|
Objection 1: It would seem that not only a bishop confers the
sacrament of Order. For the imposition of hands has something to do
with the consecration. Now not only the bishop but also the assisting
priests lay hands on the priests who are being ordained. Therefore not
only a bishop confers the sacrament of Order.
Objection 2: Further, a man receives the power of Order, when
that which pertains to the act of his Order is handed to him. Now the
cruet with water, bowl and towel, are given to the subdeacon by the
archdeacon; as also the candlestick with candle, and the empty cruet
to the acolyte. Therefore not only the bishop confers the sacrament of
Order.
Objection 3: Further, that which belongs to an Order cannot be
entrusted to one who has not the Order. Now the conferring of minor
Orders is entrusted to certain persons who are not bishops, for
instance to Cardinal priests. Therefore the conferring of Orders
does not belong to the episcopal Order.
Objection 4: Further, whoever is entrusted with the principal is
entrusted with the accessory also. Now the sacrament of Order is
directed to the Eucharist, as accessory to principal. Since then a
priest consecrates the Eucharist, he can also confer Orders.
Objection 5: Further, there is a greater distinction between a
priest and a deacon than between bishop and bishop. But a bishop can
consecrate a bishop. Therefore a priest can ordain a deacon.
On the contrary, Ministers are applied by their Orders to the
Divine worship in a more noble way than the sacred vessels. But the
consecration of the vessels belongs to a bishop only. Much more
therefore does the consecration of ministers.
Further, the sacrament of Order ranks higher than the sacrament of
Confirmation. Now a bishop alone confirms. Much more therefore does
a bishop alone confer the sacrament of Order.
Further, virgins are not placed in a degree of spiritual power by
their consecration, as the ordained are. Yet a bishop alone can
consecrate a virgin. Therefore much more can he alone ordain.
I answer that, The episcopal power stands in the same relation to the
power of the lower Orders, as political science, which seeks the
common good, to the lower acts and virtues which seek some special
good, as appears from what was said above (Question 37, Article
1). Now political science, as stated in Ethic. i, 2, lays down
the law to lower sciences, namely what science each one ought to
cultivate, and how far he should pursue it and in what way. Wherefore
it belongs to a bishop to assign others to places in all the Divine
services. Hence he alone confirms, because those who are confirmed
receive the office, as it were, of confessing the faith; again he
alone blesses virgins who are images of the Church, Christ's
spouse, the care of which is entrusted chiefly to him; and he it is
who consecrates the candidates for ordination to the ministry of
Orders, and, by his consecration, appoints the vessels that they are
to use; even as secular offices in various cities are allotted by him
who holds the highest power, for instance by the king.
Reply to Objection 1: As stated above (Question 37, Article
5), at the imposition of hands there is given, not the character of
the priestly Order, but grace which makes a man fit to exercise his
Order. And since those who are raised to the priesthood need most
copious grace, the priests together with the bishop lay hands on them,
but the bishop alone lays hands on deacons.
Reply to Objection 2: Since the archdeacon is as it were
minister-in-chief, all things pertaining to the ministry are handed
by him, for instance the candle with which the acolyte serves the
deacon by carrying it before him at the Gospel, and the cruet with
which he serves the subdeacon; and in like manner he gives the
subdeacon the things with which the latter serves the higher Orders.
And yet the principal act of the subdeacon does not consist in these
things, but in his co-operation as regards the matter of the
sacrament; wherefore he receives the character through the chalice
being handed to him by the bishop. On the other hand, the acolyte
receives the character by virtue of the words of the bishop when the
aforesaid things---the cruet rather than the candlestick---are
handed to him by the archdeacon. Hence it does not follow that the
archdeacon ordains.
Reply to Objection 3: The Pope, who has the fulness of episcopal
power, can entrust one who is not a bishop with things pertaining to
the episcopal dignity, provided they bear no immediate relation to the
true body of Christ. Hence by virtue of his commission a simple
priest can confer the minor Orders and confirm; but not one who is not
a priest. Nor can a priest confer the higher Orders which bear an
immediate relation to Christ's body, over the consecration of which
the Pope's power is no greater than that of a simple priest.
Reply to Objection 4: Although the Eucharist is in itself the
greatest of the sacraments, it does not place a man in an office as
does the sacrament of Order. Hence the comparison fails.
Reply to Objection 5: In order to bestow what one has on another,
it is necessary not only to be near him but also to have fulness of
power. And since a priest has not fulness of power in the hierarchical
offices, as a bishop has, it does not follow that he can raise others
to the diaconate, although the latter Order is near to his.
|
|