THIRD ARTICLE [III, Q. 89, Art. 3]

Whether, by Penance, Man Is Restored to His Former Dignity?

Objection 1: It would seem that man is not restored by Penance to his

former dignity: because a gloss on Amos 5:2, "The virgin of Israel is

cast down," observes: "It is not said that she cannot rise up, but

that the virgin of Israel shall not rise; because the sheep that has

once strayed, although the shepherd bring it back on his shoulder,

has not the same glory as if it had never strayed." Therefore man

does not, through Penance, recover his former dignity.

Obj. 2: Further, Jerome says: "Whoever fail to preserve the dignity

of the sacred order, must be content with saving their souls; for it

is a difficult thing to return to their former degree." Again, Pope

Innocent I says (Ep. vi ad Agapit.) that "the canons framed at the

council of Nicaea exclude penitents from even the lowest orders of

clerics." Therefore man does not, through Penance, recover his former

dignity.

Obj. 3: Further, before sinning a man can advance to a higher sacred

order. But this is not permitted to a penitent after his sin, for it

is written (Ezech. 44:10, 13): "The Levites that went away . . . from

Me . . . shall never [Vulg.: 'not'] come near to Me, to do the office

of priest": and as laid down in the Decretals (Dist. 1, ch. 52), and

taken from the council of Lerida: "If those who serve at the Holy

Altar fall suddenly into some deplorable weakness of the flesh, and

by God's mercy do proper penance, let them return to their duties,

yet so as not to receive further promotion." Therefore Penance does

not restore man to his former dignity.

_On the contrary,_ As we read in the same Distinction, Gregory

writing to Secundinus (Regist. vii) says: "We consider that when a

man has made proper satisfaction, he may return to his honorable

position": and moreover we read in the acts of the council of Agde:

"Contumacious clerics, so far as their position allows, should be

corrected by their bishops, so that when Penance has reformed them,

they may recover their degree and dignity."

_I answer that,_ By sin, man loses a twofold dignity, one in respect

of God, the other in respect of the Church. In respect of God he

again loses a twofold dignity. One is his principal dignity, whereby

he was counted among the children of God, and this he recovers by

Penance, which is signified (Luke 15) in the prodigal son, for when

he repented, his father commanded that the first garment should be

restored to him, together with a ring and shoes. The other is his

secondary dignity, viz. innocence, of which, as we read in the same

chapter, the elder son boasted saying (Luke 15:29): "Behold, for so

many years do I serve thee, and I have never transgressed thy

commandments": and this dignity the penitent cannot recover.

Nevertheless he recovers something greater sometimes; because as

Gregory says (Hom. de centum Ovibus, 34 in Evang.), "those who

acknowledge themselves to have strayed away from God, make up for

their past losses, by subsequent gains: so that there is more joy in

heaven on their account, even as in battle, the commanding officer

thinks more of the soldier who, after running away, returns and

bravely attacks the foe, than of one who has never turned his back,

but has done nothing brave."

By sin man loses his ecclesiastical dignity, because thereby he

becomes unworthy of those things which appertain to the exercise of

the ecclesiastical dignity. This he is debarred from recovering:

first, because he fails to repent; wherefore Isidore wrote to the

bishop Masso, and as we read in the Distinction quoted above (Obj.

3): "The canons order those to be restored to their former degree,

who by repentance have made satisfaction for their sins, or have made

worthy confession of them. On the other hand, those who do not mend

their corrupt and wicked ways are neither allowed to exercise their

order, nor received to the grace of communion."

Secondly, because he does penance negligently, wherefore it is

written in the same Distinction (Obj. 3): "We can be sure that those

who show no signs of humble compunction, or of earnest prayer, who

avoid fasting or study, would exercise their former duties with great

negligence if they were restored to them."

Thirdly, if he has committed a sin to which an irregularity is

attached; wherefore it is said in the same Distinction (Obj. 3),

quoting the council of Pope Martin [*Martin, bishop of Braga]: "If a

man marry a widow or the relict of another, he must not be admitted

to the ranks of the clergy: and if he has succeeded in creeping in,

he must be turned out. In like manner, if anyone after Baptism be

guilty of homicide, whether by deed, or by command, or by counsel, or

in self-defense." But this is in consequence not of sin, but of

irregularity.

Fourthly, on account of scandal, wherefore it is said in the same

Distinction (Obj. 3): "Those who have been publicly convicted or

caught in the act of perjury, robbery, fornication, and of such like

crimes, according to the prescription of the sacred canons must be

deprived of the exercise of their respective orders, because it is a

scandal to God's people that such persons should be placed over them.

But those who commit such sins occultly and confess them secretly to

a priest, may be retained in the exercise of their respective orders,

with the assurance of God's merciful forgiveness, provided they be

careful to expiate their sins by fasts and alms, vigils and holy

deeds." The same is expressed (Extra, De Qual. Ordinand.): "If the

aforesaid crimes are not proved by a judicial process, or in some

other way made notorious, those who are guilty of them must not be

hindered, after they have done penance, from exercising the orders

they have received, or from receiving further orders, except in cases

of homicide."

Reply Obj. 1: The same is to be said of the recovery of virginity as

of the recovery of innocence which belongs to man's secondary dignity

in the sight of God.

Reply Obj. 2: In these words Jerome does not say that it is

impossible, but that it is difficult, for man to recover his former

dignity after having sinned, because this is allowed to none but

those who repent perfectly, as stated above. To those canonical

statutes, which seem to forbid this, Augustine replies in his letter

to Boniface (Ep. clxxxv): "If the law of the Church forbids anyone,

after doing penance for a crime, to become a cleric, or to return to

his clerical duties, or to retain them the intention was not to

deprive him of the hope of pardon, but to preserve the rigor of

discipline; else we should have to deny the keys given to the Church,

of which it was said: 'Whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be

loosed in heaven.'" And further on he adds: "For holy David did

penance for his deadly crimes, and yet he retained his dignity; and

Blessed Peter by shedding most bitter tears did indeed repent him of

having denied his Lord, and yet he remained an apostle. Nevertheless

we must not deem the care of later teachers excessive, who without

endangering a man's salvation, exacted more from his humility,

having, in my opinion, found by experience, that some assumed a

pretended repentance through hankering after honors and power."

Reply Obj. 3: This statute is to be understood as applying to those

who do public penance, for these cannot be promoted to a higher

order. For Peter, after his denial, was made shepherd of Christ's

sheep, as appears from John 21:21, where Chrysostom comments as

follows: "After his denial and repentance Peter gives proof of

greater confidence in Christ: for whereas, at the supper, he durst

not ask Him, but deputed John to ask in his stead, afterwards he was

placed at the head of his brethren, and not only did not depute

another to ask for him, what concerned him, but henceforth asks the

Master instead of John."

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part III (Tertia Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 646 / 654 题