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. Praeterea, Apostoli nihil aliud praedicaverunt quam Evangelium Christi, ut patet Rom. 1. Sed doctrina Apostolorum committitur subdiaconibus enuntianda. Ergo et doctrina Evangelii. Obj. 5: Further, the apostles preached naught else but the Gospel of Christ (Rom 1:15). But the teaching of the apostles is entrusted to subdeacons to be read by them. Therefore, the Gospel teaching should be also. Praeterea, secundum Dionysium, quod est superioris ordinis, non debet inferiori convenire. Sed ministrare cum urceolo est actus subdiaconorum. Ergo non debet acolythis attribui. Obj. 6: Further, according to Dionysius (On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchies 5) that which belongs to a higher order should not be applicable to a lower order. But it is an act of subdeacons to minister with the cruets. Therefore, it should not be assigned to acolytes. Praeterea, actus spirituales debent corporalibus praeeminere. Sed acolythus non habet nisi actum corporalem. Ergo exorcista non habet actum spiritualem pellendi daemones: cum sit inferior. Obj. 7: Further, spiritual actions should rank above bodily actions. But the acolyte’s act is merely corporeal. Therefore, the exorcist has not the spiritual act of casting out devils, since he is of inferior rank. Praeterea, quae magis conveniunt, iuxta se ponenda sunt. Sed legere vetus Testamentum maxime debet convenire cum lectore novi Testamenti, quod competit superioribus ministris. Ergo legere vetus Testamentum non debet poni actus lectoris, sed magis acolythi: et praecipue cum lumen corporale quod acolythi deferunt, significet lumen spirituale doctrinae. Obj. 8: Further, things that have most in common should be placed beside one another. Now the reading of the Old Testament must have most in common with the reading of the New Testament, which latter belongs to the higher ministers. Therefore, the reading of the Old Testament should be reckoned the act, not of the lector, but rather of the acolyte; especially since the bodily light which the acolytes carry signifies the light of spiritual doctrine. Praeterea, in quolibet actu ordinis spiritualis debet esse aliqua vis spiritualis quam habeant ordinati prae aliis. Sed in apertione et clausione ostiorum non habent aliam potestatem ostiarii quam alii homines. Ergo non debet poni actus ipsorum. Obj. 9: Further, in every act of a special order, there should be some special power which the person ordained has to the exclusion of other persons. But in opening and shutting doors the porter has no special power that other men have not. Therefore, this should not be reckoned their act. Respondeo dicendum quod, cum consecratio quae fit in ordinis sacramento, ordinetur ad sacramentum Eucharistiae, ut dictum est; ille est principalis actus uniuscuiusque ordinis secundum quem magis proxime ordinatur ad Eucharistiae sacramentum. Et secundum hoc etiam unus ordo est alio eminentior, secundum quod unus actus magis de proximo ad praedictum sacramentum ordinatur. Sed quia ad Eucharistiae sacramentum, quasi dignissimum, multa ordinantur; ideo non est inconveniens ut, praeter principalem actum, etiam multos actus unus ordo habeat; et tanto plures quanto est eminentior, quia virtus, quanto est superior, tanto ad plura se extendit. I answer that, Since the consecration conferred in the sacrament of holy orders is directed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, as stated above (A. 2), the principal act of each order is that whereby it is most nearly directed to the sacrament of the Eucharist. In this respect, too, one order ranks above another, insofar as one act is more nearly directed to that same sacrament. But because many things are directed to the Eucharist, as being the most exalted of the sacraments, it follows not unfittingly that one order has many acts besides its principal act, and all the more as it ranks higher, since a power extends to the more things the higher it is. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod duplex est praeparatio suscipientium sacramentum. Quaedam remota: et haec per ministros efficitur. Quaedam proxima, qua statim efficiuntur idonei ad sacramentorum susceptionem. Et haec pertinet ad sacerdotes. Quia etiam in naturalibus ab eodem agente fit materia in ultima dispositione ad formam, et recipit formam. Et quia in proxima dispositione ad Eucharistiam fit aliquis per hoc quod a peccatis purgatur, ideo omnium sacramentorum quae sunt instituta principaliter ad purgationem peccatorum, est minister proprius sacerdos: scilicet baptismi, poenitentiae et extremae unctionis. Reply Obj. 1: The preparation of the recipients of a sacrament is twofold. One is remote and is effected by the ministers: another is proximate, whereby they are rendered apt at once for receiving the sacraments. This latter belongs to priests, since even in natural things matter receives from one and the same agent both the ultimate disposition to the form, and the form itself. And since a person acquires the proximate disposition to the Eucharist by being cleansed from sin, it follows that the priest is the proper minister of all those sacraments which are chiefly instituted for the cleansing of sins: namely, baptism, penance, and extreme unction. Ad secundum dicendum quod actus aliqui immediate ad Deum ordinantur dupliciter. Uno modo, ex parte unius personae tantum, sicut facere orationes singulares, et vovere, et huiusmodi. Et talis actus competit cuilibet baptizato. Alio modo, ex parte totius Ecclesiae. Et sic solus sacerdos habet actus immediate ad Deum ordinatos: quia ipse solus potest gerere personam totius Ecclesiae qui consecrat Eucharistiam, quae est sacramentum universalis Ecclesiae. Reply Obj. 2: Acts are directed immediately to God in two ways: in one way, on the part of one person only, for instance, the prayers of individuals, vows, and so forth; such acts befit any baptized person. In another way, on the part of the whole Church, and thus the priest alone exercises acts immediately directed to God: for to impersonate the whole Church belongs to him alone who consecrates the Eucharist, which is the sacrament of the universal Church. Ad tertium dicendum quod oblationes a populo oblatae per sacerdotem offeruntur. Et ideo duplex ministerium circa oblationes est necessarium. Unum ex parte populi: et hoc est subdiaconi, qui accipit oblationes a populo et altari imponit, vel offert diacono. Aliud ex parte sacerdotis: et hoc diaconi est, qui oblationes ministrat ipsi sacerdoti. Et in hoc est actus principalis utriusque ordinis. Et propter hoc ordo diaconi est superior. Legere autem epistolam non est actus diaconi: nisi secundum quod actus inferiorum ordinum superioribus attribuuntur. Similiter etiam crucem ferre. Et hoc secundum consuetudinem aliquarum ecclesiarum. Quia in actibus secundariis non est inconveniens diversas consuetudines esse. Reply Obj. 3: The offerings made by the people are offered through the priest. Hence a twofold ministry is necessary with regard to offerings. One on the part of the people: and this belongs to the subdeacon who receives the offerings from the people and places them on the altar or offers them to the deacon. The other is on the part of the priest, and belongs to the deacon, who hands the offerings to the priest. This is the principal act of both orders, and for this reason the deacon’s order is the higher. But to read the epistle does not belong to a deacon, except as the acts of lower orders are ascribed to the higher; and in like manner to carry the cross. Moreover, this depends on the customs of Churches, because in secondary acts it is not unfitting for customs to vary. Ad quartum dicendum quod doctrina est remota praeparatio ad sacramentum suscipiendum: et ideo pronuntiatio doctrinae ministris committitur. Sed doctrina veteris Testamenti adhuc est magis remota quam doctrina novi: quia non instruit de hoc sacramento nisi in figuris. Et ideo novum Testamentum superioribus ministris pronuntiandum committitur, vetus autem inferioribus. Doctrina etiam novi Testamenti perfectior est quam Dominus per seipsum tradidit, quam ipsius manifestatio per Apostolos. Et ideo Evangelium diaconis, epistola subdiaconis committuntur. Reply Obj. 4: Doctrine is a remote preparation for the reception of a sacrament; wherefore the announcement of doctrine is entrusted to the ministers. But the doctrine of the Old Testament is more remote than that of the New Testament, since it contains no instruction about this sacrament except in figures. Thus, announcing of the New Testament is entrusted to the higher ministers, and that of the Old Testament to the lower ministers. Moreover, the doctrine of the New Testament is more perfect as delivered by our Lord himself than as made known by his apostles. Therefore, the Gospel is committed to deacons and the Epistle to subdeacons. Et secundum hoc patet solutio ad quintum. This suffices for the reply to the fifth objection. Ad sextum dicendum quod acolythi habent actum super urceolum tantum, non super ea quae in urceolo continentur. Sed subdiaconus habet actum super contentis in urceolo: quia utitur aqua et vino ad ponendum in calice, et aquam iterum manibus sacerdotis praebet. Et diaconus, sicut et subdiaconus, solum actum habet super calicem, non super contenta: sed sacerdos super contenta. Et ideo, sicut subdiaconus in sui ordinatione accipit calicem vacuum, sacerdos plenum; ita acolythus urceolum vacuum, sed subdiaconus plenum. Et sic est quaedam connexio in ordinibus. Reply Obj. 6: Acolytes exercise an act over the cruet alone, and not over the contents of the cruet; whereas the subdeacon exercises an act over the contents of the cruet, because he handles the water and wine to the end that they be put into the chalice, and again he pours the water over the hands of the priest; and the deacon, like the subdeacon, exercises an act over the chalice only, not over its contents, whereas the priest exercises an act over the contents. Therefore, as the subdeacon at his ordination receives an empty chalice, while the priest receives a full chalice, so the acolyte receives an empty cruet, but the subdeacon a full one. Thus there is a certain connection among the orders. Ad septimum dicendum quod corporales actus acolythi magis de proximo ordinantur ad actum sacrorum ordinum quam actus exorcistarum, quamvis sit aliquo modo spiritualis: quia acolythi habent ministerium super vasa in quibus materia sacramenti continetur, quantum ad vinum, quod vase continente indiget propter sui humiditatem. Et ideo inter minores ordines ordo acolythorum superior est. Reply Obj. 7: The bodily acts of the acolyte are more intimately connected with the act of holy orders than the act of the exorcist, although the latter is, in a fashion, spiritual. For the acolytes exercise a ministry over the vessels in which the sacramental matter is contained as regards the wine, which needs a vessel to hold it on account of its wetness. Hence of all the minor orders, the order of acolytes is the highest. Ad octavum dicendum quod actus acolythorum se habet propinquius ad actus principales superiorum ministrorum quam actus aliorum minorum ordinum, ut per se patet. Et similiter etiam quantum ad actus secundarios, quibus populum per doctrinam disponunt: quia acolythus doctrinam novi Testamenti visibiliter figurat lumen portans, sed lector recitando figuras alias. Ideo acolythus est superior. Similiter etiam exorcista. Quia, sicut se habet actus lectorum ad actum secundarium diaconi et subdiaconi, ita se habet actus exorcistae ad secundarium actum sacerdotis, scilicet ligare et solvere, per quem totaliter homo a servitute diaboli liberatur. Reply Obj. 8: The act of the acolyte is more closely connected with the principal acts of the higher ministers than the acts of the other minor orders, as is self-evident; and again as regards the secondary acts whereby they prepare the people by doctrine. For the acolyte, by bearing a light, represents the doctrine of the New Testament in a visible manner, while the lector by his recital represents it differently: wherefore the acolyte is of higher rank. It is the same with the exorcist, for as the act of the lector is compared with the secondary act of the deacon and subdeacon, so is the act of the exorcist compared with the secondary act of the priest, namely, to bind and to loose, by which man is wholly freed from the slavery of the devil.