Dist. 24, Part 2, Dubia
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 24
DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.
Dub. I.
In parte ista sunt dubitationes circa litteram, et primo quaeritur de hoc quod dicitur: Habiturus partem cum his qui bene verbum Dei ministraverunt. Videtur enim male dicere, quia, cum tales habuerint aureolam, videtur, quod omnes lectores habeant aureolam, et ita omnes sacerdotes.
Respondeo: Ad hoc dici potest, quod officium lectoris est non tantum prophetiam nudam legere, sed etiam exponere; et tunc bene patet1 officium, quoniam non solum legit corticem litterae, sed etiam explicat arcanum prophetiae; et tunc est praedicator et doctor et meretur aureolam. Quodsi tantum officium accipiat et non impleat, non habebit ex hoc aureolam, quia aureola non redditur voluntati, vel p. 637 officio per se, sed voluntati iunctae cum actu praerogativae alicuius. — Posset tamen dici, quod illud intelligitur quantum ad meritum substantiale2.
Dub. II.
Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod ab archidiacono accipiunt candelabrum etc. Videtur enim male dicere: quia archidiaconus non potest ordinare, ergo nec dare vasa, in quibus significetur potestas.
Item quaeritur, quis sit actus principalior acolythorum, an ministrare de cereo, an ministrare de urceolo. Et videtur, quod de urceolo, quia secundum istum actum quodam modo iungitur cum officio subdiaconi. — Sed ad oppositum est, quia unusquisque ordo denominatur a digniori et principaliori3; sed acolythi dicuntur quasi ceroferarii.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod potestas traditur ab episcopo, sed archidiaconus tradit urceolum et candelabrum, ut significetur, quod talis ministrat subdiacono, et hoc primum incipit circa altare ministrare. Archidiaconus autem dicitur princeps ministerii4.
Quod obiicitur, quis actus principalior; dicendum, quod actus, a quo denominantur, qui est ferre cereos, quia hunc actum habent in quadam completione; sed actum ministrandi habent in imperfectione quantum ad ministrationem aquae. Subdiaconus autem completius hunc actum habet. — Alia ratio est, quia in ferendo cereos significatur potestas, quam habet in dando bonum exemplum5; et quia hoc est cuiusdam superpositionis, sed in ministratione aquae subiectio: ideo etc.
Dub. III.
Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod levitae ex nomine auctoris vocati sunt. Videtur enim male dicere: quia sacerdotium novae legis evacuat sacerdotium veteris6, ergo pari ratione ministerium evacuat ministerium: ergo non debent amplius levitae dici.
Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: Ad diaconum pertinet assistere sacerdotibus: quia, cum unius ordinis unus sit actus et una potestas, videtur, quod male assignet diacono novem actus, sicut intelligitur ex littera7: ergo aut diaconus complectitur novem ordines et novem characteres, aut non bene nec vere assignantur ei huiusmodi actus.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod levitae8 proprio nomine appellantur diaconi, in quo nomine clauditur proprius eorum actus et principalis, scilicet ministrare sacerdoti specialiter et immediate in sacris. Ad diaconos enim pertinet corpus Domini transferre, in primitiva Ecclesia etiam sanguinem dispensare9; unde immediate isti sacerdotibus assistunt et ministrant. Et quando datur eis potestas ad hunc actum, tunc est dicendum, characterem imprimi. Unde cum novem vel circa illud in littera assignentur, intelligendum, quod alii sunt annexi, hi principales. — Et si tu quaeras: quare vocantur levitae? dicendum, quod non ideo dicuntur levitae, quia officium habeant levitarum, sed quia consimile illi et per illud officium praefiguratum10.
Dub. IV.
Item quaeritur de divisione, quam ponit de actibus sacerdotalibus, qui sunt: corpus Domini conficere, orationes dicere, dona Dei benedicere. Videtur enim, quod cum actus ligandi et solvendi sit multo nobilior, quod Magister deberet assignare ipsi11 sacerdoti.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod isti actus sunt proprii sacerdotum et respiciunt sacerdotem secundum se; sed actus ligandi et solvendi respicit confessionem: ideo supra12 de hoc actu in Sacramento de poenitentia sive tractatu determinatum est; et ideo Magister non repetit hic.
Dub. V.
Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod canones duos tantum sacros appellari censent. Videtur p. 638 enim falsum esse, quia subdiaconatus etiam ordo est sacer, quod patet, quia ibi vovetur continentia et castitas13. Item, subdiaconus tangit vasa sacra: ergo videtur etc.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod ordines sacri dicuntur, quia sacrum exigunt ministrum, secundum illud Isaiae quinquagesimo secundo14: Mundamini qui fertis vasa Domini; unde quia contingunt res sacratas, sacri debent esse; et omnes isti tres dicuntur sacri. Alio modo stricte dicitur sacer ordo, quia ipsum sacrum dispensat et quodam modo tractat, deferendo et aliis administrando; et sic presbyter et diaconus15. Tertio modo sacrum dicitur propriissime, quia sacram rem conficit; et hoc competit ordini supremo, et ideo sacerdos appellatur.
Dub. VI.
Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod ordo est signaculum sacrum. Videtur enim male dicere, quia Sacramentum est elementum; sed ordo est Sacramentum: ergo ordo est elementum, non ergo spirituale signaculum. — Item, cum in aliis Sacramentis16 imprimatur character, propter quid ordo magis definitur per signaculum? — Item quaeritur, quid sit res, et quid signum in Sacramento ordinis.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod in collatione ordinis est collatio potestatis, per quam homo ponitur in statu definito et gradu; et quoniam diversitas est in potestatibus, diversitas est in signaculis, et per consequens diversitas est et debet esse in exterioribus signis; aliter tamen: quia signa sunt simpliciter diversa, sed potestates conveniunt in eadem anima in hoc, quod uniformis ratio distinguendi reperitur in omnibus characteribus et ad unum ordinatis. Quoniam igitur ordo debet definiri per id quod commune est; et communitas non est a parte elementi exterioris, sed signaculi impressi: ideo magis definitur per id quam per elementum exterius; et iterum, magis hoc Sacramentum quam aliud, quoniam character plus habet hic rationem suam, id est rationem distinguendi, quam in aliis Sacramentis17.
---
DOUBTS CONCERNING THE TEXT OF THE MASTER.
Doubt I.
In this part there are doubts concerning the text, and first it is asked about that which is said: He will have a share with those who have ministered the word of God well. For it seems ill said, because, since such men have had the aureole, it seems that all lectors have the aureole, and thus all priests.
I respond: To this it can be said that the office of the lector is not only to read the bare prophecy, but also to expound it; and then the office is well evident1, since he not only reads the bark of the letter, but also unfolds the secret of the prophecy; and then he is a preacher and doctor and merits the aureole. But if he should receive the office only and not fulfil it, he will not have the aureole from this, because the aureole is not rendered to the will, or p. 637 to the office by itself, but to the will joined with the act of someone's prerogative. — Yet it could be said that this is understood as regards substantial merit2.
Doubt II.
Likewise it is asked about what he says, that from the archdeacon they receive the candlestick, etc. For it seems ill said: because the archdeacon cannot ordain, therefore neither can he give the vessels in which power is signified.
Likewise it is asked which is the more principal act of the acolytes, whether to minister with the candle, or to minister with the cruet. And it seems [to be] with the cruet, because according to this act it is in a certain way joined with the office of the subdeacon. — But on the contrary it stands, because each order is denominated from the more worthy and more principal3; but the acolytes are called as it were taper-bearers (ceroferarii).
I respond: It must be said that power is handed over by the bishop, but the archdeacon hands over the cruet and candlestick, that it may be signified that such a one ministers to the subdeacon, and this first begins to minister about the altar. But the archdeacon is called the prince of the ministry4.
As to the objection, which act is more principal; it must be said that [it is] the act from which they are denominated, which is to carry the candles, because this act they have in a certain completion; but the act of ministering they have in imperfection as regards the ministration of water. But the subdeacon has this act more completely. — Another reason is that in carrying the candles is signified the power which he has in giving good example5; and because this is of a certain superposition, but in the ministration of water [is] subjection: therefore etc.
Doubt III.
Likewise it is asked about what he says, that the levites are named from the name of their author. For it seems ill said: because the priesthood of the new law abolishes the priesthood of the old6, therefore by parity of reasoning the ministry abolishes the ministry: therefore they ought no longer to be called levites.
Likewise it is asked about what he says: To the deacon it belongs to assist the priests: because, since of one order there is one act and one power, it seems that he wrongly assigns nine acts to the deacon, as is understood from the text7: therefore either the deacon comprises nine orders and nine characters, or such acts are not well nor truly assigned to him.
I respond: It must be said that the levites8 are by their proper name called deacons, in which name is enclosed their proper and principal act, namely to minister to the priest specially and immediately in sacred things. For to the deacons it belongs to transfer the body of the Lord, and in the primitive Church also to dispense the blood9; whence immediately these assist and minister to the priests. And when power is given them to this act, then it must be said that a character is imprinted. Hence, since nine or thereabouts are assigned in the text, it must be understood that the others are annexed, these [are] principal. — And if you should ask: why are they called levites? it must be said that they are not called levites because they have the office of the Levites, but because [it is] similar to it and through it the office was prefigured10.
Doubt IV.
Likewise it is asked about the division which he sets down concerning the priestly acts, which are: to confect the body of the Lord, to say the prayers, to bless the gifts of God. For it seems that, since the act of binding and loosing is much nobler, the Master ought to assign it to the priest11 [himself].
I respond: It must be said that these acts are proper to priests and regard the priest according to himself; but the act of binding and loosing regards confession: therefore above12, concerning this act in the Sacrament of penance or [its] treatise, it was determined; and therefore the Master does not repeat [it] here.
Doubt V.
Likewise it is asked about what he says, that they judge only two canons to be called sacred. For it seems p. 638 false, because the subdiaconate also is a sacred order, which is evident, because there continence and chastity13 are vowed. Likewise, the subdeacon touches the sacred vessels: therefore it seems etc.
I respond: It must be said that orders are called sacred because they require a sacred minister, according to that [word] of Isaiah, chapter fifty-two14: Be cleansed, you who carry the vessels of the Lord; whence, because they touch consecrated things, they ought to be sacred; and all these three are called sacred. In another way an order is strictly called sacred, because it dispenses the sacred thing and in a certain way handles [it], bearing [it] and administering [it] to others; and thus [the order of] presbyter and deacon15. In a third way it is called sacred most properly, because it confects the sacred thing; and this belongs to the supreme order, and therefore he is called priest.
Doubt VI.
Likewise it is asked about what he says, that an order is a sacred seal. For it seems ill said, because a Sacrament is an element; but an order is a Sacrament: therefore an order is an element, [and] not therefore a spiritual seal. — Likewise, since in other Sacraments16 a character is imprinted, why is an order rather defined by a seal? — Likewise it is asked what is the thing (res) and what the sign (signum) in the Sacrament of order.
I respond: It must be said that in the conferral of an order there is a conferral of power, by which a man is placed in a defined state and grade; and since there is diversity in the powers, there is diversity in the seals, and consequently there is and ought to be diversity in the exterior signs; yet otherwise: because the signs are not simply diverse, but the powers converge in the same soul in this, that a uniform account of distinguishing is found in all the characters and ordered to one [end]. Since therefore an order ought to be defined by that which is common; and community is not on the side of the exterior element, but of the impressed seal: therefore it is rather defined by that than by the exterior element; and again, this Sacrament [is defined so] rather than another, because the character here has more its own account, that is, the account of distinguishing, than in the other Sacraments17.
---
- 1Codd. L R S T planius implet.Codices L R S T read [it] more plainly, implet ("fulfils," for bene patet).
- 2Vide infra d. 33. a. 2. q. 3; S. Thom., hic circa lit.See below, d. 33, a. 2, q. 3; St. Thomas, here on the text.
- 3Cfr. supra pag. 470, nota 7. — Superius pro quodam modo cod. G immediate.Cf. above, p. 470, note 7. — Higher up, for quodam modo codex G [reads] immediate.
- 4In C. Perlectis (1, sumtus ex Epist. Isidori ad Ludifredum), d. 25. § 11. dicitur: Archidiaconus enim imperat subdiaconis et levitis. — Cfr. supra a. 1. q. 4. ad 4.In the canon Perlectis (1, taken from Isidore's Letter to Ludifredus), d. 25, § 11, it is said: For the archdeacon commands the subdeacons and the levites. — Cf. above, a. 1, q. 4, ad 4.
- 5Secundum Pontificale Romanum episcopus acolythos ordinandos admonet verbis Matth. 5, 16: Luceat lux vestra etc., et Phil. 2, 15: In medio nationis pravae... lucetis sicut luminaria in mundo. Vide etiam hic lit. Magistri, c. 8, et Comment. a. 2. q. 4. — De hoc dubio cfr. B. Albert., hic a. 24. seq.; S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 2. (ubi et de seqq. dubiis).According to the Roman Pontifical, the bishop admonishes the acolytes to be ordained with the words of Matt. 5:16: Let your light shine, etc., and Phil. 2:15: In the midst of a depraved nation... you shine as lights in the world. See also here the text of the Master, c. 8, and the Commentary, a. 2, q. 4. — On this doubt, cf. Bl. Albert, here a. 24 f.; St. Thomas, here q. 2, a. 2 (where also on the following doubts).
- 6Cfr. Hebr. 7, 12, et supra p. 1. a. 2. q. 3.Cf. Heb. 7:12, and above, p. 1, a. 2, q. 3.
- 7Hic c. 10. — Edd. novum actum et paulo inferius novum ordinem et novum characterem. In codd. desideratur ergo.Here c. 10. — The editions [read] novum actum, and a little lower novum ordinem et novum characterem. In the codices ergo is wanting.
- 8Pro levitae, quod cod. aa omittit, alii codd. diaconi.For levitae, which codex aa omits, other codices [read] diaconi.
- 9Iustin., Apolog. I. pro Christian. n. 65: Qui apud nos dicuntur diaconi panem et vinum et aquam, in quibus gratiae actae sunt [ἀπὸ τοῦ εὐχαριστηθέντος ἄρτου καὶ οἴνου καὶ ὕδατος], unicuique praesentium participanda distribuunt et ad absentes perferunt. Cyprian., de Lapsis, n. 25: Solemnibus adimpletis, calicem diaconus offerre praesentibus coepit etc. Cfr. etiam Ambros., I. de Offic. ministr. c. 41. n. 214. (ad cuius loci explicationem in nota adiecta allegatur Concil. Aquisgr. c. 7, et Isidor., II. de Offic. eccles. c. 8: Nam sicut in sacerdote consecratio, ita in ministro dispensatio Sacramenti est); August., Serm. 304. (alias 37. de Diversis), c. 1. n. 1, et C. Diaconos (13.), seqq. d. 93. — Aliquanto inferius pro cum novem vel edd. cum novum nihil.Justin, Apology I for the Christians, n. 65: Those who among us are called deacons distribute the bread and wine and water, over which thanks have been given [from the bread and wine and water that have been eucharistized], to each of those present for their participation, and carry [them] to the absent. Cyprian, On the Lapsed, n. 25: When the solemn rites were completed, the deacon began to offer the chalice to those present, etc. Cf. also Ambrose, On the Duties of Ministers I, c. 41, n. 214 (for the explanation of which passage, in an appended note, is adduced the Council of Aachen, c. 7, and Isidore, On the Offices of the Church II, c. 8: For just as in the priest there is consecration, so in the minister there is dispensation of the Sacrament); Augustine, Serm. 304 (alias 37, On Various Matters), c. 1, n. 1, and the canon Diaconos (13) and following, d. 93. — Somewhat below, for cum novem vel the editions [read] cum novum nihil.
- 10Cfr. B. Albert., hic a. 29.Cf. Bl. Albert, here a. 29.
- 11Cod. G ipsum.Codex G [reads] ipsum.
- 12Dist. 18. p. 1. et d. 19. per totam. — Idem dub. solvit B. Albert., hic a. 35.Distinction 18, part 1, and d. 19 throughout. — Bl. Albert resolves the same doubt, here a. 35.
- 13Prima haec ratio omittitur in edd. et uno alteroque cod. Post falsum esse codd. B D F Q addunt si hoc dicunt, cod. E si haec dicuntur.This first reason is omitted in the editions and in one or another codex. After falsum esse, codices B D F Q add si hoc dicunt, codex E si haec dicuntur.
- 14Vers. 11. — Superius post dicuntur edd. supplent: tribus modis. Primo large. Pro exigunt ministrum cod. A exhibent ministerium (etiam plures alii codd. falso ponunt ministerium). Inferius pro contingunt codd. R S T tangunt, et pro sacratas plures codd. sacras.Verse 11. — Higher up, after dicuntur the editions supply: tribus modis. Primo large ("in three ways. First broadly"). For exigunt ministrum codex A [reads] exhibent ministerium (several other codices also wrongly put ministerium). Lower down, for contingunt codices R S T [read] tangunt, and for sacratas several codices [read] sacras.
- 15Ita codd. B P (F L a secunda manu), quorum lectio ex contextu comprobatur; alii codd. presbyter et subdiaconus, edd. diaconus et subdiaconus [sed subdiaconi est tantum sacra vasa tangere]. Cfr. supra a. 2. q. 1. — Idem dub. solvunt B. Albert., hic a. 36; S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 1. quaestiunc. 3. et circa lit.; Petr. a Tar. et Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.So codices B P (F L by a second hand), whose reading is confirmed by the context; other codices [read] presbyter et subdiaconus, the editions diaconus et subdiaconus [but it belongs to the subdeacon only to touch the sacred vessels]. Cf. above, a. 2, q. 1. — The same doubt is resolved by Bl. Albert, here a. 36; St. Thomas, here q. 2, a. 1, subquestion 3, and on the text; Peter of Tarentaise and Richard of Middleton, here on the text.
- 16Scil. in baptismo et confirmatione; cfr. supra d. 6. p. 1. q. 4.Namely in baptism and confirmation; cf. above, d. 6, p. 1, q. 4.
- 17Cfr. supra a. 1. q. 1. seqq.; B. Albert. hic a. 37; S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 1. quaestiunc. 2; Petr. a Tar., hic q. 2. a. 1. quaestiunc. 2.Cf. above, a. 1, q. 1 and following; Bl. Albert, here a. 37; St. Thomas, here q. 1, a. 1, subquestion 2; Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 2, a. 1, subquestion 2. ---