Question about Holy Orders

  • Thread starter Thread starter Latinitas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Latinitas

Guest
Hi everyone,

Here’s a question I’ve been thinking about for quite some time:

Is it necessary for the validity of the sacrament of Holy Orders, that the Order prior to it be received validly?

For example, is it necessary for the validity of the priestly ordination, that the person have validly received the diaconate? It certainly is requried for the liceity (canon 1050 n.2), but is required for validity? Similarly, is it necessary for the validity of the episcopal consecration that the presbyteral ordination have been conferred on the person?

Apparently, some books I’ve been reading say that some Popes in the Middle Ages were consecrated bishops from the diaconate, but this is more conceivable, since the lesser is contained in the greater, in the case of the presbyterate and the episcopate.

St. Thomas answers this question in the negative (S.Th. Suppl. q. 35 a. 5), but he has an incorrect view of Holy Orders in that he views the subdiaconate and minor orders as sacraments (that is, having a true sacramental character), whereas the episcopacy is not a sacrament, and he proves this with the argument that the priestly character is presupposed in the episcopal consecration, which does not hold in regards to the priesthood and lower. However, if one holds the Episcopacy does not possess a distinct and superior sacramental character, then one is led to this view naturally, since one then must see it as simply a solemn consecration, but since we know that the episcopacy is sacramental (cf. Lumen Gentium, 21), this view is difficult to hold.

We also must take into account the fact that the Gospels never speak of Jesus ordaining his Apostles to the diaconate or presybteral, but does speak of them being ordained to the episcopacy (by the washing of the feet).

I’m tempted to agree with St. Thomas that one Order need not presuppose another for validity, but I’m not sure, since neither the Catechism of the Catholic Church, nor Dr. Ott speak about this.

Any thoughts? Magisterial documents and examples from Church history are greatly appreciated. Opinions may also be expressed.
 
The direct answer is: no. It is not necessary for validity.

The requirement of receiving the lesser orders first is a discipline that dates back at least to the 4th century, however, there are still plenty of examples of bishops (yes, most of them in the first 3 centuries) who were not ordained deacon or priest.

It wasn’t until Vatican II that this question was finally settled, but the Church understands that the episcopate is the fullness of orders. When a man is ordained a bishop, he receives the fullness of Apostolic Succession. It is not that episcopal ordination completes priestly ordination; rather, the priest or deacon receives only a part of the whole. It’s a subtle distinction, but an important one.

If you need the direct quotes I can look them up in the Vatican II documents and the catechism.

Think of it this way: if we were to deny the validity of an episcopal ordination w/out deacon and priest, then we would necessarily need to deny the validity of a great many of the earliest bishops; and a consequence of that would be that we would have no assurance of any valid succession.

As everyone knows, it’s unlikely in the extreme, but if the man who is elected pope is not already a bishop, he is to be ordained a bishop immediately. (UNIVERSI DOMINICI GREGIS 88). He is not required to be ordained deacon or priest if not-already. Instead he is to be immediately ordained bishop. I realize that some might think “well, it’s implied that if he is a layman, he must be ordained deacon, then ordained priest first.” But the word “immediately” doesn’t mean that something must happen first. It means exactly that “immediately.”
 
Fr. David’s explanation is correct - episcopal orders are not the last in a series of stages, but fullness that is otherwise conferred only partially in the lesser grades.
 
Thank you. This is what I thought, but I just wanted to be sure.

Thanks,
Benedicat Deus,
Latinitas
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top