Dist. 19
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 19
Cap. I. Quando hae claves dantur et quibus.
Postquam ostensum est, quae sint claves apostolicae, et quis earum usus; superest investigare, quando istae claves dentur et quibus. — Dantur hae claves per ministerium episcopi alicui in promotione sacerdotii; cum enim recipit ordinem sacerdotalem, simul et has claves recipit. — Sed non videtur, quod omnes, vel soli sacerdotes has claves habeant, quia plerique ante sacram ordinationem scientiam discernendi habent, plures post consecrationem ea carent. — Sane dici potest, quod alteram clavium istarum, id est scientiam discernendi, non omnes habent sacerdotes; unde dolendum est atque lugendum. Multi enim, licet indiscreti atque scientiae, qua eminere debent1, exsortes, sacerdotii gradum recipere praesumunt, vita et scientia eo indigni, qui nec ante sacerdotium nec post scientiam habent discernendi, qui ligandi sint vel solvendi. Ideoque illam clavem in consecratione non recipiunt, quia semper scientia carent. Qui vero ante sacerdotium scientia discernendi praediti sunt, licet habeant discretionem, non tamen in eis clavis est, quia non valent ea claudere vel aperire; ideoque, cum promovetur in sacerdotem, clavem discretionis dicitur accipere, quia et ante habita discretio augetur et fit in eo clavis, ut ea iam valeat uti ad claudendum vel aperiendum.
Cumque iam constet, non omnes sacerdotes illas duas claves habere, quia scientia discernendi plerique carent; de altera, id est potentia ligandi et solvendi, quaeritur, utrum omnes sacerdotes eam habeant. — Quidam enim hanc potestatem putant illis solis esse concessam, qui doctrinam simul ac vitam Apostolorum servant. Illas enim claves promisit Dominus Petro et imitatoribus eius tantum, ut aiunt; qui etiam auctoritatibus utuntur in munimentum suae opinionis. Hoc enim dicunt Augustinum sensisse superius2, ubi ait: « Remissionem peccatorum vel per se ipsum facit Deus, vel per columbae membra ». Dicit etiam idem, peccata dimitti vel teneri a Sanctis. Idem super Exodum, ubi de lamina aurea legitur: Erat autem lamina aurea semper in fronte sacerdotis: « Haec, inquit, significat fiduciam bonae vitae, quam qui vere perfecteque, non significatione, sed veritate, sacerdos habet, solus potest peccata auferre ». Item Gregorius3: « Illi soli habent in hac carne positi ligandi et solvendi potestatem, sicut sancti Apostoli, qui illorum exempla simul cum doctrina tenent ». Item ex dictis Origenis: « Haec potestas soli Petro concessa est et imitatoribus Petri. Nam quicumque vestigia Petri imitantur, habent recte ligandi et solvendi potestatem ». His aliisque testimoniis innituntur qui asserunt, potestatem ligandi ac solvendi illis solis concessam sacerdotibus, qui vita et doctrina pollent sicut Apostoli.
Aliis autem videtur, quod et mihi placere fateor, cunctis sacerdotibus hanc clavem dari, scilicet ligandi et solvendi; sed non eam recte ac digne habent, nisi qui vitam et doctrinam apostolicam servant. Nec praemissae auctoritates malos sacerdotes hanc potestatem habere negant, sed illos solos digne ac recte hac potestate uti significant, qui praediti sunt vita et doctrina apostolica, quia soli Apostolorum imitatores digne recteque possunt ligare et solvere; et per Deum tantum, vel per Sanctos, in quibus habitat Spiritus sanctus, digne et recte fit remissio vel retentio peccatorum. Fit tamen et per illos qui sancti non sunt, sed non digne vel recte. Dat enim Deus benedictionem digne poscenti etiam per indignum ministrum. Quod vero hanc potestatem habeant omnes sacerdotes, Hieronymus4 testa-
tur super illum locum Evangelii, ubi dixit Dominus Petro: Tibi dabo claves regni caelorum: « Habent, inquit, eandem iudiciariam potestatem alii Apostoli, habet et omnis Ecclesia in episcopis et presbyteris. Sed ideo Petrus eam specialiter accepit, ut omnes intelligant, quod quicumque ab unitate fidei et societate Ecclesiae se separaverit, nec a peccatis solvi nec caelum potest ingredi ».
Cap. II. Utrum per indignos transfundatur gratia dignis.
Item, quod sacerdos, etiam si malus sit, gratiam tamen transfundit5 pro suae dignitatis officio, Augustinus ostendit dicens: « Dictum est a Domino in Numeris ad Moysen et Aaron sacerdotes: Vos ponite nomen meum super filios Israel, et ego Dominus benedicam eos; ut gratiam traditio per ministerium ordinati transfundat hominibus, nec voluntas sacerdotis obesse vel prodesse possit, sed meritum benedictionem poscentis. Quanta autem sit dignitas sacerdotis officii et ordinis, hinc advertamus. Dictum est de nequissimo Caipha inter cetera: Hoc autem a semetipso non dixit, sed, cum esset pontifex anni illius, prophetavit; per quod ostenditur, Spiritum gratiarum non personam sequi digni vel indigni, sed ordinem traditionis; ut, quamvis aliquis boni meriti sit, non tamen possit benedicere, nisi fuerit ordinatus, ut officii ministerium exhibeat. Dei autem est effectum tribuere benedictionis ». — Hinc evidenter ostenditur ordo6 non privari potestate tribuendi gratiam ob ministri indignitatem. — Huic tamen Augustini sententiae videtur obviare quod ait Hesychius7: « Sacerdotes, inquit, non propria virtute benedicunt, sed quia figuram Christi gerunt et propter eum, qui in ipsis est, benedictionis plenitudinem tribuunt; nec solum is qui sacerdotium sortitus est, sed quicumque Christum in se ipso habet et eius figuram gerit per conversationem bonam, sicut Moyses, idoneus est ut benedictionem praestet ». — Ecce hic habes, quod non solum sacerdos, sed omnis, in quo Christus habitat, benedictionem praestat. Sed alia est benedictio, quae solis sacerdotibus congruit, alia, quae ab omnibus bonis communiter exhibetur. Denique illi sacerdotes, in quibus Christus habitat, benedictionis plenitudinem tribuere dicuntur, non quia soli illi transfundant gratiam, sed quia illi soli licite et digne id agunt. Nec subditos mala vita sacerdotis laedit, si bona faciunt, quae ille dicit. Unde Gregorius8: « Multi, dum plus vitam sacerdotum quam suam discutiunt, in erroris foveam dilabuntur, minus considerantes, quod non eos vita sacerdotum laederet, si humiliter bonis sacerdotum admonitionibus aurem accommodarent ».
Cap. III. Quomodo intelligendum sit: Maledicam benedictionibus vestris.
Praemissae vero sententiae, qua dicitur etiam per mali sacerdotis ministerium transfundi gratia benedictionis, videtur obviare quod Dominus per Malachiam9 prophetam malis sacerdotibus comminatur: Maledicam benedictionibus vestris; et alibi: Vae his qui vivificant animas, quae non vivunt, et mortificant animas, quae non moriuntur. Si enim maledicit Dominus benedictionibus eorum, et si animae, quas vivificant, non vivunt; quomodo per eos gratia benedictionis transfunditur? — Sed illud capitulum Maledicam etc. Explanantes quidam referunt ad haereticos, qui ab Ecclesia praecisi sunt, et ad excommunicatos, quorum benedictiones fiunt maledictiones his qui eorum sequuntur errores. Illud vero alterum, scilicet: Vivificant etc., super omnes illos sacerdotes exponunt, qui absque clave scientiae et forma bonae vitae praesumunt ligare vel solvere. Sed nullus officio sacerdotis uti debet, nisi immunis sit ab illis quae in aliis iudicat; alioquin se ipsum condemnat.
Cap. IV. Qualis esse debeat iudex ecclesiasticus.
Qualem autem oporteat esse qui aliorum iudex constituitur, Augustinus10 describit ita dicens: « Sacerdos, cui omnis offertur peccator, ante quem statuitur omnis languor, in nullo eorum sit iudicandus, quae in alio iudicare est promptus. Iudicans enim alium, qui est iudicandus, condemnat se ipsum. Cognoscat igitur se et purget in se quod alios videt sibi offerre; caveat, ut a se proiecerit, quidquid in alio damnosum reperit. Animadvertat, quod qui sine peccato est primus in illam lapidem mittat. Ideo enim Dominus liberavit peccatricem, quia non erat qui iuste proiiceret lapidem. Quomodo lapidaret qui se lapidandum cognosceret? Nullus enim erat sine peccato; in quo intelligitur, omnes fuisse reos. Nam venialia semper remittebantur per caerimonias; si quod ergo in eis peccatum erat, criminale erat. In hoc igitur patentissimum est crimen sacerdotum et11 detestabile, qui non prius se iudicant et alios alligant. — Caveat spiritualis iudex, ut, sicut non commisit crimen nequitiae, ita non careat munere scientiae; oportet, ut sciat cognoscere, quidquid debeat iudicare. Iudiciaria enim potestas hoc postulat, ut quod debet iudicare discernat. Diligens igitur investigator sapienter interroget a peccatore, quod forsitan ignoret, vel verecundia velit occultare. Cognito vero crimine, varietates eius non dubitet investigare et locum et tempus et cetera, quae supra di-
ximus; quibus cognitis, adsit benevolus, paratus erigere et secum onus portare: habeat dulcedinem in affectione, discretionem in varietate, doceat perseverantiam, caveat, ne corruat, ne iuste perdat iudiciariam potestatem. Etsi enim poenitentia possit ei acquirere gratiam, non tamen mox restituit in potestatem primam. Etsi Petrus post lapsum restitutus fuerit, et saepe lapsis sacerdotibus reddita sit dignitatis potestas; non tamen est necesse, ut omnibus concedatur quasi ex auctoritate. Invenitur auctoritas, quae concedit et quasi imperat; invenitur alia, quae non concedit, sed vetat. Quae scripturae non repugnant, sed concordant. Cum enim tot sunt qui labuntur, ut pristinam dignitatem ex auctoritate defendant et quasi usum peccandi sibi faciant; recidenda est spes ista. Si vero locus est, ubi ista non concurrant, restitui possunt qui peccant ». — Ex his satis perpenditur, qualis debeat esse sacerdos, qui alios ligat et solvit, discretus scilicet et iustus; alioquin mortificat saepe animas, quae non moriuntur, et vivificat, quae non vivunt; et ita incidit in maledictionis iudicium. Illud autem Malachiae, scilicet: Maledicam benedictionibus vestris, sive super haereticos tantum et excommunicatos, sive super omnes sacerdotes, qui vita et scientia carentes benedicere praesumunt, dictum accipiatur, sic intelligi potest: Maledicam benedictionibus vestris, id est « his quae in eis benedictionibus possidetis12 », quia faciam ea vobis cedere in maledictionem, non in benedictionem, quia, etsi benedicunt Sanctis, non hoc faciunt ex vero corde, et ideo eorum benedictio eis vertitur in maledictionem. Vel maledicam benedictionibus vestris, id est « quod a vobis benedicitur a me erit maledictum », quia benedicunt inique agentibus adulanturque peccantibus, dummodo divites sint.
---
Chap. I. When these keys are given, and to whom.
After it has been shown what the apostolic keys are, and what their use is; it remains to investigate when these keys are given, and to whom. — These keys are given by the ministry of the bishop to someone in the promotion to the priesthood; for when he receives the priestly order, he receives at the same time these keys also. — But it does not seem that all, or only, priests have these keys, because many before sacred ordination have the knowledge of discerning, and many after consecration lack it. — It can soundly be said that not all priests have one of these keys, namely the knowledge of discerning; whence it is to be grieved and lamented. For many, although undiscerning and devoid of the knowledge in which they ought to excel1, presume to receive the grade of the priesthood, unworthy of it in life and knowledge, who neither before the priesthood nor after have the knowledge of discerning who are to be bound or loosed. And therefore they do not receive that key in consecration, because they always lack knowledge. But those who before the priesthood are endowed with the knowledge of discerning, although they have discretion, nevertheless the key is not in them, because they are not able to close or open with it; and therefore, when one is promoted to the priesthood, he is said to receive the key of discretion, because the discretion had even before is increased and becomes in him a key, so that he is now able to use it for closing or opening.
And since it is now established that not all priests have those two keys, because many lack the knowledge of discerning; concerning the other, that is the power of binding and loosing, it is asked whether all priests have it. — For some suppose this power to have been granted to those alone who keep both the doctrine and the life of the Apostles. For the Lord promised those keys to Peter and to his imitators only, as they say; and they also use authorities in defense of their opinion. For they say that Augustine thought this above2, where he says: « God brings about the remission of sins either through himself, or through the members of the dove ». The same also says that sins are forgiven or retained by the Saints. The same on Exodus, where it is read of the golden plate: Now there was always a golden plate on the forehead of the priest: « This, he says, signifies the confidence of a good life, which the priest who has it truly and perfectly, not in signification but in truth, alone can take away sins ». Likewise Gregory3: « They alone, placed in this flesh, have the power of binding and loosing, like the holy Apostles, who hold their examples together with their doctrine ». Likewise from the sayings of Origen: « This power was granted to Peter alone and to the imitators of Peter. For whoever imitate the footsteps of Peter rightly have the power of binding and loosing ». On these and other testimonies they rely who assert that the power of binding and loosing was granted to those priests alone who are strong in life and doctrine like the Apostles.
But to others it seems — which I confess pleases me also — that this key, namely of binding and loosing, is given to all priests; but they do not have it rightly and worthily except those who keep the apostolic life and doctrine. Nor do the aforesaid authorities deny that bad priests have this power, but they signify that those alone worthily and rightly use this power who are endowed with apostolic life and doctrine, because the imitators of the Apostles alone can worthily and rightly bind and loose; and through God only, or through the Saints, in whom the Holy Spirit dwells, the remission or retention of sins is done worthily and rightly. Yet it is done also through those who are not holy, but not worthily or rightly. For God gives a blessing to one who asks worthily even through an unworthy minister. But that all priests have this power, Jerome4 testi-
fies on that place of the Gospel where the Lord said to Peter: To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven: « The other Apostles, he says, have the same judiciary power, and the whole Church has it in bishops and presbyters. But Peter received it specially for this reason, that all may understand that whoever shall have separated himself from the unity of the faith and the society of the Church can neither be loosed from sins nor enter heaven ».
Chap. II. Whether through the unworthy grace is transfused to the worthy.
Likewise, that a priest, even if he be bad, nevertheless transfuses grace5 by reason of the office of his dignity, Augustine shows, saying: « It was said by the Lord in Numbers to Moses and Aaron the priests: Put my name upon the children of Israel, and I the Lord will bless them; so that the handing-on may transfuse grace to men through the ministry of the ordained, and the will of the priest can neither harm nor profit, but the merit of the one asking for the blessing. But how great is the dignity of the priestly office and order, let us note from this. It was said of the most wicked Caiaphas among other things: But this he said not of himself, but, being the high priest of that year, he prophesied; by which it is shown that the Spirit of graces does not follow the person of the worthy or the unworthy, but the order of the handing-on; so that, although someone be of good merit, nevertheless he cannot bless unless he has been ordained, so that he may exhibit the ministry of the office. But it belongs to God to bestow the effect of the blessing ». — Hence it is evidently shown that the order6 is not deprived of the power of bestowing grace on account of the minister's unworthiness. — Yet to this opinion of Augustine there seems to be opposed what Hesychius7 says: « Priests, he says, do not bless by their own power, but because they bear the figure of Christ and on account of him who is in them they bestow the fullness of blessing; nor only he who has obtained the priesthood, but whoever has Christ in himself and bears his figure through a good manner of life, like Moses, is fit to bestow a blessing ». — Behold, here you have it, that not only the priest, but everyone in whom Christ dwells, bestows a blessing. But there is one blessing which befits priests alone, and another which is exhibited in common by all good men. Finally, those priests in whom Christ dwells are said to bestow the fullness of blessing, not because they alone transfuse grace, but because they alone do it lawfully and worthily. Nor does the bad life of the priest harm his subjects, if they do the good things which he speaks. Whence Gregory8: « Many, while they examine the life of priests more than their own, slip into the pit of error, considering less that the life of priests would not harm them, if they humbly lent their ear to the good admonitions of the priests ».
Chap. III. How it is to be understood: I will curse your blessings.
But to the aforesaid opinion, by which it is said that grace of blessing is transfused even through the ministry of a bad priest, there seems to be opposed what the Lord through Malachi9 the prophet threatens to bad priests: I will curse your blessings; and elsewhere: Woe to those who give life to souls that do not live, and put to death souls that do not die. For if the Lord curses their blessings, and if the souls which they vivify do not live; how is grace of blessing transfused through them? — But that chapter I will curse etc. some, explaining it, refer to heretics who are cut off from the Church, and to the excommunicate, whose blessings become curses to those who follow their errors. But that other, namely: They vivify etc., they expound of all those priests who without the key of knowledge and the form of a good life presume to bind or loose. But no one ought to use the office of priest unless he be free from those things which he judges in others; otherwise he condemns himself.
Chap. IV. What sort the ecclesiastical judge ought to be.
But what sort he ought to be who is appointed judge of others, Augustine10 describes, saying thus: « The priest, to whom every sinner is presented, before whom every infirmity is set, let him in none of those things be judged in which he is prompt to judge another. For one judging another, who is himself to be judged, condemns himself. Let him therefore know himself and purge in himself what he sees others present to him; let him beware that he has cast from himself whatever he finds harmful in another. Let him take heed that he who is without sin first cast the stone at her. For the Lord freed the sinful woman for this reason, that there was no one who could justly cast the stone. How could he stone who knew himself to be stoned? For there was no one without sin; in which it is understood that all were guilty. For venial sins were always remitted through the ceremonies; if therefore there was any sin in them, it was criminal. In this, therefore, the crime of the priests is most manifest and11 detestable, who do not first judge themselves and bind others. — Let the spiritual judge beware that, as he has not committed the crime of wickedness, so he be not without the gift of knowledge; it is needful that he know how to recognize whatever he ought to judge. For the judiciary power requires this, that he discern what he ought to judge. Therefore let the diligent investigator wisely question the sinner about what he perhaps may not know, or out of shame may wish to conceal. But the crime being known, let him not hesitate to investigate its varieties and the place and the time and the rest, which we said above;
these being known, let him be present benevolent, ready to raise up and to bear the burden with him: let him have sweetness in affection, discretion in variety, let him teach perseverance, let him beware lest he fall, lest he justly lose the judiciary power. For although penance may be able to acquire grace for him, nevertheless it does not at once restore him to the first power. Although Peter was restored after his fall, and the power of dignity has often been given back to fallen priests; nevertheless it is not necessary that it be granted to all as if by authority. There is found an authority which grants and as it were commands; there is found another which does not grant, but forbids. These scriptures do not contradict, but agree. For since there are so many who fall, so that they defend their former dignity by authority and as it were make for themselves a custom of sinning; this hope must be cut off. But if there is a place where these things do not concur, those who sin can be restored ». — From these things it is sufficiently weighed what sort a priest ought to be who binds and looses others, namely discerning and just; otherwise he often puts to death souls that do not die, and vivifies those that do not live; and thus he falls into the judgment of cursing. But that of Malachi, namely: I will curse your blessings, whether it be taken as said of heretics only and the excommunicate, or of all priests who, lacking life and knowledge, presume to bless, can be understood thus: I will curse your blessings, that is « those things which you possess by those blessings12 », because I will make them turn to your curse, not to a blessing, because, even if they bless the holy, they do not do this from a true heart, and therefore their blessing is turned for them into a curse. Or I will curse your blessings, that is « whatever is blessed by you shall be cursed by me », because they bless those who act unjustly and flatter sinners, provided they be rich.
---
- 1Codd. B D et ed. 1 debet sacerdos pro debent; deinde pro qui cod. E et plures edd. quia. Inferius pro discretionis dicitur cod. E et edd., excepta 1, discretionis recte dicitur.Codd. B D and ed. 1 have debet sacerdos for debent; then for qui cod. E and several editions have quia. Below, for discretionis dicitur cod. E and the editions, except 1, have discretionis recte dicitur.
- 2Dist. praeced. c. 3, scil. V. de Baptismo contra Donatist. c. 21. n. 29. — Seq. locus eiusdem est II. Quaestion. in Pentateuch. q. 120; respicitur Exod. 28, 38.The preceding distinction, c. 3, namely Augustine, bk. V On Baptism against the Donatists, c. 21, n. 29. — The following passage is from the same, Questions on the Pentateuch II, q. 120; Exod. 28:38 is referred to.
- 3Libr. II. Homil. in Evang. homil. 26. n. 4. seq.; II. Dialog. c. 23; ast verbotenus apud Hugon. a S. Vict., Sum. Sent. tr. 6. c. 14, ubi invenitur etiam seq. locus Origenis Comment. in Matth. libr. XII. n. 9.Bk. II Homilies on the Gospel, homily 26, n. 4 f.; Dialogues II, c. 23; but word for word in Hugh of St. Victor, Summa Sententiarum tr. 6, c. 14, where is also found the following passage of Origen, Commentary on Matthew, bk. XII, n. 9.
- 4Non invenimus in Hieron. hunc locum, sed verbotenus in Glossa Matth. 16, 17. et apud Rabanum V. Comment. in Matth. loc. cit., qui primam partem sumsit ex Beda in eundem locum. Cfr. etiam C. Si iustus (30.), C. 1. q. 1. et C. Ut evitentur (82.), ibid.We have not found this passage in Jerome, but word for word in the Gloss on Matt. 16:17 and in Rabanus V, Commentary on Matthew, at the cited place, who took the first part from Bede on the same passage. Cf. also the canon Si iustus (30), C. 1, q. 1, and the canon Ut evitentur (82), ibid.
- 5Codd. A B D E transfundat. — Locus August. est in non genuinis Quaestion. ex veteri testam. q. 11; C. Dictum est (96.), ibid., ubi citatur Num. 6, 27, et infra Ioan. 14, 31.Codd. A B D E have transfundat. — The passage of Augustine is in the non-genuine Questions on the Old Testament, q. 11; the canon Dictum est (96), ibid., where Num. 6:27 is cited, and below John 14:31.
- 6Plures edd. ordinem, refragantibus codd. et ed. 1, 2, 3, 7.Several editions have ordinem, against the codices and edd. 1, 2, 3, 7.
- 7Libr. II. in Levit. (9, 23.).Bk. II on Leviticus (9, 23).
- 8Can. Multi saecularium (84.), ibid. Locus hic, ut volunt editores, ab alio formatus est secundum Gregor.The canon Multi saecularium (84), ibid. This passage, as the editors hold, was formed by another according to Gregory.
- 9Cap. 2, 2, deinde Ezech. 13, 19. — De loco Malachiae cfr. supra d. XIII. c. 1. 2. — Inferius pro fiunt maledictiones ed. 1 vertuntur in maledictiones.Chapter 2:2, then Ezek. 13:19. — On the passage of Malachi cf. above, d. XIII, c. 1, 2. — Below, for fiunt maledictiones ed. 1 has vertuntur in maledictiones.
- 10De Vera et falsa Poenitent. c. 20. n. 36. (inter opera); C. Qui vult confiteri (1.), de Poenitentia d. 6. § 2. 3. — Ibi respiciuntur Rom. 2, 1, deinde Ioan. 8, 7.On True and False Penitence, c. 20, n. 36 (among the works [of Augustine]); the canon Qui vult confiteri (1), On Penitence d. 6, § 2, 3. — There Rom. 2:1, then John 8:7, are referred to.
- 11Vat. cum paucis edd. esse; originale cum canone et cod. E et ultra modum detestabile.The Vatican edition with a few editions has esse; the original with the canon and cod. E has et ultra modum detestabile.
- 12Hic et seq. locus est ex Hieron. in Malach. 2, 2. et in Glossa apud Lyran. ibid.This and the following passage is from Jerome on Malachi 2:2 and in the Gloss in Lyra, ibid.