Summa Theologica Part IV (Tertia Pars) Part 108

Objection 1: It seems that not G.o.d alone, but also the minister, works inwardly unto the sacramental effect. For the inward sacramental effect is to cleanse man from sin and enlighten him by grace. But it belongs to the ministers of the Church "to cleanse, enlighten and perfect," as Dionysius explains (Coel. Hier. v).

Therefore it seems that the sacramental effect is the work not only of G.o.d, but also of the ministers of the Church.

Obj. 2: Further, certain prayers are offered up in conferring the sacraments. But the prayers of the righteous are more acceptable to G.o.d than those of any other, according to John 9:31: "If a man be a server of G.o.d, and doth His will, him He heareth." Therefore it stems that a man obtains a greater sacramental effect if he receive it from a good minister. Consequently, the interior effect is partly the work of the minister and not of G.o.d alone.

Obj. 3: Further, man is of greater account than an inanimate thing.

But an inanimate thing contributes something to the interior effect: since "water touches the body and cleanses the soul," as Augustine says (Tract. lx.x.x in Joan.). Therefore the interior sacramental effect is partly the work of man and not of G.o.d alone.

_On the contrary,_ It is written (Rom. 8:33): "G.o.d that justifieth."

Since, then, the inward effect of all the sacraments is justification, it seems that G.o.d alone works the interior sacramental effect.

_I answer that,_ There are two ways of producing an effect; first, as a princ.i.p.al agent; secondly, as an instrument. In the former way the interior sacramental effect is the work of G.o.d alone: first, because G.o.d alone can enter the soul wherein the sacramental effect takes place; and no agent can operate immediately where it is not: secondly, because grace which is an interior sacramental effect is from G.o.d alone, as we have established in the Second Part (I-II, Q.

112, A. 1); while the character which is the interior effect of certain sacraments, is an instrumental power which flows from the princ.i.p.al agent, which is G.o.d. In the second way, however, the interior sacramental effect can be the work of man, in so far as he works as a minister. For a minister is of the nature of an instrument, since the action of both is applied to something extrinsic, while the interior effect is produced through the power of the princ.i.p.al agent, which is G.o.d.

Reply Obj. 1: Cleansing in so far as it is attributed to the ministers of the Church is not a was.h.i.+ng from sin: deacons are said to "cleanse," inasmuch as they remove the unclean from the body of the faithful, or prepare them by their pious admonitions for the reception of the sacraments. In like manner also priests are said to "enlighten" G.o.d's people, not indeed by giving them grace, but by conferring on them the sacraments of grace; as Dionysius explains (Coel. Hier. v).

Reply Obj. 2: The prayers which are said in giving the sacraments, are offered to G.o.d, not on the part of the individual, but on the part of the whole Church, whose prayers are acceptable to G.o.d, according to Matt. 18:19: "If two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning anything whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done to them by My Father." Nor is there any reason why the devotion of a just man should not contribute to this effect. But that which is the sacramental effect is not impetrated by the prayer of the Church or of the minister, but through the merit of Christ's Pa.s.sion, the power of which operates in the sacraments, as stated above (Q. 62, A. 5).

Wherefore the sacramental effect is made no better by a better minister. And yet something in addition may be impetrated for the receiver of the sacrament through the devotion of the minister: but this is not the work of the minister, but the work of G.o.d Who hears the minister's prayer.

Reply Obj. 3: Inanimate things do not produce the sacramental effect, except instrumentally, as stated above. In like manner neither do men produce the sacramental effect, except ministerially, as also stated above.

_______________________

SECOND ARTICLE [III, Q. 64, Art. 2]

Whether the Sacraments Are Inst.i.tuted by G.o.d Alone?

Objection 1: It seems that the sacraments are not inst.i.tuted by G.o.d alone. For those things which G.o.d has inst.i.tuted are delivered to us in Holy Scripture. But in the sacraments certain things are done which are nowhere mentioned in Holy Scripture; for instance, the chrism with which men are confirmed, the oil with which priests are anointed, and many others, both words and actions, which we employ in the sacraments. Therefore the sacraments were not inst.i.tuted by G.o.d alone.

Obj. 2: Further, a sacrament is a kind of sign. Now sensible things have their own natural signification. Nor can it be said that G.o.d takes pleasure in certain significations and not in others; because He approves of all that He made. Moreover, it seems to be peculiar to the demons to be enticed to something by means of signs; for Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xxi): "The demons are enticed ... by means of creatures, which were created not by them but by G.o.d, by various means of attraction according to their various natures, not as an animal is enticed by food, but as a spirit is drawn by a sign."

It seems, therefore, that there is no need for the sacraments to be inst.i.tuted by G.o.d.

Obj. 3: Further, the apostles were G.o.d's vicegerents on earth: hence the Apostle says (2 Cor. 2:10): "For what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned anything, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ," i.e. as though Christ Himself had pardoned. Therefore it seems that the apostles and their successors can inst.i.tute new sacraments.

_On the contrary,_ The inst.i.tutor of anything is he who gives it strength and power: as in the case of those who inst.i.tute laws. But the power of a sacrament is from G.o.d alone, as we have shown above (A. 1; Q. 62, A. 1). Therefore G.o.d alone can inst.i.tute a sacrament.

_I answer that,_ As appears from what has been said above (A. 1; Q.

62, A. 1), the sacraments are instrumental causes of spiritual effects. Now an instrument has its power from the princ.i.p.al agent.

But an agent in respect of a sacrament is twofold; viz. he who inst.i.tutes the sacraments, and he who makes use of the sacrament inst.i.tuted, by applying it for the production of the effect. Now the power of a sacrament cannot be from him who makes use of the sacrament: because he works but as a minister. Consequently, it follows that the power of the sacrament is from the inst.i.tutor of the sacrament. Since, therefore, the power of the sacrament is from G.o.d alone, it follows that G.o.d alone can inst.i.tute the sacraments.

Reply Obj. 1: Human inst.i.tutions observed in the sacraments are not essential to the sacrament; but belong to the solemnity which is added to the sacraments in order to arouse devotion and reverence in the recipients. But those things that are essential to the sacrament, are inst.i.tuted by Christ Himself, Who is G.o.d and man. And though they are not all handed down by the Scriptures, yet the Church holds them from the intimate tradition of the apostles, according to the saying of the Apostle (1 Cor. 11:34): "The rest I will set in order when I come."

Reply Obj. 2: From their very nature sensible things have a certain apt.i.tude for the signifying of spiritual effects: but this apt.i.tude is fixed by the Divine inst.i.tution to some special signification.

This is what Hugh of St. Victor means by saying (De Sacram. i) that "a sacrament owes its signification to its inst.i.tution." Yet G.o.d chooses certain things rather than others for sacramental signification, not as though His choice were restricted to them, but in order that their signification be more suitable to them.

Reply Obj. 3: The apostles and their successors are G.o.d's vicars in governing the Church which is built on faith and the sacraments of faith. Wherefore, just as they may not inst.i.tute another Church, so neither may they deliver another faith, nor inst.i.tute other sacraments: on the contrary, the Church is said to be built up with the sacraments "which flowed from the side of Christ while hanging on the Cross."

_______________________

THIRD ARTICLE [III, Q. 64, Art. 3]

Whether Christ As Man Had the Power of Producing the Inward Sacramental Effect?

Objection 1: It seems that Christ as man had the power of producing the interior sacramental effect. For John the Baptist said (John 1:33): "He, Who sent me to baptize in water, said to me: He upon Whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, He it is that baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." But to baptize with the Holy Ghost is to confer inwardly the grace of the Holy Ghost. And the Holy Ghost descended upon Christ as man, not as G.o.d: for thus He Himself gives the Holy Ghost. Therefore it seems that Christ, as man, had the power of producing the inward sacramental effect.

Obj. 2: Further, our Lord said (Matt. 9:6): "That you may know that the Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins." But forgiveness of sins is an inward sacramental effect. Therefore it seems that Christ as man produces the inward sacramental effect.

Obj. 3: Further, the inst.i.tution of the sacraments belongs to him who acts as princ.i.p.al agent in producing the inward sacramental effect.

Now it is clear that Christ inst.i.tuted the sacraments. Therefore it is He that produces the inward sacramental effect.

Obj. 4: Further, no one can confer the sacramental effect without conferring the sacrament, except he produce the sacramental effect by his own power. But Christ conferred the sacramental effect without conferring the sacrament; as in the case of Magdalen to whom He said: "Thy sins are forgiven Thee" (Luke 7:48). Therefore it seems that Christ, as man, produces the inward sacramental effect.

Obj. 5: Further, the princ.i.p.al agent in causing the inward effect is that in virtue of which the sacrament operates. But the sacraments derive their power from Christ's Pa.s.sion and through the invocation of His Name; according to 1 Cor. 1:13: "Was Paul then crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" Therefore Christ, as man, produces the inward sacramental effect.

_On the contrary,_ Augustine (Isidore, Etym. vi) says: "The Divine power in the sacraments works inwardly in producing their salutary effect." Now the Divine power is Christ's as G.o.d, not as man.

Therefore Christ produces the inward sacramental effect, not as man but as G.o.d.

_I answer that,_ Christ produces the inward sacramental effect, both as G.o.d and as man, but not in the same way. For, as G.o.d, He works in the sacraments by authority: but, as man, His operation conduces to the inward sacramental effects meritoriously and efficiently, but instrumentally. For it has been stated (Q. 48, AA. 1, 6; Q. 49, A. 1) that Christ's Pa.s.sion which belongs to Him in respect of His human nature, is the cause of justification, both meritoriously and efficiently, not as the princ.i.p.al cause thereof, or by His own authority, but as an instrument, in so far as His humanity is the instrument of His G.o.dhead, as stated above (Q. 13, AA. 2, 3; Q. 19, A. 1).

Nevertheless, since it is an instrument united to the G.o.dhead in unity of Person, it has a certain heads.h.i.+p and efficiency in regard to extrinsic instruments, which are the ministers of the Church and the sacraments themselves, as has been explained above (A. 1).

Consequently, just as Christ, as G.o.d, has power of _authority_ over the sacraments, so, as man, He has the power of ministry in chief, or power of _excellence._ And this consists in four things. First in this, that the merit and power of His Pa.s.sion operates in the sacraments, as stated above (Q. 62, A. 5). And because the power of the Pa.s.sion is communicated to us by faith, according to Rom. 3:25: "Whom G.o.d hath proposed to be a propitiation through faith in His blood," which faith we proclaim by calling on the name of Christ: therefore, secondly, Christ's power of excellence over the sacraments consists in this, that they are sanctified by the invocation of His name. And because the sacraments derive their power from their inst.i.tution, hence, thirdly, the excellence of Christ's power consists in this, that He, Who gave them their power, could inst.i.tute the sacraments. And since cause does not depend on effect, but rather conversely, it belongs to the excellence of Christ's power, that He could bestow the sacramental effect without conferring the exterior sacrament. Thus it is clear how to solve the objections; for the arguments on either side are true to a certain extent, as explained above.

_______________________

FOURTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 64, Art. 4]

Whether Christ Could Communicate to Ministers the Power Which He Had in the Sacraments?

Objection 1: It seems that Christ could not communicate to ministers the power which He had in the sacraments. For as Augustine argues against Maximin, "if He could, but would not, He was jealous of His power." But jealousy was far from Christ Who had the fulness of charity. Since, therefore, Christ did not communicate His power to ministers, it seems that He could not.

Obj. 2: Further, on John 14:12: "Greater than these shall he do,"

Augustine says (Tract. lxxii): "I affirm this to be altogether greater," namely, for a man from being unG.o.dly to be made righteous, "than to create heaven and earth." But Christ could not communicate to His disciples the power of creating heaven and earth: neither, therefore, could He give them the power of making the unG.o.dly to be righteous. Since, therefore, the justification of the unG.o.dly is effected by the power that Christ has in the sacraments, it seems that He could not communicate that power to ministers.

Obj. 3: Further, it belongs to Christ as Head of the Church that grace should flow from Him to others, according to John 1:16: "Of His fulness we all have received." But this could not be communicated to others; since then the Church would be deformed, having many heads.

Therefore it seems that Christ could not communicate His power to ministers.

_On the contrary,_ on John 1:31: "I knew Him not," Augustine says (Tract. v) that "he did not know that our Lord having the authority of baptizing ... would keep it to Himself." But John would not have been in ignorance of this, if such a power were incommunicable.

Therefore Christ could communicate His power to ministers.

_I answer that,_ As stated above (A. 3), Christ had a twofold power in the sacraments. One was the power of _authority,_ which belongs to Him as G.o.d: and this power He could not communicate to any creature; just as neither could He communicate the Divine Essence. The other was the power of _excellence,_ which belongs to Him as man. This power He could communicate to ministers; namely, by giving them such a fulness of grace--that their merits would conduce to the sacramental effect--that by the invocation of their names, the sacraments would be sanctified--and that they themselves might inst.i.tute sacraments, and by their mere will confer the sacramental effect without observing the sacramental rite. For a united instrument, the more powerful it is, is all the more able to lend its power to the separated instrument; as the hand can to a stick.

Reply Obj. 1: It was not through jealousy that Christ refrained from communicating to ministers His power of excellence, but for the good of the faithful; lest they should put their trust in men, and lest there should be various kinds of sacraments, giving rise to division in the Church; as may be seen in those who said: "I am of Paul, I am of Apollo, and I of Cephas" (1 Cor. 1:12).

Reply Obj. 2: This objection is true of the power of authority, which belongs to Christ as G.o.d. At the same time the power of excellence can be called authority in comparison to other ministers. Whence on 1 Cor. 1:13: "Is Christ divided?" the gloss says that "He could give power of authority in baptizing, to those to whom He gave the power of administering it."

Reply Obj. 3: It was in order to avoid the incongruity of many heads in the Church, that Christ was unwilling to communicate to ministers His power of excellence. If, however, He had done so, He would have been Head in chief; the others in subjection to Him.

_______________________

FIFTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 64, Art. 5]

Whether the Sacraments Can Be Conferred by Evil Ministers?

Objection 1: It seems that the sacraments cannot be conferred by evil ministers. For the sacraments of the New Law are ordained for the purpose of cleansing from sin and for the bestowal of grace. Now evil men, being themselves unclean, cannot cleanse others from sin, according to Ecclus. 34:4: "Who [Vulg.: 'What'] can be made clean by the unclean?" Moreover, since they have not grace, it seems that they cannot give grace, for "no one gives what he has not." It seems, therefore, that the sacraments cannot be conferred by wicked men.