WHAT IS AN ORTHODOX CATHOLIC PRIEST MAR RAMON ALLEE, S.S.B., D.D. HOLY ORTHODOX CHURCH (AMERICAN JURISDICTION) THE HUMAN USE OF DIVINE POWERS IN THE SACRAMENT MYSTERIES Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew. So were His Apostles. Christianity originated within the Jewish milieu of Palestine and its first activity centered there. Building His kingdom upon Jewish foundations, Jesus took many usages, practices and beliefs from His own people and put new reality into them, sometimes with unheard of, almost incredible meanings. When He instituted the Sacraments, He did not invent them ex nihilo: He took practices already familiar to His people and made them into infallible instruments of Divine Grace to fulfill uniquely Christian needs. He endowed, for example, the Jewish ritual bath, or "baptism", which was a mere symbol of moral change, with the tremendous power of spirituality regenerating men through water and the Holy Spirit, making them "sons of God." The age-old familiar gesture of healing and blessing - the imposition of hands - He remade into the instrument of actually imparting the Holy Spirit. Taking the Jewish traditional signs of oneness and unity, the bread and wine blessed and consummated in the Last Supper, He transformed them into the Eucharist, into His own Body and Blood, which effects real union and oneness with the partakers. He utilized the Jewish practice of "binding and loosing", the Jewish repentance and confession, with actual forgiveness of sins imparted in time and in eternity. He transformed the Jewish anointing of the sick, which had only earthly, natural effects, into the unction of the sick, which always cures spiritually, saves the sick person, and sometimes restores bodily health. He refashioned marriage, which had been only a contract, albeit a sacred, solemn one, into an effectual channel of grace for His baptized followers. - 1 - The prototype of Judaic priestly institutions and leadership He remade into the Sacrament of Priestly Orders to provide His ecclesia (Holy Church) with dispensers of His divine powers. Jesus, as we shall see, truly gave the Apostles the divine powers to do these things, that is to "perform" the Sacraments, and commissioned them not only to use these powers themselves but to transmit the same capacity to others. They, in turn, did just that: they actually bestowed or transferred the same capability to their successors, with effects that God would ratify. To help us understand how this was possible, we turn to the "Apostles" and to the Scriptural meaning of the term. The concept of "Apostle" was not an invention of Jesus, but can be traced to its Jewish counterpart. the Christian "Apostle", as St. Jerome points out, is recognized in the Jewish prototype of shaliach: the Jews had envoy-representatives - friends or slaves, "sent" as plenipotentiaries not only "in the name", but "in the person" of their principals. The envoy's action committed the principal as if he had been present. this concept appears in Genesis chapter 24: Abraham had sent a shaliach to procure a wife for his son Isaac from among his own countrymen; when the shalicah's choice fell on Rebecca, her father Bethuel and brother Laban could act without hesitation, for they knew that Abraham was bound by his shaliach's action and could not disavow it. The Judaic institution, both secular and religious, was well known in the time of Christ. Jewish references to the office of shaliach are numerous, though most from the Christian era - form the "Apostles" of the High Priest and Sanhedrin to those of the Patriarch of Jamnia, who seems to have "ordained them with the imposition of hands and sent - 2 - them on their missions. Jewish congregations used to appoint a shaliach to represent them before God and man. The Talmud itself cites the rabbinic adage, "A man's shaliach is as it were (or "like") himself" - and this at least nine times! When founding His Church, Jesus utilized the concept behind this Jewish institution - personal representation through a plenipotentiary - and adapted it to Christian purposes. His people appreciated its full import, the Jewish tradition behind it, and especially the fact that the principal could never repudiate his shaliach's action. When Christ gave His twelve chosen ones the divine power of forgiving sins, He prefaced His action by saying, "As the Father sent Me, so am I sending you" (John 20:31). They immediately understood that the Father sent Jesus as His shaliach and they in turn were to be his; and they, as shelihim (Plural of shaliach) of Jesus in using the power of pardoning sins, were unalterably committed to the divine principal for both Jesus and His Father in Heaven. Whatever they pardoned on earth would be pardoned in Heaven, and whatever they retained would be retained. At the Last Supper, after He had washed the feet of His disciples, Jesus explained His action as an example to them and told them: "I tell you most solemnly, no servant is greater than his master, no "Apostle - Shaliach") is greater than the Man who sent him" (John 13:16). In fact, His farewell discourse is largely based on the concept of the shaliach; "Whoever welcomes the one I send welcomes Me, and whoever welcomes Me welcomes the One who sent Me"; "If you know Me, you know My Father too"; "The words I say to you I do not speak as from Myself; it is the Father, living in Me, who is doing this - 3 - work. You will understand that I am in My Father and you in Me and I in you"; "I am the vine, you are the branches," etc. The Apostles did not receive an unlimited right to act in the Lord's Name: their power extended only to those matters which He had entrusted to them; they had no mandate to re-establish polygamy, to allow murder, fornication, etc., as such conduct violated God's laws and He was not about to change is Law! Their commission was to preach His word, to baptize ("Go, therefore, make disciples of all the nations; baptize them ... and teach them to observe all the commands I gave you: (Matthew 28:19 f,), to make the Eucharist. (This is My Body ... do this in anamnesis of Me" Luke 22:19), etc. If this concept of shaliach-Apostle was so important, why was it so seldom applied to the twelve in the Gospels? The answer is simple: the shaliach is the principal's envoy-representative, but when the principal is present, there is no need of representing him. He can act for himself. As long as Jesus was present, He acts in His own Name. Mark, who never used the expression, refers to the concept when he writes: "And He appointed twelve; they were to be His companions and to be sent out to preach, with power to cast out devils. And so He appointed them" (Mark 3:13-15). Neither did Matthew ever use the word, yet he draws a parallel between the mission of the Twelve and that of Christ (Matthew 9:35; 10:7-8). Luke draws the same parallel (9:1 f.), and uses the expression twice. In short, just as Jesus was, in the words of the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews: "the Apostle and High Priest of our religion" (Hebrews 3:1), "being the - 4 - plenipotentiary of God, so after Christ's Ascension the twelve are His Apostle-shelihim, His plenipotentiaries doing in His Name whatever He had commissioned them to do. From then on, the "Apostle" began exercising their functions as shelihim of the Lord, nd the term"Apostles" began to be used. Soon others were added: Matthias (to fill the vacancy left by Judas), James, "the brother of the Lord" (James the son of Zebedee was already an Apostle), and Saul of Tarsus, later known as Paul. Whenever St. Paul says he acted "in the Name of the Lord," or "in the Person of Christ," the shaliach-concept is implied. Christ's appointment of the original Twelve was well known; His was not. So, when his authority was challenged by the Galatians, he begins, "From Paul to the churches of Galatia, and from all the brothers who are here with me," and significantly, insistingly adds, "an Apostle who does not owe his authority to men or his appointment to any human being, who has been appointed by Jesus Christ and by God the Father who raised Jesus from the dead" (Galatians 1:1 ff.). The title "Apostle" is given to Barnabas (Acts 14:14), Silvanus (1 Thessalonians 2:6), Andronicus and Junias Romans 16:7), etc. These were not "witnesses of these things" as had been the original Twelve, but they are shelihim, commissioned by shelihim of the Lord, and were fulfilling the functions of "Apostles." So were Timothy and Titus. Successors, presbyters and bishops, had been indeed appointed by the Apostles (Acts 14:23) or by their representatives (Titus 1:5), through the imposition of hands (1 Timothy 5:22; cf. 1 Timothy 4:14; 2 Timothy 1:6), and their power derived from the Holy Spirit (Acts 20:28). These were true shelihim of God, with the same power and authority as the original - 5 - Apostles. James, for example, writes about having presbyters anoint the sick "in the Name of the Lord." When anointing by His authority and power, they are acting as His shelihim - their action committing the Lord as if He Himself had performed it - for it would result in the sick man being saved, his sins forgiven, etc. (James 5:13-16). Obviously, the mandate had been transferred. This appears to differ from Jewish custom whereby a shaliach could not appoint a successor. Jesus changed the custom, extending its use to include "deputizing" or commissioning others. Each ordination is a joint divine and human action: the ordaining bishop calls down the Holy Spirit, the divine principal, who "makes" the new shaliach-bishop or priest, giving him divine authority and power (cf. Acts 20:28). Each ordination, therefore, empowers the elect with the same capability to act in the Divine Name as had the original Apostles (except that mere priests cannot ordain others). The shaliach-principle utilized by our Lord in His Sacrament of Holy Orders aids us immeasurably in understanding the human use of divine powers in pardoning sins, in conferring the Holy Spirit, in transforming bread and wine into Christ's Body and blood, etc., and indeed, in creating new shelihim or priests of God - and, finally, in understanding how these divine powers are transmitted from one shaliach of the Lord to another in the Apostolic Succession. In all of this, we see that Christianity is not merely a new Judaism but is sui generis, completely unique and differing from anything the world has ever known. Why? Because, among other things, in conferring the Sacraments, priests and bishops truly act as God's plenipotentiaries, as His shelihim, using His divine powers in a real way "as it were Himself!" - 6 - THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PRIESTLY ORDERS As Jesus took familiar usages and put new reality into them when He established the other Sacraments, so did He do with Holy Orders. We have already seen how the principle or concept behind the Jewish office of shaliach provided the base for establishing His "Apostles" as His envoy- representatives, "sent" as plenipotentiaries not only "in the Name" but "in the Person" of Christ-God. Whatever they were charged to do as His shelihim, they were exercising His divine powers to a degree no man dared to imagine. To forgive sins was beyond human dreams, yet He charged them: "As the Father sent Me, so am I sending you ... Receive the Holy Spirit. For those whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven ..." (John 20:21 ff.). No man could have thought of regenerating other men, making them "sons of God," "participants in His Divine Nature," through water and the Holy Spirit, through baptism, yet He commissioned them to do so: "All authority in Heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Go, therefore ... baptize them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:18 ff.). The absolutely unimaginable feat of making it possible for mere man to literally partake of the Body and Blood of the God-man is even incomprehensible today, yet at the Last Supper, after transmuting bread and wine into His own Body and Blood, Jesus charged the Apostles to do the same: "Do this in anamnesis of Me." (Luke 22:19). In these and all the other sacramental actions, the Apostles were indeed shelihim of the Lord, His plenipotentiaries, doing, acting in His Name and in His -7 - Person, committing Him as if He Himself were personally present and effecting these things. They were His agents, obeying His instructions, irrevocably committing Him to accomplish whatever effects their actions entailed: forgiving sins, imparting the Holy Spirit of Pentecost, changing bread and wine into His Body and Blood, etc. Theirs was the earthly action, His the spiritual effect. Though a Jewish shaliach could not pass on to another the authority and power committed to himself, the plenipotentiaries of Jesus could and did transfer their powers to others. These, in turn, acted in the Lord's Name and in His Person. Preaching the Gospel message, performing the Sacramental Mysteries, etc., were essential functions in the Church's mission and, therefore, had to be handed on. Thus, other "apostles" were made who carried on the same functions (e.g., Acts 1:15; 9:18). In James Epistle, we read that presbyters should be called in to anoint the sick "in the Name of the Lord," so that the Lord would save and raise up the sick man and His sin be forgiven (James 5:14 f.). These presbyters had already been made shelihim of the Lord. In Jewish communities, both in Palestine and in the Diaspora, the presbyteroi, the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew zeqenim, formed the body of "Elders" administering Jewish community affairs. They were elected and ordained to this office for life by the laying- on of hands. Generally, in large communities of the Diaspora, an executive committee, consisting of a chairman, treasurer, and other officers, was elected annually from among the "presbyters." Not connected with the Aaronic priesthood, their functions were primarily civil, administrative, financial and judiciary, - 8 - including all corporate dealings with Gentile authorities on behalf of the Jewish community. Though the presbyterate may be called a civil administration, it was far from being a totally secular one, for we must remember Judaism was an ecclesia precisely to the extent that it was a nation, the People of God. Therefore, in a very real way, their civil government was regarded as a religious function. The law of the community was the Torah, primarily a religious code, even in its civil application, and in all the rabbinical minutiae added to it. The Elders or presbyters administered this law and addenda, taught and explained it to the people; again, this work was fundamentally spiritual and, like the judges of the Old Testament, the presbyters were regarded as divinely endowed and set apart for it. Moses is credited with instituting the presbyterate. When the burden of leading Israel became too much of him, Moses gathered seventy Elders of the people on instruction from Yahweh, who then "took some of the spirit that was on him [Moses] and put it on the seventy (cf. Number 11:14-25). The Scriptures are more specific in the "ordination" of Joshua by Moses who did it by the laying-on of hands: "Moses did as Yahweh had ordered. He took Joshua and brought him before Eleazar the priest and the whole community, laid his hands on him and gave him his orders" (Numbers 27:22 f.). From then on, the laying-on of hands was used to "ordain" other presbyter-elders for their functions, and this, by those who had themselves been ordained in the same way. The action was designed to "transmit" the spirit received by Moses to successive Elders: Moses transmitted the spirit to Joshua, Joshua to his successor, and so on to all the Elders of Israel (Cf. Numbers 27:18 ff.; Deuteronomy 34:9). - 9 - In Jerusalem, the high-priest was the permanent member of the Great Sanhedrin of seventy-one members chosen from the Aaronic priesthood and rabbinically recommended laymen. Though their functions as zeqenim of the Great Sanhedrin were chiefly judiciary and legal, the religious implications of the Law were such that essentially it was a spiritual work. As late as the second century A.D., we read of the Patriarch of Jamnia and two of his presbyters imposing hands on recently elected members of the Sanhedrin. This "ordination" could have been in an unbroken line of succession from Moses and Joshua. Even when the high-priest was president of the Sanhedrin, however, the ordination conferred by him had no relation with the Aaronic priesthood, this office was an hereditary right to official religious Tabernacle and Temple worship, in the sanctuary: also the offering of incense twice daily (Exodus 30:7); the weekly renewal of the loaves of proposition (Leviticus 24:9), the cleaning and filling of the oil lamps (Leviticus 24:1); in the outer court,the maintaining of the sacred fire on the Altar of Burnt Sacrifices (Exodus 29:38 ff.). At subsidiary services, the Aaronic priests had to sound the trumpets announcing the Holy Days (Numbers 10:1 ff.), declare lepers clean or unclean (Leviticus 13 and 14; Deuteronomy 24:8; cf. Matthew 8:4), appraise all objects vowed to the Sanctuary (Leviticus 27), offer sacrifice for those who broke the Law of the Nazarites (that is, the vow to avoid all intoxicating drinks and every uncleanness, especially contact with a corpse, and letting ones hair grow long, Numbers 6:1-21). They also acted as teachers by explaining the Law to the people (Leviticus 10; Deuteronomy 33:10) and as judges, settling difficult lawsuits among the people (Deuteronomy 17:8; 19:17; 21:5). - 10- The solemn consecration of the Aaronites to the priesthood was performed about the same time as the anointing of Aaron as high-priest with almost the same ceremonial (Exodus 29:1-37; 40:12 ff.; Leviticus 8:1-36). The consecration was unique in that it was never repeated: it included all the descendants of the priests, so that the priesthood was hereditary. This was probably one of the reasons why the Aaronic priesthood did not serve as a model for the Christian priesthood: confined exclusively to the House of Aaron, it could hardly serve the universal scope of Christianity. The Aaronic priestly ministrations were local: their liturgical functions were confined first to the Tabernacle, then to the Temple at Jerusalem, but never extended to any synagogue in Palestine or the Diaspora. Christian worship, on the other hand, as Jesus told the Samaritan woman, was not to be confined to Jerusalem or to Mount Gerzim (where the Samaritans had built a Temple rivaling that of Jerusalem). All indications point, not to the Aaronic priesthood, but to the Jewish "presbyerate," or body of Elders, as the pattern on which the Christian priesthood was founded, even to the extent of borrowing its original name from it. Thus, we have a body of "presbyters" (or Elders) governing each Christian community both in Jerusalem (Acts 11:30; 15:2 f.; 21:18) and in the Dispersion (Acts 14:23; 20:27; Titus 1:5). For centuries, priests in the Christian ecclesia were known as "presbyters." Most of the Apostles probably acted as St. Paul did in evangelizing a locality: starting the work, then leaving it to others (cf. 1 Cor. 3:6, 10; Colossians 1:7 f.; Romans 15:23) appointed by him. He writes to titus (1:5-7): "The reason I left you behind in Crete - 11 - was for you to get everything organized there and appoint presbyters in every town, in the way that I told you; that is, each of them must be a man of irreproachable character ..." Since, as president he will be God's representative. "He writes likewise to Timothy (1 Timothy 5:17, 22): "The presbyters who do their work well while they are in charge are to be given double consideration, especially those who are assiduous in preaching and teaching ... Do not be too quick to lay hands on any man ..." Timothy had been consecrated by a similar rite: Make use of the time until I arrive by reading to the people, preaching and teaching. You have in you a spiritual gift (grace) which was given to you when the Prophets spoke, and the body of presbyters laid their hands on you, do not let it lie unused. Think hard about all this and put it into practice" (1 Timothy 4:13-16; cf. Acts 13:3; 14:22). St. Paul (and the presbyters) had laid hands on Timothy, for in another passage he reminds Timothy: "That is why I am reminding you now to fan into flame the gift (grace) that God gave you when I laid my hands on you. God's gift (grace) was not a spirit of timidity but the Spirit of power, and love, and self control" (2 Timothy 1:6-7). These passages contain the essential elements of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. The imposition of hands by those already ordained is the outward sign. The imposition of hands was productive of grace necessary for the ministry, since St. Paul warns Timothy to fan into flame the gift of grace and charges him to teach and preach as a necessary consequence of this grace. Furthermore, this gift was the Spirit of power, which can only be interpreted as that promised by the Lord and realized by the Apostles collectively (Acts 4:33; 1 Cor. 4:20; 54) and individually (Acts 6:8; 1 Cor. 2:4; 2 Cor. 6:7; 12:9), and was now part of the general - 12 - stream of the Pentecostal gift poured out by the Ascended Lord through the imposition of hands. This gift was given for the rightful discharge of official duties. There must have been an element of timidity in Timothy's natural disposition which, it seems, was prejudicial to his efficiency as a Church ruler. Timothy's duties, like those of the presbyters, were not only practical, but also didactic (1 Timothy 3:2; 5:17; Titus 1:9), administrative (1 Timothy 3:5; Titus 1:7), and undoubtedly sacred and religious, as instituted by Christ. As we have seen, the imposition of hands was a gesture of blessing (Matthew 19:15), of healing (Matthew 9:18 f.; Mark 6;5; 7:32; 8:23 ff.; 16:18; Luke 4:40; Acts :12, 17), or of imparting the Holy Spirit to the newly baptized (Acts 1:5 ff.). Here, it is used in consecrating Timothy for a particular ministry, endowing him with a permanent grace-gift for it (as also the case of the seven in Acts 6:6, and of those mentioned in Acts 13:3). St. Paul seems to use the word episcopos and presbyteros interchangeably in the passage where he tells Titus (1:5.7) to appoint "presbyters" and goes on to say, "For as episcopos he will be God's representative." Or, to cite another example: in Acts (20:17, 28) we read "he sent for the presbyters of the church of Ephesus," and in his speech to them he calls them episcopous: "Be on your guard for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you episcopos, to feed the Church of God." The Greek word episcopos taken over from the pagan world, probably as an equivalent for a semitic title, meaning overseer, supervisor, teacher, guardian. It has been argued persuasively that episcopos indicated the duty or function of the Christian officer, while - 13 - presbyteros indicated the same status or dignity of the same officer. While this may be true, it is not certain that every presbyteros necessarily fulfilled the function of an episcopos. To summarize: on the basis of New Testament sources, it is easy to trace Jewish antecedents to the Apostolic Christian community. Where Judaism had shelihim, Christianity had Apostles, true shelihim appointed by Christ Himself. They were in a category by themselves. They in turn as shelihim of the Lord commissioned their successors - called presbyters (or episcopos) - by the imposition of hands bestowing on them the Holy Spirit who, as the divine principal, made them His true shelihim. The process was repeated in turn with their successors. Where the Jewish prototypes, the zeqenim (Elders, presbyters), were "ordained" for their duties by the laying on of hands, and conceived to "transmit" the Spirit received by Moses (given by him to all the Elders of Israel), the Christian presbyteroi- episcopoi were ordained also by a laying on of hands, at first by the Apostles, then by their successors - but the Spirit transmitted was that of Pentecost. We read in the New Testament of another office, the diaconoi, deacons, are mentioned as specific office- holders of the church (together with the episcopoi) at Philippi (Philippians 1:1). In his letter to Timothy (1 Timothy 3:8-11), St. Paul clearly distinguishes them from the presbyteroi who preside (1 Timothy 5:17) and exercise supervision (1 Timothy 3:1-2). Obviously, the presbyteroi-episcopoi, exercising the office of "rulership," could not easily fulfill all the subordinate duties to the Christian faithful; hence the diaconoi. Their functions were probably those of "helpers," or "attendants," though at this early stage no - 14 - specific duties are listed. We read in Acts (6:2-6), for example, that the Apostles found it difficult if not impossible, to fulfill their office and still perform menial tasks: "It would not be right for us to neglect the word of God so as to give out food." Seven were chosen and presented "to the Apostles who prayed and laid their hands on them." Whether these were ordained deacons or presbyters matters little: they were ordained for helping with such services as feeding the poor - serving and superintending the table at which the poor were fed, or supplying the things necessary for sustenance. Such functions were similar to those of the seven parnashim who superintended Jewish relief for the poor. Other functions, of course, were incumbent upon the Christian diaconia, or deacons, for every work in the Church was a diaconia. Whether high or low the expression "diaconia (the word indicates service). That is why St. Paul could apply the word diaconos to himself and Apollos (1 Cor. 3:5). the Twelve Apostles did not object to the work of ministering to the poor, but only to the neglect of the higher office for the sake of the lower. In the Septuagint, the word diaconos refers to the king's chamberlains and servants (four times in Esther 1:10; 2:2; 6:3,, 5); diaconia refers to their service (Esther 6:3,5), but also to the sending of gold by Jonathan to Antiochus (1 Maccabees 11:58). In the New Testament, both the noun diaconos and its verbal form diaconia usually refer to divine worship, but sometimes also the human service: for instance, the helpers of St. Paul (Acts 19:22), the service rendered to the brethren of Judaea in the famine (Acts 11:29; 12:25), the Gentile collections for the same purpose (Romans 15:25, 31; 2 Cor. 8:4; 9:1, 1, 13), and probably also the service rendered by Staphanas to traveling Christians (1 Cor. 16:15; cf. Romans 16:1). - 15 - In the Gospels, the verbal form indicates the ministering to Christ's early needs. In Philippians (1:11) and Timothy (1 Timothy 3:8 ff.), St. Paul seems to refer to a specific office concerned with subsidiary tasks: rendering whatever help was needed by the episcopoi or presbyteroi to free them from time-consuming chores for the higher duties of their "rulership." The "offices of episcopoi, presbyteroi, and diaconoi are the only ones discernable in the New Testament sources. Jewish rabbis or scribes, though regarded with reverence, were never religious officers. They had no public function or authority. Their personal competence qualified them for "ordination" through the imposition of hands by rabbinic teachers. This may be seen as a kind of graduation. The Christian counterparts of rabbis were the teachers, but these had no official status in the Church either, unless they were also ordained to the official teaching office of presbyter. When Christians recognized that the Law was abrogated - which was very early - there was no reason for maintaining Christian 'rabbis." In the second century, Christian "teachers," if these were not presbyteroi or episcopoi, were similar to the heathen philosophical "lecturers." Perhaps the modern counterparts would be the lay theologians. Christians endowed with charismatic gifts, such as prophets, speakers in tongues,"workers of miracles," were not officers in the primitive ecclesia. Theirs were valued functions, but not offices. Anyone might prophecy: an Apostle, like St. Paul (cf. 1 Cor. 14:6), women (1 Cor. 11:5), new converts (Acts 19:6), or any member of the congregation (1 Cor. 14:29). - 16 - Manifestations of such powers by increasing a man's reputation as a "prophet," or "speaker for God," might lead to his selection for the presbyterate - but only if he possessed the qualifications listed by St. Paul. St. Paul's passage to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 12:28) listing various kinds of people and functions and comprising the Mystical Body of Christ is quoted in support of a "charismatic" or "missionary" ministry. Here, however, St. Paul is merely illustrating the different functions of members of a single body, the ecclesia, without any reference to Church order, government, or official function. He puts the Apostles at the head of the list, but evidence from his own writing shows this has nothing to do with a hierarchy of functions, especially if we compare this list with that in Romans (12:6 ff.), and with his remarks about glossolalia: "Now suppose, my dear brothers, I am someone with the gift of tongues and I come to visit you, what use shall I be if all my talking reveals nothing new, tells you nothing, and neither inspires you nor instructs you?" (1 Cor. 14:6). If we subscribe to the theory that prophets and teachers here indicate Holy Offices or Orders within the Church, then we must also conclude that "single- minded givers," and "cheerful showerers" along with "prophets, ministers., teachers, exhorters and rulers (in Romans 12:6) are also "Orders" in a charismatic or missionary hierarchy with the ordained presbyterate or episcopate - an obviously absurd position. - 17 -