Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

OFFICERS NOT BELONGING TO THE PRIESTHOOD.

129

dependent of the bishop. They were totally distinct from the stewards of cloisters, and other similar establishments.

c) Cimeliarchs, neiuntiάozui, Thesaurii, Sacellii, Sacristae, different from the sacristans, or sextons before mentioned, treasurers. Μέγας σκευοφύλαξ, chancellor of the exchequer ; μέγας σακελλάριος, treasurer of the cloisters, prefect of monasteries, etc.

d) Notarii. The Greek votágios, was of late origin. Previous to this, the corresponding terms were γραμματείς, ὑπογραφεύς, ὑποδοχεύς, ὀξυγράφος, ταχυγράφος, etc. neither of which exactly expresses the meaning of the term notarius. This denotes a scribe, and always implies that he acts in some official capacity, as the scribe or secretary of a deliberative assembly, or the clerk of a court. The Notarii were frequently employed by private persons, but retained even then their official character. The ὀξυγράφοι and ταχυγράφοι, were copyists and translators of homilies, records, etc.1 It was particularly their duty to write memoirs of such as suffered martyrdom,2 and to record the protocols of synods, and doings of councils.3 They also acted the part of a modern secretary of legation, and were again the agents of bishops and patriarchs in exercising a supervision over remote districts of their diocese. In this capacity, they frequently attained to great influence and honor.5

The various services of a secretary or scribe in preparing writings, whether of a judicial, or extra-judicial character, were chiefly performed by men of the clerical order, because they were the best qualified for these duties.

e) Apocrisiarii, or Responsales. They were often legates or ambassadors from one court to another, like the cancellarii, consiliarii, secretarii, referendarii, etc. The title of apocrisiary, was appropriated particularly to the pope's deputy or agent, who resided at the court of Constantinople to receive the pope's orders and the emperor's answers. The existence of such an agent at that court, has been called in question without good reason. Both Leo and Gregory the Great once resided there in that capacity, and there are other unequivocal notices of the office.1

After the reestablishment of the Western empire, an accredited agent of the pope, of the like character, was accustomed to reside at the French court; he was sometimes called capellanus, palatii custos, corresponding to a modern charge d'affaires.

The most celebrated cloisters and abbeys, as well as the arch

bishops had also their agents at Rome. Since the ninth century they have had the name of ambassadors.

g) Syncelli, oryxellow. The chief syncellus at Constantinople was an officer of high rank, and the syncelli were generally chosen from the bishops and metropolitans to this office. The prelates of Rome had also their syncelli; but the office in time degenerated into an empty name. Their business is said to have been originally to attend upon the patriarchs and prelates as their spiritual advisers, and as witnesses of their deportment, and the purity of their manners.

h) The Syndici, ovvdixoi, defensores. Their business was to redress the wrongs of the poor and the injured, to defend the rights of the church, to exercise a supervision over the property of the church, to settle disputes, manage law-suits, etc. They were known in the church as early as the fourth or fifth century.

i) There was still another class of officers who may perhaps be styled patrons or protectors. By whatever name they are called, they were divided into three subdivisions. 1. Learned men, knights, and counts, who were patrons and guardians of different religious bodies. 2. The agents of the church, patrons, who, especially in the absence of the bishop, acted in his place in the administration of affairs both of church and state. Under this head may be classed those who, under the name of landlords, exercised a territorial jurisdiction in matters relating to the church. 3. Kings and emperors, who claimed to be patrons of the church, and defenders of the faith. The Roman Catholic princes of Germany, and the kings of France, have been peculiarly emulous of this honor.

CHAPTER V.

OF APPOINTMENT TO ECCLESIASTICAL OFFICES.

1. ELECTION BY LOT.

The first example on record of the appointment of an officer in the christian church is that of Matthias, Acts 1: 15-26. He was not chosen, but rather designated to his office by lot. And subsequently, the church were accustomed to resort to the same expedient, when they could not agree respecting any individual. This form of election was neither peculiar to any sect, nor prevalent at any given time, nor applicable to any one case; but was adopted as occasion required. The election was little else than a decision between several candidates who were equally eligible to the office.1

2. OF ELECTIONS BY THE CHURCH COLLECTIVELY.

Many learned men are of opinion that in the apostolic age the right of universal suffrage was enjoyed by the church. In proof of this they appeal to Acts 1: 15 seq., where the apostles appointed a substitute in the place of Judas Iscariot, but not without the consent of the church at Jerusalem. In the appointment of the seven deacons it is worthy of remark, that the brethren, the church, were first required to look out among them seven men of honest report and full of the Holy Ghost; and that they made the choice and set the persons chosen before the apostles [to be inducted into office]. Hugo Grotius, indeed, maintains that this case proves no more than the right of the church to choose their own deacons to distribute alms, and that in all the New Testament there is not the least hint of the appointment of any bishop or presbyter by the intervention of the church. He goes on to say that the apostles themselves did appoint presbyters, Acts. 14: 23. 2 Tim. ii. Tit. 1: 5, and that Timothy and Titus were authorized by Paul to do the same. But in opposi tion to this assertion, it should be remembered that the expression zagotovεiv relates to the act of consecration and ordination, and by no means excludes the idea of a preceding election by the church.

The apostle presupposes that Timothy and Titus, when authorized by him to consecrate and induct into office a presbyter who had been duly elected, would proceed as he himself and the other apostles did in similar cases-i. e. that they would proceed according to the rule given in Acts 6: 3, and appoint no man presbyter without the knowledge and choice or desire of the church. The following passages and many others are sufficient to show that the advice and consent of the church was had in other matters, Acts 15: 1 seq. 1: 15. 1 Cor. 5: 2. 2 Cor. ii. 8: 19, 20.

Clemens Romanus is the best interpreter of the apostle's sentiments, and the earliest witness that can be obtained on this subject. This writer informs us that the apostles appointed and ordained the first ministers (versteher) of the church, and "then gave direction how, when they should die, other chosen and approved men, dedoxiμaoμévoi ärdoes, should succeed to their ministry. Wherefore we cannot think those may justly be thrown out of their ministry who were either appointed by them or afterwards by other eminent men with the consent of the whole church, συνευδοκησάσης τῆς εκκλησίας άons. Those persons who received, in this manner, the concurring suffrages of the church, were to be men of tried character, and of good report with all, μεμαρτυρημένους τε πολλοῖς χρόνοις ὑπὸ πάντων. This concurrence of the whole church, based upon their previous acquaintance with the candidates, evinces clearly the coöperation of the church in the appointment of its ministers; and that this intervention of the church was not merely a power of negativing an appointment made by some other authority."

The fullest evidence that bishops and presbyters were chosen by the people, is also derived from Cyprian. It was, according to his authority, a rule of divine appointment that a minister should be chosen in the presence of the people, and should be publicly acknowledged and approved as worthy of the office-plebe presente sub om

* The apostles appointed bishops and deacons,-Kai ustağv iñivoμîv deδώκασιν, ὅπως ἐὰν κοιμηθῶσιν, διαδέξωνται ἕτεροι δεδοκιμασμένοι ἄν δρες τὴν λειτουργίαν αὐτῶν. Τοὺς οὖν κατασταθέντας ὑπ' ἐκείνων, ἢ με ταξὺ ὑφ ̓ ἑτέρων ἐλλογίμων ἀνδρῶν, συνευδοκησάσης τῆς ἐκκλησίας πάσης, καὶ λειτουργήσαντας ἀμέμπτως τῷ ποιμνίῳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ ταπεινοφροσύνης, ἡσύχως καὶ ἀβαναύσως, μεμαρτυρημένους τε πολλοῖς χρόνοις ὑπὸ πάντων, τούτους οὐ δικαίως μομίζομεν ἀποβαλέσθαι τῆς λειτουργίας. CLEM. ROM. Ep. (1) ad Corinth. § 44.

nium oculis deligatur, et dignus atque idoneus publico judicio ac lestimonio comprobetur. He further says that the act of ordination should in no instance be solemnized without the knowledge and assistance of the people, so that the crimes of the bad may be detected, and the merits of the good made known. In this manner the ordination becomes regular and valid, justa et legitima. Such, he observes, was the example of the apostles, not only in the appointment of bishops and ministers, but also of deacons. And all this was done to prevent the intrusion of unworthy men into the sacred office.3* He further says of Cornelius," that he was made bishop agreeably to the will of God, and of Christ, by the testimony of almost all the clergy, and the suffrage of the people then present."4

With reference to this influence in appointing them, the bishops elect were wont to style their constituents, the people, fathers. “Ye, (says St. Ambrose,) ye are my fathers who chose me to be bishop: ye, I say, are both my children and fathers, children individually, fathers collectively."5 Which intimates that he owed his appointment to the choice of the people. And this is still further confirmed by the testimony even of profane writers. Alexander Severus, who reigned from A. D. 222 to 235, whenever he was about to appoint any governors of provinces, or receivers of public revenue first pub

* Quod et ipsum videmus de divina auctoritate descendere ut sacerdos plebe praesente sub omnium oculis deligatur, et dignus atque idoncus publico judicio ac testimonio comprobetur. . . Coram omni synagoga jubet Deus constitui sacerdotem, id est, instruit atque ostendit ordinationes sacerdotales nonnisi sub populi assistentis conscientia fieri oportere, ut plebe praesente vel detegantur malorum crimina, vel bonorum merita praedicentur, et sit ordinatio justa et legitima, quae omnium suffragio et judicio fuerit examinata. Quod postea secundum divina magisteria observatur in Actis Apostolorum. ... Nec hoc in episcoporum tantum et sacerdotum, sed et in diaconorum ordinationibus apostolos fecisse animadvertimus. . . Quod utique idcirco tam diligentur et caute convocata plebe tota gerebatur, ne quis ad altaris ministerium, vel ad sacerdotalem locum, indignus obreperet. CYPRIAN, Ep. 68.—Factus est autem Cornelius episcopus de Dei et Christi ejus judicio, de clericorum pene omnium testimonio, de plebis, quae tunc adfuit, suffragio, et de sacerdotum antiquorum et bonorum virorum collegio, cum nemo ante se factus esset, cum Fabiani locus, id est, cum locus Petri et gradus cathedrae sacerdotalis, vacaret: quo occupato de Dei voluntate, atque omnium nostrum consensione firmato, quisquis jam episcopus fieri voluerit, foris fieri necesse est, nec habeat ecclesiasticam ordinationem, qui ecclesiae non tenet unitatem. id. Ep. 52.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »