Quaestio 82 Question 82 De ministro huius sacramenti The Minister of This Sacrament Deinde considerandum est de ministro huius sacramenti. Et circa hoc quaeruntur decem. We now proceed to consider the minister of this sacrament: under which head there are ten points for our inquiry: Primo, utrum consecrare hoc sacramentum sit proprium sacerdotis. (1) Whether it belongs to a priest alone to consecrate this sacrament? Secundo, utrum plures sacerdotes simul possent eandem hostiam consecrare. (2) Whether several priests can at the same time consecrate the same host? Tertio, utrum dispensatio huius sacramenti pertineat ad solum sacerdotem. (3) Whether it belongs to the priest alone to dispense this sacrament? Quarto, utrum liceat sacerdoti consecranti a communione abstinere. (4) Whether it is lawful for the priest consecrating to refrain from communicating? Quinto, utrum liceat sacerdoti omnino a celebratione abstinere. (5) Whether a priest may lawfully refrain altogether from celebrating? Sexto, utrum sacerdos peccator possit conficere hoc sacramentum. (6) Whether the Mass of a wicked priest is of less value than that of a good one? Septimo, utrum Missa mali sacerdotis minus valeat quam boni. (7) Whether those who are heretics, schismatics, or excommunicated, can perform this sacrament? Octavo, utrum haeretici, schismatici vel excommunicati possint conficere hoc sacramentum. (8) Whether degraded priests can do so? Nono, utrum degradati. (9) Whether communicants receiving at their hands are guilty of sinning? Decimo, utrum peccent a talibus communionem recipientes. (10) Whether a priest in sin can perform this sacrament? Articulus 1 Article 1 Utrum consecratio huius sacramenti proprie sit sacerdotis Whether the consecration of this sacrament belongs to a priest alone? Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod consecratio huius sacramenti non proprie sit sacerdotis. Dictum est enim supra quod hoc sacramentum consecratur virtute verborum quae sunt forma huius sacramenti. Sed illa verba non mutantur sive dicantur a sacerdote sive a quocumque alio. Ergo videtur quod non solus sacerdos, sed etiam quilibet alius possit hoc sacramentum consecrare. Objection 1: It seems that the consecration of this sacrament does not belong exclusively to a priest. Because it was said above (Q. 78, A. 4) that this sacrament is consecrated in virtue of the words, which are the form of this sacrament. But those words are not changed, whether spoken by a priest or by anyone else. Therefore, it seems that not only a priest, but anyone else, can consecrate this sacrament. Praeterea, sacerdos hoc sacramentum conficit in persona Christi. Sed laicus sanctus est unitus Christo per caritatem. Ergo videtur quod etiam laicus possit hoc sacramentum conficere. Unde et Chrysostomus dicit, super Matth., quod omnis sanctus est sacerdos. Obj. 2: Further, the priest performs this sacrament in the person of Christ. But a devout layman is united with Christ through charity. Therefore, it seems that even a layman can perform this sacrament. Hence Chrysostom (Opus imperfectum in Matth., Hom. xliii) says that every holy man is a priest. Praeterea, sicut Baptismus ordinatur ad hominum salutem, ita et hoc sacramentum, ut ex supra dictis patet. Sed etiam laicus potest baptizare, ut supra habitum est. Ergo non est proprium sacerdotis conficere hoc sacramentum. Obj. 3: Further, as Baptism is ordained for the salvation of mankind, so also is this sacrament, as is clear from what was said above (Q. 74, A. 1; Q. 79, A. 2). But a layman can also baptize, as was stated above (Q. 67, A. 3). Consequently, the consecration of this sacrament is not proper to a priest. Praeterea, hoc sacramentum perficitur in consecratione materiae. Sed alias materias consecrare, scilicet chrisma et oleum sanctum et oleum benedictum, pertinet ad solum episcopum, quarum tamen consecratio non est tantae dignitatis sicut consecratio Eucharistiae, in qua est totus Christus. Ergo non est proprium sacerdotis, sed solius episcopi, hoc sacramentum conficere. Obj. 4: Further, this sacrament is completed in the consecration of the matter. But the consecration of other matters such as the chrism, the holy oil, and blessed oil, belongs exclusively to a bishop; yet their consecration does not equal the dignity of the consecration of the Eucharist, in which the entire Christ is contained. Therefore it belongs, not to a priest, but only to a bishop, to perform this sacrament. Sed contra est quod Isidorus dicit, in quadam epistola, et habetur in decretis, dist. XXV, ad presbyterum pertinet sacramentum corporis et sanguinis domini in altari Dei conficere. On the contrary, Isidore says in an Epistle to Ludifred (Decretals, dist. 25): It belongs to a priest to consecrate this sacrament of the Lord’s body and blood upon God’s altar. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, hoc sacramentum tantae est dignitatis quod non conficitur nisi in persona Christi. Quicumque autem aliquid agit in persona alterius, oportet hoc fieri per potestatem ab illo concessam. Sicut autem baptizato conceditur a Christo potestas sumendi hoc sacramentum, ita sacerdoti, cum ordinatur, confertur potestas hoc sacramentum consecrandi in persona Christi, per hoc enim ponitur in gradu eorum quibus dictum est a domino, hoc facite in meam commemorationem. Et ideo dicendum est quod proprium est sacerdotum conficere hoc sacramentum. I answer that, As stated above (Q. 78, AA. 1, 4), such is the dignity of this sacrament that it is performed only as in the person of Christ. Now whoever performs any act in another’s stead, must do so by the power bestowed by such a one. But as the power of receiving this sacrament is conceded by Christ to the baptized person, so likewise the power of consecrating this sacrament on Christ’s behalf is bestowed upon the priest at his ordination: for thereby he is put upon a level with them to whom the Lord said (Luke 22:19): Do this for a commemoration of Me. Therefore, it must be said that it belongs to priests to accomplish this sacrament. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod virtus sacramentalis in pluribus consistit, et non in uno tantum, sicut virtus Baptismi consistit et in verbis et in aqua. Unde et virtus consecrativa non solum consistit in ipsis verbis, sed etiam in potestate sacerdoti tradita in sua consecratione vel ordinatione, cum ei dicitur ab episcopo, accipe potestatem offerendi sacrificium in Ecclesia tam pro vivis quam pro mortuis. Nam et virtus instrumentalis in pluribus instrumentis consistit, per quae agit principale agens. Reply Obj. 1: The sacramental power is in several things, and not merely in one: thus the power of Baptism lies both in the words and in the water. Accordingly the consecrating power is not merely in the words, but likewise in the power delivered to the priest in his consecration and ordination, when the bishop says to him: Receive the power of offering up the Sacrifice in the Church for the living as well as for the dead. For instrumental power lies in several instruments through which the chief agent acts. Ad secundum dicendum quod laicus iustus unitus est Christo unione spirituali per fidem et caritatem, non autem per sacramentalem potestatem. Et ideo habet spirituale sacerdotium ad offerendum spirituales hostias, de quibus dicitur in Psalmo, sacrificium Deo spiritus contribulatus, et Rom. XII, exhibeatis corpora vestra hostiam viventem. Unde et I Petri II dicitur, sacerdotium sanctum offerre spirituales hostias. Reply Obj. 2: A devout layman is united with Christ by spiritual union through faith and charity, but not by sacramental power: consequently he has a spiritual priesthood for offering spiritual sacrifices, of which it is said (Ps 1:19): A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit; and (Rom 12:1): Present your bodies a living sacrifice. Hence, too, it is written (1 Pet 2:5): A holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices. Ad tertium dicendum quod perceptio huius sacramenti non est tantae necessitatis sicut perceptio Baptismi, ut ex supra dictis patet. Et ideo, licet in necessitatis articulo laicus possit baptizare, non tamen potest hoc sacramentum conficere. Reply Obj. 3: The receiving of this sacrament is not of such necessity as the receiving of Baptism, as is evident from what was said above (Q. 65, AA. 3, 4; Q. 80, A. 11, ad 2). And therefore, although a layman can baptize in case of necessity, he cannot perform this sacrament. Ad quartum dicendum quod episcopus accipit potestatem ut agat in persona Christi supra corpus eius mysticum, idest super Ecclesiam, quam quidem potestatem non accipit sacerdos in sua consecratione, licet possit eam habere ex episcopi commissione. Et ideo ea quae non pertinent ad dispositionem corporis mystici, non reservantur episcopo, sicut consecratio huius sacramenti. Ad episcopum vero pertinet non solum tradere populo, sed etiam sacerdotibus, ea ex quibus possunt propriis officiis uti. Et quia benedictio chrismatis et olei sancti et olei infirmorum, et aliorum quae consecrantur, puta altaris, Ecclesiae, vestium et vasorum, praestat quandam idoneitatem ad sacramenta perficienda quae pertinent ad officium sacerdotum, ideo tales consecrationes episcopo reservantur, tanquam principi totius ecclesiastici ordinis. Reply Obj. 4: The bishop receives power to act on Christ’s behalf upon His mystical body, that is, upon the Church; but the priest receives no such power in his consecration, although he may have it by commission from the bishop. Consequently all such things as do not belong to the mystical body are not reserved to the bishop, such as the consecration of this sacrament. But it belongs to the bishop to deliver, not only to the people, but likewise to priests, such things as serve them in the fulfilment of their respective duties. And because the blessing of the chrism, and of the holy oil, and of the oil of the sick, and other consecrated things, such as altars, churches, vestments, and sacred vessels, makes such things fit for use in performing the sacraments which belong to the priestly duty, therefore such consecrations are reserved to the bishop as the head of the whole ecclesiastical order. Articulus 2 Article 2 Utrum plures sacerdotes possunt unam et eandem hostiam consecrare Whether several priests can consecrate one and the same host? Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod plures sacerdotes non possunt unam et eandem hostiam consecrare. Dictum est enim supra quod plures non possunt unum baptizare. Sed non minor vis est sacerdotis consecrantis quam hominis baptizantis. Ergo etiam non possunt simul plures unam hostiam consecrare. Objection 1: It seems that several priests cannot consecrate one and the same host. For it was said above (Q. 67, A. 6), that several cannot at the same time baptize one individual. But the power of a priest consecrating is not less than that of a man baptizing. Therefore, several priests cannot consecrate one host at the same time. Praeterea, quod potest fieri per unum, superflue fit per multos. In sacramentis autem Christi nihil debet esse superfluum. Cum igitur unus sufficiat ad consecrandum, videtur quod plures non possunt unam hostiam consecrare. Obj. 2: Further, what can be done by one, is superfluously done by several. But there ought to be nothing superfluous in the sacraments. Since, then, one is sufficient for consecrating, it seems that several cannot consecrate one host. Praeterea, sicut Augustinus dicit, super Ioan., hoc sacramentum est sacramentum unitatis. Sed contrarium unitati videtur esse multitudo. Ergo non videtur conveniens esse huic sacramento quod plures sacerdotes eandem hostiam consecrent. Obj. 3: Further, as Augustine says (Tract. xxvi in Joan.), this is the sacrament of unity. But multitude seems to be opposed to unity. Therefore it seems inconsistent with the sacrament for several priests to consecrate the same host. Sed contra est quod, secundum consuetudinem quarundam Ecclesiarum, sacerdotes, cum de novo ordinantur, concelebrant episcopo ordinanti. On the contrary, It is the custom of some Churches for priests newly ordained to co-celebrate with the bishop ordaining them. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, sacerdos, cum ordinatur, constituitur in gradu eorum qui a domino acceperunt potestatem consecrandi in cena. Et ideo, secundum consuetudinem quarundam Ecclesiarum, sicut apostoli Christo cenanti concenaverunt, ita novi ordinati episcopo ordinanti concelebrant. Nec per hoc iteratur consecratio super eandem hostiam, quia, sicut Innocentius III dicit, omnium intentio debet ferri ad idem instans consecrationis. I answer that, As stated above (A. 1), when a priest is ordained he is placed on a level with those who received consecrating power from our Lord at the Supper. And therefore, according to the custom of some Churches, as the apostles supped when Christ supped, so the newly ordained co-celebrate with the ordaining bishop. Nor is the consecration, on that account, repeated over the same host, because as Innocent III says (De Sacr. Alt. Myst. iv), the intention of all should be directed to the same instant of the consecration. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Christus non legitur simul baptizasse cum apostolis quando iniunxit eis officium baptizandi. Et ideo non est similis ratio. Reply Obj. 1: We do not read of Christ baptizing with the apostles when He committed to them the duty of baptizing; consequently there is no parallel. Ad secundum dicendum quod, si quilibet sacerdotum operaretur in virtute propria, superfluerent alii celebrantes, uno sufficienter celebrante. Sed quia sacerdos non consecrat nisi in persona Christi, multi autem sunt unum in Christo, ideo non refert utrum per unum vel per multos hoc sacramentum consecraretur, nisi quod oportet ritum Ecclesiae servari. Reply Obj. 2: If each individual priest were acting in his own power, then other celebrants would be superfluous, since one would be sufficient. But whereas the priest does not consecrate except as in Christ’s stead; and since many are one in Christ (Gal 3:28); consequently it does not matter whether this sacrament be consecrated by one or by many, except that the rite of the Church must be observed. Ad tertium dicendum quod Eucharistia est sacramentum unitatis ecclesiasticae, quae attenditur secundum hoc quod multi sunt unum in Christo. Reply Obj. 3: The Eucharist is the sacrament of ecclesiastical unity, which is brought about by many being one in Christ. Articulus 3 Article 3