|
Objection 1: It would seem that the power of the keys extends to the
remission of guilt. For it was said to the disciples (Jn.
20:23): "Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven
them." Now this was not said in reference to the declaration only,
as the Master states (Sent. iv, D, 18), for in that case the
priest of the New Testament would have no more power than the priest
of the Old Testament. Therefore he exercises a power over the
remission of the guilt.
Objection 2: Further, in Penance grace is given for the remission
of sin. Now the priest is the dispenser of this sacrament by virtue of
the keys. Therefore, since grace is opposed to sin, not on the part
of the punishment, but on the part of the guilt, it seems that the
priest operates unto the remission of sin by virtue of the keys.
Objection 3: Further, the priest receives more power by his
consecration than the baptismal water by its sanctification. Now the
baptismal water receives the power "to touch the body and cleanse the
heart," as Augustine says (Tract. lxxx in Joan.). Much more,
therefore, does the priest, in his consecration, receive the power to
cleanse the heart from the stain of sin.
On the contrary, The Master stated above (Sent. iv, D, 18)
that God has not bestowed on the minister the power to co-operate with
Him in the inward cleansing. Now if he remitted sins as to the
guilt, he would co-operate with God in the inward cleansing.
Therefore the power of the keys does not extend to the remission of
guilt.
Further, sin is not remitted save by the Holy Ghost. But no man
has the power to give the Holy Ghost, as the Master said above
(Sent. i, D, 14). Neither therefore can he remit sins as to
their guilt.
I answer that, According to Hugh (De Sacram. ii), "the
sacraments, by virtue of their sanctification, contain an invisible
grace." Now this sanctification is sometimes essential to the
sacrament both as regards the matter and as regards the minister, as
may be seen in Confirmation, and then the sacramental virtue is in
both together. Sometimes, however, the essence of the sacrament
requires only sanctification of the matter, as in Baptism, which has
no fixed minister on whom it depends necessarily, and then the whole
virtue of the sacrament is in the matter. Again, sometimes the
essence of the sacrament requires the consecration or sanctification of
the minister without any sanctification of the matter, and then the
entire sacramental virtue is in the minister, as in Penance. Hence
the power of the keys which is in the priest, stands in the same
relation to the effect of Penance, as the virtue in the baptismal
water does to the effect of Baptism. Now Baptism and the sacrament
of Penance agree somewhat in their effect, since each is directly
ordained against guilt, which is not the case in the other sacraments:
yet they differ in this, that the sacrament of Penance, since the
acts of the recipient are as its matter, cannot be given save to
adults, who need to be disposed for the reception of the sacramental
effect; whereas Baptism is given, sometimes to adults, sometimes to
children and others who lack the use of reason, so that by Baptism
children receive grace and remission of sin without any previous
disposition, while adults do not, for they require to be disposed by
the removal of insincerity. This disposition sometimes precedes their
Baptism by priority of time, being sufficient for the reception of
grace, before they are actually baptized, but not before they have
come to the knowledge of the truth and have conceived the desire for
Baptism. At other times this disposition does not precede the
reception of Baptism by a priority of time, but is simultaneous with
it, and then the grace of the remission of guilt is bestowed through
the reception of Baptism. On the other hand, grace is never given
through the sacrament of Penance unless the recipient be disposed
either simultaneously or before. Hence the power of the keys operates
unto the remission of guilt, either through being desired or through
being actually exercised, even as the waters of Baptism. But just as
Baptism acts, not as a principal agent but as an instrument, and does
not go so far as to cause the reception itself of grace, even
instrumentally, but merely disposes the recipient to the grace whereby
his guilt is remitted, so is it with the power of the keys. Wherefore
God alone directly remits guilt, and Baptism acts through His power
instrumentally, as an inanimate instrument, and the priest as an
animate instrument, such as a servant is, according to the
Philosopher (Ethic. viii, 11): and consequently the priest acts
as a minister. Hence it is clear that the power of the keys is
ordained, in a manner, to the remission of guilt, not as causing that
remission, but as disposing thereto. Consequently if a man, before
receiving absolution, were not perfectly disposed for the reception of
grace, he would receive grace at the very time of sacramental
confession and absolution, provided he offered no obstacle. For if
the key were in no way ordained to the remission of guilt, but only to
the remission of punishment, as some hold, it would not be necessary
to have a desire of receiving the effect of the keys in order to have
one's sins forgiven, just as it is not necessary to have a desire of
receiving the other sacraments which are ordained, not to the remission
of guilt, but against punishment. But this enables us to see that it
is not ordained unto the remission of guilt, because the use of the
keys, in order to be effective, always requires a disposition on the
part of the recipient of the sacrament. And the same would apply to
Baptism, were it never given save to adults.
Reply to Objection 1: As the Master says in the text (Sent.
iv, D, 18), the power of forgiving sins was entrusted to
priests, not that they may forgive them, by their own power, for this
belongs to God, but that, as ministers, they may declare the
operation of God Who forgives. Now this happens in three ways.
First, by a declaration, not of present, but of future forgiveness,
without co-operating therein in any way: and thus the sacraments of
the Old Law signified the Divine operation, so that the priest of
the Old Law did but declare and did not operate the forgiveness of
sins. Secondly, by a declaration of present forgiveness without
co-operating in it at all: and thus some say that the sacraments of
the New Law signify the bestowal of grace, which God gives when the
sacraments are conferred, without the sacraments containing any power
productive of grace, according to which opinion, even the power of the
keys would merely declare the Divine operation that has its effect in
the remission of guilt when the sacrament is conferred. Thirdly, by
signifying the Divine operation causing then and there the remission of
guilt, and by co-operating towards this effect dispositively and
instrumentally: and then, according to another and more common
opinion, the sacraments of the New Law declare the cleansing effected
by God. In this way also the priest of the New Testament declares
the recipient to be absolved from guilt, because in speaking of the
sacraments, what is ascribed to the power of the ministers must be
consistent with the sacrament. Nor is it unreasonable that the keys of
the Church should dispose the penitent to the remission of his guilt,
from the fact that the guilt is already remitted, even as neither is it
unreasonable that Baptism, considered in itself, causes a disposition
in one who is already sanctified.
Reply to Objection 2: Neither the sacrament of Penance, nor the
sacrament of Baptism, by its operation, causes grace, or the
remission of guilt, directly, but only dispositively. Hence the
Reply to the Third Objection is evident.
The other arguments show that the power of the keys does not effect the
remission of guilt directly, and this is to be granted.
|
|