1387. Sed videamus quae sunt claves. Domus quando est serata impedit introitum; clavis vero removet impedimentum. Regnum caelorum habebat impedimentum, sed non ex parte sua; Apoc. IV, 1: vidi, et ecce ostium apertum; sed impedimentum erat ex parte nostra, scilicet peccatum, quia nihil coinquinatum intrabit in illam. Ista impedimenta removit Christus per suam passionem, quia lavit nos a peccatis nostris in sanguine suo, Apoc. I, 5. Et hanc communicavit ut per ministerium peccata tollerentur, quod expletur per virtutem sanguinis Christi: unde sacramenta virtutem habent a virtute passionis Christi. Unde dabo tibi ministerium et cetera. Is. cap. XXII, 22: dabo super te claves David.
1387. But let us see what the keys are. When a house is locked, it obstructs entry; but a key removes the obstacle. The kingdom of heaven had an obstacle, but not on its own part; I looked, and behold a door was opened in heaven (Rev 4:1), but the obstacle was on our part, namely, sin, because there shall not enter into it anything defiled (Rev 21:27). Christ removed this impediment by his passion, because he washed us from our sins in his blood (Rev 1:5). And he communicated this so that sins might be removed through a ministry, which is completed by the strength of Christ’s blood. Hence the sacraments have strength from the strength of Christ’s passion. Hence I will give to you a ministry. And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder: and he will open, and none will shut: and he will shut, and none will open (Isa 22:22).
Sed dicit tibi dabo; nondum enim erant fabricatae; res autem non potest dari antequam sit. Fabricandae autem hae erant in passione; unde in passione fuit eorum efficacia. Unde hic promisit, sed post passionem dedit, cum dixit: pasce oves meas.
But he says, I will give to you, for the keys were not yet made; and a thing cannot be given before it exists. Now, they were made in the passion, hence their efficacy came in the passion. Hence he promised them here, but gave them after the passion, when he said, feed my sheep (John 21:17).
1388. Sed quare dicit claves? Quia absolvere est removere obstaculum. Duo enim sunt, quia duo requiruntur, potestas et scientia.
1388. But why does he say keys? Because to absolve is to remove an obstacle. For there are two keys, since two things are required, power and knowledge.
Sed quid est? Numquid non aliqui sacerdotes sunt, qui non habent scientiam? Intelligatis quod habent scientiam, quia nullus clavem scientiae habet nisi sacerdos. Non dicitur hic scientia habitus intellectus etc., sed dicitur auctoritas discernendi. Unde est aliquis iudex, qui non habet scientiam primo modo, et tamen habet scientiam secundo modo, quia habet auctoritatem; aliquis autem habet scientiam primo modo, et non secundo modo, quia non habet auctoritatem. Unde scientia hic dicitur auctoritas discernendi, et sacerdos quilibet hanc habet ut discernat in absolvendo.
But what is this? Are there not some priests who do not have knowledge? Understand that they have knowledge, because no one has the key of knowledge except priests. Knowledge here does not mean a habit of the intellect, but the authority of discerning. Hence there is a judge who does not have knowledge in the first way, and yet has knowledge in the second way, because he has authority; and there is someone who has knowledge in the first way, and not the second way, because he has no authority. Hence knowledge here means the authority of discerning, and any priest has this, so he may discern in absolving.
1389. Consequenter ponit usum clavium quodcumque ligaveris super terram, erit ligatum et in caelis. Sed videtur quod inconvenienter ponatur, quia usus clavis non est ligare, sed aperire.
1389. Next, he sets down the use of the keys: and whatever you bind on earth will be bound also in heaven. But it seems that this is set down unfittingly, because a key is not used to bind, but to open.
Dico quod clavium conveniens iste usus est. Ipsum enim caelum apertum est; Apoc. cap. IV, 1: vidi ostium apertum. Unde non est necessarium ut aperiatur; sed ligatus qui debet introire, oportet quod solvatur.
I say that this is a fitting use of a key. For heaven itself is open: I looked, and behold a door was opened in heaven (Rev 4:1). Hence it is not necessary that it be opened; rather, the bond of him who should enter must be loosed.
1390. Sed hic vitandi sunt aliqui errores. Primus tangitur in Glossa, quia quidam usurpaverunt quod possent omnes, quos vellent, absolvere, et introducere in regnum caelorum. Sed hoc non potest stare, quia solius Dei est immutare voluntates.
1390. But here some errors should be avoided. The first is touched upon in the Gloss, for some have claimed that anyone who wished could absolve, and lead others into the kingdom of heaven. But this cannot stand, because it belongs to God alone to change desires.
Alius error est, quod sacerdos non ligat, sed ostendit esse absolutum. Sed istud derogat virtuti sacramenti, eo quod sacramenta novae legis efficiunt quod figurant; sacramenta vero veteris legis non. Unde si nihil efficeret, non esset sacramentum novae legis.
Another error is that the priest does not bind, but merely points out that a sin is absolved. But this takes away from the strength of the sacrament, because the sacraments of the new law effect what they figure; but the sacraments of the old law did not. Hence if it effected nothing, it would not be a sacrament of the new law.
Tertio aliqui dicunt quod in peccato sunt tria: culpa, et reatus, et poena. A duobus absolvitur homo per se per contritionem; sed quando homo ab his absolutus est, remanet obligatus ad poenam temporalem, quam per se tollere et evitare homo non sufficit; ideo dantur claves, quae minuunt aliquid de ista poena, et ligant quantum ad poenam aliquam.
Third, some say that there are three things in sin: guilt, liability, and punishment. A man is absolved per se from two of these by contrition; but when a man is absolved from these, he remains bound to a temporal punishment, which a man cannot take away and avoid of himself. Therefore the keys are given, which reduce something of this punishment, and bind as regards some punishment.
Tamen videtur mihi, quod hoc non sit bene dictum, quia sacramentum novae legis dat gratiam, sed gratia non ordinatur contra poenam, sed contra culpam. Unde dico quod sic est in sacramento isto confessionis, sicut in sacramento baptismi, quod habet virtutem spiritualem instrumentalem, secundum quam mundat a culpa. Unde Augustinus: quae est virtus aquae, ut carnem abluat, et culpam tollat? Sic dico quod in sacerdote est quaedam vis spiritualis instrumentalis, a qua dicitur minister, et sic ministerialiter operatur remissionem, sicut aqua baptismi.
Yet it seems to me that this is not well said, because a sacrament of the new law gives grace, and grace is not ordered against punishment but against guilt. Hence I say that in the sacrament of confession, just as in the sacrament of baptism, there is a spiritual, instrumental strength, according to which it cleanses from guilt. Hence Augustine: what is water’s strength, that it washes off the body and takes away guilt? Thus I say that in a priest there is a certain spiritual, instrumental strength, from which he is called a ‘minister,’ and thus he works the remission of sins ministerially, just as water works baptism.
1391. Sed hic facit difficultatem, quia modo solum pueri veniunt ad baptismum: et si accedat adultus, aut venit fictus, aut non: fictus venit, quando sine innovatione mentis, et tunc non remittitur culpa; non fictus venit, quando cum proposito confessionis, unde requiritur gratia, sive propositum conversionis, et istud est ex gratia. Gratia autem tollit culpam. Unde in sacramento baptismi veniens adultus, si praeparat se, recipit remissionem culpae. Sic in sacramento poenitentiae, ad quod soli adulti accedunt, non est contritus, nisi habeat in proposito se subiicere discretioni et iudicio sacerdotis. Si non est contritus, non consequitur effectum, sicut nec in Baptismo. Sed potest accidere, quod aliquis accedit non totaliter contritus, qui virtute gratiae collatae in sacramento perfecto efficitur contritus; ideo intelligendum est: quodcumque solveris, idest si ministerium absolutionis adhibes. Et dicit quodcumque, quia non solam culpam, sed poenam. Solutum erit in caelis, idest habebitur tamquam absolutum in caelis, sicut est de baptismo: unde debet dicere sacerdos, ego te absolvo, sicut ego te baptizo.
1391. But here a difficulty arises, because at the present time only children come to baptism. And if an adult were to approach, he would come either falsely, or not: he would come falsely if he came without a renewal of the mind, and then guilt would not be remitted; he would not come falsely if he came with the intention of confession. Hence grace is required, or the intention of conversion, which is from grace. Now, grace takes away guilt. Hence in the sacrament of baptism, when an adult comes, if he prepares himself, he receives the remission of guilt. Thus in the sacrament of penance, to which only adults come, a man is not contrite unless he has the intention of subjecting himself to the discretion and judgment of a priest. If he is not contrite, the effect will not follow, just as neither in baptism. But it can happen that someone approaches not entirely contrite, and is made contrite by virtue of the grace received in the perfect sacrament; therefore one should understand, whatever you loose, i.e., if you use the ministry of absolution. And he says, whatever because not only guilt, but punishment is loosed. Will be loosed also in heaven, i.e., it will be held as loosed in heaven, just as it is with baptism. Hence the priest should say, I absolve you, just as he says, I baptize you.
1392. Sed potest quis quaerere qualiter ligat.
1392. But someone can ask how he binds.
Sciendum quod sacerdos minister est Dei, et actio ministri dependet ab actu Domini: unde eo modo quo Dominus ligat et solvit, sic sacerdos ministerialiter. Solvit Deus infundendo gratiam, ligat non infundendo: sic sacerdos solvit sacramento, ministrando sacramentum, ligat vero non adhibendo.
One should know that the priest is a minister of God, and the action of the minister depends on the Lord’s action. Hence in the same way the Lord binds and looses, so the priests do ministerially. The Lord looses by pouring in grace, and binds by not pouring in: in the same way, the priest looses by the sacrament, by administering the sacrament, but binds by not giving it.
Aliter dicitur, quod per caelos praesens Ecclesia designatur; unde quodcumque ligaveris, excommunicatione, vel solveris, erit solutum vel ligatum, quoad administrationem sacramentorum Ecclesiae. Unde volunt, quod ista administratio, haec ligatio et absolutio sit super terram, ita quod non se extendat ad mortuos.
In another way, it is said that the present Church is designated by the heavens; hence whatever you bind by excommunication, or loose, will be loosed or bound as regards the administration of the Church’s sacraments. Hence they would have it that this administration, this binding and loosing, is on earth, so that it does not extend to the dead.
Sed hoc reprobatur, quia non solum se extendit ad vivos, sed etiam ad mortuos: unde si ad utrumque referatur, sensus est: quodcumque ligaveris super terram, tunc dico existens super terram, erit ligatum et in caelis.
But this is refuted, because it extends not only to the living, but even to the dead. Hence if it is referred to both, the sense is: whatever you bind upon earth, at that time, I say, being on earth, will be bound also in heaven.
1393. Sed est alia quaestio, quia alibi habetur, Io. XX, 23: quorum remiseritis peccata, remittentur eis; hic vero solum hoc dicit Petro.
1393. But there is another question, because it is written in another place, whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven them (John 20:23), but here he says this only to Peter.
Dicendum quod immediate dedit Petro; alii vero a Petro recipiunt; ideo ne credantur ista solum dici Petro, dicit: quorum remiseritis et cetera. Et hac ratione Papa, qui est loco sancti Petri, habet plenariam potestatem, alii vero ab ipso.
One should say that he gave it to Peter immediately, but the others receive from Peter. For this reason, lest they believe that this is said only to Peter, he says, whose sins you forgive (John 20:23). And for this reason the Pope, who is in the place of holy Peter, has full power, but the others have power from him.
Lectio 3
Lecture 3
Prophetia crucifixionis
Prophecy of the crucifixion
16:20 Tunc praecepit discipulis suis, ut nemini dicerent, quia ipse esset Iesus Christus. [n. 1394]
16:20 Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ. [n. 1394]
16:21 Exinde coepit Iesus ostendere discipulis suis, quia oporteret eum ire Ierosolymam, et multa pati a senioribus, et scribis, et principibus sacerdotum, et occidi, et tertia die resurgere. [n. 1396]
16:21 From that time, Jesus began to show to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and scribes and chief priests, and be put to death, and on the third day rise again. [n. 1396]
16:22 Et assumens eum Petrus, coepit increpare illum, dicens: absit a te, Domine, non erit tibi hoc. [n. 1401]
16:22 And Peter taking him, began to rebuke him, saying: Lord, let it be far from you, this will not happen to you. [n. 1401]
16:23 Qui conversus dixit Petro: vade post me, satana, scandalum es mihi, quia non sapis ea quae Dei sunt, sed ea quae hominum. [n. 1403]
16:23 Turning, he said to Peter: go behind me, satan, you are a scandal to me: because you do not understand the things that are of God, but the things that are of men. [n. 1403]
16:24 Tunc Iesus dixit discipulis suis: si quis vult post me venire, abneget semetipsum, et tollat crucem suam, et sequatur me. [n. 1407]
16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples: if any man wants to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. [n. 1407]
16:25 Qui enim voluerit animam suam salvam facere, perdet eam: qui autem perdiderit animam suam propter me, inveniet eam. [n. 1411]
16:25 For he who would save his life, will lose it and he who would lose his life for my sake, will find it. [n. 1411]
16:26 Quid enim prodest homini si mundum universum lucretur, animae vero suae detrimentum patiatur? Aut quam dabit homo commutationem pro anima sua? [n. 1412]
16:26 For what does it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange will a man give for his soul? [n. 1412]
16:27 Filius enim hominis venturus est in gloria Patris sui cum angelis suis, et tunc reddet unicuique secundum opera eius. [n. 1415]
16:27 For the Son of man will come in the glory of his Father with his angels and then he will render to every man according to his works. [n. 1415]
16:28 Amen dico vobis, sunt quidam de hic stantibus, qui non gustabunt mortem, donec videant Filium hominis venientem in regno suo. [n. 1416]
16:28 Amen I say to you, there are some of them who stand here, who will not taste death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. [n. 1416]
1394. Supra posita est confessio Petri de divinitate Christi, hic mandat taciturnitatem ad tempus, ne scilicet dicerent quod ipse esset Christus.
1394. Above, Peter’s confession of Christ’s divinity was set down; here he commands silence for a time, lest they should say that he is the Christ.
Sed hic videtur quaestio. Quia supra Dominus miserat discipulos ad praedicandum regnum Dei, quomodo hic prohibet?
But here a question arises. Since, above, the Lord had sent the disciples to preach the kingdom of God, how does he forbid it here?
Secundum superficiem litterae potest dici quod non praecepit supra quod annuntiarent Christum, sed regnum Dei. Sed quia annuntiatio regni Dei includit in se Annuntiationem Christi, ideo quod praecepit supra, videtur hic prohibere.
According to the surface of the letter, it can be said that he did not instruct them above that they should announce the Christ, but the kingdom of God. But since announcing the kingdom of God includes in itself announcing the Christ, then he seems to forbid here what he commanded above.
Hieronymus dicit, quod illud quod ante praedicaverat, non prohibet, quia ante praeceperat praedicari Iesum, hic praecipit ne dicant eum Christum: Christus enim est nomen dignitatis, Iesus nomen salvatoris. Unde supra I, 21: et vocabis eum Iesum. Origenes respondet quod apostoli ante loquebantur de Christo, ut de magno viro; sed de Christo voluit subticeri, ut post eis magis appareret; sicut aliquando praemittitur doctrina, ut habeant tempus discernendi.
Jerome says that he does not forbid what he had preached before, because before he had commanded that Jesus be preached, while here he forbids them to call him the Christ: for Christ is a name of dignity, Jesus the name of the savior. Hence above, and you will call his name Jesus (Matt 1:21). Origen responds that the apostles spoke before about Christ, as of a great man; but he wished them to be silent about the Christ, so that he might appear more to them afterward, just as sometimes he gives them teaching beforehand, that they may have time for discernment.
Vel dicendum quod illud: euntes autem praedicate, non debet retorqueri ad tempus ante passionem, sed post. Unde ibi tangitur quod trahentur ante reges et praesides etc., et non fuit hoc factum ante passionem.
Or one should say that this, and going, preach (Matt 10:7), should not be referred to the time before the passion, but after. Hence it touches there on the fact that they will be dragged before kings and governors, and this was not done before the passion.
1395. Sed quare Dominus nunc mandavit istud tacendum? Futurum enim erat ut populi viderent eum patientem, et quando aliqui percipiunt confusionem ab aliquo magno, ad scandalum magis incitantur, ideo et cetera.
1395. But why did the Lord command that this should be left unmentioned? For it was going to happen that people would see him suffering, and often when men perceive that some great man is confounded, they are incited more to scandal.
Chrysostomus dicit: si quod plantatur evellatur, non potest ita cito plantari. Unde si plantata fuisset fides, et evulsa fuisset in passione, post non fuisset tam cito plantata. Unde multa non sunt dicenda propter scandalum vitandum. Et quod haec sit causa, patet, quia statim suam passionem annuntiat; unde subditur
Chrysostom says: if what is planted is rooted out, it cannot be re-planted as quickly. Hence if the faith had been planted, and then had been rooted up in the passion, afterward it would not have been planted as quickly. Hence many things should not be said for the sake of avoiding scandal. And that this is the cause is clear, because he immediately announces his passion; hence there is added next:
1396. et exinde coepit Iesus ostendere discipulis suis, quia oporteret eum ire Ierosolymam et multa pati. Et circa hoc tria facit.
1396. From that time, Jesus began to show to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things. And concerning this, he does three things: