Commentaria in Summam contra Gentiles, Liber IV

Having shown that the sacrament of Order is fittingly instituted in the Church, St. Thomas consequently determines concerning the distinction of orders¹.

Concerning this, however, he does two things: first, he determines concerning the sacred orders themselves; second, concerning the episcopal power by which the orders themselves are dispensed, in the following chapter.

I. As to the first, he lays down two conclusions. The first is: There must be in the Church a priestly order, and other orders of those ministering to it. The first part is proved. The power of order is principally ordered to consecrating the body of Christ and dispensing it to the faithful, and to cleansing the faithful from sins. Therefore there must be some principal order whose power extends principally to this, which is the priestly order.

The second part, however, is proved, because a power which is ordered to some principal effect is naturally suited to have lower powers serving it beneath itself. This is declared in the arts.

II. The second conclusion is: The orders of the ministers, both the lowest and the higher ones, are fittingly instituted. It is declared. For since priestly power extends to the consecration of the body of Christ, and to rendering the faithful fit through absolution from sins for the reception of the Eucharist, it is necessary that the lower orders serve it either in both, or in only one of the two; and one among the lower orders is the higher in proportion as he serves the priestly order in more things, or in something more worthy. The lowest ones, therefore, serve it only in the preparation of the people: the Porters, namely, by keeping the unfaithful away from the assembly of the faithful; the Readers, by instructing the catechumens, that is, those who are instructed in the rudiments of the faith; the Exorcists, that is, adjurers, by purging those who have already been instructed, if they are hindered in some way by a demon from the reception of the sacraments². — The higher ones, however, serve it both in the preparation of the people and for the consummation of the sacrament. The Acolytes, indeed, have a ministry over the non-sacred vessels, in which the matter of the sacrament is prepared; the Subdeacons, over the sacred vessels, and over the disposition of the matter not yet consecrated; the Deacons, however, over the matter already consecrated, inasmuch as they dispense the blood of Christ to the faithful. From these things it is inferred that the order of priests, deacons and subdeacons are called sacred orders: because, namely, they receive a ministry concerning sacred things. — It is also added that the higher orders serve the priestly order also in the preparation of the people. A sign of this is that the evangelical doctrine is entrusted to deacons, the apostolic to subdeacons, and to acolytes that they exhibit, concerning each, what pertains to the solemnity of the doctrine, namely that they carry lights and administer other things of this kind.

III. Note first, according to the doctrine of St. Thomas in Quarto, d. XXIV, q. II³, that this division of orders is not a division of some integral or universal whole, but is a division of a potestative whole, whose nature is that the whole according to its complete ratio is in one, while in the others there is some participation of it. For here too the whole fullness of Order is in the priesthood; in the others, however, there is a certain participation of Order.

But this is not to be understood as if the ratio and name of the sacrament of Order did not belong to the lower orders, but only a certain participation of it; but because the perfect power of Order is in the priesthood alone, inasmuch as it contains virtually every power, even that pertaining to the lower orders; in the other, lower orders, however, there is not the whole and perfect power of order, but a certain part of it.

2. Note second, that an order can be called sacred in two ways. In one way, in itself: and thus every order is sacred, since it is a sacrament. In another way, by reason of the matter about which it has some act: and thus it has been said that only three orders are sacred.

The other things which pertain to this matter, St. Thomas very copiously declares in the place cited above⁴.

IV. But concerning the aforesaid, certain doubts arise, touched upon by Durandus⁵. The first is, because it seems that those things which are called the lower orders should not be counted among the sacraments. For when many actions are ordered to one spiritual effect, so that one attains it while the others only dispose; that one alone which principally attains it is a sacrament, the rest, however, are only sacramentals, as is clear concerning catechism and exorcism with respect to the baptismal washing: but it is so in these actions of the orders. Therefore, etc.

2. The second is, because it does not seem that any of those can be called the sacrament of Order. For, as was said above⁶, the power of Order, as it is a sacrament, is for confecting or conferring sacraments. But in the lower orders no such power is conferred, as is clear. Therefore, etc.

It is confirmed. Because in them there is not conferred to the one ordained a power by which he can do something which he could not do before, as happens in the conferral of the priesthood: but only one by which he can licitly do what was not licit before.

3. To the first of these it is said first, that certainly each one of those things which were previously enumerated is a sacrament, although it is imperfect in comparison to the order of the priesthood, to which it is ordered.

It is said second, following Capreolus, Quarto, d. XXIV⁷, that the assumption perhaps is true concerning actions ordered by the Church to the principal action instituted by Christ, especially when those are done upon the same supposit. It is not, however, true concerning actions ordered by Christ upon diverse supposits and with diverse forms: as concerning the actions of the lower orders, each of which has its own effect ex opere operato; although those are not first intended per se, but are ordered to the Eucharist as to the principal effect.

4. To the second doubt it is said that each one of those orders is properly called the sacrament of Order. For the definition of order placed by the Master in XXIV dist. Quarti⁸ fits it, where it is said that order is a certain seal of the Church through which spiritual power is handed over to the one ordained. For it is clear, running through the individual orders according to what St. Thomas says in this place⁹, that this definition fits them all.

But when it is urged first, because the power of this sacrament is for confecting or ministering a sacrament: — it is said that this is understood mediately or immediately: whether that it is for confecting a sacrament, or for preparing or ministering something ordered to this. And this fits every order.

When it is urged second, because through those orders there is not conferred to the one ordained that he can do something which he could not before: — it is said that it is not required for the ratio of the sacrament of Order that through it there be conferred a power to do something which he could not do before in any way: but it suffices, as St. Thomas seems to intend, Quarto, d. XXIV, q. II, a. 2, ad 9, that through the conferred power he can act licitly, or ex officio, doing what before he could not do licitly or ex officio.

V. But this is to be noted lastly, that all seven orders can be said in some way to be seven sacraments, namely materially, inasmuch as the ratio of sacrament fits each one of them; and they can be said to be one sacrament, namely formally and completively, inasmuch as all are ordered to one end, namely to the Eucharist. And because it is the form which completes the ratio of a thing and gives it unity, therefore all the orders are counted by the doctors as one sacrament, while they say that there are seven sacraments of the Church, of which one is Order.