Commentaria in Summam contra Gentiles, Liber IV

After St. Thomas has determined concerning the sacrament of Order, in which a certain power is given to the ministers of the Church for dispensing the sacraments to the faithful, he consequently determines in general concerning the ministers of the sacraments, upon whom the power of Order has been conferred, namely as to their fitness ¹.

I. And he lays down this conclusion: Ecclesiastical sacraments can be conferred by sinners and evil men, provided they have Order.

It is proved first thus. The power of Order remains perpetually in the ministers of the Church. Therefore it is not removed by sin. Therefore etc. — Both consequences are clear. — But the antecedent is proved: because the ministers of the Church receive a certain power in the reception of Order, namely through a certain consecration. But what is acquired by any thing through consecration remains perpetually in it. A sign of this is that nothing consecrated is consecrated again: namely, if it remains intact.

Secondly. No one, no matter how good he may be, can dispense the sacraments unless he receives the power of dispensing them. Therefore neither is he who has received the power hindered by sin from being able to dispense the sacraments. — The consequence is proved: because malice and sin are opposed to a man's goodness. — But the antecedent is proved, because the things that are done in the sacraments exceed human capacity. But nothing can act toward that which exceeds its capacity except by a power received from elsewhere. This is made clear in water with respect to heating, and in a bailiff with respect to coercing citizens.

It must be noted that the foundation of this reason is that, just as a person does not have it from goodness that he can dispense the sacraments, so from malice, which is opposed to goodness, he who has received the power does not have it that he is hindered from such dispensation of the sacraments.

Thirdly. Through a habit, no capacity (posse) is given to us or taken away from us, but only that we may do something well or badly. In this it differs from a potency. Therefore, from the fact that someone is good or evil, he is not potent or impotent for dispensing the sacraments, but fit or unfit for dispensing them well. — The consequence is proved: because a man is called good or evil according to virtue or vice, which are certain habits.

It must be noted, from the doctrine of St. Thomas, Tertia, q. LXIV, a. 6; and In IV Sent., d. 5, q. 2, a. 2 ², that evil men ministering ecclesiastical sacraments sin, in that they are not conformed to Him whose instruments they are. For this reason it is said here that an evil man is not fit for dispensing well, that is, for dispensing according to the fittingness and congruity of the sacrament; although he is fit for dispensing the sacraments simpliciter with a sufficient fitness. For it suffices for someone to confer a sacrament that he be a man having the power of Order.

Fourthly. The ministers of the Church in the sacraments do not act by their own power, but by the power of Christ, of whom it is said in John 1: This is he who baptizeth. Therefore the malice of ministers does not hinder the faithful from attaining salvation from Christ through the sacraments. — The consequence is proved: because that which acts in the power of another does not assimilate the patient to itself, but to the principal agent, as is clear in the instruments of a house. — But the antecedent is proved, because ministers are said to act as an instrument.

II. But it seems that this argument is not effective. For although an instrument does not assimilate the effect to itself, but to the principal agent, yet if it is indisposed and inept, it cannot bring the effect to the likeness of the principal agent: just as, on account of a defect and malice in the instrument, a craftsman cannot sometimes induce the intended effect. And thus, although an evil minister is not hindered from dispensing the sacrament because the effect must be assimilated to him (namely, so that an evil effect is produced from him), yet he can be hindered on account of his indisposition and ineptitude for the effect of the principal agent, namely Christ.

It is answered that there can be a twofold indisposition in an instrument: one through which it is indisposed for receiving the motion and power of the principal agent, which is, namely, the lack of some perfection due to it inasmuch as it is an instrument; the other through which it is imperfect in itself, as lacking some perfection due to it inasmuch as it is such a thing, but not inasmuch as it is an instrument. Through the first imperfection an instrument can be hindered from the production of the effect of the principal agent; but not through the second, because the latter is related accidentally to it inasmuch as it is an instrument. Thus, if the surgeon's hand is withered so that it cannot be moved by him, the cure that the surgeon intends cannot proceed from it; but if it is disposed for receiving the motion from the surgeon, although it suffers from some disease, such as leprosy, it is not hindered from the production of the principally intended effect. Therefore an evil man, although he is indisposed in himself through the privation of the virtue that he ought to have, is nevertheless not indisposed inasmuch as he is an instrument of divine power. For in order that he may be moved by God according to ordination to cause salvation and grace instrumentally, through which one is assimilated to Christ, through the ministration of the sacrament, it suffices that he be a man having Order. And therefore he is not hindered by malice from being able to confer a true sacrament. It would be otherwise, however, if the effect had to be assimilated to the evil minister himself: because, since he is evilly disposed according to his mind and is deprived of divine grace, he could not effectively cause a good disposition of mind and grace in another. And St. Thomas's reason proceeds in this sense.

III. Fifthly. If the malice of the minister could hinder the effect of the sacrament, a man could not have certain confidence concerning his salvation, nor would his conscience remain free from sin. But this is unfitting. Therefore etc. — The sequence is proved: because a man cannot judge concerning the malice or goodness of another man, but this belongs to God alone, who searches the secrets of the heart. — This argument is confirmed: because if a man did not hope to attain salvation through the sacraments unless they were dispensed by a good minister, he would seem to place the hope of his salvation in some way in man. But this is against what is said in Jer. 17: Cursed is the man etc. — Therefore it must be confessed that the sacraments are salvific from the power of Christ, whether they are dispensed by good or by evil ministers.

Sixthly. The Lord also teaches that evil prelates are to be obeyed, whose works nevertheless are not to be imitated, as is clear from Matt. 23. Therefore evil ministers are also to be obeyed. Therefore the power of Order remains in them. Therefore they have the power of dispensing the sacraments. — The first consequence is proved: because men are much more to be obeyed on account of having received a ministry from Christ than on account of the chair of Moses. — But the second is proved, because they are obeyed on account of the power of Order.

But it seems that this argument is not effective. For someone is to be obeyed on account of the power of jurisdiction existing in him. Therefore, from the fact that evil prelates or evil ministers are to be obeyed, it does not follow that they can minister the sacraments, but only that they can exercise jurisdiction over their subjects.

It is said that someone is to be obeyed not only on account of the power of jurisdiction, but also on account of the power of Order: for the penitent is bound to obey the priest who enjoins a satisfactory penance upon him. And the reason proceeds concerning such power. Hence, in order to show that St. Thomas is speaking of this power of Order, and not of the power of jurisdiction, he assumed that evil ministers are obeyed on account of the power of Order.

By this, however, says St. Thomas, the error of those who say that all good men can minister the sacraments, and no evil men, is excluded.