Question XII: Whether regular prelates can do anything concerning the conferring of orders and the blessing of things or places, and what

THIS question, as regards the first part, is to be solved more broadly; I say therefore, according to the ancient law, from the Seventh Synod chap. 14, on chap. 1 dist. 69, only this is read as law: Abbots can in their own monastery ordain Lectors only; and since the Ostiariate and Tonsure are inferior to the lectorate, thence the Gloss there and Innocent gather, chap. Cum contingat, de aetate et qualitate, that these also can be conferred by an Abbot according to that law; which law Suarez concludes to be undoubted, chap. 29 num. 3, where num. seq., where he requires four conditions in such an Abbot.

The FIRST is, that such an Abbot be set over some Monastery; where in the Latin edition of the councils not an Abbot specifically is expressed, but the Prefect of the Monastery, as Suarez well notes, in the place cited; by which name, if you regard the thing itself, all Regular Prelates can come; but if you consider the use, or custom, which is the best interpreter of ancient laws, no Prelate who is not an Abbot can aspire to that power; for this has been neither seen nor heard in our times, although many other privileges of Abbots, insofar as they are prefects of coenobia, are communicated to Regulars, as appears everywhere in the compendiums of Privileges, and Suarez teaches, in the place cited.

The REASON of this non-communication can be, that that favor was granted to Abbots rather in favor of the more eminent dignity than of regular government; this appears from the fact that the laws always express the Abbot most specifically; but where there is a most specific clause, communication is excluded: Add that Pontifical insignia are granted to Abbots, not to others; which would not become others equally.

The SECOND condition is Priesthood, for this ordination is of itself of order, at least broadly, rather than of jurisdiction, that it may be valid.

The THIRD is the benediction, imparted to him by the Bishop, which is understood in chap. cit. impositione manus.

The FOURTH is jurisdiction, on account of which it is asked whether, if an Abbot ordain the subject of another, he do it validly; which is the same as asking whether that condition be required for a licit, or for a valid ordination: The Gloss affirms, chap. Abbates de privilegiis, in 6, that it is required only for a licit ordination.

The COMMON opinion of Doctors, however, with Suarez num. 8, requires it by force of the ancient law, that he may be ordained licitly and validly; because this is a privilege granted only in one's own monastery. But a privilege is not to be drawn beyond the proper signification of the words. It is proved by a like case: if a pope gave this privilege for one person and not for another, or for one day and not for another, that he could do this is undoubted; doubtless an Order conferred on such a person or at such a time would be valid; but not otherwise, since otherwise, after the time of the privilege ended, he could ordain, and thus an Abbot, just like a Bishop, from an intrinsic power, or extension of his Character, could confer orders, which no one has said; whence only broadly by pontifical extension is this act in an Abbot of Orders, as I said in the second condition: wherefore this power is not very unlike the power of Confirming given to a simple priest for a certain time or place; which circumstances, if he did not observe, he would confirm neither validly nor licitly. Understand this by force of the old privilege, for otherwise perhaps it is now ordained, as I shall say below.

You WILL ASK whether that condition, that the Abbot be blessed, be now necessary, so that without it the ordination be invalid.

It is answered, with Suarez num. 17, that triennial Abbots can do this by special privilege, as is had in the Cistercian compendium, V. Abbas §. 4 and 5, and by the privilege of Julius II, with Suarez in the place cited; see Felinus on chap. eam te de rescriptis, with many others on chap. inter monasterium de re iudicata. Yet the privilege of these Abbots is restricted to Religious subjects alone, whence they cannot ordain others, although subjects, who are seculars, contrary to the cited concession of Julius II, by which it pleased him to promote any subjects whatsoever to Orders. This restriction is had in the Council of Trent, sess. 23 chap. 10 de reformatione, to which in Confirmation succeeds the declaration of the Holy Congregation, with Suarez in the place cited; yet if such an Abbot should ordain or tonsure one not subject to himself, he would not be retonsured or reordained, but dispensed, because the Council says: it is not lawful, but not: it does not avail; as the sacred Congregation of Cardinals also declares, with Suarez num. 20.

You WILL ASK whether, by force of the old privileges above mentioned, other orders above the Lectorate can be given.

It is answered by Suarez negatively, because this is determined in the very text, nor are privileges to be amplified against the force of their proper words.

BVT it was declared by the Congregation of Cardinals in the said chap. 10 of the Council, says Suarez num. 21, that Abbots obtaining the right of bearing the Mitre and Staff, and having priesthood with benediction, can confer the minor Orders on whomsoever, provided they have letters dimissorial with a special note from their own Prelates, if they are aliens, and moreover the license of that Bishop in whose diocese the orders are to be ministered. Which new law, if it be true — of which Suarez doubts at the end, and deservedly, since it could never appear — must needs be more ample than the ancient, in which it was proved neither licit nor valid, as we saw above.

Some will have this power extended to the Diaconate and Subdiaconate by the privilege of Innocent VIII given to the Abbot of Citeaux and four other principal Abbots of that order.

BVT whatever be the truth of that indult, which the collector of the Privileges of the Cistercian Order omitted, it is certain that the Council of Trent established that Regulars be ordained neither in minority of age, nor without diligent examination of the Bishop, any privileges whatsoever being in this respect wholly excluded, wherein it is intimated that all Regulars are to be ordained in sacred orders only by Bishops, as Navarro teaches, concil. 13 de privil., with Suarez num. 24 at the end.

AS REGARDS Benediction to be imparted to things or vestments; it is certain that Regular Abbots can consecrate the Pallae of the altar, Corporals, and the rest of its vestments. But if the matter be of the consecration of an Altar, a Chalice, or another thing, in which the anointing of Chrism intervenes, this is granted to Bishops alone; the Doctors are to be seen on either side in chap. Abbates de privilegiis in 6, and Suarez in the place cited.

The former power was introduced for all Regular Abbots rather by custom and the tacit concession of the supreme Pontiff than by any manifest privilege; although privileges exist for some. But why such a right was sanctioned by custom, and not the right of chrismating, ordaining, etc., since to bless and consecrate are acts of order, to be performed by a simple priest with a certain solemnity of words, Suarez teaches, num. 4, saying that certain things befit Bishops by force of Episcopal consecration, as to Confirm, to bless Chrism, and the like; which, because they are of divine right, cannot be abrogated by any custom; for things divine, like things human, are not subject to this: Certain things also are annexed to Episcopal power by ecclesiastical institution, and resting rather on the sacerdotal than pontifical Character: but these, since they are in the manner of jurisdiction, can be acquired by the extrinsic signification of the supreme Prelate and tacit approbation: for although true jurisdiction is not to be introduced except by express concession; yet if it be already exercised and knowingly tolerated, it is a sign that it was once truly granted.

But the said custom, although it holds for Abbots, yet fails for Mendicants: for we cannot find such a memorable custom for them; although from other titles the aforesaid right of consecrating the vestments of the sacred altar, pallae, etc., accrues to them.

For in the first place the communication of Mendicants with monastic orders can have place in this, although it does not as regards the conferring of Orders; for to this pressed special reasons, which I touched above: But for the benedictions of vestments the necessity can be greater, nor is the reason unlike in Mendicants, on account of the continual use of vestments and altar ornaments, and the number of priests sacrificing daily.

Wherefore Leo X, the Pontiff, indulged to the Minors that they may exercise such benedictions under only a twofold restriction; the first is, that they bestow them for the use of their own brethren; the second, that where Chrism or anointing is required, they cannot bless; otherwise the said concession is most ample. See the compend. of the Society, V. benedicere, §. 1, and the supplem. of the Minors, concess. 55. But that it may be more distinctly recognized in what things and by what Persons the said privilege of Leo X is to be applied to use, it pleases to report the words written of it, as they are had in the compend. of the Minors, V. benedictio, §. 14, and are reported by Bonagratia citing below, V. benedicere, num. 63; in which places this is established: That all and singular the Churches, Cemeteries, Chapters, and Oratories of the same Order and Observance, existing anywhere, both received and to be received, and the vestments, ornaments, and other things whatsoever necessary for Divine worship and the use of the Brothers, in which Chrism does not intervene, for the use of the same Brothers only, they may validly bless with solemn benediction, which other Brothers of the same Order deputed for this in General Chapters cannot do; and that they can likewise reconcile Churches, etc., which have been polluted in any way by effusion of blood or seed, and this with water blessed by the aforesaid Prelates, especially in remote places, where they could not approach the Bishop blessing the water for two days. And although Corporals are not there expressed, they are nevertheless included: And it is more expressly permitted by Innocent VIII: That the Priors of the Order, and Vicars in the absence of the Prior, and anyone having the government of any Monastery whatsoever, can bless Corporals, vestments, and the other ecclesiastical ornaments pertaining to Divine worship, of his own Monastery as well as from wherever they come. But this Constitution is had in Sorore, in Addit., and was made for the Congregation of St. Justina, 1487, and for those communicating with it.

Nor does it stand against this last privilege that it be an oracle of the living voice, and consequently ought to lack force by the constitutions of Gregory XV and Urban VIII, indicating to the General and the other ministers of each order that such oracles of the voice, being revoked, be published in the provinces and convents of Regulars; for without this publication they do not obtain revocation.

For to this instance Bonagratia, our countryman, responds at length in his summula, V. Benedicere, and the word Privilegium, that all oracles of the living voice passed into the Bullary confirmations by the declaration of subsequent Pontiffs; see him proving this by the various responses of ministers, both Provincial and General, drawn from the archives of our order; and likewise by the response of Urban VIII himself made to Father M. Antonio de Carpenedulo, then General of the Capuchins, whereby he willed in no way to involve the Prelates of this order in his revocations; which was perhaps done on account of his singular affection toward this Religion, in which his own German brother had then lived with the highest praise, until he was raised to the dignity of Cardinal.

For the various species and forms of benedictions, see our Bonagratia, under the word Benedicere; see also Suarez lib. 2 cited, chap. 30 num. ult. at the end, where he mentions the privilege of Innocent VIII granted to the Cistercians; and another of Julius II given to the Prior General of the Canons of St. Savior, to whom it is granted without restriction that they may bless whatever pertains to the fact of the Altar, or sacred uses, whether of their own monastery or from wherever they come.