Dist. 6, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 4
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 6
Quaestio IV. Per quid character imprimatur.
Quarto quaeritur, per quid character imprimatur, et quaeritur, utrum imprimatur per virtutes, sicut per Sacramenta. Et quod sic, videtur:
1. Quia character est signum conformativum sive configurativum; sed per virtutes configuratur anima Deo1: ergo per virtutes imprimitur character.
2. Item quaero, utrum imprimatur per Sacramenta veteris Testamenti. — Et videtur, quod sic: quia character est signum distinctivum, distinguens populum a non-populo; sed Dominus tempore Legis habuit populum, qui debuit distingui, sicut et modo: ergo si distinguebantur per Sacramenta2, patet, quod in illis imprimebatur signaculum distinctivum; hoc autem est character: ergo etc.
3. Item quaero, utrum per omnia Sacramenta novi Testamenti. — Et videtur, quod sic: quia quod potest in maius potest in minus3; sed omnia dant gratiam, quae maior est quam character: ergo etc.
4. Item, character disponit ad gratiam4: ergo cum omnia Sacramenta dent gratiam et disponant ad illam, omnia dant characterem.
Contra: 1. Character est signum indelebile5 et solum est impressivum characteris, quod non iteratur circa subiectum; sed tantum tria sunt Sacramenta non iterabilia, ut baptismus, confirmatio et ordo: ergo tantum illa tria imprimunt characterem.
Quaeritur ergo ulterius gratia huius — cum omnis passio6, quae inest aliquibus, insit per aliquam naturam communem — quae sit illa natura communis reperta in his tribus, et non in aliis. Et constat, quod non est materia, quia non est communis; nec forma, quia nec illa est communis. — Et si dicas, quod conveniunt in invocatione Trinitatis, et quia est unus efficiens7: similiter et in aliis est invocatio Trinitatis et efficiens, quia ille est unus in omnibus Sacramentis. Necesse igitur est, quod illa natura sumatur ex parte finis. Sed hoc non videtur, quia in fine communi videntur omnia convenire; in finibus autem proximis omnia differunt. — Et si dicas, quod hoc est, quia ista tria Sacramenta sunt respicientia statum fidei determinatum: ergo cum fides sit eadem secundum diversos status, videtur, quod in omnibus istis Sacramentis unus imprimatur character. Sed constat, quod multi sunt characteres, alioquin non posset quis ordinari, si non esset confirmatus.
Quaeritur ergo, quae sit ratio multitudinis; et videtur, quod superfluant, cum sufficienter per unum possint distingui. Quod autem sint multi; videtur, quia character interior similitudinem habet cum signo exteriori; sed signa sunt dissimilia et diversa: ergo et characteres.
Conclusio.
Character imprimitur non in virtutibus, sed in Sacramentis novae legis, ast tantum in tribus.
Respondeo: Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum, quod character est signum interius distinctivum. Quia ergo signare non convenit ei nisi ratione signi visibilis; ideo solum in Sacramentis, non in virtutibus, imprimitur. Quia vero interius spiritualiter distinguens; ideo in Sacramentis, quae sunt non carnalis populi, sed spiritualis: ideo imprimitur in Sacramentis novae legis, non veteris. Quia distinctivum non unius, sed multorum; ideo unitivum multorum in uno statu fidei: ideo in his Sacramentis solum imprimitur, quae respiciunt statum fidei determinatum. — Tres autem sunt status fidei distinctos: scilicet genitae, roboratae et iam multiplicatae; et secundum hoc attenditur triplex distinctio in populo, scilicet bonorum a malis, fortium ab infirmis, clericorum a laicis. — Et haec triplex distinctio praecessit in figura in populo Israel: prima, cum omnes sunt distincti ab Aegyptiis ad veniendum in terram promissionis; secunda, cum fortes ab infirmis ad pugnandum in bello; tertia, cum levitae ab alio populo ad ministrandum in templo8. — Similiter triplex fuit distinctio in domo David: prima, domus eius ab infidelibus; secunda, quia erant ibi specialiter pugnatores; tertia, quia levitae et sacerdotes et scribae ab aliis etiam distincti erant, et etiam duces et principes habebant9.
Quia ergo tria tantum sunt Sacramenta, quae respiciunt statum fidei determinatum: baptismus, primum quia ibi fides gignitur, et homo ab Aegyptiis separatur; confirmatio, secundum, quia ibi fides roboratur, et ut pugil inungitur homo ad proeliandum et ab infirmis discernitur; et ordo, tertium, quia ibi virtus multimoda datur, et homo ut sanctus ad ministerium templi a laicis separatur: ideo ista tria tantum imprimunt characterem.
Natura ergo communis, reperta in his et non in aliis, est, quia sunt signa visibilia interius operantia, respicientia statum fidei determinatum. Et quia distinctio populi a non-populo praecedit alias distinctiones; ideo baptismalis character praecedit alios de necessitate. Sed distinctio fortium ab infirmis praecedit distinctionem aliam solum de congruo, non de necessitate. — Ex hoc igitur patet ordo characterum; patet et numerus, quia tres sunt secundum tres status et tres distinctiones et tria Sacramenta; patet etiam ratio imprimendi. Praesupposita namque identitate ex parte materialis elementi, ratione cuius competit significatio, sumitur ratio principalis ex parte finis. Quia tamen finis movet efficientem, et efficiens secundum exigentiam finis introducit formam in materiam10: concurrit triplex ratio: et prima est status fidei determinatio ex parte finis; ex parte efficientis institutio, qui ad talem finem ordinans dedit talem virtutem, ut in his imprimeretur character; ex parte vero formae est sanctae Trinitatis invocatio. Et sic patent omnia.
1. Quod enim primo obiicitur de virtutibus, iam patet: quia secundum non est configuratio, quam attendatur signum distinctivum, eo quod non est signum sensibile11 extra.
2. Ad illud quod obiicitur de Sacramentis veteris legis, similiter patet responsio: quia ibi erat tantum configuratio exterius in carne, quia erant Sacramenta populi carnalis.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur: quod potest in maius potest in minus; dicendum, quod istud non est generaliter verum, quia frequenter virtus creaturae ordinatur ad maius, non ad minus; homo enim potest generare hominem, non festucam12.
4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod omnia Sacramenta disponunt ad gratiam; dicendum, quod actus disponendi ad gratiam non est proprius characteris, sed magis qui praedeterminatus est.
Quod postmodum quaeritur, satis patet et melius patet13, si brevius resumantur praedicta. —
Ordo enim et summa praedictorum est, quia character est signum interius distinctivum pariter et unitivum in aliquo fidei statu; ideo imprimitur a signo visibili, interius operante, respiciente statum fidei determinatum. Status ergo fidei determinatus est prima ratio imprimendi. Quia «finis imponit necessitatem his quae sunt ad finem14», ideo, quia ipse instituit ad hunc finem Sacramenta, dedit virtutem et formam verborum congruam. — Est etiam ratio multiplicandi. Quia enim tantum tres status fidei sunt et tres distinctiones15, ideo tantum tres characteres. — Est etiam ratio ordinandi. Nam fidei generatio praecedit confirmationem, et confirmatio multiplicationem; sed primum de necessitate praecedit secundum et tertium et secundum praecedit tertium de congruo. Talis ordo est in distinctionibus populi: nam primo est separatio fidelis populi ab Aegyptiis vel malis; secundo, fortium ab infirmis; tertio, sanctorum et perfectorum ab aliis. Et sic est ordo in characteribus.
I. In hac quaestione solvenda omnes satis conveniunt. Attamen Scot. (hic q. 9. n. 21.) putat, posse concedi, quod in circumcisione imprimeretur aliquis character imperfectus. De eadem Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 8. m. 8. a. 1. § 4. 7. — S. Thom., IV. Sent. d. 4. q. 1. a. 4; S. III. q. 63. a. 1. 6. — B. Albert., hic a. 6. quaestiunc. 2. — Petr. a Tar., IV. Sent. d. 5. q. 2. a. 3. — Richard. a Med. rem tangit IV. Sent. d. 5. q. 2. a. 3. — Durand., IV. Sent. d. 4. q. 1.
II. Quoad seq. (5.) quaestionem tum Eugenii IV. Decretum pro Armenis tum Concil. Trident. (Sess. VII. de Sacram. in generali can. 9.) characterem dicunt esse indelebilem; quod secundum Scot. (loc. cit. n. 20.) intelligendum est non respectu potentiae Dei absolutae («quia nulla forma potest esse in anima, quam non possit Deus de potentia absoluta delere»), sed de potentia ordinaria. Quod character sit indelebilis etiam in altera vita (hic ad 4.), communi theologorum suffragio probatur. — Rationem, quare character sit indelebilis, S. Thom. (S. loc. cit. a. 5.) in eo ponit, quod «anima sit subiectum characteris secundum intellectivam partem»; sed (ibid. ad 2.) addit: «propter immobilitatem principalis moventis». S. Bonav., vix ab illo recedit, nisi quod doceat, ut diximus, imaginem esse eiusdem subiectum (supra q. 3.). Praeter locos citt.: Alex. Hal., loc. cit. § 5. — S. Thom., Comment. loc. cit. quaestiunc. 4. — B. Albert., hic a. 7. quaestiunc. 2. — Petr. a Tar., loc. cit. a. 2. quaestiunc. 2. — Richard. a Med., loc. cit. q. 3.
III. De 6. quaestione cfr. infra d. 23. a. 2. q. 4, et Concil. Trident., Sess. VII. de baptismo can. 11, qui definit, verum et rite collatum baptismum non esse iterandum. De eadem quaestione: Alex. Hal., loc. cit. m. 12. — Scot., hic q. 7. — S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 5. III. q. 66. a. 9. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 3. a. 1. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 4. q. 1. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 3.
---
Question IV. By what means the character is imprinted.
Fourthly it is asked, by what means the character is imprinted, and it is asked whether it is imprinted through the virtues, as it is through the Sacraments. And that it is so, seems shown:
1. Because the character is a conforming or configuring sign; but through the virtues the soul is configured to God1: therefore the character is imprinted through the virtues.
2. Likewise I ask whether it is imprinted through the Sacraments of the Old Testament. — And it seems that it is: because the character is a distinctive sign, distinguishing a people from a non-people; but the Lord in the time of the Law had a people who had to be distinguished, just as also now: therefore if they were distinguished through the Sacraments2, it is clear that in those a distinctive seal was imprinted; but this is a character: therefore etc.
3. Likewise I ask whether it is through all the Sacraments of the New Testament. — And it seems that it is: because what can do the greater can do the lesser3; but all give grace, which is greater than the character: therefore etc.
4. Likewise, the character disposes to grace4: therefore since all the Sacraments give grace and dispose to it, all give the character.
On the contrary: 1. The character is an indelible sign5, and that alone is impressive of a character which is not repeated upon the subject; but only three Sacraments are non-repeatable, namely baptism, confirmation, and order: therefore only those three imprint a character.
It is therefore asked further on account of this — since every passion6 which is in certain things is in them through some common nature — what is that common nature found in these three, and not in the others. And it is established that it is not matter, because it is not common; nor form, because neither is that common. — And if you say that they agree in the invocation of the Trinity, and because there is one efficient cause7: likewise in the others too there is invocation of the Trinity and an efficient cause, since he is one in all the Sacraments. It is necessary therefore that that nature be taken from the side of the end. But this does not seem so, because in the common end all seem to agree; but in the proximate ends all differ. — And if you say that this is because these three Sacraments are those regarding a determinate state of faith: therefore since faith is the same according to the diverse states, it seems that in all these Sacraments one character is imprinted. But it is established that there are many characters, otherwise no one could be ordained if he were not confirmed.
It is therefore asked what is the ground of the multitude; and it seems that they are superfluous, since they could be sufficiently distinguished by one. But that they are many; seems shown, because the interior character has a likeness with the exterior sign; but the signs are dissimilar and diverse: therefore so too are the characters.
Conclusion.
The character is imprinted not in the virtues, but in the Sacraments of the new law, and only in three.
I respond: For the understanding of the foregoing it must be noted that the character is an interior distinctive sign. Since, then, to signify does not belong to it except by reason of a visible sign; therefore it is imprinted only in the Sacraments, not in the virtues. But since it distinguishes interiorly and spiritually; therefore it is in the Sacraments, which are of a people not carnal but spiritual: therefore it is imprinted in the Sacraments of the new law, not of the old. Since it is distinctive not of one, but of many; therefore unitive of many in one state of faith: therefore it is imprinted only in those Sacraments which regard a determinate state of faith. — Now there are three states of faith, namely begotten, strengthened, and now multiplied; and according to this a threefold distinction is observed in the people, namely of the good from the wicked, of the strong from the weak, of clerics from the laity. — And this threefold distinction was prefigured in the people of Israel: the first, when all are distinguished from the Egyptians for coming into the land of promise; the second, when the strong from the weak for fighting in war; the third, when the Levites from the rest of the people for ministering in the temple8. — Likewise the distinction was threefold in the house of David: the first, his house from the unbelievers; the second, because there were there especially warriors; the third, because the Levites and priests and scribes were also distinguished from the rest, and also had leaders and princes9.
Since therefore there are only three Sacraments which regard a determinate state of faith: baptism, the first because there faith is begotten, and a man is separated from the Egyptians; confirmation, the second, because there faith is strengthened, and as a champion a man is anointed for battle and is set apart from the weak; and order, the third, because there manifold power is given, and a man as holy is set apart from the laity for the ministry of the temple: therefore these three alone imprint a character.
The common nature, therefore, found in these and not in the others, is that they are visible signs operating interiorly, regarding a determinate state of faith. And because the distinction of the people from the non-people precedes the other distinctions; therefore the baptismal character precedes the others of necessity. But the distinction of the strong from the weak precedes the other distinction only by fittingness, not of necessity. — From this, then, is clear the order of the characters; clear also the number, because there are three according to the three states and the three distinctions and the three Sacraments; clear also the ground of imprinting. For, presupposing identity on the side of the material element, by reason of which signification belongs to it, the principal ground is taken from the side of the end. Since, however, the end moves the efficient cause, and the efficient cause according to the requirement of the end introduces the form into the matter10: a threefold ground concurs: and the first is the determination of the state of faith on the side of the end; on the side of the efficient cause, the institution, who, ordaining to such an end, gave such power that in these a character might be imprinted; on the side of the form, however, is the invocation of the holy Trinity. And thus all things are clear.
1. As for what is first objected concerning the virtues, it is now clear: because [it is] not according to a configuration that the distinctive sign is regarded, on account of the fact that it is not a sensible sign11 outwardly.
2. To that which is objected concerning the Sacraments of the old law, the response is likewise clear: because there was there only an exterior configuration in the flesh, since they were the Sacraments of a carnal people.
3. To that which is objected: that what can do the greater can do the lesser; it must be said that this is not generally true, because frequently the power of a creature is ordained to the greater, not to the lesser; for a man can beget a man, not a straw12.
4. To that which is objected, that all the Sacraments dispose to grace; it must be said that the act of disposing to grace is not proper to the character, but rather to that which is predetermined.
As for what is asked afterward, it is sufficiently clear, and is more clearly clear13, if the foregoing be more briefly resumed. —
For the order and sum of the foregoing is this: that the character is an interior sign at once distinctive and unitive in some state of faith; therefore it is imprinted by a visible sign, operating interiorly, regarding a determinate state of faith. The determinate state of faith, then, is the first ground of imprinting. Since «the end imposes necessity upon the things that are unto the end14», therefore, because he himself instituted the Sacraments unto this end, he gave the power and the congruous form of words. — There is also a ground of multiplying. For since there are only three states of faith and three distinctions15, therefore only three characters. — There is also a ground of ordering. For the begetting of faith precedes confirmation, and confirmation precedes multiplication; but the first of necessity precedes the second and the third, and the second precedes the third by fittingness. Such is the order in the distinctions of the people: for first there is the separation of the faithful people from the Egyptians or the wicked; second, of the strong from the weak; third, of the holy and perfect from the rest. And thus there is order in the characters.
I. In solving this question all agree well enough. Yet Scotus (here q. 9, n. 21) holds that it can be conceded that in circumcision some imperfect character was imprinted. On the same, Alexander of Hales, Summa p. IV, q. 8, m. 8, a. 1, § 4, 7. — St. Thomas, IV Sent. d. 4, q. 1, a. 4; Summa III, q. 63, a. 1, 6. — Bl. Albert, here a. 6, quaestiuncula 2. — Peter of Tarentaise, IV Sent. d. 5, q. 2, a. 3. — Richard of Middleton touches on the matter, IV Sent. d. 5, q. 2, a. 3. — Durandus, IV Sent. d. 4, q. 1.
II. As to the following (5th) question, both Eugenius IV's Decree for the Armenians and the Council of Trent (Sess. VII, on the Sacraments in general, can. 9) say the character is indelible; which according to Scotus (loc. cit. n. 20) is to be understood not with respect to God's absolute power («because no form can be in the soul which God could not by absolute power delete»), but of the ordinary power. That the character is indelible even in the other life (here, to obj. 4) is proved by the common consent of the theologians. — The reason why the character is indelible St. Thomas (Summa loc. cit. a. 5) places in this, that «the soul is the subject of the character according to the intellective part»; but (ibid. ad 2) he adds: «on account of the immobility of the principal mover». St. Bonaventure scarcely departs from him, except that he teaches, as we have said, that the image is its subject (above, q. 3). Besides the cited places: Alexander of Hales, loc. cit. § 5. — St. Thomas, Commentary, loc. cit. quaestiuncula 4. — Bl. Albert, here a. 7, quaestiuncula 2. — Peter of Tarentaise, loc. cit. a. 2, quaestiuncula 2. — Richard of Middleton, loc. cit. q. 3.
III. On the 6th question see below, d. 23, a. 2, q. 4, and the Council of Trent, Sess. VII, on baptism, can. 11, which defines that true and rightly conferred baptism is not to be repeated. On the same question: Alexander of Hales, loc. cit. m. 12. — Scotus, here q. 7. — St. Thomas, here q. 2, a. 5; Summa III, q. 66, a. 9. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 3, a. 1. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 4, q. 1. — Dionysius the Carthusian, here q. 3.
---
- 1Aristot., VII. Ethic. c. 1: Ex hominibus, sicut dicunt, ob virtutis excellentiam divini efficiuntur.Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics VII, c. 1: Out of men, as they say, on account of excellence of virtue, divine ones come to be.
- 2Cfr. supra d. 1. p. II. a. 2. q. 2. ad 1.Cf. above, d. 1, p. II, a. 2, q. 2, to obj. 1.
- 3Nam ut dicit regula iuris 35. in VI: Plus semper in se continet quod est minus. Cfr. ibid. regula 53. — De minori cfr. supra q. 2. solut. ad obiect. de assimilatione.For, as the rule of law 35 in the Sext says: The greater always contains within itself that which is less. Cf. ibid. rule 53. — On the lesser cf. above, q. 2, in the solution, to the objection concerning assimilation.
- 4Ut ostensum est supra q. 1. et 2. — De seq. proposit. vide supra d. 1. p. I. q. 4.As was shown above, q. 1 and 2. — On the following proposition see above, d. 1, p. I, q. 4.
- 5Probatur quaest. seq. — De tribus Sacramentis, quae iterari nequeunt, cfr. q. 6.; lit. Magistri, d. VII. c. 5, et ibid. Comment. dub. 6. nec non d. 24. p. II. a. 1. q. 1. seqq.It is proved in the following question. — On the three Sacraments which cannot be repeated, cf. q. 6; the Master's text, d. VII, c. 5, and the Commentary there, dub. 6, as well as d. 24, p. II, a. 1, q. 1 ff.
- 6Graece πάθος, quod in recentioribus versionibus operum Aristotelis latine redditur affectus (affectio), significat generaliter praedicatum sive attributum sive proprietatem [quae sensu stricto accepta i. e. conveniens omni et soli speciei et semper, dicitur propria passio]. Cfr. Aristot., I. Poster. c. 7; VI. Topic. c. 3. (c. 6.); I. de Generat. et corrupt. text. 11. (c. 3.), et III. de Caelo et mundo, text. 7. (c. 1.). — De ipsa proposit. cfr. tom. II. pag. 26, nota 5.In Greek πάθος, which in more recent versions of Aristotle's works is rendered in Latin affectus (affection), signifies generally a predicate or attribute or property [which, taken in the strict sense, i.e. belonging to all and only the species and always, is called a proper passion]. Cf. Aristotle, Posterior Analytics I, c. 7; Topics VI, c. 3 (c. 6); On Generation and Corruption I, text 11 (c. 3), and On the Heavens and the Earth III, text 7 (c. 1). — On the proposition itself cf. tom. II, p. 26, note 5.
- 7Supplevimus ex codd. G1 et quia est unus efficiens, quod in aliis codd. desideratur, pro quo Vat. ut efficientis. Cod. Z legit planius: in invocatione Trinitatis. Similiter et in aliis est invocatio Trinitatis: ergo si haec esset causa, omnia Sacramenta conferrent characterem. Nec potest sumi natura communis ex parte efficientis; quia ille est unus in omnibus Sacramentis.We supplied from codd. G1 and because there is one efficient cause, which is wanting in the other codices, for which the Vatican edition reads as of the efficient cause. Codex Z reads more plainly: in the invocation of the Trinity. Likewise in the others too there is invocation of the Trinity: therefore if this were the cause, all the Sacraments would confer a character. Nor can a common nature be taken from the side of the efficient cause; because he is one in all the Sacraments. <!-- page 143 footer -->
- 8De prima vide Exod. 11, 7. seq.; de secunda cfr. Num. 1, 3. seq., 31, 3. seqq. et Deut. 20. 8; de tertia vide Exod. 18, 1. et Num. 1, 49. seq. — Pro ab alio permulti codd. ab illo.On the first see Exod. 11:7 f.; on the second cf. Num. 1:3 f., 31:3 ff. and Deut. 20:8; on the third see Exod. 18:1 and Num. 1:49 f. — For from another very many codices read from that one.
- 9B. Albert., hic a. 6, pro prima affert Ps. 77, 70. seq., pro secunda II. Reg. 23, 8. seqq.; de tertia cfr. ibid. 15, 24, et 20, 25. seq., IV. Reg. 19, 2; 23, 4, et 25, 18. seq. — Pro etc.Bl. Albert, here a. 6, for the first adduces Ps. 77:70 f., for the second 2 Kings 23:8 ff.; on the third cf. ibid. 15:24, and 20:25 f., 4 Kings 19:2; 23:4, and 25:18 f. — For etc.
- 10Cfr. Aristot., II. Phys. text. 29. (c. 3.), et V. Metaph. text. 2. seq. (IV. c. 2.). — Plures codd. in materia. Inferius pro qui edd. quae, cod. S quia.Cf. Aristotle, Physics II, text 29 (c. 3), and Metaphysics V, text 2 f. (IV, c. 2). — Several codices read in the matter. Below, for who the editions read which, codex S because.
- 11Cod. N bene visibile.Codex N rightly reads visible.
- 12Vide infra d. 23. a. 1. q. 1. ad 4; I. Sent. d. 41. a. 1. ad 6; II. Sent. d. 8. p. I. a. 2. q. 1. ad 3; d. 27. a. 2. q. 1. ad 2; III. Sent. d. 14. a. 3. q. 3. ad 3.See below, d. 23, a. 1, q. 1, to obj. 4; I Sent. d. 41, a. 1, to obj. 6; II Sent. d. 8, p. I, a. 2, q. 1, to obj. 3; d. 27, a. 2, q. 1, to obj. 2; III Sent. d. 14, a. 3, q. 3, to obj. 3.
- 13Fide codd. B F H K Q aa supplevimus et melius patet.On the authority of codices B F H K Q aa we supplied and is more clearly clear. <!-- page 144 footer -->
- 14Secundum Aristot., II. Phys. text. 88. seqq. (c. 9.).According to Aristotle, Physics II, text 88 ff. (c. 9).
- 15Cod. Z supplet populi.Codex Z supplies of the people.