The laying on of hands as a gesture of “ordination.” The hierarchical degrees of the priesthood.

Chapter VIII: THE TRANSMISSION OF THE PRIESTHOOD AND THE HIERARCHY IN THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES AND IN THE LETTERS OF SAINT PAUL.

Grace… conferred through the laying on of hands.

In the books of the NT, allusions to the laying on of hands are found very frequently. As to its content, this rite has various meanings. In Matt. 10:13-16, for example, it expresses the blessing given to someone through this gesture. Very often, especially in the descriptions of miraculous healings, it is Christ who lays on his hands. (Matt. 9:18; Mark 6:5; 8:23-25; Luke 4:40; 13:13). The apostles have at times also had recourse to that gesture to grant healing (Acts 28:8). Paul himself recovers his sight when Ananias lays his hands upon him (Acts 9:12-17).

But there are texts in which the laying on of hands is an outward sign of the transmission of a certain power or of a function. Thus, for example, the election of the deacons is carried out through prayer and the laying on of hands by the college of the apostles upon the seven candidates presented to them (Acts 6:6). In the same way, by laying on their hands, Paul and Barnabas instituted elders in all the communities (14:23); by the same rite the presbyters and bishops were instituted at Ephesus; thus is described the sending of Paul and Barnabas on mission among the pagans: “Then, after they had prayed and fasted, they laid their hands upon them and released them to their mission” (13:3).[1]

On the basis of these texts, one may believe that the power to exercise the apostolate from the time of Paul was transmitted by means of the laying on of hands and a prayer not further specified. The texts of Acts 13:13 and 14:23 demonstrate this clearly. Three declensions of Peter in the letters to Timothy deserve careful examination: 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; 2 Tim. 1:6.

In order to resolve more conveniently a difficulty in these texts, it is fitting to analyze together 1 Tim. 4:14 and 2 Tim. 1:6: “neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the imposition of the hands of the priesthood” (1 Tim. 4:14); “for which cause I admonish thee that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands” (2 Tim. 1:6). Here it is Paul himself who has laid his hands upon the disciple, while the text of 1 Tim. 4:14 speaks of a priestly community that is not too precisely specified. A fair amount of data therefore seems to indicate that this community accompanied Paul and that he was the principal actor of the aforementioned rite: in fact, in the two texts two different prepositions have been used. The participation of the priestly community in the ceremony of the laying on of hands is expressed by the preposition metá, which almost always designates the circumstances accompanying an action. In the text of 2 Tim. 1:6, on the contrary, the phrase that speaks of the laying on of hands by Paul carries the preposition diá, which in general expresses the idea of instrumental causality.

This is not a mere grammatical peculiarity, but rather seems an invitation to consider that in both cases it is Paul who lays his hands upon Timothy. Paul is cited alone in the second text, while the first speaks of the participation of the community of elders.

The context does not permit this laying on of hands to be assimilated to any blessing whatsoever, still less to the narration of a healing. The theological content of the text receives its full meaning in virtue of the Old Testament parallels, in which the laying on of hands underscores the solidarity between the one who blessed and the one who received the blessing, and who thus received a certain good. (Lev. 1:4; 16:21; Num. 8:10; 27:15; Deut. 34:9) One is therefore in the presence of a biblical rite that confers the Spirit and transmits an office, as is seen in Num. 27:18-23, where Moses confers the succession upon Joshua.

The meaning of the rite of the laying on of hands is also the following: the ministry of the new covenant is transmitted, so that the mission and priesthood of Christ may be communicated not only to the apostles but also to their successors, until the end of time, as 1 Cor. 11:26 suggests: “For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall show the death of the Lord, until he come.”

The laying on of hands was accompanied by a prayer, of which the formula has not been preserved. This must have expressed the will of God concerning the one chosen, and invoked upon him the Spirit of God. Of this one can form an idea by considering the special charism produced by the laying on of hands and by the prayer pronounced on that occasion, a charism of which mention is made only in the texts that allude to that rite: to proclaim the gospel with true doctrinal authority; to fulfill well the apostolic work (1 Tim. 4:12-16); to receive “the spirit of power, and of love, and of sobriety” (2 Tim. 1:7). By grace of this “gift (chárisma) which God hath deposited” in him, the apostle can show himself strong by the grace of God, not be ashamed of the gospel, and proclaim it throughout the whole world.

Paul, then, has transmitted his power (which he himself had received from God: 2 Tim. 1:11) to Timothy. The latter, in turn, will be able to communicate it to others. In fact 1 Tim. 5:22 warns against the haste of laying hands upon anyone. Some exegetes would like to distinguish there some trace of a penitential rite. Rather, it is a matter of the same rite of which 1 Tim. 4:14 and 2 Tim. 1:6 speak; the allusion to the presbyters immediately preceding (vv. 17-21) lends support to this interpretation.[2]

These texts show that the office of the ministers of the priesthood of Christ is transmitted through the laying on of hands and the prayer that accompanies it. It is unlikely that reference is here made to a rite instituted as such by Jesus himself; nor can the idea of a Judeo-rabbinic origin be maintained[3]. The apostles, conscious of committing the future, referred to a significant rite practiced by those responsible for old Israel (Num. 27:18-23); in the new people of God, by means of the same rite that communicates the Spirit, the leaders assured the perpetuity of their succession.

Author: Casimir Romaniuk

Source: Apologetica.org

Casimir Romaniuk, Il sacerdozio del Nuovo Testamento. Esegesi e Tradizione, Bologna (1976), 213-226.
Translated by Sister María de las Virtudes, SSVM, Convento de Contemplativas, Pontina, Italy

Bibliography

N. ADLER, Taufe und Handauflegung. Eine Exegetisch-theologische Untersuchung von Apg. 8,14-17 (Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen B. XIX, Heft 3), Münster i. Westf., 1951.

J. BEHM, Die Handauflegung im Urchristentum, Leipzig, 1911.

J. COPPENS, L’imposition des mains et les rites connexes dans le Nouveau Testament et dans l’Eglise ancienne, París, 1925.

J. B. FREY, Les communautés juives à Rome aux premiers siècles de l’eglise, RSR 19, 1931, pp. 137-145.

J. L. LEUBA, L’Institution et l’Evénment, París- Neuchâtel, 1950.

E. LOHSE, Die Ordination im Spätjudentum und im Neuen Testament, Göttingen, 1951.

W. MICHELIS, Das Altesamt der christlichen Gemeide im Lichte der Heiligen Schrift, Bern, 1953.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The hierarchical degrees of the priesthood in the Acts of the Apostles and in the letters of Saint Paul.[4]

Disciples and apostles

There are some differences of terminology regarding the use of the term “disciple” in the gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles. In the gospels, those indicated as disciples are men who had joined their lot to that of Jesus, whether by a tacit consent or by an explicit desire. They undoubtedly constituted a substantial group, but not to the point of being confused with the multitude of people.

The author of the third gospel frequently uses the term “disciple” also in the Acts of the Apostles: this time, he simply indicates the faithful, the members of the various churches: “In those days, the number of the disciples increasing, there arose a murmuring of the Greeks against the Hebrews… Then the twelve calling together the multitude of the disciples, said: …” (Acts 6:1-2; cf. also Acts 6:7; 9:25; 9:38; 11:26-29; 13:52; 14:20,22,28; 15:10; 16:1; 18:23-27; 19:1-30; 20:1-30; 21:4-16).

The forms of organization of the church went on developing from the time when Christ chose the twelve. The Acts of the Apostles allow one to glimpse that the hierarchy in the church was properly constituted beginning from this group. The Acts give them the name of apostles without reserving it exclusively to them, since it is attributed also to Paul and to those whom the twelve and Paul called to be part of the group, such as Joseph called Barnabas, a native of Cyprus (Acts 4:36). James, the brother of the Master, head of the community of Jerusalem, was also, at least according to some exegetes, an apostle instituted not by Christ, but by men. Contrary to Barnabas, an itinerant apostle, James remains in Jerusalem until the end of his life. The first represents an ambulatory hierarchy and the second the type of a residential power. Both were plenipotentiaries of the College of the Apostles, that is, of those who accompanied the Lord Jesus all the time that He lived among them (Acts 1:21) and who saw him risen.

Inasmuch as they are less well known, Andronicus and Junia were also, according to Paul himself, authentic apostles instituted by men (Rom. 16:7).

Therefore, men who devote themselves to an apostolic work, of whatever kind, are thus called apostles. Paul clearly distinguishes them from the body of the twelve, never places them on the same level, and never says that they are instituted as apostles of Jesus Christ.

He is conscious that the presence of something incommunicable lies in the experience of the twelve and in his own.

The deacons

With the passing of time, the Church separates itself ever more from the synagogue, and because of the tasks of a social character that it takes on, it has need of new forces. Thus one arrives at the institution of the diaconate (Acts 6:1-7), whose existence marks a stage in the history of the organization of the primitive Church. The deacons have principally the task of organizing the charitable work of the Church (Acts 6:3)[5]. They can also teach, as the activity of Saint Stephen (6:8-51) and of Philip (8:5 ff.) proves; they have also the right to baptize (8:38). And above we have seen that they are instituted deacons by means of the laying on of hands. They participate very closely in the ministry of the apostles.

In Phil. 1:1 they are recalled as particularly worthy persons. Upon them are imposed some important moral requirements: cf. 1 Tim. 3:8-10,12,13.

It is worth noting that in 1 Tim. 3:11 allusion is made to certain women, the deaconesses. It seems that one of them was Phoebe, a pious woman recalled in Rom. 16:1, who rendered service at Cenchreae. Later documents attribute to these women the duty of teaching other women the truths of the faith, of assisting at the rites of baptism of other women, and of visiting the sick. The texts of the NT say nothing about the manner in which they are recruited, and we do not know the details of their apostolic activity.

The deacons therefore did not have the power to govern the various local churches. Likewise it is never said that they laid hands upon anyone. The community was united to the person of the apostle who was its effective head and exercised his power, either personally with periodic visits to the Churches he had founded, or by correspondence, or also by means of special envoys.

The presbyters-bishops

With the passing of time, alongside this itinerant hierarchy a local hierarchy is established, particularly in the Palestinian communities and on the model of the civil administrations.

We think particularly of the institution of the elders (presbyteroi). It was a college generally composed of seven experienced men, respected by all. They had an administrative and judicial power and had to concern themselves with the financial matters of the community. Therefore, it seems that they never performed priestly functions.[6] In non-Christian societies, the elders formed, together with the experts in the Scriptures, the class of the leaders of the people; in Jerusalem they were members of the Sanhedrin (Flavius Josephus, Antiq. IX, 3:15; XIV, 5:4). Now some texts of the Acts of the Apostles make us think of a similar administrative system also among the Christians. For example, Paul and Barnabas deliver the gifts for the Church of Antioch precisely into the hands of the elders (Acts 11:30). Moreover, some duties of the elders require the functions of the deacons. According to Acts 15:6 the elders took an active part in the “council” of Jerusalem: not only did they there take the floor, but also certain decisions: “Then it pleased the apostles and ancients, with the whole church, to choose men of their own company, and to send to Antioch, with Paul and Barnabas” (Acts 15:22). The formula “the apostles and the elders” is repeated several times in the Acts of the Apostles (15:2-4,22), which leads one to think that the presbyters had not only a certain administrative power, but also the possibility of pronouncing upon the questions that involved the life and the future of the Church. On the model of Palestinian society, colleges of elders exist also in the communities founded by Paul and Barnabas in Asia Minor and in Greece. As we have already seen, they receive their office by means of the laying on of hands. (Acts 14:23)[7].

The elders are personally united to the community of origin; for this reason it is commonly said: “The elders of this or that church.” But nothing indicates that one of them usurped the privilege of primacy, or that he was head of the local Church. The supreme power is always in the hands of the apostles in person, inasmuch as the elders exercised a certain power of direction (1 Tim. 5:17). Contrary to the procedure of election observed in the non-Christian Palestinian communities, Paul, in the churches founded by him, chooses the elders himself alone and lays his hands upon them. Here one has a new indication about the nature of the ministerial priesthood: mediation comes from God, and it is transmitted by tradition.

The term “elder,” given the frequent use made of it by the Acts of the Apostles, seems to go back very far, which leads one to think that this same function began to exist in the customs of the primitive Church before that of the episcopate[8].

With the passing of time there appears in these same communities a new title: “guardian,” “epíscopos,” and the holders of this office have a certain power over the deacons and over the faithful. The community over which they find themselves as guides is called the church of God (1 Tim. 3:5), and in the life of these communities, liturgical prayer holds the first place. “Governing” (proistámenoi, 1 Tim. 3:4) is one of the principal duties of the bishop. He must also know how to lead and, following the example of Christ, must be a shepherd (poimén). But principally he watches over the community, he “keeps vigil” over it.

Thus it is above all in the churches of Asia Minor, in the time of Ignatius of Antioch, that is, between the 1st and 2nd centuries. To this bear witness the writings of Ignatius of Antioch, the letters of Clement of Rome, and the “Teaching of the Twelve Apostles”[9]. But the term epíscopos already appeared in the Acts of the Apostles and in the letters of Saint Paul, where it indicates, at times, the same persons who elsewhere are called “elders.” For example, in Acts 20:17, Paul convokes at Miletus the elders of Ephesus and reminds them of the responsibility they have in virtue of their institution in the office of bishops, on the part of the Holy Spirit. They are bishops to watch over the church of God: “Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God” (Acts 20:28).

In the introduction of the letter to the Philippians, Paul greets the bishops and the deacons. The fact that he omits the elders could be explained by admitting that the term epíscopoi designates at once both the bishops and the elders. It is probable that the term epíscopoi is used in an analogous manner in 1 Tim. 3:2. One could not otherwise understand the abrupt transition by which the text passes from the bishops to the deacons. Furthermore: the allusion to the bishops (in the plural) of the city of Philippi or of Ephesus would be in full contradiction with the tradition of the Church: it is indeed notable that custom forbids two bishops to reside in the same city[10]. The text of Titus 1:5-7 is even more illuminating on the meaning of the terms epíscopos and presbyteros: “For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and shouldest ordain priests in every city, as I also appointed thee…”

The bishop, in fact, in his quality (deî gár tòn epíscopon eînai). Here it is a matter of the same persons, even if at the beginning they are called “bishops” and afterwards “elders.”

These terms, epíscopos and presbyteros, are not, however, synonyms. The second designates a state, while the first expresses the idea of a vigilance and indicates a determined function[11].

As a consequence, when these same persons constituted the governing college of the local churches they were called elders; and when, with the passing of time, some of their functions came to be better defined, they began to be called bishops[12].

The results of the more recent exegeses no longer permit one to maintain the thesis according to which the epíscopoi of the NT would be the true predecessors of the ministerial priests, while the presbyteroi would have been laymen, with no say in the chapter as regards teaching and worship, with activity limited to the purely external administration of the churches. Many scriptural texts remain in contradiction with such an interpretation. In Acts 5:24 it is said, in effect, that hands were laid both upon the elders and upon the bishops; and from the letter of James 5:14 one can conclude that it was precisely the elders who performed the anointing of the sick, which, very truly, had a sacramental character. It seems then that those are right who maintain that the elders had the same priestly power as the bishops. The latter, in certain circumstances, formed a special executive committee created by the college of the elders. The regime of organization of the non-Christian communities, Jewish and Hellenistic, gives us many examples that support this hypothesis[13]. In the primitive Church there existed therefore, on the one hand, elder-bishops who had the duty of presiding over the liturgical assemblies, offering the Eucharist, teaching in the strict sense of the word, and administering the material goods of the church; on the other hand, the elders who were not bishops, although they had received all the powers required to fulfill the acts just mentioned, did not exercise this power; or if they exercised it, they did so in turns, thus becoming bishops[14].

But this rule admits too many exceptions. We have already had occasion to observe how, within the space of a few verses, the inspired authors, even when addressing the same recipients, made use of two terms, thus wishing to draw attention to the diversity and breadth of the functions of the head of the community.

This observation takes on its full significance when one recalls the other titles attributed to those in charge. These are ordinary words that, in Jewish or Greek circles, designate functionaries and leaders. Paul speaks of those “set over the assistance and government of the Church” (1 Cor. 12:38). A term used also in Rom. 12:8 “he that ruleth” and in 1 Tim. 5:17. It is not a matter of an honorific post, but of a grave charge of governing. The names hegeúmenoi (Heb. 13:7,17,24) and poiménes (Eph. 4:11-12; 1 Pet. 5:1-4) express the idea that in the Christian community the leader-guide leads, feeds his flock: “the pastors (are) charged with organizing the saints for the work of the ministry, in view of the building up of the body of Christ, which is the church” (Eph. 4:11-12). Finally, the word epimeletés evokes the function of the Roman curator, who convoked the assembly for the feasts and the games, or watched over the works ordered by the public bodies.

The study of the hierarchical degrees of the priesthood leads us to draw the following conclusions:

1- In the books of the NT, and above all in the letters of Saint Paul, the terms “bishop” and “elder” are used in such a way that they can be interchangeable, although certain differences of meaning should not be minimized.

2- The custom of defining the head of the community with the name of “elder” is of Jewish origin. It brings out the seriousness, the dignity, the personal maturity of the one responsible for the Church.

3- The term epíscopos and the function it designates are rather of Hellenistic origin. It indicates the function more than the dignity of the person.

4- Thus the situation reflected in the letters of Paul, on account of the imprecision and fluidity of the expressions, differs from the state of things we observe in the life of the Church of the second and third centuries.

5- The vocabulary underscores that the function of the apostles and of the hierarchy instituted by them is first of all one of government, of responsibility toward the new people of God. This duty is realized on the one hand in evangelization, and on the other in the liturgical assembly. The minister of Jesus proclaims to men the word and raises up to God the offering of the holy people gathered around the sacrifice of their Lord.

Bibliography

E. BAUMGARTENER, Zur Siebenzahl der Diakone in der Urkiche zu Jerusalem, BZ, 1909, pp. 49-66.

S. BIHEL, De septem diaconis, «Antonianum» 3, 1928, pp. 129-150.

J. COLSON, Le fonction diaconale aux origines de l’Eglise, Paris-Bruges, 1960.

G. DIX, Le Ministère dans l’Eglise ancienne, Neuchâtel, 1955.

L. M. DEWAILLY, Envoyés du Père. Mission et Apostolicité, París, 1960.

D. ERMONI, Les premiers ouvriers de l’Evangile, París, 1905.

J. D’ESPINE, Les Anciens, Neuchâtel, 1946.

P. GAECHTER, Die Sieben, ZKTh 74, 1952,pp. 129-166.

G. HOLTUM, Die Terminologie berzüglich der kirchlichen Amter in der Apostolegeschichte, den Briefen des hl. Paulus und aderen neutestamentichen Schriften, «Theol. U. Glaube» 19, 1927, pp. 461-475.

J. MARTIMORT, De l‘évêque, Paris, 1946.

PH. MENOUD, L‘Eglise et les Ministères selon le Nouveau Testament, Neuchâtel, 1949.

K.H. RENGSTORF, Apostolat undl Predigtamt. Ein Beitrag zur neutestamentlichen Grundlegung einer Lehre vom Amti Kirche (Tübinger Studien zur systematischen Theologie 3), Stuttgart, 1934.

B. REICKE, Diakonie. Festfreude und Zelos in Verbindung mitl der altchristlichen Agapenfeier, Uppsala, 1951.

C. SPJCQ, Si quis episcopatum desiderant, RSPT, 1940, pp. 316-325.

K. L. SCHMIDT, Le Ministère et les ministères dans l‘Eglise du Nouveau Testament. RHPR 17, 1937, pp. 313-336.

J. SCHMITT, Sacerdoce judaique et hiérarchie ecciésiale dans les pre­mières communautés palestiniennes, RSR 29, 1955, pp. 250-261.

R. SCHNACKENBURG, Episcopos und Hirtenamt. Zu Apg. XX, 28, « Epi­scopus ». Festchr. Kard. Faulhaber), Regensburg, 1949, pp. 66-88.

P. TISCHLEDER, Wesen und Stellung der Frau nach der Lehre des hl. Paulus, Münster, 1923.

J. VITEAU, L‘institution, des diacres et des veuves, RHE 22, 1926, pp. 513-537.

H. ZIMMERMANN, Die Wahl der Sieben (Apg. 6, 1-6). Ihre Bedeutung für die Wahrung der Einheit in der Kirche (Festschr. für Kard. J. Frings), Köln, 1960, pp. 364-378.

K. RAHNER, Cosa dice la teologia circa il ripristino del diaconato, in: « Saggi sui sacramenti e l‘escatologia », Roma, 1965, pp. 307-398.

Notes

  1. The book of Numbers shows us an analogous example in the Old Testament: “And Moses did as the Lord had commanded. And when he had taken Josue, he set him before Eleazar the priest, and all the assembly of the people, and laying his hands on his head, he repeated all things that the Lord had commanded” (27:22-23). ↩
  2. On this subject, cf. N. ADLER, Die Handauflegung im NT bereits ein Bussritus? Zur Auslegung von 1 Tim 5,22 (Neutestamentliche Aufsätze-Festschrift für J. Schmid), Regensburg, 1963, pp. 1-6. ↩
  3. Cf. J. LECUYER, Il sacerdozio di Cristo e della Chiesa, Bologna 1964, p. 319 f. ↩
  4. Those who refuse to admit the Pauline authenticity of the pastoral letters appeal, among other things, to the fact that the hierarchical degrees of the priesthood cited in these texts are not confirmed except in the non-biblical historical sources of the 2nd and beginning of the 3rd century. According to these authors, the pastoral letters would come from that period and would therefore not be by Saint Paul. Others, who likewise do not recognize the authenticity of the pastoral letters, think that one may speak of later interpolations, at least for the fragments in which hierarchical degrees already determined are treated. Cf. A. HARNACK, Entstehung und Entwicklung der Kirchenverfassung und des Kirchenrechts, Leipzig 1910, p. 50 ff.; H. LIETZMANN, Zur altchristlichen Verfassungsgeschichte, ZwissTh 55, 1913, pp. 97-152. ↩
  5. “The service of the table,” although such is the exact sense of the verb diakonéin, is certainly not the only motive for which the seven deacons were called. Cf. J. COLSON, Les ecclésiales aux premiers siècles, París, 1956, p. 30 ff.; K. THIEME, Diaconie primordiale, remède au schisme primordial, “Dieu vivant” 26, 1954, pp. 101-123. ↩
  6. Cf. W. MICHELIS, Das Altesamt der christlichen Gemeinde im Lichte der Heiligen Schrift, Bern, 1953, p. 9 ff.; E. SCHURER, Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes, Leipzig, 1907, II, pp. 241-258; J. B. FREY, Les Communautés juives aux premiers siècles de l’Église, RSR 19, 1931, pp. 137-139. ↩
  7. The election of the zeqenim, that is, of the elders, was already made in an analogous manner in the OT. (cf. Num. 11:16; 28:18). ↩
  8. But the Qumran texts could suggest that the title of bishop, in the Hebraic form mebbaqqer, could go back as far as that of elder. ↩
  9. It is already used by the Seventy (Num. 4:16), in which it also expresses the dignity of the person who bears it. In the NT, this title is applied once to Christ in person (1 Pet. 2:25). ↩
  10. Cf. P. BENOIT, Les origines apostoliques de l’épiscopat, in “L’Evêque dans l’Eglise du Christ.” Work of the Symposium of L’Abresle, 1960, collected and edited by H. BUESSÈ and A. MANDUOZE, París, 1963, p. 16 ff. One may also refer to the article translated into the Italian language: BENOIT, Le origini dell’episcopato nel NT, “Benoit, Esegesi e teologia”, Roma, 1964, p. 461-487 (ed. note). ↩
  11. This differentiation in the use of the two terms is already visible in the translators of the 70 and in non-biblical Greek literature. Cf. P. BENOIT, Les origines apostoliques de l’épiscopat, pp. 18-32. ↩
  12. Ibidem, p. 36. ↩
  13. Ibidem, p. 44, notes 1-2. ↩
  14. Cf. P. BENOIT, Les origines apostoliques de l’épiscopat, pp. 44-45. The hypothesis advanced by J. COLSON, who holds that the terms episcopos and presbyteros are synonyms, is less plausible and oversimplifies the problem: the first would have been used above all in the Hellenistic milieu and the second in the communities formed principally by Jewish-Christians. (Les fonctions ecclésiales aux deux premiers siècles, p. 108 ff.). ↩