Articulus 5 Article 5 Utrum sacerdoti character imprimatur in ipsa calicis porrectione Whether the character is imprinted on a priest when the chalice is handed to him? Ad quintum sic proceditur. Videtur quod sacerdoti character non imprimatur in ipsa calicis porrectione. Quia consecratio sacerdotis fit cum quadam unctione, sicut et confirmatio. Sed in confirmatione in ipsa unctione imprimitur character. Ergo et in sacerdotio: et non in calicis porrectione. Objection 1: It would seem that the character is not imprinted on the priest at the moment when the chalice is handed to him. For the consecration of a priest is done by anointing as in confirmation. Now in confirmation the character is imprinted at the moment of anointing and therefore also in the priesthood: not at the handing of the chalice. Praeterea, Dominus dedit discipulis sacerdotalem potestatem quando dixit: accipite Spiritum sanctum: quorum remiseritis peccata, etc., Ioan. 20. Sed Spiritus datur per manus impositionem. Ergo in ipsa manus impositione imprimitur character ordinis. Obj. 2: Further, our Lord gave his disciples the priestly power when he said: receive ye the Holy Spirit: whose sins you shall forgive (John 20:22–23), etc. Now the Holy Spirit is given by the imposition of hands. Therefore, the character of holy orders is given at the moment of the imposition of hands. Praeterea, sicut consecrantur ministri, ita et vestes ministrorum: sed vestes sola benedictio consecrat. Ergo in ipsa benedictione episcopi consecratio sacerdotis efficitur. Obj. 3: Further, as the ministers are consecrated, even so are the ministers’ vestments. Now the blessing alone consecrates the vestments. Therefore, the consecration of the priest also is effected by the mere blessing of the bishop. Praeterea, sicut sacerdoti datur calix, ita et vestis sacerdotalis. Ergo, si in datione calicis imprimitur character, eadem ratione et in datione casulae. Et sic haberet duos characteres: quod falsum est. Obj. 4: Further, as a chalice is handed to the priest, even so is the priestly vestment. Therefore, if a character is imprinted at the giving of the chalice, so likewise is there at the giving of the chasuble, and thus a priest would have two characters: but this is false. Praeterea, ordo diaconi conformior est ordini sacerdotis quam ordo subdiaconi. Sed, si character imprimeretur sacerdoti in ipsa calicis porrectione, subdiaconus conformior esset sacerdoti quam diaconus: quia subdiaconus characterem, recipit in ipsa calicis porrectione, non autem diaconus. Ergo character sacer dotalis non imprimitur iri ipsa calicis porrectione. Obj. 5: Further, the deacon’s order is more closely allied to the priest’s order than is the subdeacon’s. But if a character is imprinted on the priest at the moment of the handing of the chalice, the subdeacon would be more closely allied to the priest than the deacon; because the subdeacon, not the deacon, receives the character at the handing of the chalice. Therefore, the priestly character is not imprinted at the handing of the chalice. Praeterea, acolythorum ordo magis appropinquat ad actum sacerdotis per hoc quod habet actum super urceolum, quam per hoc quod habet actum super candelabrum. Sed magis imprimitur character in acolythatu quando accipiunt candelabrum, quam quando accipiunt urceum: quia nomen acolythi cerei portationem significat. Ergo et in sacerdotio non imprimitur character quando calicem accipit. Obj. 6: Further, the order of acolytes approaches nearer to the priestly act by exercising an act over the cruet than by exercising an act over the torch. Yet the character is imprinted on the acolytes when they receive the torch rather than when they receive the cruet, because the name of acolyte signifies candle-bearer. Therefore, the character is not imprinted on the priest when he receives the chalice. Sed contra, principalis actus ordinis sacerdotis est consecrare corpus Christi. Sed ad hoc datur sibi potestas in acceptione calicis. Ergo tunc imprimitur character. On the contrary, The principal act of the priest’s order is to consecrate Christ’s body. Now he receives the power to this effect at the handing of the chalice. Therefore, the character is imprinted on him then. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, eiusdem est formam aliquam inducere, et materiam de proximo praeparare ad formam. Unde episcopus in collatione ordinum duo facit: praeparat enim ordinandos ad ordinis susceptionem; et ordinis potestatem tradit. I answer that, As stated above (A. 4), to cause the form and to give the matter its proximate preparation for the form belong to the same agent. Therefore, the bishop in conferring holy orders does two things, for he prepares the candidates for the reception of holy orders and delivers to them the power of order. Praeparat quidem et instruendo eos de proprio officio; et aliquid circa eos operando ut idonei sint potestatem accipiendi. Quae quidem operatio in tribus consistit: scilicet benedictione, manus impositione, et unctione. Per benedictionem divinis obsequiis mancipantur. Et ideo benedictio omnibus datur. Sed per manus impositionem datur plenitudo gratiae, per quam ad magna officia sunt idonei. Et ideo solis diaconibus et sacerdotibus fit manus impositio, quia eis competit dispensatio sacramentorum: quamvis uni sicut principali, alteri sicut ministro. Sed unctione ad aliquod sacramentum tractandum consecrantur. Et ideo unctio solis sacerdotibus fit, qui propriis manibus corpus Christi tangunt: sicut etiam calix inungitur, qui tenet sanguinem, et patena, quae continet corpus. He prepares them both by instructing them in their respective offices and by doing something to them, so that they may be adapted to receive the power. This preparation consists of three things: namely, blessing, imposition of hands, and anointing. By the blessing they are enlisted in the divine service; thus the blessing is given to all. By the imposition of hands the fullness of grace is given, whereby they are qualified for exalted duties; thus only deacons and priests receive the imposition of hands, because they are competent to dispense the sacraments, although the latter as principal dispensers, the former as ministers. But by the anointing they are consecrated for the purpose of handling the sacrament; thus the anointing is done to the priests alone who touch the body of Christ with their own hands, even as a chalice is anointed because it holds the blood, and the paten because it holds the body. Sed potestatis collatio fit per hoc quod datur eis aliquid quod ad proprium actum pertinet. Et quia principalis actus sacerdotis est consecrare corpus et sanguinem Christi, ideo in ipsa datione calicis, sub forma verborum determinata, character sacerdotalis imprimitur. The conferring of power is effected by giving them something pertaining to their proper act. And since the principal act of a priest is to consecrate the body and blood of Christ, the priestly character is imprinted at the very giving of the chalice under the prescribed form of words. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod in confirmatione non datur officium operandi super aliquam materiam exteriorem. Et ideo character ibi non imprimitur in aliqua exhibitione alicuius rei, sed in sola manus impositione et unctione. Sed in ordine sacerdotali aliter est. Et ideo non est simile. Reply Obj. 1: In confirmation there is not given the office of exercising an act on an exterior matter, wherefore the character is not imprinted in that sacrament at the handing of some particular thing, but at the mere imposition of hands and anointing. But it is otherwise in the priestly order, and consequently the comparison fails. Ad secundum dicendum quod Dominus discipulis dedit potestatem sacerdotalem quantum ad principalem actum, ante passionem in Cena, quando dixit: accipite et manducate. Unde subiunxit: hoc facite in meam commemorationem. Sed post resurrectionem dedit eis potestatem sacerdotalem quantum ad actum secundarium, qui est ligare et solvere. Reply Obj. 2: Our Lord gave his disciples the priestly power as regards the principal act before his Passion, at the Supper when he said: take ye and eat (Matt 26:26), wherefore he added: do this for a commemoration of me (Luke 22:19). After the resurrection, however, he gave them the priestly power as to its secondary act, which is to bind and loose. Ad tertium dicendum quod in vestibus non requiritur alia consecratio nisi quod divino cultui mancipentur. Et ideo sufficit eis pro consecratione benedictio. Sed aliter est de ordinatis, ut ex dictis patet. Reply Obj. 3: Vestments require no other consecration except to be set aside for the divine worship, wherefore the blessing suffices for their consecration. But it is different with those who are ordained, as explained above. Ad quartum dicendum quod vestis sacerdotalis non significat potestatem sacerdoti datam, sed idoneitatem quae in eo requiritur ad actum potestatis exequendum. Et ideo nec sacerdoti nec alicui alii imprimitur character in alicuius vestis datione. Reply Obj. 4: The priestly vestment signifies not the power given to the priest, but the aptitude required of him for exercising the act of that power. Therefore, a character is imprinted neither on the priest nor on anyone else at the giving of a vestment. Ad quintum dicendum quod potestas diaconi est media inter potestatem subdiaconi et sacerdotis: sacerdos enim directe habet potestatem super corpus Christi, subdiaconus autem super vasa tantum, sed diaconus super corpus in vase contentum. Unde eius non est tangere corpus Christi, sed portare corpus in patena, et dispensare sanguinem cum calice. Et ideo eius potestas ad actum principalem non potuit exprimi nec per dationem vasis tantum, nec per dationem materiae. Sed exprimitur potestas eius ad actum secundarium, in hoc quod datur ei liber Evangeliorum: et in hac potestate intelligitur alia. Et ideo in ipsa libri datione imprimitur character. Reply Obj. 5: The deacon’s power is midway between the subdeacon’s and the priest’s. For the priest exercises a power directly on Christ’s body, the subdeacon on the vessels only, and the deacon on Christ’s body contained in a vessel. Hence it is not for him to touch Christ’s body, but to carry the body on the paten, and to dispense the blood with the chalice. Consequently, his power, as to the principal act, could not be expressed either by the giving of the vessel only, or by the giving of the matter; and thus his power is expressed as to the secondary act alone, by his receiving the book of the Gospels, and this power is understood to contain the other; wherefore the character is impressed at the handing of the book. Ad sextum dicendum quod principalior actus acolythi est quo ministrat in urceolo quam quo ministrat in candelabro: quamvis denominetur ab actu secundario, propter hoc quod est magis notus et magis proprius ei. Et ideo in datione urceoli imprimitur acolytho character, virtute verborum ab episcopo prolatorum. Reply Obj. 6: The act of the acolyte whereby he serves with the cruet ranks before his act of carrying the torch; although he takes his name from the secondary act, because it is better known and more proper to him. Hence the acolyte receives the character when he is given the cruet by virtue of the words uttered by the bishop. Quaestio 38 Question 38 De conferentibus hoc sacramentum Those Who Confer Orders Deinde considerandum est de conferentibus hoc sacramentum. We must now consider those who confer this sacrament. Circa quod quaeruntur duo. Under this head there are two points of inquiry: Primo: utrum solus episcopus possit; hoc sacramentum conferre. (1) Whether a bishop alone can confer this sacrament? Secundo: utrum haereticus, vel quicumque ab Ecclesia praecisus, possit hoc sacramentum conferre. (2) Whether a heretic or any other person cut off from the Church can confer this sacrament? Articulus 1 Article 1 Utrum tantum episcopus ordinis sacramentum conferat Whether a bishop alone confers the sacrament of holy orders? Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod non tantum episcopus ordinis sacramentum conferat. Quia manus impositio ad consecrationem aliquid facit. Sed sacerdotibus qui ordinantur non solum episcopus manus imponit, sed etiam sacerdotes adstantes. Ergo non solus episcopus confert ordinis sacramentum. Objection 1: It would seem that not only a bishop confers the sacrament of order. For the imposition of hands has something to do with the consecration. Now not only the bishop but also the assisting priests lay hands on the priests who are being ordained. Therefore, not only a bishop confers the sacrament of order. Praeterea, tunc unicuique datur potestas ordinis quando ei exhibetur quod ad actum sui ordinis pertinet. Sed subdiacono datur urceolus cum aqua, bacili et manutergio, ab archidiacono: similiter acolythis candelabrum cum cereo et urceolus vacuus. Ergo non solus episcopus confert ordinis sacramentum. Obj. 2: Further, a man receives the power of order when that which pertains to the act of his order is handed to him. Now the cruet with water, bowl, and towel, is given to the subdeacon by the archdeacon; as also the candlestick with candle, and the empty cruet, to the acolyte. Therefore, not only the bishop confers the sacrament of order. Praeterea, illa quae ordinis sunt, non possunt alicui committi qui non habet ordinem. Sed conferre ordines minores committitur aliquibus qui non sunt episcopi, sicut presbyteris cardinalibus. Ergo conferre ordines non est episcopalis ordinis. Obj. 3: Further, that which belongs to an order cannot be entrusted to one who has not the order. Now the conferring of minor orders is entrusted to certain persons who are not bishops; for instance, to cardinal presbyters. Therefore, the conferring of orders does not belong to the episcopal order. Praeterea, cuicumque committitur principale, et accessorium. Sed ordinis sacramentum ordinatur ad Eucharistiam sicut accessorium ad principale. Cum ergo sacerdos consecret Eucharistiam, ipse etiam poterit ordines conferre. Obj. 4: Further, whoever is entrusted with the principal is entrusted with the accessory also. Now the sacrament of order is directed to the Eucharist, as accessory to principal. Since, then, a priest consecrates the Eucharist, he can also confer orders. Praeterea, plus distat sacerdos a diacono quam episcopus ab episcopo. Sed episcopus potest consecrare episcopum. Ergo et sacerdos potest promovere diaconum. Obj. 5: Further, there is a greater distinction between a priest and a deacon than between bishop and bishop. But a bishop can consecrate a bishop. Therefore, a priest can ordain a deacon. Sed contra: Nobiliori modo applicantur ad divinum cultum ministri per ordines quam vasa sacra. Sed consecratio vasorum pertinet ad solum episcopum. Ergo multo fortius consecratio ministrorum. On the contrary, Ministers are applied by their orders to the divine worship in a more noble way than the sacred vessels. But the consecration of the vessels belongs to a bishop only. Much more, therefore, does the consecration of ministers. Praeterea, sacramentum ordinis est excellentius quam confirmationis. Sed solus episcopus confirmat. Ergo multo magis solus confert ordinis sacramentum. Further, The sacrament of order ranks higher than the sacrament of confirmation. Now a bishop alone confirms. Much more, therefore, does a bishop alone confer the sacrament of order. Praeterea, virgines per benedictionem non constituuntur in aliquo gradu spiritualis potestatis, sicut ordinati constituuntur. Sed virgines benedicere est solius episcopi. Ergo multo magis solus ipse potest aliquos ordinare. Further, Virgins are not placed in a degree of spiritual power by their consecration, as the ordained are. Yet a bishop alone can consecrate a virgin. Therefore, much more can he alone ordain. Respondeo dicendum quod potestas episcopalis habet se ad potestatem ordinum inferiorum sicut politica, quae coniectat bonum commune, ad inferiores artes et virtutes, quae coniectant aliquod bonum speciale, ut ex dictis patet. Politica autem, ut dicitur in I Ethic., ponit legem inferioribus artibus: scilicet, quis quam debeat exercere, et quantum et qualiter. Et ideo ad episcopum pertinet in omnibus divinis ministeriis alios collocare. Unde ipse solus confirmat: quia confirmati in quodam officio confitendi fidem constituuntur. Ideo etiam solus ipse virgines benedicit, quae figuram gerunt Ecclesiae Christo desponsatae, cuius cura ipsi principaliter committitur. Ipse etiam in ministeriis ordinum ordinandos consecrat, et vasa quibus debent uti eis determinat sua consecratione: sicut et officia saecularia in civitatibus distribuuntur ab eo qui habet excellentiorem potestatem, sicut a rege. I answer that, The episcopal power stands in the same relation to the power of the lower orders as does political science, which seeks the common good, to the lower acts and virtues, which seek some special good, as appears from what was said above (Q. 37, A. 1). Now political science, as stated in Ethics 1.2, lays down the law to lower sciences, namely, what science each one ought to cultivate, and both how far and in what way it should be pursued. Wherefore it belongs to a bishop to assign others to places in all the divine services. Hence he alone confirms, because those who are confirmed receive the office, as it were, of confessing the faith; again he alone blesses virgins who are images of the Church, Christ’s spouse, the care of which is entrusted chiefly to him; and he it is who consecrates the candidates for ordination to the ministry of holy orders, and, by his consecration, appoints the vessels that they are to use; even as secular offices in various cities are allotted by him who holds the highest power, for instance, by the king. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod in impositione manuum non datur character sacerdotalis ordinis, ut ex dictis patet, sed gratia secundum quam, ad exequendum ordinem sint idonei. Et quia indigent amplissima gratia, ideo sacerdotes manus cum episcopo imponunt eis qui in sacerdotes promoventur: sed diaconis solus episcopus. Reply Obj. 1: As stated above (Q. 37, A. 5), at the imposition of hands there is given not the character of the priestly order, but grace which makes a man fit to exercise his order. And since those who are raised to the priesthood need most copious grace, the priests together with the bishop lay hands on them, but the bishop alone lays hands on deacons.