Dist. 25, Art. 1, 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/25/q/bon-sent-IV-d25-a1-q2
----------------------------------------
### Question II. *Whether a heretical bishop can confer orders.*

Secondly it is asked whether a heretical bishop can confer orders. And that he can, seems [to be shown].

1. Augustine, *Against Parmenianus*, says: "Just as we say in baptism that [a sacrament] can be given through them [the heretics], so also in ordination"; and to this there are several authorities in the text [of the Master].

2. Likewise, it seems [so] by *reason*: for, as a priest stands to the power of consecrating, so a bishop stands to the power of ordaining; but a priest, however much a heretic, if he has the intention of doing what the Church does, truly consecrates: therefore also a heretical bishop truly ordains, if he preserves the ecclesiastical form.

3. Likewise, if some catholic is ordained within the Church and afterward lapses into heresy, if he again returns, he is not reordained; therefore by lapsing into heresy he did not lose his orders, and by parity of reasoning neither does a bishop lose his episcopal dignity or grade: therefore while existing as a heretic he has that dignity or excellence of order, and therefore also the operation that follows upon it in fact: therefore if he ordains, [the man] is ordained.

4. Likewise, the character is equally truly in the wicked as in the good, and is equally truly imprinted on the wicked as on the good: therefore by parity of reasoning it is equally well given by the wicked or the perverse as by the good: therefore since the essence of order consists in the character, it is evident, etc.

**On the contrary:** 1. Innocent says, and it is held in the text: "It is established that he who has lost the honor cannot give the honor"; but the heretic is such a one: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, *Cause* I, *Question* I: "The blessing is turned into a curse for him who is ordained to the end that he become a heretic": therefore if by a curse no one is promoted to an order, it is evident, etc.

3. Likewise, it is more to promote someone to an order than to absolve or bind; but a heretic who is cut off can absolve or bind no one: therefore he can promote no one to sacred orders.

4. Likewise, a lower power cannot act except by continuation with a superior and proper power; but the fullness of power is in the Supreme Pontiff, from whom the heretic who is cut off is separated and disjoined: therefore it seems that he can confer nothing at all of those things that pertain to the ecclesiastical powers.

### Conclusion.

> *Among heretics an order can be dispensed as to its truth, not as to its usefulness.*

**I respond:** It must be said that, although this question was once much in doubt among illustrious doctors concerning all the Sacraments — as much concerning baptism

as concerning the others, [namely] that they would not exist among heretics — nevertheless through the most illustrious doctor Augustine this question has been clearly opened up to us, [namely] that the ecclesiastical Sacraments among heretics, who preserve the form of the Church and have the intention of doing what the Church does, do exist as to their *truth*, although they do not exist as to their *usefulness*: because they dispense the Sacraments, yet do not obtain the fruit of the Sacraments, for the reason that the Holy Spirit is not outside the catholic Church. And therefore in all the Sacraments which have a *truth* distinct from their *usefulness*, it is generally true that they can exist among heretics; but all the Sacraments are of this kind except the Sacrament of penance, whose *reality* is interior contrition, without which no absolution is genuine, and with which no absolution is empty or useless: therefore all can be dispensed and are truly dispensed except the absolution of penance alone; and therefore none are repeated except that one, unless perhaps extreme unction. And thus, since order has a character which exists apart from the grace of the Holy Spirit by which sins are blotted out, it must be said that among them [the heretics] it can be truly dispensed.

To 1 and 2. To that, then, which is objected concerning Innocent and Gregory, to those two authorities it must be said that [the heretic] is said to *receive a curse* because he does not receive grace; he is said *not to receive the honor* because he who is ordained by a heretic that is cut off does not receive the execution [of the office]; who is therefore said *to have lost the order* for the reason that he lost the execution of the order, not because he lost the character, which cannot be blotted out.

To 3. To that which is objected concerning the power of absolving, it must be said that the case is not similar: because sacerdotal absolution is either null or is without pretense; but no one is knowingly absolved by a heretic who is free of pretense. — Yet it can be put otherwise, [namely] that a fourfold power is found in the ministers of the Church. For a certain [power] is founded chiefly upon *order*, such as the power of consecrating; a certain [power] chiefly upon *canonical jurisdiction*, such as the power of excommunicating; a certain [power] upon *order and eminence*, such as the power of ordaining; a certain [power] upon *order and jurisdiction*, such as the power of absolving and binding in the penitential forum. And since the character cannot be taken away, therefore the power which *follows upon the character* cannot in fact be taken away. But since jurisdiction descends in ordered fashion from the superior to the inferior, so that the fullness is in the Supreme Pontiff, therefore he can take away that [jurisdiction] and the power which *follows upon it*. Hence by excommunicating he can take away the power of absolving and of excommunicating, but not of ordaining.

To 4. And through this the reply is evident to many [objections] and also to the following one. For as to what is objected, that in the Supreme Pontiff there is the fullness of power: this is true according as power *follows upon jurisdiction*, which is greatest and at its term in him, but not insofar as it *follows upon the character*, because that is imprinted immediately by God and is equal in all; nevertheless the *execution* of every power must be carried out according to his governance; and therefore, if he prohibits it, such a power cannot lawfully go forth into act; yet, since in reality it does not in fact depend on him, [the heretic] acts, just as another does. And thus the whole matter is evident.

---