Question about Orders

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ite_ad_Ioseph
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

Ite_ad_Ioseph

Guest
The Encarta Encyclopedia on my computer said that until Vatican II the Church thought of Orders as the following:
1: bishops and priests
2: deacons
3: subdeacons
because a long time ago bishops and priests were the considered the same, something having to do with the terms being interchangibly used in the Bible sometimes. I have never heard this ever, I assumed it was always bishop/priest/deacon.
Am I stupid or what?
 
See here for the Summa Theologica argument that bishops and priests are the same level of the sacrament of Holy Orders.
 
Ite_ad_Ioseph said:
The Encarta Encyclopedia on my computer said that until Vatican II the Church thought of Orders as the following:
1: bishops and priests
2: deacons
3: subdeacons
because a long time ago bishops and priests were the considered the same, something having to do with the terms being interchangibly used in the Bible sometimes. I have never heard this ever, I assumed it was always bishop/priest/deacon.
Am I stupid or what?
Click to expand...
St. Paul used both the term for priest (presbuterous) and bishop (episcopos) interchangeably because the roles were not clearly defined. In the cursus honorum or “way of honor” prior to Vatican II the bishop and priest were no different in terms of orders. It was with Vatican II that the sacramental theology of orders took a big step. At that point the entry into the clerical state was defined as the diaconate and, since there were three major orders, the role of priest and bishop became the other two. It as at this time that the Church stopped talking about “consecrating” a man a bishop and began speaking of episcopal ordination.

Deacon Ed
 
So, did devopment of doctrine happen? As in, we realize after all this time that Bishops and priests are two separate orders? Or was it just a reorganization policy of the council?; which means that orders were
1: deacon
2: priest/bishop
because as I understood it subdeacon was created by the Church, and not and order.
Random thoughts: Since both a priest and bishop can give confirmation, it can be argued they are the same order. But, married men were never allowed to be bishops, like priests can be (in some rites).
Pax
 
Ite_ad_Ioseph said:
Random thoughts: Since both a priest and bishop can give confirmation, it can be argued they are the same order. But, married men were never allowed to be bishops, like priests can be (in some rites).
Pax
Click to expand...
If given the authority by the pope, a priest can perform ordinations as well. See here for the thread on that topic.
 
Priests ordaining priests only applies in that special case though. If there are no bishops left in the world, but one priest, can he ordain other priests, or are we out of luck?
Pax
 
Ite_ad_Ioseph said:
Priests ordaining priests only applies in that special case though. If there are no bishops left in the world, but one priest, can he ordain other priests, or are we out of luck?
Pax
Click to expand...
Good question. I don’t think there is a definitive answer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top