Bonaventure — Opera Omnia

Dist. 7, Dubia

Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 7

Textus Latinus

p. 175

Dub. I

In parte ista sunt dubitationes circa litteram, et primo dubitatur de hoc quod dicit Magister, quod pro scandalo semel tantum concessisse aestimatur¹².

Videtur enim non fuisse recta talis concessio, quia scandalum de veritate vitae vel doctrinae nihil immutat⁷; si ergo solus episcopus potest confirmare, videtur, quod propter scandalum non debuit illud permittere.

p. 176

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod quamvis sacerdos non possit propria auctoritate, tamen pro causa necessaria summus Pontifex, in quo est plenitudo potestatis, potest alii quam episcopo¹ committere; et ille non facit auctoritate sua, sed auctoritate sibi commissa, unde ille potius facit, cuius auctoritate fit: unde non est dubium, quin pontificalis auctoritas sit de necessitate huius Sacramenti. — Aliqui tamen dicunt, quod non concessit eis conferre Sacramentum, sed solum aliquod sacramentale, sicut aliquando datur laicis panis benedictus loco corporis dominici².

Dub. II

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod virtus huius Sacramenti est donatio Spiritus sancti ad robur; quia, si hoc verum est, contra hoc est, quia eucharistia confirmat, unde in Psalmo³: Panis cor hominis confirmat.

Respondeo: Ad hoc multipliciter respondetur. Primo modo sic, quod istud Sacramentum ordinatur ad robur per se, sed eucharistia per accidens⁴; sed hoc non solvit, quia, sive per se sive per accidens, dum tamen habeant effectum eundem, videtur, alterum superfluere. — Secundus modus dicendi est, quod confirmatio confirmat contra malum, sed eucharistia in bono. Sed nec illud sufficit, quia omne Sacramentum, cum sit remedium, est contra malum, et ita eucharistia. — Alii dicunt, quod duo sunt nobis necessaria, scilicet fides et mores; et unum confirmat in fide, scilicet confirmatio, sed eucharistia quantum ad bonos mores; quia, ut dicit Bernardus⁵, eucharistia non solum delet venialia, sed etiam consensum fortificat, ne inclinetur ad mortalia. — Alii dicunt, quod utrumque fortificat fidem; sed duo necessaria sunt ad fidem firmam, scilicet corde credere et ore confiteri⁶; et eucharistia confirmat quantum ad fidem in corde, sed confirmatio quantum ad confessionem sive prolationem in ore. — Alii dicunt, quod utrumque fortificat caritatem, quia ab eius fortitudine pendet fortitudo omnium. Sed caritas potest deficere dupliciter, scilicet per defectum alimenti, vel per actionem contrarii, sicut patet in igne materiali⁷; et contra primum est eucharistia, quae cibat; contra secundum confirmatio, ut impugnantibus resistat. — Alii dicunt aliter et probabilius, quod confirmatio est ad corroborationem fidei, sed eucharistia caritatis; et hoc patet, quia hic est signum confessionis fidelis, ibi signum unionis. — Et si quaeratur: quare magis confirmantur hae duae virtutes quam aliae? dicendum, quod quia in his duabus pendet fortitudo spiritualis aedificii⁸ quantum ad intellectum et affectum; et quia in fide est prima elevatio, in caritate elevatio summa, et utrobique difficultas; et quia pronitas est ad contrarium: ideo magis confirmantur⁹.

Dub. III

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit Rabanus¹⁰, quod hoc Sacramentum maiori veneratione tenendum est, sicut a maioribus datur. Videtur enim secundum hoc, quod amplior gratia in eo datur.

Respondeo: Et dicendum, quod communiter dici consuevit, quod unum Sacramentum dicitur maius alio quinque modis. Primo modo propter significationem; sic matrimonium dicitur maius, quia significat unitatem naturarum in Christo¹¹. Secundo modo propter continentiam; et sic eucharistia dicitur maius. Tertio, propter efficaciam; et sic baptismus. Quarto, propter dignitatem ministrantium sive dispensantium; et sic dicitur confirmatio maior, quia datur a summis sacerdotibus sive episcopis¹². Quinto, propter hoc, quod ponit in nobiliori gradu; et sic dicitur ordo maius Sacramentum.

Dub. IV

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: In digniori parte corporis fit. Videtur enim falsum dicere, quia vertex est dignior quantum ad situm, et cor quantum ad virtutem: ergo potius debet dari in capite, vel in corde. — Item, videtur, quod in lingua, quia ibi est confessio.

p. 177

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod pars dignior quantum ad virtutem et operationem est cor, sed tamen occulta est et latet interius¹. Inter partes vero, quae se offerunt sensibus nostris, caput est dignius, et in capite facies, scilicet anterior pars: et ideo hoc Sacramentum datur in facie, sed magis in fronte, quia ibi est sedes verecundiae². Unde quia hoc Sacramentum est contra confusionem et verecundiam confitendi nomen Christi, quae linguam contrahit, ne aperte dicat, debet hoc Sacramentum in fronte dari. Frons quidem pars est faciei eminentior. Unde dixerunt quidam, quod in nova lege fit prima unctio in capite ratione virtutis, secunda vero in fronte, tertia iterum in capite. Et prima fit in baptismo; secunda vero in confirmatione; tertia vero in episcopi consecratione³. — Et prima signata est in prima unctione David, primi Regum decimo sexto⁴; secunda vero in unctione David super duas tribus, secundi Regum secundo; tertia vero in unctione David super cunctum regnum, secundi Regum quinto. Et satis possunt aptari istis, si quis inspiciat. In prima enim David non habuit potentiam; in secunda habuit potentiam et resistentiam; in tertia habuit potentiam et praesidentiam super gentem suam⁵.

Dub. V

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: Hoc Sacramentum tantum a ieiunis et ieiunis⁶ tradi debet. Videtur enim, quod quia est ad robur, quod cibus non impediat: cibus enim corporalis non repugnat fortitudini spirituali.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod in hoc Sacramento datur gratia, et gratia corroborans; et iterum, contrahitur affinitas quaedam. Ideo ista tria statuta fuerunt⁷ ab antiquis Patribus in Sacramento servari tanquam congrua: ut ieiuno stomacho propter gratiam Spiritus sancti suscipiendam; ut confirmandus ab alio portetur vel teneatur, qui sit confirmatus, in signum debilitatis et imbecillitatis; ut sit consimilis sexus propter periculum affinitatis⁸.

Dub. VI

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod nec debet iterari, sicut nec baptismus. Videtur enim quod possit iterari, quia morbus pusillanimitatis potest iterari, contra quem est: ergo et Sacramentum. Si tu dicas, quod non potest propter characterem; tunc videtur, quod character praeiudicet morbo: si ergo non est curatio morbi propter characterem, sed magis e converso, patet etc.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod illud Sacramentum non potest iterari propter characterem, qui imprimitur in eo indelebiliter. Non debet etiam tum ratione morbi, quem curat, tum ratione effectus, quem donat, tum ratione rei, quam allegorice significat. Ratione morbi, quia est poena contracta; haec autem, secundum quod huiusmodi, non iteratur, sed si iteratur, hoc est solum, secundum quod acta⁹. Ratione effectus, quem donat, qui est plenitudo gratiae ad robur; et quia integer effectus, ideo status. Ratione rei, quam allegorice significat, quia significat adventum Spiritus sancti de caelo in Apostolos in die Pentecostes¹⁰, qui postquam advenit, nunquam ab eis discessit. Et sic patet illud.

English Translation

p. 175

Doubt I

In this part there are doubts concerning the text, and first it is doubted about this which the Master says, that he is reckoned to have granted it only once on account of scandal¹².

For such a concession seems not to have been right, because scandal changes nothing of the truth of life or of doctrine⁷; if therefore the bishop alone can confirm, it seems that he ought not to have permitted that on account of scandal.

p. 176

I respond: It must be said that although a priest cannot [confirm] by his own authority, yet for a necessary cause the supreme Pontiff, in whom is the fulness of power, can commit it to another than a bishop¹; and that man does not act by his own authority, but by an authority committed to him, whence he rather acts by whose authority it is done: hence there is no doubt that pontifical authority belongs to the necessity of this Sacrament. — Yet some say that he did not grant them to confer the Sacrament, but only some sacramental, just as sometimes blessed bread is given to the laity in place of the Lord's body².

Doubt II

Likewise it is asked about this which he says, that the power of this Sacrament is the gift of the Holy Spirit unto strength; because, if this is true, against this it is, that the eucharist confirms, whence in the Psalm³: Bread strengthens the heart of man.

I respond: To this it is answered in many ways. In the first way thus, that this Sacrament is ordained unto strength of itself, but the eucharist accidentally⁴; but this does not solve it, because, whether of itself or accidentally, so long as they have the same effect, one seems to be superfluous. — The second way of speaking is that confirmation confirms against evil, but the eucharist in good. But neither does that suffice, because every Sacrament, since it is a remedy, is against evil, and so [is] the eucharist. — Others say that two things are necessary for us, namely faith and morals; and one confirms in faith, namely confirmation, but the eucharist as to good morals; because, as Bernard says⁵, the eucharist not only blots out venial [sins], but also strengthens consent, lest it be inclined toward mortal [sins]. — Others say that both strengthen faith; but two things are necessary for a firm faith, namely to believe with the heart and to confess with the mouth⁶; and the eucharist confirms as to faith in the heart, but confirmation as to confession or utterance with the mouth. — Others say that both strengthen charity, because on its strength depends the strength of all. But charity can fail in two ways, namely through defect of nourishment, or through the action of a contrary, as is plain in a material fire⁷; and against the first is the eucharist, which feeds; against the second confirmation, that it may resist attackers. — Others say otherwise and more probably, that confirmation is for the strengthening of faith, but the eucharist of charity; and this is plain, because here is the sign of a believer's confession, there the sign of union. — And if it be asked: why are these two virtues confirmed rather than others? it must be said that [it is] because on these two depends the strength of the spiritual edifice⁸ as to intellect and affection; and because in faith is the first elevation, in charity the highest elevation, and in both [there is] difficulty; and because there is a proneness to the contrary: therefore they are confirmed the more⁹.

Doubt III

Likewise it is asked about this which Rabanus says¹⁰, that this Sacrament is to be held in greater veneration, as it is given by greater [ministers]. For according to this it seems that a fuller grace is given in it.

I respond: And it must be said that it is commonly wont to be said that one Sacrament is called greater than another in five ways. In the first way on account of signification; thus matrimony is called greater, because it signifies the union of the natures in Christ¹¹. In the second way on account of containment; and thus the eucharist is called greater. Third, on account of efficacy; and thus baptism. Fourth, on account of the dignity of those ministering or dispensing; and thus confirmation is called greater, because it is given by the highest priests or bishops¹². Fifth, on account of this, that it places in a nobler grade; and thus order is called the greater Sacrament.

Doubt IV

Likewise it is asked about this which he says: It is done on the worthier part of the body. For it seems false to say so, because the crown of the head is worthier as to position, and the heart as to power: therefore it ought rather to be given on the head, or on the heart. — Likewise, it seems [it should be] on the tongue, because there is confession.

p. 177

I respond: It must be said that the part worthier as to power and operation is the heart, but yet it is hidden and lies within¹. But among the parts which offer themselves to our senses, the head is worthier, and in the head the face, namely the front part: and therefore this Sacrament is given on the face, but rather on the forehead, because there is the seat of shame². Hence, because this Sacrament is against the confusion and shame of confessing the name of Christ, which contracts the tongue, lest one speak openly, this Sacrament ought to be given on the forehead. The forehead indeed is the more eminent part of the face. Hence some have said that in the new law the first anointing is made on the head by reason of power, the second on the forehead, the third again on the head. And the first is made in baptism; the second in confirmation; the third in the consecration of a bishop³. — And the first was signified in the first anointing of David, in the sixteenth [chapter] of the first [book] of Kings⁴; the second in the anointing of David over the two tribes, in the second [chapter] of the second [book] of Kings; the third in the anointing of David over the whole kingdom, in the fifth [chapter] of the second [book] of Kings. And they can well enough be fitted to these, if one looks. For in the first David did not have power; in the second he had power and resistance; in the third he had power and presidency over his people⁵.

Doubt V

Likewise it is asked about this which he says: This Sacrament ought to be delivered only by those fasting and to those fasting⁶. For it seems that, because it is unto strength, food should not impede it: for bodily food is not repugnant to spiritual strength.

I respond: It must be said that in this Sacrament grace is given, and a strengthening grace; and again, a certain affinity is contracted. Therefore these three things were established⁷ by the ancient Fathers to be observed in the Sacrament as fitting: that [it be received] on a fasting stomach, on account of the grace of the Holy Spirit to be received; that the one to be confirmed be carried or held by another who is [already] confirmed, in sign of weakness and feebleness; that he be of the like sex, on account of the danger of affinity⁸.

Doubt VI

Likewise it is asked about this which he says, that neither ought it to be repeated, just as neither [is] baptism. For it seems that it can be repeated, because the sickness of faint-heartedness, against which it is, can be repeated: therefore [so can] the Sacrament also. If you say that it cannot, on account of the character; then it seems that the character prejudices the sickness: if therefore there is no cure of the sickness on account of the character, but rather the contrary, it is plain etc.

I respond: It must be said that that Sacrament cannot be repeated on account of the character, which is imprinted in it indelibly. Nor ought it [to be repeated], whether by reason of the sickness which it cures, or by reason of the effect which it gives, or by reason of the thing which it allegorically signifies. By reason of the sickness, because it is a contracted penalty; and this, as such, is not repeated, but if it is repeated, this is only insofar as it is acted⁹. By reason of the effect which it gives, which is the fulness of grace unto strength; and because the effect is whole, therefore [it is] a settled state. By reason of the thing which it allegorically signifies, because it signifies the coming of the Holy Spirit from heaven into the Apostles on the day of Pentecost¹⁰, who, after he came, never departed from them. And thus that is plain.

Apparatus Criticus

1
Cap. Si quis presbyter, (1.), X. (lib. III. tit. 43.) de presbytero non baptizato: Si quis presbyter ordinatus deprehenderit, se non esse baptizatum: baptizetur et iterum ordinetur. — De minori vide infra d. 24. p. II. a. 1. q. 1. et d. 25. a. 1. q. 2.
Chapter Si quis presbyter, (1.), X. (book III, tit. 43) on the unbaptized priest: If an ordained priest shall discover that he is not baptized: let him be baptized and ordained again. — On the lesser [order] see below, d. 24, p. II, a. 1, q. 1, and d. 25, a. 1, q. 2.
2
Cfr. C. Sollicitudo (1.), d. 52, ubi Alexander II. docet, quod qui, praetermisso subdiaconatus ordine, ad maiorem ordinem ascenderit, tamdiu a maioribus abstineat, quousque congruo tempore praetermissum accipiat.
Compare canon Sollicitudo (1.), d. 52, where Alexander II teaches that he who, the order of subdiaconate having been omitted, has ascended to a greater order, should abstain from the greater [orders] until at a fitting time he receives what was omitted.
7
Cfr. supra pag. 86, nota 6, in fine.
Compare above, page 86, note 6, at the end.
1
Cod. Z addit sed non inferiori quam presbytero. Inferius pro sua codd. F G I propria.
Codex Z adds sed non inferiori quam presbytero (but not to one inferior to a priest). Below, for sua codices F G I read propria.
2
Vide supra a. 1. q. 3. — Idem dub. solvit Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 9. m. 5. a. 1. § 3; B. Albert., hic a. 4. quaestiunc. 3; S. Thom., hic q. 3. a. 1. quaestiunc. 3; Petr. a Tar., hic q. 3. a. 1. quaestiunc. 2. et circa lit.; Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 1. ad 1.
See above, a. 1, q. 3. — The same doubt is resolved by Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 9, m. 5, a. 1, § 3; Albert the Great, here a. 4, little-question 3; Thomas, here q. 3, a. 1, little-question 3; Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 3, a. 1, little-question 2 and on the text; Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 2, q. 1, to 1.
3
Psalm. 103, 15.
Psalm 103, 15.
4
Cfr. Guliel. Altissiod., S. p. IV. tr. 1. c. 1.
Compare William of Auxerre, Summa, p. IV, tr. 1, c. 1.
5
Serm. in Coena Domini, n. 3: Duo enim illud Sacramentum [eucharistia] operatur in nobis, ut videlicet et sensum minuat in minimis et in gravioribus peccatis tollat omnino consensum. Cfr. infra d. 12. p. II. a. 1. q. 3.
Sermon on the Lord's Supper, n. 3: For that Sacrament [the eucharist] works two things in us, namely that it both lessens the feeling in the least [sins] and altogether removes consent in the graver sins. Compare below, d. 12, p. II, a. 1, q. 3.
6
Rom. 10, 10: Corde enim creditur ad iustitiam, ore autem confessio fit ad salutem. — Pro firmam cod. W firmandam. Inferius post prolationem cod. K supplet verborum.
Romans 10, 10: For with the heart one believes unto justice, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. — For firmam codex W reads firmandam. Below, after prolationem codex K supplies verborum.
7
Hoc docet Aristot., de Iuventute et senect. etc. c. 3. (c. 5.) cfr. de Longitud. et brevit. vitae, c. 2. (c. 3.).
Aristotle teaches this, On Youth and Old Age etc., c. 3 (c. 5); compare On Length and Shortness of Life, c. 2 (c. 3).
8
Cfr. tom. III. pag. 604, nota 9. — Post quod codd. F G I omittunt quia.
Compare tom. III, page 604, note 9. — After quod codices F G I omit quia.
9
Idem dub. solvit Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 9. m. 3. a. 2. § 2; S. Thom., Petr. a Tar. et Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.
The same doubt is resolved by Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 9, m. 3, a. 2, § 2; Thomas, Peter of Tarentaise, and Richard of Mediavilla, here on the text.
10
Ita quidem codd., sed edd., omisso Rabanus, infra post secundum hoc addunt verba Melchiadis cui attribuitur canon supra pag. 162, nota 1. citatus.
So indeed the codices, but the editions, Rabanus having been omitted, add below after secundum hoc the words of Melchiades, to whom is attributed the canon cited above, page 162, note 1.
11
Vide III. Sent. d. 6. a. 2. q. 2. Cfr. etiam infra d. 26. a. 2. q. 1. — De eucharistia vide dist. seq. dub. 2; de efficacia baptismi cfr. supra d. 4. p. I. a. 1. q. 1. seq.
See III Sentences, d. 6, a. 2, q. 2. Compare also below, d. 26, a. 2, q. 1. — On the eucharist see the following distinction, dub. 2; on the efficacy of baptism compare above, d. 4, p. I, a. 1, q. 1 ff.
12
Cfr. supra a. 1. q. 3. et a. 2. q. 3. — Idem dub. solvit Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 9. m. 4. a. 3; B. Albert., hic a. 6; S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 1. quaestiunc. 3; Petr. a Tar., hic q. 2. a. 2. quaestiunc. 3.
Compare above, a. 1, q. 3, and a. 2, q. 3. — The same doubt is resolved by Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 9, m. 4, a. 3; Albert the Great, here a. 6; Thomas, here q. 1, a. 1, little-question 3; Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 2, a. 2, little-question 3.
1
Cfr. tom. III. pag. 289, nota 1. et pag. 290, nota 1. 2.
Compare tom. III, page 289, note 1, and page 290, notes 1, 2.
2
Secundum Glossam ordinariam in Rom. 10, 10, apud Petr. Lombard. et Lyranum.
According to the Ordinary Gloss on Romans 10, 10, in Peter Lombard and Lyra.
3
Vide Innocentii III. C. Cum venisset X. (libr. 1. tit. 15.), de sacra unctione.
See Innocent III, canon Cum venisset X. (book 1, tit. 15), on sacred anointing.
4
Vers. 13. — Secundus locus est II. Reg. 2, 4, ubi Vulgata, quam sequitur Vat. et cod. I, super domum Iuda pro super duas tribus; tertius est ibid. 5, 3.
Verse 13. — The second place is II Kings 2, 4, where the Vulgate, which the Vatican edition and codex I follow, [reads] super domum Iuda (over the house of Judah) for super duas tribus (over the two tribes); the third is the same place, 5, 3.
5
Idem dub. solvit Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 9. m. 5. a. 6; B. Albert., hic a. 7; S. Thom., hic q. 3. a. 3. quaestiunc. 2; Petr. a Tar., hic q. 3. a. 3. quaestiunc. 1; Richard. a Med., hic a. 6. q. 2.
The same doubt is resolved by Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 9, m. 5, a. 6; Albert the Great, here a. 7; Thomas, here q. 3, a. 3, little-question 2; Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 3, a. 3, little-question 1; Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 6, q. 2.
6
Cfr. C. Ut ieiuni (6.) et C. Ut episcopi non nisi ieiuni (7.), de Consecrat. d. 5, ubi praecipitur, quod confirmandi sint ieiuni, et quod « traditionem Spiritus sancti a ieiunis Pontificibus convenit celebrari ».
Compare canon Ut ieiuni (6.) and canon Ut episcopi non nisi ieiuni (7.), On Consecration, d. 5, where it is prescribed that those to be confirmed should be fasting, and that « it is fitting that the handing-on of the Holy Spirit be celebrated by fasting Pontiffs ».
7
Vat. consuecerunt. Subinde pro Patribus cod. S possunt. Inferius pro confirmatus codd. F U confirmando.
The Vatican edition [reads] consuecerunt. Then for Patribus codex S [reads] possunt. Below, for confirmatus codices F U [read] confirmando.
8
Vide infra d. 42. a. 1. q. 1. — De ipso dubio cfr. Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 9. m. 5. a. 5. § 1. ad ult.; B. Albert., hic a. 8; S. Thom., hic circa lit.
See below, d. 42, a. 1, q. 1. — On the doubt itself compare Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 9, m. 5, a. 5, § 1, to the last; Albert the Great, here a. 8; Thomas, here on the text.
9
De poena contracta et acta cfr. tom. II. pag. 826, nota 4. Permulti codd. perperam aucta, cod. M ducta vel acta. — Idem dicit Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 9. m. 5. a. 7. § 1. — De ratione vide verba Rabani allegata hic in lit. Magistri, c. 4.
On contracted and acted penalty compare tom. II, page 826, note 4. Very many codices wrongly [read] aucta, codex M ducta vel acta. — Alexander of Hales says the same, Summa, p. IV, q. 9, m. 5, a. 7, § 1. — On the reason see the words of Rabanus cited here in the text of the Master, c. 4.
10
Cfr. supra a. 2. q. 1. seqq. — Praeter Alex. Hal. loc. cit. cfr. de hoc dubio B. Albert., hic a. 9; S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 1; Petr. a Tar., hic q. 3. a. 3. quaestiunc. 2; Richard. a Med., hic a. 6. q. 1.
Compare above, a. 2, q. 1 ff. — Besides Alexander of Hales, loc. cit., compare on this doubt Albert the Great, here a. 9; Thomas, here q. 2, a. 1; Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 3, a. 3, little-question 2; Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 6, q. 1.