INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION From the Diakonia of Christ to the Diakonia of the Apostles *

(2002) FOREWORD The study on the subject of the diaconate was originally undertaken by the International Theological Commission in its preceding quinquennium (1992-1997). The work was carried out by a subcommission, devoted to the analysis of certain ecclesiological questions, presided over by Mgr. Max Thurian and composed of the following members: H.E. Mgr. Christoph Schönborn OP, H.E. Mgr. Joseph Osei-Bonsu, Rev. Charles Acton, Mgr. Giuseppe Colombo, Mgr. Joseph Doré PSS, Prof. Gösta Hallonsten, Rev Father Stanislaw Nagy SCI, Rev. Henrique de Noronha Galvão. However, as this subcommission was not able to extend its work as far as the production of a text, the study was resumed in the course of the subsequent quinquennium, building on the work previously carried out. A new subcommission was formed in order to carry out the work, presided over by Rev. Henrique de Noronha Galvão and composed of Rev. Santiago del Cura Elena, Rev. Pierre Gaudette, Mgr. Roland Minnerath, Mgr. Gehrard Ludwig Müller, Mgr. Luis Antonio G. Tagle and Rev. Ladislaus Vanyo. General discussions on the subject took place in the course of numerous meetings of the subcommission, as well as during the plenary sessions of the Commission itself, held in Rome between 1998 and 2002. The current text was approved in forma specifica by unanimous vote of the Commission on 30th September 2002. It was then submitted to its President, Card. J. Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, who authorised its publication. INTRODUCTION The Second Vatican Council, with the aim of the aggiornamento of the Church, sought inspiration and resources in its origins and history in order to announce, and more effectively make present, the mystery of Jesus Christ. Among these riches of the Church are found the diaconate ministry, to which the texts of the New Testament bear witness, and which has rendered important services in the life of Christian communities, above all in the time of the ancient Church. Having fallen into decline during the Middle Ages, it eventually disappeared as a permanent ministry and only endured as a time of transition towards the presbyterate and episcopate. This has not altered the fact that, from Scholastic times to the present day, there has been interest in its theological meaning, especially with regards to the question of its sacramental value as a grade of Holy Orders. Following its restoration as an effective ministry, placed by the Vatican II at the disposal of the particular Churches, different receptive processes have been witnessed. Each Church has tried to become aware of the true reach of the Conciliar initiative. Taking into account the particular circumstances of ecclesial life in each context, variation according to country and continent, the ecclesial authorities continue to evaluate the opportunity or inopportunity of including the permanent diaconate in the reality of their communities. In this receptive process, some questions have arisen regarding the interpretation of both New Testament and historical data, the theological implications of the Conciliar decision and of the extensions which have been conferred on the ecclesial Magisterium. Furthermore, although the Council did not make a pronouncement on the feminine diaconal ministry, of which mention is found in the past, this must be studied in order to establish its ecclesial status and the current reality in which it could be accommodated examined. The International Theological Commission has examined these questions with the aim of clarifying them, through a greater knowledge of both historical and theological sources, as well as of the current life of the Church. While it is true that facts must be rigorously established by the historical method, their consideration does not become locus theologicus except in so far that this is carried out in the light of the sensus fidei. It is necessary to distinguish between that which can be identified as the essence of Tradition itself, from its origins, and regional variations or links to a particular era of this same Tradition [1]. From this perspective, it is essential to highlight the function of the interventions in the Church which pertain to the competence of the hierarchy, namely the decisions of Ecumenical Councils and the declarations of the Magisterium. Briefly, in order to arrive at properly theological conclusions efforts of discernment have to be made in the light of these interventions, allowing for the fact that knowledge of history and its generality have the inestimable advantage of making known the life of the Church, in a specific time and place, within whom there is always a truly human element and a truly divine element (LG, 8). Only faith is capable of distinguishing the action of the Spirit of God therein. Man, a material and spiritual being, both historical and transcendent, becomes the providential recipient of an opening of God in his Word made flesh and his Spirit who, being pneuma and dynamis, grants men the capacity to identify God, who communicates by words and signs, in historical phenomena. Precisely because He opens his mystery to the community of faith by his Word and his Spirit, God erects the Church as a community of witnesses, whose testimony emanates from Revelation and represents it. Dogma is the verbalisation of the Word who is God and was made flesh, according to the expression of the Church’s profession of faith, the response to divine Revelation. Scripture, which with Tradition is the supreme rule of faith (DV 21), presents us in living, frequently symbolic language, the mystery and mission of Christ; language which speculative theology especially tries to rigorously interpret. However, it cannot be forgotten that in all its forms, theological language always remains somewhat analogical, its ultimate criterion really residing its capacity to tell of Revelation. The regula fidei is the regula veritatis. The present investigation has remained attentive to the divergence which characterises the diaconate ministry and the course of the different historical periods and which even today animate the debate which it stirs. The reflection presented herein is founded on the living awareness of the gift made by Jesus Christ to his Church when he communicated to the Twelve a particular responsibility in fulfilling the mission which he himself had received from the Father. The Church has never been without the Spirit, who both enables the discovery of the riches which God has made available to her and continues to bear fresh witness of her faithfulness to the salvific project which He offers us in his Son. It is because of his condition as a servant, by his diaconate assumed in obedience to the Father and for the benefit of man as, according to Scripture and Tradition, Jesus Christ carried out the divine design of salvation. Only by starting from this primordial Christological fact can the vocation and mission of the diaconate in the Church, manifested in her ministries, be understood. In this light we initially ask about the historical and theological significance of the ministry of deacons in the course of the Church’s history and what the reasons for its disappearance were in order to finally ask about the extent of introducing an effective diaconal ministry at the service of the Christian community in the present day. CHAPTER I FROM THE DIAKONIA OF CHRIST TO THE DIAKONIA OF THE APOSTLES I. Diakonia of Christ and Christian Existence Through the incarnation of the Word who is God and by whom all was made (cf. Jn 1:1-18) the strangest revolution imaginable has come about. The Kyrios, Lord, becomes the diakonos, servant, of all. The Lord God comes out to meet us in his Servant Jesus Christ, the only Son of God (Rom 1:3), who, being in the "form of God", "did not see in the form of God a prize to be coveted, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave. Having become like men ... he abased himself and became obedient to death, even death on a cross" (Phil 2:6-8). The essence of being a Christian can thus be grasped in a Christological perspective. Christian existence is a sharing in the diakonia or service which God himself fulfilled in favour of mankind; it likewise leads to an understanding of the fulfilment of mankind. Being a Christian means following Christ's example in putting oneself at the service of others to the point of self-renunciation and self-giving, for love. Baptism confers this diakonein, power of service, on every Christian. Through it, by virtue of their participation in the diakonia, leiturgia and martyria, the service, worship and witness of the Church, Christians cooperate in Christ's own diakonia for the salvation of mankind. As members of the Body of Christ, all should become servants of one another, using the charisms which they have received for the building up of the Church and their brethren in faith and love: "If anyone claims to serve, let it be as by a command received from God" (1 Pet 4:11—12; cf. Rom 12:8; 1 Cor 12:5). This diakonia done to others by Christians can take the form of different expressions of fraternal charity, service to the physically or spiritually sick, to the needy, to prisoners (Mt 25); the help given to the Churches (Rom 15:25; 1 Tim 5:3—16); or different kinds of assistance given to Apostles, as can be seen in the case of the men and women collaborators of Saint Paul, who sends them his greetings (Rom 16:3—5; Phil 4:3). II. Diakonia of the Apostles Because he was the doulos, or slave, carrying out the Father's saving will in total obedience, Jesus Christ was made Lord of all creation. He made himself the instrument through which God's sovereignty was achieved, by giving his life: "The Son of Man has not come to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mk 10:45). In the same way, Jesus instituted the Twelve "to be his companions, and sent them out to preach, giving them the power to cast out demons" (Mk 3:14-15). In a way that was radically opposed to the lords and rulers of this world who abuse their power to oppress and exploit others, the disciple must be ready to become diakonos and doulos of all (Mk 10:42-43). Diakonein, to serve, is the essential characteristic of the Apostle's ministry. Apostles are collaborators and servants of God (cf. 1 Thess 3:2; 1 Cor 3:9; 2 Cor 6:1), "servants of Christ and witnesses of God's mysteries" (1 Cor 4:1). They are "ministers of a new covenant" (2 Cor 3:6) and ministers of the Gospel (cf. Col 1:23; Eph 3:6ff.), "servants of the word" (Acts 6:4). They are, in their function as Apostles, "ministers of the Church" in order to bring about the coming of the word of Christ in its fullness to believers (cf. Col 1:25), and to organise the building up of the Church, the Body of Christ, in love (cf. Eph 4:12). The Apostles become the servants of believers because of Christ, since it is not themselves whom they are proclaiming, but Christ Jesus the Lord (2 Cor 4:5). They are sent in the name of Christ, the word having been passed on to them so that they may proclaim it in the service of reconciliation. Through them, God himself exhorts and acts in the Holy Spirit and in Christ Jesus, who has reconciled the world with him (cf. 2 Cor 5:20). III. Diakonia of the Apostles’ Collaborators Within the pauline communities, with, as well as, or after Saint Paul, Saint Peter and the other eleven Apostles (cf. 1 Cor 15:3—5; Gal 2), are to be found direct collaborators with Saint Paul in the apostolic ministry (for example, Sylvanus, Timothy, Titus, Apollos) as well as many others allied to him in apostolic activities and service to local Churches (2 Cor 8:23). These include Epaphroditus (Phil 2:25), Epaphras (Col 4:12) and Archippus (Col 4:17), who are named as servants of Christ. In the opening words of the Epistle to the Philippians (around a.d. 50) Saint Paul sends a special greeting to "their bishops and their deacons" (Phil 1:1). This necessarily calls to mind the ministries that were then taking shape in the Church. It is of course recognised that the terminology of these ministries was not yet fixed. Reference is made to the proistamenoi (Rom 12:8) "who are at your head in the Lord and who reprimand you", and whom the Thessalonians are to hold "in extreme charity, by reason of their work" (1 Thess 5:12); reference is also made to leaders (hegoumenoi), "who have made you hear the word of God"; the Epistle to the Hebrews adds, "Obey your leaders and be docile to them" (13:7, 17; cf. 13:24; cf 1 Clem 1:3; 21:6); and reference is made to the "men who were sent" who guide the communities (cf Acts 15:22), to apostles, prophets, and teachers (cf 1 Cor 12:28; Gal 6:6; Acts 13:1; 4:14), and to "evangelists, or rather shepherds and teachers" (Eph 4:11). Saint Paul says of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus, "the first-fruits of Achaia", "that they spontaneously put themselves at the service of the saints" (1 Cor 16:15); and he exhorts the Corinthians: "Place yourselves under such men, and under whoever works arid labours with them" (1 Cor 16:16). The activity expressed in these terms points to the official titles which were to take shape soon afterwards. It is clear from these documents that the early Church attributed the formation of the various ministries to the action of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11; Acts 20:28) and to the personal initiative of the Apostles, who owed their sending forth on their mission to the Most High and Lord of this world, and who anchored their role of upholding the Church in the power they had received from him (Mk 3:13-19; 6:6-13; Mt 28:16-20; Acts 1:15-26; Gal 1:10-24). Diakonein is shown to be a radical determination of Christian life, expressing itself in the sacramental basis of Christian existence, of the charismatic building up of the Church, and also of the sending out of the Apostles on their mission and of the ministry which flows from the apostolate, of the proclamation of the Gospel, and of the sanctification and governance of Churches. CHAPTER II THE DIACONATE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

AND IN THE WRITINGS OF THE FATHERS I. The Diaconate in the New Testament 1. Difficulties in Terminology The word diakonos is almost absent from the Old Testament, by contrast with presbyteros which is abundantly used. In the Septuagint, in the rare places where the word diakonos is attested, it means messenger or servant.1 The Latin Bible (Vulgate) renders it in a general sense by minister or, in a specific sense, by transliterating the Greek word to give diaconus. But the terms minister, ministerium, and ministrare are also used to render other Greek terms, such as hyperetes and leitourgos. In the Vulgate the use of diaconus is found three times,2 and in the remaining cases the word is translated by minister.3 Apart from the words diakoneo, diakonia, and diakonos, Greek could choose between the following words: douleuo (to serve as a servant), therapeuo (someone who volunteers to serve), latreuo (to serve for wages), leitourgeo (someone who holds public office), and hypereteo (governor).4 In any case, it is characteristic that the verbal form diakonein is unknown in the Septuagint, the functions of service being translated by the verbs leitourgein or latreuein. Philo only used it in the sense of "to serve".5 Josephus knew it in the sense of "to serve", "to obey" and "priestly service".6 In the New Testament, the word douleuo meant service of a very personal kind: the service of charity. In the language of the Gospels7 and at Acts 6:2, diakoneo means "ministering at table". Making a collection whose proceeds Paul would take to Jerusalem was a service of this kind.8 The Apostle goes to Jerusalem for "a ministry to the saints".9 As for the use of the words cheirotonia, cheirotesia, ordinatio, there is a degree of uncertainty with regard to these terms.10 2. Data from the New Testament The first fundamental fact of relevance from the New Testament is that the verb diakonein designates Christ's actual mission as servant (Mk 10:45 and parallels; cf. Mt 12:18; Acts 4:30; Phil 2:6-11). This word or its derivatives also designate the exercise of service or ministry by his disciples (Mk 10:43ff.; Mt 20:26ff.; 23:11; Lk 8:3; Rom 15:25), the ministries of different kinds in the Church, especially the apostolic ministry of preaching the Gospel, and other charismatic gifts.11 The words diakonein and diakonos are widely used, with a wide range of meanings, in the language of the New Testament.12 The diakonos may mean the servant who waits at table (e.g. Jn 2:5 and 9), the servant of the Lord (Mt 22:13; Jn 12:26; Mk 9:35; 10:43; Mt 20:26; 23:11), the servant of a spiritual power (2 Cor 11:14; Eph 3:6; Col 1:23; Gal 2:17; Rom 15:8; 2 Cor 3:6), the servant of the Gospel, of Christ or of God (2 Cor 11:23). Pagan authorities are also in the service of God (Rom 13:4); the deacons are the servants of the Church (Col 1:25; 1 Cor 3:5). In the case where the deacon belongs to one of the Churches, the Vulgate does not use the word minister, but retains the Greek word diaconus.13 This fact shows clearly that in Acts 6:1-6 it is not the institution of the diaconate which is being referred to.14 "Diaconate" and "apostolate" are sometimes synonymous, as in Acts 1:17-25, where, on the occasion of the addition of Matthias to the eleven Apostles, Peter calls the apostolate "a share in our service" (v. 17: ton kleron tes diakonias tautes) and speaks of service and apostolate (v. 25: ton topon tes diakonias kai apostoles, which is sometimes translated as "the service of the apostolate". This text from Acts also quotes Psalm 109:8: "Let another take over his position [ten episkopen]". The question therefore arises as to whether diakonia, apostole, and episkope are equivalent to each other or not. In the opinion of M.J. Schmitt and J. Colson, "apostolate" is "an editorial term correcting 'diakonias'."15 Acts 6:1-6 describes the institution of the "Seven" 16"to serve at tables". The reason for this is given by Luke as stemming from internal tensions within the community: "The Hellenists complained [egeneto goggysmos] against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food" (Acts 6:1). It has not yet been ascertained whether the widows of the "Hellenists" belonged to the community or not, according to strict respect for ritual purity. Were the Apostles hoping to send to the provinces the rebellious "Hellenists" of Jerusalem who, in their preaching in the synagogue, were responsible for much provocation? Is this why the Apostles chose "Seven", which was the number of provincial community magistrates attached to a synagogue? But at the same time, through the imposition of hands, they wished to preserve the unity of the Spirit and avoid a schism.17 Commentators on Acts do not explain the significance of this laying on of the Apostles' hands. It is possible that the Apostles appointed the Seven to be at the head of the "Hellenists" (baptised Greek-speaking Jews) to fulfil the same task as the presbyters among the "Hebrew" Christians.18 The reason given for the designation of the chosen Seven (complaints by the Hellenists) is in contradiction with their actual activity as later described by Luke. We hear nothing about serving at tables. Out of the Seven, Luke only speaks of the activities of Stephen and Philip; or more precisely, Stephen's discourse in the synagogue at Jerusalem, and his martyrdom, and the apostolate carried out in Samaria by Philip, who also baptised people.19 There is no word of the others.20 In the Churches entrusted to Saint Paul's apostolic care, deacons appear beside the episkopoi as exercising a ministry subordinate to or coordinated with theirs (Phil 1:1; 1 Tim 3:1-13). In the apostolic writings mention is often made of deacons with the bishop, or else of the bishop with priests. However, historical sources which cite all three together, bishop, priest and deacon, are very rare. II. The Apostolic Fathers The first epistle of Saint Clement of Rome to the Corinthians (first century) mentions that the bishops and deacons have a spiritual function in the community: "The Apostles received for us the good news through the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus, the Christ, was sent by God. Therefore the Christ comes from God, the Apostles come from Christ; both proceeded in due order from the will of God [egenonto oun amphotera eutaktos ek thelematos Theou]. They therefore received instructions and, filled with conviction by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, strengthened by the word of God, with the full conviction of the Holy Spirit, they set out to announce the good news of the coming of God s kingdom. They preached in the countryside and in the towns and they established [kathistanon] its first-fruits, they tested them by the Spirit, so as to make them bishops and deacons [eis episkopous kai diakonous] of those who were to believe. And there was nothing new [ou kainos] in this; for long ago Scripture spoke of bishops and deacons [egegrapto peri episkopon kai diakonon]; for it is written somewhere, 'I shall establish their bishops in justice and their deacons in faith'."21 When the author of the Epistle of Clement speaks of liturgical functions he refers to the Old Testament;22 when he explains the institution of the episkopoi kai diakonoi, he refers to the will of God, and to the Apostles.23 The order of bishops and deacons was not an innovation, but was founded on the will of God, and therefore was a "due order"; their sending originated in God himself. The successors chosen by the Apostles were the first-fruits offered to God. The Apostles had tested the chosen ones by the Spirit; those who succeeded them would be established by the choice of the whole assembly.24 Here we find the tradition of the pastoral letters in reverse order: (1) the testing in the Spirit (cf. 1 Tim 3:1-7 and 8:10fE); (2) the use side by side of the terms episkopos kai diakonos (cf Phil 1:1),. where episkopos does not yet correspond to the present definition of bishop.25 It is worth noting the way Saint Polycarp linked the ministry of deacons with the service of Christ the Saviour: "Let them walk in the truth of the Lord who became the servant [diakonos] of all" (Letter of Saint Polycarp to the Philippians 5:2). The text of the Didache (written before a.d. 130) at 15, 1 only mentions bishops and deacons as the successors of the prophets and the didaskaloi, and says nothing of priests: "Choose yourselves therefore bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, mild men, fair-minded, truthful and reliable, for they too fulfil towards you the offices of prophets and teachers."26 J.-P. Audet comments, "The two words admittedly sound different to us. But in Greek, at the time of the Didache, an episkopos was a supervisor, foreman, guardian, moderator, warden or steward ... whereas a diakonos was simply a servant able to fulfil different functions according to the particular conditions of his service. The two terms are widely used with a variety of meanings.... The specific way they were appointed (cheirotonesate) remains unclear. They were chosen and appointed, perhaps by election; that is all that can be said."27 The Didache does not say anything about ordination. According to K. Niederwimmer, the term cheirotonein means election.28 It is certain that at that period the deacons were responsible for the life of the Church with regard to works of charity towards widows and orphans, as was the case in the first community at Jerusalem. Their activities were doubtless linked to catechesis and also probably to the liturgy. However information on this subject is so brief29 that it is difficult to learn from it the precise range of their functions. The letters of Saint Ignatius of Antioch point to a new stage. His statements about the ecclesiastical hierarchy with its three grades are similar to those of Clement of Rome: "Let everyone revere the deacons as Jesus Christ, the bishop as the image of the Father, and the presbyters as the senate of God and the assembly of the Apostles. For without them one cannot speak of the Church."30 And again, "All of you, follow the bishop, as Jesus Christ [follows] his Father, and the presbyterium as the Apostles; as for the deacons, respect them as the law of God."31 Saint Ignatius speaks of the bishop in the singular and of priests and deacons in the plural, but says nothing on the character of the diaconate, simply exhorting the faithful to venerate the deacons as appointed by God. Saint Justin (fl65) gives information especially about the liturgical activity of deacons. He describes the role of deacons in the Eucharist during the oblatio and the communio: "Then there is brought to him who presides over the assembly of the brethren, some bread and a cup of water and wine mixed.... Once the prayers and giving of thanks are over, all the people present express their assent by replying Amen. When the president of the assembly has finished the prayer of thanksgiving [eucharist] and all the people have made their response, those who among us are called deacons [oi kaloumenoi par 'emin diakonoi’] give to each of those present to share in the bread and in the wine mixed with water over which has been said the prayer of thanksgiving [eucharist], and they carry it to those who are absent."32 III. Consolidation and Development of the Diaconate in the Third and Fourth Centuries According to Clement of Alexandria there are in the Church, as in the life of civil society, positions which are intended to benefit either the body or the soul (therapeia beltiotike, hyperetike). There are also people who in themselves are ordered to the service of people of a higher grade. Priests are of the first kind, and deacons of the second.33 In Origen, the diakonia of the bishop is always the service of the whole Church (ekklesiastike diakonia). The bishop is called "prince" and, at the same time, also called "servant of all".34 Deacons are often criticised by Origen because they are particularly infected by the spirit of covetousness. Because of their responsibility for charitable works, they were more in contact with money. In a passage on the expulsion of the traders from the Temple, Origen speaks of those "deacons who do not administer rightly the tables of the money of the Church [sc. of the poor], but always act fraudulently towards them."35"They amass riches for themselves, misappropriating money meant for the poor."36 The Didascalia (third century) evidences a degree of supremacy of deacons over priests, since deacons are compared to Christ, while priests are only compared to the Apostles.37 But in the first place, priests are presented as the senate of the Church and the bishop's assessors; they are placed around the altar and the episcopal throne. The deacons are called the "third ones", which probably suggests that they come after the bishop and the priests. However, the status and activity of deacons undoubtedly seem to have surpassed those of priests. The laity ought to have great confidence in the deacons and not importune the head, but make their wishes known to him through the hyperetai, that is through the deacons, for no one can approach the almighty Lord and God either except through Christ.38 In the Didascalia the increase in the status of the diaconate in the Church is remarkable, resulting in a growing crisis in the reciprocal relations of priests and deacons. To the deacons' social and charitable responsibilities was added that of providing various services during liturgical assemblies: ushering in newcomers and pilgrims; taking care of the offerings; supervising orderliness and silence; and ensuring that people were suitably dressed. The Traditio Apostolica of Hippolytus of Rome (f235) presents the theological and juridical status of the deacon in the Church for the first time. It includes them among the group of the ordinati by the imposition of hands (cheirotonein), contrasting them with those in the hierarchy who are called instituti. The "ordination" of deacons is done only by the bishop (Chapter 8). This connection defines the scope of the tasks of the deacon, who is at the disposition of the bishop, to fulfil his orders, but is excluded from taking part in the council of priests. A comparison should be made between the two texts for the ordination of deacons, that of the Veronense (L, Latin version) and that of the Sahidic Ethiopian (S[AE]), because there are some differences between them. L says: "Diaconus vero cum ordinatur, eligatur secundum ea, quae praedicta sunt, similiter imponens manus episcopus solus sicuti praecipi-mus." S[AE] is clearer: "Episcopus autem instituet [kathistasthat] diaconum qui electus est, secundum quod praedictum est." There is still, however, a difference between ordinatio and institutio. The tenth chapter, speaking of the widows of the Traditio Apostolica contributes some significant elements. "Non autem imponetur manus super eam, quia non offert oblationem neque habet liturgiam. Ordinatio [cheirotonia] autem fit cum clero [kleros] propter liturgiam. Vidua [xera] autem instituitur [kathistasthai] propter orationem: haec autem est omnium.,,39 According to this text, if the imposition of hands is absent from the rite, then it is only an institution (katastasis, institutio) and not an ordinatio. Thus, in the course of the third century, the imposition of hands already constituted the distinctive sign of the rite of ordination to major orders. In the fourth century it was extended to minor orders as well. In what concerns the liturgy, the task of the deacon was to bring the offerings and distribute them. In the administration of baptism, his role was to accompany the priest and serve him "the oil of the catechumens and the chrism and also to go down into the water with the person who was to receive baptism" (Chapter 21). Another field of work for the deacons was teaching: "Let them come together and instruct those with whom they are in the Church" (Chapter 39). Their social activity is emphasized, specifically in close union with the bishop. According to Saint Cyprian, "The deacons should not forget that the Lord himself chose the Apostles, that is, the bishops and the heads of the Church, while in the case of deacons, it was the Apostles who instituted them after the Lord's Ascension, to be ministers of their episcopate and of the Church. Hence, just as we cannot undertake anything in defiance of God who makes us bishops, neither can they too undertake anything in defiance of us, who make them deacons."40 It seems that, from time to time, even at Carthage, the deacons wished to take the place of the priests. They had to be warned that deacons came in third place in the order of the hierarchy. While the see was vacant they also had an important role in the governance of the Church. In exile, Cyprian normally addressed his letters "to the priests and deacons" to discuss disciplinary problems. In Cyprian's writings priests and deacons were sometimes designated by the word clerus, and less frequently were called praepositi.41 The priest Gains Didensis and his deacons were both charged to offer the Eucharist, but the fifth letter indicates that in reality it was the priests who offered it, attended by the deacons.42 To deacons, on the other hand, falls the practice of charity by prison-visiting. They are described as "boni viri et ecclesiasticae administrationis per omnia devoti".43 The word administratio is found in the expression sancta administratio applied to the deacon Nicostratus in regard to the Church money that he looked after. Thus deacons would be charged not only with the practice of charity towards the poor, but also with the administration of the finances belonging to the community.44 To sum up, as well as the fact of the existence of the diaconate in all the Churches from the beginning of the second century, and the fact of the ecclesiastical nature of the diaconate as such, it can be said that the role fulfilled by deacons was basically the same everywhere, although the emphasis placed on the various elements of their commitment may have differed in different regions. The diaconate was stabilised in the course of the fourth century. In the synodal and conciliar directives of this period the diaconate was regarded as an essential element of the hierarchy of the local Church. At the synod of Elvira (c. 306-309) the diaconate's preeminent role in the administrative sector of the Church was primarily underlined. Paradoxically, at the same time as it imposed a certain limitation on the involvement of deacons in the liturgical sector, this synod attributed to them the possibility of giving absolution of sins in urgent cases. This tendency to invade the field of competences of priests, which was also manifested in the claim to preside at the Eucharist (albeit as an exception) was put a stop to by the synod of Aries (314) and particularly by the Council of Nicaea (325, can. 18). The Constitutiones Apostolorum (CA), which forms the most impressive of the juridical collections drawn up in the fourth century, cites the different parts of the Didache and the Didascalia which refer to deacons, and comments on them in ways which reflect the point of view of the period. Also included are the statements of Saint Ignatius in his letters, thus providing a considerable amount of information. The text is characterised by a tendency to historicism, the more so since the author-editor looks for prefigurations in parallel passages of the Old Testament. He introduces his discourse with a solemn formula (cf. Deut 5:31 and 27:9): "Hear, O sacred and catholic Church.... For these are your pontiffs; your priests are the presbyters, and your Levites are now the deacons, these are your lectors, cantors and door-keepers, these are your deaconesses, your widows, your virgins and your orphans.... The deacon will attend him as Christ attends the Father."45 He describes the relation of the bishop with the deacon through the prefigurations of the Old Covenant and the heavenly models: "For you now, Aaron is the deacon and Moses the bishop; if therefore Moses was called a god by the Lord, among you the bishop shall be likewise honoured as a god and the deacon as his prophet ... and as the Son is the angel and prophet of the Father, in the same way the deacon is the angel and prophet of the bishop."46 The deacon represents the eye, the ear, and the mouth of the bishop "so that the bishop does not have to concern himself with a multitude of matters, but only with the most important ones, as Jethro established for Moses, and his counsel was well received." 47The prayer of ordination of a deacon by the bishop attests that the diaconate was envisaged as a transitory grade towards the presbyterate: "Grant that he may satisfactorily accomplish the service which has been entrusted to him, in a seemly manner, without deviation or blame or reproach, to be judged worthy of a higher rank [meizonos axiothenai bathmou], through the mediation of your Christ, your onlybegotten Son."48 In the Euchologion of Serapion (towards the end of the fourth century) there appears a prayer of ordination of a deacon whose terminology is similar to that of the Sahidic version of the Traditio Apostolica. The text of the prayer alludes to the canons of the Church, to the three hierarchical grades, and refers to the Seven in Acts chapter 6; to designate the ordination of the deacon it employs the verb katisthanai: "Pater unigeniti, qui jilium misisti tuum et ordinasti res super terra atque ecclesiae canones et ordines dedisti in utilitatem et salutem gregum, qui elegisti episcopos et presbyteros et diaconos in ministerium catholicae tuae ecclesiae, qui elegisti per unigenitum tuum septem diaconos eisque largitus es spiritum sanctum: constitue [katasteson] et hunc diaconum ecclesiae tuae catholicae et da in eo spiritum cognitionis ac discretionis, ut possit inter populum sanctum pure et immaculate ministrare in hoc ministerio per unigenitum tuum Iesum Christum, per quern tibi gloriam et imperium in sancto spiritu et nunc et in omnia saecula saeculorum, amen."49 The prayer of consecration of a deacon in the Sacramentarium Veronense speaks of the service of the holy altar, and, like the text in the Constitutiones Apostolorum, considers the diaconate to be a transitory grade. "Oremus . . . quos consecrationis indultae propitius dona conservet . .. quos ad officium levitarum vocare dignaris, altaris sancti ministerium tribuas sufficienter implere ... trinis gradibus ministrorum nomini tuo militare constituehs ... dignisque successibus de inferiori gradu per gratiam tuam capere potiora mereantur."50 The Sacramentarium Gregorianum is similar at every point to the texts already cited. It also recalls the three grades, and uses the word "constituere" to designate the ordination of the deacon.51 Behind their apparent unanimity, the declarations of the Fathers of the Church in the fourth century give a glimpse of certain dissensions which had been well known since the third century, as for example the deacons' claim to appropriate the places, rank and tasks of the priests.52 There is also evidence of the idea that the three grades (bishop, priest and deacon) were like elements of one and the same order. Pseudo-Athanasios speaks of this in his work De Trinitate as a "consubstantiality".53 In addition, Christianity was beginning to spread in provincial areas, with bishops or priests leaving the town against their will, and deacons doing so very willingly, but abusing the situation in that they used to appropriate certain of priests' rights. The historical context also contributed to this development. What had happened was that the Arians had compromised the standing of the episcopate. Contrasting with bishops and priests avid for power and money, the popularity of deacons grew strongly because of their close links with monks and laypeople. The widespread opinion in the fourth century Was that deacons had been instituted by the Apostles and the bishop ordained them in the same way as priests. Deacons belonged to the clergy, but only assisted at the liturgy.54 The sources show us that even Chrysostom did not manage to place the three grades of the ecclesial order in a clear historical continuity There were Jewish models for the priesthood, but the episcopate and diaconate were instituted by the Apostles. It is not clear what should be understood by these notions.55 Chrysostom stated that the diaconate had been instituted by the Holy Spirit.56 In the course of this century the Latins also took up the use of the Greek word "diaconus", as Saint Augustine attests.57 The fourth century marked the end of the process which led to the recognition of the diaconate as a grade or degree in the ecclesial hierarchy, placed after the bishop and the priests, with a well-defined role. Linked to the bishop himself and his mission, this role encompassed three tasks: the service of the liturgy, the service of preaching the Gospel and teaching catechesis, and a vast social activity concerning the works of charity and administrative action in accordance with the bishop's directives. IV. The Ministry of Deaconesses In the apostolic era different forms of diaconal assistance offered to the Apostles and communities by women seem to have been institutional. Thus Paul recommends to the community at Rome "our sister Phoebe, servant [he diakonos] of the Church at Cenchreae" (cf. Rom 16:1-4). Although the masculine form of diakonos is used here, it cannot therefore be concluded that the word is being used to designate the specific function of a "deacon"; firstly because in this context diakonos still signifies servant in a very general sense, and secondly because the word "servant" is not given a feminine suffix but preceded by a feminine article. What seems clear is that Phoebe exercised a recognised service in the community of Cenchreae, subordinate to the ministry of the Apostle. Elsewhere in Pauls writings the authorities of the world are themselves called diakonos (Rom 13:4), and in Second Corinthians 11:14-15 he refers to diakonoi of the devil. Exegetes are divided on the subject of First Timothy 3:11. The mention of "women" following the reference to deacons may suggest women deacons (by parallel reference), or the deacons' wives who had been mentioned earlier. In this epistle, the functions of the deacon are not described, but only the conditions for admitting them. It is said that women must not teach or rule over men (1 Tim 2:8-15). But the functions of governance and teaching were in any case reserved to the bishop (1 Tim 3:5) and to priests (1 Tim 5:17), and not to deacons. Widows constituted a recognised group in the community, from whom they received assistance in exchange for their commitment to continence and prayer. First Timothy 5:3-16 stresses the conditions under which they may be inscribed on the list of widows receiving relief from the community, and says nothing more about any functions they might have. Later on they were officially "instituted" but "not ordained";58 they constituted an "order" in the Church,59 and would never have any other mission apart from good example and prayer. At the beginning of the second century a letter from Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia, mentioned two women who were described by the Christians as ministrae, the probable equivalent of the Greek diakonoi (10, 96-97). It was not until the third century that the specific Christian terms diaconissa or diacona appeared. From the end of the third century onwards, in certain regions of the Church60 (and not all of them), a specific ecclesial ministry is attested to on the part of women called deaconesses.61 This was in Eastern Syria and Constantinople. Towards 240 there appeared a singular canonico-liturgical compilation, the Didascalia Apostolorum (DA), which was not official in character. It attributed to the bishop the features of an omnipotent biblical patriarch (cf. DA 2, 33-35, 3). He was at the head of a little community which he governed mainly with the help of deacons and deaconesses. This was the first time that deaconesses appeared in an ecclesiastical document. In a typology borrowed from Ignatius of Antioch, the bishop held the place of God the Father, the deacon the place of Christ, and the deaconess that of the Holy Spirit (the word for "Spirit" is feminine in Semitic languages), while the priests (who are seldom mentioned) represented the Apostles, and the widows, the altar (DA 2, 26, 4-7). There is no reference to the ordination of these ministers. The Didascalia laid stress on the charitable role of the deacon and the deaconess. The ministry of the diaconate should appear as "one single soul in two bodies". Its model is the diakonia of Christ, who washed the feet of his disciples (DA 3, 13, 1-7). However, there was no strict parallelism between the two branches of the diaconate with regard to the functions they exercised. The deacons were chosen by the bishop to "concern themselves about many necessary things", and the deaconesses only "for the service of women" (DA 3, 12, 1). The hope was expressed that "the number of deacons may be proportionate to that of the assembly of the people of the Church" (DA 3, 13, l).62 The deacons administered the property of the community in the bishop's name. Like the bishop, they were maintained at its expense. Deacons are called the ear and mouth of the bishop (DA 2, 44, 3-4). Men from among the faithful should go through the deacons to have access to the bishop, as women should go through the deaconesses (DA 3, 12, 1-4). One deacon supervised the entries into the meeting place, while another attended the bishop for the Eucharistic offering (DA 2, 57, 6). Deaconesses should carry out the anointing of women in the rite of baptism, instruct women neophytes, and visit the women faithful, especially the sick, in their homes. They were forbidden to confer baptism themselves, or to play a part in the Eucharistic offering (DA 3, 12, 1-4). The deaconesses had supplanted the widows. The bishop may still institute widows, but they should not either teach or administer baptism (to women), but only pray (DA 3, 5, 1-3, 6, 2). The Constitutiones Apostolorum, which appeared in Syria towards 380, used and interpolated the Didascalia, the Didache and the Traditio Apostolica. The Constitutiones were to have a lasting influence on the discipline governing ordinations in the East, even though they were never considered to be an official canonical collection. The compiler envisaged the imposition of hands with the epiklesis of the Holy Spirit not only for bishops, priests and deacons, but also for the deaconesses, sub-deacons and lectors (cf. CA 8, 16-23).63The concept of kleros Was broadened to all those who exercised a liturgical ministry, who were maintained by the Church, and who benefited from the privileges in civil law allowed by the Empire to clerics, so that the deaconesses were counted as belonging to the clergy while the widows were excluded. Bishop and priests were paralleled with the high priest and the priests respectively of the Old Covenant, while to the Levites corresponded all the other ministries and states of life: "deacons, lectors, cantors, door-keepers, deaconesses, widows, virgins and orphans" (CA 2, 26, 3; CA 8, 1, 21). The deacon was placed "at the service of the bishop and the priests" and should not impinge on the functions of the latter.64 The deacon could proclaim the Gospel and conduct the prayer of the assembly (CA 2, 57, 18), but only the bishop and the priests exhorted (CA 2, 57, 7). Deaconesses took up their functions through an epithesis cheirôn or imposition of hands that conferred the Holy Spirit,65 as did the lectors (CA 8, 20, 22). The bishop pronounced the following prayer: "Eternal God, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, creator of man and woman, who filled Myriam, Deborah, Anne and Hulda with your spirit; who did not deem it unworthy for your Son, the Only-Begotten, to be born of a woman; who in the tent of witness and in the temple did institute women as guardians of your sacred doors, look now upon your servant before you, proposed for the diaconate: grant her the Holy Spirit and purify her of all defilement of flesh and spirit so that she may acquit herself worthily of the office which has been entrusted to her, for your glory and to the praise of your Christ, through whom be glory and adoration to you, in the Holy Spirit, world without end. Amen."66 The deaconesses were named before the sub-deacon who, in his turn, received a cheirotonia like the deacon (CA 8, 21), while the virgins and widows could not be "ordained" (8, 24-25). The Constitutiones insist that the deaconesses should have no liturgical function (3, 9, 1-2), but should devote themselves to their function in the community which was "service to the women" (CA 3, 16, 1) and as intermediaries between women and the bishop. It is still stated that they represent the Holy Spirit, but they "do nothing without the deacon" (CA 2, 26, 6). They should stand at the women's entrances in the assemblies (2, 57, 10). Their functions are summed up as follows: "The deaconess does not bless, and she does not fulfil any of the things that priests and deacons do, but she looks after the doors and attends the priests during the baptism of women, for the sake of decency" (CA 8, 28, 6). This is echoed by the almost contemporary observation of Epiphanius of Salamis in his Panarion, in around 375: "There is certainly in the Church the order of deaconesses, but this does not exist to exercise the functions of a priest, nor are they to have any undertaking committed to them, but for the decency of the feminine sex at the time of baptism." 67A law of Theodosius of 21 June 390, revoked on 23 August of the same year, fixed the age for admission to the ministry of deaconesses at 60. The Council of Chalcedon (can. 15) reduced the age to 40, forbidding them subsequent marriage.68 Even in the fourth century the way of life of deaconesses was very similar to that of nuns. At that time the woman in charge of a monastic community of women was called a deaconess, as is testified by Gregory of Nyssa among others.69 Ordained abbesses of the monasteries of women, the deaconesses wore the maforion, or veil of perfection. Until the sixth century they still attended women in the baptismal pool and for the anointing. Although they did not serve at the altar, they could distribute communion to sick women. When the practice of anointing the whole body at baptism was abandoned, deaconesses were simply consecrated virgins who had taken the vow of chastity. They lived either in monasteries or at home. The condition for admission was virginity or widowhood and their activity consisted of charitable and health-related assistance to women. At Constantinople the best-known of the fourth-century deaconesses was Olympias, the superior of a monastery of women, who was a protegee of Saint John Chrysostom and had put her property at the service of the Church. She was "ordained" (cheirotonein) deaconess with three of her companions by the patriarch. Canon 15 of the Council of Chalcedon (451) seems to confirm the fact that deaconesses really were "ordained" by the imposition of hands (cheirotonia). Their ministry was called leitourgia and after ordination they were not allowed to marry. In eighth-century Byzantium, the bishop still imposed his hands on a deaconess, and conferred on her the orarion or stole (both ends of which were worn at the front, one over the other); he gave her the chalice, which she placed on the altar without giving communion to anyone. Deaconesses were ordained in the course of the Eucharistic liturgy, in the sanctuary, like deacons.70 Despite the similarities between the rites of ordination, deaconesses did not have access to the altar or to any liturgical ministry. These ordinations were intended mainly for the superiors of monasteries of women. It should be pointed out that in the West there is no trace of any deaconesses for the first five centuries. The Statuta Ecclesiae antiqua laid down that the instruction of women catechumens and their preparation for baptism was to be entrusted to the widows and women religious "chosen ad ministerium baptizandarum mulierum".71 Certain councils of the fourth and fifth centuries reject every ministerium feminae72 and forbid any ordination of deaconesses.73 According to the Ambrosiaster (composed at Rome at the end of the fourth century), the female diaconate was an adjunct of Montanist ("Cataphrygian") heretics.74 In the sixth century women admitted into the group of widows were sometimes referred to as deaconesses. To prevent any confusion the Council of Epaone forbade "the consecrations of widows who call themselves deaconesses".75 The Second Council of Orleans (533) decided to exclude from communion women who had "received the blessing for the diaconate despite the canons forbidding this and who had remarried".76 Abbesses, or the wives of deacons, were also called diaconissae, by analogy with presbyterissae or even episcopissae.77 The present historical overview shows that a ministry of deaconesses did indeed exist, and that this developed unevenly in the different parts of the Church. It seems clear that this ministry was not perceived as simply the feminine equivalent of the masculine diaconate. At the very least it was an ecclesial function, exercised by women, sometimes mentioned together with that of sub-deacon in the lists of Church ministries.78 Was this ministry conferred by an imposition of hands comparable to that by which the episcopate, the priesthood and the masculine diaconate were conferred? The text of the Constitutiones Apostolorum would seem to suggest this, but it is practically the only witness to this, and its proper interpretation is the subject of much debate.79 Should the imposition of hands on deaconesses be considered the same as that on deacons, or is it rather on the same level as the imposition of hands on sub-deacons and lectors? It is difficult to tackle the question on the basis of historical data alone. In the following chapters some elements will be clarified, and some questions will remain open. In particular, one chapter will be devoted to examining more closely how the Church through her theology and Magisterium has become more conscious of the sacramental reality of Holy Orders and its three grades. But first it is appropriate to examine the causes which led to the disappearance of the permanent diaconate in the life of the Church. CHAPTER III THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THE PERMANENT DIACONATE I. The Changes in the Diaconal Ministry At Rome, from the third century onwards, each deacon was at the head of one of the seven pastoral regions, while the priests had a smaller titulus (the future parish). Deacons were charged with administering funds and organising charitable works. The Council of Neo-Caesarea, at the beginning of the fourth century, had asked that each Church, however big it was, should have no more than seven deacons, in memory of Acts 6:1-6.80This provision, still remembered by Isidore of Seville81 but infrequently observed, particularly in the East,82 heightened the prestige of the diaconal order and encouraged deacons still more to leave their original functions to other members of the clergy. They were to define themselves more and more explicitly by reference to their liturgical attributes, and come into conflict with the priests. The functions of deacons were progressively being taken over by other ministers. As early as the Traditio Apostolica (13), "sub-deacons" were appointed "to follow the deacon". Those who "followed the deacon" soon became his "acolytes".83 The acolytes had the job of taking the fermentum, the portion of the bishop's Eucharist, to the priests of the tituli in the town. It was also the acolytes who took it to those who were absent. The "door-keepers" also fulfilled a function which had originally been the task of the deacons. It may be considered that the minor ministries resulted from a sharing-out of diaconal functions. The state of sub-deacon approached that of deacon more closely. Towards 400, in the East, the Council of Laodicea tried to prevent sub-deacons from encroaching on the liturgical functions of deacons, stating that they should content themselves with looking after the doors.84 Sub-deacons adopted the rule of life of deacons. The African councils of the last part of the fourth century demanded continence on the part of clergy "who serve at the altar",85 The Canones in causa Apiarii (419-425) extended this requirement to sub-deacons, "who touch the sacred mysteries".86 Leo the Great (440-461) confirmed this requirement for sub-deacons.87 Leo made a ready distinction between sacerdotes (the bishop and priests), levitae (the deacons and sub-deacons), and clerici (the other ministers).88 Cyprian had already found it necessary to remind people that deacons had been instituted by the Apostles and not by the Lord himself.89 In certain places deacons must have been tempted to take the place of priests. The Council of Aries (314) reminded them that they could not offer the Eucharist (can. 15) and that they should show due honour to priests (can. 18). Nicaea forbade them to give communion to priests, or to receive it before the bishops: they were to receive communion from the bishop or from a priest, and after them. They were not to sit among the priests. "Let the deacons remain within the limits of their competence, knowing that they are the servants of the bishop and are inferior to priests in rank" (can. 19).90 Towards 378 the anonymous Ambrosiaster, composed at Rome, witnessed to the persistent tension between the presbyterate and the diaconate.91 Jerome went further, exclaiming that deacons were not superior to priests!92 Priests came to exercise more and more of the functions reserved to deacons, at the same time as they received progressively more autonomy in their responsibilities within the urban tituli and the rural parishes. Deacons, who had wanted to exercise the liturgical and teaching functions reserved to priests, now suffered from a backlash against such an attitude: they became subordinate to the priests, their direct link with the bishop faded away, and they ended up having no specific function. The clergy of the Church in the Empire progressively forgot about their function of service and maintained the concept of the sacredness of the priesthood, towards which all the other degrees of the clerical career tended. The deacons were the first to suffer the consequences of this. Towards the end of the fifth century the thinking of Pseudo-Dionysius began to have a lasting influence both in the East and in the West. In Dionysius' hierarchically structured view of heaven and the Church, every being received its specific determination and function from the order to which it belonged. The ecclesiastical hierarchy was composed of two groups of three. The first group contained the order of the hierarchs or bishops, the order of priests, and the order of "liturges" or ministers. This latter order included the ecclesiastical orders from deacon to door-keeper. The diaconate no longer had any specific mark to distinguish it from the other orders beneath the priests.93 Still towards the end of the fifth century, the career path of the clergy was defined in function of their liturgical attributes as well as the demand of continence for those who served in the sanctuary, or related positions. Leo the Great considered that the ideal path, before proceeding to the priesthood and the episcopate, was to go through all the degrees of the clergy with an appropriate interval between each.94 The number and names of the different degrees (gradus) of the clergy fluctuated. There were eight at Rome in the time of Pope Cornelius.95 In the fifth century, the door-keeper and the exorcist were no longer included among them.96 The author of De septem ordinibus at the beginning of the fifth century speaks of grave-diggers, door-keepers, lectors, sub-deacons, deacons, priests and bishops.97 The Statuta Ecclesiae antiqua, also composed in the south of Gaul towards 480, re-proposed a list of eight officiates ecclesiae who received an ordinatio: bishop, priest and deacon received an imposition of hands, [while] the candidates for orders inferior to these (sub-deacon, acolyte, exorcist, lector and doorkeeper) were installed by a rite of handing over of the instruments of their office.98 Thus the functions which had in the past been autonomous and practical, became stages in the career path towards the priesthood. The sacramentary of Verona (around 560-580) contained a prayer of "consecration" for the bishop and the priest, and a prayer of "blessing" for the deacon. It said that the deacon was essentially ordained in view of liturgical ministry; he should be an example of chastity.99 Progress through the clerical career path was still often made per saltum. At Rome in the ninth century the sub-diaconate was the only obligatory degree before major orders. All the popes between 687 and 891 had been sub-deacons. Five had then become deacons before being raised to the episcopate, and nine passed directly from the sub-diaconate to the priesthood and then to the episcopate. One of the former competencies of deacons, the management of the funds of the community, was also lost to them. The Council of Chalcedon (451) sanctioned this development, laying down that each bishop should entrust this responsibility to an officer chosen from "among his own clergy" (can. 26), not necessarily from among the deacons. Aid to the poor was often looked after by monasteries. Under Gregory the Great, the huge "Patrimony of Saint Peter" was managed by defensores or notarii, who were added to the clergy, in other words at least given the tonsure. In the East, the Byzantine Council in Trullo in 692 analysed the contents of Acts 6:1-6. The Seven, it observed, were neither deacons nor priests nor bishops. They were people who were "charged with administering the common property of the community of that time.. .. They are an example of charity" (can. 7).100 At the end of the ninth century in the East, the deacons still formed a permanent order of clergy, but for liturgical needs alone. The Byzantine rite had two preparatory stages for the sacred ministry: those of lector (or cantor) and sub-deacon, conferred by cheirothesia, and obligatory before the diaconate.101 But the sub-diaconate was often conferred at the same time as the lectorate, or just before the diaconate. According to the ritual of the Constitutiones Apostolorum, which was still applied in the East, admission to the minor orders of sub-diaconate and lectorate was accomplished by the imposition of hands and the handing over of the instruments of office. In the West too, the activity of deacons was reduced, in practice, to their liturgical functions.102 When rural parishes were created the Councils insisted that they should be endowed with a priest. It did not occur to them to call for deacons.103 From the tenth century onwards, at least in the Holy Roman Empire, the rule was ordination per gradum. The reference document was the Pontifical Romano-Germanique,104 composed at Mainz in around 950. It was in direct continuity with the tradition of the Ordines Romani of the preceding centuries,105 to which it added plentiful elements from the Germanic ritual. The ordination of deacons included the handing over of the book of the Gospels, signifying their function of proclaiming the Gospel in the liturgy. The deacon here appears closer to the sub-deacon than to the priest. The priest was the man of the Eucharist; the deacon attended him at the altar. This ritual was introduced at Rome through the Germanic emperors' zeal for reform at the end of the tenth century. Rome fell into line with the per gradum career path for clergy which was the rule in the Empire. From that time on the history of the ordination rites attests perfect continuity.106 The First Lateran Council (1123) can. 7, and the Second Lateran Council (1139) can. 6, deprived of their office any clergy who contracted marriage, from the sub-diaconate inclusive. Can. 7 of the Second Lateran Council declared that such a marriage would be null and void.107 From that time on the Latin Church normally ordained only celibate men. The patristic and liturgical texts of the first millennium all mentioned the ordination of bishops, priests and deacons, but they did not yet explicitly raise the question of the sacramentality of each of these ordinations. The history of the ministries shows that the priesthood has had a tendency to take over the functions of the lesser orders. When the progression through the various orders became stabilised, each grade possessed the competencies of the previous grade, plus some additional ones-what a deacon can do, a priest can also do. The bishop, being at the summit of the hierarchy can exercise all the ecclesiastical functions. The fact that the different competencies fitted together in this way and that lesser functions were taken over by higher ones; the fragmentation of the original role of deacons into many different functions to be performed by subordinate clergy; and the progression to the higher functions per gradum, all go to explain how the diaconate as a permanent ministry lost its reason for existing. All that was left were liturgical tasks exercised for a given time by candidates for the priesthood. II. Towards the Disappearance of Deaconesses After the tenth century deaconesses were only named in connection with charitable institutions. A Jacobite author of that time notes: "In ancient times, deaconesses were ordained. Their function was to look after women so that they should not have to uncover themselves before the bishop. But when religion spread more widely and it was decided to administer baptism to infants, this function was abolished."108We find the same statement in the Pontifical of Patriarch Michael of Antioch (1166-1199).109When commenting on can. 15 of the Council of Chalcedon, Theodore Balsamon, at the end of the twelfth century, observed that "the topic of this canon has altogether fallen into disuse. For today deaconesses are no longer ordained, although the name of deaconesses is wrongly given to those who belong to communities of ascetics." 110Deaconesses had become nuns. They lived in monasteries which no longer practised works of diakonia except in the field of education, medical care, or parish service. The presence of deaconesses is still attested in Rome at the end of the eighth century. While the Roman rituals had previously not mentioned deaconesses, the sacramentary Hadrianum, sent by the pope to Charlemagne and spread by him throughout the Frankish world, includes an Oratio ad diaconam faciendum. It was in fact a blessing, placed as an appendix among other rites of first institution. The Carolingian texts often combined deaconesses and abbesses. The Council of Paris of 829 contained a general prohibition on women performing any liturgical function.111 The Decretals of Pseudo-Isidore contain no mention of deaconesses; and neither does a Bavarian Pontifical from the first half of the ninth century.112 A century later, in the Pontifical Romano-Germanique of Mainz, the prayer Ad diaconam faciendum is to be found after the ordinatio abbatissae, between the consecratio virginum and the consecratio viduarum. Once again, this was merely a blessing accompanied by the handing over of the stole and veil by the bishop, as well as the nuptial ring and the crown. Like widows, the deaconess promised continence. This is the last mention of "deaconesses" found in the Latin rituals. In fact the Pontifical of Guillaume Durand at the end of the thirteenth century speaks of deaconesses only with reference to the past.113 In the Middle Ages, the nursing and teaching religious orders of nuns fulfilled in practise the functions of diakonia without, however, being ordained for this ministry. The title, with no corresponding ministry, was given to women who were instituted as widows or abbesses. Right up until the thirteenth century, abbesses were sometimes called deaconesses. CHAPTER IV THE SACRAMENTALITY OF THE DIACONATE FROM THE TWELFTH TO THE TWENTIETH CENTURIES The sacramentally of the diaconate is a question which remains implicit in biblical, patristic and liturgical texts which have just been discussed. We now need to see how the Church first became explicitly conscious of it in a period in which, apart from certain rare exceptions, the diaconate was simply a stage on the way to the priesthood. I. In the First Scholastic Teaching Although "sacramentality" can have a broad, generic meaning, in the strict sense it refers to the seven sacraments (outward and effective signs of grace), among which is the sacrament of "Holy Orders". Within this sacrament were different "orders" or "grades", between seven and nine in number. The diaconate and the priesthood were always listed among the ordines sacri of the sacrament, and the sub-diaconate began to be included among them because of its requirement of celibacy; the episcopate was excluded from them in most cases.114 According to Peter Lombard (+ 1160),115 the diaconate was an ordo or gradus qfficiorum (the sixth). Although he held that all the ordines were spirituales et sacri, he underlined the excellence of the diaconate and the priesthood, the only ones which existed in the primitive Church by the will of the Apostles, while the others had been instituted by the Church in the course of time. He did not consider the episcopate to share in this excellence, saying that it did not belong to the sacramental ordines but rather to the domain of dignities and offices.116 II. From St. Thomas Aquinas (+ 1273) to Trent (1563) 1. Affirmation of Sacramentality Saint Thomas' teaching on the diaconate117 included the fact that it was a sacrament insofar as it belonged to Holy Orders, one of the seven sacraments of the new law. He considered that each of the different orders constituted in some way a sacramental reality; however, only three (priest, deacon and sub-deacon) could strictly be said to be ordines sacri by reason of their special relation to the Eucharist.118 But it should not be concluded that their sacramentality meant that the priesthood and the diaconate were different sacraments; the distinction between the orders did not indicate that each was a universal or integral whole, but indicated a potestative wholeness.119 The way that the unity and oneness of the sacrament of Holy Orders was bound together in its different grades had to do with their reference to the Eucharist, Sacramentum sacramentorum.120 Because of that, the different orders needed a sacramental consecration depending on their type of power with respect to the Eucharist. Through ordination priests received the power to consecrate, while deacons received the power to serve the priests in the administration of the sacraments.121 The relationship of each order to the Eucharist became the deciding factor in avoiding the idea that each order gave the power to administer a specific sacrament. The same criterion also served to exclude the orders of psalmist and cantor from the sacramental orders. But this criterion was also used to exclude the episcopate from sacramentality.122 In spite of everything, although Saint Thomas refuses to recognise in the episcopate any sort of power superior to that of the priest in relation to the verum corpus Christi, he considers the episcopate to be also an ordo in a certain way, by reason of the powers which the bishop holds over the corpus mysticum.123 Because the diaconate is a sacrament, it is an ordo which imprints a character on the soul. Saint Thomas applies this doctrine to baptism, confirmation and Holy Orders. His thinking on this developed with time. Starting from the priesthood of Christ he defined Holy Orders alone as imprinting a character (In IV Sent), but finally defined the complete doctrine of character (STh).124 On the subject of the diaconate, he explained all its potestates, in relation to the dispensatio of the sacraments, as something that seemed to belong rather within the domain of what was "licit" and not within the domain of a new radical enablement with regard to the "validity" of the functions in question.125 In his turn, in Summa theologiae, III, q. 67, a. 1, he asks whether evangelizing and baptizing are part of the deacon s office, and he answers that no direct administration of the sacraments belongs to the diaconate quasi ex proprio officio, any more than any task in relation with docere, but only with cathechizare126 2. Sacramentality Called into Question Durandus of Saint-Pourfain (+ 1334) represented a doctrinal line which was to reappear intermittently up until the present day. According to this line, only ordination to the priesthood is a "sacrament"; the other orders, including the diaconate, were only "sacramentals".127 The reasons for his position were as follows: a. with regard to the Eucharist, the distinction between the power of consecrating, which belonged exclusively to the order of the priesthood (which should be considered a sacrament) and the preparatory actions, which belonged to the other orders (merely considered as sacramentals); b. in the same way as with baptism, there was a "potestas ad suscipiendum sacramenta"; but it was only the priesthood that was granted a "postestas ordinis ad conficiendum vel conferendum ea", which was not granted to any of the orders inferior to the priesthood, not even to the diaconate; c. ordination to the priesthood grants a power ad posse and not ad licere, so that the ordained priest can really do something which he could not do before his ordination. The diaconate, on the other hand, grants the capacity to do licite something that he could in fact do before, although illicitly, and this is why the diaconate can be considered as an institution or ecclesial deputation to exercise certain functions; d. it is also demanded by the unity of the sacrament of Orders and the evaluation of the priesthood as the fullness of this sacrament, since otherwise it would be hard to preserve the meaning of what Saint Thomas said on the unity and oneness of the sacrament of Holy Orders;128 e. the distinction between sacramentum and sacramentalia did not, however, prevent Durandus from saying that each of the orders imprints a "character". He distinguished in his turn between a deputatio which had its origin in God himself, and made the order in question a sacramentum, and an ecclesiastical deputatio instituted by the Church, which only made the orders in question (all the other orders) sacramentalia. In this sense it could be said that the diaconate imprints a character; the doubt or debate concerned exactly when the character was imprinted, since some maintained that it would come "in traditione libri evangeliorum" (an opinion which Durandus rejected) while others held that it came "in impositione manuum" (an opinion which he appeared to adopt).129 3. The Teaching of Trent (1563) The Council of Trent chose to make a dogmatic definition of Holy Orders as a sacrament; the direction of its doctrinal statements leaves no doubt on the subject. However, it is not clear to what extent the sacramentality of the diaconate should be considered as being included in this definition. The question has remained a controversial one to the present day, although very few people indeed now debate the subject. This makes it necessary to interpret the statements of the Council of Trent. As against the denials of the Reformers, Trent declared the existence of a hierarchia in Ecclesia ordinatione divina (which led to a rejection of the statement "omnes christianos promiscue Novi Testamenti sacerdotes esse") and also a hierarchia ecclesiastica (which led to the distinction between the different grades within the sacrament of Holy Orders).130 The references by Trent to the diaconate (which it also refers to explicitly) need to be set within the general theology of the sacrament of Holy Orders. However, it is not entirely certain that the dogmatic declarations of Trent on the sacramentality and the sacramental character of the priesthood, to which Trent refers explicitly, include an intention on the part of the Council to define the sacramentality of the diaconate as well. According to Trent deacons are mentioned directly in the New Testament, although it is not stated that they were instituted directly by Christ the Saviour. In accordance with the way the other orders are envisaged, the diaconate is also conceived of as a help to exercising "dignius et maiore cum veneratione ministerium tarn Sancti sacerdotii" and to serve the priesthood "ex officio" (it is not said to be "ad ministerium episcopi"). Furthermore, the diaconate appears to be a stage on the way to the priesthood - there is no explicit mention of a permanent diaconate.131 When Trent defined dogmatically that ordo or sacra ordinatio was "vere sacramentum",132 there was no explicit mention of the diaconate, which was included among the ordines ministrorum.133 Thus, if the dogmatic statement of sacramentality is to be applied to the diaconate, it should perhaps be applied equally to the other ordines ministrorum, which seems excessive and unjustified. Something similar can be said on the subject of the doctrine of "sacramental character".134 In view of the expressions used by the Council, there can be no doubt that Trent referred explicitly and directly to the "priests of the New Testament", to distinguish them clearly from the "laypeople". There is no mention made of "deacons", either direct or indirect; therefore it would be difficult to see in the text of Trent any intention to establish the dogma of character for the diaconate. Can. 6 merits particular attention ("si quis dixerit in Ecclesia catholica non esse hierarchiam, divina ordinatione institutam, quae constat ex episcopis, presbyteris et ministris, a.s."135) because of different interpretations of the word ministris: deacons, or deacons and other ministers, or all the other orders? Right up until the day before its approval (14 July 1563), the text of can. 6 said "et aliis ministris". That day, in view of petitions made by a Spanish group, the expression aliis ministris was altered to exclude the word aliis. But the reasons and scope of this change are not very clear.136 How should the term ministris, and their inclusion in the hierarchia, be interpreted? The exclusion of the word aliis means, according to some, that the dividing line within the ecclesiastical hierarchy should be drawn between sacerdotes (bishops and priests) on the one hand, and ministri on the other; the suppression of the word aliis was intended to stress once again that the bishops and priests are not "nudi ministri" but "sacerdotes Novi Testamenti". The history of the text in question, in the light of its previous formulations, would seem to suggest a broad understanding of ministri, to include "diaconos caeterosque ministros", corresponding to a triple division of the hierarchy ("praecipue episcopi, deinde praesbyteri, diaconi et alii ministri"). But it must not be forgotten that according to other authors the suppression of the term aliis meant that the subdiaconate and other minor orders were excluded from the hierarchy "divina ordinatione instituta" - an expression whose interpretation is in its turn polemical.137 To sum up, whether one interprets it exclusively or inclusively, it cannot be doubted that deacons are included in the term ministri. But the dogmatic consequences concerning their sacramentality and their inclusion in the hierarchy will differ, depending on whether the word ministri refers to deacons alone, or includes the other orders too. III. Theological Nuances after Trent After the Council of Trent, in the theology of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, a majority of opinions maintained the sacramentality of the diaconate, with only a minority questioning or denying it. However, the form in which this sacramentality was defended had many differing nuances, and it was generally considered to be a point which had not been dogmatically defined by Trent, and which was reasserted doctrinally in the Roman Catechism where it describes the functions of deacons.138 Thus for example, F. de Vitoria (+ 1546) considers as probabilissima the opinion that "solum sacramentum est saeerdotium" and that all the other orders are sacramentals. D. de Soto (+ 1560), for his part, although in favour of the sacramentality of both the diaconate and the sub-diaconate, considered that anyone who followed Durandus was not to be reprehended.139 Robert Bellarmine (+ 1621) well described the status quaestionis at that point. He established the sacramentality of Holy Orders ("vere ac proprie sacramentum novae legis") as a fundamental principle admitted by all Catholic theologians and denied by (Protestant) heretics. But as regarded the sacramentality of the individual orders he felt it necessary to make a distinction, because although there was unanimous agreement on the sacramentality of the priesthood, this was not the case for the other orders.140 Bellarmine declared himself clearly in favour of the sacramentality of the episcopate ("ordinatio episcopalis sacramentum est vere ac proprie dictum"), as against the scholastics of old who denied it; and he considered this an assertio certissima, based on Scripture and Tradition. Moreover, he spoke of an episcopal character which was distinct from and superior to the character of the presbyterate. As regards the doctrine of the sacramentality of the diaconate, Bellarmine adopted it, considering it very probable; however, he did not take it as a certainty ex fide, since it could not be deduced from the evidence of Scripture nor Tradition nor any explicit pronouncement on the part of the Church.141 Bellarmine was also in favour of the sacramentality of the sub-diaconate, basing his opinion on the doctrine of character, on celibacy, and on the common opinion of theologians, although he recognised that this doctrine was not as certain as that of the diaconate.142 Still less certain, in his view, was the sacramentality of the other minor orders. IV. The Sacramentality of the Diaconate in Vatican II Concerning deacons or the diaconate in the texts of Vatican II (SC 86; LG 20, 28, 29, 41; OE 17; CD 15; DV 25; AG 15, 16) the sacramentality of both modes (permanent and transitory) was taken for granted. Sometimes it was stated simply in passing, or indirectly, or faintly. Taken all together, the texts of Vatican II repeated what had been the majority opinion in theology up to that time, but went no further. Neither did the Council clarify a number of uncertainties which were expressed in the course of the debates. 1. In the Conciliar Debates The sacramentality of the diaconate was a theme tackled in several interventions in the second period of the Council (1963). The result was a majority in favour, particularly among those who upheld the institution of the permanent diaconate; among who opposed such an institution, there was no majority in favour of the sacramentality of the diaconate.143 In the relatio of the doctrinal Commission, some explanatory notes on the text are presented which are of interest in interpreting it. The notes give the exegetical reason for not directly mentioning Acts 6:1-6,144and also explain the moderate way in which the sacramentality of the diaconate is mentioned, as caused by unwillingness to give the impression of condemning those who questioned it.145 The conciliar debate did not in fact reach unanimity on the sacramental nature of the diaconate. Also of interest for interpretation of the texts are the nuances introduced into the summary of the discussion. Among the arguments in favour of restoration, mention was first made of the sacramental nature of the diaconate, of which the Church ought not to be deprived. Among the arguments against restoration the main one was undoubtedly that of celibacy. But others were added, such as whether or not the diaconate was needed for tasks which could be carried out by laypeople. The following questions were asked under this heading: whether all tasks were to be considered, or only some of them; whether those tasks were of a regular nature or were exceptional; whether or not there was a privation of the special graces linked to the sacramentality of the diaconate; whether negative or positive influences on the apostolate of the laity could be considered; whether it was appropriate to recognise ecclesially, by ordination, the diaconal tasks which were in fact already being carried out; and whether deacons' (and especially married deacons') possible situation as a "bridge" between the higher clergy and the laity could be considered.146 2. In the Texts of Vatican II In Lumen gentium 29, the proposition according to which there was an imposition of hands on deacons "non ad sacerdotium, sed ad ministerium" was to become a key reference for the theological understanding of the diaconate. However, many questions have been left open up until the present day for the following reasons: the suppression of the reference to the bishop in the formula which was settled upon;147 the dissatisfaction felt by certain people about the ambiguity in that formula;148 the interpretation given by the Commission;149 and the scope of the actual distinction between sacerdotium and ministerium. In Lumen gentium 28a, the term ministerium is used in a double sense in turn: (a) to refer to the ministry of the bishops, who as successors of the Apostles partake of the "consecration" and "mission" received by Christ from his Father, which they hand on in various degrees to different individuals, without explicit mention being made of deacons;150 [and] (b) to refer to the "ecclesiastical ministry" as a whole, divinely established on different levels, embracing those who from antiquity have been called bishops, priests and deacons.151 In the relevant note, Vatican II gives a reference to Trent, session 23, cap. 2 and can. 6.152 The same sort of caution can be observed in both sources in the expressions which relate to the diversity of grades: "ordinatione divina" (Trent), "divinitus institutum" (Vatican II); "ab ipso Ecclesiae initio" (Trent), "ab antiquo" or else "inde ab Apostolis" according to Ad gentes 16 (Vatican II).153 The statement which relates most directly to the sacramentality of the diaconate is found in Lumen gentium 29a: "gratia enim sacramentali roborati, in diaconia liturgiae, verbi et caritatis populo Dei, in communione cum Episcopo eiusque presbyterio, inserviunt"; and also in Ad gentes 16: "lit ministerium suum per gratiam sacramentalem diaconatus efficacius expleant". The expression gratia sacramentalis is prudent, appropriate for an interjection, and much more nuanced than the formula "sacramental ordination" employed in the previous project of Lumen gentium in 1963. Why was this caution apparent in the expressions finally used? The doctrinal Commission referred to the basis in tradition of what is affirmed, and to the concern to avoid giving the impression that those who had doubts on the subject were being condemned.154 3. The Sacramentality of the Diaconate in Post-Conciliar Developments 1. Mention must first be made of the document which puts the Council's decisions into effect, i.e. the Motu Proprio of Pope Paul VI, Sacrum diaconatus ordinem (1967). In what concerns the theological nature of the diaconate, it takes up what Vatican II said about the gratia of the diaconate, while adding a reference to the indelible "character" (absent from the Council texts), and it is understood as a "stable" service.155 As a grade of the sacrament of Holy Orders, it bestows the capacity to exercise tasks which mostly belong to the domain of the liturgy (eight out of the eleven mentioned). In some expressions these appear as tasks which are deputized or delegated.156 Thus it is not clear up to what point the diaconal "character" confers the capacity for some competencies or powers which could only be exercised by reason of previous sacramental ordination; since there is another way of accessing them (by delegation or deputizing, and not by reason of the sacrament of Holy Orders). 2. The most recent step taken in the Motu Proprio of Pope Paul VI, Ad pascendum (1972) refers to the instituting of the permanent diaconate (not excluding it as a transitory stage) as a "middle order" between the upper hierarchy and the rest of the People of God. In what concerns sacramentality, as well as considering this medius ordo as "signum vel sacramentum ipsius Christi Domini, qui non venit ministrari, sed ministrare", the document presupposes the sacramentality of the diaconate and limits itself to repeating the aforementioned expressions such as sacra ordinatio or sacrum ordinem.157 3. Following some positions which had already been taken up before Vatican II, certain authors expressed their doubts with regard to the sacramentality of the diaconate more explicitly and with detailed arguments, after the Council too. Their motives were varied. J. Beyer (1980) primarily presented his analysis of the conciliar texts, whose silence on the distinction between the power of "order" and of "jurisdiction" seemed to him to avoid rather than provide a solution to the questions which were still unresolved.158 The same would apply to the fluctuation in meaning which could be accorded to the term ministerium, and the contrast between it and sacerdotium. He further evaluated the caution shown in the Council texts not only as the result of concern to avoid condemning anyone, but also as a result of doctrinal hesitations.159 This was why further clarification was needed of the question: "Estne diaconatus pars sacerdotii sicut et episcopatus atque presbyteratus unum sacerdotium efficiunt?" This need was not satisfied by referring to the "common priesthood" of the faithful and excluding deacons from the "sacrificing" priesthood (cf. Philips). According to Tradition, the ministerial priesthood was "unum" and "unum sacramentum". If it was this sacramental priesthood alone which rendered someone capable of acting in persona Christi with effect ex opere operato, then it would be hard to call the diaconate a "sacrament" because it was not instituted to accomplish any act in persona Christi with effect ex opere operato. Additionally, further careful investigation was needed into the statements of Trent and also into the normative value of its references to the diaconate.160 The acts of Vatican II, the development of the schemas, the various interventions and the relatio of the relevant Commission, also needed a careful re-reading. It could be concluded from this relatio that a solution had not altogether been found of the difficulties with regard to the following points: (a) the exegetical foundation of the institution of the diaconate (Acts 6:1-6 was excluded because it was open to debate, and consideration was limited to the simple mentions of deacons in Philippians 1:1 and First Timothy 3:8-12); [and] (b) the theological justification of the sacramental nature of the diaconate, in connection with the intention of re-establishing its permanent mode. In conclusion: if Vatican II spoke cautiously and ex obliquo of the sacramental nature of the diaconate, it was not only from a concern not to condemn anyone, but rather because of the "incertitudo doctrinae".161 Therefore, to confirm its sacramental nature, neither the majority opinion of theologians (which had also existed concerning the sub-diaconate), nor the mere description of the rite of ordination (which needed to be clarified from other sources) nor the mere imposition of hands (which could be non-sacramental in character) was sufficient. 4. In the new Codex Iuris Canonici of 1983, the diaconate is spoken of from the standpoint of its sacramentality, introducing certain developments which deserve comment. This is true of cann. 1008-1009. The diaconate is one of the three orders, and the CIC seems to apply to it the general theology of the sacrament of Holy Orders in its integrity162 If this application is valid, then it follows from it that the diaconate is a sacramental reality, of divine institution, which makes deacons sacri ministri (in the CIC, those who are baptized and ordained), imprints on them an "indelible character" (taking for granted what was said by Paul VI) and by reason of their consecration and deputation ("consecrantur et deputantur") renders them capable of exercising in persona Christi Capitis and in the grade which corresponds to them ("pro suo quisque gradu") the tasks of teaching, sanctifying and ruling, in other words the functions proper to those who are called to guide the People of God. Integrating the diaconate within the general theology of the sacrament of Holy Orders in this way raises certain questions. Can it be theologically maintained that deacons, even pro suo gradu, really exercise the "munera docendi, sanctificandi et regendi" in persona Christi Capitis as do bishops and priests? Is that not something particular and exclusive to those who have received sacramental ordination and the consequent power to "conficere corpus et sanguinem Christi", i.e. to consecrate the Eucharist, which does not belong to deacons in any way? Should the CIC's expression in persona Christi Capitis be understood in a broader sense so that it can also be applied to the functions of deacons? How, then, should the Council's statement be interpreted, which says that deacons are "non ad sacerdotium, sed ad ministerium"? Can the task of "pascere populum Dei" be considered an effect of the sacramentality of the diaconate? Would not arguing over its "powers" lead to an impasse? It is very natural that the CIC should concern itself specially and at length with the faculties proper to deacons, and it does so in several canons.163 In cann. 517, 2 and 519 deacons are mentioned with reference to cooperation with the parish priest as "pastor proprius", and to the possibility of granting them a share in the exercise of the cura pastoralis (can. 517, 2). This possibility of sharing in the exercise of the cura pastoralis paroeciae (which refers in the first place to deacons, although it can also be granted to laypeople) raises the question of the capacity of the deacon to assume the pastoral guidance of the community, and takes up again, with different nuances, what had already been established by Ad gentes 16 and Sacrum diaconatus 5/22. Although these points referred directly to regere, can. 517, 2 speaks in a more nuanced way of "participatio in exercitio curae pastoralis". In any case, with reference to the possibility opened by can. 517, which is presented as a last solution, more precise thought needs to be given to the real participation of deacons, by reason of their diaconal ordination, in the "cura animarum" and the task of "pascere populum Dei".164 5. The recent Catechismus Catholicae Ecclesiae (CCE), in its definitive 1997 edition, seems to speak more decidedly in favour of the sacramentality of the diaconate. It states that the potestas sacra to act in persona Christi only corresponds to the bishops and priests, whereas deacons hold "vim populo Dei serviendi" in their various diaconal functions (no. 875). It also mentions deacons when, concerning the sacrament of Holy Orders, it considers "ordination" as a "sacramental act" enabling recipients to exercise a "sacred power" which proceeds ultimately from Jesus Christ alone (no. 1538). On the one hand it seems that according to the CCE deacons could also be included in a certain way in a general understanding of the sacrament of Holy Orders under some categories of the priesthood, since it mentions them from this point of view at the same time as bishops and priests in nos. 1539-43. On the other hand in the definitive version of no. 1554 it justifies the restriction of the term sacerdos to bishops and priests, excluding deacons, while maintaining that deacons also belong to the sacrament of Holy Orders (no. 1554). Finally, the idea of sacramentality is strengthened by the explicit attribution of the doctrine of "character" to deacons as a special configuration with Christ, deacon and servant of all (no. 1570). 6. The recent Ratio fundamentalis (1998), which recognises the difficulties that exist in reaching an understanding of the "germana natura" of the diaconate, nevertheless firmly upholds the clarity of the doctrinal elements ("clarissime definita", nos. 3 and 10) on the basis of original diaconal practise and conciliar indications. There is no doubt that we have here a way of speaking of the specific identity of the deacon which offers certain novelties in comparison with what has usually been the case up till now. The deacon has a specific configuration with Christ, Lord and Servant.165 To this configuration there corresponds a spirituality whose distinguishing mark is "serviceability", which by ordination makes the deacon into a living "icon" of Christ the Servant in the Church (no. 11). This is offered in justification of restricting the configuration with Christ the Head and Shepherd to priests. But configuration with Christ the "Servant", and "service" as a characteristic of the ordained minister, are also valid for priests; so that it is not very clear what is "specifically diaconal" in this service, what it is that might express itself in functions or "munera" (cf. no. 9) which were the exclusive competence of deacons by reason of their sacramental capacity. All in all, the Ratio clearly affirms the sacramentality of the diaconate as well as its sacramental character, in the perspective of a common theology of the sacrament of Holy Orders and the respective character which it confers.166 Here the language is decisive and explicit, although it is not altogether clear to what extent it is the expression of more consistent theological developments or a new or better-justified base. V. Conclusion The doctrinal position in favour of the sacramentality of the diaconate is broadly speaking the majority opinion of theologians from the twelfth century to the present day and it is taken for granted in the practise of the Church and in most documents of the Magisterium; it is upheld by those who defend the permanent diaconate (for celibate or married people) and constitutes an element which includes a large number of the propositions in favour of the diaconate for women. Despite everything, this doctrinal position faces questions which need to be clarified more fully, either through the development of a more convincing theology of the sacramentality of the diaconate, or through a more direct and explicit intervention by the Magisterium, or by a more successful attempt to connect and harmonize the various elements. The path which was followed concerning the sacramentality of the episcopate could be taken as a decisive and instructive reference point. Among the questions requiring deeper or more fully developed theology are the following: (a) the normative status of the sacramentality of the diaconate as it was fixed by the doctrinal interventions of the Magisterium, especially in Trent and in Vatican II; (b) the "unity" and "oneness" of the sacrament of Holy Orders in its diverse grades; (c) the exact scope of the distinction "non ad sacerdotium, sed ad ministerium (episcopi)"; (d) the doctrine of the character of the diaconate and its specificity as a configuration with Christ; [and] (e) the "powers" conferred by the diaconate as a sacrament. To reduce sacramentality to the question of potestates would undoubtedly be an overly narrow approach; ecclesiology offers broader and richer perspectives. But in the case of the sacrament of Holy Orders, this question cannot be passed over with the excuse that it is too narrow. The other two grades of Holy Orders, the episcopate and the priesthood, give a capacity, by reason of sacramental ordination, for tasks which an unordained person cannot perform validly. Why should it be otherwise for the diaconate? Does the difference lie in the way in which the munera are exercised or in the personal quality of the person performing them? But how could this be rendered theologically credible? If in fact these functions can be exercised by a layperson, what justification is there for the argument that they have their source in a new and distinct sacramental ordination? The discussion of diaconal powers gives rise once again to general questions on: the nature or condition of the potestas sacra in the Church, the connection of the sacrament of Holy Orders with the "potestas conficiendi eucharistiam", and the need to widen ecclesiological perspectives beyond a narrow view of this connection. CHAPTER V THE RESTORATION OF THE PERMANENT DIACONATE AT VATICAN II In three places, Vatican II uses different terms to describe what it intends to do when it speaks of the diaconate as a stable rank of the hierarchy of the Church. Lumen gentium 29b uses the notion of restitutio,167 Ad gentes 16f uses that of restauratio,168 while Orientalium Ecclesiarum 17 employs the word instauratio.169 All three connote the idea of restoring, renewing, re-establishing, and re-activating. In the present c