Secunda ratio sumenda est ex statu hominis, qui peccando se subdidit per affectum corporalibus rebus. Ibi autem debet medicinale remedium homini adhiberi ubi patitur morbum. Et ideo conveniens fuit ut Deus per quaedam corporalia signa hominibus spiritualem medicinam adhiberet, nam, si spiritualia nuda ei proponerentur, eius animus applicari non posset, corporalibus deditus. The second reason is taken from the state of man who in sinning subjected himself by his affections to corporeal things. Now the healing remedy should be given to a man so as to reach the part affected by disease. Consequently it was fitting that God should provide man with a spiritual medicine by means of certain corporeal signs; for if man were offered spiritual things without a veil, his mind being taken up with the material world would be unable to apply itself to them. Tertia ratio sumenda est ex studio actionis humanae, quae praecipue circa corporalia versatur. Ne igitur esset homini durum si totaliter a corporalibus actibus abstraheretur, proposita sunt ei corporalia exercitia in sacramentis, quibus salubriter exerceretur, ad evitanda superstitiosa exercitia, quae consistunt in cultu Daemonum, vel qualitercumque noxia, quae consistunt in actibus peccatorum. The third reason is taken from the fact that man is prone to direct his activity chiefly towards material things. Lest, therefore, it should be too hard for man to be drawn away entirely from bodily actions, bodily exercise was offered to him in the sacraments, by which he might be trained to avoid superstitious practices, consisting in the worship of demons, and all manner of harmful action, consisting in sinful deeds. Sic igitur per sacramentorum institutionem homo convenienter suae naturae eruditur per sensibilia; humiliatur, se corporalibus subiectum recognoscens, dum sibi per corporalia subvenitur; praeservatur etiam a noxiis corporalibus per salubria exercitia sacramentorum. It follows, therefore, that through the institution of the sacraments man, consistently with his nature, is instructed through sensible things; he is humbled, through confessing that he is subject to corporeal things, seeing that he receives assistance through them: and he is even preserved from bodily hurt, by the healthy exercise of the sacraments. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod corporalis exercitatio, inquantum est corporalis, non multum utilis est. Sed exercitatio per usum sacramentorum non est pure corporalis, sed quodammodo est spiritualis, scilicet per significationem et causalitatem. Reply Obj. 1: Bodily exercise, as such, is not very profitable: but exercise taken in the use of the sacraments is not merely bodily, but to a certain extent spiritual, viz. in its signification and in its causality. Ad secundum dicendum quod gratia Dei est sufficiens causa humanae salutis. Sed Deus dat hominibus gratiam secundum modum eis convenientem. Et ideo necessaria sunt hominibus sacramenta ad gratiam consequendam. Reply Obj. 2: God’s grace is a sufficient cause of man’s salvation. But God gives grace to man in a way which is suitable to him. Hence it is that man needs the sacraments that he may obtain grace. Ad tertium dicendum quod passio Christi est causa sufficiens humanae salutis. Nec propter hoc sequitur quod sacramenta non sint necessaria ad humanam salutem, quia operantur in virtute passionis Christi, et passio Christi quodammodo applicatur hominibus per sacramenta, secundum illud apostoli, Rom. VI, quicumque baptizati sumus in Christo Iesu, in morte ipsius baptizati sumus. Reply Obj. 3: Christ’s Passion is a sufficient cause of man’s salvation. But it does not follow that the sacraments are not also necessary for that purpose: because they obtain their effect through the power of Christ’s Passion; and Christ’s Passion is, so to say, applied to man through the sacraments according to the Apostle (Rom 6:3): All we who are baptized in Christ Jesus, are baptized in His death. Articulus 2 Article 2 Utrum ante peccatum fuerint homini necessaria sacramenta Whether before sin sacraments were necessary to man? Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod ante peccatum fuerint homini necessaria sacramenta. Quia, sicut dictum est, sacramenta sunt necessaria homini ad gratiam consequendam. Sed etiam in statu innocentiae homo indigebat gratia, sicut in prima parte habitum est. Ergo etiam in statu illo erant necessaria sacramenta. Objection 1: It seems that before sin sacraments were necessary to man. For, as stated above (A. 1, ad 2) man needs sacraments that he may obtain grace. But man needed grace even in the state of innocence, as we stated in the First Part (Q. 95, A. 4; cf. I-II, Q. 109, A. 2; Q. 114, A. 2). Therefore sacraments were necessary in that state also. Praeterea, sacramenta sunt convenientia homini secundum conditione humanae naturae, sicut dictum est. Sed eadem est natura hominis ante peccatum et post peccatum. Ergo videtur quod ante peccatum homo indiguerit sacramentis. Obj. 2: Further, sacraments are suitable to man by reason of the conditions of human nature, as stated above (A. 1). But man’s nature is the same before and after sin. Therefore it seems that before sin, man needed the sacraments. Praeterea, matrimonium est quoddam sacramentum, secundum illud Ephes. V, sacramentum hoc magnum est, ego autem dico in Christo et Ecclesia. Sed matrimonium fuit institutum ante peccatum, ut dicitur Gen. II. Ergo sacramenta erant necessaria homini ante peccatum. Obj. 3: Further, matrimony is a sacrament, according to Eph. 5:32: This is a great sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in the Church. But matrimony was instituted before sin, as may be seen in Gen. 2. Therefore sacraments were necessary to man before sin. Sed contra est quod medicina non est necessaria nisi aegroto, secundum illud Matth. IX, non est opus sanis medicus. Sed sacramenta sunt quaedam spirituales medicinae, quae adhibentur contra vulnera peccati. Ergo non fuerunt necessaria ante peccatum. On the contrary, None but the sick need remedies, according to Matt. 9:12: They that are in health need not a physician. Now the sacraments are spiritual remedies for the healing of wounds inflicted by sin. Therefore they were not necessary before sin. Respondeo dicendum quod in statu innocentiae sacramenta necessaria non fuerunt. Cuius ratio accipi potest ex rectitudine status illius, in quo superiora inferioribus dominabantur, et nullo modo dependebant ab eis, sicut enim mens suberat Deo, ita menti suberant inferiores animae vires, et ipsi animae corpus. Contra hunc autem ordinem esset si anima perficeretur, vel quantum ad scientiam vel quantum ad gratiam, per aliquid corporale, quod fit in sacramentis. Et ideo in statu innocentiae homo sacramentis non indigebat, non solum inquantum sacramenta ordinantur in remedium peccati, sed etiam inquantum ordinantur ad animae perfectionem. I answer that, Sacraments were not necessary in the state of innocence. This can be proved from the rectitude of that state, in which the higher (parts of man) ruled the lower, and nowise depended on them: for just as the mind was subject to God, so were the lower powers of the soul subject to the mind, and the body to the soul. And it would be contrary to this order if the soul were perfected either in knowledge or in grace, by anything corporeal; which happens in the sacraments. Therefore in the state of innocence man needed no sacraments, whether as remedies against sin or as means of perfecting the soul. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod homo in statu innocentiae gratia indigebat, non tamen ut consequeretur gratiam per aliqua sensibilia signa, sed spiritualiter et invisibiliter. Reply Obj. 1: In the state of innocence man needed grace: not so that he needed to obtain grace by means of sensible signs, but in a spiritual and invisible manner. Ad secundum dicendum quod eadem est natura hominis ante peccatum et post peccatum, non tamen est idem naturae status. Nam post peccatum anima, etiam quantum ad superiorem partem, indiget accipere aliquid a corporalibus rebus ad sui perfectionem quod in illo statu homini necesse non erat. Reply Obj. 2: Man’s nature is the same before and after sin, but the state of his nature is not the same. Because after sin, the soul, even in its higher part, needs to receive something from corporeal things in order that it may be perfected: whereas man had no need of this in that state. Ad tertium dicendum quod matrimonium fuit institutum in statu innocentiae, non secundum quod est sacramentum, sed secundum quod est in officium naturae. Ex consequenti tamen aliquid significabat futurum circa Christum et Ecclesiam, sicut et omnia alia in figura Christi praecesserunt. Reply Obj. 3: Matrimony was instituted in the state of innocence, not as a sacrament, but as a function of nature. Consequently, however, it foreshadowed something in relation to Christ and the Church: just as everything else foreshadowed Christ. Articulus 3 Article 3 Utrum post peccatum, ante Christum, sacramenta debuerunt esse Whether there should have been sacraments after sin, before Christ? Ad tertium sic proceditur. Videtur quod post peccatum, ante Christum, sacramenta non debuerunt esse. Dictum est enim quod per sacramenta passio Christi hominibus applicatur, et sic passio Christi comparatur ad sacramenta sicut causa ad effectum. Sed effectus non praecedit causam. Ergo sacramenta non debuerunt esse ante Christi adventum. Objection 1: It seems that there should have been no sacraments after sin, before Christ. For it has been stated that the Passion of Christ is applied to men through the sacraments: so that Christ’s Passion is compared to the sacraments as cause to effect. But effect does not precede cause. Therefore there should have been no sacraments before Christ’s coming. Praeterea, sacramenta debent esse convenientia statui humani generis, ut patet per Augustinum, XIX contra Faustum. Sed status humani generis non fuit mutatus post peccatum usque ad reparationem factam per Christum. Ergo nec sacramenta debuerunt immutari, ut, praeter sacramenta legis naturae, alia statuerentur in lege Moysi. Obj. 2: Further, sacraments should be suitable to the state of the human race, as Augustine declares (Contra Faust. xix). But the state of the human race underwent no change after sin until it was repaired by Christ. Neither, therefore, should the sacraments have been changed, so that besides the sacraments of the natural law, others should be instituted in the law of Moses. Praeterea, quanto magis est aliquid propinquum perfecto, tanto magis debet ei assimilari. Sed perfectio salutis humanae per Christum facta est, cui propinquiora fuerunt sacramenta veteris legis quam ea quae fuerunt ante legem. Ergo debuerunt esse similiora sacramentis Christi. Cuius tamen contrarium apparet, ex eo quod sacerdotium Christi praedicitur esse futurum secundum ordinem Melchisedech, et non secundum ordinem Aaron, ut habetur Heb. VII. Non ergo convenienter fuerunt disposita ante Christum sacramenta. Obj. 3: Further, the nearer a thing approaches to that which is perfect, the more like it should it be. Now the perfection of human salvation was accomplished by Christ; to Whom the sacraments of the Old Law were nearer than those that preceded the Law. Therefore they should have borne a greater likeness to the sacraments of Christ. And yet the contrary is the case, since it was foretold that the priesthood of Christ would be according to the order of Melchisedech, and not . . . according to the order of Aaron (Heb 7:11). Therefore sacraments were unsuitably instituted before Christ. Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit, XIX contra Faust., quod prima sacramenta, quae celebrabantur et observabantur ex lege, praenuntia erant Christi venturi. Sed necessarium erat ad humanam salutem ut adventus Christi praenuntiaretur. Ergo necessarium erat ante Christum sacramenta quaedam disponi. On the contrary, Augustine says (Contra Faust. xix) that the first sacraments which the Law commanded to be solemnized and observed were announcements of Christ’s future coming. But it was necessary for man’s salvation that Christ’s coming should be announced beforehand. Therefore it was necessary that some sacraments should be instituted before Christ. Respondeo dicendum quod sacramenta necessaria sunt ad humanam salutem inquantum sunt quaedam sensibilia signa invisibilium rerum quibus homo sanctificatur. Nullus autem sanctificari potest post peccatum nisi per Christum, quem proposuit Deus propitiatorem per fidem in sanguine ipsius, ad ostensionem iustitiae suae, ut sit ipse iustus et iustificans eum qui ex fide est Iesu Christi. Et ideo oportebat ante Christi adventum esse quaedam signa visibilia quibus homo fidem suam protestaretur de futuro salvatoris adventu. Et huiusmodi signa sacramenta dicuntur. Et sic patet quod ante Christi adventum necesse fuit quaedam sacramenta institui. I answer that, Sacraments are necessary for man’s salvation, in so far as they are sensible signs of invisible things whereby man is made holy. Now after sin no man can be made holy save through Christ, Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in His blood, to the showing of His justice . . . that He Himself may be just, and the justifier of him who is of the faith of Jesus Christ (Rom 3:25, 26). Therefore before Christ’s coming there was need for some visible signs whereby man might testify to his faith in the future coming of a Savior. And these signs are called sacraments. It is therefore clear that some sacraments were necessary before Christ’s coming. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod passio Christi est causa finalis veterum sacramentorum, quae scilicet ad ipsam significandam sunt instituta. Causa autem finalis non praecedit tempore, sed solum in intentione agentis. Et ideo non est inconveniens aliqua sacramenta ante Christi passionem fuisse. Reply Obj. 1: Christ’s Passion is the final cause of the old sacraments: for they were instituted in order to foreshadow it. Now the final cause precedes not in time, but in the intention of the agent. Consequently, there is no reason against the existence of sacraments before Christ’s Passion. Ad secundum dicendum quod status humani generis post peccatum et ante Christum dupliciter potest considerari. Uno modo, secundum fidei rationem. Et sic semper unus et idem permansit, quia scilicet iustificabantur homines per fidem futuri Christi adventus. Alio modo potest considerari secundum intensionem et remissionem peccati, et expressae cognitionis de Christo. Nam per incrementa temporum et peccatum coepit in homine magis dominari, in tantum quod, ratione hominis per peccatum obtenebrata, non sufficerent homini ad recte vivendum praecepta legis naturae, sed necesse fuit determinari praecepta in lege scripta; et cum his quaedam fidei sacramenta. Oportebat etiam ut per incrementa temporum magis explicaretur cognitio fidei, quia, ut Gregorius dicit, per incrementa temporum crevit divinae cognitionis augmentum. Et ideo etiam necesse fuit quod in veteri lege etiam quaedam sacramenta fidei quam habebant de Christo venturo, determinarentur quae quidem comparantur ad sacramenta quae fuerunt ante legem sicut determinatum ad indeterminatum; quia scilicet ante legem non fuit determinate praefixum homini quibus sacramentis uteretur, sicut fuit per legem. Quod erat necessarium et propter obtenebrationem legis naturalis; et ut esset determinatior fidei significatio. Reply Obj. 2: The state of the human race after sin and before Christ can be considered from two points of view. First, from that of faith: and thus it was always one and the same: since men were made righteous, through faith in the future coming of Christ. Second, according as sin was more or less intense, and knowledge concerning Christ more or less explicit. For as time went on sin gained a greater hold on man, so much so that it clouded man’s reason, the consequence being that the precepts of the natural law were insufficient to make man live aright, and it became necessary to have a written code of fixed laws, and together with these certain sacraments of faith. For it was necessary, as time went on, that the knowledge of faith should be more and more unfolded, since, as Gregory says (Hom. vi in Ezech.): With the advance of time there was an advance in the knowledge of Divine things. Consequently in the old Law there was also a need for certain fixed sacraments significative of man’s faith in the future coming of Christ: which sacraments are compared to those that preceded the Law, as something determinate to that which is indeterminate: inasmuch as before the Law it was not laid down precisely of what sacraments men were to make use: whereas this was prescribed by the Law; and this was necessary both on account of the overclouding of the natural law, and for the clearer signification of faith. Ad tertium dicendum quod sacramentum Melchisedech, quod fuit ante legem, magis assimilatur sacramento novae legis in materia, inquantum scilicet obtulit panem et vinum, ut habetur Gen. XIV, sicut etiam sacrificium novi testamenti oblatione panis et vini perficitur. Sacramenta tamen legis Mosaicae magis assimilantur rei significatae per sacramentum, scilicet passioni Christi, ut patet de agno paschali et aliis huiusmodi. Et hoc ideo ne, propter continuitatem temporis, si permaneret eadem sacramentorum species, videretur esse sacramenti eiusdem continuatio. Reply Obj. 3: The sacrament of Melchisedech which preceded the Law is more like the Sacrament of the New Law in its matter: in so far as he offered bread and wine (Gen 14:18), just as bread and wine are offered in the sacrifice of the New Testament. Nevertheless the sacraments of the Mosaic Law are more like the thing signified by the sacrament, i.e., the Passion of Christ: as clearly appears in the Paschal Lamb and such like. The reason of this was lest, if the sacraments retained the same appearance, it might seem to be the continuation of one and the same sacrament, where there was no interruption of time. Articulus 4 Article 4 Utrum post Christum debuerint esse aliqua sacramenta Whether there was need for any sacraments after Christ came? Ad quartum sic proceditur. Videtur quod post Christum non debuerint esse aliqua sacramenta. Veniente enim veritate, debet cessare figura. Sed gratia et veritas per Iesum Christum facta est, ut dicitur Ioan. I. Cum igitur sacramenta sint veritatis signa sive figurae, videtur quod post Christi passionem sacramenta esse non debuerint. Objection 1: It seems that there was no need for any sacraments after Christ came. For the figure should cease with the advent of the truth. But grace and truth came by Jesus Christ (John 1:17). Since, therefore, the sacraments are signs or figures of the truth, it seems that there was no need for any sacraments after Christ’s Passion. Praeterea, sacramenta in quibusdam elementis consistunt, ut ex supra dictis patet. Sed apostolus dicit, Galat. IV, quod, cum essemus parvuli, sub elementis mundi eramus servientes, nunc autem, temporis plenitudine veniente, iam non sumus parvuli. Ergo videtur quod non debeamus Deo servire sub elementis huius mundi, corporalibus sacramentis utendo. Obj. 2: Further, the sacraments consist in certain elements, as stated above (Q. 60, A. 4). But the Apostle says (Gal 4:3, 4) that when we were children we were serving under the elements of the world: but that now when the fullness of time has come, we are no longer children. Therefore it seems that we should not serve God under the elements of this world, by making use of corporeal sacraments. Praeterea, apud Deum non est transmutatio nec vicissitudinis obumbratio, ut dicitur Iac. I. Sed hoc videtur ad quandam mutationem divinae voluntatis pertinere, quod alia sacramenta nunc exhibeat hominibus ad sanctificationem tempore gratiae, et alia ante Christum. Ergo videtur quod post Christum non debuerunt institui alia sacramenta. Obj. 3: Further, according to James 1:17 with God there is no change, nor shadow of alteration. But it seems to argue some change in the Divine will that God should give man certain sacraments for his sanctification now during the time of grace, and other sacraments before Christ’s coming. Therefore it seems that other sacraments should not have been instituted after Christ. Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit, contra Faust. XIX, quod sacramenta veteris legis sunt ablata, quia impleta, et alia sunt instituta virtute maiora, utilitate meliora, actu faciliora, numero pauciora. On the contrary, Augustine says (Contra Faust. xix) that the sacraments of the Old Law were abolished because they were fulfilled; and others were instituted, fewer in number, but more efficacious, more profitable, and of easier accomplishment. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut antiqui patres salvati sunt per fidem Christi venturi, ita et nos salvamur per fidem Christi iam nati et passi. Sunt autem sacramenta quaedam signa protestantia fidem qua homo iustificatur. Oportet autem aliis signis significari futura, praeterita seu praesentia, ut enim Augustinus dicit, XIX contra Faust., eadem res aliter annuntiatur facienda, aliter facta, sicut ipsa verba passurus et passus non similiter sonant. Et ideo oportet quaedam alia sacramenta in nova lege esse, quibus significentur ea quae praecesserunt in Christo, praeter sacramenta veteris legis, quibus praenuntiabantur futura. I answer that, As the ancient Fathers were saved through faith in Christ’s future coming, so are we saved through faith in Christ’s past birth and Passion. Now the sacraments are signs in protestation of the faith whereby man is justified; and signs should vary according as they signify the future, the past, or the present; for as Augustine says (Contra Faust. xix), the same thing is variously pronounced as to be done and as having been done: for instance the word passurus (going to suffer) differs from passus (having suffered). Therefore the sacraments of the New Law, that signify Christ in relation to the past, must needs differ from those of the Old Law, that foreshadowed the future. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, sicut Dionysius dicit, in V cap. Eccl. Hier., status novae legis medius est inter statum veteris legis, cuius figurae implentur in nova lege; et inter statum gloriae, in qua omnis nude et perfecte manifestabitur veritas. Et ideo tunc nulla erunt sacramenta. Nunc autem, quandiu per speculum in aenigmate cognoscimus, ut dicitur I Cor. XIII, oportet nos per aliqua sensibilia signa in spiritualia devenire. Quod pertinet ad rationem sacramentorum. Reply Obj. 1: As Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. v), the state of the New Law is between the state of the Old Law, whose figures are fulfilled in the New, and the state of glory, in which all truth will be openly and perfectly revealed. Wherefore then there will be no sacraments. But now, so long as we know through a glass in a dark manner, (1 Cor 13:12) we need sensible signs in order to reach spiritual things: and this is the province of the sacraments. Ad secundum dicendum quod sacramenta veteris legis apostolus vocat egena et infirma elementa, quia gratiam nec continebant, nec causabant. Et ideo utentes illis sacramentis dicit apostolus sub elementis mundi Deo servisse, quia scilicet nihil erant aliud quam elementa huius mundi. Nostra autem sacramenta gratiam continent et causant. Et ideo non est de eis similis ratio. Reply Obj. 2: The Apostle calls the sacraments of the Old Law weak and needy elements (Gal 4:9) because they neither contained nor caused grace. Hence the Apostle says that those who used these sacraments served God under the elements of this world: for the very reason that these sacraments were nothing else than the elements of this world. But our sacraments both contain and cause grace: consequently the comparison does not hold. Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut paterfamilias non ex hoc habere monstratur mutabilem voluntatem quod diversa praecepta familiae suae proponit pro temporum varietate, non eadem praecipiens hieme et aestate; ita non ostenditur aliqua mutatio esse circa Deum ex hoc quod alia sacramenta instituit post Christi adventum, et alia tempore legis; quia illa fuerunt congrua gratiae praefigurandae, haec autem sunt congrua gratiae praesentialiter demonstrandae. Reply Obj. 3: Just as the head of the house is not proved to have a changeable mind, through issuing various commands to his household at various seasons, ordering things differently in winter and summer; so it does not follow that there is any change in God, because He instituted sacraments of one kind after Christ’s coming, and of another kind at the time of the Law. Because the latter were suitable as foreshadowing grace, the former as signifying the presence of grace.