Links to
individual items
'Voice from Worcester' Tracts
Other booklets
|
There may be a number of small typographical errors in this transcription.
The transcription has been created by a text-recognition scanning process
and, although fairly accurate, some errors will inevitably remain.
The sacrament of Orders
being the ninth chapter of
St. Thomas Aquinas on the Sacraments
By
W.B. Monahan
Chapter IX
The sacrament of Orders - The essence of Orders - The effect
of this sacrament - The recipients of this sacrament - The distinction of
Orders, their acts and the character imprinted - The ministers of this
sacrament - The impediments to this sacrament - Things annexed to the sacrament
of Orders.
Summa Theologica
Supplement XXXIV to XLI also
Supplement LXVI on Bigamy from the Sacrament of Marriage.
THE SACRAMENT OF ORDERS
THE breach with Apostolic Order in the Sixteenth Century has been the
cause of such a breakup of the ministerial. order of Western Christendom
involving such a multiplication of sects, each claiming to have a true
ministry, that no parallel can be found in any previous period of the
Church's history. It is not surprising, therefore, that many of the
ideas put forward since the Reformation to justify separation from the
Church's ministry and for the justification of new ministries are not
directly dealt with in the works of St. Thomas. The present author must.
therefore be excused for declining to enter into the controversy with
Rome on the subject of Anglican Orders except to say that although these
Orders are besmirched with much error. of foolish defenders whose arguments
have turned out to be like the boomerang, a weapon which returns to
wound the thrower without hurting his antagonist, nevertheless no attack
on English . Orders can be confidently shown to be any proof of invalidity.
With regard to the sectaries, who have in America a separate sect for
every day of the year, and almost as many sects in England as individuals,
we do not bring any railing accusation, but only the damning sentence,
that these men consent neither to Scripture nor to tradition. Since
they reject the Church as the pillar and ground of truth and the divinely
appointed interpretero of the Scripture, there remains no exterior criterion
by which the faith of such men may be tested or proved, and established
or rejected. The rejection of the Church and of the right teaching of
Scripture deprives these men of any ground of reason or faith on which
to establish their varied religions. We can but repeat the arguments
of Irenaeus when .he was dealing with the Valentinians who claimed to
have received secret revelations not known to the Church, and we maintain
that there is no heresy of to-day more insidious, attractive and more
difficult to defeat in argument than Valentinianism, which is now represented
by the claim to individual revelations. The fact on which Irenaeus was
content to rest his refutation of the heretical sects of his own day
was that in the various Churches the perpetual succession of bishops
was kept up. It is proof positive of the Apostolical Succession. It
is in the power of every man in every Church, who desires to sec the
truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the Apostles shown throughout
the whole world: and we are in a position to reckon up those who were
by the Apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and to demonstrate
the successions of these men to our own times. These men did not promulgate
any of the strange doctrines which have cropped up in Europe and in
England since the Reformation. St. Irenaeus goes on to say: "Since it
would be very tedious to reckon up all the successions of all the Churches,
we put to confusion all who have started unauthorized gatherings by
indicating that tradition derived from the Apostles, of the very great,
the very ancient and universally known Church founded and organized
at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul: and by indicating
the faith preached to men, which comes down to our times by means of
the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that
every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre-eminent
authority." Adversus Haereser III. III. 2.
The Apostolic Succession is to be seen in the line of bishops in every
Church whether that of Rome, of Alexandria, Antioch or Canterbury. We
do not pretend to offer any statement that would convince those who
do . not know that our Lord Jesus Christ instituted a Church for the
continuance of His work. The ministry was instituted by our Lord. The
ministry is "our Lord's provision for His work to be carried on until
the end of time.
THE SACRAMENT OF ORDER
Under this head we consider (1) Orders in general: (2) The difference of Orders:
(3) Those who confer Orders: (4) The impediments to receiving of Orders:
and (5) Things connected with Orders.
Under the head of Orders in general we consider (I) Order in
its essence, what it is, and its parts: (2) Its effect: and (3) The
recipients of Orders.
THE ESSENCE OF ORDERS
Under this head we have to show that there should be Holy
Order in the Church: we must give a definition of Order: show'
that it is a sacrament: and indicate its form and its matter.
The first thing to prove is that there should be order in the
Church. All things done by God are done in order. One power
rules, while another is subject. And "there is no power but of
God." Rom. xiii. 1. If the government of states be ordained of God for the
"powers that be are ordained of God," how much more confidently may we say that the powers of the Church are of God:
and if of God then they are in due order under God. If order
is needed in the state so should there be order in the Church.
The state of the Church is between the state of nature and the
state of glory. Now we find order in nature, "one star differeth
from another star in glory," 1 Cor. xv. 41. in that some things are above
others: and likewise in glory there is order as among the angels,
there are the nine orders, so that there should be' order in the
Church. God wished to produce His works in likeness to Him-
self as far as possible in order that they might be perfect, and
that He might be known through them. To this end He laid
this natural law on all things that last things should be sublimated
simplified and perfected by middle things, and middle. things
by the first. This is the cause 'of the beauty of things. And that
this beauty be not lacking to the Church God established order
in her so that some should deliver the sacraments to others, being
thus made like to God in their own way, as co-operating with
Him even as in the body some members act on others. The fact
that order requires subjection and eminence is not incompatible
with the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free : for there
can be no true liberty without order, as without order there can
be no guarantee against slavery. The subjection required by
order is not the subjection of slavery because those who are
pre-eminent have to seek the salvation of their subjects and not
their own profit. Orders are a kind of office in which a man while
maintaining and exalting his office may at the same time esteem
others better than himself in merit though not in office. There
are some who wrongly think that orders should be regarded from
the point of view that one man is more holy than another.
Degrees of holiness do not affect the power of Orders in the
Church Militant. For the Orders in the Church Militant regard
the sharing in the sacraments and the communication of them
. to others; and this participation in and communication of the
sacraments are the cause of grace, and in a way precede grace:
consequently our Orders do not require sanctifying grace, but
only the power to dispense the sacraments: because Order does
not correspond to the difference of sanctifying grace but to the
difference of power. However holy a man may be, if he is out-
side the succession his holiness does not confer on him the power
to administer the sacraments. He must have the power of Order.
Peter Lombard, the Master of. the Sentences, defined Order.
His definition is : "Order is a seal of the Church, whereby
spiritual power is conferred on the person ordained." IV, Sent. D. 53. Order is
defined as a sacrament having the outward sign, i.e. the seal and
the inward effect, viz. the conferring of spiritual power upon the
ordinand. The word seal in this definition stands not for the
inward character or mark, but for the outward act which is the
sign and cause of the inward power. Nevertheless inward
character itself is essentially and principally the sacrament of
Order. Although in baptism there is conferred a spiritual power
to receive the other sacraments for which reason it imprints a
character: nevertheless this is not 'its chief effect, but inward
cleansing: the need of which would require baptism though the
motive of imprinting the character did not exist: whereas Order
denotes power principally. Wherefore the character which is a
spiritual power is included in the definition of Order, but not
in that of baptism. Order is a sacrament. In the Penny Catechism the question is asked: "How many sacraments are there?"
And the reply is: "There are seven sacraments: Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Holy
Order and Matrimony." To the question whether Holy Order
is a sacrament we. apply a principle which often serves the
theologian in good stead, viz.: The cause of a thing being such
is more so. Now Order is the cause of a man being the dispenser
of other: sacraments: so that he is the cause of other sacraments
taking place. Therefore Order has more reason for being a
sacrament than the others. A sacrament is nothing else than a
sanctification conferred on man with some outward sign. Wherefore
since by receiving Orders a consecration is conferred on a
man by visible signs it is clear that Order is a sacrament. It
might be argued that as kings receive secular authority by means
of consecration and anointing, the ceremony of anointing the
king should be numbered as a sacrament. To which we say that
I not every blessing or consecration given to men is a sacrament,
for both monks and abbots are blessed, and; yet such blessings
are not sacraments, so neither is the anointing of a king: because
by such blessings men are not ordained and given power to
dispense the divine sacraments, for that power is conferred only
by the blessing of Order.
In dealing with the matter and form of the sacrament of
Sacred Orders it must be noted that there have been differences
of opinion as to the matter of the sacrament: some saying that
imposition of hands is the sole matter, while ,others say that the
matter consists in' the imposition of hands together with the
handing of the chalice and paten to the ordinand. All are agreed
that the imposition of hands is apostolic and necessary. In the
Greek, Church there never has been the handing of the vessels:
nor was it known in the ancient Latin rituals. The Council of
Trent to avoid controversy contented themselves with declaring
that ordination is performed by words and external signs: that
no one ought to doubt that Orders is truly and properly one of
the seven sacraments of the holy Church: and they quote St.
Paul to Timothy: "Stir up the gift which is in thee by the putting
on of my hands." Sess. XXIII. II Tiro. i. 6. It can be said that it is undeniable that the
laying on of hands is the matter. Even the lifting up of the
bishop's hand to indicate the man he means to make a priest has
been customary in some parts of the Church: and it is sufficient
matter. As for the form: since the putting on of hands is common
to all liturgies; and as the form follows the matter, a sufficient
form consists in words which express the meaning of the putting
on of hands and the ministry and duties to which the man is
ordained, viz., the power to offer the holy Sacrifice and to forgive
sins. To be ordained to "the office and work of a priest in the
Church of God, and to be a faithful dispenser of God's sacraments" implies the offering of the sacrifice of the mass, the power
to forgive sin and the power to give blessings. There cannot be
said to be any fixed and settled form which is universal. The
form in the Western Church is the nearest to any fixed form that
there is, and the form for the ordination of priests is in accordance
with the safer rite, and for matter it includes the tradition
of the vessels: to a priest is given a chalice with wine, and a
paten with bread. It may be added that the rite as given in the
Anglican Ordinal is a remarkable instance of the overruling of
cross-purposes by Divine ,Providence: and the preservation as
by an act ·of God, of as valid a rite as any in Christendom. It is
for this reason that all attacks on the validity of Anglican Orders
must fail. The efficacy of the sacraments is from the Divine
power. In this sacrament there is a kind of universal communication, of the power whereby the other sacraments are dispensed.
The ordained man receives power to dispense all the other
sacraments. The gift is widespread. There is a special reason
why this sacrament, rather than the others, is conferred by
employing the imperative mood because the bishop who confers
the power of Orders gives that power as being derived from his
own inherited power, which derives from the Apostles. and so
, from Christ: he therefore uses the imperative mood. The sacrament of Orders consists chiefly in the power conferred. Now
power is conferred by power, as like proceeds from like: and
again power is made known by its use, since faculties are manifested by their acts. Wherefore in the form of Order the use of
Order is indicated by the act which is commanded. And the conferring of power is expressed by employing the imperative mood.
This sacrament is, received by the ordinand for. the sake of
exercising priestly duties in the Church. In dealing with the
matter of this sacrament we must bear in mind that St. Thomas
has in mind-the four minor orders as well as- the three sacred
orders of deacon, priest and bishop. There were various vessels
handed to each of the orders with words signifying his office: the
Doorkeeper received a key : the Reader a book: the Acolyte a
candlestick: the Exorcist a book of forms of exorcisms: and the
Sub deacon either the book of the Epistles, or as .now in the
Roman Pontifical an empty chalice with an empty paten on it.
Such formed the matter for minor orders. For the sacred orders:
the Deacon was handed the book of the Gospels: and the Priest
the chalice with wine and paten with bread on it. With regard
to priestly orders enough has been said of the matter which consists in the laying on of hands, or some sign indicating the intention of the ordaining bishop. Some have thought that the sacrament of Orders has no matter: because they said that in every
sacrament that has matter the power that works in the sacrament
is in the matter. But in the material objects used here, such as
keys, books, candlesticks and so forth, there is no power of
sanctification. The following statements will dispose of this
argument. Every sacrament consists of things and words. Now
in any sacrament the thing is the matter. Therefore the things
employed in this sacrament are its matter.' Furthermore, to
dispense the sacraments more is requisite than to receive them.
Yet baptism, wherein power is given to receive the sacraments,
needs a matter; therefore Order also does, wherein the power is
given to dispense them. The matter employed outwardly in the
sacraments signifies that the power which works in the sacraments comes entirely from without. Wherefore since the effect
proper to this sacrament, namely the character, is not received
through any operation of the one who approaches the sacrament,
that is of the ordinand, as was the case in penance in which the
sins of the penitent forms the matter of the sacrament, in Orders
the character is received wholly from without, wherefore it is
fitting it should have a matter., yet otherwise than the other
sacraments have. matter: because that which is bestowed in the
other sacraments comes from God alone, and not from the
minister who dispenses the sacrament: whereas that which is
conferred in this sacrament, namely the spiritual power, comes
also from him who gives the sacrament, as imperfect from perfect
power. Hence the efficacy of the other sacraments resides chiefly
in the matter which both signifies and contains the divine power
through the sanctification applied by the . minister : whereas the
efficacy of this sacrament resides chiefly with him who dispenses
the sacrament. And the matter is employed to show the powers
conferred in particular by one who has it completely, rather than
the cause of the power: and this is clear from the fact that the
matter is in keeping with the use of the power.. The emphasis in
the above statement is on the fact that the efficacy of this sacrament resides chiefly with him who dispenses it. He must be a
bishop in the Apostolic Succession. So that Order is received
from the minister and not from the matter, it is enough to
present the matter, which presentation of the matter is more
essential to the sacrament than contact therewith. Wherefore in
the priest's ordination the presentation of the matter is the
bishop's indication of the man by lifting his hand over him or
putting his hand upon his head: and in the minor orders contact
with the matter seems to be regarded as necessary since the
words which follow imply contact with the thing. The form of
the priesthood in the Western Rite is: "Receive power to offer
sacrifice in the Church for the living and for the dead in the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost."
THE EFFECT OF THIS, SACRAMENT
Under this head we say that: sanctifying grace is conferred in
the sacrament of Orders: that a character is imprinted with all
the orders: that the sacrament of Orders presupposes the
baptismal character: that it does not presuppose the character of
confirmation: and that the character of one Order does not pre-
suppose the character of another Order. The sacraments of the
Gospel cause what they signify. Order by its sevenfold number
signifies the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost. Therefore the gifts
of the Holy Ghost,'which are not apart from sanctifying grace,
are given in Orders. Furthermore: Order is a sacrament of the
New Law: and the sacraments of the New Law cause what they
signify. ·Wherefore the sacrament of Order causes grace in the
recipient. Just as sanctifying grace is necessary that a man may
receive the sacraments worthily, so sanctifying grace is necessary
that he dispense them worthily. And as in baptism a man is
adapted to receive the other sacraments, and in it sanctifying
grace is given, so also in the sacrament of Orders is sanctifying
grace given whereby a man is ordained to dispense the other
sacraments. The worthy exercise of Orders requires not any
kind of goodness but excellent goodness, in order that as they
who receive Orders are set above the people in the degree of
Order, so may they be above them by the merit of holiness. By
the gift of Order they are given a greater gift of grace than the
ordinary gift which makes them worthy members of Christ's
people; and by this greater gift they are rendered apt for greater
things. A character is imprinted by the sacrament of Orders.
Every sacrament in which a character is not imprinted can be
repeated. But no Order can be repeated. Therefore a character
is imprinted in each Order. A character is a distinctive sign.
Now there is something distinctive in every Order. Therefore
every Order imprints a character.· There have been three
opinions on this point. First: some say that character is imprinted only in the Order of Priesthood: but this is not true since
none but a deacon can exercise the act of the diaconate, so that
in the dispensation of the sacraments he has a power which others
have not. So that secondly others have said that a character is
impressed in the sacrament but not in the minor orders. But
this again comes to nothing, since each order sets a man above
the people in some degree of authority directed to the dispensation of the sacraments. Wherefore since a character is a mark and
sign by which one thing is distinguished from another, it follows
that a character is imprinted in each Order. And this is never
repeated. This is the third and more common opinion. The
practice of the Church of England on this point is that when a
nonconformist minister seeks Orders in the Church of England
his former Orders are ignored, as he is regarded as not having
yet received Holy Orders, and he is ordained: but when a Roman
Catholic priest comes to minister in the Church of England he
is not reordained as he is regarded as being in possession of true
Apostolic Orders: and he cannot therefore be reordained,
The character of Order presupposes the baptismal character.
Baptism is the door of the sacraments. And since Order is a
sacrament it presupposes baptism. No one can receive what he
has not the power to receive. Now the character of baptism gives.
a man the power to receive the other sacraments. Without the
baptismal character no one can receive the other sacraments.
Wherefore the character of Order presupposes the character of
baptism. The following interesting supposition is dealt with
here. It may happen that a man not baptized may think that it
is probable that he has been baptized. Should such an one be
ordained to the priesthood, whatever he does by way of consecration or absolution will be invalid and the Church will be
deceived in this case. The answer is that it is true that such a man
is not a priest and he can neither consecrate the Eucharist nor
absolve in the tribunal of penance. If it be known that such is
the case he must be baptized and reordained. And should he be
raised to the episcopate, those whom he ordains do not receive
Order. Yet it may be piously believed that in regard to the
ultimate effects of the sacraments the High Priest will supply the
defect and that He would not allow this to' be so hidden as to
endanger the Church. But lest this pious belief should be exploited in favour of acknowledging the non-episcopal ordinations
of Presbyterian, Methodist and other Non-conformist ministers.
it must be pointed out that in the case before the mind of St.
Thomas the defect was hidden, whereas in the case of dissenting
ministers, while their baptism is valid, their ordination is known
to be wanting in the sanction of any bishop. So that the cases
are not parallel. The character of Order does not necessarily
presuppose the character of confirmation, because whereas the
Apostles received the power of Order before the Ascension, they
did not receive confirmation till after the Ascension when they
were confirmed on Whitsun Day by the coming of the Holy
Ghost. Nevertheless the character of confirmation is congruous
to the sacrament of Orders but not necessary to its validity, as is
the character of baptism. As congruous to the sacrament of
Order a man is required to have every perfection whereby he
becomes adapted to the exercise of Orders, and one of these is to
be confirmed, and in practice confirmation always precedes
ordination. In the early Church some were ordained priests
without having received the lower Orders, because the lower
power is comprised in the higher. Afterwards the Church
made a regulation that no one should present himself for the
higher Orders who had not previously humbled himself in the
lower offices. So that the character of the priesthood does not
necessarily presuppose the character of another Order: and he
who receives a higher Order is not re-ordained, but where the
lower Orders are in operation, the man receives what was lacking
per saltum. As the Church of England does not use those Orders
below the Order of deacon this rule does not apply: and as it is
a matter of discipline, there can be no charge of invalidity on
account of the lack of lower Orders.
QUALITIES REQUIRED IN THE RECIPIENTS OF HOLY ORDERS
Holiness of life is requisite for Orders, as a matter of precept,
but not as essential to the sacrament: and if a wicked man be
ordained he none the less receives the Order, yet he receives it
sinfully. He is guilty of presumption who being conscious of
mortal sin presents himself for Orders: and he sins mortally:
for in every Order a man is appointed to lead others in divine
things, and a man who is to be a leader of others should himself
be godly. A man may receive this sacrament unworthily without
touching its validity: just as he may dispense sacraments un-
worthily without destroying their validity. For a man to exercise
the office of' an Order it is necessary for him to have as much
knowledge as suffices for his direction in the act of that Order..
A man should know enough of Holy Scripture more or less
according as his office is of greater or less extent: For example,
a reader need not be deeply versed in things pertaining to faith.
and morals: whereas a man who is to be placed over others as a
priest who is also to receive cure of souls must know enough of
such things for the proper exercise of his office. A priest exercises a double act; the principal one is over the true Body of
Christ in the Eucharist: the other is over the mystical body of
. Christ in the cure of souls. His work in the cure of souls depends
on his power over the true Body of Christ: while his power over
the true Body of Christ does not depend on his act as having the
cure of souls. Some are raised to the priesthood for the exercise
of. the power over the Body of Christ: for instance, certain
religious who are not empowered with the cure of souls. They'
are required only for the celebration of the sacraments : and as
the law is not sought at their mouths it is enough for them to
have such knowledge as enables them to observe rightly those
things that regard the celebration of the sacrament. They are
called massing priests. Others are raised to exercise power over
the mystical body of Christ, and it is at their mouth that people
seek the law; therefore they should possess such knowledge of
the law of God as they have to teach the people to believe and
do. For the resolution of knotty questions they can have recourse
to their Superiors. To bishops it belongs to know even those
points in God's law which offer some difficulty, and on account
of their exalted position they should know them more perfectly
than priests. St. Peter teaches that a Christian should be: "ready
always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason
of the hope that is in you.". This injunction does not imply that
the reason we give for our faith and hope must be such as to
prove our faith and hope, so as to convince others: for both
faith and hope are invisible, and the proof of them is not in our
power. But it means that we should be able to give general
proofs of their probability, and for this there is not much need'
of great knowledge. Order does not consist in the mere merit of
holiness: for holiness once possessed can be lost: but an ordained
man never loses his Order. In Christ from Whom all grace comes
down on all men there must needs be fullness of grace: while in
the ministers of the Church to whom it belongs not to give grace,
but to give the sacraments of grace, the degree of Order does not
result from them having grace, but from their participation in a
sacrament of grace. There is a sense in which every righteous
man may be in a general way called' a priest: because the word
Sacerdos signifies a dispenser of holy things (sa era dans): and
the righteous man is a priest in so far as he assists others by the
sacraments: but .this is not speaking according to the actual
meaning, for the word sacerdos (priest) is employed to signify
one who actually gives sacred things by dispensing the sacraments. The ministers of the Church are placed over others, not
to confer anything on them by virtue of their own holiness (for
this belongs to God alone) but as ministers, and as instruments
so to say, of the outpouring of the Head to the members. The
dignity of Order does not require holiness for validity, but
holiness is in congruity with Orders.
He who promotes the unworthy by raising them to Orders cannot escape sin. For it is worse to raise the wicked to the
sacred ministry than to fail in correcting those already raised.
In the case of the sons of Eli, their father sinned mortally by not
correcting them for their wickedness; wherefore he: "fell from
off the seat backward ... and his neck brake and he died." 1 Sam. iv. 18.
Further, in the Church spiritual things take precedence of
temporal things. Now a man would commit a mortal sin were
he knowingly to endanger the temporalities of the Church: much
more is it a mortal sin to endanger spiritual things; which he
would do were he to promote a wicked man to the ministry, for if
a man's life is wicked and contemptible his ministry is liable to
be despised; and spiritual things are put in jeopardy. A man
would be unfaithful to an earthly master were he to put unworthy
men in places of trust in his service. So would he be unfaithful
to our Lord who should put forward unworthy men for the
priesthood. For our Lord describes that servant whom He has
set over His household the Church to give them their portion of
meat in due season as a faithful servant. So that he is unfaithful
to our Lord who gives any man Divine things above his portion;
and he who promotes the unworthy does so. Wherefore he
commits a mortal sin as being unfaithful to his Sovereign Lord
especially since it is detrimental to the Church and to the Divine
honour which is promoted by good ministers. At times whatever
difficulties there may be in getting many ministers to serve in
the Church, God never so abandons His Church that apt
ministers are not to be found sufficient for the needs of His
people. There is no excuse for the promotion of the unworthy:
for it would be better to have a few good ministers than many bad
ones. It is required at the least that the ordainer know of nothing
contrary to holiness in the candidate for ordination. He must
take care, especially in regard to Sacred Orders, to be satisfied
of the qualifications of the candidate, and to know that he is well
spoken of by those who know him: and so he observes the
injunction of the. Apostle to "lay hands suddenly on no
man."
A man who is in sin cannot without sin exercise the Order he
has received. This is especially true of one in Priest's Orders.
For a priest is a blasphemer and a cheat if he exercises his Order
unworthily, that is while he is in mortal sin, and in doing so he
sins mortally. Dionysius says that it is wrong for the wicked
even to touch the sacramental signs. And in the Epistle to
Demophilus he says: "It is presumptuous for one in sin to lay
hands on priestly things: for he is neither afraid nor ashamed, all
unworthy as he is, to take part in Divine things, with the thought
that God does not see what he sees in himself: he thinks by false
pretences, to cheat Him Whom he calls his Father; he dares to
utter, in the Person of Christ, words polluted by his infamy, I
will not call them prayers, over the Divine symbols." Further,
holiness of life is required in one who receives an Order, that he
may be qualified to exercise it. A man sins mortally who in
mortal sin presents himself for Orders: much more does he sin
mortally whenever he exercises his Order while in mortal sin: he
who does so exercises his Order unworthily. A man in sin can
renounce his sin and then he can rightly exercise his office. There
can be no dispensation to permit a man in sin exercising his
Order: for it is of the natural law that a man should handle just
and holy things justly, that is in a holy way. Yet there may be
some instances of necessity when it would be allowable even for
a layman to act, for example to baptize in a case of urgency, or
to gather up the Lord's Body should it have fallen on the ground.
Also in cases of necessity a layman would not be held to be an
accomplice and co-operator in his sin for him to receive the'
sacrament from a priest who celebrated while in sin: for so long
as the Church recognises him as a minister, it is not sinful for
his subjects to receive the sacraments from him, since this is
the purpose for which he is bound to that priest. Still it would
not be safe to induce a priest who is in sin to exercise his Order.
This is all on the supposition that the layman knows that the
.s priest is in sin. As for the priest himself, as long as he is conscious
of mortal sin he should not exercise his office. But this consciousness of· mortal sin he can lay aside through the sacrament of
penance, or if that be out of reach for the time, by an act of
contrition; since a man is repaired in an instant' by Divine
grace.
THE DISTINCTION OF ORDERS, THEIR ACTS, AND
THE IMPRINTING OF CHARACTER
As in the natural body there are various members for their
various offices, so in the mystical body of Christ the Catholic
Church there should be various Orders. In the New Testament
there should be several Orders; because in the Old Testament
not only the priests but their ministers the Levites were consecrated. Now the ministry of the New Testament is superior to
that of the Old Testament: so that the ministry of the New
Testament should not fall short of the Old in that there be
several Orders. Multiplicity of Orders was introduced into the
Church for three reasons: first to show forth the wisdom of God
reflected in the distinction of things b.oth natural and spiritual:
as it says of the Queen of Sheba when she saw the order of his
servants, and the attendance of his ministers there was no more
spirit in her. 1 Kings x. 4. 5. Secondly in order to succour human weakness
because one man alone cannot bear the burden of fulfilling the
Divine mysteries; without the help of the various Orders; as
shown by the Lord giving Moses the seventy elders to assist
him. Thirdly, that men may be given a broader way for advancing to perfection, seeing that the various duties are. divided
among many men, so that all become co-operators with God:
than which nothing is more God-like. This sacrament is chiefly
that certain acts may be performed: and so there are differences
of Orders according to the differences of acts. The entire fullness
of the sacrament is in one Order, viz., the Priesthood, while in
the other sacraments' there is the participation of Order: as the
Lord said to Moses: "I will take of the spirit which is upon thee,
and will put it upon them, and they shall bear the burden of the
people with thee." Numbers xi. 17. Wherefore all the Orders are one sacrament.
An objector raised a point which needs' a reply because of its
liability to arise in every age on a comparison of systems of
government as of monarchy and of aristocracy. The man said
that . according to Aristotle the form of authority in which one
alone governs is a better government of the common weal than
aristocracy where different persons occupy different offices. But
the government of the Church should be best of all: therefore
in the Church there should be no distinction of Orders for
different acts, but the whole power should reside in one person:
so that there ought to he only one Order. In reply St. Thomas
says that in a kingdom although the entire fullness of power
resides in the king, this does not exclude the ministers having a
power which is a participation of the kingly power. In the
aristocratic form of government, on the contrary, the fullness of
power resides in no bne but in all, whereas in the Church it is
the same as in a kingdom, so that in the sacrament of Order the
power is conveyed to the lower Orders as participants in the
higher, being derived through the bishop from the Apostles: and
so in their degree they share the authority of Christ the head and
fount of Order. Whereas in the aristocratic form of government
the fullness of power resides in no one person, but in all. The
same thing is true of modern democracies: there is no one person
who can be said to have the fullness of power, but by supposition
it resides in no one but in all the voters. Regarding the distinction of Orders there were some who said that they correspond
to the gratuitous graces as given in I Corinthians xii: thus they
said that the word of wisdom belongs to the bishop: knowledge
to the priest: faith to the deacon. as the one to preach the gospel :
miracles to the subdeacon: interpretation of tongues to the
acolyte as signified by the light he carries: healing to the exorcist:
diverse tongues to the psalmist: prophecy to the reader: and
discerning of spirits to the doorkeeper who admits some and
excludes others. But this is of no account for the gratuitous
graces are spread among many, and they are not like Orders all
given to one man: also the episcopate as we shall show later on,
is not an Order, nor is the psalmist in Orders. Others suit the Orders to the' seven gifts of the Spirit: but this is also of no
account, since the sevenfold grace is given to each one of the .
Orders. The emphatic truth is that the sacrament of Order is
directed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, which is the Sacrament of sacraments. For just as church, 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 their distinction is derived from their
relation to the Eucharist. For the power of Order is directed
either to the consecration of the Eucharist itself, or to some
ministry connected with it. If the power of Order is directed to
the consecration of the Eucharist itself, then the power is in the
Order of priests: so that according to the Latin rite they receive
the chalice with wine, and the paten with bread, because they are
receiving the power to consecrate the body and blood of Christ.
When the power of Order is directed to some ministry in connection with the Eucharist, the co-operation of the ministers is
directed either to the Sacrament itself or to the recipients. If to
the Sacrament itself in the first place the deacon works with the
priest by dispensing the blood, and not in consecrating which is
the business of the priest alone; but it belongs to the deacon to
minister to the priest in whatever is done in Christ's Sacrament
and so he dispenses Christ's blood. In the second place there is
ministry engaged in the disposal of the sacramental matter in
the sacred vessels of the Sacrament: and this belongs to the sub-
deacon. Hence it is his business to carry the vessels of Our Lord's
body and blood, and to place the oblation 011 the altar: so that
when they are ordained, they receive the chalice empty from the
bishop's hands. In the third place, there is the ministry 'directed
to the proferring of the sacramental matter, and this belongs to
the acolyte; for he prepares the cruet with wine and water:
wherefore in his ordination he receives an empty cruet.
So far we have dealt with the power of Order as directed to
the Sacrament itself and to some ministries connected with the
Sacrament itself or with the recipients. We now pass on to deal
with the preparation of the recipients. The ministry for this
purpose 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 sorts: 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:
and this power to exclude belongs to the doorkeepers. In our
owntimes this rule is not rigidly applied; and it only comes into
action in cases of brawling, and of the enemies of the faith coming
to mass for the express purpose of disturbance and irreverence
to the Eucharist. The second sort of unbeliever consists of those
who are willing to believe, but are not yet instructed, they are
the catechumens who are under instruction by the Order of
readers which ministry is directed thereto, and they are entrusted
with the reading of the first rudiments of the faith, viz., the Old
Testament. To this class of uninstructed belong great numbers,
of Church people whose religion has never got further than the
Old Testament, they know more about Joseph the food-controller of Egypt than of Joseph the guardian of our Lord Jesus
Christ and His blessed Mother: and they are more familiar with
the psalms than with the gospels and epistles: 'and they seem to,
take more interest in the kings of Israel than in the apostles and
fathers of the Church. The third class of those in preparation
for the Eucharist are believers and instructed, yet they lie under
some impediment through, the power of the devil, namely the
possessed: and to this ministry is devoted the exorcists., This is
the rational explanation of the seven Orders and their various
degrees and duties. The text quoted by St. Thomas in this
explanation is from Peter Lombard, Master of the Sentences,
Sentence IV. D. 24. In the early Church, because of the fewness
, of the ministers,' all the lower ministries were entrusted to the
deacons: .as all the power to do all the lower offices is in the
deacon, though implicitly. And this is the state to 'which the
Church of England returned in what is facetiously called a
Reformation. But after the nakedness of those early days when
Divine worship developed and became more worthy the Church
distributed expressly to several persons what had in early times
been committed implicitly in one Order. That is what the
Master of the Sentences means when he says the Church instituted the other Orders, viz., from sub deacon down to door- ,
.keeper. The distinction of Orders in the angels bears no relation
to a sacrament as it is with men but only to the hierarchical
actions which each Order exercises on the' Orders below. ' The
reason for this is that the angels are divided into various hierarchies, for it is possible for them to have various ways of receiving Divine things. But in men there is only one hierarchy,
because men have only one way of receiving Divine things, which
way results from the human species, viz., through the images of
the objects of sense. The angels have no sacraments.
On the question whether the Orders should be divided into
those that are sacred and those that are not, St. Thomas says
that there are three Orders of Priest, Deacon and Sub-deacon
which are accounted sacred and they are an impediment to the
contracting of marriage. The four lower Orders of Acolyte,
Reader, Doorkeeper and Exorcist neither impede the contracting
nor annul the contract: therefore they are not sacred Orders. An
Order is said to be sacred in two ways. First, in itself, and thus
every Order is sacred, since it is a sacrament. Secondly, by
reason of the matter about which it exercises an act, and thus
an Order is called sacred if the act is about some consecrated
thing. In this way there are only three sacred Orders, viz. the
priesthood and the diaconate, which exercise an act about the
consecrated body and blood of Christ, and the sub diaconate,
which exercises an act about the sacred vessels. On these three
continency is enjoined that they who handle holy things may
themselves be holy and clean. The text of the Master of the
Sentences, viz., IV Sent. D. 24, is justified by St. Thomas who
says that the acts of the Orders are rightly assigned in that text.
Since the consecration conferred in the sacrament of Orders
is directed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, the principal act of
each Order is that whereby it is most closely directed to the
sacrament of the Eucharist. One Order ranks above another in
so far as one act is more nearly directed to the Eucharist. One
Order has many acts besides its principal act, for there. are many
things prescribed for the Eucharist as being the most exalted of
the sacraments, and as an Order ranks higher, its power extends
to more things the higher it is. Absolution from sins is fittingly
reckoned among the acts of a priest, since a person acquires the
proximate disposition to the Eucharist by being cleansed from
sin; wherefore it follows that the priest is the proper minister of
all those sacraments which are chiefly instituted for the cleansing
of sins, viz., Baptism, Penance and Extreme Unction. The
remote preparation for the recipients of a sacrament which consists chiefly in their instruction is done by the minister. While
individual Christians can for themselves direct certain acts
towards God, e.g. prayers, vows and such-like, it is the priest
alone who acts for the whole Church, and he alone can exercise
acts which are directly prescribed towards God: for to impersonate the whole Church belongs to him alone who consecrates
the Eucharist which is the Sacrament of the whole Catholic or
Universal Church.
With regard to offerings the sub deacon receives them from the
people and he places them on the altar or he offers them to the
deacon; and he does this on behalf of the people: while it is the
deacon who hands the offerings to the priest on whose behalf he
receives them as from the people. His ministry is towards the
priest as that of the sub deacon is towards the people. For this
reason the deacon's Order is the higher. As to the reading of the
epistle and carrying of the cross and other things, such acts as
being of a secondary nature depend on the' customs of churches,
in which as regards secondary things customs may not unfittingly
vary.
Doctrine is a remote preparation for the reception of a sacrament: and as the teaching of the Old Testament is more remote
than that of the New, since it contains no instruction about the
Eucharist except in figures, it is customary for the announcing of
the Old Testament to be entrusted to the lower ministers and
that of the New to the higher ministers: and as the doctrine of
the New Testament is more perfect as delivered by Our Lord
Himself as in the gospel, the deacons read the gospel at mass:
while that doctrine as made known by the apostles in the'
epistles is read by the sub deacon. Acolytes exercise an act over
the cruets alone and not' over the contents, for it is the sub deacon
who has to do with the wine and water and who puts it into the
chalice as in the rite of the Dominicans: but this is done by the
priest in the Roman rite; and the sub deacon pours the water
over the hands of the priest: and the deacon' has to do with the
chalice only, and not over its contents, for it is the priest who
exercises an act over its contents. Wherefore 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 sub deacon a full one. Of all the minor Orders the
Order of acolytes is the highest. The acolyte by carrying a light
represents the doctrine of the New Testament in a visible way:
while the reader by his recital of the Old Testament renders it
less conspicuously.' 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 way, spiritual. For the
acolyte exercises a ministry over the vessels in which is contained
the sacramental matter, to wit the wine. The business of the
acolyte is more closely connected with the chief acts of the
higher ministers, than is the business of the other minor Orders.
The same is the case in regard to the secondary acts whereby
they prepare the people by doctrine, which is symbolised as we
have said by the acolyte carrying a light as of the New Testament
while the reader represents the Old Testament in his teaching.
So too is it in the case of the exorcist who is above the reader:
for as the reader is compared with the secondary act of the deacon
and sub deacon, the exorcist is compared with the secondary act
of the priest, viz., in binding and loosing, for the exorcist casts
out the devil, and the priest sets the man wholly free from the
slavery of the devil. This helps us to see the reason of the
orderliness of the Orders since only the three' higher Orders
Go-operate with the priest in his principal act in consecrating the
body of Christ, while both the higher and the lower Orders co-
operate with him in his secondary act which is to loose and to
bind. There.remains the doorkeeper who receives a sacramental
grace by virtue of his office which gives him the right and
authority to debar certain persons from entering the church
when the holy mysteries are being celebrated. It is the case,
however, in all minor Orders that they can be lawfully exercised
by others, even though these have no office to that effect: so that
a well-instructed server may exercise any function of the minor
Orders though he be not actually ordained thereto by a bishop.
Just as mass may be said in an unconsecrated building, although
the consecration of a church is prescribed for the purpose, that
mass be said there.
The principal act of the priest's Order is to consecrate Christ's
body: and he receives the power for this act at the handing of
the chalice. On this account the character of the priesthood is in
that act imprinted on him. It is the business of the same person
to bring about the form and to apply to the matter its proximate
preparation for the form. Wherefore the bishop in conferring
Orders does two things, viz., he prepares the candidates for the
reception of Orders and he delivers to them the power of Order.
He prepares them by instructing them in their respective offices,
and by doing something to them to make them apt to receive the
power. This preparation consists of three things, viz., blessing,
imposition of hands, and anointing. By the blessing they are
enlisted in the Divine service, on which account the blessing is
given to all. By the imposition of hands the fullness of grace is
given, whereby they are qualified for exalted duties, wherefore
only deacons and priests receive the imposition of hands, be-
cause they are competent to dispense the sacraments, the priests
as chief dispensers, and the deacons as ministers. But by the
anointing the priests are consecrated for the purpose of handling
the Sacrament, and this 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. The conferring of power is effected by giving
them something 'pertaining to their proper act. And since the
proper 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. In confirmation
the character is imprinted by the imposition of hands and
anointing. There is no need for anything ·to be handed to the
confirmees, because they are not ordained to exercise any act on
exterior matter. Our Lord gave His disciples the priestly power
as regards its principal act, at the last supper and before His
passion when He said: "Take eat" Matt. xxvi. 26. and He added: "This do in
remembrance of Me." Luke xxii. 19. In these words He constituted them as
priests with authority to consecrate His body and blood, which
is the chief business of a priest. After the resurrection He gave
them the priestly power as to its secondary act which is to bind
and loose when He said: "Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are
remitted unto them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are
retained." John xx. 23. Not only is a chalice handed to the priest at his
ordination, but he is also given the chasuble: which does not
imprint character. The priestly vestment signifies not the power
given to the priest, but the aptitude required of him for exercising
the act of that power. In the ordination of the deacon the character is impressed at the handing to him of the book of the
gospels. It may be asked why the sub deacon receives character
by being handed an empty chalice while the deacon's character
is impressed by the receiving of the book. The explanation is
that the deacon's power is midway between that of the sub deacon
and the priest. For the priest exercises a power directly on
Christ's body, the sub deacon on the vessels only, and the
deacon on Christ's body contained in a vessel. It is not for the
deacon to touch Christ's body, but to carry the body on a paten,
and to dispense the blood with the chalice. ,Consequently his
power as to its chief act, could not be expressed, either by the
giving of the vessel only, as is done to the sub deacon, or by giving
of the matter, viz., the imposition of hands alone; but his power
is expressed as to the secondary act only, by receiving the book
of the gospels, and this power is understood to contain the other.
The acolyte receives the character when he is given the cruet,
by virtue of the bishop's words, although he takes his name from
his secondary act, viz., carrying the torch, for his chief act is
ministering the cruet.
We must now consider those who confer the sacrament of
Orders. A bishop alone can confer this sacrament. The consecration of the sacred vessels is reserved exclusively to bishops:
far more important is the consecration of the ministers and there-
fore their consecration belongs only to bishops: since if a bishop
is required for the less, so a bishop is required for the greater.
The sacrament of Order ranks higher than the sacrament of Confirmation: and as a bishop alone confirms much more therefore
does a bishop alone confer the sacrament of Order. Again, a
bishop alone can consecrate a virgin: but by her consecration a
virgin is not placed in a degree of spiritual power as is the case
of the ordained: wherefore a bishop alone can ordain. A bishop
is appointed to secure the common good of the Church within
his jurisdiction, so that he lays down the law for, and assigns
their places to, others in the Divine service. Hence he alone
confirms because those who are confirmed receive the office, as
it were of confessing the faith, and it is proper for a bishop to
confer an office. Again he alone blesses virgins who are images
of the Church, the bride of Christ, the care of which is entrusted
chiefly to the bishop: and he it is who consecrates the candidates
for ordination to the ministry of Orders: and by his consecration
he appoints the vessels that they are to use: for he is in the
highest grade in the diocese: and originally the bishop reigned
in spiritual things in the chief city -of his diocese just as the chief
magistrate or the representative of the king reigned there in
civic affairs. It is meet that ministers who by their Orders are
applied to the worship of God in a nobler way than the sacred
vessels, than candidates for confirmation, or than virgins, should
have their Orders conferred by one who holds the highest power
in the Divine worship. From apostolic times the Church has
been governed by elders or priests who were raised above the
rank of simple priests and they were called ruling elders. By
immemorial custom and universal practice the bishops were
vested with the Apostolic Succession by which as by an unbroken
chain they conveyed the powers of Christ, derived to them
through the Apostles to those ministers as priests to consecrate
the Eucharist, to forgive sins and to bestow blessings on God's
people. This power of succession IS vested in bishops alone and
not in simple priests. It is true that the pope who has the fu1ness
of episcopal power can entrust one who is not a bishop with
things pertaining to the episcopal dignity, provided they bear no
immediate relation to the true body of Christ. Hence by virtue
of the pope's commission a simple priest can confer the minor
orders and confirm: but such a commission is not given to one
who is not a priest. Nor can a priest confer the higher Orders
which bear an immediate relation to Christ's body, for over the
consecration of such things the pope's power is no greater than
that of a simple priest. So that there is no power that can constitute a simple priest with power to ordain deacons and sub-
deacons. In the ordination service the cruet, bowl and towel are
given to the sub deacon by the archdeacon, since the archdeacon
is in a way the minister in chief, as his title suggests: and so it is
suitable that the things pertaining to the ministry are handed to
the ministers by him, for instance the candle with which the
acolyte serves the deacon by carrying it before him at the Gospel,
and the cruet with which he serves the sub deacon : and in like
manner he gives the sub deacon the things with which he serves
the higher Orders. And yet the principal act of the sub deacon
does not consist in these things, but in his co-operation as
regards the matter of the Sacrament: wherefore he receives the
character through the empty chalice being handed to him by the
bishop. On the other hand the acolyte receives the character by
virtue of the words of the bishop when the aforesaid things, the
cruet, bowl and towel rather than the candlestick are handed to
him by the archdeacon. But this does not mean that the arch-
deacon ordains him. Sometimes not only the bishop but also
assisting priests lay hands on the priests who are being ordained;
but the imposition of hands does not convey the character of the
priestly Order; what it does convey is grace which makes the
man fit. to exercise his Order. And the reason why assisting
priests lay hands on the priest is because those who are raised to
the priesthood are in need of the most copious grace: which is
signified by the priests whom the bishop calls to this act. The
bishop alone lays hands on deacons. It has at times been urged
that as the sacrament of the Eucharist is the principal Sacrament, the sacrament of Order being accessory to it, and as a
priest can consecrate the principal so he should be able also to confer Orders as accessory to the Eucharist. The answer is that
although the Sacrament of the Eucharist is in itself the greatest
of sacraments, it does not place a man in an office as does the
sacrament of Order.
We must now address ourselves to the question whether
heretics and those cut off from the Church can confer Orders.
S1. Thomas, at the very beginning of this Treatise on the Sacraments in general and under the head of the Causes of the
Sacraments, discussed the question whether the sacraments can
be conferred by evil ministers. III Q. LXIV. 5, 9. His conclusion in that place is
relevant to the case before us, viz., whether heretical and ex-communicated bishops can confer Orders. The sacraments can
be conferred by evil ministers. St. Augustine says that the
ministry would certainly pass to both good and evil men: and
he exclaims: "What is a bad minister to thee where the Lord is
good !"Tract V. In Joan The ministers of the Church are like instruments in the
hand of God in doing the sacraments, and the instrument
depends on the power of him who moves it: and whatever form
or power the instrument in this case has in addition to the power
of God is accidental: as in the case of a doctor his body is the
instrument of his mind and will, and whether it is healthy or
sickly is not of any consequence in regard to the effect: or as in
the case of a pipe for conveying water it matters not whether it
is of lead or silver. One of the Thirty-nine Articles which were
agreed upon in 1562 and issued "for the avoiding of diversities
of opinion and for the establishing consent touching' true
religion," is germane to the present discussion and it expresses
Catholic doctrine whether it, like the other Articles, has hopelessly failed to avoid diversities of opinions or to establish true
religion, or whether it, like so many of its fellows, has had the
effect rather of precipitating dissent and disunion, nevertheless
contains sound teaching well-expressed on the subject of "the
unworthiness of the ministers which hinders not the effect of the
sacrament." It runs: "Although in the visible Church the evil
be ever mingled with the good, and sometimes the evil have
chief authority in the ministration of the word and sacraments,
yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but
in Christ's, and do minister by His commission and authority,
we may use their ministry ... in the receiving of the sacraments.
Neither is the effect of Christ's ordinance taken away by their
wickedness, nor the grace of God's gifts diminished from such
as by faith and rightly do receive the sacraments ... which be
effectual because of Christ's institution and promise, although
they be ministered by evil men."XXVI. The actual question before
us under the head of Orders refers specifically to heretics and ex-
communicate; and there may be some people who would regard
sins of faith as of less account than breaches of the moral law, an
. opinion contrary to the truths of religion. So that we must deal
with heretics as a special class of' the wicked. The Catholic
Church is our guide in matters of practice. It is the practice of
the Church not to reconsecrate a bishop who, having fallen into
heresy, has repented and seeks reconciliation; which shows that
the Church does-not regard Orders to be forfeited on account of
heresy and the like: neither therefore is their power to ordain
forfeited. As the one who baptized exercises a merely outward
ministry, so does one who .ordains, while God works inwardly.
But one who is cut off. from the Church by no means loses the
power to baptize: neither therefore does he lose the power to
ordain. On this question four opinions are noted by Peter
Lombard.IV Sent.: D. 25. (I) Some said that heretics, so long as they are
tolerated by the Church, retain the power to ordain, but not
after they have been cut off from the Church: as neither do those
retain the power to ordain who have been degraded and the like.
This is, however, impossible, because happen what may no
power which is given with a consecration can be taken away, so
long as the thing itself remains, any more than the consecration
itself can be annulled, for even an altar or chrism once consecrated remains consecrated for ever. Wherefore since the
episcopal power is conferred by consecration, it must. needs
endure for ever, however much a man may sin or be cut off from
the Church. (2) The second opinion is of them who said that
even those who are cut off from the Church can confer Orders
and the other sacraments provided they observe the due form
and intention, both as to the first effect, which is the conferring
of the sacrament, and as to the ultimate effect, which is the conferring of grace. But this also is inadmissible, since by the very
fact that a person who presents himself for Orders sins because
he communicates in the sacraments with a heretic who is cut
off from the Church, and since he sins he approaches the sacra-
ments insincerely and he cannot obtain grace, except perhaps In
baptismin a case of necessity. (3) The third opinion is of those
who say that they confer the sacraments validly, but do not
confer grace with thein, not that the sacraments are lacking in
efficacy, but on account of the sins of those who receive them
from such persons and in despite of the prohibition of the
Church. This is the true opinion. (4) The fourth opinion is of
those who said that since the episcopal power is conferred by
consecration it must endure, but that those who are cut off from
the Church after having episcopal power in the Church, retain
the power to ordain and raise others, but that those who are
raised by them have not this power. This is impossible, for if
those who were ordained in the Church retain the power they
received, it is clear that by exercising their power they consecrate validly, and therefore they validly confer whatever power
is given with consecration, and thus those who receive ordination
or promotion from them have the same power as they. A heretic
cannot absolv.e because he cannot confer grace in the sacraments: and absolution is nothing else but the forgiveness Of sins
which results from grace. Absolution restores grace when it has
been lost by sin.. Heretics cannot do it: not only because they
I cannot confer grace, but also because in order to give absolution
it is necessary to have jurisdiction which one cut off from the
Church has, not. A priest is given character which remains
indelibly, so that even when separated from the Church he can
consecrate. Now a bishop does not receive character, and yet
what he does receive, viz., a power in relation to Christ's mystical
body, he retains forever: and the power received by a bishop is
as indelible as the character is in a priest because his power is
given by consecration. Those who are ordained by heretics,
although they receive an Order, do not receive the exercise of it,
and they cannot lawfully minister in their Orders, because those
who are expelled from a community cannot minister the offices
of the community. The sacraments derive their efficacy from
Chri~t's passion and heretics are in themselves severed from it
by their unbelief. How then can the sacraments ministered by
them convey the efficacy of Christ's passion? The answer is that
heretics are united to the passion of Christ by the faith of the
Church, and they are united with it by the Church's form which
they observe: and this is the case when they use the Catholic
Ordinal.
We now come to the impediments to the sacrament of Orders.
The female sex is an impediment to the reception of Orders.
The authority of St. Paul is decisive, He says: "Let the woman
learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to
teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."Tim. ii. 11, 12.
And again: "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for
it is not permitted unto them to speak: but they are commanded
to be under obedience, as also saith the law."Cor. xiv. 34. In former times
the tonsure or, as it was called, the crown, was required previous
to receiving Orders, as a custom, but not for the validity of the
sacrament. But the crown or tonsure is not befitting to women:
for the Apostle says it is "a shame for a woman to be shorn" ;Cor. xi. 6.
so neither is it befitting for women to receive Orders. There are
certain things which, if they be lacking, neither the sacrament
itself cab be received nor the reality of the sacrament. In regard
to these things such as the validity of the sacrament, though a
woman were made the object of all that -is done in conferring'
Orders, she would not receive Orders, for since a sacrament is a
sign, not only the sign but its signification is required in all
sacramental acts, for example in the sacrament of extreme unction
it is necessary to have a sick man, in order to signify the need of
healing. Accordingly since it is.not possible in the female sex to
signify eminence of degree, for a woman is in a state of subjection,
it follows that she cannot receive the sacrament of Order. Other
things are required not indeed for the validity, but for its lawful-
ness, as being congruous to the sacrament; and without these the
sacrament is received but not its reality. Some have erroneously
asserted that the male sex is necessary for the lawfulness but not
for the validity of the sacrament of Order, because of the mention
of deaconesses and priestesses even in the Decretals. But
deaconess there denotes a woman who shares in some act of a
deacon, viz., one who reads the homilies in church: and a
priestess is a widow for the word "presbyter" means an elder:
and therefore priestess or presbyteress means possibly the widow
of an elder. There have been prophetesses, but that is no reason
for giving Orders to a woman because prophecy is not a sacrament, but a gift from God. So that in a woman there is the thing
necessary, viz. the soul: while there is not the signification which
is needed in a sacrament: for a sacrament is a sign in the sense
that it accomplishes. what it signifies. In matters pertaining to
the soul woman does not differ from man as to the thing (for
sometimes a woman is better than many men as regards the soul,
as in the case of the blessed Virgin Mary) and so woman may
receive the gift of prophecy and the like, but even our blessed
Lady could not receive the sacrament of Orders: neither can-any
woman, however good and gifted: because there is no sacrament
which can accomplish her elevation from the state of subjection
in which a woman was created.Gen. iii. 16. Abbesses have an ordinary
authority, but delegated; because of the danger of men and
women living together it would be unwise to set a man over a
, community of women. But this authority of the abbess is
delegated, and it does not constitute Order, for it has no
reference to the sacrament, arid it is of the nature of a temporal
and prudent arrangement and. rule, not of a priestly sort, nor
concerning priestly matters . Women can exercise sovereignty
and authority in temporal affairs, as Deborah did in the Old
Testament, and as queens exercise rule in various states.
St. Thomas discusses the question whether boys and those
who lack the use of reason can receive Orders. The best course
for us to adopt is to give the gist of St. Thomas's arguments and
then rehearse some of the acts of the Council of Trent anent this
question. When the term "boy" is used in this context it some-
times means one who is under the legal age of twenty-one. Such
are called minors in this country, and have not yet reached years
of discretion. There have been cases of persons raised to Orders
before the age of discretion, and permitted to exercise them
without re-ordination, which would not be the case if he had not
received Orders. Therefore a boy irrespective of age can receive
Orders. Boys can receive baptism and confirmation in which a
character or mark has been imprinted: which suggests that
Orders, which is a sacrament in which character is stamped can
be received by minors. In this context a distinction is to be
drawn between the minor Orders and the higher Orders: for the
higher Orders the use of reason is required both out of respect
for, and for the lawfulness of the sacrament not only on account
of the vow of continency annexed thereto, but also because the
handling of the sacraments is entrusted to them. For the episco-
pate the act of accepting the pastoral care of souls is required,
because by the episcopate a man receives power also over the
mystic body, the Church: and therefore the use of reason is
necessary for the validity of episcopal consecration. Some,
however, maintain that the use of reason is necessary for the
validity of the sacrament in all the Orders: but this statement is
not confirmed either by authority or by reason. To enlarge on
this point it can be stated that boyhood and other defects which
remove the use of reason occasion an impediment to act. We
now speak of an age at which the boy has not attained the use of
reason which is normally about the age of seven: and they are
unfit to receive all those sacraments which require an act on the
part of' the recipient of the sacrament, such as penance and
matrimony. But children and those who have not the use of
reason can receive all the sacraments in which an act on the part
of the recipient is not required for the validity of the sacrament,
but some spiritual power is conferred from above; with this
difference, however, that in the minor Orders the age of discretion is required out of respect for the dignity of the Sacrament
but not for its lawfulness nor for its validity. The minor Orders
can be validly and lawfully given before the years of discretion.
Hence some can without sin be raised to the minor orders before
the years of discretion, if there be an urgent reason for it and
hope of their proficiency, and they be validly ordained: for
although at the time they be not qualified for the office entrusted
to them they will become qualified by being habituated to it.
These conclusions are based on the sound practice of the Church
as shown in infant baptism and in the confirmation of infants
immediately after baptism at various periods and localities in the
Church, which is based on the doctrine that in baptism, confirmation and Orders God plays the chief part in our redemption
and sanctification, as exhibited in these cases where no subjective
response is possible, as signally indicated in the baptism of
infants. St. Thomas adduces a great principle of nature which
is cognate to a theological truth: namely that since infused
powers like natural powers precede acts-although acquired
powers follow acts-and the removal of that which comes after
does not entail the removal of what comes first, it follows that
children and those that lack the use of reason can receive all the
sacraments in which an act on the part of the recipient is not required for the validity of the sacrament, but some spiritual power
is conferred from above: with this difference, as we have already
noted, that in the minor Orders the age of discretion is required
out of respect for the dignity of the sacrament but not for its
lawfulness, nor for its validity. This great principle of Catholic
teaching and practice was practically displaced by the Lutheran
doctrine of faith alone necessary for salvation, and Luther's
error is not quite banished from some of the Church of England
formularies, and it peeps through the Homilies: and it is accountable for much inexcusable controversy. Infant baptism puts the
work of our salvation on God, Who takes the initiative through
His Church and it guards against exaggeration of our part which
modems describe as self-dedication, fellowship, moral idealism
and achievements. It is on this same principle that St. Thomas
bases his conclusions on the sacrament of Orders. Before leaving
the subject of this Question, a few passages from the Council of
Trent will help us to get a true perspective and a sound basis
about the age for the higher Orders. Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent Session XXIII, Chaps. IV, XI, XII: On
Reformation: "None shall be initiated by the first tonsure who
have not received the sacrament of confirmation, nor have been
taught the rudiments of the Faith: nor able to read and write:
and concerning whom there is not a probable conjecture, that
they have chosen this manner of life." Chapter XI supposes
that boys are at an early age prepared for the reception of minor
Orders: "the intervals of time to be filled up between each Order
under the direction of the bishop who assigns them a church
unless they be absent on account of their studies: and they thus
ascend from step to step: increasing in worthiness of life as they
grow and as their knowledge increases; of which they shall give
proof by good conduct and assiduity in their ministry in the
church and their greater reverence towards priests and the
Superior Orders as well as by more frequent communion than
heretofore of the body of Christ. And whereas from these minor
orders is the entrance unto the higher grades and to .the most
sacred mysteries, no one shall be initiated into the minor orders
whom the promise of knowledge does not show to be worthy of
the greater Orders. And such shall not be promoted to sacred
Orders till a year after the reception of the last degree of minor
Orders: unless necessity, or the advantage of the Church,
according to the bishop's judgement, shall require otherwise."
In Chapter XII we read of the age for the greater Orders: the
worthy only to be admitted: "No one shall in future be promoted
to the Order of sub deacon before his twenty-second year: to that
of deacon before his twenty-third: and to that of the priesthood
before his twenty-fifth year." Not all who have attained that age
are to be admitted to these higher Orders; but only those who
. are worthy and "whose approved life is an old age." From all
this we gather that while the minor Orders may be generally
regarded as steps to the priesthood they are not necessarily to be
treated in view of the higher Orders: but there may be men whose
whole life is spent in some one of the minor Orders: and there
may be men. who never advance from the diaconate or sub-
diaconate to the priesthood; although in practice this is seldom
the case, because the higher Orders are usually recruited from
men in the minor Orders who have passed through some
seminary or theological college which has rendered them fit for
the higher Orders, and the subdiaconate and diaconate are
usually steps to the priesthood, Returning to the main question
as to impediments to Orders it is to be emphasised that not all
that is necessary for the lawfulness of a sacrament is necessary for
its validity. A sacrament may be used validly and unlawfully at
the same time. Also in the reception of Orders no act is required
on the part of the recipients, since no act on their part is expressed
in their consecration. It is not like the sacrament of matrimony
which is caused by consent, which consent implies the use of
reason: so far as consent is. concerned about Holy Order, the
Catholic rule is that the candidate must not have the intention
not to be ordained: the common opinion about the ordination of
boys who have not the use of reason is that their ordination is
valid, but that those so ordained are not bound by the duties of
the clerical state, e.g. celibacy, unless they afterwards elect to
remain in that state. The act of Orders requires the use of
reason; but the power of Order does not require the use of
reason, for sometimes such a power as freewill precedes its act:
and this is so with Order. Its power precedes its act: and the
act need not follow. Our next question is whether the state of
slavery is an impediment to receiving Orders. It is a question of
interest to-day, not indeed in itself, but because the same conclusion applies to any who are under an obligation to others,
such as those in debt and other like persons. By receiving Orders
a man pledges himself to the Divine offices. And since no man
can give what is not his, a slave and anyone else who has not the
disposal of himself cannot be raised to Orders. If, however, he
be raised he receives the Order as to its validity, for freedom is
not requisite for the validity of the sacrament, although it is
requisite for its lawfulness, since the lack of lawfulness does not
hinder the power of the sacrament but only its act. Bodily subjection hinders the obligation to bodily acts which obligation is
imposed by the spiritual powers received in the sacrament. The
subjection of a woman is by nature, whereas that of a slave is
not: hence the subjection of the one and of the other are not
similar as impediments. Wherever slavery may still exist it is an
impediment not to the validity but to the precepts concerning
Orders. A man is debarred from receiving Orders on account of
homicide. There are many canons to this effect, as also the
custom of the Church. All the Orders bear a relation to the
sacrament of the Eucharist, which is the sacrament of the peace
vouchsafed to us by the shedding of Christ's blood. And since
homicide is most opposed to peace, and those who slay are conformed to Christ's slayers rather than to Christ slain, to Whom
all the ministers of the aforesaid sacrament ought to be con-
formed, it follows that it is unlawful, although not invalid, for
homicides to be raised to Orders. Even a judge who has
sentenced anyone to death contracts irregularity which hinders
him receiving Orders, because he is unfit to administer the
sacrament of the Eucharist, because the shedding of blood is
unbecoming in ministers of that sacrament. This old law bequeathed to our law by Catholic custom still holds good in the
law courts, in which a priest is not required to take any part in
a trial for murder, in which there maybe a sentence of death:
for all who take part in such a trial whether as judge, jury, or
prosecuting counsel, contract irregularity and may not be pro-
moted to Orders. St. Thomas says that a man who slays another
in self-defence contracts irregularity: and this is true according
to the Canon Law of his time, but it is no longer true now. A
man killing another by mishap and without knowing it is a man,
is not a homicide, he does not incur irregularity unless he was
occupying himself in some unlawful way or failed to take sufficient care: for the act lacked voluntariness. Abbot, archbishop
of Canterbury, while out shooting accidentally killed a man:
and never again would the archbishop say mass, an attitude not
required by the Church and therefore, a mistake, involving
failure to exercise his office. Abbot was archbishop after the
breakaway from Rome: for had he submitted his case to the pope
he would have been exonerated and restored to his altar: perhaps
he was satisfied with saying mattins: and the loss of mass may
not have been to him a serious deprivation.
Illegitimacy of birth is an impediment to Orders. From the
Hebrew Bible in Deuteronomy xxiii, verse 3, the word mamzer
is adopted by the Vulgate and both Vulgate and Authorised put
it in verse 2, while the latter translates it "bastard." The Vulgate
reads: "A mamzer, that is to say one born of a prostitute, shall
not enter into the Church of the Lord until the tenth generation."! Much less therefore should he be ordained.Douay Those who
are ordained are placed in a position of dignity above others.
Propriety requires that they should be free from any cause of
reproach by others and that they be of good repute: and this not
for the validity but for the lawfulness, of the sacrament: for they
should be under no ban as public penitents nor that their virtue
be stained by any offence to others. The canon law now permits
that bastards who have become legitimatized or who have
received a dispensation are eligible for Orders. And as there are
degrees of discredit from mamzers to the fruits of unlawful
union so there is greater or less difficulty in obtaining dispensation. Irregularity is not a punishment due to sin: so that in
being irregular the illegitimate do not bear the iniquity of their
fathers. It might be urged that what is a man's own fault would
seem to be a greater impediment than the fault of another as,
e.g. of his father: and as personal fault, even unlawful intercourse,
is not a bar to Order, so neither should a man be barred by the
unlawful intercourse of his father. The comparison fails because
a man's own fault can be removed by penance: while a fault of
nature cannot be removed: there is no comparison between sinful
act and sinful origin which really is a stigma which neither needs repentance on the part of the candidate for Orders; nor can
repentance and contrary conduct remove it. He who suffers
from a lack of members is debarred from receiving Orders if the
defect be such as to constitute a notable blemish, whereby a
man's comeliness is bedimmed, e.g. if his nose is cut off, or the
exercise of his Order be imperilled: otherwise he is not debarred.
A man is disqualified either on account of an impediment to the
act or on account of an impediment affecting his personal comeliness. Integrity however is necessary for the lawfulness, but
not for the validity of the sacrament.
Bigamy is an impediment to Orders. What follows here is
taken from Part III Supplement Question LXVI.
There are four kinds of bigamy. The first is when a man has
several lawful wives successively. The second is when a man has
several wives at once, one in law, and another in fact. The third
when he has several successively, one in law, the other in fact.
The fourth when a man marries a widow. Irregularity attaches
to each of these, and each of these constitutes an impediment to
Orders. By the sacrament of Orders a man is appointed to the
ministry of the sacraments: and he who has to minister the sacraments to others must suffer from no defect in the sacraments.
Now there is a defect in the sacrament when the entire signification is not found in it. And the sacrament of marriage signifies
the union of Christ with the Church, which is the union of one
with one. Therefore the perfect signification of the sacrament
requires the husband to have only one wife, and the wife to have
but one husband: wherefore bigamy which frustrates this causes
irregularity. The signification of the sacrament is seated both
in the union of minds, as expressed in the consent, and in the
union of bodies. Wherefore bigamy must affect both the consent
and the union of bodies at the same time in order to cause
irregularity. By a decree of Innocent III consummation is
necessary to make a marriage: and therefore the consent alone
which must be in the present tense "I take thee" is not
sufficient, contrary to what the Master of the Sentences
taught.IV. Sent. D. XXVII.
Should a man's wife die after the public consent in the words
"I take thee to my wedded wife," but before consummation the
man would not become irregular, that is, he would not be a
bigamist in the ecclesiastical sense of the word, because judged
not to be married. It must be added that whereas having a
number of wives at the same time would be wholly inconsistent
with the signification. of the sacrament, and thus the sacrament
would be voided, because such a number is absolute, such is not
the case if the number be of successive wives, because the
number is not absolute and all at the same time, but only relative
and one after the other: so that the signification of the sacrament
would not be entirely voided, for the essence of the sacrament
would not .be voided thereby, but only in its perfection, which is
required of those who are the dispensers of sacraments. There
is a subsidiary reason why bigamy causes irregularity: it is
because those who receive the sacrament of Order should be
marked by the greatest spirituality, both because they administer
spiritual things, viz., sacraments, and because they teach spiritual
things and they should be occupied in spiritual matters. So that
since concupiscent desire is most incompatible with spirituality
for it tends to make a man wholly carnal, spiritual persons should
give no sign of persistent concupiscence, which does indeed show
itself in bigamous persons, seeing they are not content with one
wife. The reason given above, however, is a better reason. We
proceed to consider the case of a man who has two wives, one in
law and the other in fact, this man contracts irregularity and
cannot receive Orders. Referring to the four kinds of bigamy
there is more to be said under the second and third heads: for
although in one case there is no sacrament, viz., in the case of the
man who has several wives at the same time: yet there is another
case, viz., of a man who has in law married a woman but has not
known her carnally, and he marries another in fact and not in
law and knows her carnally, whether the former woman be living
or dead, in this case the man is not reckoned a bigamist, for the
first marriage lacked its full and perfect signification seeing that
actual union did not take place and that the marriage was not
consummated: and his union with the second woman is not
marriage. Nevertheless, if by the judgement' of the Church the
man be compelled, to return to his first wife and carnally know
her, he becomes forthwith irregular, because the irregularity is
the result no of sin but of imperfect signification. In the cases
of the two kinds of bigamy we are concerned with irregularity
is contracted because though in one, namely the one who is wife
in fact and not in law there is no sacrament, yet there is a certain
likeness to a sacrament: there the two cases of the marriages in
fact not in law are secondary and the irregularity is contracted
on account of the first and principal kind of bigamy. We now
ask whether irregularity is contracted by marrying one who is not.
a virgin. Gregory says: "We command you never to make unlawful ordinations, nor to admit to Holy Orders a bigamist, or
one who has married a woman that is not a virgin, or one who
is unlettered, or one who is deformed in his limbs, or bound to
do penance, or to perform some civil duty, or who is in any
state of subjection."Registrum Epistolarum. II. On the part of the husband it is required
that he. should not have married another wife, but not that he
should be a virgin, whereas on the part of the wife it is required
that she should not have married another husband, and that she
should also be a virgin; some expositors give the reason that it
is because the bridegroom signifies the Church Militant which is
entrusted to the care of a bishop, and in which there are many
corruptions, while the spouse signifies Christ Who is a Virgin:
wherefore they said that virginity on the part of the spouse but
not on the part of the bridegroom, is required in order that a
man be made a bishop. This reason is expressly contrary to the
words of the Apostle where he says: "Husbands love your wives
as Christ also loved the Church," which show that the bride
signifies the Church and the bridegroom Christ: and again he
says: "For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the
had of the Church."Eph. v. 23, 25. The question is not one of sin but of
signification. No defect would be caused in the sacrament by a
man receiving Orders after marriage with a woman not a virgin:
but his marriage would not signify the perfect union between
Christ and His Church because the woman's loss of virginity
does not terminate in herself, but it finds its term in the husband,
and the act takes its species from its term, which in regard to
that act is the matter so to speak of the sacrament. Even baptism
cannot remove the impediment of bigamy because it is the question of a sacrament, Rot of a sin. Baptism removes sin but does
not dissolve a marriage. Wherefore since irregularity results
from a marriage it cannot be removed by baptism for baptism is
not aimed at the removal of an irregularity: nor can virginity be
regained by baptism. On the subject of dispensation it can be
said that: irregularity attaches to bigamy not by natural law but
by positive law: nor is it one of the essentials of Order that a man
be not a bigamist, which is clear from the fact that if a bigamist
presents himself for Orders he receives the character: so that the
pope can dispense altogether from such irregularity: but a bishop
can do so only in respect of the minor Orders; and some say that
he can dispense therefrom as regards the major Orders in those
who wish to serve God in religion. This does not contradict
what. has already been laid down as to signification for not every
signification is essential to a sacrament, but that alone which
belongs to the sacramental effect, and this effect is not removed
by irregularity. Dispensation is justified in view of the fact that
in particular cases there is no ratio that applies to all equally, on
account of their variety. Hence what is reasonably established
for all, in consideration of what happens in the majority of cases,
can with equal reason be abrogated in a certain definite in-
stance.
|
