Part IV (Tertia Pars) Part 102 (1/2)
Obj. 3: Further, it is not fitting that the salvation of men be restricted by the Divine Law: still less by the Law of Christ, Who came to save all. But in the state of the Law of nature determinate things were not required in the sacraments, but were put to that use through a vow, as appears from Gen. 28, where Jacob vowed that he would offer to G.o.d t.i.thes and peace-offerings. Therefore it seems that man should not have been restricted, especially under the New Law, to the use of any determinate thing in the sacraments.
_On the contrary,_ our Lord said (John 3:5): ”Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of G.o.d.”
_I answer that,_ In the use of the sacraments two things may be considered, namely, the wors.h.i.+p of G.o.d, and the sanctification of man: the former of which pertains to man as referred to G.o.d, and the latter pertains to G.o.d in reference to man. Now it is not for anyone to determine that which is in the power of another, but only that which is in his own power. Since, therefore, the sanctification of man is in the power of G.o.d Who sanctifies, it is not for man to decide what things should be used for his sanctification, but this should be determined by Divine inst.i.tution. Therefore in the sacraments of the New Law, by which man is sanctified according to 1 Cor. 6:11, ”You are washed, you are sanctified,” we must use those things which are determined by Divine inst.i.tution.
Reply Obj. 1: Though the same thing can be signified by divers signs, yet to determine which sign must be used belongs to the signifier.
Now it is G.o.d Who signifies spiritual things to us by means of the sensible things in the sacraments, and of similitudes in the Scriptures. And consequently, just as the Holy Ghost decides by what similitudes spiritual things are to be signified in certain pa.s.sages of Scripture, so also must it be determined by Divine inst.i.tution what things are to be employed for the purpose of signification in this or that sacrament.
Reply Obj. 2: Sensible things are endowed with natural powers conducive to the health of the body: and therefore if two of them have the same virtue, it matters not which we use. Yet they are ordained unto sanctification not through any power that they possess naturally, but only in virtue of the Divine inst.i.tution. And therefore it was necessary that G.o.d should determine the sensible things to be employed in the sacraments.
Reply Obj. 3: As Augustine says (Contra Faust. xix), diverse sacraments suit different times; just as different times are signified by different parts of the verb, viz. present, past, and future. Consequently, just as under the state of the Law of nature man was moved by inward instinct and without any outward law, to wors.h.i.+p G.o.d, so also the sensible things to be employed in the wors.h.i.+p of G.o.d were determined by inward instinct. But later on it became necessary for a law to be given (to man) from without: both because the Law of nature had become obscured by man's sins; and in order to signify more expressly the grace of Christ, by which the human race is sanctified. And hence the need for those things to be determinate, of which men have to make use in the sacraments. Nor is the way of salvation narrowed thereby: because the things which need to be used in the sacraments, are either in everyone's possession or can be had with little trouble.
_______________________
SIXTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 60, Art. 5]
Whether Words Are Required for the Signification of the Sacraments?
Objection 1: It seems that words are not required for the signification of the sacraments. For Augustine says (Contra Faust.
xix): ”What else is a corporeal sacrament but a kind of visible word?” Wherefore to add words to the sensible things in the sacraments seems to be the same as to add words to words. But this is superfluous. Therefore words are not required besides the sensible things in the sacraments.
Obj. 2: Further, a sacrament is some one thing, but it does not seem possible to make one thing of those that belong to different genera.
Since, therefore, sensible things and words are of different genera, for sensible things are the product of nature, but words, of reason; it seems that in the sacraments, words are not required besides sensible things.
Obj. 3: Further, the sacraments of the New Law succeed those of the Old Law: since ”the former were inst.i.tuted when the latter were abolished,” as Augustine says (Contra Faust. xix). But no form of words was required in the sacraments of the Old Law. Therefore neither is it required in those of the New Law.
_On the contrary,_ The Apostle says (Eph. 5:25, 26): ”Christ loved the Church, and delivered Himself up for it; that He might sanctify it, cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of life.” And Augustine says (Tract. x.x.x in Joan.): ”The word is added to the element, and this becomes a sacrament.”
_I answer that,_ The sacraments, as stated above (AA. 2, 3), are employed as signs for man's sanctification. Consequently they can be considered in three ways: and in each way it is fitting for words to be added to the sensible signs. For in the first place they can be considered in regard to the cause of sanctification, which is the Word incarnate: to Whom the sacraments have a certain conformity, in that the word is joined to the sensible sign, just as in the mystery of the Incarnation the Word of G.o.d is united to sensible flesh.
Secondly, sacraments may be considered on the part of man who is sanctified, and who is composed of soul and body: to whom the sacramental remedy is adjusted, since it touches the body through the sensible element, and the soul through faith in the words. Hence Augustine says (Tract. lx.x.x in Joan.) on John 15:3, ”Now you are clean by reason of the word,” etc.: ”Whence hath water this so great virtue, to touch the body and wash the heart, but by the word doing it, not because it is spoken, but because it is believed?”
Thirdly, a sacrament may be considered on the part of the sacramental signification. Now Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. ii) that ”words are the princ.i.p.al signs used by men”; because words can be formed in various ways for the purpose of signifying various mental concepts, so that we are able to express our thoughts with greater distinctness by means of words. And therefore in order to insure the perfection of sacramental signification it was necessary to determine the signification of the sensible things by means of certain words. For water may signify both a cleansing by reason of its humidity, and refreshment by reason of its being cool: but when we say, ”I baptize thee,” it is clear that we use water in baptism in order to signify a spiritual cleansing.
Reply Obj. 1: The sensible elements of the sacraments are called words by way of a certain likeness, in so far as they partake of a certain significative power, which resides princ.i.p.ally in the very words, as stated above. Consequently it is not a superfluous repet.i.tion to add words to the visible element in the sacraments; because one determines the other, as stated above.
Reply Obj. 2: Although words and other sensible things are not in the same genus, considered in their natures, yet have they something in common as to the thing signified by them: which is more perfectly done in words than in other things. Wherefore in the sacraments, words and things, like form and matter, combine in the formation of one thing, in so far as the signification of things is completed by means of words, as above stated. And under words are comprised also sensible actions, such as cleansing and anointing and such like: because they have a like signification with the things.
Reply Obj. 3: As Augustine says (Contra Faust. xix), the sacraments of things present should be different from sacraments of things to come. Now the sacraments of the Old Law foretold the coming of Christ. Consequently they did not signify Christ so clearly as the sacraments of the New Law, which flow from Christ Himself, and have a certain likeness to Him, as stated above. Nevertheless in the Old Law, certain words were used in things pertaining to the wors.h.i.+p of G.o.d, both by the priests, who were the ministers of those sacraments, according to Num. 6:23, 24: ”Thus shall you bless the children of Israel, and you shall say to them: The Lord bless thee,” etc.; and by those who made use of those sacraments, according to Deut. 26:3: ”I profess this day before the Lord thy G.o.d,” etc.
_______________________
SEVENTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 60, Art. 7]
Whether Determinate Words Are Required in the Sacraments?
Objection 1: It seems that determinate words are not required in the sacraments. For as the Philosopher says (Peri Herm. i), ”words are not the same for all.” But salvation, which is sought through the sacraments, is the same for all. Therefore determinate words are not required in the sacraments.
Obj. 2: Further, words are required in the sacraments forasmuch as they are the princ.i.p.al means of signification, as stated above (A.
6). But it happens that various words mean the same. Therefore determinate words are not required in the sacraments.
Obj. 3: Further, corruption of anything changes its species. But some corrupt the p.r.o.nunciation of words, and yet it is not credible that the sacramental effect is hindered thereby; else unlettered men and stammerers, in conferring sacraments, would frequently do so invalidly. Therefore it seems that determinate words are not required in the sacraments.