Bonaventure

Articulus I. De institutione extremae unctionis.

Quaestio II. Utrum hoc Sacramentum fuerit institutum a Christo, an ab aliquo eius discipulo.

The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation; each apparatus entry gives the Quaracchi Latin note (La.) followed by an English rendering (En.). Quaracchi restarts footnote numbering on each printed page; the markers here are renumbered sequentially across the whole question.

Secundo quaeritur de causa efficiente sive instituente, et quaeritur, utrum hoc Sacramentum instituerit Christus, vel aliquis eius discipulus. Et quod Christus, videtur:

Ad oppositum.

1. Quia legislatoris est leges instituere; sed Sacramenta omnia sunt leges et statuta in lege evangelica: ergo non solum hoc instituit Christus¹, verum etiam omnia.

2. Item, Deus per se ipsum instituit omnia Sacramenta veteris legis, Moysi loquendo et praecipiendo — unde in principio cuiuslibet sacramentalis praecepti dicitur in Levitico²: Locutus est Dominus etc. — si ergo Sacramenta evangelica sunt multo digniora, videtur etc.

3. Item, «Sacramentum, sicut habitum est supra distinctione decima tertia³, est, in quo divina virtus secretius operatur»: si ergo virtus divina operatur in Sacramentis principaliter; cum instituere Sacramentum sit maioris dignitatis quam operari in Sacramento, et operatio est a divina virtute: ergo et institutio.

4. Item, Marci sexto⁴ dicitur, quod discipuli inungebant oleo multos infirmos, et curabantur; sed constat, quod Apostoli nondum erant tantae auctoritatis, quod per se auderent aliquid instituere: ergo videtur, quod Dominus eis mandaverit: ergo videtur, quod ipse instituit.

Contra:

1. Magister dicit in littera⁵: «Hoc Sacramentum legitur ab Apostolis institutum».

2. Item, alibi non habemus mandatum de hoc Sacramento nisi Iacobi quinto⁶: ergo videtur ibi institutum fuisse.

3. Item, omne Sacramentum, quod Christus instituit, ipse per se exhibuit⁷; sed Christus hoc Sacramentum non exhibuit, quia nunquam infirmos oleo, sed solo verbo sanavit: ergo etc.

4. Item, omne Sacramentum, quod Christus instituit, habuit figuram in veteri testamento; sed hoc non habuit ibi figuram, quia nunquam legimus, infirmos propter curationem in veteri testamento inungi: ergo videtur, quod institutio huius Sacramenti non pertinuerit ad Christum.

Conclusio.

Praefertur opinio, quod extrema unctio a Spiritu sancto per Apostolos instituta et a sancto Iacobo promulgata sit.

Respondeo: Ad horum intelligentiam notandum est, quod aliqui dicere voluerunt, omnia Sacramenta instituta fuisse a Christo, quoniam ipse fuit legislator. Unde quamvis non expresse legatur de confirmatione et extrema unctione; tamen credendum est, ipsum instituisse; et hoc aliquo modo innuitur de confirmatione, cum manus pueris imposuerit, Matthaei decimo nono⁸; de extrema unctione, cum discipulos ad praedicandum misit, qui oleo ungebant infirmos, et curabantur, sicut dicitur Marci sexto; haud dubium, quin per mandatum ipsius hoc fecerint. Si autem Apostoli dicuntur aliqua instituisse, hoc est, quia institutionem promulgaverunt, sicut beatus Iacobus⁹ confessionis et unctionis. — Sed tamen — cum in Evangelio sufficienter lex evangelica exprimatur, et evangelica lex contineat Christi statuta et facta, et magis statuta quam facta¹⁰ — quomodo probabile est, ut omnes Evangelistae sic sub silentio tam nobilia Sacramenta pertransissent, si Christus instituisset, cum ex his nostrae salutis adminiculum eliciatur? Et ideo probabilius alii dicunt — et Magister videtur hoc sentire, immo aperte dicit — quod Spiritus sanctus per Apostolos hoc Sacramentum instituit, sicut supra¹¹ dictum est de Sacramento confirmationis. — Et quod hoc potuerit esse, manifestum est, cum ipse sit doctor praecipuus, sicut et Christus; et exemplo patet: quia Apostoli, Spiritu sancto dictante, formam baptismi a Christo institutam et confirmatam ad tempus mutaverunt¹²; quanto magis quod Christus insinuaverat instituere potuerunt?

Et quod ita fuerit congruum, manifestum est, si attendatur diversitas Sacramentorum. Quaedam enim sunt Sacramenta communia legis veteris et novae, quaedam propriissima legis novae, quaedam medio modo¹³. Communia sunt illa quae sunt quodam modo ex dictamine naturae, quod quia semper idem manet, illa Sacramenta ab initio cucurrerunt, ut matrimonium et poenitentia, secundum quod Deo reconciliat; et haec quidem Dominus Iesus consummavit et confirmavit in lege nova, non evacuavit¹⁴. — Quaedam sunt propriissima legis novae, et haec sunt quae significant gratiam in tali statu, quae proprie competit legi novae; haec autem duo sunt: confirmatio et unctio, ubi significatur gratia Spiritus sancti, secundum quam inungitur quis in pugilem, ut pro Christo audeat mori, et in regem, ut in regnum caelorum possit introire tanquam in suum. Hoc est novae legis proprium; ideo in veteri non habuerunt certam figuram haec duo Sacramenta. Et quia significant Spiritus sancti gratiam in aliqua abundantia; et Spiritus sanctus abundanter non fuit datus, quousque Iesus non fuit glorificatus, sicut dicitur Ioannis septimo¹⁵: ideo haec duo Sacramenta a Christo fuerunt insinuata, sed post a Spiritu sancto fuerunt instituta. — Quaedam sunt Sacramenta media, quae in veteri lege non fuerunt in veritate, fuerunt tamen in figura et significatione, sicut baptismus, eucharistia et ordo. Et quia Christus Legem implevit¹⁶ et figuras evacuavit, haec tria Sacramenta per se ipsum instituit. — Et sic patet, quomodo congruentissime statuta et instituta sunt ecclesiastica Sacramenta, ut nihil sit gestum per oblivionem, sed secundum inenarrabilem Dei dispensationem. — Concedendae igitur sunt rationes probantes, Spiritum sanctum per Apostolos hoc Sacramentum instituisse.

Ad 1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod hoc est legislatoris; dicendum, quod Spiritus sanctus supplevit hoc quod ipse Dominus dimiserat in doctrina, sicut dicitur Ioannis decimo sexto¹⁷: Multa habeo vobis dicere, quae non potestis portare modo; et post: Cum venerit etc. Unde sicut supplevit quod deerat de doctrina secundum Dei ordinatam dispensationem, ita etiam quod de institutione ex causa

congrua dimissum erat. Nec sunt duo legislatores Christus et Spiritus eius.

Ad 2 et 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod per semetipsum; dicendum, quod¹⁸ ipse immediate loquebatur Moysi, et post Moyses praecipiebat populo sicut nuntius Dei et minister; sic Spiritus sanctus Apostolis, et ipsi ut ministri populis exponebant. Unde Sacramentorum institutionem non attribuimus nisi Deo vel per Filium, vel per Spiritum sanctum. Nec credendum est, quemquam Apostolorum hoc per se instituisse, sed totum collegium; sed Iacobus promulgavit, sicut sententiam tulit de observantia legalium, Actuum decimo quinto¹⁹. — Et per hoc patet sequens, quia, sicut Deus operatur principaliter, et sacerdos ut minister; sic institutio Sacramentorum respicit Deum ut auctorem, et Apostolos respicit ut ministros in promulgando.

Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod Apostoli ungebant oleo; dicendum, quod ibi non fuit hoc Sacramentum institutum, sed insinuatum; et hoc patet, quia unctio illa principaliter fiebat ad sanitatem corporalem, non ad curationem spiritualem principaliter. Unde sicut gratiam sanitatum tunc habebant Apostoli et non potentiam ligandi et absolvendi; sic oleum illud deserviebat sive operabatur ad salutem corporis; nunc autem principaliter operatur ad salutem spiritus, sicut in ipsa forma²⁰ evidenter exprimitur.

---

Article I. On the institution of extreme unction.

Question II. Whether this Sacrament was instituted by Christ, or by one of his disciples.

Secondly it is asked concerning the efficient or instituting cause, and it is asked whether Christ instituted this Sacrament, or one of his disciples. And that Christ [did], it seems:

On the opposite side.

1. Because it belongs to the lawgiver to institute laws; but all the Sacraments are laws and statutes in the evangelical law: therefore not only this did Christ institute¹, but indeed all.

2. Likewise, God by his very self instituted all the Sacraments of the old law, by speaking and commanding to Moses — whence at the beginning of every sacramental precept it is said in Leviticus²: The Lord spoke etc. — if therefore the evangelical Sacraments are much more worthy, it seems etc.

3. Likewise, «a Sacrament, as was held above in the thirteenth distinction³, is that in which the divine power more secretly operates»: if therefore the divine power operates in the Sacraments principally; since to institute a Sacrament is of greater dignity than to operate in a Sacrament, and the operation is from the divine power: therefore also the institution [is].

4. Likewise, in Mark chapter six⁴ it is said that the disciples anointed many sick with oil, and they were healed; but it is agreed that the Apostles were not yet of such authority that they would dare of themselves to institute anything: therefore it seems that the Lord commanded them: therefore it seems that he himself instituted [it].

On the contrary:

1. The Master says in the text⁵: «This Sacrament is read to have been instituted by the Apostles».

2. Likewise, elsewhere we have no mandate concerning this Sacrament except in James chapter five⁶: therefore it seems to have been instituted there.

3. Likewise, every Sacrament that Christ instituted he himself exhibited in his own person⁷; but Christ did not exhibit this Sacrament, because he never healed the sick with oil, but by word alone: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, every Sacrament that Christ instituted had a figure in the old testament; but this had no figure there, because we never read of the sick being anointed for healing in the old testament: therefore it seems that the institution of this Sacrament did not pertain to Christ.

Conclusion.

The opinion is preferred, that extreme unction was instituted by the Holy Spirit through the Apostles and promulgated by Saint James.

I respond: For the understanding of these matters it must be noted that some have wished to say that all the Sacraments were instituted by Christ, since he himself was the lawgiver. Whence, although it is not expressly read concerning confirmation and extreme unction, nevertheless it must be believed that he instituted them; and this is in some way intimated concerning confirmation, since he laid his hands upon the children, Matthew chapter nineteen⁸; concerning extreme unction, when he sent the disciples to preach, who anointed the sick with oil, and they were healed, as is said in Mark chapter six; there is no doubt that they did this by his mandate. But if the Apostles are said to have instituted certain things, this is because they promulgated the institution, as blessed James⁹ [did] for confession and unction. — But nevertheless — since in the Gospel the evangelical law is sufficiently expressed, and the evangelical law contains Christ's statutes and deeds, and rather statutes than deeds¹⁰ — how is it probable that all the Evangelists would thus in silence have passed over such noble Sacraments, if Christ had instituted them, since from these the support of our salvation is drawn? And therefore others say more probably — and the Master seems to hold this, indeed openly says it — that the Holy Spirit instituted this Sacrament through the Apostles, as was said above¹¹ concerning the Sacrament of confirmation. — And that this could be so is manifest, since he himself is the chief teacher, just as also Christ; and it is clear by example: for the Apostles, at the dictation of the Holy Spirit, changed for a time the form of baptism instituted and confirmed by Christ¹²; how much more could they institute what Christ had intimated?

And that it was thus fitting is manifest, if the diversity of the Sacraments is considered. For some Sacraments are common to the old law and the new, some are most proper to the new law, some are of a middle manner¹³. The common ones are those which are in some way from the dictate of nature, which, because it always remains the same, those Sacraments ran their course from the beginning, as matrimony and penance, according as it reconciles to God; and these indeed the Lord Jesus consummated and confirmed in the new law, he did not abolish¹⁴. — Some are most proper to the new law, and these are those which signify grace in such a state as properly belongs to the new law; and these are two: confirmation and unction, wherein is signified the grace of the Holy Spirit, according to which one is anointed into a combatant, that he may dare to die for Christ, and into a king, that he may be able to enter into the kingdom of heaven as into his own. This is proper to the new law; therefore in the old these two Sacraments did not have a fixed figure. And because they signify the grace of the Holy Spirit in a certain abundance; and the Holy Spirit was not abundantly given until Jesus was glorified, as is said in John chapter seven¹⁵: therefore these two Sacraments were intimated by Christ, but afterward were instituted by the Holy Spirit. — Some are middle Sacraments, which in the old law were not present in truth, yet were present in figure and signification, as baptism, the eucharist, and order. And because Christ fulfilled the Law¹⁶ and voided the figures, these three Sacraments he instituted through his very self. — And thus it is clear how most fittingly the ecclesiastical Sacraments have been established and instituted, so that nothing was done through forgetfulness, but according to the ineffable dispensation of God. — Therefore the reasons proving that the Holy Spirit instituted this Sacrament through the Apostles must be granted.

To the 1st. To that, then, which is objected, that this belongs to the lawgiver; it must be said that the Holy Spirit supplied that which the Lord himself had left out in his teaching, as is said in John chapter sixteen¹⁷: I have yet many things to say to you, which you cannot bear now; and afterward: When he shall come etc. Whence, just as he supplied what was lacking of the teaching according to God's ordained dispensation, so also [he supplied] what concerning the institution had for a fitting cause

been left out. Nor are there two lawgivers, Christ and his Spirit.

To the 2nd and 3rd. To that which is objected, that [God instituted] through his very self; it must be said that¹⁸ he himself spoke immediately to Moses, and afterward Moses commanded the people as a messenger of God and minister; so the Holy Spirit [spoke] to the Apostles, and they as ministers expounded to the peoples. Whence we do not attribute the institution of the Sacraments except to God, either through the Son or through the Holy Spirit. Nor must it be believed that any one of the Apostles instituted this of himself, but the whole college; but James promulgated [it], just as he passed the sentence concerning the observance of the legal precepts, Acts chapter fifteen¹⁹. — And through this the following point is clear, that, just as God operates principally, and the priest as minister; so the institution of the Sacraments regards God as author, and regards the Apostles as ministers in promulgating.

To the 4th. To that which is objected, that the Apostles anointed with oil; it must be said that there this Sacrament was not instituted, but intimated; and this is clear, because that unction was principally done for bodily health, not for spiritual healing principally. Whence, just as the Apostles then had the grace of healings and not the power of binding and loosing; so that oil served or operated for the health of the body; but now it operates principally for the health of the spirit, as is evidently expressed in the very form²⁰.

---