Dist. 22, Art. 2, Q. 2
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/4/d/22/q/bon-sent-IV-d22-a2-q2
----------------------------------------
### Article II. *On penance in its character as a Sacrament.*
### Question II. *On the Sacrament of penance with respect to its signification.*

Secondly it is asked concerning penance with respect to its signification; and it is asked what here is the *sign*, and what the *thing signified*. And it seems that exterior penance signifies the interior, thus.

1. That Sacrament *signifies by institution* which *represents naturally*; but exterior penance naturally represents the interior: therefore it signifies by institution.

2. Likewise, as bodily baptism stands to the spiritual, so exterior penance to the interior; but the baptism of water signifies the baptism of the Spirit: therefore exterior penance too [signifies] the interior.

3. Likewise, penance-the-Sacrament frees from shipwreck; but it is impossible for one actually sinning to be freed from shipwreck except through interior penance: therefore penance-the-Sacrament contains it in itself, yet not in the character of a sign: therefore in the character of a thing signified.

4. Likewise, «perfect penance strives to bring [the sinner] back to the purity of baptism»; but a sinner is never brought back to that purity except through sorrow of heart: therefore exterior penance signifies the interior.

**Contra:**
1. Hugh: «A Sacrament is a material element set forth outwardly to the senses, representing by likeness»; but exterior penance is not such, because it is not an element: therefore it is neither a Sacrament nor a sign.

2. Likewise, interior penance is a virtue, or an act of a virtue; but the grace of the virtues and [the grace] of the Sacraments are different: therefore interior penance is not the *thing* (res) of any Sacrament.

3. Likewise, whenever a sign and a thing signified are rightly ordered in a Sacrament, the sign is the *cause* of the thing signified, by the definition of a Sacrament set forth above; but exterior penance is not the cause of the interior, nor is the latter its effect, but rather the reverse: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, since in the perfection of penance there are three, namely contrition, confession, and satisfaction, it is asked: by reason of which is it called exterior, and by reason of which interior? If it is called interior by reason of contrition, and exterior by reason of confession and satisfaction; *on the contrary*: these do not signify contrition, but rather the will to confess and to make satisfaction. If it is called exterior by reason of the three; then, since they are three diverse things, there will be three Sacraments. *If you say* that they are united; I ask: by what kind of unity are they united?

### Conclusion

> *The* thing *(res) of the Sacrament of penance is the perfect remission of sin; the* sign, *however, is exterior humiliation according to the ecclesiastical form; while the* thing-and-sign *is interior penitence.*

**I respond:** It must be said that, just as in judging concerning institution the judgment about penance must be varied,  according as it is a Sacrament reconciling to *God*, and according as it reconciles not only to *God* but also to the *Church*; so also in the matter at hand. For according as it is a Sacrament reconciling to *God*, for its *thing* (res) it has the remission of sin; for its *sign* it has exterior humiliation, whether in bearing or in word; for its *thing-and-sign*, interior penitence. Nor is it necessary that the first be the cause of the middle, but rather the reverse, and this because it is from a natural dictate; and therefore the exterior *proceeds* from the interior; the exterior does not *make* that which is interior. — But insofar as it is a Sacrament of the *Church*, having institution, it thus has the character of cause and of sign, like the other Sacraments; and the character of *causality* resides in that which is *formal*, whereas the character of *sign* [resides] in that which is *material*. Now the *material* in this Sacrament is the humiliation of the penitent, whether with respect to the *act of contrition*, or with respect to the *word of accusation*, or with respect to the *penalty of satisfaction*; the *formal*, however, is the *absolution of the priest*. These two joined together signify *interior penance*, according as through it there is perfect remission of guilt with respect to *penalty* and with respect to *guilt*; and with respect to the remission of sin as to *guilt* the exterior Sacrament has the character of a *sign*, [while] with respect to the remission of *penalty* it has in a certain way the character of a *cause*.

And thus it is clear what in this Sacrament is the *thing* (res), namely the perfect remission of sin; and what the *sign*, namely exterior penance according to the ecclesiastical form, in which there is humiliation and absolution; the *thing-and-sign* is interior penitence. — Hence the arguments for the first part must be conceded.

1. To that, then, which is objected, that it is not an element; it must be said that Hugh takes *element* very broadly for everything that appears outwardly to the senses. — Or if it be appropriated to the *bodily* Sacraments, then it is understood only of the Sacraments proper to the new law.

2. To that which is objected, that the grace of the virtues differs from the grace of the Sacraments; it must be said that this is true in a certain way; but it is not required with respect to *essence*, but it suffices with respect to *effect*, as was determined above at the beginning; and so it is in the matter at hand. For interior penance is the *thing* (res) of the exterior, according as beyond the rectitude of a virtue it adds a further effect, namely of perfect remission with respect to *guilt and penalty*, when the exterior is perfect; and it is similar in baptism, as was seen above.

3. To that which is objected, that the interior is the cause of the exterior; it must be said that, because this Sacrament is partly of *natural dictate* and partly of *institution*, therefore the exterior sign is in a certain way *caused* and in a certain way *causes*. For interior detestation, insofar as it is detestation, does indeed cause a man to be outwardly humbled; but according as it absolves entirely from guilt and penalty, this it has from the exterior absolution and penance. And thus it is clear that most fittingly there is an ordering in *signifying* and in *causing*, according as befits it.

4. To that which is objected, by reason of which of those three it is a *sign*; I say, by reason of *all*; for *contrition* is taken for the exterior groaning. Nor yet are they three Sacraments, but those three as one perfect sign signify perfect penance. And this is clear: because, if one truly repents in heart, then he grieves, and this is signified through the *groaning of contrition*; therefore he detests the guilt and reproaches himself, and this is signified through the *word of confession*; therefore he has the will of amending, and this is signified through the *penalty of satisfaction*. These three interior penance contains, which is one and a true virtue; and therefore all the exterior signs converge into one perfect sign and are one Sacrament and have the *unity of a Sacrament*. — And it is a special mode of unity, since many modes are assigned by various [authors]. And *if you object* that they are not simultaneous; it must be said that at least with respect to the *purpose*, or the vow of the will, one remains in the other, as he who is contrite truly purposes to confess and to make satisfaction; otherwise there is no true contrition. So it is to be understood of the others.

---