|
Objection 1: It would seem that one who is excommunicated or
suspended can excommunicate another. For such a one has lost neither
orders nor jurisdiction, since neither is he ordained anew when he is
absolved, nor is his jurisdiction renewed. But excommunication
requires nothing more than orders or jurisdiction. Therefore even one
who is excommunicated or suspended can excommunicate.
Objection 2: Further. it is a greater thing to consecrate the body
of Christ than to excommunicate. But such persons can consecrate.
Therefore they can excommunicate.
On the contrary, one whose body is bound cannot bind another. But
spiritual gyves are stronger than bodily fetters. Therefore one who is
excommunicated cannot excommunicate another, since excommunication is a
spiritual chain.
I answer that, Jurisdiction can only be used in relation to another
man. Consequently, since every excommunicated person is severed from
the communion of the faithful, he is deprived of the use of
jurisdiction. And as excommunication requires jurisdiction, an
excommunicated person cannot excommunicate, and the same reason applies
to one who is suspended from jurisdiction. For if he be suspended from
orders only, then he cannot exercise his order, but he can use his
jurisdiction, while, on the other hand, if he be suspended from
jurisdiction and not from orders. he cannot use his jurisdiction,
though he can exercise his order: and if he be suspended from both, he
can exercise neither.
Reply to Objection 1: Although an excommunicated or suspended
person does not lose his jurisdiction, yet he does lose its use.
Reply to Objection 2: The power of consecration results from the
power of the character which is indelible, wherefore, from the very
fact that a man has the character of order, he can always consecrate,
though not always lawfully. It is different with the power of
excommunication which results from jurisdiction, for this can be taken
away and bound.
|
|