Can the 'laying on of hands' be traced back to the apostles?

Question

When I was confirmed as an Anglican a few years back, I remember being told before the ceremont that the Bishop, who lays his hands on your head as part of the ceremony, could trace back the same thing to the apostles. Ie, he received the holy spirit from someone who received the holy spirit from.... etc ... Saint Peter. Is this true?

Do Catholics/Orthodox/other churches have a similar belief? Is there a competition to find the 'true' hand-layees as their is for the descendants of Muhammed?

Answer 1

The LDS faith also belives that the "Laying on of Hands" is a necessary part of membership. It is believed that through such performance one is confirmed a member of the church and receives the gift of the Holy Ghost. All blessings given in the church are done by the laying on of hands.

There are many instances throughtout the Old (thus pre-dating the apostles) and New Testament where the Laying on of Hands is demonstrated to be a part of ordination, miracles, blessings, etc... See Acts 8: 14-19

Also, levitical priests during the time of moses and Israel wandering in the desert were ordained and called by the laying on of hands.

Answer 2

Well, because Henry VIII created the Anglican faith out of nothing - only those Catholic Cardinals who agreed with Henry VIII can be said to have the "laying of hands" within them.

In that case, the answer is yes for anybody who can establish apostolic succession like the Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans, et al. For most Protestant Bishops - the answer is a resounding NO.

Answer 3

Actually it was done since the first man, Adam, performed this with his children. It was something done throughout the Old Testament but is not talked about much. Remember Abraham bestowing the blessing on his son? That's another thing that required laying on of hands.

Answer 4

Acts 8:18 But it matters not who was the first or last to use the laying on of hands, because it is not about the person doing it, but about the God that it is done because of.

Answer 5

Mormons believe that the line of "laying on of hands" to confer Godly authority was lost in time. But later restored by Peter, James and John. They came to Joseph Smith and laid their hands on Joseph head, giving him authority to act in God's name here on the Earth. Peter James and John got their authority directly from Jesus Christ.

Catholics claim that Peter was the first Pope -- don't know if the do a laying on of hands, but claim a line of authority straight to Jesus Christ.

Answer 6

It can be traced back to Jesus.

Muslims have no such belief.

Answer 7

The "laying on of hands" was something ONLY the apostles could do. Those that received the "gifts" could not transfer those on to someone else, therefore, once the Apostles and those, like Peter who had the abilities, passed away, the miracles and "healing abilities" ceased to exist.

If Acts 2 and 10 are the only instances of Holy Spirit baptism in the New Testament, how, then, do we account for the fact that numerous others in the New Testament performed miracles or were able to speak in tongues? If they, too, were not recipients of Holy Spirit baptism, how did they receive the ability to do what they did? The New Testament dictates only one other way that one could obtain a miraculous capability: through the laying on of the apostles’ hands. Only the apostles possessed the ability to transfer miraculous capabilities to others—a phenomenon that was described succinctly by Luke:

Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. Now when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money, saying, “Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Spirit.” But Peter said unto him, “Thy silver perish with thee, because thou hast thought to obtain the gift of God with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter” (Acts 8:17-21, emp. added).

This description establishes two important facts: (1) only the apostles were able to impart to others the ability to perform miracles; and (2) those other than the apostles who could perform miracles received their ability indirectly through the apostles—not directly from God via Holy Spirit baptism.

This fascinating feature of the miraculous in the first century makes it possible to understand how other individuals received their supernatural powers. For example, Philip possessed the ability to perform miracles (Acts 8:6,13). Since he was not an apostle, and since he did not receive direct ability from God via baptism of the Holy Spirit, where, then, did he derive his ability? Philip previously had received the laying on of the apostles’ hands (Acts 6:5-6). Likewise, the first Christians in Ephesus were enabled to speak in tongues—when the apostle Paul laid his hands on them (Acts 19:6). Even Timothy received his gift from the laying on of Paul’s hands (2 Timothy 1:6).

Some have challenged the exclusivity of the role of the apostles in their unique ability to impart the miraculous element by drawing attention to the admonition given by Paul to Timothy: “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery” (1 Timothy 4:14, emp. added). How does one explain the fact that Paul stated that Timothy’s gift had come through the presbytery (i.e., the eldership) as well? Once again, the grammar of the text provides the definitive answer. In 2 Timothy 1:6, where Paul claimed sole credit for imparting the gift to Timothy, he employed the Greek preposition dia with the genitive, which means “through” or “by means of ” (Machen, 1923, p. 41; Dana and Mantey, 1927, p. 101). However, in 1 Timothy 4:14, where Paul included the eldership in the action of impartation, he employed a completely different Greek preposition—meta. The root meaning of meta is “in the midst of ” (Dana and Mantey, p. 107). It refers to the attendant circumstances of an event that takes place—the accompanying phenomena (Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, pp. 510-511). It means “in association with” or “accompanied by” (Moule, 1959, p. 61; Thayer, 1901, p. 404; cf. Robertson, 1934, p. 611). In other words, Paul—as an apostle—imparted the miraculous gift to Timothy. It came from God through Paul. However, on that occasion, the local eldership of the church was present and participated with Paul in the event, lending their simultaneous support and accompanying commendation. After examining the grammatical data on the matter, Nicoll concluded: “[I]t was the imposition of hands by St. Paul that was the instrument used by God in the communication of the charisma to Timothy” (1900, 4:127; cf. Jamieson, et al., n.d., 2:414; Williams 1960, p. 956). Consequently, 1 Timothy 4:14 offers no proof that miraculous capability could be received through other means in addition to apostolic imposition of hands and/or the two clear instances of Holy Spirit baptism.