

On March 10, 1906, the Congregation of Rites issued a decree which was confirmed by the Holy Father, and which covers the points at issue here. The decree says: “A cleric is never to be appointed to discharge the office of subdeacon in a solemn Mass unless there is a reasonable cause and he has been constituted in minor orders, or has at least received sacred tonsure.”

The decree forbids laymen to act as subdeacons in a solemn Mass. The wording is “num-quam deputetur.” That a man who is not in subdeacon’s orders, may act as a subdeacon at a solemn Mass, two conditions are required:

1. That the man be at least tonsured.

2. That there be real need for him to act.

Here it might be inquired whether it be the purpose of the decree to forbid even seminarians, who are not tonsured, to act as subdeacons in a case of necessity. We hardly think it is. The decree seems to be intended primarily for those countries where every person who begins to study for the priesthood is immediately tonsured, even though he be but a young boy. In those countries, generally speaking, there are no seminarians who are not tonsured. The custom exists in some countries of Europe on solemn feasts, of having a layman, not a seminarian, but a man who has no notion of ever being a priest, act as subdeacon. Even a married man, v. g. the sexton of the church or the sacristan is at times permitted to take the place of the subdeacon. If there were a seminarian in the parish, he of course would be tonsured and very likely in minor orders and in a few years a subdeacon. His acting -as subdeacon would not scandalize the faithful, whereas the participation of the layman in the sacred function does scandalize the faithful. In countries like the United States, young men, studying for the priesthood, live in the seminary and wear the cassock, although they may not be tonsured. They hold the same station among the laity as tonsured clerks do in other countries. They are looked upon as clerics and the same conduct is required of them as is required of tonsured clerks elsewhere. In a country like Germany, where many men follow the courses of theology at the university and intend to be priests, but who have never lived in a seminary, nor dressed as clerics, it is unbecoming to allow them to act as sub-deacons, and we understand that the decree forbids such action. The decree includes also those young men who, in a country like France or Canada, enter the great seminary to test their vocation, but who do not adopt any clerical dress, nor in any way consider themselves as clerics. It is evident that these should not appear at the altar in sacred vestments to take part in a solemn Mass.

In case a cleric not in sacred orders acts as subdeacon at a solemn Mass, the decree of the Congregation of Rites just mentioned makes a few observations for his guidance. He is to vest exactly like the subdeacon, omitting only the maniple. He is to perform all the ceremonies, as if he were a subdeacon, except the following:

1. He must not pour the water into the chalice at the offertory, but must let the deacon do so.

2. He must not touch the chalice infra actionem, nor cover it with the pall, nor uncover it.

3. After the communion, he must not purify the chalice, the celebrant must purify it; after which he (the subdeacon) covers it with the veil and burse and carries it to the side table.