DIACONO E ARCIDIACONO

DEACON and ARCHDEACON. — Etymologically derived from διακόνος (servant), the diaconate is today the second of the major Orders (v. SACRED ORDER). In the Gospel this name occurs eight times, always in the sense of servant. In the modern technical sense it is first attested in St. Paul (Phil. 1:1 and 1 Tim. 3:8-12). The diaconate is certainly a sacrament, although this is not a defined article of faith, and it holds a place in the hierarchical order.

I. INSTITUTION

The first mention of deacons in the New Testament, following the order not of the writings but of events, occurs in connection with the disturbances that arose in the primitive Christian community when it seemed that the distribution of alms to widows and orphans was not being carried out with due impartiality. The Apostles entrusted “seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom” (Acts 6:3) with this task “and after praying they laid their hands on them” (ibid., 6:6). In this account tradition sees the fulfillment of a truly sacramental act. Indeed, the discharge of charitable activity does not exhaust the entire ministry of deacons: they were also assistants to the Apostles. Stephen and Philip preached the Gospel (ibid., 6:8 ff.; 8:5; 26:40). Philip even baptized (ibid., 8:12 ff.; 38). Beginning with St. Ignatius of Antioch, the Fathers place the diaconate as the lowest of the three degrees of the hierarchy of Orders. St. Ignatius (Ad Trall., 2:1) calls deacons “ministers of the mysteries of God,” and says: “Let all respect the deacons as they would Jesus Christ, even as the bishop and the priests; without them there is no Church” (ibid., 3:1).

II. RITE OF ORDINATION

Today, in order to be admitted to the diaconate, besides the *bonum testimonium* mentioned in the Acts, celibacy is also required (can. 132,1); in the East, since the Council of Nicaea, only a first marriage is permitted.

Moreover, the candidate must have completed 22 years of age (can. 975), have begun the fourth year of theological studies (can. 976 § 2) in schools approved by ecclesiastical authority and organized according to can. 1365 (can. 976 § 3), be a subdeacon for at least three months, and have exercised the subdiaconate (can. 978 § 1-2). To advance to the presbyterate, an identical interval of three months must be observed, with the exercise of the diaconate (can. 978 § 2).

The rite of ordination to the diaconate is described in the Roman Pontifical (title *De ordinatione diaconi*). The minister of ordination is the bishop. This is the common doctrine, against which difficulties have been raised by the bulls *Exponit* of Innocent VIII (1489) and *Sacrae Religionis* of Boniface IX (1400), but the historical-theological question, still unresolved, concerns the minister of Orders (v. SACRED ORDER).

The diaconal ordination, like that of the other major Orders, is conferred by the laying on of hands and the episcopal prayer, in accordance with Acts 6:1 ff. (cf. Pius XII, *Sacramentum Ordinis*, 30 Nov. 1947; AAS, 40 [1948], p. 5). From the Gallican liturgy in the Middle Ages came the tradition of the conferral of insignia (stole, dalmatic, Gospel book); in the 14th century, following scholastic disputations, the formula “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum ad robur et resistendum” was introduced into the preface, i.e., the consecratory prayer; from this arose a famous controversy regarding the matter and form of the diaconate, which was settled (loc. cit.) by Pius XII.

III. OFFICE

Today no special power is transmitted with the diaconate to perform certain sacred actions that are exclusive to this Order; rather, the deacon is given the faculty to exercise certain sacred functions *ex officio*.

The proper function of the deacon has always been to serve the bishop (cf. St. Ignatius, *Eph.*, 2:1; *Philad.*, 11:1-2) with a twofold duty: sacred ministry and works of charity, particularly the care of the poor.

Soon deacons were entrusted with liturgical functions: according to St. Ignatius (*Trall.*, 2:3) they are “ministers of the mysteries of Christ Jesus... for they are not ministers of meat and drink, but of the Church of God”; they preach (Philad., 11:1) and, according to St. Justin (*Apologia*, I, 65 and 67), distribute the Eucharist, especially the Blood of Christ, and bring Holy Communion to the absent; they receive offerings from the hands of the faithful, read the diptychs, and with the bishop’s permission baptize, instruct catechumens, and perform exorcisms over them; according to St. Cyprian (*Epist.*, 18:1) they had the authority to readmit “lapsi” in case of necessity, at least when they could show the libellus of the confessors; this practice of reconciliation was preserved for deacons until the Middle Ages (B. Bartmann, *Lehrbuch der Dogmatik*, II, 7th ed., Freiburg im Br. 1929, p. 409). According to ancient practice, deacons were the bishop’s eye: they watched over discipline; they were his ear, to hear the requests and complaints of the faithful; his hand, to distribute alms to the poor; his heart, to care for the sick and needy (Didascalia, III, 13:7; IX, 28:6; 44:3 and 4). Already in the Apostolic Constitutions (2:57) the singing of the Gospel is reserved to deacons.

The care of the poor entailed the administration of Church goods.

Of the many offices of the deacon, the Roman Pontifical and the Code of Canon Law have preserved three in particular: to serve the priest at the altar when he celebrates solemnly or to substitute for him in certain functions, to baptize, and to preach.

Assisting the priest at solemn Mass as his first minister involves various duties, determined by the liturgical books, such as singing the Gospel, handing him the host at the offertory, pouring the wine into the chalice, presenting the ciborium at the moment of benediction, etc. The deacon, as an extraordinary minister of the Most Holy Eucharist, may substitute for the priest and distribute Holy Communion under two conditions: a) that there is a grave reason, understood in a rather broad sense, such as an illness or pressing duties of the parish priest, etc.; b) that there is the permission of the Ordinary or the parish priest, i.e., of the one to whom the right belongs by law to distribute Holy Communion to the faithful; this permission, in case of necessity, may be presumed lawfully (can. 845 § 2). If one of these conditions is lacking, the deacon, though administering, would not commit a grave sin and much less incur the irregularity mentioned in can. 985 § 7.

The deacon is also a minister, together with the priest, of the exposition or reposition of the Most Holy Sacrament, but not of benediction (can. 1274 § 2), which he may and must give only when bringing Communion to the sick according to the rite prescribed in the Roman Ritual (tit. IV, cap. 4, n. 23, 36; Pont. Comm. Cod., 13 July 1930: AAS, 22 [1930], p. 365). Then, as in the ordinary case of distributing Holy Communion, he must also bless with the hand according to the prescriptions of the same Ritual (tit. IV, cap. 2, n. 10; AAS, 22 [1930], p. 365), and wait with holy water at the beginning (Rit. Rom., tit. IV, cap. 4, n. 15).

These, together with the blessing of the paschal candle on Holy Saturday (cf. Missale Rom., rubric in Sabb. Sancto “benedictio cerei”); the exorcisms and blessings that occur in solemn Baptism, are the only blessings expressly permitted and therefore allowed to the deacon (can. 1147 § 4).

Finally, the deacon, with the permission of the Ordinary or at least the parish priest, may substitute for the priest in conducting the funeral (Decr. authent. S. R. C., n. 3074), and may also, as seems more probable, wear the cope. In cases of particular necessity he may also probably conduct ordinary processions in accordance with can. 1290 § 2, under the same conditions as above (F.M. Cappello, *De Sacramentis*, IV, Rome 1942, n. 119).

The proper insignia of the deacon are the stole worn across the left shoulder to the right side, and in a certain sense the dalmatic.

2. The deacon is an extraordinary minister of Baptism.

The deacon (d.) is a sacred minister who, though not a priest, is called to a special office of service in the Church. He can administer certain sacraments and sacramentals only under two conditions: a) the existence of a just cause, which need not be grave, as in the case of Holy Communion; b) the permission of the local Ordinary or parish priest, which may be presumed in case of necessity (can. 471).

In the administration of Baptism, the deacon must follow the rite of the Roman Ritual (tit. II, cap. 2) and perform all the ceremonies, with the exception of the blessing of salt (loc. cit., n. 6) and of water (Rit. Rom., tit. II, cap. 8; S. R. C., Decreta Authent., n. 3684).

3. The deacon is qualified “qua talis” to exercise the ministry of preaching like a priest, but he may do so only after receiving a legitimate mission and the permission of the competent superior (can. 1342 § 1, 1328).

Moreover, the deacon shares all the privileges and obligations common to the other clergy; in common with the subdeacon, he is bound to recite the Divine Office (can. 135), and from celibacy arises for him an impediment to marriage (can. 1072). The Holy See today grants dispensations from this impediment with less rigor than in the past, and therefore it can be dispensed in urgent cases and in danger of death according to canons 1043–1045; not, however, according to canon 81 (Pont. Comm. Cod., 26 Jan. 1949; AAS, 41 [1949], p. 158).

IV. THE ARCHDEACON —

I. Origins

In memory of the primitive institution, most Churches, beginning with that of Rome, originally had no more than seven deacons, whereas there was no fixed number for the priests; and at the Council of Caesarea (314) it was decreed against certain abuses that there should be seven deacons in each church (can. 15). Later, however, the Eastern Church first—attested by Sozomen (Hist. eccl., I, 15)—and then the Western Church no longer adhered to this number.

At Alexandria in the 4th century there were counted 9 deacons who followed Arius and 20 who subscribed to the decree for his deposition (PG 18, 577–81); at Edessa in 451 there were 39 deacons (Mansi, VII, 255), and at Constantinople in the 6th century there were 100 (Novellae, III, 1).

At Rome the tradition remained more constant due to the division of the city into seven regions (under Pope Fabian, 236–51, according to the Liber Pontificalis), each of which was presided over by a deacon (regionarius). But even here, alongside the regionarii, other deacons were gradually appointed (statonarii, martyrarii: J. Mabillon, Museum Ital., II, Paris 1689, pp. XVII–XVIII).

It was natural that, since the administration and distribution of the Church’s goods were entrusted in particular to the deacons, one among them should have oversight and direct responsibility, while the others were subject to him. Thus arose the archdeacon, first mentioned in the East, but in the West assuming a broader and more clearly defined role. He emerged as the bishop’s trusted man in a sphere so delicate; this does not mean, however, that later he did not dare to overstep his bounds and seek to impose his will. Thanks to his qualities or influence, he could succeed in influencing the election of a new bishop when a see fell vacant, favoring either himself or someone he preferred; in ordinary cases, in antiquity, the choice fell either on a deacon or on a priest.

The full development of this office took place from the 4th to the 8th century. Cecilian, later bishop of Carthage, is the first in the West to whom the title of archdeacon is applied by his biographer, Optatus of Milevis (c. 380), while narrating the rigorous measures he took in that capacity to correct certain abuses during the Diocletian persecution (De schism. Donatist., I, 16: PL 11, 916). Some other authors apply the title to earlier figures, but write after their time.

St. Augustine calls St. Lawrence an archdeacon (Serm., 392, 9: PL 38, 1388). “Leader of deacons” is the title given to St. Athanasius of Alexandria by Theodoret (Hist. eccl., I, 25: PG 82, 980).

Sozomen (Hist. eccl., IV, 28: ibid. 67, 1204) calls an archdeacon the cleric who in 361 attempted at Antioch to prevent St. Meletius the Great, bishop of that city, from making an orthodox profession of faith on the Trinity, and relates that St. Gregory Nazianzen (c. 380) appointed Evagrius as archdeacon of Constantinople (op. cit., VI, 3: ibid. 67, 1384). Likewise, in the acts of the Synod “ad Quercum” (403), the accuser of St. John Chrysostom is Martyrius, a former archdeacon of the Church of Constantinople (Act of Accusation, no. 26: Mansi, VI, 1144; Ep. S. Joh. Crys. ad Inn., I, 1: PG 52, 321).

The archdeacon is also mentioned by the Council of Toulouse in 400 (c. 20, Mansi, III, 1002) and by St. Jerome in several places in his works (Ep. 125: PL 22, 1080; Ep. 146, 1: ibid., 1194, etc.).

By the 5th century the title of archdeacon had become common in many Churches, and St. Leo the Great could write that the archdeacon of the Church of Constantinople (453) was entrusted with the dispensatio tenitoris causae et curiae ecclesiasticae (Ep. 111, 112: ibid. 54, 1021), that is, subordinate to the bishop, the entire ecclesiastical discipline. Regarding the administration of goods entrusted to the archdeacon, his letters (492–96) bear witness to this.

Pope Gelasius entrusts to the archdeacon Justin, together with two others, the administration of the goods of the church of Volterra, from which he had deprived Bishop Eucaristus (ibid. 59, 140–45), and recalls the case of the bishop of Faleria, who had removed his archdeacon John from office in order to dispose more freely of the goods for his own advantage (ibid., 100). The same situation recurred under Gregory I at Salona (Ep., II, 18–20: ibid. 77, 552–65).

The care of widows and orphans entrusted to the archdeacon is mentioned in the Statuta Ecclesiae antiqua (cap. 17: H. T. Bruns, Canones Apostolorum et conciliorum, Berlin 1839, I, 143) and in the Second Council of Mâcon (cap. 12: Bruns, II, 253) of 585; the care and visitation of prisoners is imposed as an obligation in the Fifth Council of Orléans ([519], cap. 20: Bruns, II, 214); while the Councils of Paris in 614 (II, cap. 7–9: Bruns, II, 257) and of Châlons-sur-Marne in 650 (cap. 7: Bruns, I, 266) impose upon him, together with the bishop, the office of executor of the wills of clerics.

The education of young clerics, especially those gathered in the “diaconia” of the episcopal city, is attested in various sources (cf. St. Gregory of Tours, Hist. Franc., 10, 8: PL 71, 536; Statuta Eccl. antiqua, cap. 9; Bruns, I, 142), which also tell us of the part played by the archdeacon in the ordination of these clerics (Statuta Ecclesiae antiqua, cap. 5–6: loc. cit.), since admission to Orders depended on his judgment (Council of Beirut 1449: Mansi, VII, 223).

Even after ordination, young clerics remained subject to the vigilance of the archdeacon (Councils of Agde in 506, cap. 20: Bruns, II, 150 and of Orléans [541], cap. 26: Bruns, II, 206). The office of archdeacon was freely assigned by the bishop (Sozomen, Hist. eccl., VI, 30; 8, 9; 8, 15) and, given its importance, was often held for life.

Promotion to the presbyterate was considered an injury (St. Jerome, Comm. ad Ezech., cap. 48: PL 25, 484), and bishops resorted to it when they wished to rid themselves of an archdeacon (Ep. Leonis I: ibid. 54, 1021; Ep. Gregorii M.: ibid. 77, 552 ff.).

2. Vicar of the Bishop

From the end of the 7th century the archdeacon appears increasingly as the bishop’s vicar in all matters concerning the governance of the diocese.

So much so that the Ordo Romanus, I, no. 4 (M. Andrieu, Les Ordines Romani du haut moyen âge, II, Louvain 1948, p. 68) calls the archdeacon of the Roman Church the vicar of the Pope, and Incarnatus in the 9th century refers to his archdeacon with the title of comminister noster (Capit. a. XII episcopatus super., cap. 1: PL 125, 793). The visitation of the diocese is entrusted to the archdeacon together with the bishop or even in his place, and extends not only to the lower clergy but also to the personal visitation of priests, on whom various councils impose detailed prescriptions (Capit. Walteri episc. Aurelian. [871]: ibid. 119, 726-46), while Incarnatus (Capit. Archidiaconibus, presbyteris data, capp. 1-13: ibid. 125, 800) recommends to his archdeacons to exercise their office of correction with charity but without weakness.

The Ordo Romanus, inserted in the Decretals (I, X, I, 23), subjects to him all the clergy without exception, urban and rural. A text of the same period, sometimes attributed to a Council of Toledo (I, X, I, 24) and sometimes to St. Isidore (I, § 12, D. 25), expressly states that the archdeacon is subject to the archdeacon; he must obey him as his bishop, even though he is the head of the priests (loc. cit.). The same is repeated for the primicerius (c. unic., X, I, 25), for the sacristan (c. unic., X, I, 26) and for the custos (I, X, I, 27). With the growing power of the archdeacon, the danger of abuses also increases. Capitularies and councils warn the archdeacon about this. Eight of the thirteen chapters of Incarnatus mentioned above deal with this subject (chaps. 1-6, 9, 11). The office becomes desirable even to laymen, but the Capitularies hasten to bar them from it (Capit. missor. in Theodonis villa [805], cap. 15).

3. The archdeacon prelate, who until the 9th century was merely a deacon, from then on is often a priest, and whereas previously he was the only one for the whole diocese, from this time he loses his unity, because Frankish sources begin to speak of various archdeacons in the same diocese, each assigned a particular territory (Conc. Chalon-sur Saône [813], cap. 5; Paris [829], cap. 25).

German sources, on the other hand, speak of more archdeacons in the same diocese only in the 10th century, but in the 11th-12th centuries the division had become common (A. Hauck, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, IV, Leipzig 1931, p. 11 ff.) and is found even in England, at Canterbury (PL 214, 1029); whereas in Italy it is scarcely found before the 12th century. The number of archdeacons varies according to the regions. In Germany there is often one for each mother parish.

At Rome the archdeacon remained unique; he was one of the principal figures in the College of Cardinals. It is not really known what his particular functions were in the 11th century. Previously one has only the testimony of Pope Martin (657; ibid., 87, 201), according to whom he shared the government during a vacancy of the see together with the archpriest and the primicerius of the notaries. But precisely in the 11th century we see a Roman archdeacon, even before being elected pope, filling the history of the Church with his activities.

The multiplication of archdeacons, if not from the beginning, soon led to the division of the diocese into districts (archdeaconries). Where the division exists, the boundaries of the archdeaconry often correspond to those of a civil district (pagus); sometimes they correspond to deaneries, as at Basel; but ordinarily several deaneries constituted an archdeaconry, while there are churches and monasteries which by privilege obtained exemption with their own archdeaconry rights. The name of archdeaconry, however, does not appear until the 11th century, whereas previously the term parish is found (cf. B. Guérard, Essai sur le système des divisions territoriales de la Gaule, Paris 1832, p. 93).

With the division into territories, the jurisdiction of the archdeacon, which previously was delegated by the bishop, gradually became habitual for his own territory. On the other hand, since certain revenues were connected with the exercise of jurisdiction, the office and benefice of archdeacon with jurisdiction no longer delegated but ordinary arose. From the 11th century the office constituted one of the dignities of the Chapter of the cathedral or of a collegiate church and sometimes, as in the diocese of Salzburg, was annexed to the cure of certain parishes. Thus, in many places, in the 11th-12th centuries the archdeacons were true prelates with ordinary jurisdiction in their own territory.

It followed that the archdeacons in the dioceses were the ordinary judges of first instance, from whom appeal was made to the bishop. To the contentious jurisdiction corresponded a very extensive administrative power (7, 9, 10, X, de officio archid., I, 23). This led to a certain independence from the diocesan bishop, and to resistance on the part of the latter to the transformation in progress. In this resistance of the archdeacon, the Roman Pontiffs often gave their support (c. 4-5, XI, I, 23).

Nevertheless, in the 12th century, the jurisdiction of the archdeacons became ordinary and, as ordinary, delegable. The Council of Tours of 1163 (can. 7) does not blame the archdeacons for appointing their delegates, but only because they do so for money.

The archdeacons, placed almost on the same level as the bishops, in turn appoint their own vicars and officials (cf. St. Thomas of Canterbury, Letters, 173, 182, 189, 191, 225, 292, in Recueil des histor. des Gaules, XVI, pp. 345, 354, 360, 363, 389, 447).

By the second half of the 13th century the power of the archdeacons reached its peak. This is visible through the councils and statutes of the time more than through the sources of common law, which lag rather behind the existing reality (cf. 7, X, I, 23). As the gloss on the Decretals observes, custom had considerably increased the prerogatives of the archdeacons, who were no longer mere delegates (In Decret., I, 1, tit. 23, c. 4, V. Consuetudinis etc.). It is superfluous to repeat their prerogatives in detail: it will suffice to emphasize a few new acquisitions. As regards the preparation of ordinations and the ordinandi, they can do everything except grant the dimissory letters, which can only be granted with the consent of the bishop (8, X, I, 23). Thus the supervision of the clergy extends to all, including archpriests and deans (7, X, I, 23), and, once they have been instituted by the bishop, to whom they are presented, they can put them in possession of any office and benefice (loc. cit.). Sometimes particular law and custom authorize the archdeacon even to override this last exclusive right of the bishop and to put clerics in possession without consulting the bishop. Likewise, while common law authorized archdeacons to install abbots and abbesses in their archdeaconry (9, X, I, 23), custom gave them the right, as at Sens, to install even bishops (cf. A. Amanieu, Archidiacre, in DDC, I, col. 969).

As to the right of the archdeacon to the pastoral visitation, to be carried out annually, there is no doubt; ordinarily he does it alone. The councils limit themselves to specifying and analyzing the object of the visitation or to advising the archdeacon not to make it too burdensome with his retinue, by increasing the taxes etc. (cf. Conc. Later. III, a. 1179, c. 4; Later. IV, a. 1215, c. 33 [6, 23, X, III, 39]).

DIA CONO E ARCIDIACONO - Ordination of the d. Drawing from the Pontificale of Landolfo I of Benevento (957-84).

Rome, Biblioteca Casanatense, 724 B I 13.

The same power was held by the archdeacon in special meetings, particularly in conferences of the clergy of the archdeaconry and almost as a complement to the pastoral visitation (Const. Aegidi Sarisburien., [1256], de Capitulis celebrandis: Mansi, XXIII, 905); up to this point, the archdeacon's power of jurisdiction. Regarding the power of Order, examples of archdeacons ordained as priests before the 10th century had already occurred, even while retaining their office: examples multiplied from the 10th to the 12th centuries, but this practice never became universal, with some protesting that receiving priestly ordination did not enhance the dignity of the office but rather diminished it (cf. Peter of Blois, Epist., 123: PL 207, 365-66). Some even neglected to receive the diaconate, so much so that many councils and finally the first three Lateran Councils (I, can. 6; II, can. 10; III, can. 3), besides prescribing the age of 23, had to command that an archdeacon, having care of souls, receive the Order of the diaconate within a year of assuming office (23 D. 60; c. 7 X, I, 6).

All in all, at this time the archdeacon was almost solely for the power of Order, inferior to the bishop; and his power was personal, no longer vicarious.

4. Decline

The danger of the archdeacons' excessive power increased due to the fact that, alongside the ancient free collation by the bishop, their designation had often been replaced by election by the chapter or royal nomination (P. Hinschius, System des Kath. Kirchenrechts, II, Berlin 1878, pp. 195 ff., 201 ff.).

It is therefore not surprising that bishops sought to curb the archdeacons' excessive power through various means (Council of Tours, [1239], c. 8), gradually replacing them with other ministers more dependent on their own will, removable *ad nutum*, and in this struggle finding help—sought or not—from chapter conflicts.

The chapters, alongside the bishops, cooperated in undermining the dignity of the archdeacon, first containing and then attempting to secure for themselves the extension of his powers in chapter life and diocesan affairs. In some respects, this was natural; once the archdeacon entered the chapter, the other canons tended to regard him as their equal. Encouraged by discipline and esprit de corps, the canons questioned not only the precedence claimed by the archdeacon but even the jurisdiction of a prelate, seeking to reduce him to the status of one among them.

Ordinarily, archdeacons were to be the first dignitaries in chapters; but this was not always or everywhere the case. In France, chapters generally had at their head a provost or dean: thus archdeacons ranked second, if not third, as in Paris and Meaux, and sometimes even seventh, as in Chartres.

This custom, according to canonists, was widespread even outside France. In Italy, for example, in Turin, Padua, and Reggio, the archdeacon was preceded by the archpriest, while in Antwerp he ranked third. In Spain, at Avila and Barcelona, the archdeacon was the second dignity, at Zamora the third. St. Antoninus of Florence bears witness at his time to this diversity (Summa theol. mor., pars 3a, tit. 19, c. 6 § I, Venice 1571, p. 345). This determination of precedence was often the fruit of struggles in which the archdeacon, as is evident, frequently emerged the loser.

Abbots too sought to render their monasteries increasingly independent of the power of the archdeacons (cf. M. Quantin, Cartulaire général de l'Yonne, Auxerre 1854, pp. 102 ff., no. 235).

But more than these, so to speak, secondary causes of reservation and compromise, it was the creation by bishops of vicars general for the ordinary government of the diocese and officials for the administration of justice that dealt the strongest blow to the decline of the archdeacons' power.

For the archdeacons, once vicars of the bishops, had become ordinary prelates, acting on their own authority and no longer as delegates, within a part of the diocese. In practice, the bishop was left without assistance at a time when diocesan affairs were multiplying and the remnants of law required the presence in the episcopal curia of a legal technician.

Between the 15th and 16th centuries, the decline of the archdeacon intensified, and by the 16th century he existed no longer except as a chapter dignity, and the common law regarding him was no longer applied. M. Navarro (Manuale confessarorum, cap. 25, n. 136) said that he knew of no archdeacon in Spain to whom the texts of the Decretals could be applied.

5. From the Council of Trent to the Code

This gradual erosion of the archdeacon's powers reached its conclusion at the Council of Trent, which removed from his jurisdiction matrimonial and criminal causes of clerics (Sess. XXIV, c. 20 de ref.), especially the cases of clerical concubinage; indeed, it even removed the power to communicate and to visit the diocese (Sess. XXV, c. 3 de ref.). And even where particular law recognized the right of visitation to archdeacons, the Council specified that it was to be exercised personally and with the bishop's authorization, to whom an account was to be rendered (loc. cit.).

After the Council of Trent, despite its high praise for the merits of the archdeacon (Sess. XXIV, c. 12 de ref.), this office, stripped of all judicial power, was reduced to a mere honorary dignity in chapters (cf. S. C. C., 23 Jan 1598; 4 May 1726); often it was the first dignity, but at other times it had to yield precedence to the provost or more rarely to the archpriest.

Benedict XIV observed that the attributions of the archdeacon had been reduced to assisting the bishop in sacred ordinations (Const. Ex quo dilectus, 14 Jan 1747: Bullarium, IV, Malines [1826], pp. 369 ff.); and this corresponds to what the Sacred Congregation of Rites had decided regarding pontifical functions in general.

6. Present discipline

The *Codex Iuris Canonici* does not even mention the archdeacon. It does not mention him when, in can. 217 § 1, it recommends that the bishop divide his diocesan territory into regions or districts containing several parishes, without limiting the variety of names by which they may be called, especially in view of historical denominations. It does not mention him when treating of chapter dignities, respecting the variety of names and the hierarchy of precedence that centuries of development have established in each chapter. But naturally, where it exists, the norms regarding chapter dignities apply to the archdeacon: those concerning erection (can. 391 § 1), conferral (can. 396 § 1, 1435 § 1), the right of option (can. 396 § 1), requirements (can. 396 § 3), rights and duties (can. 397, 405, 408), relations with the chapter (can. 393 § 2; 411 § 3), obligations (can. 1406 § 1 n. 5; 2; 410 § 1; 2403), exemptions (can. 416), and distributions (can. 395 § 3). It is likewise natural that those norms especially concerning the first chapter dignity apply (can. 396 § 3), where the archdeacon truly holds that rank. Like any other dignity, that of archdeacon may be revived where it once existed by the bishop with the consent of the chapter, without recourse to the Apostolic See (can. 394 § 1). In the Roman Pontifical, the assisting priest who presents candidates for ordination and is questioned regarding their suitability for Orders is still called the archdeacon (Pont. Rom., tit. de ordinatione diaconi, presbyteri, etc.).

On the right of precedence, a response from the Sacred Congregation of the Council after the CIC clarifies that in every case and circumstance, the right of precedence over the archdeacon or other capitular dignities belongs to the vicar general «even in choir and in capitular acts... even if he intervenes not as vicar and in the garb of a vicar, but as a canon and in canonical dress» (Cuneen. et Utinen., praecedentiae, 17 May 1919; H. Ferretti, De iure praecedentiae Vicarii generalis super clero dioecesis..., Rome 1919, p. 3). — Vedi tav. XCIV.