Page images

$ 200.


(Sacramentum Ordinis.)

This sacrament is intimately connected with the doctrine of the Church, and with the distinction made between thelaity and the clergy. It is that sacrament by which men are fitted to administer the other sacraments. Accordingly, its essence lies in the ecclesiastical power which it communicates.' None but bishops can ordain,' and only baptised and grown-up males can receive ordination. Theologians differed in their opinions respecting the validity of ordination by heretical bishops. Further regulations (concerning ordines majores et minores, etc.) belong to the canon law. This sacrament has a character indelebilis.'

Thomas Aquinas, Pars iii., Supplem. Qu. 34, Art. 3: Propter Ordinem fit homo dispensator aliorum sacramentorum, ergo Ordo habet magis rationem, quod sit sacramentum, quam alia.—Raimund of Sabunde says, that the administrators to the sacraments stand in the same relation to the sacred acts in which parents stand to the act of generation. They dispense the external signs, God effects the inward grace; as parents beget the body, but God creates the soul (the creatianist view); see Matzke, Raimund von Sabunde, p. 101.

* The statements are very vacillating as to what really constitutes the material (in distinction from the formal) part of ordination. As regards the external sign of ordination, there was a considerable difference of opinion. The earlier Church regarded the laying on of hands (Xelpotovía) as having a higher, a magical virtue, while the later theologians attached no great importance to it; comp. Klee, ii. pp. 280, 281. [Klee, loc. cit., says: The ancient church, in accordance with the Scriptures, made the laying on of hands to be the matter of the ordination ; by this is effected the elevation and consecration to the episcopate, the presbyterate and the diaconate. Anointing is also very early mentioned in the inauguration of bishops and priests (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. x. 4; Greg. Naz. Orat. IV.; Greg. Nyss. Virg. cap. xxiv.; Leo, often); and the laying the Gospels on the head, at the ordination of bishops (Hippolytus, De Chrism. cap. 1: Chrysost. Homil. quod Veteris Test. Unus Legislator, in Photii Cod. cclxxvii.)] The consecrated oil also was only occasionally mentioned. Thomas Aquinas, l. c. Art. 5, candidly avowed, that while the efficacy of the other sacraments consisted in the matter, quod divinam virtutem et significat et continet, it depended, in the present case, on the person who administered the sacrament, and that it was transmitted by him to the person to be ordained. Therefore, in his view, the act of ordination is the material,—not the symbols, which are used at its administration. Nevertheless, it is said in the Decret. Eugenii IV. in Conc. Florent. a. 1439, I. c. col. 1058 : Sextum Sacramentum est

[ocr errors]

Ordinis, cujus materia est illud, per cujus traditionem confertur Ordo : sicut Presbyteratus traditur per calicis cum vino et patenæ cum pane porrec tionem; Diaconatus vero per libri Evangeliorum dationem; Subdiaconatus vero per calicis vacui cum patena vacua superposita traditionem, et similiter de aliis per rerum ad ministeria sua pertinentium assignationem. Forma sacerdotii talis est: Accipe potestatem offerendi sacrificium in ecclesia pro vivis et mortuis, in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti. Et sic de aliorum ordinum formis, prout in pontificali remano late continetur. Compare also Peter Lombard, Lib. iv. Dist. 24. He calls (Lit. B.) the tonsure (corona) the signaculum, quo signantur in partem sortis ministerii divini... Denudatio capitis est revelatio mentis (God grant it!]. Clericus enim secretorum Dei non ignarus esse debet. Tondentur etiam capilli usque ad revelationem sensuum, scilicet oculorum et aurium, ut vitia in corde et opere pullulantia doceantur præcidenda, ne ad audiendum et intelligendum verbum Dei præpediatur mens, pro quo servato reddetur in excelsis corona.

* Decret. Eug. IV. loc. cit. : Ordinarius minister hujus sacramenti est Episcopus. Comp. Thom. Aqu., Qu. 38, Art. 1.

• This is self-evident. Concerning the age at which persons may be ordained, the following regulations were made : ut Subdiaconus non ordinetur ante quatuordecim annos, nec Diaconus ante viginti quinque, nec Presbyter ante triginta. Deinde, si dignus fuerit, ad episcopatum eligi potest; see Peter Lombard, loc. cit. lit. I. The priests were to be thirty years old, because Christ (according to Luke iii.) commenced bis public ministry at the age of thirty years.

* The views of Peter Lombard on this point were still unsettled, Sent. iv. Dist. 25, De ordinatis ab hæreticis. Thomas Aquinas P. iii., in Supplem. Dist. 38, Art. 2, gave it as his final opinion, quod (hæretici) vera sacramenta conferunt, sed cum eis gratiam non dant, non propter inefficaciam sacramentorum, sed propter peccata recipientium ab eis sacramenta contra prohibitionem ecclesiæ. As the present question was analogous to that concerning the baptism of heretics, it was to be decided on the same principles; see Auxilius, quoted by Klee, ii. p. 282. [Si enim non perdit baptizatus baptismum, etiam eliminatus ab ecclesia, quo facto perdit sacratus licet excommunicatus sacramentum suæ impositionis posse nisi ad tempus obtemperando priori, ut paulo post absolutus iterum fungatur officio, sicut et baptizatus ecclesiæ ingressum ? Est igitur posse, sed non in actu. Auxilius, Libell. super Caus. et Negot. Formosi Papæ.]

Peter Lombard, loc. cit. The seven classes of Holy Orders are enumerated in the following succession, commencing with the lowest : Ostiarii, Lectores, Exorcistæ, Acoluthi—Subdiaconi, Diaconi, Presbyteri.

Thomas Aquinas, Qu. 25,. Art. 2, Qu. 37, Art. 5, quoted by Münscher, edit. by von Cölln, p. 303. [To the objection, that the character conferred was not indelible, because the person could return to the laity, Aquinas replied : Quantumcunque homo ad laicatum se transferat, semper tamen manet in eo character, Quod patet ex hoc quod, si ad clericatum revertatur, non iterum Ordinem quem habuerat suscipit.]


§ 201.


(Sacramentum matrimonii conjugii.)

One of the strange contradictions found in the general views of the Catholic Church during the middle ages, was, that, while on the one hand single life was thought to be a special virtue, on the other hand matrimony was numbered among the sacraments.' Much ingenuity was indeed required to show the true signs of a sacrament in matrimony in the concrete, as they were specified by the Church itself in the abstract. In the absence of a visible material element matrimony itself was regarded as a type of the union of Christ with the Church (according to Eph. v. 32), and the word uvotýplov, translated sacramentum, as the Vulgate has it.' That it was a divine institution was more easily shown ; in fact, as regards an

1; tiquity, matrimony occupied the first place among the sacraments, since it was instituted in Paradise. Though it has not a character indelebilis, it is indissoluble as a sacrament, even where bodily separation may have taken place. Further regulations concerning conjugal duties, prohibited relationships, etc., belong partly to the canon law, partly to ethics. According to the laws of the Western Church, the two sacraments of matrimony and of holy orders so exclude each other, that he who receives the one must, as a general rule, renounce the other.

· Peter Lombard, loc. cit. Dist. xxvi. F. Thomas Aquinas, Qu. 53, Art. 3. -Some scholastics, however, restricted the idea of sacrament; thus Durandus, Sent. iv. Dist. 26, Qu. 3. No. 8, quoted by Klee, Dogmengesch. ii. p. 302, (Cramer, vii. p. 807): Quod matrimonium non est sacramentum stricte et proprie dictum, sicut alia sacramenta novæ legis. On the opinions of Abelard and Peter John Oliva, see ibidem.-[Abelard, Theol. Christ. cap. xxxi. : Quod (conjugium) quidem sacramentum est, sed non confert aliquod donum, sicut cætera faciunt, sed tamen mali remedium est, datur enim propter incontinentiam refrænandam, unde magis ad indulgentiam. Peter Oliva held the same view, but retracted.]—That which constitutes tho sacrament of matrimony is not the performance of the ceremony by the priest, but the consensus of husband and wife. Peter Lombard, Dist. xxvii. C. Respecting particular decrees of popes and councils, see Klee, ii. p. 305. [The scholastics generally held, that the will of the contracting parties constitutes the marriage; they complete the sacrament; secret marriages, though forbidden, are valid. In none of the ancient rituals is there a sacramental form of marriage to be spoken by the priests.]

Peter Lombard, loc. cit. ... Ut enim inter conjuges conjunctio est secundum consensum animorum, et secundum permixtionem corporum : sic

[ocr errors]

Ecclesia Christo copulatur voluntate et natura, qua idem vult cum eo et ipse formam sumsit de natura hominis. Copulata est ergo sponsa sponso spiri. tualiter et corporaliter, i.e. charitate ac conformitate naturæ. Hujus utriusque copulæ figura est in conjugio. Consensus enim conjugum copulam spiritualem Christi et ecclesiæ, quæ fit per charitatem, significat. Commixtio vero sexuum illam significat, quæ fit per naturæ conformitatem.-Eugen. IV. in Conc. Florent. loc. cit. col. 1058, s. : Septimum est sacramentum Matrimonii, quod est signum conjunctionis Christi et Ecclesiæ secundum Apostolum dicentem (Eph. v. 31): Sacramentum hoc, etc.

Compare above $ 190, note 1. A distinction, however, should be made - viz. prior to the fall matrimony was instituted, ad officium, posterior to it, ad remedium (propter illicitum motum devitandum); see Peter Lombard, loc. cit. Dist. xvi. B. Thomas Aquinas, Qu. 42, Art. 2, Conclus.

Peter Lombard, loc. cit. Dist. xxxi. lit. B.: Separatio autem gemina est, corporalis scilicet et sacramentalis. Corporaliter possunt separari causa fornicationis, vel ex communi consensu causa religionis, sive ad tempus sive usque in finem. Sacramentaliter vero separari non possunt dum vivunt, si legitimæ personæ sint. Manet enim vinculum conjugale inter eos, etiamsi aliis a se discedentes adhæserint.–Eugen. IV. in Conc. Florent. I. c.: Quamvis autem ex causa fornicationis liceat tori divisionem facere, non tamen aliud matrimonium contrahere fas est, cum matrimonii vinculum legitime contracti perpetuum sit.—The notions of the Greeks concerning the indis solubility of matrimony were less rigid; the Nestorians alone form an exception; see Klee, ii. pp. 297, 298. [Assemanus, Diss. de Nestorian. in Bib. Orient. Tom. iii. Pars, iii. p. 326.]

* The theologians of the time treated of all those regulations in their works on dogmatic theology. Peter Lombard had set them an example, Comp. Dist. xxiv.-xliii.—Many definitions of Peter Lombard, Bonaventura, and others, do not at all involve the idea of sacrament; such as, that matrimony is conjunctio legitima maris et fæminæ, individuam vitæ consuetudinem retinens, etc. The same may be said with regard to their statements, that the design of matrimony is the propagation of the human race, to be a safeguard against sin, etc.

* Thomas Aquinas, Qu. 53, Art. 3 : Ordo sacer de sui ratione habet ex quadam congruentia, quod matrimonium impediri debeat, quia in sacris Ordinibus constituti sacra vasa et sacramenta tractant, et ideo decens est ut munditiam corporalem per continentiam servent. Sed quod impediat matrimonium ex constitutione ecclesiæ habet. Tamen aliter apud Latinos, quam apud Græcos. Quia apud Græcos impedit matrimonium contrahendum solum ex vi Ordinis, sed apud Latinos impedit ex vi Ordinis et ulterius ex voto continentiæ, quod est Ordinibus sacris annexum : quod etiamsi quis verbotenus non emittat, ex hoc ipso tamen, quod Ordinem suscipit secundum ritum occidentalis ecclesiæ, intelligitur emisisse. Et ideo apud Græcos et alios Orientales sacer Ordo impedit matrimonium contrahendum, non tamen matrimonii prius contracti usum : possunt enim matrimonio prius contracto uti, quamvis non possunt matrimonium denuo contrahere. Sed apud occidentalem ecclesiam impedit matrimonium et matrimonii usum, nisi forte ignorante ant contradicente uxore vir Ordinem sacrum susceperit, quia ex hoc non potest ei aliquod præjudicium generari. The priests, on the one hand, are excluded from the sacrament of matrimony, nor are the laity, on the other, under any necessity of observing it. Therefore matrimony is neither a sacramentum necessitatis, as baptism, penance, and the Lord's Supper, nor a sacramentum dignitatis, as Holy Orders, but a sacramentum consilii. Alanus ab Insulus in his Expositio (quoted by Klee, ii. p. 304, note.)

Protestant writers on the history of doctrines can not be expected to investigate fully the history of each separate sacrament. But this much appears to be certain, that it is exceedingly difficult, in the case of most of the so-called sacraments, to prove that they are founded upon a definite idea of sacrament, according to the canon established by the Church itself. In the case of some (such as penance, the ordination of priests, and matrimony) we have no visible element, properly speaking, which might be regarded as sacræ rei signum (as the bread and wipe in the Lord's Supper, or the water of baptism, or the xpīoua), unless we transpose the whole thing, and convert into the symbol that which is properly the res sacramenti. In the case of others, the divina institutio is either altogether wanting (e. g., in the case of confirmation), or it can only be demonstrated by that sort of interpretation by which we may prove anything (thus in the case of extreme unction). But as these theologians were accustomed to regard the external element in the Lord's Supper as mere accidens, and thus destroyed its originally symbolical character, they did not think it necessary to be very precise in the case of other sacraments. And as for the divina institutio, they were to appeal not only to Scrip. ture, but also to tradition.

« PreviousContinue »