Workington.
217. _Full Orders._--This term is well understood to mean those orders
conferred in the church which elevate a deacon to the rank of a priest,
capable of a full and entire performance of the duties of the Christian
ministry. An interesting point has recently been stirred afresh,
touching the validity of any ministerial commission which does not draw
its authority from the imposition of episcopal hands. I am not proposing
to start a controversial question, unsuited to the quiet and pleasant
pages of "NOTES AND QUERIES;" but there branches out from this question
a Query solely relating to the Church of England, and involving no
dispute; and therefore I beg to ask, whether our church holds that a
bishop can confer the full orders of the priesthood without any
concomitant laying on of the hands of the presbytery? The rubric in the
office for the Ordering of Priests, says, "_The Bishop with the Priests
present shall lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that
receiveth the order of Priesthood_:" and the Bishop then says, "Receive
the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest in the Church of God,
now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands," &c. Is, then,
the aid of the priests _essential_ to the due performance of the rite?
Does the expression "_our_ hands" mean both bishop's and priests' hands,
as the joint instruments of conveying authority to do the work and
office of a priest? Is there any instance of an Anglican bishop
ordaining a priest without assistance? I am aware that Beveridge
considers that the bishop's hands alone are sufficient; that it has
never been the practice in the Greek or the Eastern churches for priests
to take a part in the ceremony of conferring "full orders;" and that the
custom of their doing so is referred to a decree of the Council of
Carthage, A.D. 398, which says, "When a priest is ordained, the
bishop blessing him and laying the hand upon his head, let all the
priests also, that are present, hold their hands upon his head, by the
hands of the bishop." Without the slightest reference to which is really
the orthodox method, I would merely ask, whether the Church of England
could _legally_ forego the intervention of the priests, just as the
Church of Scotland dispenses with the aid of bishops in the act of
conferring "full orders?"