Definition
Consecration, in its legal dimension, refers primarily to the formal ecclesiastical act of ordaining a person to the episcopate — that is, making someone a bishop through a prescribed ceremony involving the laying on of hands. In English law, the process was governed by statute and canon, making it a matter of legal as well as religious significance. The term also encompasses the formal dedication of a place — a church, chapel, or burial ground — to sacred use, a process that carried legal consequences regarding property use, alienation, and the jurisdiction of ecclesiastical courts.
1. Consecration of a bishop: The act by which a qualified clergyman is elevated to the rank of bishop through a ceremony conducted by existing bishops, typically including imposition of hands. In England, this was regulated by statute and required royal assent or license in certain circumstances.
2. Consecration of a place: The formal dedication of a building or ground to sacred purposes under episcopal authority. Once consecrated, property was subject to ecclesiastical law governing its use and could not ordinarily be diverted to secular purposes without specific legal process.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): "The act or ceremony of consecrating; the state of being consecrated; dedication."
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): "The act or ceremony of consecrating; the state of being consecrated; dedication." Webster's adds a cautionary note from South: "Consecration makes not a place sacred, but only solemnly declares it so."
The common and legal meanings are closely aligned in vocabulary but diverge in consequence. In ordinary usage, consecration is a spiritual or ceremonial act. In law, it triggers specific jurisdictional, property, and governance rules — a consecrated church building is subject to ecclesiastical regulation in ways an unconsecrated building is not, and a consecrated bishop holds a defined legal status within an established church's governance structure. The ceremony is the same; the legal effects are not merely symbolic.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers working in ecclesiastical law, church-state relations, or English legal history will encounter consecration as a term with operational legal weight, not merely descriptive religious significance. Several navigational points:
First, the consecration of bishops in England sat at the intersection of royal prerogative and canon law. Statutory intervention — including the Ecclesiastical Appointments Acts and earlier Tudor legislation — shaped who could consecrate, under what authority, and with what civil effect. Researchers reading historical sources must be alert to whether a source is speaking of the canonical requirements or the statutory ones, which were not always identical.
Second, consecration of land and buildings determined which legal regime governed the property. Disputes over whether a building had been properly consecrated, or whether consecration had been legally undone, were litigated in ecclesiastical courts and occasionally in common law courts on jurisdictional grounds. This created a body of case law that sits awkwardly between civil and religious sources.
Third, American researchers should be cautious about importing English frameworks wholesale. The Establishment Clause context of U.S. law means that civil courts have generally declined to enforce or adjudicate the legal consequences of religious consecration directly. The term appears in American legal sources primarily in property disputes involving churches, where the question may be framed in terms of deed restrictions or charitable trust law rather than consecration per se.
Fourth, in corpus research, the term may appear in contexts ranging from purely liturgical to sharply contested legal proceedings, particularly in nineteenth-century English ecclesiastical court reports.
Historical Dictionary Support
Rapalje & Lawrence (1883) treat consecration narrowly and practically: making a bishop by act, with reference to statutory provisions (Act, § 24 et seq., 49) and the canonical requirement of imposition of hands (Order 5 et seq.). The entry is skeletal — a pointer to statutory and canonical authority rather than a substantive definition. This reflects the dictionary's practice of treating ecclesiastical terms as cross-references to governing instruments rather than explaining them in full.
What Rapalje & Lawrence do not address: consecration of places, the civil law dimensions of consecrated property, or any comparative treatment. The entry is useful as a navigational marker to English ecclesiastical legislation but should not be read as a complete account of the term's legal significance even within its own period.
Webster's 1913, writing for a general audience, captures the ceremonial meaning well but is silent on legal consequence — unsurprising given its purpose, but a useful reminder that dictionary authority varies by audience and intent.
Jurisdictional Note
In England and Wales, consecration of bishops and buildings carried defined statutory and canonical significance under the Church of England's established status. In the United States, civil courts have generally treated consecration as an internal ecclesiastical matter, declining to give it independent legal effect; property consequences are typically analyzed under neutral principles of property and trust law rather than by reference to consecration status.