Articulus 2 Article 2 Utrum sint septem ordines Whether there are seven orders? Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod non sint septem ordines. Ordines enim Ecclesiae ordinantur ad actus hierarchicos. Sed tres sunt tantum actus hierarchici, scilicet purgare, illuminare et perficere. Secundum quos Dionysius distinguit tres ordines, in 5 cap. Eccles. Hier. Ergo non sunt septem. Objection 1: It would seem that there are not seven orders. For the orders of the Church are directed to the hierarchical acts. But there are only three hierarchical acts, namely, to cleanse, to enlighten and to perfect, for which reason Dionysius distinguishes three orders (On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchies 5). Therefore, there are not seven. Praeterea, omnia sacramenta habent efficaciam et auctoritatem ex institutione Christi, vel saltem Apostolorum eius. Sed in doctrina Christi et Apostolorum non fit mentio nisi de presbyteris et diaconibus. Ergo videtur quod non sint alii ordines. Obj. 2: Further, all the sacraments derive their efficacy and authenticity from their institution by Christ, or at least by his apostles. But no mention except of priests and deacons is made in the teaching of Christ and his apostles. Therefore, seemingly there are no other orders. Praeterea, per sacramentum ordinis constituitur aliquis dispensator aliorum sacramentorum. Sed alia sacramenta sunt sex. Ergo debent esse tantum sex ordines. Obj. 3: Further, by the sacrament of holy orders a man is appointed to dispense the other sacraments. But there are only six other sacraments. Therefore, there should be only six orders. Sed contra: Videtur quod debeant esse plures. Quia, quanto aliqua virtus est altior, tanto est minus multiplicabilis. Sed potestas hierarchica est altiori modo in angelis quam in nobis: ut Dionysius dicit. Cum ergo in hierarchia angelica sint novem ordines, totidem deberent esse in Ecclesia, vel plures. Obj. 4: On the other hand, it would seem that there ought to be more. For the higher a power is, the less is it subject to multiplication. Now the hierarchical power is in the angels in a higher way than in us, as Dionysius says (On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchies 1). Since, then, there are nine orders in the angelic hierarchy, there should be as many, or more, in the Church. Praeterea, prophetia psalmorum est nobilior inter omnes alias prophetias. Sed ad pronuntiandum in Ecclesia alias prophetias est unus ordo, scilicet lectorum. Ergo et ad pronuntiandum psalmos deberet esse alius ordo: et praecipue cum in Decretis, dist. 21, psalmista secundus ab ostiario inter ordines ponatur. Obj. 5: Further, the prophecy of the Psalms is the most noble of all the prophecies. Now there is one order, namely of lectors, for reading the other prophecies in the Church. Therefore, there ought to be another order for reading the Psalms, especially since the psalmist is reckoned as the second order after the porter (Decretals). Respondeo dicendum quod quidam sufficientiam ordinum assumunt per quandam adaptationem ad gratias gratis datas, de quibus habetur I Cor. 12. Dicunt enim quod sermo sapientiae competit episcopo, quia ipse aliorum ordinator est, quod ad sapientiam pertinet; sermo scientiae sacerdoti, quia debet habere clavem scientiae; fides diacono, qui praedicat Evangelium; opera virtutum subdiacono, qui se ad opera perfectionis extendit per votum continentiae; interpretatio sermonum acolytho, quod significatur in lumine quod defert; gratia sanitatum exorcistae; gratia linguarum psalmistae; prophetia lectori; discretio spirituum ostiario, qui quosdam repellit et quosdam admittit. I answer that, Some show the sufficiency of the orders from their correspondence with the gratuitous graces which are indicated in 1 Corinthians 12. For they say that the word of wisdom belongs to the bishop, because he is the ordainer of others, which pertains to wisdom; the word of knowledge to the priest, for he ought to have the key of knowledge; faith to the deacon, for he preaches the Gospel; the working of miracles to the subdeacon, who sets himself to do deeds of perfection by the vow of continency; interpretation of speeches to the acolyte, this being signified by the light which he bears; the grace of healing to the exorcist; diverse kinds of tongues to the psalmist; prophecy to the lector; and the discerning of spirits to the porter, for he excludes some and admits others. Sed hoc nihil est. Quia gratiae gratis datae non dantur eidem, sicut omnes ordines dantur eidem: dicitur enim I Cor. 12: Divisiones gratiarum sunt. Et iterum ponuntur quaedam quae ordines non dicuntur: scilicet episcopatus et psalmistatus. But this is of no account, for the gratuitous graces are not given, as the orders are, to one same man. For it is written: there are distributions of graces (1 Cor 12:4). Moreover, the episcopate (Cf. Q. 40, A. 5) and the office of psalmist are included, which are not orders. Et ideo alii assignant secundum quandam assimilationem ad caelestem hierarchiam, in quibus ordines distinguuntur secundum purgationem, illuminationem et perfectionem. Dicunt enim quod ostiarius purgat exterius, segregando bonos a malis etiam corporaliter; interius vero acolythus, quia per lumen quod portat significat se interiores tenebras pellere; sed utroque modo exorcista, quia diabolum, quem expellit, utroque modo perturbat. Sed illuminatio, quae fit per doctrinam, quantum ad doctrinam propheticam fit per lectores; quantum ad Apostolicam fit per subdiaconos; quantum ad Evangelicam fit per diaconos. Sed perfectio communis, utpote quae est poenitentiae et baptismi et huiusmodi, fit per sacerdotem; excellens vero per episcopum, ut consecratio sacerdotum et virginum; sed excellentissima per Summum Pontificem, in quo est plenitudo auctoritatis. Wherefore others account for the orders by likening them to the heavenly hierarchy, where the orders are distinguished in reference to cleansing, enlightening, and perfecting. Thus they say that the porter cleanses outwardly, by separating even in the body the good from the wicked; that the acolyte cleanses inwardly, because by the light which he bears he signifies that he dispels inward darkness; and that the exorcist cleanses both ways, for he casts out the devil who disturbs a man both ways. But enlightening, which is effected by teaching, is done by lectors as regards prophetic doctrine; by subdeacons as to apostolic doctrine; and by deacons as to the gospel doctrine; while ordinary perfection, such as the perfection of penance, baptism, and so forth is the work of the priest; excellent perfection, such as the consecration of priests and virgins, is the work of the bishop; while the most excellent perfection is the work of the Sovereign Pontiff in whom resides the fullness of authority. Sed hoc nihil est. Tum quia ordines caelestis hierarchiae non distinguuntur per praedictas actiones hierarchicas: cum quaelibet cuilibet ordinum conveniat. Tum quia, secundum Dionysium, solis episcopis convenit perficere, illuminare autem sacerdotibus, purgare autem ministris omnibus. But this again is of no account; both because the orders of the heavenly hierarchy are not distinguished by the aforesaid hierarchical actions, since each of them is applicable to every order; and because, according to Dionysius (On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchies 5), perfecting belongs to the bishops alone, enlightening to the priests, and cleansing to all the ministers. Et ideo alii appropriant ordines septem donis: ut sacerdotio respondeat donum sapientiae, quae nos pane vitae et intellectus cibat, sicut sacerdos nos pane caelesti reficit; sed timor ostiario, quia nos separat a malis; et sic intermedii ordines respondent mediis donis. Wherefore others suit the orders to the seven gifts, so that the priesthood corresponds to the gift of wisdom, which feeds us with the bread of life and understanding, even as the priest refreshes us with the heavenly bread; fear to the porter, for he separates us from the wicked; and thus the intermediate orders to the intermediate gifts. Sed hoc iterum nihil est. Quia in quolibet ordine septiformis gratia datur. But this again is of no account, since the sevenfold grace is given in each one of the orders. Et ideo aliter dicendum quod ordinis sacramentum ad sacramentum Eucharistiae ordinatur, quod est sacramentum sacramentorum, ut Dionysius dicit. Sicut enim templum et altare, et vasa et vestes, ita et ministeria quae ad Eucharistiam ordinantur, consecratione indigent: et haec consecratio est ordinis sacramentum. Et ideo distinctio ordinis est accipienda secundum relationem ad Eucharistiam. Consequently, we must answer differently by saying that the sacrament of order is directed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, which is the sacrament of sacraments, as Dionysius says (On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchies 3). For just as temple, altar, vessels, and vestments need to be consecrated, so do the ministers who are ordained for the Eucharist; and this consecration is the sacrament of order. Hence the distinction of orders is derived from their relation to the Eucharist. Quia potestas ordinis aut est ad consecrationem Eucharistiae ipsius, aut ad aliquod ministerium ordinandum ad hoc. Si primo inodo, sic est ordo sacerdotum. Et ideo, cum ordinantur, accipiunt calicem cum vino et patenam cum pane, potestatem accipientes consecrandi corpus et sanguinem Christi. For the power of order is directed either to the consecration of the Eucharist itself, or to some ministry in connection with this sacrament of the Eucharist. If in the former way, then it is the order of priests; hence when they are ordained, they receive the chalice with wine, and the paten with the bread, because they are receiving the power to consecrate the body and blood of Christ. Cooperatio autem ministrorum est vel in ordine ad ipsum sacramentum, vel in ordine ad suscipientes. Si primo modo, sic tripliciter. Primo enim est ministerium quo minister cooperatur sacerdoti in ipso sacramento, quantum ad dispensationem, sed non quantum ad consecrationem, quam solus sacerdos facit. Et hoc pertinet ad diaconum. Unde in littera dicitur quod ad diaconum pertinet ministrare sacerdotibus in omnibus quae aguntur in sacramentis Christi. Unde et ipsi sanguinem dispensant. Secundo est ministerium ordinatum ad materiam sacramenti ordinandam in sacris vasis ipsius sacramenti. Et hoc pertinet ad subdiaconum. Unde dicitur in littera quod corporis et sanguinis Domini vasa portant, et oblationes in altari ponunt. Et ideo accipiunt calicem de manu episcopi, sed vacuum, cum ordinantur. Tertio est ministerium ordinatum ad praesentandum materiam sacramenti. Et hoc competit acolytho. Ipse enim, ut in littera dicitur, urceolum cum vino et aqua praeparat. Unde accipiunt urceolum vacuum. The cooperation of the ministers is directed either to the sacrament itself, or to the recipients. If the former, this happens in three ways. For in the first place, there is the ministry whereby the minister cooperates with the priest in the sacrament itself, by dispensing, but not by consecrating, for this is done by the priest alone; and this belongs to the deacon. Hence in the text (Sentences IV, D. 24) it is said that it belongs to the deacon to minister to the priests in whatever is done in Christ’s sacraments, wherefore he dispenses Christ’s blood. Second, there is the ministry directed to the disposal of the sacramental matter in the sacred vessels of the sacrament, and this belongs to subdeacons. Wherefore it is stated in the text (Sentences IV, D. 24) that they carry the vessels of our Lord’s body and blood, and place the oblation on the altar; hence, when they are ordained, they receive the chalice from the bishop’s hand, but it is empty. Third, there is the ministry directed to the proffering of the sacramental matter, and this belongs to the acolyte. For he, as stated in the text (Sentences IV, D. 24), prepares the cruet with wine and water; wherefore he receives an empty cruet. Sed ministerium ad praeparationem recipientium ordinatum non potest esse nisi super immundos: quia qui mundi sunt, iam sunt ad sacramenta percipienda idonei. Triplex autem est genus immundorum, secundum Dionysium. Quidam enim sunt omnino infideles, credere nolentes. Et hi totaliter etiam a visione divinorum et a coetu fidelium arcendi sunt. Et hoc pertinet ad ostiarios. Quidam autem sunt volentes credere, sed non instructi, scilicet catechumeni. Et ad horum instructionem ordinatur ordo lectorum. Et ideo prima rudimenta doctrinae fidei, scilicet vetus Testamentum, eis legendum committitur. Quidam vero sunt fideles et instructi, sed impedimentum habentes ex daemonis potestate, scilicet energumeni. Et ad hoc habet ministerium ordo exorcistarum. The ministry directed to the preparation of the recipients can be exercised only over the unclean, since those who are clean are already apt for receiving the sacraments. Now the unclean are of three kinds, according to Dionysius (On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchies 3). For some are absolute unbelievers and unwilling to believe; and these must be altogether debarred from beholding divine things and from the assembly of the faithful; this belongs to the porters. Some, however, are willing to believe, but are not as yet instructed, namely, catechumens, and to the instruction of such persons the order of lectors is directed, who are therefore entrusted with the reading of the first rudiments of the doctrine of faith, namely, the Old Testament. But some are believers and instructed, yet lie under an impediment through the power of the devil, namely, those who are possessed: and to this ministry the order of exorcists is directed. Et sic patet ratio numeri et gradus ordinum. Thus the reason and number of the degrees of orders is made clear. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Dionysius loquitur de ordinibus non secundum quod sunt sacramenta, sed secundum quod ad hierarchicas actiones ordinantur. Et ideo secundum actiones illas tres ordines distinguit. Quorum primus habet omnes tres, scilicet episcopus; secundus habet duas, scilicet sacerdos; sed tertius habet unam, scilicet purgare, scilicet diaconus, qui minister dicitur; et sub hoc omnes inferiores ordines comprehenduntur. Sed ordines habent quod sint sacramenta ex relatione ad maximum sacramentorum. Et ideo secundum hoc debet numerus ordinum accipi. Reply Obj. 1: Dionysius is speaking of the orders not as sacraments, but as directed to hierarchical actions. Wherefore he distinguishes three orders corresponding to those actions. The first of these orders, namely, the bishop, has all three actions; the second, namely, the priest, has two; while the third has one, namely, to cleanse; this is the deacon who is called a minister: and under this last all the lower orders are comprised. But the orders derive their sacramental nature from their relation to the greatest of the sacraments, and consequently the number of orders depends on this. Ad secundum dicendum quod in primitiva Ecclesia, propter paucitatem ministrorum, omnia inferiora ministeria diaconibus committebantur: ut patet per Dionysium, 3 cap. Eccles. Hier., ubi dicit: ministrorum alii stant ad portas templi clausas, alii aliud quid proprii ordinis operantur, alii autem sacerdotibus proponunt super altare sacrum panem et benedictionis calicem. Nihilominus erant omnes praedictae potestates, sed implicite, in una diaconi potestate. Sed postea ampliatus est cultus divinus, et Ecclesia quod implicite habebat in uno ordine, explicite tradidit in diversis. Et secundum hoc dicit Magister in littera quod Ecclesia alios ordines sibi instituit. Reply Obj. 2: In the early Church, on account of the fewness of ministers, all the lower ministries were entrusted to the deacons, as Dionysius says (On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchies 3), where he says: some of the ministers stand at the closed door of the Church; others are otherwise occupied in the exercise of their own order; others place the sacred bread and the chalice of benediction on the altar and offer them to the priests. Nevertheless, all the power to do all these things was included in the one power of the deacon, though implicitly. But afterwards the divine worship developed, and the Church committed expressly to several persons that which had hitherto been committed implicitly in one order. This is what the Master means, when he says in the text (Sentences IV, D. 24) that the Church herself instituted other orders. Ad tertium dicendum quod ordines ordinantur principaliter ad sacramentum Eucharistiae, ad alia autem per consequens: quia etiam alia sacramenta ab eo quod in sacramento continetur, derivantur. Unde non oportet quod distinguantur ordines secundum sacramenta. Reply Obj. 3: The orders are directed to the sacrament of the Eucharist chiefly, and to the other sacraments consequently, for even the other sacraments flow from that which is contained in that sacrament. Hence it does not follow that the orders ought to be distinguished according to the sacraments. Ad quartum dicendum quod angeli differunt specie: et propter hoc in eis potest esse modus diversus recipiendi divina. Et ideo etiam diversae hierarchiae in eis distinguuntur. Sed in ordinibus tantum est una hierarchia, propter imum modum accipiendi divina, qui consequitur humanam speciem, scilicet per similitudinem rerum sensibilium. Et ideo distinctio ordinum in angelis non potest esse per comparationem ad aliquod sacramentum, sicut est apud nos: sed solum per comparationem ad hierarchicas actiones quas in inferiores exercet quilibet ordo in eis. Et secundum hoc nostri ordines eis respondent: quia in nostra hierarchia sunt tres ordines secundum hierarchicas actiones distincti, sicut in qualibet hierarchia una angelorum. Reply Obj. 4: The angels differ specifically ( I, Q. 50, A. 4): for this reason it is possible for them to have various modes of receiving divine things, and hence also they are divided into various hierarchies. But in men there is only one hierarchy, because they have only one mode of receiving divine things, which results from the human species, namely, through the images of sensible objects. Consequently, the distinction of orders in the angels cannot bear any relation to a sacrament as it is with us, but only a relation to the hierarchical actions which among them each order exercises on the orders below. In this respect our orders correspond to theirs, since in our hierarchy there are three orders distinguished according to the three hierarchical actions, even as in each angelic hierarchy. Ad quintum dicendum quod psalmistatus non est ordo, sed officium ordini annexum: quia enim psalmi cum cantu pronuntiantur, ideo dicitur psalmista cantor. Cantor autem non est nomen ordinis specialis. Tum quia cantare pertinet ad totum chorum. Tum quia non habet aliquam specialem relationem ad Eucharistiae sacramentum. Tum quia officium quoddam est: quod inter ordines largo modo acceptos computatur quandoque. Reply Obj. 5: The office of psalmist is not an order, but an office annexed to an order. For the psalmist is also named ‘cantor’ because the psalms are recited with chant. Now ‘cantor’ is not the name of a special order, both because it belongs to the whole choir to sing, and because he has no special relation to the sacrament of the Eucharist. Since, however, it is a particular office, it is sometimes reckoned among the orders, taking these in a broad sense. Articulus 3 Article 3 Utrum ordines debeant distingui per sacros et non sacros Whether holy orders should be divided into those that are sacred and those that are not? Ad tertium sic proceditur. Videtur quod ordines non debeant distingui per sacros et non sacros. Omnes enim ordines sacramenta quaedam sunt. Sed omnia sacramenta sunt sacra. Ergo omnes ordines sunt sacri. Objection 1: It would seem that the orders ought not to be divided into those that are sacred and those that are not. For all the orders are sacraments, and all the sacraments are sacred. Therefore, all the orders are sacred. Praeterea, secundum ordines Ecclesiae non deputatur aliquis, nisi ad divina officia. Sed omnia talia sunt sacra. Ergo omnes ordines sunt sacri. Obj. 2: Further, by the orders of the Church a man is not appointed to any other than divine offices. Now all these are sacred. Therefore, all the orders also are sacred. Sed contra est quod ordines sacri impediunt matrimonium contrahendum et dirimunt iam contractum. Sed quattuor inferiores ordines non impediunt contrahendum nec dirimunt contractum. Ergo non sunt sacri ordines. On the contrary, The sacred orders are an impediment to the contracting of marriage and annul the marriage that is already contracted. But the four lower orders neither impede the contracting nor annul the contract. Therefore, these are not sacred orders. Respondeo dicendum quod ordo sacer dicitur dupliciter. Uno modo, secundum se. Et sic quilibet ordo est sacer: cum sit sacramentum quoddam. Alio modo, ratione materiae circa quam habet aliquem actum. Et sic ordo sacer dicitur qui habet aliquem actum circa rem aliquam consecratam. Et sic sunt tantum tres ordines sacri: scilicet sacerdos; et diaconus, qui habet actum circa corpus Christi et sanguinem consecratum; et subdiaconus, qui habet actum circa vasa consecrata. Et ideo etiam eis continentia indicitur, ut mundi sint qui sancta tractant. I answer that, An order is said to be sacred in two ways. First, in itself, and thus every order is sacred, since it is a sacrament. Second, by reason of the matter about which it exercises an act, and thus an order is called sacred if it exercises an act about some consecrated thing. In this sense there are only three sacred orders: namely, the priesthood and diaconate, which exercise an act about the consecrated body and blood of Christ, and the subdiaconate, which exercises an act about the consecrated vessels. Hence continency is enjoined them, that they who handle holy things may themselves be holy and clean. Et per hoc patet solutio ad obiecta. This suffices for the replies to the objections. Articulus 4 Article 4 Utrum actus ordinum convenienter in littera assignentur Whether the acts of the orders are rightly assigned in the text? Ad quartum sic proceditur. Videtur quod actus ordinum inconvenienter in littera assignentur. Quia per absolutionem praeparatur aliquis ad corpus Christi sumendum. Sed praeparatio suscipientium sacramentum pertinet ad inferiores ordines. Ergo inconvenienter absolutio a peccatis inter actus ponitur sacerdotis. Objection 1: It would seem that the acts of the orders are not rightly assigned in the text (Sentences IV, D. 24). For a person is prepared by absolution to receive Christ’s body. Now the preparation of the recipients of a sacrament belongs to the lower orders. Therefore, absolution from sins is unfittingly reckoned among the acts of a priest. Praeterea, homo per baptismum est immediate Deo configuratus, characterem configurantem suscipiens. Sed orare et offerre oblationes sunt actus immediate ad Deum ordinati. Ergo quilibet baptizatus potest hos actus facere, et non soli sacerdotes. Obj. 2: Further, man is made like to God immediately in baptism by receiving the character which causes this likeness. But prayer and the offering of oblations are acts directed immediately to God. Therefore, every baptized person can perform these acts, and not priests alone. Praeterea, diversorum ordinum diversi sunt actus. Sed oblationes in altari ponere et epistolam legere ad subdiaconum pertinet. Crucem etiam ferunt subdiaconi coram Papa. Ergo hi non debent poni actus diaconi. Obj. 3: Further, different orders have different acts. But it belongs to the subdeacon to place the oblations on the altar, and to read the epistle; and subdeacons carry the cross before the Pope. Therefore, these acts should not be assigned to the deacon. Praeterea, eadem veritas continetur in novo et in veteri Testamento. Sed legere vetus Testamentum est lectorum. Ergo, eadem ratione, et legere novum: et non diaconorum. Obj. 4: Further, the same truth is contained in the Old and in the New Testament. But it belongs to the lectors to read the Old Testament. Therefore, it should belong to them likewise, and not to deacons, to read the New Testament.