FIRST ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 187, Art. 1]

Whether It Is Lawful for Religious to Teach, Preach, and the Like?

Objection 1: It would seem unlawful for religious to teach, preach,

and the like. For it is said (VII, qu. i, can. Hoc nequaquam) in an

ordinance of a synod of Constantinople [*Pseudosynod held by Photius

in the year 879]: "The monastic life is one of subjection and

discipleship, not of teaching, authority, or pastoral care." And

Jerome says (ad Ripar. et Desider. [*Contra Vigilant. xvi]): "A

monk's duty is not to teach but to lament." Again Pope Leo [*Leo I,

Ep. cxx ad Theodoret., 6, cf. XVI, qu. i, can. Adjicimus]: says "Let

none dare to preach save the priests of the Lord, be he monk or

layman, and no matter what knowledge he may boast of having." Now it

is not lawful to exceed the bounds of one's office or transgress the

ordinance of the Church. Therefore seemingly it is unlawful for

religious to teach, preach, and the like.

Obj. 2: Further, in an ordinance of the Council of Nicea (cf. XVI,

qu. i, can. Placuit) it is laid down as follows: "It is our absolute

and peremptory command addressed to all that monks shall not hear

confessions except of one another, as is right, that they shall not

bury the dead except those dwelling with them in the monastery, or if

by chance a brother happen to die while on a visit." But just as the

above belong to the duty of clerics, so also do preaching and

teaching. Therefore since "the business of a monk differs from that

of a cleric," as Jerome says (Ep. xiv ad Heliod.), it would seem

unlawful for religious to preach, teach, and the like.

Obj. 3: Further, Gregory says (Regist. v, Ep. 1): "No man can fulfil

ecclesiastical duties, and keep consistently to the monastic rule":

and this is quoted XVI, qu. i, can. Nemo potest. Now monks are bound

to keep consistently to the monastic rule. Therefore it would seem

that they cannot fulfil ecclesiastical duties, whereof teaching and

preaching are a part. Therefore seemingly it is unlawful for them to

preach, teach, and do similar things.

_On the contrary,_ Gregory is quoted (XVI, qu. i, can. Ex

auctoritate) as saying: "By authority of this decree framed in virtue

of our apostolic power and the duty of our office, be it lawful to

monk priests who are configured to the apostles, to preach, baptize,

give communion, pray for sinners, impose penance, and absolve from

sin."

_I answer that,_ A thing is declared to be unlawful to a person in

two ways. First, because there is something in him contrary to that

which is declared unlawful to him: thus to no man is it lawful to

sin, because each man has in himself reason and an obligation to

God's law, to which things sin is contrary. And in this way it is

said to be unlawful for a person to preach, teach, or do like things,

because there is in him something incompatible with these things,

either by reason of a precept--thus those who are irregular by

ordinance of the Church may not be raised to the sacred orders--or by

reason of sin, according to Ps. 49:16, "But to the sinner God hath

said: Why dost thou declare My justice?"

In this way it is not unlawful for religious to preach, teach, and do

like things, both because they are bound neither by vow nor by

precept of their rule to abstain from these things, and because they

are not rendered less apt for these things by any sin committed, but

on the contrary they are the more apt through having taken upon

themselves the practice of holiness. For it is foolish to say that a

man is rendered less fit for spiritual duties through advancing

himself in holiness; and consequently it is foolish to declare that

the religious state is an obstacle to the fulfilment of such like

duties. This error is rejected by Pope Boniface [*Boniface IV] for

the reasons given above. His words which are quoted (XVI, qu. i, can.

Sunt. nonnulli) are these: "There are some who without any dogmatic

proof, and with extreme daring, inspired with a zeal rather of

bitterness than of love, assert that monks though they be dead to the

world and live to God, are unworthy of the power of the priestly

office, and that they cannot confer penance, nor christen, nor

absolve in virtue of the power divinely bestowed on them in the

priestly office. But they are altogether wrong." He proves this first

because it is not contrary to the rule; thus he continues: "For

neither did the Blessed Benedict the saintly teacher of monks forbid

this in any way," nor is it forbidden in other rules. Secondly, he

refutes the above error from the usefulness of the monks, when he

adds at the end of the same chapter: "The more perfect a man is, the

more effective is he in these, namely in spiritual works."

Secondly, a thing is said to be unlawful for a man, not on account of

there being in him something contrary thereto, but because he lacks

that which enables him to do it: thus it is unlawful for a deacon to

say mass, because he is not in priestly orders; and it is unlawful

for a priest to deliver judgment because he lacks the episcopal

authority. Here, however, a distinction must be made. Because those

things which are a matter of an order, cannot be deputed to one who

has not the order, whereas matters of jurisdiction can be deputed to

those who have not ordinary jurisdiction: thus the delivery of a

judgment is deputed by the bishop to a simple priest. In this sense

it is said to be unlawful for monks and other religious to preach,

teach, and so forth, because the religious state does not give them

the power to do these things. They can, however, do them if they

receive orders, or ordinary jurisdiction, or if matters of

jurisdiction be delegated to them.

Reply Obj. 1: It results from the words quoted that the fact of their

being monks does not give monks the power to do these things, yet it

does not involve in them anything contrary to the performance of

these acts.

Reply Obj. 2: Again, this ordinance of the Council of Nicea forbids

monks to claim the power of exercising those acts on the ground of

their being monks, but it does not forbid those acts being delegated

to them.

Reply Obj. 3: These two things are incompatible, namely, the ordinary

cure of ecclesiastical duties, and the observance of the monastic

rule in a monastery. But this does not prevent monks and other

religious from being sometimes occupied with ecclesiastical duties

through being deputed thereto by superiors having ordinary cure;

especially members of religious orders that are especially instituted

for that purpose, as we shall say further on (Q. 188, A. 4).

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 1103 / 1128 题