Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Members of the Church · On the Clergy (Book I)
Chapter 13: On the Offices of the Ministers
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 remains the office, in which too Kemnitz and Calvin differ from us not a little. Let us speak of each separately. The beginning in the Church is taken from the first tonsure, which indeed is not an order, since it has no fixed office annexed, but is a certain disposition and preparation for the orders. For those who are thus shorn profess that they are to be initiated into the orders and to pass from the affairs of the world to the ecclesiastical warfare. Now of the rite of the tonsure and shaving there will be a proper disputation below.
The first order, then, is of doorkeepers, about which order we nearly agree. For Calvin admits (Book IV Institutes, chapter 4, section 9) that the office of doorkeepers among the ancients was to open and close the doors of the church, and accordingly to have care of the temple itself. But afterward, in the same book (chapter 19, section 27), he reprehends that among us the bishops ordain doorkeepers by a solemn rite. For he thinks it is not a fixed ecclesiastical order, but only an office, such as is that of those who are janitors in secular houses. But he brings nothing by which to prove his opinion. We, however, have the testimonies cited above, in which the order of doorkeepers is numbered among the orders of the Church. And besides, in the Fourth Council of Carthage (canon 9) the form and rite of ordaining doorkeepers is prescribed, and it is that very one which the Church now uses: “A doorkeeper, when he is ordained, after he has been instructed by the archdeacon how he ought to conduct himself in the house of God, at the suggestion of the archdeacon let the bishop also deliver to him the keys of the church from the altar, saying: So act as one who is to render an account to God for the things which are kept under these keys.” And so Calvin, while he laughs at these things, laughs not only at the modern papists (as he speaks), but also at the Catholic Church, which is, and which was in Christ, 1100 years ago.
The second is the order of lectors, whose office was to read from the pulpit in the church whatever was to be read from either Testament. For that even the Gospels were wont to be read by lectors Cyprian testifies (Book II, letter 5), where, speaking of Aurelius ordained lector: “Nothing is more fitting to the voice which has confessed the Lord by a glorious profession than to sound forth in the celebrating of the divine readings, and after the sublime words which have proclaimed the martyrdom of Christ, to read the Gospel, whence martyrs are made.” Thus he. Yet it is credible that it was not the office of the lector to read the Gospel at the time of the sacrifice (for that was the deacons’, as we shall show a little after), but only outside that time. Calvin indeed admits that this was the office of lectors (Book IV, chapter 4, Institutes, section 9), but says it was not a grade, nor a fixed order in the Church, but only that the bishops were wont to enjoin certain of their household ministers to read the Scriptures in the church, that in that way they might become known to the people and learn to bear the sight of men. But not only does the Fourth Council of Carthage (canon 8) prescribe a solemn rite of ordaining lectors, but Saint Cyprian too (Book II, letter 5; Book III, letter 22; and Book IV, letter 5) openly signifies that the lectorate was an order and grade in the Church; for he everywhere calls it a grade and ecclesiastical honor. Likewise he says that Celerinus at first out of humility fled that grade, but at length, admonished by a divine revelation, acquiesced. Besides, he excuses at length that he ordained certain lectors, under pressing necessity, without the express counsel and consent of the clergy. Finally he said that he had first made a certain man, named Saturus, near to the clergy, because he had permitted him to read in the church at Easter, when he was not ordained; but afterward he co-opted him into the clergy and promoted him to the order of lector. Where you see it is one thing to read in the church, which alone Calvin acknowledges, and another to be promoted to the order of lector.
The third is the order of exorcists, to whose office it pertains to read the exorcisms of the Church over the possessed, and in that way to prepare them that they may be made partakers of the divine sacrifice. For of old, because demons were most frequently driven from human bodies, very many possessed persons flocked to the church, so that there were as it were herds of the possessed, and therefore this order was instituted. That there was really a fixed ecclesiastical order of exorcists, and not only a gift and grace freely given (as Calvin will have it), is plain from the testimonies cited above — of Ignatius (in the letter to the Antiochenes), of Pope Cornelius (in the letter to Fabian, in Eusebius, Book VI of the history, chapter 43), and of Cyprian (Book V, letter 14), of the Roman Council under Sylvester (canon 3), and of the Council of Laodicea (canon 24), where exorcists are numbered among the orders; but it is chiefly shown from the Fourth Council of Carthage (canon 7), where we read thus: “An exorcist, when he is ordained, let him receive from the hand of the bishop a little book in which the exorcisms are written, the bishop saying to him: Receive, and commit to memory, and have power of imposing the hand over the possessed, whether baptized or catechumen.” The Council of Laodicea too (canon 26) forbids anyone to exorcize, either publicly or privately, unless he has been advanced by the bishop to that order. From which Councils we understand how openly Calvin lies when he says (Book IV Institutes, chapter 19, section 24): “It is feigned that power was given to those exorcists of imposing hands over the possessed.” For how do we feign what we prove from Councils so ancient? Add too the testimony of Sulpicius, who (in the book On the Life of Blessed Martin, chapter 4) writes thus: “Hilary tried, by imposing on him the office of deacon, to bind Martin more closely to himself and to fetter him with the divine ministry; but when he had most often resisted, crying out that he was unworthy, the man of higher wit understood that he could be constrained in this way, if he imposed on him that office in which there seemed some place of injury. And so he ordered him to be an exorcist, which ordination he, lest he should seem to have despised it as too humble, did not refuse.”
The fourth is the order of acolytes, whose it is proper to follow the deacon with a lighted candle to the place of the Gospel, and to prepare the little jugs and cruets for the sacrifice, and hand them to the subdeacon. For thence he was called acolyte, as it were a follower, from akoloutheo, which is “I follow,” and also ceroferarius [candle-bearer] from carrying the candle. Here indeed Calvin cannot hold his laughter, for he says thus (Book IV Institutes, chapter 19, section 23): “But first of all remarkable is the subtlety with which they philosophize on the name of acolyte, calling him a candle-bearer, by a word (as I think) magical, certainly unheard of by all nations and tongues.” And above (chapter 4, section 9): “They called acolytes those who were present to the bishop in domestic services and perpetually accompanied him, first for honor’s sake, then lest any suspicion should arise.” Thus he. And so he will have it that acolytes were of old nothing else than, as it were, the chamberlains of the bishops. But he proves what he says by no witness; accordingly let him see whether he did not feign the office of the acolyte out of his own head. But that the order of acolytes was an ecclesiastical grade we prove from the very many testimonies cited above — of Cornelius, Cyprian, the Roman Council, and the Council of Carthage. Moreover, that candles and jugs pertained to his office, which Calvin laughs at, the Fourth Council of Carthage testifies (canon 6): “An acolyte, when he is ordained, let him indeed be taught by the bishop how he ought to act in his office, but let him receive from the archdeacon a candlestick with a candle, that he may know he is assigned to lighting the lights of the church; and let him receive an empty jug for supplying wine unto the Eucharist of the blood of Christ.” Thus there. Where you also see that the name ceroferarius is not magical, nor unheard of by all nations and tongues, unless you would have so many holy Fathers, and with them Blessed Augustine who was present at the Council, to be magicians and men of no nation or tongue. The same name too is in Isidore (Book VII of the Etymologies, chapter 12), in Amalarius (Book II, chapter 10), in Rabanus (Book I On the Instruction of Clerics, chapter 9), in Hugh (Book II On the Sacraments, part 3, chapter 5), and in many others, who were neither magicians nor of no nation or tongue.
The fifth is the order of subdeacons, to whose office it properly pertains to minister to the deacon in the sacrifice, and therefore, when he is ordained, he receives an empty chalice and paten, as we have in the Fourth Council of Carthage (canon 5) and in the Fourth Council of Toledo (canon 27). His it is to read the epistles of Blessed Paul at Mass, as the Council of Reims teaches (canon 4). All the authors cited above mention this order. Accordingly it is false what Calvin writes (Book IV Institutes, chapter 4, section 5), that the office of subdeacons was nothing else than to help the deacons in distributing alms and caring for the poor.
The sixth is the order of deacons, who were set over the collecting of the offerings and the administering of the wealth of the Church, as is agreed between Catholics and heretics; for the Acts of the Apostles (chapter 6) testify this. The same is plain from Leo in the sermon on Saint Laurence. From which office perhaps it came to pass of old that deacons grew insolent against priests; for offices connected with money always seem to have been loved beyond the rest. Certain Councils reprehend the arrogance of deacons — Nicaea (canon 14), Laodicea (canon 20), and Toledo (the Fourth, canon 38). Likewise the Fathers: Cyprian (Book III, letter 9), Jerome (in letter 83 to Evagrius, and Book XIV on Ezekiel, expounding chapter 48), and Bernard (Book IV On Consideration).
But besides this office the deacons had also certain others which the adversaries do not acknowledge. First, it was the deacons’ to assist and minister to the priest sacrificing, and to distribute the Eucharist to the people; and on account of this sacred ministry they especially receive sacred ordination. For we see (Acts 6) that deacons are ordained by the imposition of hands — a sacred ceremony which it is not credible the Apostles would have used if they had wished to commit to deacons only the ministry of the tables; for before, widows ministered to the tables, and yet were not ordained by any fixed rite. Besides, Clement (Book II, chapter 14, of the Constitutions) signifies that deacons were wont to minister to the priest in the offering of the sacrifice; which Cyprian too openly teaches (in the sixth sermon, which is On the Lapsed). The same we learn from the history of Saint Laurence in Ambrose (Book I On the Offices, chapter 41). For he introduces Saint Laurence speaking thus to Blessed Sixtus: “Whither dost thou go without thy son, father? Whither dost thou hasten, holy priest, without thy deacon? Thou wast never wont to offer the sacrifice without a minister.” And below: “To whom hast thou committed the fellowship of consummating the Sacraments, to him dost thou deny the fellowship of thy blood?” The same is plain from the Liturgy of Chrysostom, and from homily 83 on Matthew. The same from Saint Gregory, who in the letter to Leander (which is prefixed to his books on Job) calls the diaconate nothing else than the ministry of the sacred altar. Finally Isidore, Rabanus, Amalarius, Hugh, and the others cited above, who describe the offices of all the orders, teach this which we have said.
Secondly, it was the deacons’ to read the Gospel at the time of the sacrifice. This, besides the authors above mentioned, Saint Jerome testifies (in letter 48 to Sabinian): “Thou, bloodless and pale, that thou mightest be free from all suspicion, didst read the Gospel of Christ as a deacon.” Saint Gregory too testifies it (in the Roman Synod, which is had in Book IV, letter 88), where he forbids deacons to sing in the church except the Gospel, at the time of the sacrifice. The same the ancient Councils testify — that of Vaison (canon 4) and of Reims (canon 5).
Thirdly, it was the deacons’ to baptize, to preach, to reconcile public penitents, to carry the Eucharist and give it to the laity, and, in brief, to do all that bishops and priests do, except the consecration of the body of the Lord, the ordination of clerics, and the other offices which require the power of order. For that deacons can baptize is plain from the example of Philip the deacon (Acts 8); whence Tertullian (in the book On Baptism): “The right of giving Baptism the high priest has, then also the priests and deacons.” That deacons can likewise preach the example of Stephen and Philip the deacons teaches (Acts 7 and 8); likewise the example of Saint Vincent the Martyr, who, though a deacon, yet preached, as Augustine testifies (sermon 2 on Saint Vincent). Finally Gregory (Book IV, letter 88) teaches that the office of preaching pertains also to the deacon, and that Gregory himself, while still a deacon, preached, John the Deacon testifies (in his life, Book I, chapter 41). Again, that deacons were sometimes wont to reconcile penitents in the absence of the bishop and priests, Cyprian teaches (Book III, letter 17). Likewise that deacons can give the Eucharist to the laity in the absence of the priests, the Council of Nicaea teaches (canon 14). Justin too testifies (at the end of the second Apology) that deacons were wont to carry the Eucharist to the absent.
It is to be observed, however, that all these things, and chiefly the office of preaching, are proper to the bishops, so that it is not lawful even for priests to preach except by the mandate or consent of the bishop. For bishops properly succeed the Apostles; and the Apostles are those who (Acts 6) say: “It is not good that we leave the word of God and serve the tables.” For Possidius writes (in the life of Blessed Augustine, chapter 5) that Bishop Valerius granted to Saint Augustine, his priest, the power of preaching, because he himself, being a Greek, could less conveniently preach to a Latin people. We read too, in the Second Council of Vaison (canon 2), that the power of preaching was given to priests by a Council of bishops. In the same place it is also prescribed that deacons, when there is no priest to preach the word, recite the homilies of the holy Fathers in place of a sermon.
The seventh order is of priests, about which a grave controversy is carried on between us and the heretics, which is to be disputed in the following chapter.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XIII. De officiis Ministrorum. Restat officium, in quo etiam non parum a nobis Kemnitius, et Calvinus dissentiunt. Dicamus de singulis seorsim. Exordium in Ecclesia sumitur a prima tonsura, quse qui¬ dem non est ordo, cum nullum habeat cer¬ tum officium annexum : sed est quaedam dispositio, ac praeparatio ad Ordines. Profi¬ tentur enim se ordinibus initiandos, et a sjeculi negotiis ad militiam Ecclesiasticam transituros, qui ita tondentur. Porro de ritu tonsurae et rasurae erit infra propria dispu¬ tatio. Primus igitur ordo, Ostiariorum est, de quo Ordine fere convenimus. Patetur enim Calvinus lib. IV. Institut. cap. 4. §. 9. Offi¬ cium Ostiariorum apud veteres fuisse aperi¬ re, et claudere fores Ecclesiae, proinde cu¬ ram habere ipsius templi. Caeterum postea libro eodem, cap. 19. §. 27. reprehendit, quod solemni ritu Ostiarios ordinent Epis¬ copi apud nos. Existimat enim ipse non esse certum ordinem Ecclesiasticum, sed officium tantum, quale est eorum, qui Janitores sunt m profanis domibus. At nihil ipse affert, quo sententiam suam probet. Nos autem ha¬ bemus testimonia supra citata, in quibus Ostiariorum Ordo inter Ordines Ecclesiae nu¬ meratur. Ac praeterea in Goncil. Carthagi¬ niensi IV. can. 9. praescribitur forma, et ritus ordinandorum Ostiariorum, et est ille ipse, quo nunc utitur Ecclesia : « Ostiarius, in¬ quit Concilium, cum ordinatur postquam ab Archidiacono instructus fuerit, qualiter in domo Dei debeat conversari, ad suggestio¬ nem Archidiaconi, tradat et Episcopus claves Ecclesiae de Altario dicens : Sic age quasi redditurus Deo rationem probis rebus, quae his clavibus reconduntur. » Itaque Calvinus dum haec ridet, non solum modernos Papis- tas, ut ipse loquitur, ridet, sed etiam Eccle¬ siam Catholicam, quae est, et quae erat in Christo ante annos 1100. Secundus est ordo Lectorum , quorum officium erat legere ex pulpito in Ecclesia quidquid legendum erat ex utroque Testa¬ mento; Nam etiam Evangelia legi a Lectori¬ bus consuevisse testatur Cyprianus lib. II. epist. 5 ubi loquens de Aurelio ordinato Lec- toie . « Nihil, inquit, magis congruit voci, quae Dominum gloriosa praedicatione con¬ fessa est, quam celebrandis divinis lectioni¬ bus personare, et post sublimia verba, quae Christi martyrium prolocuta sunt, Evange- lium legere, unde martyres fiunt.» Haec ille. Credibile tamen est, Lectoris officium non fuisse, ut legeret Evangelium tempore sa¬ crificii, (id enim Diaconorum fuisse pau¬ lo post ostendemus) sed solum extra illud tempus. Calvinus fatetur quidem hoc fuisse offi¬ cium Lectorum, lib. IV. cap. 4. Institut. § 9. Sed dicit non fuisse gradum, neque or¬ dinem certum in Ecclesia, sed solum soli¬ tos Episcopos quibusdam ex domesticis suis ministris injungerO, ut in Ecclesia legerent Scripturas, ut eo modo innotescerent plebi, et discerent ferre conspectum hominum. At non solum Concilium Carthaginiense IAL can. 8. praescribit ritum solemnem ordi¬ nandi Lectores, sed etiam S. Cyprianus lib. II. epist. 5. libr. III. epist. 22. et lib. IV. epist. 5. aperte significat, Lectoratum fuisse ordinem, et gradum in Ecclesia ; nam passim vocat gradum, et honorem Ecclesiasticum. Item dicit, Celerinum initio ex humilitate refugisse eum graidum, sed tandem divina revelatione admonitum acquievisse. Ad haec excusat multis verbis, quod quosdam ordi¬ naverit Lectores, urgente necessitate sine consilio, et consensu expresso Cleri. Denique dixit, se prius quemdam, Saturum nomine, fecisse Clero proximum, quod ei permisisse 438 LIBER I. in Paschate legere in Ecclesia, cum ordina¬ tus non esset : deinde vero eum in Clerum cooptasse, atque ad ordinem Lectoris pro¬ movisse. Ubi vides aliud esse legere in Ec¬ clesia, quod solum Calvinus agnoscit, aliud vero promoveri ad ordinem Lectoris. Tertius ordo Exorcistarum est, ad quorum officium pertinet exorcismos Ecclesiae legere super Energumenos, et eo modo praeparare illos, ut sacrificii divini participes fieri pos¬ sint. Olim siquidem, quia frequentissime daemones pellebantur de corporibus huma¬ nis, concurrebant plurimi Energumeni ad Ecclesiam, ita ut essent quasi greges Ener¬ gumenorum, ac propterea iste ordo institu¬ tus fuit. Fuisse revera ordinem certum Ecclesiasti¬ cum Exorcistarum, et non solum donum, et gratiam gratis datam, ut vult Calvinus, patet ex testimoniis supra citatis, Ignatiiinepist. ad Antiochenos, Cornelii Papae in epist. ad Fa¬ bianum, apudEusebium lib. VI. histor. cap. 33. et Cypriani lib. Y. epistola 14. Concilii Romani sub Sylvestro can. 3. et Concilii Laodiceni can. 24. ubi Exorcistae inter ordi¬ nes numerantur; sed praecipue id ostenditur ex Concilio Carthaginiensi IY, can7. ubi sic legimus : « Exorcista cum ordinatur, acci¬ piat de manu Episcopi libellum, in quo scripti sunt Exorcismi, dicente sibi Episcopo : Accipe, et commenda memoriae, et habeto potestatem imponendi manum super Ener- gumenum, sive baptizatum, sive catechu¬ menum. » Concilium item Laodicenum can. 26. prohibet, ne quis exorcizet neque publi¬ ce, neque privatim, nisi ab Episcopo ad eum ordinem provectus sit. Ex quibus Conciliis intelligimus, quam aper- tementiatur Calvinus, cum aitlib. IV. Institut. cap. 19. §. 24. « Fingitur illis Exorcistis po¬ testas data imponendi manus super Energu¬ menos. » Quomodo enim fingimus, quod ex tam antiquis Conciliis comprobamus ? Adde etiam testimonium Sulpitii, qui in lib. de vi¬ ta B. Martini cap. 4. ita scribit : « Tentavit Hilarius imposito Diaconis officio sibi Mar- tinum arctius implicare, et ministerio vincire divino, sed cum saepissime restitisset, indi¬ gnum se esse vociferans, intellexit vir altio- ris ingenii, hoc eum modo posse constringi, si id ei officii imponeret, in quo quidam lo¬ cus injuriae videretur. Itaque Exorcistam eum esse praecepit, quam ille ordinationem, ne despexisse tanquam humiliorem videre¬ tur, non repudiavit. » Quartus ordo Acolythorum est, quorum id esse proprium, ut cum cereo accenso sequun¬ tur Diaconum ad locum Evangelii, et urceo¬ los, atque ampullas ad sacrificium prae pa¬ rent, ac Subdiacono porrigant. Inde enim dictus est Acolythus, quasi pedissequus ab «xoXouQlw, quod est sequor, et etiam cerofera- rius a gestando cereo. Hic vero Calvinus risum tenere non po¬ test, sic enim ait lib. IY. Institut. cap. 19. §. 23: « Sed, inquit, in primis spectabilis est argutia, qua in Acolythi nomine Philoso¬ phantur, ceroferarium appellantes, verbo, ut arbitror, magico, certe inaudito Gentibus ao linguis omnibus.» Et supra cap. 4. §9. «Vo¬ cabant, inquit, Acolythos, qui Episcopo in domesticis obsequiis adessent, eumque per¬ petuo comitarentur, primum honoris causa, deinde ne qua suspicio oriretur. » Ha)c ille. Itaque vult Acolythos nihil aliud olim fuisse, nisi Episcoporum quasi Cubicularios. At ipse quidem nullo teste probat quod dicit, proin¬ de viderit ipse, an non finxerit Acolythi offi¬ cium ex capite suo. Nos autem Acolytharum ordinem fuisse, et gradum Ecclesiasticum, probamus ex testimoniis plurimis supra cita¬ tis, Cornelii, Cypriani, Concilii Romani, et Concilii Carthaginiensis. Porro ad officium ejus pertinuisse cereos, et urceolos, quae Calvinus ridet, testatur Concilium Carthaginiense IV. can. 6. « Aco¬ lythus, inquit Concilium, cum ordinatur, ab Episcopo quidem doceatur, qualiter in offi¬ cio suo agere debeat, sed ab Archidiacono accipiat ceroferarium cum cereo, ut sciat se ad accendenda Ecclesiae lumina manci¬ pari. Accipiat et urceolum vacuum, ad sug¬ gerendum vinum in Eucharistiam sanguinis Christi. » Haec ibi. Ubi etiam vides nomen ceroferarii non esse magicum, neque omni¬ bus Gentibus, et linguis inauditum, nisi tot sanctos Patres, et cum eis B. Augustinum, qui Concilio intererat, Magos, et nullius Gentis aut linguae homines esse velis. Idem quoque nomen est apud Isidorum lib. VII. etymolog. cap. 12. apud Amalarium lib. II. cap. 10. apud Rabanumlib. I. de institut. Cle¬ ricorum, cap. 9. apud Hugonem lib. II. de Sacramentis, par. 3. cap. 5. et apud alios multos, qui nec Magi erant, nec nullius Gen¬ tis aut linguae. Quintus ordo Subdiaconorum est, ad cujus officium proprie pertinet ministrare Diacono in sacrificio, ac propterea dum ordinatur, accipit calicem vacuum, et patenam, ut ha- CAPUT XIII. 439 bemus in Concilio Carthaginiensi IV, can. 5. et in Concilio Toletetano IV, can. 27. Ejus¬ dem est epistolas B. Pauli ad Missam legere, ut Concilium Remense can. 4. docet. Memi¬ nerunt hujus ordinis omnes auctores supra citati. Proinde falsum est, quod scribit Cal¬ vinus lib. IV. Institut. cap. 4 §. 5. Subdia- conorum officium nil aliud fuisse, nisi juvare Diaconos in eleemosynis distribuendis, pau¬ peribusque curandis. Sextus ordo Diaconorum est, quos oblatio¬ nibus colligendis, et opibus Ecclesiae admi¬ nistrandis praepositos fuisse , inter Catholi¬ cos et haereticos constat ; id enim testantur Acta Apostolorum c.VI. Idem patet ex Leone in sermone de S. Laurentio. Ex quo officio fortasse factum est olim, ut Diaconi insoles¬ cerent adversus Presbyteros : semper enim officia pecuniaria adamata prae caeleris fuis¬ se videntur. Reprehendunt Diaconorum ar¬ rogantiam Concilia nonnulla, Nicaenum can. 14. Laodicenum can. 20. et Toletanum IV, can. 38. Item Patres, Cyprian. lib. III , ep. 9. Hieronymus in epist. 83. ad Evagrium, et lib. XIV in Ezechielem exponens cap. 48. et Bornardus lib. IV de considerat. Sed praeter hoc officium habebant etiam Diaconi alia nonnulla, quae adversarii non agnoscunt. Primo, Diaconorum erat Sacer¬ doti sacrificanti assistere , ac ministrare, et populo distribuere Eucharistiam : ac prop¬ ter sacrum hoc ministerium, potissimum sa¬ cram ordinationem accipiunt. Videmus enim Actor. VI. per impositionem manuum ordi¬ nari Diaconos , qua sacra caeremonia non est credibile Apostolos usuros fuisse , si so¬ lum ministerium mensarum Diaconis com¬ mittere voluissent; antea enim viduae minis¬ trabant mensis , nec tamen certo ritu ordi¬ nabantur. Praeterea Clemens lib. II, cap. 14. Consti- tut. significat Diaconos Sacerdoti ministra¬ re solitos in sacrificii oblatione : quod etiam aperte docet Cyprianus in serm. 6. qui est de lapsis. Idem cognoscimus ex historia sancti Laurentii apud Ambrosium lib. I de of¬ ficiis cap. 41. Inducit enim sanctum Lauren¬ tium sic loquentem ad B. Sixtum : « Quo progrederis sine filio pater? Quo sacerdos sancte sine Diacono properas? Tu numquam sine ministro sacrificium offerre consueve¬ ras. » Et infra : « Cui commisisti consum¬ mandorum consortium Sacramentorum, huic consortium tui sanguinis negas? » Idem pa¬ tet ex LiturgiaChrysostomi, et ex homil. 83. super Matthamm. Idem ex S. Gregorio, qui in epistola ad Leandrum, quae praefigitur li¬ bris ejus in Job, nihil aliud Diaconatum, ni¬ si sacri altaris ministerium vocat : Denique Isidorus, Rabanus, Amalarius, Hugo, et alii supra citati , qui describunt officia omnium ordinum, hoc docent, quod nos diximus. Secundo, Diaconorum erat tempore sacri¬ ficii Evangelium legere : Id testatur praeter supradictos auctores S. Hieronymus in ep. 48. ad Sabinianum : « Tu, inquit, exanguis et pallidus, ut suspicione omni careres, Evan¬ gelium Christi, quasRDiaconus lectitabas. » Testatur etiam S. Gregorius in Synodo Ro¬ mana, quae habetur lib. IV, epist. cap. 88. ubi prohibet, ne Diaconi cantent in Ecclesia, excepto Evangelio, tempore sacrificii. Idem etiam testantur Concilia antiqua, Vasense can. 4. et Remense can. 5. Tertio, Diaconorum erat baptizare, prae¬ dicare, reconciliare publicos pcenitentes, Eu¬ charistiam deferre, et praebere laicis, ac bre¬ viter omnia facere, quae Episcopi et Presby¬ teri faciunt, excepta consecratione corporis Domini, et ordinatione Clericorum , et aliis officiis, quae requirunt potestatem ordinis. Nam Diaconos baptizare posse, patet exem¬ plo Philippi Diaconi, Actor. VIII. unde Ter¬ tullianus in lib. de Baptismo : « Jus, inquit, dandi Baptismum summus Sacerdos habet, dehinc etiam Presbyteri, et Diaconi. » Pos¬ se item Diaconos praedicare docet exemplum Stephani et Philippi Diaconorum, Actor. VII et VIII. Item exemplum S. Vincentii Marty¬ ris, qui cum Diaconus esset , praedicabat ta¬ men, ut Augustinus testatur serm. 2. de S. Vincentio. « Denique Gregorius lib. IV, epist. cap. 88. docet, ad Diaconum etiam pertinere officium praedicationis, et ipsum etiam Gregorium ad¬ huc Diaconum praedicasse testatur Joannes Diaconus in ejus vita lib. I, cap. 41. Rursus Diaconos aliquando reconciliare solitos poe- nitentes in absentia Episcopi . et Presbyte¬ rorum, docet Cyprianus lib. III , epist. 17. Item Eucharistiam praebere laicis in absen¬ tia Presbyterorum posse Diaconos , docet Concilium Nicaenum can. 14. Testatur item Justinus in Apologia secunda extrema, Dia¬ conos deferre solitos Eucharistiam ad absen¬ tes. Est tamen observandum , haec omnia, ac praecipue officium praedicandi, propria Epis¬ coporum esse, ita ut ne Presbyteris quidem praedicare liceat, nisi ex Episcopi mandato, 440 LIBER I. aut consensu. Episcopi enim proprie Apos¬ tolis succedunt . Apostoli autem sunt , qui Actor. VI. dicunt : Non est bonum nos dere¬ linquere verbum Dei, et ministrare mensis (1). Scribit enim Possidius in vita B. Augustini cap. 5, Valerium Episcopum concessisse S. Augustino Presbytero suo praedicandi potes¬ tatem, eo quod ipse cum Graecus esset, mi¬ nus commode Latino populo praedicare pos¬ set. Legimus quoque in Goncil. Vasensi II, can. 2. factam ab Episcoporum Concilio Presbyteris potestatem praedicandi. Ibidem praecipitur etiam ut Diaconi , quando non est Presbyter, qui praedicet verbum, Homi- lias sanctorum Patrum loco concionis reci¬ tent. Septimus ordo , Sacerdotum est, de quo gravis controversia inter nos et haereticos versatur, quae in sequenti capite disputanda est.