Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacraments in General · Book II: On the Effect, Number, and Ceremonies of the Sacraments
Chapter 19: The opinion of the Catholics on the Character
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Sacramentis in Genere, Book II: On the Effect, Number, and Ceremonies of the Sacraments. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
As to the second, we shall embrace the opinion of the Catholics in some propositions; in which I shall comprehend the solutions of all the questions which Kemnitz touches, and of which he says nothing is certain.
The first: “Some spiritual sign is imprinted on the soul in certain Sacraments, which is called a character.” This is the opinion of all the Catholics in book 4 distinction 6, and is had expressly in the general Councils, the Florentine in the instruction of the Armenians, and the Tridentine session 7 canon 9. But it is to be noted that some Theologians, as Durandus in book 4 distinction 4 question 1, and Scotus distinction 6 question 9, and Gabriel in the same place question 2, admit indeed the character, but teach certain things which seem to make for Kemnitz. First, Durandus says that the character is not something real distinct from the soul, but is only a respect of reason; yet in the same place he says that the character ought not to be denied, and that all the Theologians say this. Durandus's doubt, then, is not of the character, whether it is, but what it is. And all the rest confess that the character is something real distinct from the soul. Scotus doubts of the manner of proving the character, and says it cannot be proved from any manifest testimony of Scripture, or even from the Fathers; yet on account of the authority of the Church he does not doubt that it is most certain that a character is given. Gabriel doubts also whether the Church has defined it; yet he says it is presumptuous to deny the character — for these words he uses at the end of the first doubt. All the rest, not only by the authority of the Church, but also by the Scriptures and the Fathers, teach that the character can be proved. There was, then, no question among the Scholastics but of the manner of proving the character. And the name of “character” the Scholastics took from Augustine, who uses this name everywhere; for the other ancients before Augustine call it a sign or seal, not a character; yet the thing is the same. For “character” is a Greek word, and signifies a form or figure, and this name is had in the Greek Codex in the Scriptures, Hebrews 1, and in the Latin Codex, Apocalypse 13, though in these places it treats not of the Sacraments but of other things.
The second proposition: “The character is not a relation, but an absolute quality.” This is the common opinion, Scotus and Durandus excepted. Durandus in the place cited teaches that the character is a being of reason — that is, a respect arising from the deputation to a certain office, such as is the relation in Doctors, Praetors, etc. Which opinion is scarcely distinguished from the heresy of this time, and seems expressly condemned in the Councils; which, if Durandus could have seen, without doubt he would have taught otherwise. For the heretics do not deny, nor can they deny, that there is some relation of reason in the ministers which is not in others who are not deputed to minister. And accordingly the Council of Trent, when it says anathema to those denying the character, and intends to condemn some error, without doubt condemns those who deny a real character. Scotus will have it a real relation; but certainly this can scarcely be defended. For the character, by the consent of all, is produced by the sacramental action; but relations are not produced, but arise at the production of the proximate foundation. Besides, what would be the foundation of this relation? Is it the soul? But then in all men there would be a character. Is it faith, or grace? But without these the character can be. I know that Scotus constitutes a certain kind of relation to which an action can be. But it is not my purpose to dispute these things more at length; nor are there wanting those who have accurately refuted that opinion of Scotus. Certainly the very name of “character” — does it signify anything but a relation? Finally the manner of speaking of the Fathers, who say that the character is imprinted and fixed, and that by it we are consecrated and sealed, names an absolute thing. The character, then, is an absolute quality, from which, however, arises a relation of likeness to Christ, to whom we are configured through the character.
The third proposition: “The character has three offices: to make apt for divine worship, to configure to Christ, and to distinguish from others.” I explain: The first office is to make apt. For the character is a certain spiritual and supernatural power, partly active, partly passive. For only three Sacraments imprint a character: Baptism, Confirmation, Order. The character of Baptism is a passive power; for it makes a man apt to receive all the other Sacraments, and without it no reception of the other Sacraments is valid. The character of Order is an active power to minister the Sacraments to others. The character of Confirmation has both; for it both makes apt to receive the other Sacraments, and also makes apt to profess the faith. Yet that character of Confirmation seems to be more principally active than passive. For without that character the other Sacraments hold, which would not be if that character were principally passive, like the character of Baptism. Yet it is here to be noted that this power seems not physical, but moral. For the character does not attain the effect, but is said to work only because wherever such a character is, God from covenant is present, and concurs to produce the supernatural effect, which he does not do where there is not such a character. The second office arises from the first. For because this power is derived from Christ, and is, as it were, a certain participation of the power of Christ, who, as the high Priest, has all power in the Sacraments, therefore the character configures us to Christ, and makes us more like him than are others who have not the character. The third office arises from the second. For because through the character we are configured to Christ in a certain special way, thence it comes that these are distinguished from others, as priests from laymen, and confirmed laymen from the unconfirmed, and the baptized from the unbaptized. And hence is understood why the Theologians say that the character is a Sacrament and a thing of the Sacrament, whereas the external sign is a Sacrament only, and grace is a thing only. For the character is an effect of the sensible Sacrament, and so is called a thing; and at the same time is a sign that a man is consecrated to God, and a soldier of Christ, etc., nay even of the grace which either is present, or would be present, unless an obstacle were placed.
The fourth proposition: “The sacramental character is in the soul alone, as in its subject.” Note that all agree that the character is in the soul inhering. For an accident does not inhere in an accident, but in a substance; yet one accident can be in another in two ways. First, because through it it is in the substance; in which way corporeal accidents are in quantity. Second, because it perfects the operation of some other accident, in which way faith is said to be in the intellect, hope and charity in the will. In this manner some place the character in the intellect, as necessary to exercise the acts of the intellect. Others place it in the will, because they think it disposes to charity, which is in the will. Others place it simply in the substance of the soul, and this seems truer, because it is not a habit or an operative power. Whence the Councils, the Florentine and the Tridentine, say it is imprinted in the soul. The fifth proposition: “The character is indelible.” This is had in the noted Councils, and is conceded by all. The reason a posteriori is that it is established that the Sacraments which imprint a character cannot be repeated. A priori many reasons are adduced, but the chief is that the character has no contrary, and is in an incorruptible subject. For it is not like the habit of faith and of the other virtues, which are taken away by contrary acts; but is like a power, according to some, or like a form or figure, according to others. Add that the character is a certain consecration of the soul; and a consecration lasts as long as the consecrated thing lasts.
The sixth proposition: “Only three Sacraments imprint a character: Baptism, Confirmation, Order.” This too is had in the aforesaid Councils, and is conceded by all, and the reason a posteriori is the same as of the preceding conclusion. A priori it is difficult, and by no means necessary, to render a reason. This is chiefly wont to be adduced, that in these three a man receives a new power, and is deputed to a new ministry by a new consecration, and in a manner changes his state; and accordingly receives a new seal. For in Baptism a man passes from the Devil to Christ, and is enrolled in his family, and receives the power of participating the Sacraments and the other goods of the Church of Christ. In Confirmation he is enrolled in the warfare of Christ, that he may bear his standard on his forehead, and receives strength and power to fight by office against the demons. In the Sacrament of Order he is enrolled in the number of the leaders and prelates of this warfare, and receives the power of distributing to others the goods of his Lord. In the other Sacraments there is no change of state, nor is a man deputed to a new ministry, nor does he receive a new power; but either he is spiritually nourished, as in the Eucharist, or receives a medicine against the diseases and wounds of sins, as in the Sacrament of Penance, or receives an antidote against the remnants of sins, as in Extreme Unction, or finally receives a remedy against concupiscence, as in Matrimony. The seventh proposition: “Neither Circumcision, nor any Sacrament of the old law, imprinted a character on the soul.” So St. Thomas part 3 question 63 article 1. The contrary Scotus holds of Circumcision, in book 4 distinction 6 question 9 to the fourth; but the opinion of St. Thomas is truer. For Circumcision imprinted a character on the body, and in that manner was a figure of Baptism, which was to imprint a character on the soul. Besides, a character is imprinted on us to receive or minister supernatural works; but no works of the Sacraments of the old law were supernatural. Finally Scotus, because he had taught that Circumcision conferred grace ex opere operato, not without cause attributed also the impression of a character to Circumcision. But we, who teach that Circumcision had no force of itself but to cut off the flesh, ought also consequently to deny the force of imprinting a spiritual character. The eighth proposition: “No character was created in Christ.” This is St. Thomas's, part 3 question 63 article 5. And the reason is that the character is a certain participation of the priesthood of Christ; therefore it is only in those who have this priesthood by participation. Likewise to be signed with a character belongs to sheep, servants, soldiers, and finally subjects, who are received by some greater one for some ministry; but Christ is the Shepherd, the Leader, the Lord, etc. Likewise Christ received no Sacraments of the new law except the Eucharist, therefore neither their characters. Finally we need a character that God may concur with us, as from covenant, to the sacramental actions; but Christ does not need that anyone concur with him from covenant, since he himself is the principal cause as God, and the conjoined instrumental cause as man. For no one makes a covenant with himself, or with his own arm, concerning concurrence.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XIX, De charactere sententia Catholicorum. v '”"“7 Quantum ad secundum, sententiam Ca¬ tholicorum aliquot propositionibus com¬ plectemur : quibus comprehendam solutio¬ nes omnium quaestionum ; quas Kemnitius attingit, et de quibus dicit nihil esse cer¬ tum. Prima : « Signum aliquod spirituale ani¬ mae imprimitur in quibusdam Sacramentis, quod character appellatur. » Haec est om¬ nium Catholicorum in IV. dist. 6. et habetur expresse in Conciliis generalibus, Florentino in Instructione Armenorum , et Tridentino sess. VII. canon. 9. Est autem notandum, Theologos aliquos , ut Durandum in IV. dist. 4. quaest. I. et Scotum dist. 6.quaest. 9. et Gabrielem ibidem quajst. 2. admittere quidem characterem, sed quaedam docere, que videntur facere pro Kemnitio. Primo Durandus dicit characterem non esse aliquid reale distinctum ab anima, sed esse solum respectum rationis : tamen ibidem dicit, characterem non esse debere negari, et hoc omnes Theologos dicere. Igitur Durandi du¬ bitatio non est de charactere, an sit, sed quid sit. Porro caeteri omnes fatentur cha¬ racterem esse aliquid reale distinctum ab anima. Scotus dubitat de ratione probandi characterem, ac dicit non posse probari ex aliquo manifesto Scripturae testimonio, vel etiam ex Patribus : tamen ob Ecclesiae auc¬ toritatem non dubitat esse certissimum dari characterem. Gabriel dubitat etiam , an Ecclesia id definierit, T-amen dicit, esse prae- sumptuosum negare characterem : his enim v.erbis utitur in fine primi dubii. Caeteri om¬ nes non solum Ecclesiae auctoritate, sed etiam Scripturis et Patribus, docent charac¬ terem probari posse. Nulla ergo fuit inter Scholasticos quaestio, nisi de modo probandi characterem. Nomen autem characteris acceperunt Scholastici ab Augustino, qui hoc nomine passim utitur : alii enim veteres ante Au¬ gustinum, signum, aut signaculum vocant, non characterem ; res tamen eadem est. Character enim Grteco vox est et for¬ mam significat, seu figuram , et habetur in Codice Graeco hoc nomen in Scriptu¬ ris Hebr. I. et in Codice Latino Apocalyp. XIII. licet non de Sacramentis, sed de aliis rebus in his locis agatur. Secunda propositio : « Character non est relatio, sed absoluta qualitas. » IHecest com¬ munis, Scoto et Durando exceptis. Duran¬ dus loco citato, docet characterem esse ens rationis, id est, respectum advenientem ex deputatione ad certum officium, qualis est relatio in Doctoribus, Prretoribus etc. Quae sententia vix distinguitur ab haeresi hujus temporis, et videtur expresse damnata in Conciliis, quae si Durandus videre potuisset, sine dubio aliter docuisset. Haeretici enim non negant, neque negare possunt, quin sit aliqua relatio rationis in ministris, quae non est in aliis, qui non sunt deputati ad minis¬ trandum. Proinde Concilium Tridentinum cum dicit anathema negantibus characte¬ rem, et intendit errorem aliquem damnare, sine dubio damnat eos, qui negant realem characterem. Scotus vult esse realem rela¬ tionem : sed certe vix id defendi potest. Nam character omnium consensu producitur per actionem Sacramentalem : relationes autem non producuntur, sed consurgunt ad productionem fundamenti proximi . Prte- terea quod esset fundamentum hujus rela¬ tionis? num anima? At tunc in omnibus hominibus esset character. Num fides, aut gratia? At sine his character esse potest. Scio Scotum quoddam genus relationis constituere, ad quod actio esse possit. Sed non est mihi propositum ista latius dispu¬ tare; neque desunt, qui sententiam illam Scoti accurate refutaverint. Certe nomen ipsum characteris, nonne aliud, quam rela¬ tionem significat? Denique modus loquendi Patrum, qui dicunt characterem imprimi, et infigi, eoque nos consecrari, et consigna¬ ri, absolutam rem nominant. Est igitur cha¬ racter qualitas absoluta, ex qua tamen con¬ surgit relatio similitudinis ad Christum, cui configuramur per characterem. CAPUT XIX. Tertia propositio : « Character tria habet officia , aptum facere ad cultum divinum, configurare Christo, et distinguere ab aliis. » Explico : Primum officium est aptum facere, Est enim character potestas quaedam spiritu¬ alis et supernaturalis, partim activa, partim passiva. Nam tria sola Sacramenta impri¬ munt characterem, Baptismus, Confirmatio, Ordo. Character Baptismatis est passiva po¬ testas : facit enim hominem aptum ad sus¬ cipienda omnia alia Sacramenta, et sine ipso nulla Sacramentorum aliorum susceptio est rata. Character Ordinis est activa potes¬ tas ad ministranda aliis Sacramenta. Charac¬ ter Confirmationis habet utrumque : Nam et facit aptum ad alia Sacramenta suscipienda, et facit etiam aptum ad profitendam fidem. Videtur tamen magis principaliter esse activus, quam passivus, character iste Con¬ firmationis. Nam sine isto charactere tenent reliqua Sacramenta, quod non esset, si' iste character esset principaliter passivus, sicut character Baptismi.Est tamen hic notandum, istam potentiam non videri Physicam, sed moralem. Non enim character attingit affec¬ tum, sed tantum operari dicitur, quia ubi¬ cumque est talis character, Deus ex pacto adest, et concurrit ad effectum supernatura- lem producendum, quod non facit, ubi non est talis character. Secundum officium oritur ex primo. Quia enim ista potentia derivatur a Christo, et est quaedam quasi participatio potestatis Christi, qui, ut summus Sacerdos, habet omnem potestatem in Sacramentis, ideo character configurat nos Christo, et similiores illi facit, quam sint alii, qui non habent cha¬ racterem. Tertium officium oritur ex secundo. Quia enim per characterem Christo configuramur speciali quadam ratione, inde fit ut distin¬ guantur isti ab aliis, ut sacerdotes a laicis, et laici confirmati a non confirmatis et bap- tizati a non baptizatis. Atque hinc intelligi- tur cur Theologi dicant, characterem esse Sacramentum, et rem Sacramenti, cum si¬ gnum externum it Sacramentum tantum, gratia autem sit res. tantum. Nam character est effectus Sacramenti sensibilis, et sic di¬ citur res : et simul est signum, quod homo sit consecratus Deo, et Christi miles etc. imo etiam gratiae, quae vel adest, vel ades¬ set, 'nisi poneretur obex. Quarta propositio : « Character Sacra- mentalis in sola anima est, tamquam in 471 subjecto, ii Nota, convenire omnes charac¬ terem esse in anima inhaesive. Accidens enim non inhaeret in accidente, sed in substantia : tamen potest accidens unum esse in alio duobus modis. Primo, quia mediante illo est in substantia ; quo¬ modo accidentia corporalia sunt in quanti¬ tate. Secundo, quia perficit operationem alicujus alterius accidentis, quomodo fides dicitur esse in intellectu, spes et charitas in voluntate. Hoc modo characterem aliqui ponunt in intellectu, ut necessarium ad ex¬ ercendos actus intellectus. Alii ponunt in voluntate : quia putant disponere ad cha- ritatem, qme est in voluntate. Alii ponunt simpliciter in substantia animae, et hoc vide¬ tur verius, quia non est habitus, vel poten¬ tia operativa. Unde Concilia Florentinum, et Tridentinum dicunt, imprimi in anima. Quinta propositio : « Character indelebilis est. Haec habetur in Conciliis notatis, e( ab om¬ nibus conceditur. Ratio a posteriori est, quia constat, Sacramenta quae imprimunt charac¬ terem, non posse repeti. A priori multae ratio¬ nes adducuntur, sed potissima est, quia cha- crater non habet contraria, et est insubjecto incorruptibili. Non enim est sicut habitus fidei, aliarumque virtutum, qui per actus contrarios tolluntur : sed est sicut potentia secundum quosdam, vel sicut forma, seu figura secundum alios. Accedit quod charac¬ ter est quaedam consecratio animae : con¬ secratio autem tamdiu durat, .quamdiu du¬ rat res consecrata. Sexta propositio : « Tria solum Sacra¬ menta imprimunt, characterem, Baptismus, Confirmatio, Ordo. » Haec etiam habetur in Conciliis praedictis, et ab omnibus concedi¬ tur, et ratio a posteriori eadem est, quae su¬ perioris conclusionis. A priori difficile est, et minime necessariutn, reddere rationem. Illa potissimum adduci solet, quod in his tribus accipit homo novam potestatem, ac deputatur novo ministerio per novam con¬ secrationem, et quodammodo statum mu¬ tat; et proinde accipit novum signaculum. Nam in Baptismo transit homo a Diabolo ad Christum, et adseribitur in ejus familiam, et accipit potestatem participandi Sacra¬ menta, aliaque bona Ecclesiae Christi. In confirmatione adseribitur ad militiam Chris¬ ti, ut gerat vexillum ejus in fronte, ct acci¬ pit robur, et potentiam, ut ex officio pugnet contra daemones. In Sacramento Ordinis ad¬ seribitur in numerum ducum, et praeposito- 47 -2 liber ii. rum hujus militiae, et accipit potestatem distribuendi aliis bona Domini sui. In aliis Sacramentis non fit mutatio status, ncc deputatur homo novo ministerio, nec acci¬ pit novam potestatem; sed vel alitur spiri- tualiter, ut in Eucharistia, vel accipit me¬ dicamentum contra morbos, et vulnera peccatorum, ut in Sacramento Poenitentia?, vel accipit antidotum contra reliquias pec¬ catorum, ut in Extrema unctione, vel deni¬ que accipit remedium contra concupiscen¬ tiam, ut in Matrimonio. Septima propositio ; « Nec Circumcisio, nec ullum Sacramentum veteris legis impri¬ mebat characterem in anima. » Ita S. Tho- mas 3. part. quaest. LXIII. artic. I. Contra¬ rium sentit Scotus de Circumcisione in IV. dist. 6. quaest. 9. ad 4. sed verior est sen¬ tentia S. Thomae. Nam Circumcisio impri¬ mebat in corpore characterem, et eo modo figura erat Baptismi, qui characterem in anima impressurus erat. Praeterea charac¬ ter nobis imprimitur ad suscipienda vel mi¬ nistranda opera supernaturalia : nulla au¬ tem opera Sacramentorum legis veteris erant supernaturalia. Denique Scotus quia docuerat, Circumcisionem ex opere operato conferre gratiam, non sine causa tribuit etiam impressionem characteris Circumci¬ sioni. At nos, qui docemus Circumcisionem nullam vim habuisse ex se, nisi ad praeci¬ dendam carnem : debemus etiam conse¬ quenter negare vim imprimendi spiritualem characterem. Octava propositio : « Nullus in Christo character fuit creatus. » Est enim S. Tho- mae 3. part. quaest. LXIII. art. o. Et ratio est, quia character est quaedam participa¬ tio sacerdotii Christi, igitur solum est in illis, qui habent hoc sacerdotium per participatio¬ nem. Item signari charactere, est ovium, servorum, militum, denique subditorum, qui recipiuntur ab aliquo majore ad aliquod ministerium; Christus autem est Pastor, Dux, Dominus etc. Item Christus non acce¬ pit ulla Sacramenta novae legis praeter Eu¬ charistiam, ergo nec eorum characteres. Denique nos egemus charactere, ut Deus nobiscum quasi ex pacto concurrat ad ac¬ tiones Sacramentales ; At Christus non eget, ut ullus cum eo ex pacto concurrat, cum sit ipse causa principalis ut Deus, et instru- mentalis conjuncta ut homo. Non enim facit (1) II. Cor. I, 21 et 22. ullus pactum secum, aut cum suo brachio de concursu.