Dist. 24, Part 2, Art. 2, Q. 1
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/24/q/bon-sent-IV-d24-p2-a2-q1
----------------------------------------
### Article II. *On the orders, as to their number and distinction.*

Next, as to the second article, inquiry is made concerning the orders as to their number and distinction. And concerning this, four things are asked in brief.

First, inquiry is made concerning the division of orders into sacred and non-sacred.

Second, whether the office of psalmist is among the minor orders.

Third, inquiry is made whether the episcopate is an order.

Fourth, whether there are seven, or more, or fewer orders.

### Question I. *On the division of orders into sacred and non-sacred.*

Inquiry therefore is made first concerning this division of the orders, and it seems that there is none:

1. First, because an order is essentially and universally a Sacrament; but every Sacrament bespeaks a sacred thing: therefore an order is universally a sacred thing: therefore every order is sacred.

2. Likewise, in the lower orders there is given a power of ministering about the altar, and about those things which pertain to the Sacrament of Sacraments, namely the body of the Lord: therefore if in the minor [orders] one ministers about the altar, as in the diaconate and subdiaconate, though not so closely; it seems that just as those are sacred, so also are these.

3. Likewise, in the primitive Church there were no orders except sacred ones, namely the presbyterate and the diaconate: therefore either that Church was defective, or this one is superfluous.

4. Likewise, those things which pertain to the substance of a Sacrament always remain the same: if therefore the minor orders are truly orders, either they ought to have existed then, or they are not truly orders. But if they did not then exist, as can be clear, it seems [so], etc.

**On the contrary:** 1. In the Old Testament the offices of those ministering were distinct, in such wise that some ministered about the altar, others about the custody of the temple: if therefore the priesthood is now of a greater order and dignity, and divine worship is to be enlarged and has been enlarged; it seems that some ought to be deputed to these things, and others to those: therefore it seems that, since the orders are distinguished according to greater and lesser offices, there ought to be greater and lesser orders.

2. Likewise, as will be clear when marriage is treated, and is had in the thirty-second distinction in the Decretals, some orders are impediments to marriage, and some are not: if therefore in that order the body of the Lord is consecrated, in which a man is wholly removed from the act of lust; it seems that some orders are sacred, and some are not.

3. Likewise, that it ought to be so is proved: first, because an order is the Sacrament of the perfect; but one does not ascend to the state of perfection at once, but arrives gradually: therefore if a sacred order places one in some manner in the state of perfection, it seems that it ought to have certain lower orders, which are not sacred.

4. Likewise, we see in the court of an earthly king, that in order that it be sufficiently ordered, the higher ministers need the lower ones, who obey and serve, and the greater need the lesser: therefore if  the house of God ought to be ordered, it seems that there ought to be ministers there, and again ministers of the ministers, and the first are in a higher order, the second in a lower: therefore lesser and greater [orders].

### Conclusion

> **Conclusion.** Rightly are certain orders called sacred, and certain ones non-sacred.

**I respond:** It must be said that the Sacrament of order has very many grades; and the first distinction indeed is by *lower* and *higher* grades, or by *sacred* and *non-sacred* grades. — And the reason why this Sacrament has grades is because it ordains to the dispensing of the most worthy Sacrament and to ministering in the temple of God; and to that ministry there concur certain *more worthy* offices, and certain *less worthy* ones. And although all of them require holy ministers, yet those which are directed about the altar and about the carrying of the sacred vessels and about the completion of the offering of the sacrifice, most of all require holy ministers, according to that word of Isaiah, chapter fifty-two: *Be cleansed, you who carry the vessels of the Lord.* But holiness or sanctification consists most of all in continence; therefore there are certain orders which require continence in their ministers, and certain ones by no means. Therefore rightly are certain orders called *sacred*, and certain ones *non-sacred*, not by reason of themselves, but by reason of the ministry, for which holiness is required in the minister. And thus is clear the ground of this distinction of the orders into sacred and non-sacred; and the reasons for it are to be granted.

**To the arguments:**

*To 1.* To that then which is objected, that every order is a Sacrament; it must be said that all orders are sacred signs and [signs] of a sacred thing; but by this account they are not called sacred orders, as has been seen, but from the consecration of the minister, and because the orders themselves dispose toward the touching and the ministering of the consecrated vessels.

*To 2.* To that which is objected, that in all of them there is given a power of ministering something about the greatest Sacrament; it must be said that this is true, yet according to more and less, according to near and remote. For to those who are placed in the lower [orders] it is not permitted to carry the consecrated vessels by office, although on account of a scarcity of ministers it is frequently permitted to such.

*To 3.* To that which is objected, that in the primitive Church there were only sacred orders; it must be said that this is false, indeed there were others too; but they were given implicitly in the imposition of hands, since «the hand is the organ of organs». — And the reason why they were not distinguished was on account of the fewness of those ministering and on account of the fewness of the faithful; therefore it was fitting that all the offices be given to one; but now the divine worship has been multiplied: therefore the case is not similar.

*To 4.* And by this the last [argument] is clear. For as to what it says, that the substantials were always the same; it must be said that this is true; and these orders and grades were always in the Church, although they were not *unfolded* and distinct, as now. For not only now must they be distinguished on account of the *enlargement* of those ministering, but also on account of *guidance by the hand*, because from their very cradle those who are to be clerics are now ordained. Therefore according to the advance of age in the receiving of grades they ought and can be promoted, and not at once be raised to the highest grade.