|
Objection 1: It would seem that the vestments of the ministers are
not fittingly instituted in the Church. For the ministers of the New
Testament are more bound to chastity than were the ministers of the
Old Testament. Now among the vestments of the Old Testament there
were the breeches as a sign of chastity. Much more therefore should
they have a place among the vestments of the Church's ministers.
Objection 2: Further, the priesthood of the New Testament is more
worthy than the priesthood of the Old. But the priests of the Old
Testament had mitres, which are a sign of dignity. Therefore the
priests of the New Testament should also have them.
Objection 3: Further, the priest is nearer than the episcopal
Order to the Orders of ministers. Now the bishop uses the vestments
of the ministers, namely the dalmatic, which is the deacon's
vestment, and the tunic, which is the subdeacon's. Much more
therefore should simple priests use them.
Objection 4: Further, in the Old Law the pontiff wore the ephod
[Superhumerale, i.e. over-the-shoulders], which signified the
burden of the Gospel, as Bede observes (De Tabernac. iii). Now
this is especially incumbent on our pontiffs. Therefore they ought to
wear the ephod.
Objection 5: Further, "Doctrine and Truth" were inscribed on
the "rational" which the pontiffs of the Old Testament wore. Now
truth was made known especially in the New Law. Therefore it is
becoming to the pontiffs of the New Law.
Objection 6: Further, the golden plate on which was written the
most admirable name of God, was the most admirable of the adornments
of the Old Law. Therefore it should especially have been transferred
to the New Law.
Objection 7: Further, the things which the ministers of the Church
wear outwardly are signs of inward power. Now the archbishop has no
other kind of power than a bishop, as stated above (Article 6).
Therefore he should not have the pallium which other bishops have not.
Objection 8: Further, the fulness of power resides in the Roman
Pontiff. But he has not a crozier. Therefore other bishops should
not have one.
I answer that, The vestments of the ministers denote the
qualifications required of them for handling Divine things. And since
certain things are required of all, and some are required of the
higher, that are not so exacted of the lower ministers, therefore
certain vestments are common to all the ministers, while some pertain
to the higher ministers only. Accordingly it is becoming to all the
ministers to wear the "amice" which covers the shoulders, thereby
signifying courage in the exercise of the Divine offices to which they
are deputed; and the "alb," which signifies a pure life, and the
"girdle," which signifies restraint of the flesh. But the subdeacon
wears in addition the "maniple" on the left arm; this signifies the
wiping away of the least stains, since a maniple is a kind of
handkerchief for wiping the face; for they are the first to be admitted
to the handling of sacred things. They also have the "narrow
tunic," signifying the doctrine of Christ; wherefore in the Old
Law little bells hung therefrom, and subdeacons are the first admitted
to announce the doctrine of the New Law. The deacon has in addition
the "stole" over the left shoulder, as a sign that he is deputed to a
ministry in the sacraments themselves, and the "dalmatic" (which is
a full vestment, so called because it first came into use in
Dalmatia), to signify that he is the first to be appointed to
dispense the sacraments: for he dispenses the blood, and in dispensing
one should be generous.
But in the case of the priest the "stole" hangs from both shoulders,
to show that he has received full power to dispense the sacraments, and
not as the minister of another man, for which reason the stole reaches
right down. He also wears the "chasuble," which signifies charity,
because he it is who consecrates the sacrament of charity, namely the
Eucharist.
Bishops have nine ornaments besides those which the priest has; these
are the "stockings, sandals, succinctory, tunic, dalmatic, mitre,
gloves, ring, and crozier," because there are nine things which they
can, but priests cannot, do, namely ordain clerics, bless virgins,
consecrate bishops, impose hands, dedicate churches, depose clerics,
celebrate synods, consecrate chrism, bless vestments and vessels.
We may also say that the "stockings" signify his upright walk; the
"sandals" which cover the feet, his contempt of earthly things; the
"succinctory" which girds the stole with the alb, his love of
probity; the "tunic," perseverance, for Joseph is said (Gn.
37:23) to have had a long tunic---"talaric," because it
reached down to the ankles [talos], which denote the end of life;
the "dalmatic," generosity in works of mercy; the "gloves,"
prudence in action; the "mitre," knowledge of both Testaments, for
which reason it has two crests; the "crozier," his pastoral care,
whereby he has to gather together the wayward (this is denoted by the
curve at the head of the crozier), to uphold the weak (this is
denoted by the stem of the crozier), and to spur on the laggards
(this is denoted by the point at the foot of the crozier). Hence the
line:
"Gather, uphold, spur on
The wayward, the weak, and the laggard." The "ring" signifies
the sacraments of that faith whereby the Church is espoused to
Christ. For bishops are espoused to the Church in the place of
Christ. Furthermore archbishops have the "pallium" in sign of their
privileged power, for it signifies the golden chain which those who
fought rightfully were wont to receive.
Reply to Objection 1: The priests of the Old Law were enjoined
continency only for the time of their attendance for the purpose of
their ministry. Wherefore as a sign of the chastity which they had
then to observe, they wore the breeches while offering sacrifices.
But the ministers of the New Testament are enjoined perpetual
continency; and so the comparison fails.
Reply to Objection 2: The mitre was not a sign of dignity, for it
was a kind of hat, as Jerome says (Ep. ad Fabiol.). But the
diadem which was a sign of dignity was given to the pontiffs alone, as
the mitre is now.
Reply to Objection 3: The power of the ministers resides in the
bishop as their source, but not in the priest, for he does not confer
those Orders. Wherefore the bishop, rather than the priest, wears
those vestments.
Reply to Objection 4: Instead of the ephod, they wear the stole,
which is intended for the same signification as the ephod.
Reply to Objection 5: The pallium takes the place of the
"rational."
Reply to Objection 6: Instead of that plate our pontiff wears the
cross, as Innocent III says (De Myst. Miss. i), just as the
breeches are replaced by the sandals, the linen garment by the alb,
the belt by the girdle, the long or talaric garment by the tunic, the
ephod by the amice, the "rational" by the pallium, the diadem by the
mitre.
Reply to Objection 7: Although he has not another kind of power he
has the same power more fully. and so in order to designate this
perfection, he receives the pallium which surrounds him on all sides.
Reply to Objection 8: The Roman Pontiff does not use a pastoral
staff because Peter sent his to restore to life a certain disciple who
afterwards became bishop of Treves. Hence in the diocese of Treves
the Pope carries a crozier but not elsewhere; or else it is a sign of
his not having a restricted power denoted by the curve of the staff.
|
|