1. Origin and Meaning of ike Word, — ^The word is by some supposed to be derived from kXtjqoq (lo(), as if the minister were, in a special sense, icX^poc rov Ofoi), specially consecrated to God. Othen (Augustine, Expot, in Ps. 67 ; Isidor, De Off, Ecdes, ii, c. i) main- tain that it indicates that the lot by which Matthias was chosen aposUe gave the first general name for the chiefs of the Church as a class. Jerome says they were called clergy, either because they were chosen by lot to be the Lord's, or because the Lord is their lot or heritage (Dejat, xviii, 2). More recently both these derivations have been abandoned, and one pro- posed by Baur (Ursprung des Episcopats, p. 98 sq. ; D, ChrisUnthum u, Se christL Kirche der drei ersten Jahrhmd, p. 245) and by Ritschl (Enttteh, der althath. Kirche, p. 245) has met with general favor. According to it, the word KXijpog is in the N. T. (Acts i, 17, 25 ; 1 Pet. V, 8), as well as in the language of the ancient Church, commonly used in the signification of " rank," *' degree." The '* fiuthfnl" (Jickles) and catechumens were called Kkrjpoi (ordines, ranks), just as well as bishops, presbyters, deacons. Gradually — the exact point of time cannot be fixed — the ecclesiastical ofl- cers were exclusively called ^^the rank/' ickrjpog, a transition which was very natural when the difference between the officera of the Church and the bulk of the people was emphasized. The earliest writer in which the name "clergy" (icKijpog) in the restricted sense occura is Clement of Alexandria. '* It is clear from . the N. T. that there were men separated to the work of the Christian ministiy. Some of these appear to have been extraordinary, such as apostles, who had been selected by Christ himself without any inter- mediate authority ; evangeUsts, such as Timothy and Titus; prophets. See 1 Cor. xiv, 8, 22-24. These probably continued cmly during the lifetime of the aposties and those on whom they laid hands. Oth- en were ordinary ndnistera, denominated elden or
CLERGY
386
CLERGY
preflbjtera, paston, bishops, and teachers. See 1 Pet. ▼, 1-4; Acts xiv, 28; xv, 6 ; Titus i, 5. These were divinely called and appointed to their work (Acts xx, 28); they were solemnly set apart; they were enti- tled to be supported by the churches to whom they ministered ; their duties were to feed the flock, to take care of and govern the Church of God, and to watch for souls (1 Thess. v, 12, 18 ; Heb. xiU, 7, 17)" (Ck)le- man. Christian Antiquities j ch. ill).
2. Distinction of Clergy and Lmty. — In the apostol- ical Church no abstract disthiction of clergy and laity, as to privilege or sancdty, was known ; all believers were called to the prophetic, priestly, and kingly offi- ces in Christ (1 Pet. v, 8). The Jewish antithesis of clergy and laity was at first unknown among Chri»- tians; and it was **on]y as men fell back from the evangelical to the Jewish point of view" that the idea of the general Cliristian priesthood of all believers gave pUtoe, more or less completely, to that of the special priesthood or clergy (Neander, Church History^ Torrey's ed., i, 194 sq. ; Schaff, History of the Chris- tian Church, i, ch. v ; Gieselcr, Church History, i, § 62). So Tertullian, even (De BcupHsmo, c. 17, before he be- came a Montanist) : ** The laity have also the right to administer the sacraments and to teach in the com- munity. The Word of God and the sacraments were by Ihe g^race of God communicated to all, and may therefore be communicated by all Christians as instni- ments of the divine grace. But the question here re- ktes not barely to what is permitted in general, but also to what is expedient under existing circumstan- ces. We may here use the words of St. Paul, 'All things are lawful for men, but all things are not ex- pedient.' If we look at the order necessary to be maintained in the Church, the laity are therefore to exercise their priestly right of administering the sac- raments only when the time and circumstances require it." From the time of Cyprian (f 268), the father of the hierarchical system, the distinction of clergy and laity became prominent, and very soon was universal- ly admitted. Indeed, from the tiiird century onward, the term derus (KkrjpoQ, ordo) was almost exclusively applied to the ministry to distinguish it from the laity. As the Roman hierarchy was developed, the clergy came to be not merely a distinct order (which might consist with all the apostolical regulations and doc- trines), but also to be recognised as the only priest- hood, and the essential means of communication be- tween man and God (Yinet. Past. Theol. Introd.).
8. ClasHJication. — Simultaneously with the intro- duction into the Church jof a distinction between cler- 1 gy and laity, a division of the clergy into classes of j diffSerent rank was gradually developed. The earliest i and most important of those distinctions was that be- tween bishop and presbyter (see Bishop). To these | were added, in the course of time, deacon, subdeacon, archbishop, primate, patriarch, pope, and a number of officers preceding the subdiaconate. Each class was initiated into office by a special ordination (see Or- ders). In general, the various classes, according to the higher and lower dignity of the orders, were di- vided into the higher and lower clergy, the latter em- bracing the ostiarO, lectores, exordstm, and ocolytM, the former the subdeacons, deacons, priests, bishops. Up to the 13th century the subdeacons were counted among the lower clergy. The canon law very frequently ap- plies the name cferict exclusively to the lower classes pf the clergy, designating each higher class (subdea- cons, deacons, priests, bishops) by its special name. Higher (or high) clergy is commonly understood to mean bishops or prelates (q. v.), and lower (or low) clergy the others.