Dist. 19, Art. 2, Q. 1
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 19
Articulus II. Quando dantur claves.
Consequenter quantum ad secundum articulum quaeritur, quando claves dentur. Et circa hoc duo quaeruntur. Primo quaeritur, utrum claves dentur in ordine sacerdotali. Secundo, utrum contingat, eas ab eodem ordine separari.
Quaestio I. Utrum claves dentur in ordine sacerdotali.
Circa primum ostenditur, quod in solo illo ordine dentur.
1. Primo auctoritate. Ambrosius in libro de Paradiso1 loquens de potestate ligandi et solvendi, dicit: « Ius hoc solis permissum est sacerdotibus ».
2. Item, super illud2: Tibi dabo claves, Glossa Hieronymi: « Habent iudiciariam potestatem omnes Apostoli, habet etiam omnis Ecclesia in episcopis et presbyteris »; sed omnis episcopus est sacerdos: ergo etc.
3. Item, ratione videtur: quia potestas clavis Apostolis data fuit, cum Dominus dixit Ioannis vigesimo3: Quorum remiseritis peccata etc.: ergo illis solis significatur haec potestas dari, quibus haec verba dicuntur; haec autem non dicuntur nisi solis sacerdotibus: ergo etc.
4. Item, omnis habens hanc potestatem mediator est, et omnis talis constituitur in his quae sunt ad Deum, ut offerat dona et sacrificia pro peccatis4: ergo ad eum pertinet haec potestas, ad quem pertinet sacrificium offerre. Sed hoc pertinet in nova lege et veteri ad solos sacerdotes: ergo etc.
Contra:
1. Hieronymus5: « Ostiarii, inter bonos et malos habentes iudicium, dignos recipiunt et indignos respuunt »; sed hoc est officium clavium, sicut patuit in praecedentibus per Glossam, Matthaei decimo sexto: ergo etc.
2. Item, ratione videtur: quia, si alicui competit dari claves, ei competit, qui habet officium ostiarii; sed multo inferior sacerdotio est ordo ille, immo primus inter ordines8: ergo tunc videtur ei dari potestas clavium.
3. Item, exteriora, quae sunt in ordinibus, sunt signa interiorum et spiritualium, quoniam « Sacramentum est invisibilis gratiae visibilis forma9 »: ergo in illo ordine datur clavis spiritualis interius, in quo datur clavis materialis exterius: ergo cum iste sit ordo ostiariorum, patet etc.
4. Item, in omni ordine est aliqua potestas spiritualis, et illa potestas ordinata est sub sacerdotali per modum ministerii in ordinibus inferioribus; sed nos videmus, in curia regis et in curia Romana10 claves non dari principibus et consiliariis, sed clientibus et ministris: ergo cum magis competat, hanc clavem dari in traditione aliorum ordinum quam sacerdotii, cum officium sacerdotis sit in praesentia Domini ministrare et gratissimum ei sacrificium offerre; videtur etc.
Iuxta hoc quaeritur, cum detur novus usus ligandi et solvendi in dignitate episcopali, cum etiam
ibi tradatur potestas et auctoritas pontificalis, utrum tradatur ibi alia clavis. Quod si verum esset, non ergo tantum sunt duae claves; quod est contra praedeterminata11.
Conclusio
Solis sacerdotibus et in ordine sacerdotali clavium potestas confertur.
Respondeo: Dicendum, sicut dicunt Sancti, hoc etiam innuit ipse modus tradendi ordines, quod in ordine sacerdotali clavium potestas confertur. — Huius autem ratio est divina institutio. Institutionis autem congruitatem videre possumus, quoniam harum clavium conservator habet officium mediatoris et officium reconciliatoris. Mediator autem est inter Deum et homines; reconciliator vero reducendo ad Ecclesiam et reconciliando Ecclesiae. Ad hoc autem, ut possit esse mediator perfectus et competens inter Deum et hominem, oportet, quod posse habeat offerendi dona et sacrificia pro peccatis12, in quibus Deus placetur. Ad hoc, quod possit reducere ad corpus Christi mysticum, cuius caput est ipse Christus verus; ut recta sit et ordinata potestas, oportet, quod habeat posse conficiendi sanctissimum corpus Christi. Hoc autem ad solos pertinet sacerdotes. Et ideo mirabilis Dei sapientia, ordinatissimo modo ordinans ecclesiasticas potestates, potestatem ligandi et solvendi solis sacerdotibus commisit, et ita in ordine sacerdotali dantur claves. — Et quoniam episcopatus non dicit novum ordinem, sed quandam ordinis eminentiam; recte dicendum est, in eo non dari novam clavem, sed potestatem huiusmodi extendi et ampliari; ut sic pateat ultimo quaesitum. Ampliatur autem potestas iurisdictionis ad corripiendum, in cuius signum baculus ei traditur pastoralis13.
Ad 1, 2, 3. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur de ostiariis, quod habent iudicium; dicendum, quod habere iudicium et potestatem ad repellendum vel admittendum est dupliciter: vel ad ipsa Sacramenta et eorum efficaciam, ea quidem, prout oportet, administrando; et hoc quidem spectat ad claves caeli, et hae sunt claves, de quibus loquimur. Alia est potestas admittendi et repellendi ad locum: vel ad loca Sacramentorum, sicut est ecclesia; et haec spectat ad infimum ordinem; haec autem non dicitur clavis caeli, sed magis potestas quaedam respectu templi materialis, et ideo magis potest dici clavis excubantium in custodiis sanctuarii14. Et quamvis aliquo modo sit haec potestas spiritualis, quia inest ratione officii et ordinat ad spirituale; tamen ex hoc non dicitur claviculárius caeli nec ostiarius. — Et per hoc patent duo sequentia de clavibus et ostiario, quia aliam potentiam significant, non illam quae praedicta est et de qua nunc agitur.
Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod ista potestas est personarum infimarum in curiis hominum; dicendum, quod non est simile: quia haec dicit proprie potestatem respectu hominum ostium ingredientium, ex qua non acquirunt aliquam excellentiam; sed potestas clavium est potestas respectu ingredientium Ecclesiam et deinde15 caelum; et ideo ille cui collata est plena potestas, super omnes constitutus est, sicut beatus Petrus. Et quia principi collata est primo haec potestas, patet, quod non vilitatis, sed maximae nobilitatis est, et ideo nobilissimo ordini competit et aptatur.
I. Auctoritate Concilii Trident. constat, « potestatem remittendi et retinendi peccata ad reconciliandos fideles post baptismum lapsos Apostolis et eorum legitimis successoribus fuisse communicatam » (Sess. XIV. c. 1.); clavium ministerium spectare ad solos episcopos et sacerdotes (ibid. c. 6. can. 10.); « etiam sacerdotes, qui peccato mortali tenentur, per virtutem Spiritus S. in ordinatione collatam, tanquam Christi ministros functionem remittendi peccata exercere » (ibid.); insuper, « nullius momenti absolutionem eam esse debere, quam sacerdos in eum profert, in quem ordinariam aut subdelegatam non habet iurisdictionem » (c. 7. et can. 11.); « quoniam natura et ratio iudicii id exposcit, ut sententia in subditos duntaxat feratur » (c. 7.). — Hinc constat, quod licet in ordinatione sacerdoti collata sit potestas clavium respectu fori interni, tamen quoad usum huius potestatis tum licitum tum validum eidem conferenda sit iurisdictio ab Ecclesia. Eadem doctrina manifeste docetur iam a Conciliis Lateran. IV. et Florent. — Falsa igitur est opinio Durandi (hic q. 2.), quod clavis potestatis et iurisdictionis non distinguatur essentialiter a potestate ordinis; unde arguit, quod si Ecclesia non prohibuisset vi ordinationis « quilibet sacerdos potest quemlibet peccatorem a quolibet peccato absolvere ». Tunc igitur iurisdictio data ab Ecclesia per se tantum requireretur, ut licite poenitens absolveretur. Pro hac opinione citatur etiam a nonnullis S. Bonav., sed perperam, cum ipse manifeste etiam ad valorem absolutionis requirat collationem iurisdictionis (hic q. 2, infra a. 3. q. 1.), quae aliquid de novo dat, scil. « vim motivam ipsius clavis » (infra a. 2. q. 2.), et quae accedit ad characterem sicut organum oculi ad potentiam visivam in anima radicatam. — Ex opposito plures recentiores putant, iurisdictionem etiam in foro interno nullatenus ab ordine, sed omnino ab Ecclesia communicari. Mediam viam cum multis tenet Scotus (hic q. unica n. 12. seqq.), quod scil. in clavibus ordinatione datis sacerdos ab ipso Christo cum potestate remittendi peccata recipiat illam potestatem remotam, quae non fiat proxima, nisi accedente iurisdictione ecclesiastica. De relatione autem, quae est inter hanc potestatem remotam et characterem, Scot. (loc. cit. n. 11.) affert duas opiniones ut probabiles, quod scilicet duplex illa potestas (ordinis et iurisdictionis) vel fundetur etiam in duobus characteribus partialibus, « qui integrant totum ordinem sacerdotii » (cfr. infra d. 21. p. II.), vel « si non placet tot characteres ponere... potest dici, quod per unum characterem sacerdotalem habet quis potestatem conficiendi corpus Christi... et disponitur de congruo ad habendum potestatem super corpus Christi mysticum ligandi et solvendi ». Quod autem vi ordinationis sacerdotes fiant apti, ut assumantur in iudices huius tribunalis interni, conforme est doctrinae Tridentini et sententiae Ss. Bonav., Thomae et communissimae.
II. De utraque huius art. quaestione praeter citatos: Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 20. m. 8. a. 1. 2. — S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 1. quaestiunc. 3, a. 3. quaestiunc. 1; Suppl. q. 19. a. 3, q. 20. a. 1. — B. Albert., hic a. 3. 10. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 1. a. 2. quaestiunc. 2, q. 2. a. 1. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 1. q. 2. 3. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 1.
---
Article II. When the keys are given.
Next, with regard to the second article it is asked, when the keys are given. And concerning this, two things are asked. First it is asked, whether the keys are given in the priestly order. Second, whether it can happen that they be separated from that same order.
Question I. Whether the keys are given in the priestly order.
Concerning the first it is shown that they are given in that order alone.
1. First, by authority. Ambrose, in his book On Paradise1, speaking of the power of binding and loosing, says: "This right is permitted to priests alone."
2. Likewise, on that text2: I will give to you the keys, the Gloss of Jerome: "All the Apostles have judiciary power, and the whole Church too has it in the bishops and presbyters"; but every bishop is a priest: therefore etc.
3. Likewise, it seems so by reason: for the power of the key was given to the Apostles, when the Lord said, in John chapter twenty3: Whose sins you shall forgive etc.: therefore this power is signified to be given to those alone to whom these words are spoken; but these words are spoken only to priests: therefore etc.
4. Likewise, everyone having this power is a mediator, and everyone of this kind is appointed in the things that pertain to God, that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins4: therefore this power pertains to him to whom it pertains to offer sacrifice. But this, in the new law and in the old, pertains to priests alone: therefore etc.
On the contrary:
1. Jerome5: "Doorkeepers, having judgment between the good and the bad, receive the worthy and reject the unworthy"; but this is the office of the keys, as appeared in what precedes through the Gloss, on Matthew sixteen: therefore etc.
2. Likewise, it seems so by reason: for if it befits anyone to be given the keys, it befits him who holds the office of doorkeeper; but that order is far inferior to the priesthood, indeed the first among the orders8: therefore then it seems that the power of the keys is given to it.
3. Likewise, the external things which are in the orders are signs of the internal and spiritual things, since "a Sacrament is the visible form of invisible grace9": therefore in that order the spiritual key is given internally, in which the material key is given externally: therefore since this is the order of doorkeepers, it is plain etc.
4. Likewise, in every order there is some spiritual power, and that power is ordered under the priestly power by way of ministry in the lower orders; but we see, in the king's court and in the Roman court10, that the keys are not given to princes and counselors, but to dependents and ministers: therefore since it is more fitting that this key be given in the conferral of the other orders than of the priesthood — since the office of the priest is to minister in the presence of the Lord and to offer to Him the most acceptable sacrifice — it seems etc.
Together with this it is asked, since a new use of binding and loosing is given in the episcopal dignity, since there too
pontifical power and authority are handed over, whether another key is handed over there. And if this were true, then there are not only two keys; which is against what has been predetermined11.
Conclusion
To priests alone and in the priestly order is the power of the keys conferred.
I respond: It must be said, as the Saints say, that the very manner of handing over the orders also intimates this, namely that the power of the keys is conferred in the priestly order. — And the ground of this is divine institution. But we can see the fittingness of the institution, since the keeper of these keys holds the office of mediator and the office of reconciler. Now a mediator is between God and men; but a reconciler reduces them to the Church and reconciles them to the Church. To this end, however — that he may be a perfect and competent mediator between God and man — it is necessary that he have the power of offering gifts and sacrifices for sins12, in which God is appeased. To this end — that he may be able to reduce them to the mystical body of Christ, whose head is Christ Himself, the true one; so that the power may be right and ordered — it is necessary that he have the power of confecting the most holy body of Christ. But this pertains to priests alone. And therefore the wondrous wisdom of God, ordering the ecclesiastical powers in a most ordered manner, has committed the power of binding and loosing to priests alone, and so the keys are given in the priestly order. — And since the episcopate does not bespeak a new order, but a certain eminence of an order, it must rightly be said that in it no new key is given, but that a power of this kind is extended and amplified; so that thus the final question may be plain. Now the power of jurisdiction is amplified for correcting, in sign of which the pastoral staff is handed over to him13.
To 1, 2, 3. To that, then, which is objected concerning the doorkeepers, that they have judgment; it must be said that to have judgment and power for rejecting or admitting is twofold: either with respect to the Sacraments themselves and their efficacy, administering them indeed as is fitting; and this pertains to the keys of heaven, and these are the keys of which we are speaking. The other is a power of admitting and rejecting with respect to place: that is, to the places of the Sacraments, such as the church; and this pertains to the lowest order; but this is not called a key of heaven, but rather a certain power with respect to the material temple, and therefore it can rather be called the key of those keeping watch in the guard-posts of the sanctuary14. And although in some way this power is spiritual, since it inheres by reason of the office and orders toward the spiritual; yet on this account he is not called a key-bearer of heaven nor a doorkeeper. — And through this the two following [arguments] about the keys and the doorkeeper are plain, since they signify another power, not that which has been aforesaid and of which we now treat.
To 4. To that which is objected, that this power belongs to the lowest persons in the courts of men; it must be said that the case is not similar: for this [civil power] properly bespeaks a power with respect to men entering the door, from which they acquire no excellence; but the power of the keys is a power with respect to those entering the Church and thereupon15 heaven; and therefore he upon whom full power has been conferred is set over all, as was blessed Peter. And since this power was conferred first upon the chief, it is plain that it is a matter not of lowliness but of the greatest nobility, and therefore it befits and is fitted to the most noble order.
I. By the authority of the Council of Trent it is established that "the power of remitting and retaining sins, for reconciling the faithful who have fallen after baptism, was communicated to the Apostles and their legitimate successors" (Session XIV, c. 1); that the ministry of the keys belongs to bishops and priests alone (ibid. c. 6, can. 10); that "even priests bound by mortal sin, through the power of the Holy Spirit conferred in ordination, as ministers of Christ exercise the function of remitting sins" (ibid.); moreover, that "the absolution which a priest pronounces over one over whom he does not have ordinary or subdelegated jurisdiction ought to be of no moment" (c. 7 and can. 11); "since the nature and ground of a judgment demands this, that sentence be passed only upon subjects" (c. 7). — Hence it is established that, although in ordination the power of the keys with respect to the internal forum is conferred upon a priest, nevertheless, as to the use of this power both licit and valid, jurisdiction must be conferred upon him by the Church. The same doctrine is manifestly taught already by the Lateran IV and Florentine Councils. — False, therefore, is the opinion of Durandus (here q. 2), that the key of power and of jurisdiction is not distinguished essentially from the power of order; whence he argues that, if the Church had not prohibited it, by force of ordination "any priest could absolve any sinner from any sin." Then, therefore, jurisdiction given by the Church would be required of itself only in order that the penitent might be absolved licitly. For this opinion S. Bonaventure too is cited by some, but wrongly, since he manifestly requires the conferral of jurisdiction even for the validity of absolution (here q. 2, below a. 3, q. 1), which gives something anew, namely "the motive force of the key itself" (below a. 2, q. 2), and which accedes to the character as the organ of the eye does to the power of sight rooted in the soul. — On the opposite side, many more recent writers hold that jurisdiction even in the internal forum is in no way communicated by order, but wholly by the Church. A middle way, with many, is held by Scotus (here, the single question, n. 12 ff.), namely that, in the keys given in ordination, the priest receives from Christ Himself, with the power of remitting sins, that remote power, which does not become proximate unless ecclesiastical jurisdiction be added. But concerning the relation between this remote power and the character, Scotus (loc. cit. n. 11) adduces two opinions as probable: namely that this twofold power (of order and of jurisdiction) is either founded also in two partial characters, "which constitute the whole order of the priesthood" (cf. below d. 21, p. II), or "if one prefers not to posit so many characters... it can be said that through the one sacerdotal character a man has the power of confecting the body of Christ... and is fittingly disposed for having the power of binding and loosing over the mystical body of Christ." But that by force of ordination priests are made apt to be taken up as judges of this internal tribunal is in conformity with the doctrine of Trent and with the opinion of Saints Bonaventure, Thomas, and the most common opinion.
II. On each question of this article, besides those cited: Alexander of Hales, Summa p. IV, q. 20, m. 8, a. 1, 2. — St. Thomas, here q. 1, a. 1, quaestiuncula 3, a. 3, quaestiuncula 1; Supplement q. 19, a. 3, q. 20, a. 1. — Bl. Albert, here a. 3, 10. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 1, a. 2, quaestiuncula 2, q. 2, a. 1. — Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 1, q. 2, 3. — Dionysius the Carthusian, here q. 1.
---
- 1Potius lib. I. de Poenitentia, c. 2. n. 7, sicut etiam allegatur C. Verbum Dei (ol.), § 2, de Poenitentia d. 1.Rather On Penitence, bk. I, c. 2, n. 7, as it is also cited in the canon Verbum Dei (formerly), § 2, de Poenitentia d. 1.
- 2Matth. 16, 19. — De Glossa, quae est ordinaria apud Strabum et Lyranum (ubi attribuitur Hieronymo), et cuius prima pars habetur hic in lit. Magistri, c. 1, altera vero (quae est Hieron.) supra d. XVIII. c. 6, vide supra pag. 497, nota 4.Matthew 16:19. — On the Gloss, which is the ordinary one in Strabus and Lyranus (where it is attributed to Jerome), and whose first part is found here in the text of the Master, c. 1, but whose second part (which is Jerome's) is above at d. XVIII, c. 6; see above p. 497, note 4.
- 3Vers. 23.Verse 23 [John 20:23].
- 4Hebr. 5, 1. — Minor ostensa est supra d. 13. a. 1. q. 2.Hebrews 5:1. — The minor [premise] was shown above at d. 13, a. 1, q. 2.
- 5Epist. 12. seu Opuscul. de septem ordin. Ecclesiae (inter opera Hieron.), c. 2. (de secundo gradu); pluribus tamen verbis interpositis. S. Bonav. allegat secundum lit. Magistri, infra d. XXIV. c. 5. Cfr. Isidor., VII. Etymolog. c. 12. n. 32; Gratian. C. Cleros et clericos (I.), d. 21. § 19. Glossa in Matth. 16, 19. allata est supra d. 18. p. I. a. 3. q. 1. fundam. 1.Epistle 12, or the little work On the Seven Orders of the Church (among the works of Jerome), c. 2 (on the second grade); yet with several words interposed. St. Bonaventure cites it according to the text of the Master, below at d. XXIV, c. 5. Cf. Isidore, Etymologies VII, c. 12, n. 32; Gratian, canon Cleros et clericos (I), d. 21, § 19. The Gloss on Matthew 16:19 was cited above at d. 18, p. I, a. 3, q. 1, fundamentum 1.
- 8Vide infra d. 24. p. II. a. 1. q. 3.See below at d. 24, p. II, a. 1, q. 3.
- 9Secundum August. supra in lit. Magistri. d. I. c. 2. et d. VIII. c. 6.According to Augustine, above in the text of the Master, d. I, c. 2, and d. VIII, c. 6.
- 10Ita codd. E I K M T V W bb, codd. F G H N aa in curia Papae, edd. aliis curiis; pro in curia regis codd. L Y in politicis. Mox pro et consiliariis, sed clientibus cod. U et consulibus, sed servientibus. Finem arg. cod. H sic exhibet: videtur potius in aliis dari.So codices E I K M T V W bb; codices F G H N aa read in the court of the Pope; the editions, in the other courts; for in the king's court codices L Y read in political affairs. Then, for and to counselors, but to dependents, codex U reads and to consuls, but to attendants. Codex H gives the end of the argument thus: it seems rather to be given in the others.
- 11Dist. 18. p. I. a. 3. q. 2.Distinction 18, p. I, a. 3, q. 2.
- 12Hebr. 6, 1: Ut offerat dona etc. — Vat. in principio seq. propos. post quod possit addit: esse reconciliator, oportet quod possit, et inferius verbis ut recta sit praemittit et.Hebrews 6:1 [recte 5:1]: That he may offer gifts etc. — The Vatican edition, at the beginning of the following clause, after quod possit adds: esse reconciliator, oportet quod possit ["that he may be a reconciler, it is necessary that he be able"], and below it prefixes et to the words ut recta sit.
- 13Vide infra d. 24. p. II. a. 2. q. 3.See below at d. 24, p. II, a. 2, q. 3.
- 14Haec potestas in vet. test. competebat Levitis; cfr. Num. 1, 53; 3, 6; 18, 3. seqq.; 31, 30. 47. — Inferius pro et ordinat cod. X ordinati.This power in the Old Testament belonged to the Levites; cf. Numbers 1:53; 3:6; 18:3 ff.; 31:30, 47. — Below, for et ordinat codex X reads ordinati.
- 15Non pauci codd. divinum, quos ed. 1 secuta subinde substituit cultum pro caelum.Not a few codices read divinum ["divine"], which edition 1, following them, thereupon substituted, [reading] cultum ["worship"] for caelum ["heaven"]. ---