Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Members of the Church · On the Clergy (Book I)
Chapter 11: On the Number of the Ecclesiastical Orders
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Clericis (De Membris Ecclesiae, Book I), On the Clergy (On the Members of the Church, Book I). The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
There follows the third question, on the distinction of clerics or ministers of the Church — which question is placed in three things. For we differ from the adversaries about the number, the antiquity, and the office of clerics. And, to begin with the number, John Calvin (Book IV Institutes, chapters 4 and 19) and Martin Kemnitz (in the Examination of the 23rd session of the Council of Trent) reprehend the sevenfold number of orders which Catholics everywhere assert, and teach that there are only three true orders: of bishops, whom they more willingly call pastors; of priests, whom they call elders, or doctors, or ministers of the word; and of deacons.
Of the other orders they simply take away the order of exorcist; the rest they indeed acknowledge, but will have them to be neither orders nor contained by a fixed number. For they say that lectors, acolytes, doorkeepers, and the like were certain ministers whom the pastors freely took on for the necessity of the Church, that is, more or fewer, according as the greatness or smallness of the Church required. And this they prove from the fact that these orders are variously numbered by the Fathers. And indeed Calvin (Book IV, chapter 4, section 1) produces Jerome as witness, who (in the commentary on chapter 19 of Isaiah) numbers five orders: bishops, priests, deacons, the faithful, and catechumens.
Kemnitz produces witnesses. First, Dionysius the Areopagite, who (in chapter 5 of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy) makes only three orders: of pontiffs, of priests, and of ministers. Secondly, the canons of the Apostles, where five orders are numbered: of bishops, priests, deacons, lectors, and cantors. Thirdly, Ambrose, who (in the commentary on chapter 4 to the Ephesians) numbers also five, but in place of cantors puts exorcists. Fourthly, Ignatius (in the letter to the Antiochenes) and Epiphanius (at the end of the Panarion), who number more than seven; for they add kopiontas, that is, laborers. Ignatius also adds confessors. Fifthly, the canonists, who in Gratian (distinctions 23 and 25) add the psalmist. “Therefore,” says Kemnitz, “it is not a Catholic dogma, about those seven orders.” Thus they.
But Catholics will have there to be a certain and fixed number of those which are properly named orders of clerics. And it is to be observed that an ecclesiastical order is wont to be taken by authors in two ways: in one way properly, in another way commonly. Properly those are called orders which are conferred by the bishop with a certain sacred and solemn rite, and are referred to a certain ministry to be exhibited to the divine sacrifice. By which reasoning only seven orders are numbered: namely, priest, deacon, subdeacon, acolyte, lector, exorcist, and doorkeeper. For although bishop and priest are distinguished, yet as to the sacrifice they exhibit altogether the same ministry, and accordingly make one order, not two — as also lector and cantor, or psalmist.
Wherefore Pope Cornelius (in the letter to Fabian, in Eusebius, Book VI of the history, chapter 43) says that in the Roman Church in his time, that is, 1300 years ago, there were 46 priests, seven deacons, seven subdeacons, 42 acolytes, and 52 exorcists with lectors and doorkeepers — where he makes no mention of cantors, or laborers, or the others whom some number, because those neither have a proper ordination nor are referred by a distinct reasoning to the sacrifice. In the Roman Council under Sylvester (chapter 3) the same seven orders are numbered. But in the Fourth Council of Carthage (canon 2 and following), besides the orders already named in the letter of Saint Cornelius and in the Roman Council, the psalmist or cantor is added in the last place; but in the same place the Council warns that the psalmist is not ordained by the bishop, but can undertake the office of singing even without the bishop’s license, by the mere command of a priest. Isidore (Book VII of the Etymologies, chapter 12, and in the letter to Ludifredus), Rabanus (Book I On the Instruction of Clerics, chapter 6 and following), Amalarius (Book II On the Ecclesiastical Offices, chapter 7 and following), Hugh of Saint Victor (Book II On the Sacraments, part 3, chapter 5) number and explain the same seven orders; the same does the Master of the Sentences, whom all the theologians follow (on the fourth book, distinction 24). Finally, the same the Council of Florence numbers (in the instruction of the Armenians), and Trent (session 23, chapter 2); and the use of the Church testifies the same, for no other orders than these are wont to be conferred. For the first tonsure is not an order, since it has no office annexed, but is a preparation for orders, as the Catechism for Christianity.
But commonly all those are called orders which are in any way dedicated to divine services, even if they be not referred to the sacrifice. And in this way even monks, virgins, and widows consecrated to God, and also the laborers in burying the dead, are sometimes called orders by the Fathers. For of the ordination of a monk Dionysius writes (chapter 6 of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy); of the order of the laborers in burying the dead, Epiphanius (in his Compendious Doctrine); for the burial of the dead was held a certain religious action. Of the order of deaconesses, virgins, or widows, who served the Church in the instruction of the women who were to be baptized, the same Epiphanius in the same place.
From these it will be easy to explain the passages which are brought by the adversaries against the sevenfold number of orders. And first, to the passage of Jerome adduced by Calvin, I answer that Saint Jerome in that place speaks not of the orders of clerics, but of the orders of Christians; therefore he puts in the first place clerics, then laymen, whom he calls the faithful, last catechumens. Now of the clerics he names only three, that is, bishops, priests, deacons, because he wished to complete the number five; for he was explaining that of Isaiah: “There shall be five cities in the land of Egypt speaking the language of Canaan,” and by those cities he wished the Christian Church to be understood. And so, to complete the number five, out of all the clerics he put the first three, in which all the others are contained — whom the same Jerome elsewhere puts distinctly. For he mentions subdeacons in letter 91, in the first words; he mentions acolytes and lectors in the second letter to Nepotian; finally exorcists and doorkeepers in the commentary on chapter 2 of the epistle to Titus, in the last words.
To the passage of Dionysius, produced by Kemnitz, I answer that Dionysius did not wish to set out the number of orders, but the number of hierarchies. For there are three hierarchies in the Church militant, as there are also three in the Church triumphant. The first is of pontiffs; the second of priests; the third of deacons. For deacons, although they are and are called ministers if compared to priests, yet are also princes and prelates if compared to the common people, and therefore are called hierarchs; but the lower orders do not preside over the peoples, but only minister to deacons and priests. And that deacons preside, Ignatius teaches (in the letter to the Trallians): “Be subject to the bishop, and likewise to the priests and deacons.” Likewise Jerome (on chapter 2 to Titus): “Not only bishops, priests, and deacons ought greatly to provide that they excel the whole people over which they preside in conduct, speech, and knowledge, but also the lower grade — exorcists, lectors, sacristans, and absolutely all who serve the house of God.” This John Chrysostom too teaches, who (homily 83 on Matthew), persuading a deacon to keep the emperor from communion if he approach unworthily: “Restrain and coerce him; thou hast greater power than he.” And this too is the reason why bishops ordinarily took from the priests or deacons of the Church, not from the lower orders, as is plain from Leo (letter 84 to Anastasius, chapter 6) — which I also think is the cause why in the Roman Church only bishops, priests, and deacons are cardinals.
To the passage from the canons of the Apostles, I answer that Clement in the canons of the Apostles nowhere wished to number all the orders, but as occasion was given named now one, now another order. And that the same Clement acknowledged more orders is plain from canon 15, where he says: “If any priest, or deacon, or anyone of the number of the clergy,” and so on.
To the testimony of Ambrose I answer that Ambrose in the commentary on chapter 4 to the Ephesians made mention only of five orders, because he wished to explain of orders those words of Paul: “He gave some Apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and doctors”; and because Paul put only five names, therefore he too tried to number five orders. And so by Apostles he understood bishops, by prophets priests, by evangelists deacons, by pastors lectors, by doctors (or, as he reads, masters) exorcists.
To the testimony of Ignatius and Epiphanius I answer that those Fathers numbered not only orders properly so called, but also others. To the testimonies of the canonists I answer that they make nine orders, because they distinguish bishop from priest, and lector from cantor, which the theologians do not do; but in the matter there is no dissension. For the theologians consider orders only as they stand to the sacrifice, in which way (as we said) bishop and priest, lector and cantor are not distinguished; but the canonists consider orders as they constitute the hierarchy, and therefore rightly distinguish bishop from priest. And so much for the first point.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XI. De numero Ordinum Ecclesiasticorum. Sequitur tertia Quaestio de distinctione Clericorum, seu Ministrorum Ecclesiae ; quae sane quaestio tribus in rebus posita est. Dis¬ sentimus enim ab adversariis de numero, de antiquitate et de officio Clericorum. Ac, ut a numero incipiamus, Joannes Calvinus lib. IV Institut. cap. 4. et cap. 19. et Martinus Kemnitius in Examine XXIII sess. Concilii Tridentini , reprehendunt numerum septe¬ narium ordinum, quem Catholici passim as¬ serunt, ac docent, tres tantum esse veros or¬ dines, Episcoporum, quos ipsi Pastores li¬ bentius vocant, Presbyterorum, quos Senio¬ res, vel Doctores, vel Ministros verbi appel¬ lant, et Diaconorum. Ex caeteris ordinibus simpliciter auferunt ordinem Exorcistae, reliquos agnoscant qui¬ dem, sed neque ordines esse volunt, neque certo numero contineri. Dicunt enim, Lec¬ tores, Acolythos, Ostiarios et similes, fuisse ministros quosdam, quos pastores libere as¬ sumebant pro necessitate Ecclesiae, id est, plures aut pauciores, prout Ecclesiae magni¬ tudo aut parvitas requirebat. Id vero pro¬ bant ex eo, quod varie a Patribus isti ordines numerantur. Et quidem Calvinus lib. IV, c. 4. §. 1. Hieronymum producit testem, qui in Comment. cap. XIX Isaiee, quinque Ordi¬ nes numerat, Episcopos, Presbyteros, Dia¬ conos, Fideles et Catechumenos. Kemnitius autem testes producit ; Primo, Dionysium Areopagitam, qui in 5. cap. Ec¬ clesiasticae Hierarchiae, tres tantum facit or¬ dines, Pontificum, Sacerdotum, et Ministro¬ rum. Secundo, Canones Apostolorum, ubi numerantur quinque ordines, Episcoporum, Presbyterorum, Diaconorum, Lectorum et CAPUT XI. 435 Cantorum. Tertio, Ambrosium, qui in Com- ment. cap. IV ad Ephes. numerat etiam quinque, sed loco Cantorum ponit Exorcis¬ tas. Quarto, Ignatium in Epistola ad Antio¬ chenos, et Epiphanium in fine Panarii, qui plures numerat, quam septem ; addunt enim xo7T£wvras, id est, laborantes. Addit etiam Ignatius Confessores. Quinto, Canonistas, qui apud Gratianum dist. 23. et 25. addunt Psal¬ mistam : «Non igitur, inquit Kemnitius, Ca¬ tholicum dogma est, de septem illis ordini¬ bus. » Hasc illi. Porro Catholici certum ac statum nume¬ rum esse volunt eorum, qui proprie ordines Clericorum nominantur. Est autem obser¬ vandum, duobus modis accipi solere apud auctores ordinem Ecclesiasticum : Uno modo proprie; alio modo communiter. Proprie illi dicuntur ordines, qui certo ritu sacro et so- lemni conferuntur ab Episcopo, et ad certum ministerium sacrificio divino exhibendum referuntur. Qua ratione septem dumtaxat ordines numerantur , videlicet , Sacerdos, Diaconus, Subdiaconus, Acolythus, Lector, Exorcista, et Ostiarius. Etsi enim Episcopus et Presbyter distinguuntur, tamen quantum ad sacrificium, idem omnino ministerium exhibent, proinde unum ordinem, non duos faciunt, sicut etiam Lector, et Cantor, seu Psalmista. Quare Cornelius Papa in epistola ad Fa¬ bianum apud Eusebium lib. VI hist. cap. 33. dicit, in Ecclesia Romana suo tempore, id est, ante annos 1300, fuisse Presbyteros XLVI, Diaconos septem, Subdiaconos sep¬ tem, Acolythos XLII, Exorcistas cum Lec¬ toribus et Ostiariis LII, ubi nullam facit men¬ tionem Cantorum, vel laborantium, vel alio¬ rum quos alii numerant, quia nimirum illi nec habent propriam ordinationem, nec re¬ feruntur distincta ratione ad sacrificium. In Concilio item Roman. sub Sylvestro, cap. 3. numerantur iidem septem ordines. In Concilio autem Carthag. IV, can. 2. et se¬ quentibus, praeter ordines jam nominatos in epist. S. Cornelii et in Concilio Roman. ad¬ ditur ultimo loco Psalmista seu Cantor, sed ibidem Concilium monet : Psalmistam non ordinari ab Episcopo, sed etiam sine licen¬ tia Episcopi, sola jussione Presbyteri, posse officium canendi suscipere. Isidorus lib. VII Etymol. cap. 12. et in epist. ad Ludifredum; Rabanus lib. I de Instit. Cleric. c. 6. et seq. (1) Isai. XIX, 18. Amalarius lib. II de officiis Ecclesiast. c. 7. et seq. llugo de S. Victore lib. II de Sacra¬ mentis par. 3. cap. 5. eosdem septem ordi- dines numerant et explicant ; idem facit Ma¬ gister sent. quem omnes Theologi sequun¬ tur in IV dist. 24. Denique eosdem numerat Concilium Flo¬ rentinum in instructione Armenorum, et Tridentinum sess. XXIII, cap. 2. et Ecclesiae usus idem testatur; non enim alii ordines praeter istos conferri solent : Nam prima ton¬ sura non est ordo, cum nullum habeat offi¬ cium annexum, sed est praeparatio ad ordi¬ nes, ut Catechismus ad Christianismum. Communiter autem dicuntur ordines illi omnes, qui quomodocumque dedicantur di¬ vinis obsequiis, etiam si non referantur ad sacrificium. Et hoc modo etiam Monachi, virgines et viduae Deo sacratae, necnon labo¬ rantes in sepeliendis defunctis, ordines ali¬ quando dicuntur a Patribus : Nam de ordi¬ natione Monachi scribit Dionysius c. 6. Ec¬ clesiast. Hierarch. de ordine vero laboran¬ tium in sepeliendis mortuis, Epiphanius in Compendiaria doctrina. Habebatur enim ac¬ tio quaedam religiosa, sepultura mortuorum. De ordine Diaconissarum, virginum, aut vi¬ duarum, quae serviebant Ecclesiae in instruc¬ tione mulierum, quae baptizandae erant, idem Epiphanius ibidem. Ex his autem facile erit explicare loca, quae ab adversariis afferuntur contra nume¬ rum septenarium ordinum. Ac primum ad locum Hieronymi, a Calvino adductum, Res¬ pondeo, S. Hieronym. eo loco non loqui de ordinibus Clericorum , sed de ordinibus Christianorum ; ideo ponit primo loco Cle¬ ricos, deinde Laicos, quos fideles vocat, ul¬ timo Catechumenos. Porro ex Clericis no¬ minat tres tantum, id est, Episcopos, Pres¬ byteros , Diaconos , quia volebat perficere numerum quinarium; Explicabat enim illud Isaiae : Erunt quinque civitates in terra /E- gypti loquentes lingua Chanaanitide (1), ac per eas civitates Ecclesiam Christianam intelligi volebat. Itaque ad perficiendum quinarium numerum, ex omnibus Clericis tres [primos posuit, in quibus omnes alii continentur, quos idem Hieronymus alibi distincte ponit: Nam Subdiaconorum meminit in epist. 91. in primis verbis, Acolythorum meminit ac Lectorum in epist. 2. ad Nepotianum : De¬ nique Exorcistarum et Ostiariorum in Com- i 436 LIBER I. mentar. cap. II epistolse ad Titum in postre¬ mis verbis. Ad locum Dionysii, aKemnitio productum, respondeo, Dionysium non voluisse exponere numerum ordinum, sed numerum Hierai- chiarum. Tres enim sunt Hierarcliise in Ecclesia militante, ut etiam tres sunt in Ec¬ clesia triumphante ; Prima est Pontificum ; Secunda Sacerdotum ; Tertia Diaconorum. Diaconi enim, etiamsi ministri dicuntur et sunt, si comparentur ad Sacerdotes ; tamen sunt etiam Principes et Praesules, si compa¬ rentur ad plebem, et ideo dicuntur Ilierar- chse, Ordines autem inferiores non praesunt populis, sed tantum ministrant Diaconis et Sacerdotibus. Quod autem Diaconi praesint, docent Igna- tius in epist. ad Trallianos : « Subjecti, inquit, estote Episcopo, similiter et Presby¬ teris, atque Diaconis. » Item Hieronymus in cap. II. ad Titum : « Non solum, inquit, Episcopi, Presbyteri et Diaconi debent ma¬ gnopere providere, ut cunctum populum, cui praesident, conversatione, sermone, ac scien¬ tia praecedant, verum et inferior gradus, Exor¬ cistae, Lectores, iEditui, et omnes omnino, qui domui Dei serviunt. » Docet id etiam Joannes Ghrysostom. qui homil. 83. in Matth. Diacono suadens, ut Imperatorem arceat a communione, si indigne adeat : « Cohibe, inquit, et coerce, majorem tu illo habes potestatem. » Et haec etiam ratio est, cur Episcopi ordinarie assumerent ex Pres¬ byteris, aut Diaconis Ecclesiae, non ex infe¬ rioribus ordinibus, ut patet ex Leone epist. 84. ad Anastasium, cap. 6. quam etiam puto causam esse, cur in Romana Ecclesia soli Episcopi, Presbyteri et Diaconi sint Car¬ dinales. Ad locum ex Canonibus Apostolorum, Respondeo, Clementem in canonibus Apos¬ tolorum nusquam voluisse omnes ordines numerare, sed data occasione, modo unum, modo alium ordinem nominasse. Eumdem autem Clementem plures ordines agnovisse, perspicuum est ex can. 15. ubi dicit : « Si quis Presbyter, aut Diaconus, aut quilibet de numero Clericorum etc. » Ad testimonium Ambrosii respondeo, Ambrosium in commentar, cap. IV. ad Ephesios, solum quinque ordinum mentio¬ nem fecisse, quia volebat de ordinibus ex¬ plicare verba illa Pauli. Alios dedit Aposto¬ los, alios Prophetas, alios Evangelistas, alios Pastores et Doctores, et quia Paulus solum quinque nomina posuit, idcirco conatus est etiam ipse quinque ordines numerare. Ita¬ que per Apostolos intellexit Episcopos, per Prophetas Presbyteros, per Evangelistas Diaconos, per Pastores Lectores, per Docto¬ res, vel, ut ipse legit, Magistros, Exorcis¬ tas. Ad testimonium Ignatii et Epiphanii res¬ pondeo, illos Patres numerasse non solum ordines proprie dictos, sed etiam alios. Ad testimonia Canonistarum respondeo, illos facere novem ordines, quia distinguunt Episcopum a Presbytero, et Lectorem a Cantore, quod Theologi non faciunt; sed in re non est dissensio. Theologi enim solum consi¬ derant ordines, ut se habent ad sacrificium; auomodo (ut diximus) Episcopus et Presby¬ ter, Lector et Cantor non distinguuntur. Ca- nonistse autem considerant ordines, ut Hie- rarchiam constituunt, et idcirco recte dis¬ tinguunt Episcopum a Presbytero, atque heec de primo.