| |
Today November 21, 2008
|
|
 |
 Ecclesiastical ring - A ring worn by
clerics and other religious persons, notably a Bishop's ring worn by an
(arch)bishop of the Roman Catholic, Anglican and other Christian churches.
|
| Historical
antecedents |
Although the surviving ancient rings, proved by their devices,
provenance etc. to be of Christian origin, are fairly numerous (See Fortnum in
"Arch. Journ.", XXVI, 141, and XXVIII, 275), we cannot in most cases identify
them with any liturgical use. Christians no doubt, just like others, wore rings
in accordance with their station in life, for rings are mentioned without
reprobation in the New Testament (Luke 15:22, and James 2:2).
St. Clement of Alexandria (Paed., III, c. xi) says that a man
might lawfully wear a ring on his little finger, and that it should bear some
religious emblem --a dove for the Holy Spirit, a fish (ichthys) for Christ or an
anchor. On the other hand, Tertullian, St. Cyprian and the Apostolic
Constitutions (I, iii) protest against the ostentation of Christians in decking
themselves with rings and gems. In any case the Acts of Saints Perpetua and
Felicitas (c. xxi), about the beginning of the third century, mention the martyr
Saturus took a ring from the finger of Pudens, a soldier who was looking on, and
gave it back to him as a keepsake, covered with his own blood.
|
| Episcopal
rings |
Knowing that in the pagan days of Rome every flamen Dialis (a
pagan priest specially consecrated to the worship of Jupiter) had, like the
senators, the privilege of wearing a gold ring, it would not be surprising to
find evidence in the fourth century that rings were worn by Christian bishops.
But the various passages that have been appealed to as proof are either not
authentic or inconclusive. St. Augustine of Hippo indeed speaks of his sealing a
letter with a ring (Ep. ccxvii, in P.L., XXXIII, 227), but on the other hand his
contemporary Possidius expressly states that Augustine himself wore no ring
(P.L., XXXII, 53), whence we are led to conclude that the possession of a signet
does not prove the use of a ring as part of the episcopal insignia. However, in
a Decree of Pope Boniface IV (A.D. 610) we hear of monks raised to the episcopal
dignity as anulo pontificali subarrhatis, while at the Fourth Council of Toledo,
in 633, we are told that if a bishop has been deposed from his office and
afterwards reinstated, he is to receive back stole, ring and crosier (orarium,
anulum et baculum). St. Isidore of Seville at about the same period couples the
ring with the crosier and declares that the former is conferred as "an emblem of
the pontifical dignity or of the sealing of secrets" (P.L., LXXXIII, 783). From
this time forth it may be assumed that the ring was strictly speaking an
episcopal ornament conferred in the rite of consecration, and that it was
commonly regarded as emblematic of the betrothal of the bishop to his church. In
the eighth and ninth centuries in Manuscripts of the Gregorian Sacramentary and
in a few early Pontificals (e.g., that attributed to Archbishop Egbert of York)
we meet with various formulae for the delivery of the ring. The Gregorian form,
which survives in substance to the present, runs in these terms: "Receive the
ring, that is to say the seal of faith, whereby thou, being thyself adorned with
spotless faith, mayst keep unsullied the troth which thou hast pledged to the
spouse of God, His holy Church."
The ideas of the seal (signet
ring), indicative of discretion, and of 'conjugal' fidelity dominate the
symbolism attaching to the ring in nearly all its liturgical uses. The latter
idea was pressed so far in the case of bishops that we find ecclesiastical
decrees enacting that "a bishop deserting the Church to which he was consecrated
and transferring himself to another is to be held guilty of adultery and is to
be visited with the same penalties as a man who, forsaking his own wife, goes to
live with another woman" (Du Saussay, "Panoplia episcopalis", 250). Perhaps this
idea of espousals helped to establish the rule, of which we hear already in the
ninth century, that the episcopal ring was to be placed on the fourth finger
(i.e., that next the little finger) of the right hand.
As the
pontifical ring had to be worn on occasion over the glove, it is a common thing
to find medieval specimens large in size and proportionately heavy in execution.
The inconvenience of the looseness thus resulting was often met by placing
another smaller ring just above it as a keeper (see Lacy, "Exeter Pontifical",
3). As the pictures of the medieval and Renaissance periods show, it was
formerly quite usual for bishops to wear other rings along with the episcopal
ring; indeed the existing "Caeremoniale episcoporum" (Book II, viii, nn. 10-11)
assumes that this is still likely to be the case. Custom prescribes that a
layman or a cleric of inferior grade on being presented to a bishop should kiss
his hand, that is to say his episcopal ring, but it is a popular misapprehension
to suppose that any indulgence is attached to the act. Episcopal rings, both at
an earlier and later period, were sometimes used as receptacles for relics. St.
Hugh of Lincoln had such a ring which must have been of considerable capacity.
(On investiture by ring and staff see Conflict of Investitures.)
|
| Other clerical
rings |
Besides bishops, many other ecclesiastics are privileged to wear
rings. The pope of course is the first of bishops, but he does not habitually
wear the signet ring distinctive of the papacy and known as "the Ring of the
Fisherman", but usually a simple cameo, while his more magnificent pontifical
rings are reserved for solemn ecclesiastical functions.
Cardinals also wear rings independently of their grade in the
ecclesiastical hierarchy. The ring belonging to the cardinalitial dignity is
conferred by the pope himself in the consistory in which the new cardinal is
named to a particular "title". It is of small value and is set with a sapphire,
while it bears on the inner side of the bezel the arms of the pope conferring
it. In practice the cardinal is not required to wear habitually the ring thus
presented, and he commonly prefers to use one of his own. The privilege of
wearing a ring has belonged to cardinal-priests since the time of Innocent III
or earlier (see Sagmuller, "Thatigkeit und Stellung der Cardinale", 163).
Abbots in the earlier Middle Ages were permitted to wear rings
only by special privilege. A letter of Peter of Blois in the twelfth century
(P.L., CCVII, 283) shows that at that date the wearing of a ring by an abbot was
apt to be looked upon as a piece of ostentation, out in the later Pontificals
the blessing and delivery of a ring formed part of the ordinary ritual for the
consecration of an abbot, and this is still the case at the present day. On the
other hand: there is no such ceremony indicated in the blessing of an abbess,
though certain abbesses have received, or assumed, the privilege of wearing a
ring of office.
The ring is also regularly worn by certain other
minor prelates, for example prothonotaries apostolic, but the privilege cannot
be said to belong to canons as such (B. de Montault, "Le costume, etc.", I, 170)
without special indult (papal favor). In any case such rings cannot ordinarily
be worn by these minor prelates during the celebration of Mass. The same
restriction applies to the ring which is conferred as part of the insignia of
the doctor of theology or of canon law.
|
| Other Christian
rings |
The plain rings worn by certain orders of nuns and conferred
upon them in the course of their solemn profession, according to the ritual
provided in the Roman Pontifical appear to find some justification in ancient
tradition. St. Ambrose (P.L., XVII, 701, 735) speaks as though it were a
received custom for virgins consecrated to God to wear a ring in memory of their
betrothal to their heavenly Spouse. This delivery of a ring to professed nuns is
also mentioned by several medieval Pontificals, from the twelfth century
onwards.
Wedding rings, or more strictly, rings given in the
betrothal ceremony, seem to have been tolerated among Christians under the Roman
Empire from a quite early period. The use of such rings was of course of older
date than Christianity, and there is not much to suggest that the giving of the
ring was at first incorporated in any ritual or invested with any precise
religious significance. But it is highly probable that, if the acceptance and
the wearing of a betrothal ring was tolerated among Christians, such rings would
have been adorned with Christian emblems. Certain extant specimens, more
particularly a gold ring found near Arles, belonging apparently to the fourth or
fifth century, and bearing the inscription, Tecla vivat Deo cum marito seo
[suo], may almost certainly be assumed to be Christian espousal rings.
In the coronation ceremony to, it has long been the custom to
deliver both to the Sovereign and to the queen consort a ring previously
blessed. Perhaps the earliest example of the use of such a ring is in the case
of Judith, the step-mother of king Alfred the Great , but is unclear whether
that ring was bestowed upon the queen in virtue of her dignity as queen consort
or of her nuptials to Ethelwulf.
Rings have also occasionally
been used for other religious purposes.
At an early date the small keys which contained filings from the chains of
St. Peter seem to have been welded to a band of metal and worn upon the finger
as reliquaries.
In more modern times rings have been constructed with ten small knobs or
protuberances, and used for saying the rosary.
|
|
