Have minor orders been abrogated?

[savedbychrist]

They certainly no longer have a role in the Novus Ordo Missae, but orders that exclusively adopt the traditional form do have seminarians ordained into minor orders (using the 1962 missal of course). Have the minor orders actually been abrogated, or did they simply fell into disuse? Because if it’s the former, then wouldn’t the minor order ordinations nowadays be invalid?

 

[Paul_Edwards]

They are “abrogated” (or turned into “ministries”) but they certainly are valid.

I heard a ICKSP priest speak about this. Traditionally Seminarians are Clerics upon receiving the Tonsure. He said that while their seminarians are only clerics by Canon Law upon being ordained to the Diaconate, they are still Clerics by Orders upon receiving the Tonsure.

So it depends whether you mean by law, or in terms of orders. The minor orders no longer exist formally on paper (in law) but the blessings that are used with permission still work spiritually and hence they exist in that sense and are valid even though they don’t canonically mean anything.

I asked him if the minor orders confer an indelible character. He said the Church has left that open to discussion but that he takes the view (alike to a Saint he mentioned which I’ve forgotten about) that they do confer a character on the soul and said this is the traditional view. He said that nevertheless, the minor orders are never repeated in any cases, whether or not people believe they confer an indelible character or not.

While I am inclined to agree with him that they include an indelible character on the soul, the minor orders can be skipped without effecting the validity of ordination to the diaconate or priesthood. Once a priest is ordained, they are automatically all seven orders at once, so there is nothing to worry about, even though it’s a-shame that orders are not conferred in steps anymore because that was a beautiful preparation for priesthood in a way.

As a side note, the subdiaconate was absolutely suppressed in law even though the other orders are replaced by ministries. Never the less, the subdiaconate still exists in the invisible and Spiritual realm. Therefore, when there is a “straw subdeacon” at a solemn mass a maniple is not worn in the ICKSP because the maniple is only for those in major orders but it is worn by a real subdeacons nevertheless. In the ICKSP, upon being ordained to the Subdiaconate a person has to recite the entire divine office, whereas in the mainstream church a person has to from the diaconate.

I imagine that the FSSP follow all of the same ways as the ICKSP in respects to all this.

 

[Vico]

They certainly no longer have a role in the Novus Ordo Missae, but orders that exclusively adopt the traditional form do have seminarians ordained into minor orders (using the 1962 missal of course). Have the minor orders actually been abrogated, or did they simply fell into disuse? Because if it’s the former, then wouldn’t the minor order ordinations nowadays be invalid?

Remaining in the Latin Catholic Church (since 1972) are:

• reader
• acolyte (which may be called subdeacon).

 

[Paul_Edwards]

acolyte (which may be called subdeacon).

The only thing I will comment about is what is in brackets. I do not think that this would be advisable, to interchange the phrases acolyte and subdeacon, because a subdeacon touches the sacred vessels of the altar (ie the chalice and Paten) + an acolyte never wears a dalmatic etc and does not stand by the priest constantly in the same way that the Deacon does. Of course, officially there is no longer a rule about who can touch the vessels, but it is still ideal when possible that only those in major orders do so out of respect for Him who will at some point be contained in them.

Nevertheless, an acolyte would never wear a maniple unlike a subdeacon. In fact, even when there are straw subdeacons because of a lack of availability, the ICKSP will not allow that person to wear a maniple unless they have actually received the Subdiaconate.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

acolyte (which may be called subdeacon).

The only thing I will comment about is what is in brackets. I do not think that this would be advisable, to interchange the phrases acolyte and subdeacon, because a subdeacon touches the sacred vessels of the altar (ie the chalice and Paten) + an acolyte never wears a dalmatic etc and does not stand by the priest constantly in the same way that the Deacon does. Of course, officially there is no longer a rule about who can touch the vessels, but it is still ideal when possible that only those in major orders do so out of respect for Him who will at some point be contained in them.

Nevertheless, an acolyte would never wear a maniple unlike a subdeacon. In fact, even when there are straw subdeacons because of a lack of availability, the ICKSP will not allow that person to wear a maniple unless they have actually received the Subdiaconate.

I see that there are ritual differences. Using the slang straw is derisive since it means worthless. It may be good to not use the term subdeacon for acolyte, but it is not enforceable.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Using the slang straw is derisive since it means worthless. It may be good to not use the term subdeacon for acolyte, but it is not enforceable.

It is a technical term which means to say that Subdeacon serving at TLM is indeed Acolyte, and hence while he can fulfill some duties of Subdeacon, he should not cleanse the chalice (iirc). Subdeacons before were considered clerics, nowadays Acolytes (which may be called Subdeacons according to Pope St. Paul VI) are not.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

Using the slang straw is derisive since it means worthless. It may be good to not use the term subdeacon for acolyte, but it is not enforceable.

It is a technical term which means to say that Subdeacon serving at TLM is indeed Acolyte, and hence while he can fulfill some duties of Subdeacon, he should not cleanse the chalice (iirc). Subdeacons before were considered clerics, nowadays Acolytes (which may be called Subdeacons according to Pope St. Paul VI) are not.

From GIRM, an instituted acolyte may cleanse:

191.A duly instituted acolyte, as an extraordinary minister, may, if necessary, assist the Priest in distributing Communion to the people.3 If Communion is given under both kinds, in the absence of a Deacon, the acolyte administers the chalice to the communicants or holds the chalice if Communion is given by intinction.
3 Paul IV, Apostolic Letter, Ministeria quaedam, August 15, 1972, no. 6; Acta Apostolicae Sedis 64 (1972), p. 532

192. Likewise, when the distribution of Communion is completed, a duly instituted acolyte helps the Priest or Deacon to purify and arrange the sacred vessels. In the absence of a Deacon, a duly instituted acolyte carries the sacred vessels to the credence table and there purifies them, wipes them, and arranges them as usual.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

From GIRM, an instituted acolyte may cleanse:

At OF… Not at EF. He is a layman, and laity at EF do not do so.

Same way, EMCH (OF) can not distribute Eucharist at EF. Only Deacon (who is ordinary minister of Holy Communion at OF) can, but in extraordinary need for it- because at EF Deacon is extraordinary minister of Holy Communion

GIRM only speaks about OF.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

From GIRM, an instituted acolyte may cleanse:

At OF… Not at EF. He is a layman, and laity at EF do not do so.

Same way, EMCH (OF) can not distribute Eucharist at EF. Only Deacon (who is ordinary minister of Holy Communion at OF) can, but in extraordinary need for it- because at EF Deacon is extraordinary minister of Holy Communion

GIRM only speaks about OF.

I see, thank you. The different roles are certainly tied to the liturgical rite and sui iuris church laws. For example, I am Byzantine Catholic and for us, the minor orders are acolyte, lector cantor, and subdeacon. Deacon candidates will receive minor orders first, and in order. The subdiacon may remain so if Holy Orders are never received.

Also in the eastern Catholic churches the deacons do not give blessings nor bless marriages, nor are they ordinary ministers of baptism.

 

[CRM_Brother]

There is one slight caveat to the abrogation of minor orders.

There is one category of religious order, orders of clerics regular (Theatines, Jesuits, Barnabites, etc.), which require all of their members to be clerics, whether they be priests, deacons or brothers. Before the abrogation, this was done through the tonsure to allow those who, during their time in seminary, discern not to pursue priesthood or deaconate to remain in the order as a brother.

When the minor orders were abrogated, the orders were faced with a rather devastating reality. If those with minor orders were no longer considered clerics, then the orders would be required to expel all permanent brothers who were not priests or deacons. A few orders’ constitutions were flexible enough to change to include these brothers, but these were in the minority.

The Vatican gave an exception to the abrogation of the minor orders to these religious orders. They could continue with the application of the tonsure as a historical act of the orders and could regularly commit their brothers to the permanent institution of the ministries of Acolyte and Lector. They would not, of course, bestow upon them the status of a cleric as they were no longer minor orders. Instead, when a member of these orders take their vows (depending upon the order it may be their temporary or permanent vows) the Church allows them the status equivalent to that of a tonsured cleric. This allowed the orders to preserve the small numbers of their permanent brothers.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

I see, thank you. The different roles are certainly tied to the liturgical rite and sui iuris church laws. For example, I am Byzantine Catholic and for us, the minor orders are acolyte, lector cantor, and subdeacon. Deacon candidates will receive m

You are welcome. I am aware of practice in Eastern Churches, it is very interesting. By the way, Subdeacon used to be lowest Major Order by Latin standard (Bishop did not count as order, and Orders were based upon liturgical functions not upon Sacramental order). In the East, Subdeacon was classified as minor order (and highest of them). Basically same thing but different terminology… as it often is with East and West

 

[Paul_Edwards]

191.A duly instituted acolyte, as an extraordinary minister, may, if necessary, assist the Priest in distributing Communion to the people.

Even in the New Rite, only if Necessary, for example if mass will be an extra 40 minutes, as a priest was telling us at a Eucharistic retreat. But as has been said above, this doesn’t apply to the traditional form which provides no such exemption.