Seminar 6. Material Auxiliar

St Cyril on the Priesthood of Christ
and the Old Testament
Jonathan Douglas Hicks, PhD

University ofOtago Alumnus
Missionary Candidate with the
Society ofAnglican Missionaries and Senders
Abstract: Cyril 0 / Alexandria, renowned for his germinal work in

the Christological controversy, was equally accomplished as a
biblical exegete. A fully-orbed description o f Cyrils Christological
and soteriological commitments necessarily engages the exegetical
as well as the synthetic literature. One o f the themes that has
emerged in Cyrilline scholarship in relation to these commitments
is his understanding o f the priestly office o f the Son o f God. In
this study, / draw attention to a difficulty in interpreting Cyrils
early position on the priesthood o f the Son: i f the Son is said to
become priest only in the Incarnation, what is one to make o f the
priest-like ministry o fth e Son such as Cyril describes it in the Old
Testament? / conclude by reflecting on what Cyrils formulation
o fth e doctrine gives us in terms o f an account o fth e cause o fth e
Sons priesthood and its ongoing significance fo r the age to come.
rom the first years ofCyril of Alexandrias episeopal tenure - and

perhaps earlier he produced eommentaries on Holy Scripture.
These constitute an invaluable mine for unearthing Cyrils
Christological and soteriological teachings prior to the Nestorian conflict.
Cyril's scriptural exegesis majors on attending to the manner in which
eveiy text ofthe Bible unfolds to us an aspect ofthe mystery of Christ.*
An earlier version o f this text was presentedfor St Andrews Patristic Symposium

2013. / wish to thank the members o fth e Graduate Research Committee o fth e
University o f Otago fo r their generous support o f this publication in the form
o fth e University o f Otago Postgraduate Publishing Bursary. / dedicate this
article to my uncle ToddHicks, whose loveforJesus our High Priest has been a
constant source ofblessing to me and many others.
1 See Robert Louis Wilken, Cyril ofAlexandria as Interpreter ofthe Old Testament
PHRONEMA, VOL. 30(1), 2015, 91-113
91
St Cyril on the Priesthood ofC hrist and the Old Testament
Thus the Old Testament commentaries offer rich refleetion on themes both
Christological and soteriological.
In the present study, I follow one of these themes: foe priesthood of

Christ, as it is treated in foe Old Testament commentaries written prior to
foe outbreak of the Nestorian conflict. These include two that are written
on foe Books of Moses: On Adoration and Worship and Elegant Sayings
on the Pentateuch, as well as two that are written on foe ?rophets: On
Isaiah and On the Twelve Prophets.2 The selection of this theme and this
body ofliterature within foe c.yrifline corpus requires some explanation.
In some quarters, Cyrils soteriology has been described almost

solely with recourse to his claims about foe mode of foe theandric
union in foe person of the Incarnate Word. These descriptions, focusing
as they do upon foe formulae of union employed by Cyril, accentuate
foe metaphysical dimension of his Christology. The importance of
this dimension is undeniable. However, it can be over-stated. If foe
in The Theology o fS t Cyril ofAlexandria: A Critical Appreciation, ed. Thnmas

Weinandy and Daniel Keating (London: T&T Clark, 2003) 1-21,21.
2 A relative ehronology is established for the above. On Adoration and Elegant
Sayings are written in the above order and in elose conjunction with one another.
They stand as c o i l s earliest commentaries on foe Old Testament. See Alexander
Kerrigan, St Cyril ofAlexandria: interpreter o f the Old Testament, Analecta
Bblica 2 (Rome: ?ontifical Biblical Institute, 1952) 13-14. The cotmnentaries
on Isaiah and foe Book of the Twelve come later. The year 412, foe date of
Cyrils accession to foe see ofAlexandria, stands as a possible terminus a quo for
foe four works, although it is possible that Cyril was composing commentaries
before he became patriarch. The year 428 is foe terminus post quern non. The
editions used here arc as follows. On Adoration (abbreviated De ador.) is taken
from ? 0 68. Elegant Sayings (abbreviated Glaph. followed by foe book title)
is taken from PC 69. The Commentary on Isaiah (abbreviated Comm. Is.)
appears in PC 70. The Commentary on the Twelve Prophets (abbreviated Comm.
followed by book title) appears in critical edition in p. Edward Pusey, s.p.n.
Cyrilli archiepiscopi Alexandrini in xii prophetas, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1868). The English translation cited here is by Robert Bill: St Cyril /
Alexandria: Commentary on the Twelve Prophets, Fathers o f the Church 115,
116 and 124 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Ufoversity o f America Press, 2007,
2008 and 2012). Where 1 refer to Bills translation, 1 use foe abbreviation FC for
foe series name.
92
Phronema Volume 30(1), 2015
Word accomplishes our salvation only by uniting a humanity that is

consubstantial with our own to his divinity - a divinity consubstantial
with the divinity of the Father and the Holy Spirit - then one might
well ask why Cyrils soteriology does not begin and end with the Sons
conception of the Theotokos. Several scholars have persuasively argued
that Cyril acknowledges a great deal of saving significance to other
events in the economy of the Incarnation. The Word-asman receives
the Holy Spirit in his baptism in the Jordan, providing the human race
with a secure anchor for the Spirits vivifying residence in it.3 The Sons
self-emptying as man culminates in his Fassion; the Sons death and
resurrection are the events that accomplish sanctification in the Spirit,
and bring about the new creation.* In each of these instances, we see
the importance of insisting on the identity and the work of the Incarnate
Word together. Neither alone adequately portrays the salvation in Christ
that Cyril seeks to Ascribe
These kinds of correctives are salutary ones. They have opened

up several new sites for the exploration of themes that are properly
Christological and soteriological. These include the following: Christ as
the New Adam3and the great high priest.* Relatively distinctive in Cyrils
account of the Sons assumption of humanity is his highlighting of the
importance of this latter theme. Lawrence Welch avers the centrality of
the theme to Cyrils Christology, stating the case succinctly: Christ as
high priest worships as man, though without sin, prays and offers himself
to the Father for us. At the same time that Christ offers himself for us,
he also offers fallen humanity through and in himself to the Father.^ In
3 Foravery successful statement o f this case, see Daniel Keating, TheAppropriation

ofD ivine Life in Cyril ofAlexandria, Oxford The10gical ^ n o g ra p h s (Oxford:
Oxford University Fress, 2004) 20-53.
4 Lawrenee Weleh, Christology and Eucharist in the Early Thought o f Cyril /
Alexandria (San Franeiseo: International Seholars Press, 1994) 87.
5 Robert Fouis Wilken, Exegesis and foe History ofTheology: Refleetions on foe
Adam-Christ Typology in Cyril of Alexandria Church History 35:2 (1966) 139-
156.
6 Weleh, Christology andEucharist 104-30.
7 Ibid 104-5.
93
S Cyril on the Priesthood ofC hrist and the Old Testament
so doing, Christs offering of our fallen humanity to the Father effeets its
restoration and n ctifieatio n . This worship, upon whieh fallen Immunitys
communion with the Father depends, is accomplished effectiely only by
one who is neither God nor man alone, but rather God as man.T. F.
Torrance makes toe same point. The priestly ministry ofChrist cannot be
referred simply to the humanity offosus, but to toe mediatorial ministry
of toe Son of God within andfrom the side ofour humanity towards God
the Father.'9
In this study, I seek to broaden toe conclusions of Welch and

Torrance with respect to toe theme of toe priesthood of Christ in St
Cyril, chiefly by visiting a question that is beyond toe scope of both of
their investigations of him. How does toe Fatriarch relate toe priestly
ministry of toe Son of God to toe time before his Incarnation? The
question arises almost immediately from toe exegetical literature on
toe Old Testament, and toe complexity of toe answer that Cyril gives
to it belies toe Smplicity of his summary claim that toe mediating or
priestly ministry of the Son is to be attributed to what toe Word does as
man. We will see that Cyril affirms toe latter against su b o rd in a tio n ist
accounts of the Words essence. But his fuller exposition of the theme
suggests that - though he never ceases to conceive of the priestly work
of the Son economically (rather than in an essentialist way) - the priestly
ministry of toe Son in toe Incarnation is in some sense a continuation
of what he was about throughout toe history of Israel. It is toe precise
sense of this continuity that I am after in toe conclusion of the study.
The argument proceeds as follows: in toe first section I take a

look at how Cyril conceives of priestly service in toe Old Testament
c o ^ e n ta rie s .A t this stage, 1am concerned merely with trying to provide
density to toe concept of priestly service, as it pertains to the work of
toe Son. I do not yet directly take up toe question identified above, but
8 Ibid 106.
9 T. F. Torrance, Theology in Reconciliation: Essays towards Evangelical and
Catholic Unity in East and Test (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1975) 173-74,
emphases his.
94
rather try to understand what kinds of acidities Cyril is thinking of

when he speaks of the priestly ministry of the Son of God. With this
ministry more densely described, 1 turn in the second section directly to
the question o f how to understand Cyrils consistent attribution of the
priestly ministry to what the Son does as man. This language - clearly
anti-hordinationist in its scope - sits ambiguously next to Cyrils
claims that the Son was already in01ved in some of the same activities
identified above before the time of his tncarnation. In the final section,
I ask what kind of harmonisation of the two views expressed by Cyril is
possible, or whether it is better to view them as incompatible.
The ?riestly Work of Christ
Cyrils reflections on the priestly ministry of Christ in the Old Testament

commentaries may be organised fruitfully around several motifs: 1)
deliverance from sin, corruption, and death, 2) restoration of proper
worship, and 3) (closely related to the previous motif) the presentation of
the true God to humanity and of the true humanity to God. As priest, the
Incarnate Son of God delivers humanity from its bondage to sin, corruption,
and death, and restores humanity to true worship and knowledge of its
God. Conversely, as priest the Incarnate Son of God renders the Father a
knower of humanity under humanitys true form. In all of these priestly
activities, there appears a kind of reciprocal movement. As our mediator,
the Son presents himself to the Father on our behalf he likewise presents
us to the Father and alters the way in which we are known by the Father.
Deliverance andHealing
St Cyril draws on numerous scriptural themes related to the priesthood.

Far from remarking only on those that are most central - e.g. sacrifice
and cultic service - the Alexandrian also frequently remarks on themes
that are less prominent. These include the priests participation in the
politics of Israel and their involvement in securing the nations physical
welfare. Here he was recognising that, in the Old Testament, the priest
was often both political leader and doctor. Cyril draws parallels between
the work ofthe priests of Israel and that of the Son of God.
95
St Cyril on the Priesthood ofChrist and the Old Testament
Most often, Cyril draws tlris connection through actual

representaties of the office in the Cld Testament. When Israel came out
of Egyptian bondage, both Moses the lawgiver and Aaron the high priest
led them. In the same way, Cyril writes, we were called into freedom
and redeemed from the devils ^ when Christ bore us out of this.
Just as a kingly and a priestly figure led Israel in the Exodus, so it was in
the case of the return from captivity in Babylon. Joshua and Z e ru b b a b e l,
who served respectively as high priest and governor of Judah after the
captivity, led the people out of bondage to rebuild Jerusalem. Both the
governor and the priest are taken by Cyril as a type for Christ who
effects spiritual deliverance from exile. As the Saviours namesake,
Joshua son of Jehozadak is redolent ofChrist in numerous respects. What
took place for Israel through his ministry is amplified in foe work of
Christ, through whom we have been saved [...] in fleeing foe wiles of
death, and are made righteous through faith, shaking off sin that exercised
ty ran n ical control over us.**
As foe above indicates, foe priestly work ofChrist is directed - at

least in part - toward overcoming foe exilic condition of humanity in its
bondage to sin and death. The Son, as priest, renders death abolished
and corruption overtumed.^ Bow is this accomplished? Cyril adduces
Moses establishment of cities of refuge to reflect on this mystery. Those
unfortunate enough to be complicit in involuntary manslaughter were
granted sanctuary in certain cities throughout foe Land of ?romise. There
they would stay - in a kind of generous prison - 1 they were allowed
to return home at foe death ofthe high priest. So at foe death ofChrist foe
great high priest, Cyril recalls. Hades was itself despoiled. Its prisoners
walked free when foe gates below were opened to receive him who
e n d u re d death on behalf of us all.14 Death was undone, when foe staff
10 De ador. 1 (PG 68, 200A).

11 Comm. Is. 11:12-13 (PG 70, 329D). Christ ccmbines foe cffices o f king and
priest together in one person. See Comm. Hagg. 1:14-15 (Pusey, vol. 2, 260),
Comm. Zech. 4:4-6 (Pusey, vol. 2, 334) and 6:9-15 (Pusey, vol. 2, 365).
12 Comm. Hagg. 1:5-6 (Pusey, vol. 2, 251; FC 124: 68).
13 De ador. 3 (PG 68, 293AB).
14 De * 8 (PG 68, 581 AC). The passage under discussion is Numbers 35.
96
from Jesses root budded, for Christ grew again and eame to hfe again
[...] as life and God by nature [...] he v^quishes death and corruption.15
Cyrils reflections on the priestly garments of the Old Testament

priests often tend toward the same theme. Speaking of the long
undergarment worn by the priest as a symbol of the body that is united
to the Son, Cyril argues that the length of the garment signifies its
incorruptibility. In the union of the body with himself, the Son renders
his own body incorruptible. And by making his own humanity so, Christ
thereby makes us communicant with his own irao ^ p tib ility and life.16
Again, in a passage germane to our theme, Cyril argues that the death
of the Son does not signify the rem 0al of his mitre (a symbol of his
perpetual rule) nor of his garments. Rather, his death is the undoing of
death.^ In spite of the death ofhis own body, the Son rises again without
loss of the priestly garments that he had put on from the time of his
In c a rn atio n .
The L evitin-m aterial offers opportunity for parallel reflections.

The priests of the Mosaic covenant were charged with protecting the
cultic purity - and therefore the physical health - ofthe children oflsrael.
They judged the condition of houses and skin diseases alike, dispensing
the divine economy in accordance with the divine Law. In relation to a
discussion ofthe priestly activity ofjudging leprous diseases, Cyril notes
that the Son likewise acts as ruler over our souls. * Though deceived and
sick with sin, the Son presents us to God the Father, just as the Father
draws us to himself by his Son.19 Christ renders us alive by judging our
sinful condition, so that we may be presented pure before him.20 In a
beautiful image that appears later in connection with the whole Old
Testament priesthood, Cyril writes: Christ ponders (^ the
15 Deador. 10(PG 68, 673BD).

16 D eador 11(PG 68, 744C).
17 De ador. 12 (FG 68, 816B). For similar reflections, see Glaph. Lev. (FG 69,
585A).
18 Glaph. Lev.( PG 69, 568B).
19 Glaph. Lev. (PG 69, 560D).
20 Deador. 15(PG 68, 980D-981A).
97
St Cyril on the Priesthood o f Christ and the Old Testament
things that concern us and takes pains over us [...] I f o n e should become
corrupt [...] he will s u r e ly fend it [i.e. the sickness] off again.^
We may speak then of Cyrils reflection on the priestly mediation

of the Saviour as an activity direeted toward the restoration and healing
of the human race. He is eoncerned with renewing our humanity and
averting its ruin,^ and therefore to this end he takes up our humanity
and unites it to himself. Undergoing a birth and a death like ours, he
re-makes us after our first image in the course of his own human life,
and guarantees the continuity of our life in him by his resurrection and
ascension. Cyril hints in the above that this state of affairs - the Sons
ineffable union with our humanity - is irreversible for him.
Offering True Worship
Inseparably united with this aspect of the Sons priestly work is his
restoration of true worship. For the human condition of subjection to
the hostile powers of sin, corruption and death is brought about because
of humanitys alienation from and ignorance of God. The Son, in his
priestly ministry, enables true worship ofGod through himself, making it
possible for humanity to approach the Father through him, in the Spirit.
He restores the worship of the Trinity chiefly by presenting himself as an
acceptable sacrifice to the Father on our behalf.
Christ is the high priest who proffers himself as the atoning

sacrifice. In many of the cases where Cyril reflects on this theme, he
mentions that he offers himself to the Father. Thus, anticipating the vision
of the seraphim with toe burning c o a l in Isaiah 6, Cyril writes that both
angel and coal were a symbol of Christ, who for our sake and on our
behalf presented himself to toe God and Father as a spiritual sacrifice,
clean and blameless, even as a pleasing aroma.^ Though high priest,
he sacrifices himself as toe true lamb [...] for an odour of sweetness to
21 De ador. 15( P G68 , 9 8 9 D9 9 2 A).

22 See Glaph. Gen. 2 (PG 69, 72D).
23 Comw./ 5 : 1 8 .( PG 70, 181B).
98
the God and F a th e r .W h a t w^^ only partially actualised in the priests

identification with the sacrifices in the Old Testament became wholly
realised in the Sons becoming the sacrificial victim.^ The great high
priest - Jesus Christ - is therefore both the sacrificing priest ()
and the sacrifice ().^ While Aaron entered once a year into the Holy
of holies, smearing the blood of the sacrifice on the horns of the altar,
Christ besprinkles his own cross with his own blood for the salvation
and life of all.^ In the heavenly sanctuary, he now appears before God
on our behalf.^
Cyril explores another dimension of this self-offering of the Son

when he speaks of our eating of the food of his sacrifice. The sacrificial
system leads us to the mystery of Christs heavenly and life-giving
sacrifice, a sacrifice that renders the old system abolished.^ Christ,
inaugurating the new creation in himself, reconstitutes us through him
and in him -w hen we receive his holyfleshandblood.^ Clearly thinking
of the Eucharist, Cyril compares the ministry of Christ favourably to
that of Aaron: Christ, he says, feeds us with hidden sacrifices for an
unfading life.^ In each of the above examples, Cyril speaks of Christ as
the ^iest-cum-sacrifice in relation to those for whom he offered himself.
The Eucharistie language is important for what follows, for foe mystery
- tike foe rite of baptism - declares foe significance of the death of Christ
24 Comm. Hagg. 6-5: ( Fusey, vol. 2, 250 FC 124: 67).

25 See Comm. Hos. 4:7 (Fusey, v o l . 90 , ). The Levitieal priest having a share In
foe sacrifie on foe aliar sacrificed himself, as il were, for foe sins ofthe people,
as of course our Tord Jesus Chrisl also did (FC 115:110). Cyrils as it were
lan g ag e signifies foal foe self-sacrifice o f foe priests in the Old Testamenl was
largely symbolic. They were, even in that time, offering themselves to God in
foe offering up ofthe victim, though the act did not require their own physical
death. Christs self-offering is not an equivocal self-offering to theirs, though
theirs pointed to it.
26 See De ador. 3 (PG 6 8 ,292CD and 293AB). Cf. De ador. 11 (FG 68, 745A).
27 De ador. 9 (PG 68, 625A).
28 Deador. 10(PG 68, 685D-688A).
29 Comm. Mal. 1:11 (Pusey, vol. 2, 566; FC 124: 299).
30 />1 2 * ( FG 68,793C).
31 Glaph. Gen. 2 (PG 69, 109C).
99
St Cyril on the Priesthood o f Christ andthe Old Testament
for the way in which the Christian is to think of his life. The Eucharist is
a sharing in the death of Christ in a two-fold sense: it is a participation
in the benefits of Christs death and an offering up of ones own life to
share in this death.
Cyrils grasp on this point is instructive. For in the discussion of

Christs priestly sacrifice of himself, he is always keen to trace out what
it means to say that he does this on our behalf. In short, as high priest
Christ - in offering himself to the Father - offers us through himself to
the Father as well. In completion of his delivering and healing work for
us, the Son makes us acceptable to the Father [...] [by] offering us up.
The faithfiil are to offer themselves back to Cod in the only way in which
such an offering can be acceptable: through Christ.^ In Christ, their life
becomes a pleasing sacrifice,^ a pleasing aroma to the Father.^ Hence
Cyril can speak of the faithful as so many altars, giving their own life
to God,35 ofhum anitys being presented back to Cod the Father through
his Son. In this vein the Alexandrian theologian detects a priestly theme
running through Genesis 4: Abel the just, namely Christ, offers up to
God the first-fruits of the rational flock [...] Christ became the sacrificing
priest ) of the herd ofthe first-bom. For through him we have
access in the Spirit to the God and Father.36
Christ, then, as the truly great high priest, offers himself as a

pleasing sacrifice to his Father, and in so doing - in union with himself
- offers us up to the Father as well.^ Thus Cyril brings us to the brink
of pondering what is perhaps the deepest mystery in his reflections on
32 Deador. 16(PG 69, 1016B).

33 See Comm. Mic. 6:6-8 (Pusey, V1. 1, ?01; FC 1 16: 251).
34 Glaph. Gen. 2 (PG 69, ?3AB). CF. Glaph. Gen. 3 (169C): They fulfill the law
who intelligibly () and spiritually () are offered as saerifiees
by Christ and present themselves to God the Father as a pleasing aroma.
35 Comm. Amos 9:1 (Pusey, vol. 1, 528; FC 116: 119).
36 Glaph. Gen. 1 (PG 69, 40D-41A), citing Ephesians 2:18.
37 For the most nuaneed and helpfid treatment of the theme o f the dynamies
of human response to divine initiative in salvation in Cyril, see Keating,
Appropriation ofD ivine Life 105-43.
100
Christs priesthood: as great high priest, Christ is the true worshipper of

the Father. Cyril severally asserts this point. Speaking of Aarons aseent
of Mount Horeb and the feast of the elders there, Cyril writes:
Aaron imitates Christ himself, the innocent and holy high

priest, through whom we have birth through both the Spirit
and water [...] we will be taken up even into the eity above
when Christ the leader, our great high priest, goes with
us, who beeame like us for our sake and offers worship
together with us even to his Father, who is God by nature.38
To this he adds a few lines later: We go up, not without Christ, for Aaron
was present with those who worship, enumerated among those far off.
So also Christ, far off with us and beeause of us, became so in order that
we also might be near foe Father with him and through him.39 When all
those who believe in Christ are brought to foe knowledge of the truth,
Cyril says, then they offer worship through him and with him to foe
God and Father.*
The clearly anti-subordinationist character of Cyrils doctrine of

the Sons essence should warn against a reckless interpretation of these
remarks. It is by virtue of foe Sons union with our creatureliness that
he offers up worship to foe Father with us. Hence Cyril says that he
became like us for our sake. Yet Cyril is also intent on drawing us to
see the importance of his fulsome identification with our estate: Christ
renders to foe Father all that is proper to our humanity, and this includes
worship as well. Consonant with this, foe Son as our priest deigns to
receive foe sanctifying chrism that once flowed down foe beard and robes
of A aron/ He, who as God from God sanctifies all creation, becomes
sanctified inasmuch as he is human42 he is anointed by foe Holy Spirit43
38 Glaph. Ex. 3 (PG 69,516B).

39 Glaph. Ex. 3 (PG 69, 517A).
40 Comm. Zeph. 2 :1 ( Pusey, vol. 2, 203; PC 124: 30).
41 See Glaph. Gen. 2 (PG 69, 88C).
42 Deador. 12(813AB).
43 Deador. 12(816A).
101
who from all eternity (!welt with him and the Father in inapproachable
light. Out of his fullness - the inexhaustible fullness of the Sons life
in the Spirit that is reiterated in the Incarnate Sons reeeng of the
Spirit on our behalf - we receive of the Spirit as well. It is by our
sharing and partaking in this Spirit that the Son proclaims in joyful
co n fid en ce to his Father: Behold I and the children God has given me.**
We see here that, for Cyril, the Sons priestly role requires the
elevation of humanity, its offering up to the Father. The great high
priest restores the true worship of the Father by offering our humanity -
purged of sin, corruption, and death - back to him. Be acom plishes this:
receiving the Holy Spirit and his sanctification on our behalf, so that the
Spirit may be richly poured out upon the saints. In their joyful reception
of his gifts, the saints offer themselves up to the Father through the Son:
true worshippers of the Trinity. The Son, who is worshipped forever
with the Father and the Holy Spirit, becomes in the Incarnation the true
worshipper of the Father, offering himself to the Father in obedience to
his will.
Through whom we know and are known
We conclude this section on the priestly ministry of the Saviour by

examining a final motif. In addition to the Sons work of overcoming sin,
corruption and death and restoring true worship of the Father through his
own blameless self-offering and pure worship of the Father, we may add
a final element to which the other two point. The Son re-fashions us into
those who know the Father by his priestly ministry, even as he may be
said to alter the way in which we are known by the Father. As the final
quotation above indicated, the Son will have us know the Father as our
Father, just as he will have the Father know us as his children.
Reflecting once again on the priestly apparel, St Cyril writes:
[Moses commanded] that there he inserted with great skill into

the garm ent stones bearing the names o f the twelve tribes, and
44 De ador. 12 (785AB), echoing Isaiah 8:18.
102
that two o f them be given the names Declaration and Truth [...]
The Declaration and Truth were a type ofE m m anuel; ever^rthing
he heard from the Father he made known to us, m aking a
Declaration o f the will o f the one who begot him, and making
clear the w ay o f salvation [...] This was the reason that it hung
from the very heart ofth e high priest, the type, as it were, shouting
and unm istakably crying aloud that in the Saviour and R edeemer
o f everyone the sacred race will enjoy in mind and heart the Truth
and the D eclaration.^
The Son takes up the priestly responsibility of expounding the ways and
works of God to the people of God.46
If the Levites of old were like oxen, whose duty was to grind the
grain on the spiritual threshing floor and remove the layers of obscurity
from the message conveyed through the all-wise Moses,47 then Christ is
the true Levite who translates the matters ofthe slow-tongued Law into
plainness. As priest he is the Laws true exegete.48Aarons relationship
to Moses is paradigmatic here. Cyril is fond of recalling that, just as
Moses described himself as slow-of-speech and so required the mouth of
Aaron to speak for him, so the Law requires Christ as its expositor.4 So
he writes: The mouth of Moses [i.e. Aaron standing as a type of Christ]
is the most euphonic: translating the types into r e a lity .A n d he enjoins
the reader of Scripture: [t]hen let the Law be coupled to Christ, by the
seeing in the Spirit. For Moses hears, You go up, and Aaron. What
God joined together, let not a man separate.^ Only when coupled with
Christ does the Law lead to the seeing ofwhich St Paul spoke, the seeing
that pierces the veil ofthe letter and contemplates God himself.
45 Comm. Hos. 3:4-5 (Pusey, V1. 1, 8 1; F C 5 4 ( The passage to whieh Cyril is

referring is Exodus 28:15-30.
46 See De ador. 9 (PG 68, 641D-644A).
47 Comm. Hab. 3:17 (Pusey, vol. 2, 164; FC 116:398).
48 De ^ . 2 (PG 68, 252D-253B). Cf. Glaph. Ex. 2 (PG 6 9 ,480D-481B).
49 See De ador. 11 (PG 68, 728D-729B).
50 Glaph. Gen. 2 (PG 69, 89B).
51 De ador. 7 (PG 68 ,492B), commenting on Exodus 19:24 and quoting Mark 10:9.
103
St Cyril on the Priesthood ofC hrist and the Old Testament
s, as the Laws true exegete, as the true scribe trained in the Law,
the Son reveals the Father to us. As he does so he comes near to us to
bring us near the Father. Cyrils thinking - as with the notion of Christs
priestly sacrifice - has a kind of reciprocal movement on this theme as
well. As the Son draws us toward the Father, in knowledge and love of
him, so the Son likewise brings into being a new way in which the Father
knows us. When we approach Cod the Father by the spiritual sacrifice
(of ourselves), we are remembered by him [...] remembered by God
and knowledgeable of God in Christ.**
Early in On Adoration, Cyril will speak of the census conducted

by Moses and Aaron in fig u rai terms. T h ro u g h the mediation of the great
high priest came the enrolment in the divine books of those who were
courageous and most adept in virtue.^ Later he will return to the image
ofthe enrolment in the divine book, this time through the priestly apparel.
Fearl is a sign o f heaven upon the shoulder-pieee with the register

in heaven, these at all times and everywhere will rest upon Christ,
who has them immediately upon his shoulders, and makes the
good among the order o f ehildren [...] God the Father takes us in
remembranee in Christ, and we beeam e in him well-known and
worthy o fth e highest vision, even as though in G ods book-^
The priestly work of Christ is brought to a climax here, as Cyril gathers

together so many ofthe themes with which he has been conversing. The
stones that the priest takes into the presence of God in the Temple are
symbolic o f how the Son keeps us in remembrance before the Father.
By the mediation of Christ, we are known no longer as strangers. The
estrangement that had characterised our existence when we were godless
in the world is overcome by Christ who in returning to the Father takes
us with him as fellow-children by grace, carrying us upon his shoulders.
In su m m a ry of this final aspect ofthe priestly ministry of Christ
52 De ador. 16(1024AB).
53 D eador.A O X lB C ).
54 De ador 11 (736AC).
4
then, we may say that the Son makes us true w o rh p p ers of the God
who, though property beyond knowledge, is yet known by us through
his mediation. At the same time, he likewise brings us before the Father
as those who are known no longer under the form of our rebelliousness
and waywardness. The Father, hnceforward, will know us as ehildren,
as possessors by graee of the one Sonship that belongs by nature to the
Gnly-begotten. What then does St Cyril mean by the priestly aetty of
the Son? That in drawing near to us and taking a nature consubstantial
with our own, the Son offers himself up to the Father as one who is - in
the first instance - overcoming sin, corruption and death in and for us. As
mediator, the great high priests offers up worship to the Father with and
for us, rendering us knowers of the Father as our Father, and rendering
the Father knowledgeable of us as sons and heirs
The Friesthood and the !nearnatinn
With the sphere of this activity better understood, we are ready to tackle
the issue that was raised at the beginning. 1 draw attention first of all
to the fact that Cyril understands the priesthood of Christ primarily in
relation to his activity during the Incarnation. Hereby Cyril allays any
suspicion of working within a subordinationist framework. But I argue
that the priestly work of the Son in the Incarnation is anticipated by
his prevenient activity within creation and within Gods relationship
to Israel. Such an articulation of the priesthood of the Son guarantees
the continual trajectory of the Sons activity on behalf of the creation; it
avoids a facile dissociation of all that went before from that which takes
place in the Incarnation.
It is a consistent feature of Cyrils meditation on the priesthood of

Christ that the Son of God takes up the priestly office when he becomes
incarnate. Selections from the Elegant Sayings may illustrate the point:
Indeed, the doctrine of the economy is exceedingly deep. For being
God and from God by nature, the Gnly-begotten became man and dwelt
among us. Then he was entitled both apostle and our high priest.
55 Glaph. Gen. 2 (FG 69, 88AB), citing John 1:14 and alluding to Hebrews 3:1.
105
And again: The Son [...] would not he said to seiwe as priest [...] unless
he is understood to become one of us, and as he is called prophet and
apostle because of the humanity, so also p r i e s t . C y r i l emphasises the
language of becoming and entitlement in relation to Christs priesthood.^
He says that Christ is the mediator between God and humanity according
to his dispensation ().58 ?erhaps this is put most clearly in
Cyrils reflection on Christs taking up both the offices of priesthood and
kingship: Christ [...] is, as it were, prefigured in Zerubbabel and Joshua,
being both king as God and likewise chief priest as man, and mediator
b e tw e e n God and men, since the priest is mediator.^
As these passages suggest, the mediating function of the priest

requires his co n ^ stan tiality with those on whose behalf he serves as
priest.^ Moreover, this idea seems to be a stable one within Cyrils later
corpus as well.^ It is in and through the humanity that he unites to himself
in his I ^ m a tio n that the Son takes upon himself the priestly office to
which he was elected by his Father.^ Hence the priests of Old served
under the direction and to the glory of God only until the time when
Christ came into the world in the servants form. Christs transfiguration
in the presence of Moses and Elijah - with Moses serving as a symbol of
the Law and the priesthood - revealed that foe Levitical priesthood had
been brought to an end.^ Christs priesthood therefore is to be understood
primarily in economic - rather than essentialist - terms.
56 Glaph. Gen. 2 (PG 69, 100A).

57 See Glaph. Gen. 3 (FG 69, 112A) and Glaph. E x . ( FG 69, 393B).
58 De ador. 15 (PG 68, 957AB).
59 Comm. Hagg. 1:14-15 (Fusey, vol. 2, 260 FG 124: 74).
60 Here Cyril follows the New Testament teaching on Christs priesthood rather
elosely. The apostle had written that the one mediator between God and men
is the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5).
61 Gerald O Collins and Michael Keenan Jones, Jesus our Priest: A Christian
Approach to the Priesthood ofC hrist (Oxford: Oxford University Fress, 2010)
62 On the Sons election to the priesthood, see De ador. 9(613D-616A), 10(676AB)

arll(7 2 5 C -7 2 8 B ).
63 Comm. Is. 7:17 (PG 70, 220D). Cf. Comm. Is. 22:20-24 (FG 70, 517B).
106
The anti-subordinationist character of Cyrils earliest writings

is surely in the frame as a plausible e^lanation for Cyrils insistenee
that the Son becomes priest. In the Fourth Century, it had become
elear that mediation eould be interpreted in eeonomie or essentialist
terms. Essentialist interpretations of the Sons priestly service located
his mediation within an ontological framework, such that the Son
occupied some position between Cod the Father and the human race.
The mediation reflected the eternal order of things, rather than the
dispensation of the Trinity. Cyril inherited and defended the pro-Nicene
position, understanding the priestly service of the Son as something that
he takes up by occupying - in ontological terms - a place at once no
higher than our own and also equal to the Fathers. Conversely, he was
and is God, but in the Incarnation in which he offers his service for us as
priest, he became what he was not: the Son of man.
So the title high priest is bestowed upon the Son from the time
of the Incarnation. However, as I will argue below, it is not as though it
comes out of nowhere. Rather, as we will see, the Incarnation colours
the whole history of Gods relationship to his creation and Israel. Like
ink from a felt-tipped pen held long against a page, toe mark made by
toe Incarnation bleeds back through all toe pages of Holy Scripture
to toe very first one. Cyril is keen to insist on toe efficacy of toe Old
Dispensation precisely because of its intrinsic connection to toe mystery
ofChrist. I argue below that Cyril understood toe Son ofGod to be taking
up fimctions ofthe priestly work (fhnctions that he would accomplish in a
more realised sense in toe Incarnation) in his mission to Israel. Numerous
passages in toe Old Testament commentaries accentuate this dynamic,
and seem to demand some kind of explanation.
The Son was involved in magnifying toe knowledge ofthe Trinity

through toe Old priesthood. Cyril endorses toe abiding value ofthe Old
Testament. We nowhere claim, he writes, that toe old Law was devoid
of the force of reason: even if the provisions ofthe Law came as types
107
and shadows, they were nevertheless observed for the glory of God.64
It is the grounds of this statement that we are after here. Cyril repeatedly
reveals these grounds in relation to our theme. The priests of old offered
th e ir saerifices in imitation of the one mediator: the Christ.^ What is
more, the smoke from their offerings aseended to God, as it were, not
only in imitation of his mediation to eome but also by his mediation.^ The
priestly mee of old was truly sanetified, Cyril refleets, and to ^cu m v en t
the possibility of someone claiming that they were made holy by a kind
o f h o lin e s s inferior to the sanctifieation of the new covenant, he writes:
only what is sanctified in Christ is sanctified.^ Moses himself, who
entered unveiled into the Tent of Meeting, did not draw near to the Father
on Mount Horeb, except by the mediation of the Son.^
One could easily multiply examples of this kind of language

in the commentaries. In the Commentary on Zechariah, Cyril reflects
the apostolic position on the Sons activity in the Old Testament in the
broadest possible sense:
O f the fact that Christ assisted and redeem ed also the peoples o f
old no one would be in doubt [...] [I]f he it is who is the rock that
gave water to Israel w hen thirsting in the desert, and he it is from
whom everything comes from the God and Father, how is there
any doubt that it is from him that also every redem ption comes at
the right time, and every form o f assistance is provided?^
Reflecting on the Aaronic blessing-which was to serve as the paradigmatic

blessing ofthe priesthood - Cyril notes that in extending his hands outward
toward the people, Aaron was declaring in symbolic form
not that it was the hand o f a man that was blessing them, but
64 Comm. Zech. 37-6( Pusey, vol. 2, 318-319; FC 124: 119-120).

65 De ador. 13(PG 68, 880B).
66 S eeDeador. 16 (PG 68, 1057AB).
67 Glaph. Ex. 3 (PG 69, 509CD).
68 Glaph. Ex. 3 (PG 69, 524BC).
69 Comm. Zech. 2:8 (Pusey, vol. 2, 306-307 FC 124: 111). Be is reflecting Paul
teaching in 1 Corinthians 10:4.
108
rather the Lord him self [...] for Christ is the pathway o f the
blessing, and he is the distributor to us o f the heavenly blessings,
and in him and through him are all the things that eome from the
Father.70
Cyril moves seamlessly from the meaning that this text had for Israel (the
Lord himself, the Second ?erson ofthe Trinity, was blessing them) to the
meaning that it bears for his Christian audience (Christ is the pathway
o f all blessing to us). The Son, even before the carnation, is involved
in work of a priestly kind. Through him Aaron blesses Israel. Cyril
expresses this thought most eloquently in his musings on the meaning of
the seven-faceted stone of Zechariah 3. The stone is set before Joshua the
high priest, and he is told to gaze upon it. Cyril takes this as a reference
to the relationship between the priesthood according to the Law and
the person of Christ:
There was need in particular, you see, for the priesthood according
to the Law, for w hich we have cited Joshua as a type, constantly
to have before its eyes [...] the chosen stone, the cornerstone,
precious as it is, meant as the foundation o f Zion, the pearl o f great
price - namely, Christ - gazing on all things with m any eyes.7*
The priests of old gazed upon Christ, directing their ministry toward
him, even as the Son pondered them with perfect vision and knowledge,
sustaining them until the time of his becoming flesh. The Son, in coming
to the priesthood in his Incarnation, takes on a role with which he is
already - albeit in a less realised sense - familiar-
The above examples should suffice to illustrate that there is a

second dynamic at work in Cyrils account ofthe Sons priesthood. On
the one hand, Cyril is eager to relate the priestly work ofthe Son to the
Incarnation so as to safeguard the honour ofthe Sons consubstantiality
with the Father. On the other, he is keen to point out that one cannot
do justice to the true character of the old dispensations teaching on the
? De ador. 11 (PG 68, 772CD).

71 Comm. Zech. 3:8-9 (Pusey, vcl. 2, 322; FC 124: 122, emphases Hills).
109
theme ofpriesthood if one regards it only as the setting or context for the
Incarnate Sons priestly ministry. The reason that Aaron served as the
mediator of the Trinitys blessing of Israel was precisely because it was
the Son of God who was pronouncing the blessing over them. The reason
Joshua - and the other priests - served with any degree of faithfidness
was that they were looking upon Christ even as he was supervising them.
On Mt Horeb, Moses drew near the Father and looked upon him with
the eyes of his heart because of the mediation of the Son. These are
all themes we have identified as constituent elements of Christs own
Incarnate ministry, and yet they are in some sense being predicated of
him before the time of his putting on fiesh-
It is in this sense that the work of the Son in the Incarnation - at

least as regards this theme of his priesthood-is continuous with what the
Son was about in the period before: when he was, by the ministry of the
Aaronic priesthood, holding back the effects ofsin, corruption, and death,
mediating true worship of God, and shedding abroad the knowledge of
his Father in the Spirit. If we may not speak in as realised a sense about
the accomplishments of this ministry, we must at least say that it tended
in exactly the same direction-
Contradiction or Continuity?
One can therefore place Cyril within a long line of fathers for whom the
mission of the Son to the nation of Israel was the mode of Gods glorious
presence to it.72 What is more, we see Cyril speaking of this mission
in terms that emphasise the continuity of the Sons activity throughout
the entire economy: including the election of Israel. Cyril pushes us
to understand this mission as one in which the Son takes up various
functions (for example: revelation, the sustenance offaithful worship, the
mediation of blessing and prayer) that he takes up more decisively and
72 On this point, see the useful artiele by Bogdan Bucur, Exegesis o f Biblieal
Theophanies in Byzantine Hymnography: Rewritten Bible? Theological Studies
68 (2007) 02-112. Bueur traces - in several fathers - the idea that Old Testament
theophanies were Christophanies.
110
with more lasting effect in the Incarnation. Though we are now moving
beyond the purview o f the Old Testament eorpus being examined here,
it is no great stretch from such an account of Christs priestly ministry
to that which Cyril would argue several years later in his Commentary
on Hebrews. Cyril considers that the Apostle in Hebrews 2:17 speaks of
Christs becoming a mercifrl and faithfid high priest and w rites
Since he is always and by nature mercifol, the (Fathers) Only-

begotten, the Word, was made mediator () between us
and God by the Ineam ation (), that, ju st as he was
always both ^ p a s s i o n a t e and merciful, so accordingly when
he was proclaim ed to be high priest, he might have m ercy upon
those w ho were on earth. A nd doing that w hich he was pleased
to do and was accustomed to doing and not becoming separated
from any o fth e good things that are proper to him, he might show
us that the Father in heaven him self is gracious.73
The antecedent basis of the priesthood of Christ is rooted in the very

nature o fth e Trinity, whereby the Son enacts the Fathers will to have
compassion and grant mercy The Incarnation is thus the revelation ofthat
which Father, Son, and Holy Spirit will together on behalf of creation.
In the gracious condescension ofthe Son to restore humanity to its true
form by taking foe servants form, foe Son does something entirely new
which is nevertheless that which he was accustomed to doing.
We see then that for Cyril, there is a theological principle behind

his insistence that events in foe Old Testament bespeak foe mystery of
Christ. Already in foe days of foe Exodus, foe Son was speaking foe
words ofthe Father to Moses as foe true Aaron. Already in foe time ofthe
wanderings, he was presenting himself through foe types ofthe priest and
foe ram. This, not because he had arranged a mere economy of shadows,
kept in motion at a distance by his will. Rather, he was mediating for
Israel by his very presence, in his mission from foe Father sustaining
foe Israelites in their worship and knowledge ofthe living God. This is
73 From Comm. Heb. 2:17 (F. Edward Fusey, ed., s.p.n. Cyrilli Opera, vol. 3,
(Oxford: Clarendon Fress, 24-396.18 (872 ).

our provisional explanation for what is in Cyril a nuanced aceount of

the Sons assumption of the title high priest: the Son of God, in the
history of Israel, was moving toward embodying the priesthood in his
very ?erson. In eoming to serve as priest in the In^m ation, he aeted
in eontinuity with this history. In one of Cyrils favourite phrases: He
became what he was not, while remaining what he was.^
What then is toe new thing - relative to Christs priesthood and

his mediation - taken up by toe Son in toe Incarnation? Christ deals
decisively with sin, corruption, and death on our behalf. By his cross,
he offers h im s e lf-a s one consubstantial with us - to the Father. What
is more, in uniting us to himself, he offers us back to toe Father, by toe
Spirit rendering us a pure sacrifice and sanctifying our n a tu re out ofhis
own fullness in toe Spirit. In so doing, toe Son alters toe way in which we
know toe Father and toe way in which toe Father knows us. Knowing him
74 Here, incidentally, the present work diverges somewhat from Welehs frequent
assertion that the deeisive aspeet o f Cyrils theologieal method (over against
that of toe Arians) is that he worked out his Christology from within toe
eonerete, historical loeation o f toe Sons Incarnation. The following quote is
representative of Welchs approaeh to Cyril: Despite the inconsistencies and
detours in his thought, Cyril usually is intent upon toe historical Christ rather
than speculating about toe functions of the non-human Logos ( Christology
and Eucharist 38-39). See also p. 38n69. A historical approach to Christology
cannot ignore toe work of the pre-Incamate Logos. 1 agree with Welch that in
St Cyril toe economy is ordered toward that which toe Son accomplishes in
his Incarnation. But this does not rule out the speculative dimension o f Cyrils
thought on toe activities of the Logos; moreover, on Welchs account, there
seems to be some slippage on the question o f the Logos work at creation. To
what extent is toe Incarnation fondamental to toe work of toe Logos in creation?
Welch replies that when Cyril speaks o f toe Son before he became man and
implies that it was toe non-human Son through whom all things came into being,
he undermines his own insistence upon toe om m unication ofidiom s (p. 159).
It would be better to say that toe Incarnation o f toe Logos is toe goal of creation,
that it is rightly understood only through toe Incarnation of the Logos. Welchs
approach is in dangerof collapsing Cyrils fidsome vision of toe divine economy
into toe moment ofthe Incarnation. For a more sensitive approach to the Fathers
on toe issue o f toe relationship between toe Incarnation and toe creation of
toe world, see Bogdan Bucur, Foreordained from All Eternity: The Mystery
oft he Incarnation according to some Early Christian and Byzantine Writers
Dumbarton Oaks Papers 62 (2008) 199-215.
112
as he is, we worship him rightly. Knowing us under the true form of our
humanity - the form revealed in Christs humanity - the Father knows
us as his children. The logic of Christs priestly work accords perfectly
with Cyrils explicit reflections on its relation to the Sons Incarnation.
To accomplish these things, the Son must become human. He is priest
and mediator in a truly new way who before was the beginning and end,
the pathway of every blessing of the Father to us.
Keating has drawn attention to the fact that Cyril brings to the
Nestorian conflict a vibrant sense that divine indwelling - rather than a
reified divine grace - is critical to rightly understanding what is given to
humanity in the gift of salvation.^ The Old Testament exegetical literature
confirms the importance of this point. Cyril brings to the Nestorian
conflict a lengthy engagement with the Christological dimensions of the
Old Testament, not as a less proximate witness to the indwelling Son and
Spirit of God, but as a witness that in every way fills out and amplifies
what the Son does in the New in uniting human nature inseparably to his
Ferson. The Sons work of mediation and priestly service is new precisely
in that he now takes up that which is proper to our humanity into his very
Person, providing human nature with an anchor that is secure in the life
of God. That he does so in continuity with the trajectory of his mission
to Israel assures us that he is one and the same in this new work of his:
this new work that is ongoing for us in toe heavenly places. The Incarnate
Son, whose priestly mediation continues to animate toe heavenly worship
in toe Apocalypse is one and toe same Lord by and for whom all things
were brought into being. And, though I now speak beyond the bounds of
what Cyril gives us explicitly, we have every reason to expect that our
knowledge of and worship of God in toe age to come will proceed in and
through this humanity that he has united inseparably to himself.
75 See espeeially Appropriation o f Divine Life 217-19.
113

Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may priut, dow nload, or send artieles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international eopyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATT,AS subscriber agreement.
No eontent may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s) express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS eollection with permission
from the eopyright holder(s). The eopyright holder for an entire issue ajourna!
typieally is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, tbe author o fth e article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use covered by the fair use provisions o f tbe copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright hoider(s), please refer to the copyright iaformatioa in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initia funding from Liiiy Endowment !).
The design and final form ofthis electronic document is the property o fthe American
Theological Library Association.
Ordination in Christian History
E. Glenn Hinson
The practice of ordination by laying on of hands has had a chequered

history. The New Testament contains only faint traces of it, and its im-
plications therein are obscure. As was true of many other early customs, di-
verse backgrounds should probably be assumed. By the early third century
Christian ministry and ordination had undergone quite an evolution. Or-
dination was establishing a clear divide between clergy and laity and even be-
tween clergy and clergy. Through the gift of the Spirit communicated in or-
dination, it was thought, clergy became dispensers and guardians of salvation.
Thus they held an awesome authority over the faithful. A strong bishop such
as Ambrose of Milan could bring emperors to their knees begging for
restoration of communion.
The significance of ordination grew during the middle ages as the role of
the church expanded. On account of ordination, the clergy were thought to
differ essentially and not just functionally from the laity. This exalted view,
however, did not go unchallenged. Numerous essentially lay sects arose in the
late middle ages which repudiated all sacraments and made leadership func-
tional. In such sects ordination possessed little meaning.
The Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century brought a parting of
the ways on the question of ordination. On the one hand, Roman Catholics, Or-
thodox, and, to a lesser extent, Anglicans continued to think of the rite as a
sacrament which delinated an essential difference beween clergy and laity.
Protestants, on the other hand, beginning with Luther, denounced this view
and insisted that ministers differed only in function. Radical sects such as the
Quakers rejected the rite entirely.
Recent developments in the history of the church have again brought to the
fore some pressing questions about the practice of ordination. These include
changes in the ecumenical climate, the search of women for equality in society
and church, the leveling influences of modern urban and technological society,
diversification in Christian ministry as a consequence of the urban revolution,
and the general skepticism about all institutions characteristic of the modern
day.
Ordination in the Earliest Church
In the earliest period of Christian history the custom of laying on of hands
in ordination is obscure. Christians laid on hands in reference to healing (Mt.
485
9:18; Mk. 5:23; 6:5, 7:32; 8:23-25; Lk. 4:40; 13:30; Acts 9:12,17; 28:8, 10), bap-
tism (Acts 8:17, 18, 19, 19:16; Heb. 6:2; possibly 1 Tim. 5:22), and blessing
(Mk. 9:13,15) as well as ordination. Laying on of hands in connection with the
setting apart of selected persons as leaders is mentioned only four times in
New Testament writings, all in Acts and the Pastoral Epistles. The Greek
word cheirotonein, which appears several times, could sometimes bear this
nuance, but by itself it may mean no more than "appoint."
The roots of ordination are also obscure. They are doubtless sunk in
Jewish soil, but there are several plots of ground to be considered. The one
cited most often by scholars in the Catholic traditions (Roman Catholic,
Anglican, Orthodox) is the rabbinic custom of commissioning emissaries by
laying on of hands.1 Although attractive in some ways, this theory fails to
satisfy the strong missionary nuance of the Christian custom. Moreover, there
is no evidence for this practice earlier than A.D. 70.2 The discovery of the
Dead Sea Scrolls has tinned attention to Essene practices as another possible
seedbed for many Christian observances. Though the Essenes did not leave
evidence for a laying on of hands, they ranked their communities, at Qumran
and elsewhere, in strict hierarchical fashion just as some Christian com-
munities began to do quite early.8 Besides these two, an often overlooked but
perhaps most fertile soil for early Christian practices was the Old Testament.
In support of their observances Christians frequently cited Moses' laying
hands on Joshua (Deut. 34:9ff.; Num. 27:18ff.). The Old Testament, after all,
was the Bible of the early church.4
It is probably wise, given this diversity of evidence, to assume that
various influences helped to shape early Christian understanding and practice
of ordination. More crucial for us, yet highly controverted too, as a con-
sequence of paucity of information and variety of backgrounds, is the meaning
of laying on of hands. Catholic and several Protestant traditions stress the
transferrai of authority. Radical Protestants, on the other hand, denigrate the
importance of the observance, Quakers going so far as to reject it entirely. As
so often happens, the available evidence will sustain a variety of inter-
pretations.
Several bits of evidence point to an essentially missionary nuance in or-
dination. All four New Testament allusions (Acts 6:6; 13:3; 1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim.
1:6) are set within missionary contexts. Other early references such as 1
Clement 41, moreover, reflect the Militia Chrsti motif under which early
Christianity pursued its mission in the Roman Empire. Baptism was regarded
as the lay person's setting apart for mission "in the order of the laity"; laying
on of hands, as the setting apart of leaders (bishop or presbyters and deacons).
The evidence suggests also that ordination had to do with acknowl-
edgement of "gifts" for leadership along Old Testament lines. According
to Acts 6:3, the Jerusalem community chose "Seven" who were "full of the
486
Review and Expositor
Spirit and wisdom." Likewise, the community of Antioch set apart Barna-
bas and Saul on instructions given by the Holy Spirit, most likely through
prophets (Acts 13:1-3). According to the Pastoral Letters, moreover, Paul laid
hands on Timothy as a result of "charisms" recognized "through prophecy" (1
Tim. 4:14; but see 2 Tim. 1:6). The most natural background for interpreting
this idea is Moses' laying hands on Joshua, "a man full of the Spirit" (Deut.
34:9 ff.; Num. 27:18ff.). Though by the late second century Christians looked
with suspicion upon charismatics, they never relinquished their early tendency
to associate ordination with "gifts." Rather, they increasingly ascribed to the
rite itself, as administered by the bishop, the power of conferring gifts of the
Spirit.
The data indicate too that ordination played a major role in the establish-
ment and continuance of orderliness in early Christian communities. Indeed,
the presence of charlatans, sectarians, and heretical teachers soon shifted the
emphasis of ordination to this point. The Pastoral Epistles already contain a
warning against hasty ordinations (1 Tim. 5:22). The early Christian manual
called the Didache, probably put together in its present form in the early
second century but containing first century materials, urged acceptance of
presbyters and deacons as prophets.6 First Clement came down hard on the im-
portance of order as reflected in the hierarchical model. God has ordered his
church with two tiersan order of clergy and an order of the laity (1 CI. 40:5).
Ignatius of Antioch, martyred between 110 and 117, spoke still more em-
phatically. Nothingbaptisms, eucharists, marriages, burialswas to be done
without the bishop and/or his ordination! When the early pentecostal sect
called Montanists arose late in the second century, it spurred this view still
more, for Montanists recognized only prophets as leaders. By the early third
century, ordination was drawing unmistakable lines of authority between
clergy and laity.
From Functional to Essential Distinctions
The earliest evidence for ordination as an extended rite rather than the
simple laying on of hands appears in The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus,
who separated from the Roman Church about A.D. 217. According to Hip-
polytus, the people elected the bishop, but bishops alone laid hands on other
bishops and on deacons, whom Hippolytus regarded as servants of bishops.
Presbyters laid hands only on other presbyters. The ordination rite itself con-
sisted of the following:
Laying on of hands by the appropriate persons
Prayer of consecration by one of the bishops
For the power of the Holy Spirit
For a worthy ministry
For authority to forgive sins
Kiss of peace offered by all
487
Presentation of the offering by the deacons
Blessing of the offering by the newly ordained
Responsive thanksgiving:
The Lord be with you.
And with your spirit
Lift up your hearts.
We lift them up unto the Lord.
Let us give thanks to the Lord.
It is meet and right
Thanksgiving for offering of bread and wine
Thanksgiving for offering of oil (if made)
Thanksgiving for offering of cheese and olives (if made)
Celebration of the Lord's Supper
The rite described by Hippolytus was elaborated on subsequently, but it
remained the essential core of ordination practice. More extensive and con-
sequential was an escalation of the sacramental significance of ordination in
connection with a corresponding growth of the sacramental value of the Lord's
Supper. Interpretation of the latter as a sacrifice necessarily elevated the
priestly role of the clergy. About A.D. 250, for instance, Cyprian of Carthage,
arguing the necessity of mixing water with wine, spoke of the priestly role as a
"representation" of Christ's death and contended: "That priest truly
discharges the office of Christ who imitates that which Christ did."6
The Donatist schism in north Africa boosted the ordination rite to still
higher plateaus. Following in the footsteps of Cyprian, the Donatists refused
to acknowledge baptisms or ordinations performed by Catholics. By
tolerating persons who surrendered copies of scriptures to the authorities
during the persecution under the Emperor Diocletian, they argued, Catholics
had ceased to be the church. Lacking the Spirit, who flees sinners, they could
not perform valid rites. Thence Donatists rebaptized Catholic lay persons and
reordained Catholic clergy. In essence, they viewed the administrator as the
determinant of the validity of their acts.
The reply of Optatus of Mileve and Augustine of Hippo to this kind of
thinking served not to diminish but to enhance further the signficance of or-
dination. Augustine distinguished between the validity and the efficacy of
sacraments. Validity, he contended, depends on Christ alone, and not on either
the administrator or recipient. Efficacy, meaning effectiveness for salvation,
depends on the recipient's faith. Thus the worth of the administrator in no way
diminishes the value or the effectiveness of his acts. A personally unworthy
priest may perform a perfectly valid ordination. Ordination, like baptism, is,
as an act of Christ, indelible. It cannot be erased by moral misdeeds, schism, or
even heresy of the recipient. With this outlook the church was well on the way
to its medieval status as the sole and absolute dispenser of salvation.
488
While these developments were transpiring in the Latin West, others were
taking place in the Greek East which were to push ordination to an at least
equal height. In the East the shift was associated with the tendency of
gnostics and ascetics to denigrate sacraments. Thinking of the physical and
material as essentially evil and the spiritual alone as good, they armed for
their battle against evil with fasting, prayer, and self-abnegation. One may
readily discern some red flags for institutional Christianity in this
4
'charismatic" approach, and the bishops were not slow or hesitant to respond.
Basil (the Great) of Neocaesarea drew up a Rule for monks in which he could
emphasize the value of sacraments. Meantime, on account of the high esteem
in which the laity held them, monks began to fill the ranks of the clergy. In
time they became the sole source of the eastern episcopate, as they are today.
Ironically, someone with a monastic vocation trying to escape forcible or-
dination built the highest pedestal on which ordination had yet stood. John
Chrysostom ("Golden Mouth"), professing vigorously his own unworthiness
for this exalted office, attributed to ordination the power to create an essen-
tial difference between heaven and earth, above human beings and only a little
lower than angels. It is "indeed discharged on earth, but it ranks among
heavenly ordinances." Since instituted by "the Paraclete himself," it requires
persons "as pure as if standing in the heavens themselves in the midst of those
powers."8 When administering the Lord's Supper, Chrysostom asked, "Can
you then think you are still among men, and standing upon the earth?"9
Nono! Priests, though earthbound, "have received an authority which God
has not given to angels or archangels."10 Entrusted with authority to baptize,
priests "might not only be more justly feared by us than rulers and kings, but
also be more honored than parents."11 Above all, they "have authority to
forgive sins," thus standing in a position of greater responsibility and more
fearful judgment.12
Widening the Breach
During the early middle ages, as Christianity established itself as the faith
of Europe, ordination set the clergy apart as a special class. Under the feudal
system which emerged in this period society consisted of powerful land-
holders, vassals who held the land in a contractual arrangement for them,
serfs, and, quite distinct from any of these three, the clergy or religious
(monks and nuns). Such a structure offered few opportunities to move from
one class to another except by way of the last. The lower classes had some
hope of advancement through heroics in battle or, more commonly, through
the church. By ordination serfs, for instance, could become powerful figures in
society.
The advantages gained in this way eventually proved to be a point of
contention in the later middle ages as the powerful church increased the gap
between laity and clergy or religious. Numerous things separated the two.
489
By the eleventh century the custom of dipping the communion bread in the
cup became popular and later supplanted the giving of communion in both
kinds, that is, both bread and wine. The clergy alone received the cup. Mean-
time, special dress set them apart from the laity. More consequential still, the
clergy administered discipline, exacting penance for infractions of church
law and collecting indulgences in place of actual satisfactions. Even kings
and princes knuckled under the powerful sway of bishops and popes. The
clergy alone held the keys of the kingdom. They alone could bind and loose.
By the late middle ages clerical corruption, ineptness, and insensitivity com-
bined with this cleavage to evoke a powerful reaction against the Church and
clergy or monks. One will find commendable examples. Chaucer, for instance,
praised the parson on pilgrimage to Canterbury as "poor" in funds but "rich"
of "holy thoght and werk." He was, Chaucer added, a learned person, who
truly preached Christ's gospel. Rather than curse his flock to obtain tithes, he
would give to the poor in his parish out of his own meager funds. He furnished
a noble example in that "first he wroghte, and afterward he taughte; Out of the
gospel he tho words caughte." He did not run off to London, but stayed with
his flock. "He was a shepherde and no mercenarie." He drew folks by fairness
and good example. He taught the lore of Christ and the Apostles, but first he
followed it himself.13
The opposite types, however, those who abused their office, also abound-
ed. There is a record of a certain Bogo de Clare who died in London in 1294
who "had held innumerable churches, and had ill governed such as Christ had
bought with His trading." According to the Lanercost Chronicle, he "cared
not for Holy Orders but quenched the cure of souls and squandered the reve-
nues of his churches." Though he could not find money to repair the churches
charged to his care, this Chronicle continued, he gave the queen of France "a
lady's chariot of unheard-of workmanship; to wit, all of ivory, both body and
wheels, and all that should have been of iron was silver even to the smallest
nail, and its awning was of silk and gold even to the least cord whereby it was
drawn; the price whereof, as men say, was three pounds sterling; but the scan-
dal was a thousand thousand."14
The reaction against such abuses took various forms. In time it erupted in
a profusion of sects, mostly lay movements, which rejected ordination and the
clerical hierarchy. Such sects by no means held uniform views, but the Walden-
ses, who have survived to the present day, were fairly typical in insisting that
apostolic doctrine and Ufe and not ordination qualified persons to perform the
sacraments and to excommunicate or absolve penitents. According to a con-
temporary source, the Waldenses "reprove and condemn consecrations and or-
dination of acolytes, subdeacons, deacons, presbyters, and bishops."15 Fur-
ther, according to another source, they labeled bishops, clergy, and monks
"scribes and pharisees and persecutors of the apostles" and all clerical orders
"curses rather than sacraments."16 Evil life, they insisted, invalidates the
490
functions of the clergy. Contrariwise, merit "ordains" any person to perform

the Lord's Supper, grant absolution, or do other acts of mercy. "Whence
they," Alan de Insulis complained, "although not ordained, presume to bless
in the priestly manner because they think themselves to be just and to have
the merits of apostles. And they say they can consecrate, bind and loose,
because merit, not office, gives power."17
Reformation and Ordination
The Protestant reformers rode a wave of reaction against the early and
medieval tendencies to ascribe to ordination a power to make an essential
distinction between clergy and laity. Only the most radical rejected the rite en-
tirely, but all of the reformers insisted the laying on of hands distinguished
people in function alone.
Early on, Martin Luther, who came to know well the heavy hand of power
the Church could lay up on its members, emphatically rejected the medieval
view that ordination is a sacrament. By this route, he pointed out, it
has been and still is an admirable device for establishing all the
horrible things that have been done hitherto in the church, and are
yet to be done. Here Christian brotherhood has perished, here
shepherds have been turned into wolves, servants into tyrants,
churchmen into worse than worldlings.18
Against these Luther placed the priesthood of all belivers. Ordination is
"nothing else than a certain rite whereby one is called to the ministry of the
church," and that ministry is the ministry of the Word. It confers no "indelible
character" on the person ordained.
John Calvin, likewise, came down hard on abuses of the clerical office and
repudiated the sacramental interpretation. Noting that Apostles "used no
other ceremony than the laying on of hands," he construed ordination as a sign
of "offering to God him whom they were receiving into the ministry." He ad-
ded, perhaps conceding just a little to the medieval tradition, however, that
"they used it also with those upon whom they conferred the visible graces of
the Spirit (Acts 19:6)."19
Radical reformers deemphasized ordination still more. Repudiating ec-
clesiastical power structures, spiritualists among the Anabaptists claimed
divine commissioning, as Obbe Phillips wrote, "professing to have been com-
pelled in their hearts by God to baptize, preach, and teach, and establish a new
church (kercke), since the ancient church had perished."20 Yet even the most
radical spiritualists did practice laying on of hands as a sign of commissioning
to preach, baptize, teach, and "stand before the congregation/' 21 More
moderate Anabaptists, recognizing the danger in the excesses of spiritualists,
sought commissioning to the apostolic office through gathered churches.
Ministers (Dienaers) were to be "regularly called and chosen by the Lord and
491
the congregation of the Lord." True ministers would be known "by the saving
teachings of Jesus Christ, by their godly walk, and by the fruits which they
bear, and moreover by the persecution which they must suffer for the sake of
truth and righteousness. "22
The Church of England undertook to reform clerical abuses, but it did not
follow the Protestant reformers in respect to ordination. Relying especially on
the Church Fathers, Anglican reformers stressed episcopacy as the stablizing
factor in ministry and episcopal succession as the way to assure continuity. In
An Apologie of the Church of England, composed in 1560 or 1561, John Jewel,
reacting against the confusion introduced by the reform, insisted "that the
minister ought lawfully, duly, and orderly to be preferred to that office of the
Church of God, and that no man hath power to wrest himself into the holy
ministry at his own pleasure." Citing such Fathers as Tertullian, Cyprian,
Eusebius, and John Chrysostom, he defended the right of ministers to exercise
discipline." The Anglican Church provided for three ordained officesbishop,
presbyter, and deacon. Liturgies for ordination in the Book of Common Prayer
stressed the giving of the Spirit through laying on of hands as authorization
for various tasks traditionally assigned to these offices.
In England, radical Puritans included changes in the theology and prac-
tice of ordination in their "further call" for reformation. Following Calvin,
Separatists rejected episcopacy as an impediment to reform and opted for the
congregational pattern of church government now used by Congregationalists
(United Church of Christ) and Baptists. In his Short Confession (1610) John
Smyth, father of General Baptists, emphasized the importance of orderliness
through ordination. Election was to be''by the church, with fasting, and prayer
of God; for God knoweth the heart;" but investment was to be "accomplished
by the elders of the church through the laying on of hands." 24 Particular Bap-
tists also accentuated the congregation's role in selecting suitable ministers.
According to the First London Confession,
Every Church has power given them from Christ for their better
well-being, to choose to themselves meet persons into the office of
Pastors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons, being qualified according to the
Word, as those which Christ has appointed in his Testament, for the
feeding, governing, serving, and building up of his Church, and that
none other have power to impose them, either these or any other.26
Quakers assumed the most radical stance toward ordination, as they did
toward other symbolic observances. They drew no clear Une of distinction be-
tween those whom they regarded as "ministers" and others, though they did
recognize distinctions. Instead, they stressed exercise of spiritual gifts. The
authority of the Quaker minister depended not on human appointment, as
William C. Braithwaite has observed, but "upon the call of the Lord and upon
the message which He might give raising up the witness to its truth in the
492
hearts of Friends."26 Ordination could not specify such a call; it would merely
create a cleavage between clergy and laity, something which the Friends
vigorously opposed.
Toward a New Reformation
The Protestant Reformation thus resulted in a number of attitudes toward
ordination and patterns in which it would be done. The Catholic
traditionRoman Catholics, Orthodox, and Anglicanspersisted in the an-
cient and medieval customs. The Lutheran and Reformed churches denied
more than functional distinctions set by ordination and simplified its forms.
The radical reformers went still further, even to complete rejection of the rite
by virtue of its separation of clergy from laity.
Little significant change has occurred in these positions until recent years
when a combined ecumenical and social revolution has severely tested the
divergent traditions. The most significant discussion has focused on or-
dination in relation to Christian unity, the ordination of women, and or-
dination for other than traditional roles.
Roman Catholics/ Orthodox, and Anglicans have centered ecumenical
discussion on the necessity of episcopacy (and, in the case of Roman Catholics,
the papacy) for preservation of the integrity and continuity of the ministry.
Considerable evolution has occured as the ecumenical revolution has unfolded
in the years since World War II. In 1946, a group of Anglo-Catholics headed
by Bishop Kenneth Kirk insisted that episcopacy belonged to the very essence
of the Church and would tolerate no concessions to other forms of ministry.17
By 1963, however, A. G. Hebert, one of that group, had arrived at a quite dif-
ferent position concerning churches which did not practice episcopal or-
dination. "If such churches are in error in lacking Episcopacy," he said, "that
does not mean that they are not within the Church." Further, he considered
their ministries "to be real ministries, in spite of the fact that a variety of
errors which need to be remedied are found within those churches."28
Today the matter has been carried a giant step further in the Consultation
on Church Union, a merger proposal involving ten denominations with all
three polities emerging from the Reformationepiscopal, presbyterian, and
congregational. In A Plan of Union for the Church of Christ Uniting adopted at
St. Louis in 1970, the Consultation continued the traditional ordained offices
of the catholic traditionbishop, presbyter, and deacon. The interpretation of
ordination, however, reflected more the Protestant tradition.
In ordination, the united church recognizes that the call to the in-
dividual man or woman is of God, prays that the one to be ordained
will continue to receive the gifts of the Spirit, believes that God
gives grace appropriate to the office, accepts and authorizes this
ministry in and for his church. Thus, ordained ministries represent
493
the mission of God in Christ to church and world, and also the
mission of the entire church both to its members and to the world.
Ordination, moreover, was to involve not only the higher clergy but "represen-
tatives of all offices and orders of ordained ministry in the church and
representatives of the laity" so as to signify "that ordination is an act of the
whole church."29 In its 1976 Plenary at Bergamo the Consultation framed as
one of its goals the mutual recognition of ministers. By 1980, it had arrived at
a near consensus on this goal.
The ordination of women has not become a pressing issue in most
denominations until recently, but it is currently one of the most urgent mat-
ters under discussion. Depending on the sacramental character which they
ascribe to ordination, the denominations have divided sharply here. Roman
Catholic, Old Catholic, and Orthodox churches do not ordain women. The
Anglican Church sees no theological barrier to their ordination, but it has not
moved to ordain any on account of ecumenical implications. The Episcopal
Church in the United States has experienced a schism as a consequence of
its official decision to ordain women. Most major Protestant denominations
have ordained them. From the beginning Quakers have recognized the calling
of women to be equal to that of men. Since the nineteenth century Disciples
and Methodists have ordained women. Baptists, being quite diverse, have
varied in their practice, but many Baptist churches have ordained women both
as deacons and as pastors.30 Lutheran, Presbyterian, Reformed, and other
Protestant churches have ordained women as well, but there is not uniformity
even within a single denomination. Very conservative (fundamentalist)
churches tend to resist the practice on the ground that it does not have bibli-
cal support.31 In the United States today, there are about 6,000 ordained
women serving in various capacities. The matter has been receiving much
attention in the context of the National and World Council of Churches.32
The diversification of ministries which has accompanied urbanization has
posed new questions in some denominations about whom to ordain. In a
predominantly rural environment churches were usually small enough that
one person, the pastor, discharged most responsibilities. Metropolis,
however, has called for specialization. A large urban church such as the First
Baptist Church of Dallas may employ as many as three hundred staff mem-
bers. Which of these should be ordained? At one time such churches ordained
only those who preached or performed strictly pastoral functions. Now many
ordain ministers of education, ministers of music, pastoral or family coun-
selors, business managers, and others. From such expansion have come
problems.
Ordination has important practical implications in the form of tax exemp-
tions by federal, state, and local governments which have been subjected to
abuses. In 1976, for instance, half the residents of Hardenburgh, New York,
were ordained to qualify as tax-exempt clergy by George McLain, a plumber
494
from the nearby village of Liberty. By taking correspondence courses McLain

had become a bishop in the Universal Life Church, which has headquarters in
California. Such moves as this have led tax officials to scrutinize tax exemp
tions more closely.
As some have shifted from one role to another, they have wondered how to
become unordained. In a highly technological society such as ours, job changes
are frequent, of course, even in church ministry. The Baptist Program carried a
series of letters in response to the query of a former pastor: "How do I become
un-ordained?" He considered ministry too serious a vocation simply to let his
ordination stand when he no longer filled the role.89 Responses ranged all the
way from "he is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill" to "God makes
no mistakes" to what he really needs is to get someone "to affirm his new
directions."84
Conclusion
One thing which comes through quite clearly from this brief survey of or
dination in Christian history is that ordination has posed and will continue to
pose serious questions. Solutions to these range all the way from abandonment
of the custom to the reaffirming of fixed traditions of other eras. Whatever
cour is decided on, it will be important to be open to discussion and divine
leading. The ferment of the moment is wholesome so long as we maintain a
healthy respect for the views and practices of others with whom we do not
agree. We may indeed be participants in a new and greater reformation than
the one which occurred in the sixteenth century.
I
Cf. J. B. Lightfoot, "The Name and Office of an Apostle," in St Pauls Epistle to the
Galatians (Cambridge & London: Macmillan & Co., 1868, pp. 89-97; A. M. Farrer, "The Ministry
in the New Testament," in The Apostolic Ministry, ed. . E. Kirk (London: Hodder & Stoughton
Ltd., 1946), pp. 113ff.
3
See the critique of W. Schmithals, The Office of an Apostle in the Early Church, trans. John
E. Steely (Nashville & New York: Abingdon Press, 1979), pp. 96-110, and Arnold Ehrhardt, The
Apostolic Succession in the First Two Centuries of the Church (London: Lutterworth Press,
1953), pp. 95-97.
3
See E. Glenn Hinson, "Evidence of Essene Influence in Roman Christianity: An Inquiry,"
Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference of Patristics Studes (Oxford: Pergamon
Press, 1981).
4
See E. Glenn Hinson, The Evangelizing of the Roman Empire (Macon, Ga.: Mercer Univer
sity Press, 1981).
6
Did, 15.1-2.
*Ep. 62.14; ANF.V, 362.
7
On Baptism, 1.1.
8
On the Priesthood, 3.4; NPNF 1 , IX, 46.
9
Ibid.
10
Ibid., 3.5; NPNF 1 , IX, 47.
II
Ibid., 3.6; NPNF 1 , IX, 47.
Ibid., 2.2; 6.1ff.
1S
Geoffrey Chaucer, The Canterbury Tales (London: Oxford University Press, 1386-9; reprin
ted 1965), pp. 13f.
495
14
Lanercost Chronicle, p. 158, in Life in the Middle Ages, trans, and ed. G. G. Coulton (Cam-
bridge: University Press, 1967), 1,54-55.
14
Ratisbon Codex, 54; cited by Ignatius von Dllinger, Beitrge zur Sektengeschichte des
Mittelalters (2 vols.; Mnchen: C. H. Beck, 1890), II, 308f.
1
Cod. Wirceburg, 190 fol.; XII; XVI; in Dllinger, II, 328-9.
17
Alan de Insuha, Against Heresies, 2.8; PL, 210, col. 385.
1
The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, in Luther's Works (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
1959), XXXVI, 112.
19
Institutes of the Christian Religion, 4.13.16; "Library of Christian Classics" (Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1960), XXXI, 67.
* A Confession (1533-1536), "Library of Christian Classics" (Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1957), XXV, 207f.
M
Ibid., p. 217.
n
Dietrich Philips, The Church of God (ca. 1560), LCC, XXV, 240-241.
22
"Library of Christian Classics" (Philadelphia: Westminister Press, 1966), XXVI, 23.
24
Arts. 25, 26; in Baptist Confessions of Faith, ed. William L. Lumpkin (Philadelphia: Judson
Press, 1959), p. 109.
26
Art. 36; Lumpkin, p. 166.
26 William C. Braithwaite, The Second Period Of Quakerism (London: Macmillan & Co.,
1919), p. 543.
27
See The Apostolic Ministry, ed. Kenneth E. Kirk (London: Hodder & Stoughton Ltd. 1946.)
A. G. Hebert, Apostle and Bishop (New York: Seabury Press, 1963), pp. 148-149.
29
A Plan of Union for the Church of Christ Uniting (Princeton, N.J.: Consultation on Church
Union, 1970), pp. 44-45.
* See the article in this issue by Leon McBeth.
S1
See Paul K. Jewett, The Ordination of Women (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1980), for a statement of this argument and a reply.
22
See Ordination of Women in Ecumenical Perspective, ed. Constance F. Parvey, "Faith and
Order Paper," No. 105 (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1980).
" Clyde Jackson, "How Do I Become Un-Ordained?" Baptist Program, March, 1972.
M
"The Open Meeting," Baptist Program, July-August, 1979.
496
^ s
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
About ATLAS:

(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
PRIESTHOOD AS A SACRAMENT
By BISHOP ATHENAGORAS
In its particular aspect Christian Priesthood is one of the sacraments

by means of which the gift of priesthood is transmitted and perpet-
uated. In the Orthodox doctrinal books and manuals, Priesthood is
defined as the Sacrament in which by the imposition of the hands upon
the head of the elected man, and the prayer that the ordaining canonical
bishop offers, the Divine Grace descends to sanctify and to place the
candidate in the fellowship of service, raising him in that degree he
had been elected for, that is, to that of a Bishop, of a Priest, or of a
Deacon. One may say that Priesthood is the Sacrament of Sacraments,
for by it the redemptive mission of Christ is perpetuated. The world
receives the servants of its redemption in the set-aside and consecrated
persons who are the only ones entitled to minister validly the word of
God and transmit the gifts of salvation through the Sacraments. They
are the ambassadors of Christ, empowered with His own authority to
teach the faith, to forgive, to heal, to baptize, to consecrate the people,
and in the name of the Church, to offer the sacrifice of the Holy
Eucharist for the glory of God and the salvation of the world.
It has been stated that the Bible is the only authoritative source
where we may study the historical aspects and the Divine institution
of the Sacrament of Priesthood. According to Biblical testimony, man
made in the image and likeness of the Holy God manifest holy char-
acteristics. Man is the holiest among all the visible beings, a set-aside
and sacred creature. He is the priest of creation in whom and by whom
all things reflect and offer prayers and adoration to their maker. Priest-
hood is therefore something which man received with his own being
from God and which is revealed in the relation established between
man and God. It is also known from the same Biblical source that man
lost access to God because of sin and that therefore among other
things he lost his priestly consciousness and suffered considerable con-
fusion. After the fall, all functions which are described in the annals
of history as worshipful and priestly are but nostalgic efforts to capture
what was lost, that is, communion with God. This longing, after many
centuries of tragic failures, was fully realized and reestablished as it
was in the beginning only when the Son of God became the Son of
Man and the Sons of Man became again Sons of God.
168
PRIESTHOOD AS A SACRAMENT 169
The motive behind this happy historical event is love on the part
of God and faith on the part of man.1 The love of God had never
been revealed in its infinite magnitude, as when God the Son came
down to empty Himself within the limits of our nature and to become
one of us and suffer in order to redeem us and die in order to reestab-
lish us in our former glorious state of the Sonship in God.2 And the
faith of man had never taken such an unmistakable direction; it had
never reached such a degree of development and perfection; it had
never revealed its God-given dimensions and fullness, as when man
confessed Jesus the Son of the Living God, the light and the Saviour
of the world.3
This motive of love and faith has made the Church the center of
Divine and Human encounter, a Divine and Human entity, the mysti-
cal Body of Christ, destined to perpetuate on earth His saving mission,
His life and teachings.. The first human person whose faith met the
love of God was the all-holy Mother of God, Mary Ever-Virgin, whose
example of the rightly directed faith will inspire till the end of time
all the faithful followers of her Divine Son. In her person we have
the first member of the Church, the first human being restored to
salvation and complete communion with God, whose piety became
the source of Christian Tradition which motivates the life, worship,
and doctrines of the Church.
Next to the Mother of Christ, come the twelve Apostles. They were
called and instructed by Christ to become His ambassadors and share
in His life as members of His mystical Body, the Church, where man
may meet God and achieve salvation. The twelve received from Christ
all that He had received from the Father.4 Therefore, as the Son in
his incarnate state had free and continuous access to the Father, so also
His Apostles were given the privilege to communicate with the Father
and seek salvation through the Son for those who had accepted them
as Apostles and preachers of the Gospel precisely as they had accepted
the Son.5
Endowed with such powers and authority and enriched with the
Holy Spirit, who was sent to them from Christ to guide and remind
them of all that they were taught, the Twelve Apostles, the sanctified
priests of the New Covenant, undertook their holy mission with firm
faith and determination and went all over the earth to preach, to bap-
1
John 3:14-17.
2
Philip. 2:5-11.
3
Mark 9:24; John 6:69, 9:38, 20:28.
4
John 17:8-22.
5
John 17:20.
170 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
tize, to sanctify, and to guide and shepherd the people of God. Through
their labors the Church expanded and became universal, the One, Holy
Catholic and Apostolic Church, the Human and Divine Organism, the
dwelling place of the Paraclete, the center and source of Grace, where
6
man is incorporated in the Body of Christ and thus achieves salvation.
In the institution of this Apostolic office by Christ, we see the
institution of the Sacrament of Christian Priesthood, the transmission
of the saving gift which is not bestowed to be kept exclusively within
the limits of the physical lives of the Apostles but to be freely trans
mitted to others and thus to be perpetuated, for it was Christ who
promised to be with His faithful all the days of their life, till the end
of time.7 The Apostles never thought that their office would be ended
with themselves at the time that they would stop functioning. Just the
opposite is true. They acted immediately to transmit their gift. They
saw their function continued by those whom they elected and ordained.
We witness this fact in their prayer and election of St. Matthias, in the
election of the seven deacons to undertake administrational duties, in
the ordinations of St. Paul and St. Barnabas, in the ordination of St.
Timothy by St. Paul, in the succession of St. Peter by St. Ignatius, of
St John by St. Polycarp, and so on, till today the same principle of
transmission or succession of Priesthood governs the life of the Church.
Thus the saving mission of Christ, His life and work, is perpetuated.8
The time at which Christ instituted the Sacrament of Priesthood
is a question discussed and not yet answered in the same way by all
scholars. One, however, may distinguish in the New Testament three
periods in the preparation of the Twelve for the Apostolic Office. The
first period includes their election "Follow me," their instruction
and mission with the Seventy to preach and heal and cast out demons.
This period of election, instruction, and service may be taken as identi-'
9
cal with the Diaconate of the Apostles. The second period seems to
start with the return of the Twelve Apostles from their first mission.
It includes their recommission and further instruction, the washing of
their feet at the Last Supper and the Dominical command to repeat the
Eucharistie Sacrifice, "Do this in remembrance of me." This period
may be taken as the time of the "Presbyterate" of the Twelve
Apostles.10 The third period includes the prayer of Christ for their
sanctification, unity and endurance, the power to forgive, the command
John 14:26.
7
Romans 8:11; Ephes. 1:23; I Tim. 3:15.
8
Matthew 28:19-20; Acts 6:6, 13:2-3, 20:28.
9
Matthew 4:18-22.
10
Mark 3:14-19; Luke 9:1-2, 10:1-2.
to go all over the world and preach and baptize and shepherd the
people, and finally the descent of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pente
cost. During this period the Twelve received the gift of the Christian
Priesthood in its fullness and completeness, which later was identified
with the Episcopate.11
Endued with the promised power from above,12 each of the Twelve
Apostles went to his allotted place to exercise in full measure his sav
ing priesthood. As we learn from the New Testament, they did not
limit the function of their office to teaching and healing alone. In
addition they exercised their authority in preparing and raising others
to their own office to work under their guidance and to succeed them
when the time came. As St. Clement of Rome wrote:
.13 After
prayer and fasting, and after placing their hands upon the heads of
their instructed disciples, they performed upon them the Sacrament of
Priesthood, transmitting to them one of the three degrees for the func
tions of which they prepared them. In this way the servants of redemp
tion were multiplied and till today in the same way they are given to
the Church.
Because of the fact that the gift of Priesthood was transmitted by
the imposition of hands, , the Sacrament is known as
, which means "extension of the hand." This was the prac
tice of the Apostles, and whatever they did was the practice of Christ.
They must have seen their Master heal ailing people by laying His hands
upon them. 14 They must have known similar practices from the Old
Testament. Moses, for example, was directed by God to stretch his
hand that the power he had received might energize miracles. Some
thing similar took place in the consecration of the seventy presbyters
who were elected by the people to assist Moses. They were raised to
their office by the transference upon them of the Spirit that was upon
Moses. Thus, too, Aaron was consecrated High Priest. Moses, his
brother, invested him and anointed his head with oil. Also, it was by
ordination that Moses, according to Divine direction, had transferred
his own authority and glory upon Joshua, the son of Naue, to become
his successor.15 It is, therefore, evident that transference of authority
and of spiritual gifts by the laying of hands was an ancient tradition,
practiced by Christ Himself. Following this tradition, the Twelve, by
n Matthew 10:1-8; Luke 9:23-27, 18:28-34, 22:19; John 6:66, 13:4-6.

12
John 16, 17; Matthew 28:18; Luke 24:49; Acts 2:1-4.
is Migne, P.G., vol. I, 206.
4
1 Matthew 8:15, 9:29; Luke 5:13.
i Genesis 48:13-14; Exodus 7:9,17:11, 27:18-20.
placing their hands had raised their successors to the dignity of Priest
hood. St. Paul who had elevated Timothy to the Apostolic Office and
appointed him Bishop of Ephesus wrote to him: "Neglect not the gift
that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy with the laying on
of the hands of the presbytery. Stir up the gift of God which is in thee
by the putting on of my hands." 1 6 In the Book of Acts we read that
St. Paul and St Barnabas had ordained with the same manner Pres
byters to govern the churches in Asia Minor. In the same manner
Deacons were also ordained to undertake their tasks.17 This venerable
tradition was the practice from the beginning, as we see it today when
the Sacrament of Priesthood is performed, and one may substantiate
this from the writings of the Apostles. It is, however, sufficient for
our purpose to point out here the testimony of St. Basil the Great,
whose authority as an interpreter of the Holy Bible and the Christian
Tradition is well established. He wrote to Amphilochius of Iconium:
< :
. . . the ones who have departed first have been ordained by the
Fathers. Ordained by them, they obtained the spiritual gift/' 18
On the basis of this testimony, we may conclude that Priesthood,
as an intrinsic characteristic of man, distorted and lost because of sin,
was reestablished in Christ the True God and True Man. He Himself
raised the Priesthood in that awe-inspiring Sacrament by which His
mission is continued; He Himself is given to the people; His Gospel is
delivered and interpreted validly; His authority is exercised by His
ambassadors, the Apostles, and those who were raised by ordination
in the historical continuity of succession to the Apostolic Office.
As in all the other Sacraments so in the Sacrament of Priesthood,
we distinguish a twofold nature of elements, visible or outward and
invisible or inward. The visible or outward elements of Priesthood
comprise the election, the imposition of hands by the Bishop, and the
Service itself.
The election of the candidate for Priesthood by the people is an
outward element necessary for the canonical ordination. It suffices here
to mention the sixth canon of the Fourth Ecumenical Council which
presupposes the election of the candidates and forbids ordinations that
are not authorized by the people. First, there must be the people's re
quest for a clergyman to serve in a church, a chapel, or even in a
monastic community. Ordinations not requested by the people are
called at large () and are inoperative. This is a reproach
I Timothy 4:14; II Timothy 1:6.

17 Acts 6:6, 14:23.
18
St. Nicodemus, (Athens, 1841), p. 350. Cf. The Rudder,
p. 744. Cf. F. Heiler, Urktrche und Ostkirche (Mnchen, 1937), pp. 274-275.
of the Bishop who is responsible for such an ordination. 19 Therefore,

the people's consent before ordination and the confirmative exclamation
AXIOS afterwards comprise a visible element of the Sacrament that is
of scriptural and of canonical origin. Usually our theologians do not
include the people's participation among the visible elements of the
Sacrament,20 perhaps because they take it for granted that the laity's
consent is prearranged. Nevertheless, since according to Orthodox tra
dition the faithful enjoy participation in the worship and the adminis
tration of the Church, this element must be numbered among the
visible elements of the Sacrament.
The imposition of the hands, , is another indispensable

outward element of the Sacrament. As we have already seen, the trans
mission of authority and of spiritual power and the blessing of the
people by the imposition of the hands was common Jewish custom.21
The Apostles were nurtured in the Jewish practices, and they had often
seen their Lord and Master heal, strengthen, and transmit power by
laying His hands upon the people. They were to do the same thing
when the time came to transmit from the Spirit the power and authority
they had received for the work of the ministry.
Here we must draw a line of distinction between the terms -

, placing the hand, and , ordination. While both in
dicate imposition of hands, only the latter signifies the act by which
the gift of Priesthood is transmitted. The former always takes place
outside the Sanctuary ( ) in various services when the
Bishop, by imposing his hand on a layman, inducts him into one of the
lesser offices, as that of Acolyte, Reader, Cantor, or Subdeacon. The
same term is used when honorary titles and offices are conferred by
the Bishop on Deacons and Priests, such as an Archdeacon, Sakellarios,
Ecnomos, Protopresbyter, Archimandrite, Hegoumenos. The first
three titles are conferred only upon those of the clergy who belong to
the secular order. The rest are conferred upon celibate or monastic
priests.
19
Milash-Apostolopoulos, (Athens, 1906), p. 383.
, p. 106. Acts 14:23.
20
K. I. Diobouniotes, ' '
(Athens, 1912), p. 153. The author does not consider the laity's consent as an
outward element. Messoloras, however, considers the whole service together with
the Divine Liturgy as an indispensable visible element. I. Messoloras,
(Athens, 1883), II, 327-328. Cf. Frank Gavin, Some Aspects of Contempo
rary Orthodox Thought (New York, 1923), p. 323.
21
Genesis 48:13-14.
The invocation is indispensable as an outward element of the Sac

rament. Christ told His disciples to seek and they should receive.22
When humans seek something from God, they pray and invoke Divine
assistance. Thus, the praying Church seeks by the invocation, which
the Bishop pronounces in her name, the gift of Priesthood to be be
stowed upon her eligible candidate for the work of the ministry.
Following the example of the Apostles, who after prayer and the
imposition of their hands bestowed the gift of the Priesthood upon
their disciples, the Bishops as successors of the Apostles, perform the
same act in the name of the Church. They invoke Divine Grace to
ordain the candidates into one of the three degrees of Christian Priest
hood. The preface of this invocation is always the same, while the
content of the remaining prayers varies according to the degree in
which one is raised: ' T h e Divine Grace, ever healing the weak and
replenishing the wanting, ordains the devout sub-deacon [name]
Deacon; the devout Deacon [name] Presbyter; the devout Presbyter
[name] Bishop. Let us therefore pray for him that the Grace of the
All-Holy Spirit may come upon him. ,,
The privilege of ordaining the clergy belongs only to the Bishops,
for they have replaced the Apostles in both their office and functions.
As the Apostles were endowed with the fullness of Christian Priest
hood, so are the Bishops. They are endued with the same authority;
they have received the gift of Priesthood in the same measure as the
Apostles. Their office, as St. Epiphanius remarks, is a generative one. 2S
It begets fathers, the priests. Both the Priests and the Presbyters, how
ever, who have no right to ordain, beget children for the Church
through Baptism which they perform. Deacons too have no right to
perform ordinations. Their duty is to assist the Bishops and Priests
both in worship and in all their duties as pastors and teachers of the
24
Church. According to Holy Tradition described in the canons of the
Ecumenical Councils, while one Bishop may ordain one deacon and one
priest, for the ordination of a Bishop three Bishops are needed. In
26
unfavorable circumstances, at least two Bishops must participate.
Among other reasons for this ordinance, we refer to the following:
One is the dignity of the Episcopal Office which possesses the fullness
of Christian Priesthood; a second one is the canonical limitation in
the administrative jurisdiction of a Bishop; and finally, the presence
and participation of other Bishops in the election and ordination of a
Bishop confirm the candidate's canonical election and eligibility.
22 John 16:23-24.
23 St. Epiphanius, . Migne, P.G., vol. 42, 508.
24 Apostolic Constitution, Book 3, 20. Migne, P.G., I, 804.
25 First Ecumenical Council, 4th Canon. , p. 71.
That the Apostles and their successors were conscious of being

endowed with a special "charisma" or gift of great scope and signifi
cance is evident not only from the testimony of the New Testament
but also from the Holy Fathers, the interpreters and guardians of the
Sacred Christian Tradition. The recipients of this gift are called by
St. Paul servants of Christ, stewards of the mysteries of God, ministers
of reconciliation, ambassadors of God unto whom Christ had en
trusted the great cause of salvation to mankind.26 Because of the im
portance of this gift, St. Paul admonishes St. Timothy, the Bishop of
Ephesus, to honor "the gift" which he had received by ordination. At
the same time St. Timothy is instructed not to impart it to others
without the proper preparation and instruction. This gift is the in
visible element of the Sacrament of Priesthood, the characteristic of all
who have been elected and consecrated to enter the fellowship of
service. Termed by the Fourth Ecumenical Council "unventible
grace,"27 this inward element is what makes the common man a Priest
of Christ, qualified to serve and offer on the Altar the bloodless sac
rifice of the Eucharist. He is now prepared to regenerate the people in
baptism and strengthen their faith with the sevenfold gift of the Holy
Spirit in the Sacrament of Chrismation; to forgive the people's sins in
the Sacrament of Confession; to heal their spiritual and bodily infirmi
ties in the Sacrament of Holy Unction; and to bless their conjugal bond
in the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. He is now able to offer thanks
when children are born into this world and to pray for the repose of
those who are called to continue their existence in the world beyond.
In his analysis of the priestly prerogatives, St. John Chrysostom con
siders the recipients of the gift of Priesthood the only persons qualified
to exercise authority both on Earth and in heaven: "For though living
on earth they are permitted to govern heavenly things; such authority
neither Angels nor Archangels were given by God."28 St. Gregory of
Nyssa, meditating upon the awesome and sanctifying characteristics
this gift effects upon its recipients, says that Priesthood "makes the
priest venerable and honorable, and by the new blessings bestowed upon
him, separated from the community of men. Only yesterday, he was
one of the many, a member of the congregation, and now he suddenly
becomes leader, president, teacher of righteousness, guide in hidden
mysteries; and this he does without being at all changed in body or
form; but while continuing to be in all appearance the man he was
26 I Corinthians 4 : 1 ; II Corinthians 5:18-20; Titus 1:7; I Peter 4:10-11.

27
Fourth Ecumenical Council, 2nd Canon. , p. 104.
28 St. John Chrysostom, , Migne, P.G., 48, 643.
before, by some unseen power and grace, he is now transformed in

respect to his unseen soul." 29
These ministrations, by means of which the priest sanctifies the
people, are in no way hindered by moral failures. The Donatists of old
and some contemporary Protestants seem to believe that the personal
failures of the priest impede his priestly functions; he who really sac
rifices is not the visible servant of the New Covenant but Christ in the
totality of His mystical Body, the Church. 30 It is only in the name and
according to the teachings and faith and moral perfection of the Church
that the priest is able to minister the Divine Mysteries. For the Church,
being the Bride of Christ, is purity and moral perfection itself.31 What
ever is said and offered in the name of the Church is accepted by God
and is enriched with the power of the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete who
dwells in the Church, regardless of the worthiness or unworthiness,
the faithfulness or unfaithfulness of the person who ministers the
Sacraments. As long as he does what is the intention of the Church,
as long as he says what is in the mind of the Church, as long as he is
canonically ordained, the sanctifying power is not by his imperfections
prevented from coming upon the people and their offerings.
Knowing that the Church has derived this view on Priesthood from
explicit and implicit Scriptural authority, the Holy Fathers defended
it vigorously. In their writings they proved by many examples that at
any time when we consider the effect of the Sacrament as depending
upon the worthiness or the unworthiness of the priest, we place the
very scope and purpose of salvation on uncertainty and doubt. Let us
examine for a moment the lives of the Patriarchs of the Old Testament,
and we shall find that Abraham and Jacob and Isaac were not holy
and spotless persons as one might expect them to be. Their unworthi
ness and failures were unable to prevent God from utilizing them as
servants for His purpose. Neither Moses nor Aaron, King David the
Prophet nor Solomon the Wise, Jonah nor Saul, were men of insig
32
nificant shortcomings. Nevertheless, they were elected to serve the
Holy Purpose of God and instruct the people to worship the true God.
Thus they contributed in the preparation of humanity to meet its
Redeemer.
Likewise the Priests of the New Testament, serving the Holiness
of God as persons consecrated to minister the saving mysteries of
Christ, hinder in no way with their shortcomings the Divine Grace to
29
St. Gregory of Nyssa, Etc , Migne, P.G., 46, 581.
3
<>Matthew 23:2-3; John 1:33, 4:2; I Corinth. 3:2; Philip. 2:3.
31
Ephesians 5:25-27.
32
Genesis 12:12-15, 27:15-27; Exodus 32:24; Deuteronomy 34:4.
effect and complete the Sacraments. It was Christ who told the people
and His disciples not to do what the Pharisees were doing but to abide
by their recommendations.33 In the New Testament we read that the
Apostles performed baptisms. But who was the baptizer? St. John the
Baptist gives the answer: "The Son of God. , , S 4 St. Cyril of Jerusalem
offers the same answer in a different way: "The Grace is given not
from men but from God through men. Approach the minister of Bap
tism, but approaching think not of the face of him thou seeth, but re
member the Holy Ghost of whom we are now speaking. For He is
present in readiness to seal the soul and shall give thee the seal." 35
St. Isidore of Pelussium (A.D. 450) writes: "In no way is one harmed
who receives the mysteries from the priest who seems to be unworthy,
for the Holy Mysteries are not defiled even though the priest exceeds
all other men in sinfulness.,,3e St. Augustine defended the same view
in a beautiful way: "If the minister is righteous, I reckon him with the
righteous ministers. What does Paul say? have planted, Apollo
watered, but God gave the increase. Neither is he that planteth any
thing, nor he that watereth. But God who giveth the increase/ But he
who is a proud minister is reckoned with the devil; but the gift of
Christ is not contaminated. . . . For the spiritual virtue of the Sacra
ment is like the light: by those who are to be enlightened, it is received
pure and though it passes through the impure it is not stained. Let
ministers be by all means righteous and seek not their own glory." 37
In the time of St. Augustine, the Donatists were teaching that the
conscience of the recipient is washed by the conscience of the giver of
the Sacrament. St. Augustine in a lengthy answer defending the Ortho
dox view said: "When something is given that is of God, it is holy
even by conscience which is not holy and certainly it is beyond the
power of the recipient to discern whether the said conscience is holy
or not. But that which is given he can discern with clearness. That
which is known to Him who is ever Holy is received with perfect safety
whatever be the character of the minister at whose hands it is re
ceived."38 St. Augustine also remarks that "the Sacraments are holy
33
Matthew 23:2.
34
John 1:33-34.
35
St. Cyril of Jerusalem, , Migne, P.G., 33, 1009.
Cf. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. 7, 132.
36
Letters, Migne, P.G., vol. 78, 340 and 1000.
37
I Corinthians 3:6-7. St. Augustine, On the Gospel of St. John, tractate
14. Nicene and Post-Nicene Pothers, vol. 7, 36-37.
38
St. Augustine, Contra Litteras Patiliani Donatista, Book 3, chap. 8-9.
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4, 600-601. See also pp. 442-443.
through Him to whom they belong; but when taken in hand worthily
they bring reward; when unworthily, judgment. And although the men
are not the ones who take in hand the Sacrament of God worthily or
unworthily, yet that which is taken in hand, whether worthily or un-
worthily, is the same so that it does not become better or worse in
itself, but only turns to the life or death of those who handle it in either
way."39 St. John Chrysostom interprets the same view in his 8th Homily
on the First Corinthians. He says: "For it may be that rulers are wicked
and polluted and their subjects good and virtuous; that laymen may live
in piety and priests in wickedness; and there cannot be either baptism
or the Body of Christ or oblation, through such if in every instance
grace required merit. But as it is, God works even by unworthy per-
sons and in no respect is the grace of baptism damaged by the conduct
of the priest."40 Perhaps the most convincing of all the examples are
those offered by St. Gregory Nazianzen. In his beautiful oration on
Baptism, he instructs the people of Constantinople to make no dis-
tinction on the ministers of baptism and never to postpone their bap-
tism till they find the holiest priest or one of a noble birth:
"Do not say, Bishop shall baptize me, and he of Jerusalem,
and he of a noble birth, for it would be a sad thing for my
nobility to be insulted by being baptized by a man of no fam-
ily. . . . Do not ask for credentials . . . for another is his judge
and the examiner. To thee let every one be trustworthy for
purification, only not of those who have openly been con-
demned and not a stranger to the Church. Do not judge your
judges, you who need healing, and do not make nice distinc-
tions about the rank of those who shall cleanse you. One may
be higher than the other or lower than the other, but all are
higher than you. Look at it this way. One may be golden,
another iron, but both rings have engraved on them the same
royal image. And thus when they impress the wax, what dif-
ference is there between the seal of the one and that of the
other? None. And so any one can be your baptizer; for
though one may excel another in his life, yet the grace of
baptism is the same, and one may be your consecrator who is
formed in the same faith."41
This spiritual endowment and dignity, described by the Saints as
effected upon those who have received the gift of Priesthood, is not
temporary, for what is given by God is not taken away. It will remain
39
40
Letters, Nicene and Post-Nicene, vol. 4, 554.
41
Migne, P.G., vol. 61, 60.
St. Gregory Nazianzen, Migne, P.G., vol. 36, ch. 26.
forever. "The gifts of and the calling of God" are irrevocable, as God
Himself remains unchanged and unrepented. 42 As the baptized person
becomes and remains a Christian forever, so the ordained Christian
becomes and remains a priest forever. With this in mind, the Church
has forbidden the clergy to abandon their sacred duties and undertake
responsibilities fit for the laity. All who have been raised to the dignity
of Priesthood should remain within the fellowship of service and honor
their calling and the gift that Christ through His Church has bestowed
upon them. No one, therefore, is permitted to take lightly his Priest
hood and play, so to speak, with God. " N o one having put his hand
to the plough and looking back is for the kingdom of God/' 4 3
The Church has also forbidden the repetition of the ordination of
those of the clergy who have fallen or those who, after their deposition,
are reinstated in the service of the Church. "It is not permissible for
persons to be rebaptized or to be reordained." 44 Defending this prac
tice of the Church against the Donatists, St. Augustine maintained that
there is absolutely no reason to believe that a man can lose his baptism.
Likewise, the priest cannot lose his right to perform it, for both are
mysteries and both are performed upon man: the one at baptism, the
other at ordination.
This question has been discussed at length by many authors. There
are those who consider that the Sacrament of Priesthood is unrepeatable
for the same degree and person, because ordination leaves an indelible
imprint upon the soul of the recipient. This opinion, expounded by
St. Augustine, has been accepted officially by the Roman Church and
by some of our Orthodox theologians.45 St. Nicodemus the Athonite,
the great canonist of the Orthodox Church, seems, however, to disagree
with this opinion. For him Baptism is not repeatable since it typifies the
death of Christ. Likewise Priesthood is not repeatable since it typifies
the unrepeated entrance of Christ, the God-Man, into the Holy of
Holies. He remains there, forever, interceding for us. Christ will be
eternally our High Priest, and the gift of Priesthood once acquired
46
cannot be abandoned and lost.
42
Romans 11:29.
43
Luke 9:62. Fourth Ecumenical Council, 7th canon, , p. 107.
44
Council of Carthage, canon 57, , p. 289. Cf. The Rudder, p. 637.
Canon 68th of the Apostles, , p. 50.
45
Dositheos Patriarch of Jerusalem, Confession of Faith in John Carmiris,
'
(Athens, 1948), 2, 760. . Boulgaris, ' (Athens, 1940), pp.
31-33.
4
, p. 50, note 2.
Theologians may accept either of these two views. However, the

fact remains that the Sacrament of Priesthood is unrepeatable. Ac
cording to the Orthodox practice, when Deacons or Priests or Bishops
are deposed or unfrocked, for reasons judged solely by the Church,
and recalled to duty or forgiven, they are not re-ordained in order to
exercise again their ministry. Such a fact means that the gift of the
Priesthood is not taken away by the punishment of deposition (-
), but it remains inactive till the Church decides otherwise. This
is true because of the authority the Church exercises as the steward
and dispenser of grace.
The same criterion seems to govern the Orthodox practice of ordi
nation outside the Church. For example, the ordinations of heretics
are repeated, while those of schismatics are not. In a word, when a
candidate is ordained by an heretical Bishop and later wants to enter
the Orthodox Church and requests the right to exercise his Priesthood,
he will be permitted to do so only when an Orthodox Bishop ordains
him anew. In the case of a schismatic, the practice is different. In order
to be admitted into the Orthodox Church as a priest, a schismatic must
deny his former allegiance and errors; then after receiving the Sacra
ment of Holy Chrism, he will be permitted to exercise his priestly duties
as a clergyman of the Church.
We must notice that this practice is not always kept. The Church,
exercising her economy and the principle of clemency or dispensation
(), shows her motherly love and sometimes overlooks the dis
tinctions set above, because of circumstances judged by herself as de
manding leniency. In this way, the Church has accepted Roman
Catholic ordinations as valid and admitted the entrance of those
requesting the right to exercise their priesthood only after the renuncia
tion of their errors. Thus the Patriarchate of Constantinople accepted
the Latin priest Kallinikos Delikanis without re-ordination. After his
elevation to the Metropolitan title of Caesaria during the year 1933,
he died in Constantinople. Also, in 1840, Uniate Bishops were accepted
by the Russian Church. In 1912 the Church of Antioch accepted the
Jacobite Monophysite Bishop Peter and his priests without re-
ordination. 47 Also a few years ago the Church of Constantinople ac
cepted Uniate priests of America and under the canonical jurisdiction
of the Greek Archdiocese of North and South America, one of them,
4
? , (Alexandria, 1912), vol. 4, 312. I. Carmiris, -
': (Athens, 1954), p. 27. C.
Androutsos, , p. 395. On the question of Economy see Hamilcar
Alivizatos, (Athens, 1949) pp. 46-47. See also Jerome Cotsonis,
(Athens, 1957), p. 17.
Orestes Chornock, was ordained as Bishop in charge of the Carpatho-

Russian congregations of America.
From among the Protestant clergy none has as yet been accepted
to exercise priestly authority and duties without re-ordination. Even
those ordained within the Anglican Communion are not accepted with-
out re-ordination, perhaps because the validity of Anglican Orders is a
question not unanimously answered by the Orthodox Church.
Our findings, based on Biblical and Traditional testimony, thus
prove:
1. That a gift is imparted upon those who are elected and ordained
to enter the fellowship of Service.
2. That this gift was not upon them before their ordination.
3. That the fullness of this gift rests only upon the Bishops as the
successors of the Apostles.
4. That both the priests and deacons possess the gift in a lesser
measure according to the service they are called to do.
5. That this gift is the inward or invisible element of the Sacrament
of Priesthood.
6. That this gift will remain forever with its recipient, since the
Sacrament of Priesthood as well as that of Baptism is not repeatable for
the same degree and person.
HOLY CROSS
GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL SCHOOL
^ s
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
About ATLAS:

(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American

Seminar 6. Material Auxiliar

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Seminar 6. Material Auxiliar

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

St Cyril on the Priesthood of Christ

and the Old Testament

Jonathan Douglas Hicks, PhD

Abstract: Cyril 0 / Alexandria, renowned for his germinal work in

rom the first years ofCyril of Alexandrias episeopal tenure - and

An earlier version o f this text was presentedfor St Andrews Patristic Symposium

PHRONEMA, VOL. 30(1), 2015, 91-113

In the present study, I follow one of these themes: foe priesthood of

In some quarters, Cyrils soteriology has been described almost

in The Theology o fS t Cyril ofAlexandria: A Critical Appreciation, ed. Thnmas

Word accomplishes our salvation only by uniting a humanity that is

These kinds of correctives are salutary ones. They have opened

3 Foravery successful statement o f this case, see Daniel Keating, TheAppropriation

In this study, I seek to broaden toe conclusions of Welch and

The argument proceeds as follows: in toe first section I take a

rather try to understand what kinds of acidities Cyril is thinking of

The ?riestly Work of Christ

Cyrils reflections on the priestly ministry of Christ in the Old Testament

St Cyril draws on numerous scriptural themes related to the priesthood.

Most often, Cyril draws tlris connection through actual

As foe above indicates, foe priestly work ofChrist is directed - at

10 De ador. 1 (PG 68, 200A).

Cyrils reflections on the priestly garments of the Old Testament

The L evitin-m aterial offers opportunity for parallel reflections.

15 Deador. 10(PG 68, 673BD).

We may speak then of Cyrils reflection on the priestly mediation

Offering True Worship

Christ is the high priest who proffers himself as the atoning

21 De ador. 15( P G68 , 9 8 9 D9 9 2 A).

the God and F a th e r .W h a t w^^ only partially actualised in the priests

Cyril explores another dimension of this self-offering of the Son

24 Comm. Hagg. 6-5: ( Fusey, vol. 2, 250 FC 124: 67).

Cyrils grasp on this point is instructive. For in the discussion of

Christ, then, as the truly great high priest, offers himself as a

32 Deador. 16(PG 69, 1016B).

Christs priesthood: as great high priest, Christ is the true worshipper of

Aaron imitates Christ himself, the innocent and holy high

The clearly anti-subordinationist character of Cyrils doctrine of

38 Glaph. Ex. 3 (PG 69,516B).

Through whom we know and are known

We conclude this section on the priestly ministry of the Saviour by

Reflecting once again on the priestly apparel, St Cyril writes:

[Moses commanded] that there he inserted with great skill into

44 De ador. 12 (785AB), echoing Isaiah 8:18.

45 Comm. Hos. 3:4-5 (Pusey, V1. 1, 8 1; F C 5 4 ( The passage to whieh Cyril is

Early in On Adoration, Cyril will speak of the census conducted

Fearl is a sign o f heaven upon the shoulder-pieee with the register

The priestly work of Christ is brought to a climax here, as Cyril gathers

In su m m a ry of this final aspect ofthe priestly ministry of Christ

The Friesthood and the !nearnatinn

It is a consistent feature of Cyrils meditation on the priesthood of

As these passages suggest, the mediating function of the priest

56 Glaph. Gen. 2 (PG 69, 100A).

62 On the Sons election to the priesthood, see De ador. 9(613D-616A), 10(676AB)

The anti-subordinationist character of Cyrils earliest writings

The Son was involved in magnifying toe knowledge ofthe Trinity

One could easily multiply examples of this kind of language

Reflecting on the Aaronic blessing-which was to serve as the paradigmatic

64 Comm. Zech. 37-6( Pusey, vol. 2, 318-319; FC 124: 119-120).

The above examples should suffice to illustrate that there is a

? De ador. 11 (PG 68, 772CD).

It is in this sense that the work of the Son in the Incarnation - at

Since he is always and by nature mercifol, the (Fathers) Only-

The antecedent basis of the priesthood of Christ is rooted in the very