Bonaventure — Opera Omnia

Dist. 24, Part 2, Art. 2, Q. 3

Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 24

Textus Latinus

p. 632

Quaestio III. Utrum episcopatus sit ordo.

Tertio quaeritur, utrum episcopatus sit ordo. Et quod sic, videtur.

1. Distinctione septuagesima septima¹ Gelasius Papa, distinguens gradus ordinum, in fine dicit: «Deinde subdiaconus, deinde diaconus et postea presbyter, et exinde, si meretur, episcopus ordinetur».

2. Item, Isidorus in septimo libro Etymologiarum²: «Episcoporum quadripartitus est ordo»: ergo episcopatus est ordo.

3. Item, ratione videtur: quia nullus recte dicitur ordinari nisi ab ordinis susceptione; sed qui promovetur in episcopum recte dicitur in episcopum ordinari, sicut per omnes canones innuitur, qui de hac materia loquuntur³: ergo etc.

4. Item, illa inter virtutes est virtus praecipua, quae virtutes alias regit et eis imperat⁴: ergo pari ratione in ordine iste erit magis praecipuus, qui alios dispensat et regit; et ille est ordo episcopalis: ergo etc.

5. Item, hoc videtur per definitionem ordinis. «Ordo enim est, ut dicit Magister⁵, signaculum, quo spiritualis potestas traditur ordinato»; sed hoc totum est in episcopatu, ut patet: ergo etc. Minor patet per ipsam ordinationem episcopi, in qua traditur sibi baculus, qui significat potestatem spiritualem; unde dicitur sibi, cum traditur ei baculus: «Accipe baculum pastoralis officii, id est potestatem ligandi et solvendi; et sis in corrigendis vitiis saeviens pie, in fovendis virtutibus animos auditorum demulcens, in tranquillitate severitatis censuram non deferens».

6. Item, solemnior inunctio, solemnior benedictio et manuum impositio fit in consecratione episcopi quam sacerdotis⁶; sed talis inunctio non potest esse vacua a significatione et efficacia, cum sit novae legis: ergo est amplioris efficaciae. Si ergo sacerdotium est ordo, multo fortius videtur, quod episcopatus.

p. 633

Contra: 1. Magister Hugo de sancto Victore⁷, distinguens gradus ordinum, dicit sic: «Primus est ostiariorum, secundus lectorum, tertius exorcistarum, quartus acolythorum, quintus subdiaconorum, sextus diaconorum, septimus sacerdotum. Hic gradus dispares in eodem ordine habet dignitates, scilicet episcopi» etc.: ergo episcopatus solum dicit dignitatem, non ordinem: ergo etc.

2. Item, distinctio graduum et ordinum omnis est propter altaris ministerium, scilicet propter sacrificium, in quo est consummatio omnis divini cultus: ergo cum perventum est ad illam, ibi debet esse status; sed in presbyteratu pervenitur: ergo etc.

3. Item, gradus ecclesiastici talem habent ordinem, quod possibile est posteriorem accipere, omisso priori; quod patet per illud quod dicitur distinctione quinquagesima secunda⁸, Sollicitudo etc., et Extra, de Clerico per saltum ordinato, Tuae litterae etc.; sed impossibile est, aliquem promoveri in episcopum, sacerdotio omisso, sicut dicitur Extra, de Excessibus praelatorum, Ex litteris, et infra, ubi dicit Innocentius: «Pontificale officium sine altaris ministerio non valet adimpleri»: ergo videtur, quod episcopatus non sit alius ordo quam sacerdotium.

4. Item, promotus in Sabbato ad ordinem sacrum non debet in die sequenti alium ordinem sacrum suscipere⁹; sed promotus in sacerdotem potest in die sequenti, scilicet dominico, in episcopum promoveri: ergo videtur, quod episcopatus non sit ordo sacer.

Conclusio.

Episcopatus proprie non est ordo, sed ordinis eminentia vel dignitas.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod, sicut tactum est¹⁰, cum ordinis potestas principaliter sit ordinata ad dispensationem Sacramentorum et maxime illius Sacramenti nobilissimi, scilicet corporis Domini, quod ibi est status graduum et ordinum ascendentium, et ita ultra sacerdotium non est gradus ordinis. Sed tamen intra hunc gradum et ordinem contingit esse distinctionem dignitatum et officiorum, quae tamen novum gradum vel ordinem non constituunt, ut archipresbyter, episcopus, archiepiscopus, patriarcha, Pontifex Summus, quae ultra sacerdotium non addunt ordinem nec gradum¹¹ novum, sed solum dignitatem et officium. Et ita episcopatus, prout concernit ordinem sacerdotii, bene potest dici ordo; sed prout distinguitur contra sacerdotium, dicit dignitatem quandam vel officium ipsi annexum, et non est proprie nomen ordinis nec novus character imprimitur, nec nova potestas datur, sed potestas data ampliatur. Unde sicut non recipit alias claves, sic nec alium ordinem. — Et hoc sensit magister Hugo, hoc etiam sensit Magister Sententiarum, sicut patet per id quod dicit in littera¹², quod non sunt nomina ordinum, sed dignitatum; hoc etiam tenet communis opinio, quod in episcopatu character novus non imprimitur, sed illi aliqua eminentia confertur, quae semper manet cum ipso charactere ordinis, ablata omni iurisdictione. Hanc igitur opinionem sustinendo dicamus, quod episcopatus, praecise loquendo, non est ordo, sed ordinis eminentia vel dignitas.

Ad argumenta pro parte affirmativa:

1. 2. 3. Ad illud ergo quod primo obiicitur de Isidoro et Gelasio, dicendum, quod ad eorum auctoritates et consimiles unica responsione potest responderi, quod ipsi nomen ordinis ampliant ad officia et dignitates; sed magistri nostri strictius accipiunt, scilicet pro gradu potestatis; et hoc patet per hoc quod Isidorus dicit, quod «episcoporum quadripartitus est ordo». Cum enim ordinatus in episcopum, si assumatur ad archiepiscopatum, non consecretur de novo, sed solum accipiat pallium; patet, quod non potest intelligi, quod novus sit ibi ordo, sed solum dignitas altior. Si ergo dicit, ipsos esse diversos ordines, manifestum est, quod nomen ordinis ad officia et dignitates extendit. — Et per hoc patet aliud sequens. Sicut enim ampliatur vocabulum et significatio ordinis, ita et verbum, cum dicitur: iste ordinatur in episcopum; unde non ita proprie dicitur aliquis ordinari, cum promovetur in episcopum, sicut cum promovetur in sacerdotem, sed magis proprie dicitur consecrari. Unde et Apostolus, loquens proprie, dicit Actuum vigesimo¹³: Posuit vos episcopos etc.; et primae ad Timotheum tertio: Qui episcopatum desiderat bonum opus desiderat.

p. 634

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod per episcopatum ordines dispensantur; dicendum, quod nunquam possent per episcopum dispensari, nisi ordines illos, quos dispensat, haberet, maxime nisi haberet sacerdotium; et ideo concedo bene, quod episcopatus includit necessario ordinem perfectissimum, scilicet sacerdotium, et illi superaddit aliquam eminentiam, quam et ipsum nomen nobis insinuat; dicitur enim episcopus ab epi, quod est supra¹⁴.

5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod ordo est signaculum, in quo spiritualis potestas etc.; dicendum, quod episcopatus deficit quantum ad utramque partem definitionis. Primo namque deficit a ratione ordinis quantum ad hoc, quod dicitur signaculum; quia signaculum ibi accipitur pro charactere; et hic non imprimitur in episcopatu, cuius signum est, quod non potest episcopus consecrari, nisi sit sacerdos, et ita per se characterem non imprimit. Amplius deficit, quia non datur ibi nova potestas, sed solum potestas ligandi et solvendi ampliatur, et ideo in huius signum baculus pastoralis porrigitur. Unde sicut collatio pallii non dat novum ordinem archiepiscopo ultra episcopum, sic nec collatio baculi, aut anuli, aut mitrae, aut alicuius consimilis ultra sacerdotem. Talia enim potius sunt sacramentalia quam Sacramenta; non enim sacramentalia tantum praecedunt Sacramentum, sed etiam sequi possunt.

6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod solemnior est inunctio; dicendum, quod verum est, pro eo quod ad summum pontificatum assumitur, et datur ibi eminentia status et dignitas pastoralis, in qua debet esse eminentia sanctitatis; unde illa sanctitatis eminentia per superabundantem inunctionem debet significari, secundum quod dicitur¹⁵ de summo pontifice Aaron: Sicut unguentum in capite eius, quod descendit in barbam, barbam Aaron. Quia ad officium illud maior requiritur sanctitas, quam requiratur ad ordines; hinc est, quod maior fit inunctio. Reges enim et principes consueverunt inungi in signum dignitatis, quibus non ordo confertur, sed regalis dignitas; sic et episcopi, quibus confertur ordo sacerdotalis. Et propter hoc ratio illa non valet, quia inunctio non respicit ordinem, in quantum est ordo, sed magis dignitatem. Unde et sacerdos non inungitur ad ordinis necessitatem, sed magis ad solemnitatem, ut digne possit corpus Christi sacratissimum consecrare¹⁶.

---

English Translation

Question III. Whether the episcopate is an order.

Thirdly it is asked whether the episcopate is an order. And that it is, seems [to be the case]:

1. Distinction seventy-seven¹: Pope Gelasius, distinguishing the grades of orders, says at the end: «Then a subdeacon, then a deacon, and afterward a presbyter, and thereupon, if he deserves it, let him be ordained bishop».

2. Likewise, Isidore in the seventh book of the Etymologies²: «Of bishops the order is fourfold»: therefore the episcopate is an order.

3. Likewise, it seems [so] by reason: because no one is properly said to be ordained except by the reception of an order; but he who is promoted to bishop is properly said to be ordained bishop, as is intimated by all the canons that speak of this matter³: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, that is the chief virtue among the virtues which governs the other virtues and commands them⁴: therefore, by parity of reasoning, that will be the more chief [order] in the [rank of] order which dispenses and rules the others; and that is the episcopal order: therefore etc.

5. Likewise, this seems [so] from the definition of order. «For an order is, as the Master says⁵, a seal by which spiritual power is handed on to the one ordained»; but all this is in the episcopate, as is clear: therefore etc. The minor [premise] is clear through the very ordination of the bishop, in which the staff is handed to him, which signifies spiritual power; whence it is said to him, when the staff is handed to him: «Receive the staff of the pastoral office, that is, the power of binding and loosing; and be, in correcting vices, piously severe, in fostering virtues soothing the minds of the hearers, in the tranquillity of severity not laying aside censure».

6. Likewise, a more solemn unction, a more solemn benediction and imposition of hands is made in the consecration of a bishop than of a priest⁶; but such an unction cannot be void of signification and efficacy, since it is of the new law: therefore it is of greater efficacy. If, then, the priesthood is an order, much more strongly does it seem that the episcopate [is].

p. 633

On the contrary: 1. Master Hugh of St. Victor⁷, distinguishing the grades of orders, speaks thus: «The first is that of doorkeepers, the second of readers, the third of exorcists, the fourth of acolytes, the fifth of subdeacons, the sixth of deacons, the seventh of priests. This [seventh] grade has, within the same order, unequal dignities, namely that of the bishop» etc.: therefore the episcopate bespeaks only a dignity, not an order: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, every distinction of grades and orders is on account of the ministry of the altar, namely on account of the sacrifice, in which is the consummation of all divine worship: therefore, when one has come to that, there ought the terminus to be; but in the priesthood one comes [to it]: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, the ecclesiastical grades have such an order that it is possible to receive a later one, the prior having been omitted; which is clear through what is said in distinction fifty-two⁸, Sollicitudo etc., and in the Extra[vagantes], On the Cleric ordained by a leap, Tuae litterae etc.; but it is impossible for anyone to be promoted to bishop, the priesthood having been omitted, as is said in the Extra, On the Excesses of prelates, Ex litteris, and below, where Innocent says: «The pontifical office cannot be fulfilled without the ministry of the altar»: therefore it seems that the episcopate is not another order than the priesthood.

4. Likewise, one promoted on Saturday to a sacred order ought not on the following day to receive another sacred order⁹; but one promoted to the priesthood can on the following day, namely the Lord's day, be promoted to bishop: therefore it seems that the episcopate is not a sacred order.

Conclusion.

The episcopate is properly not an order, but an eminence or dignity of order.

I respond: It must be said that, as has been touched upon¹⁰, since the power of order is principally ordained to the dispensing of the Sacraments and most of all of that most noble Sacrament, namely the body of the Lord, therefore there is [in it] the terminus of the ascending grades and orders, and thus beyond the priesthood there is no grade of order. Yet nevertheless within this grade and order there happens to be a distinction of dignities and offices, which however do not constitute a new grade or order — such as archpresbyter, bishop, archbishop, patriarch, Supreme Pontiff — which beyond the priesthood add no order nor a new grade¹¹, but only a dignity and office. And so the episcopate, insofar as it concerns the order of priesthood, can well be called an order; but insofar as it is distinguished against the priesthood, it bespeaks a certain dignity or office annexed to it, and is not properly the name of an order, nor is a new character imprinted, nor is a new power given, but the power given is enlarged. Whence, just as it does not receive other keys, so neither [does it receive] another order. — And this Master Hugh held, this too the Master of the Sentences held, as is clear through what he says in the text¹², that they are not names of orders, but of dignities; this too the common opinion holds, that in the episcopate no new character is imprinted, but some eminence is conferred on it, which always remains together with the very character of order, all jurisdiction being removed. Sustaining, therefore, this opinion, let us say that the episcopate, strictly speaking, is not an order, but an eminence or dignity of order.

To the arguments for the affirmative side:

1. 2. 3. To that, then, which is objected first concerning Isidore and Gelasius, it must be said that to their authorities and the like a single response can be given, [namely] that they enlarge the name of order to [include] offices and dignities; but our masters take it more strictly, namely for a grade of power; and this is clear through what Isidore says, that «of bishops the order is fourfold». For since one ordained bishop, if he be raised to the archbishopric, is not consecrated anew, but only receives the pallium; it is clear that it cannot be understood that there is a new order there, but only a higher dignity. If, then, he says that they are diverse orders, it is manifest that he extends the name of order to offices and dignities. — And through this the other, following [point] is clear. For just as the term and signification of order is enlarged, so also is the verb, when it is said: this man is ordained to the episcopate; whence one is not so properly said to be ordained, when he is promoted to bishop, as when he is promoted to the priesthood, but is more properly said to be consecrated. Whence also the Apostle, speaking properly, says in Acts twenty¹³: He has placed you as bishops etc.; and in the first to Timothy, chapter three: He who desires the episcopate desires a good work.

p. 634

4. To that which is objected, that through the episcopate orders are dispensed; it must be said that they could never be dispensed by the bishop, unless he had those orders which he dispenses, and most of all unless he had the priesthood; and therefore I readily concede that the episcopate necessarily includes the most perfect order, namely the priesthood, and superadds to it some eminence, which the very name too intimates to us; for a bishop is [so] called from epi, which is "above"¹⁴.

5. To that which is objected, that an order is a seal, in which [is] spiritual power etc.; it must be said that the episcopate is deficient as regards both parts of the definition. For first it is deficient in respect of the account of order as to this, that it is called a seal; because "seal" is there taken for character; and this is not imprinted in the episcopate, of which the sign is that a bishop cannot be consecrated unless he be a priest, and thus of itself it does not imprint a character. Further it is deficient, because there is not given there a new power, but only the power of binding and loosing is enlarged, and therefore as a sign of this the pastoral staff is held out. Whence, just as the conferring of the pallium does not give a new order to the archbishop beyond the bishop, so neither [does] the conferring of the staff, or the ring, or the mitre, or anything of the like beyond the priest. For such things are rather sacramentals than Sacraments; for sacramentals do not only precede the Sacrament, but can also follow [it].

6. To that which is objected, that the unction is more solemn; it must be said that this is true, for the reason that [the bishop] is raised to the supreme pontificate, and there is given there an eminence of status and a pastoral dignity, in which there ought to be an eminence of holiness; whence that eminence of holiness ought to be signified by the superabundant unction, according to what is said¹⁵ of the supreme pontiff Aaron: Like the ointment upon his head, which ran down upon the beard, the beard of Aaron. Because for that office a greater holiness is required than is required for the [other] orders; hence it is that a greater unction is made. For kings and princes have been accustomed to be anointed as a sign of dignity, on whom not an order is conferred, but royal dignity; so too the bishops, on whom the sacerdotal order is conferred. And on account of this that argument is not valid, because the unction does not regard the order, insofar as it is an order, but rather the dignity. Whence also the priest is anointed not for the necessity of the order, but rather for the solemnity, that he may worthily consecrate the most holy body of Christ¹⁶.

---

Apparatus Criticus

1
Can. Illud nos (1.), qui secundum Gratian. non est Gelasii [infra in solut. huius obiect. multi codd. Pelagii], sed Caii Papae. Ed. Migne hanc notam adiicit: Caput Pseudoisidorianum [reapse Isidorus Mercator in sua Decretalium collectione haec verba Caio Papae tribuit], concinnatum secundum libr. pontificalem.
Canon Illud nos (1), which according to Gratian is not by Gelasius [below, in the solution of this objection, many codices (attribute it to) Pelagius], but by Pope Caius. The Migne edition adds this note: A Pseudo-Isidorian chapter [in fact Isidore Mercator, in his collection of Decretals, attributes these words to Pope Caius], composed according to the pontifical book.
2
Cap. 12. n. 4. Vide hic lit. Magistri, c. 17.
Chapter 12, n. 4. See here the text of the Master, c. 17.
3
Praeter C. Illud nos in penultima nota allegatum cfr. C. Episcopus cum ordinatur (7.), d. 23. — Pro innuitur codd. invenitur.
Besides the Canon Illud nos cited in the penultimate note, compare the Canon Episcopus cum ordinatur (7), d. 23. — For innuitur the codices [read] invenitur.
4
Scilicet prudentia; cfr. tom. III. pag. 471, nota 3, pag. 720, nota 1; Aristot., II. Ethic. c. 6; VI. c. 5. et 8. seqq.
Namely prudence; compare tom. III, p. 471, note 3, p. 720, note 1; Aristotle, Ethics II, c. 6; VI, c. 5 and 8 ff.
5
Hic in lit. c. 13. — Inferius in forma tradendi baculum post verba id est potestatem ligandi et solvendi, quae a S. Bonav. explicandi gratia adiuncta sunt, pontificale Romanum prosequitur: ut sis... pie saeviens, iudicium sine ira tenens, in fovendis etc.
Here in the text [of the Master], c. 13. — Below, in the form for delivering the staff, after the words "that is, the power of binding and loosing" — which were added by St. Bonaventure for the sake of explanation — the Roman pontifical continues: that you may be... piously severe, holding judgment without wrath, in fostering etc.
6
Cfr. Pontificale Romanum, c. de Consecratione electi in episcopum.
Compare the Roman Pontifical, c. On the Consecration of one elected as bishop.
7
Libr. II. de Sacram. p. III. c. 5. Textus originalis pro scilicet episcopi habet: nam post sacerdotes altiores sunt principes sacerdotum, id est episcopi.
[Hugh of St. Victor,] On the Sacraments, Book II, part III, c. 5. The original text, for "namely the bishops," has: for after the priests, higher are the chiefs of the priests, that is, the bishops.
8
Can. 1. — Seq. locus est Extra, lib. V. tit. 29. c. 1. Vide supra pag. 625, nota 3. et 5. Tertius est Extra lib. V. tit. 31. c. 10, in quo permulti codd. contra textum originalem alterius pro altaris.
Canon 1. — The following passage is Extra, Book V, tit. 29, c. 1. See above p. 625, note 3 and 5. The third is Extra, Book V, tit. 31, c. 10, in which very many codices, against the original text, [read] alterius for altaris.
9
Ut habetur C. Litteras vestras (13.), X. de Temporibus ordinationum etc. (lib. I. tit. II.). Cfr. ibid. C. Dilectus filius (15.). Vide etiam Gratian. d. 75. et d. 77, ubi de interstitiis in singulis ordinibus servandis.
As is found in the Canon Litteras vestras (13), X, On the Times of ordinations etc. (Book I, tit. II). Compare there the Canon Dilectus filius (15). See also Gratian, d. 75 and d. 77, where [it treats] of the intervals to be observed in the individual orders.
10
Fundam. 2. Cfr. q. I. et supra p. I. a. 2. q. 2. seq.
Foundation 2. Compare q. 1 and above, part I, a. 2, q. 2 f.
11
Pro nec gradum codd. A E H L aa bb secundum gradum.
For nec gradum codices A E H L aa bb [read] secundum gradum.
12
Hic c. 14. seqq. — Quod episcopus non recipiat alias claves, dictum est supra d. 19. a. 2. q. I. in corp.
Here c. 14 ff. — That the bishop does not receive other keys was stated above, d. 19, a. 2, q. 1, in the body [of the article].
13
Vers. 28: Attendite vobis et universo gregi, in quo vos Spiritus sanctus posuit episcopos etc. [codd. et edd. Posuit hos]. — Seq. locus est I. Tim. 3, 1: Si quis episcopatum etc.
Verse 28: Take heed to yourselves and to the whole flock, in which the Holy Spirit has placed you as bishops etc. [codices and editions: Posuit hos]. — The following passage is 1 Tim. 3:1: If anyone [desires] the episcopate etc.
14
Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 15, ubi ἐπίσκοπος redditur superintendens sive speculator.
Compare here the text of the Master, c. 15, where ἐπίσκοπος is rendered "overseer" or "watchman."
15
Psalm. 132, 2. Cfr. Innocent. III. C. Cum venisset ad Apostolicam sedem (1.), X. de Sacra unctione (lib. I. tit. 15.). — Inferius pro Quia ad edd. unde quia ad.
Psalm 132:2. Compare Innocent III, Canon Cum venisset ad Apostolicam sedem (1), X, On Sacred Unction (Book I, tit. 15). — Below, for Quia ad the editions [read] unde quia ad.
16
Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.
See the scholion to question 1 of this article. ---