SACRAMENTAL CHARACTER. — A spiritual, indelible mark impressed upon the soul by certain Sacraments.
I. THE DOCTRINE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
In the seventh session of the Council of Trent (3 March 1547), it was solemnly defined as a dogma of faith that the three Sacraments—Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders—imprint the s. c. upon the soul, that is, a spiritual and indelible sign; hence they cannot be repeated or received a second time: «Si quis dixerit in tribus Sacramentis, Baptismo, scilicet, Confirmatione et Ordine, non imprimi characterem in anima, hoc est signum quoddam spirituale et indelebile, unde ea iterari non possunt: anathema sit» (Denz-U, 852).According to the Tridentine definition, the s. c. is a sign, something that distinguishes the baptized person from the unbaptized, the confirmed from the unconfirmed, and the person who has received Holy Orders from one who has not. It is a spiritual sign, such as is impressed upon the human soul, whose spiritual nature transcends the order of matter and corporeal things. It is an indelible sign, not subject to being erased, at least in this life. The definition of the Council of Trent does not oblige one to believe that the c. also persists in the next life; it is, however, the common doctrine taught in Catholic schools that this does occur: the s. c. remains impressed for all eternity. Non-repeatability is objectively connected with its indelibility by divine disposition; the indelible c. requires that the Sacrament be received only once.
The Council returns to the s. c. in the twenty-second session, where, from the indelible c. impressed in the Sacrament of Orders, it concludes that the priests of the New Testament do not possess a merely temporary power and cannot become laymen again (Denz-U, 960 and 964).
In the development of the doctrine of the s. c. throughout Catholic tradition, two periods may be distinguished: one extending from the twelfth century to the Council of Trent; the other extending from the Middle Ages back toward primitive Christianity.
In the twelfth century the terminology was fixed and the existence of the character explicitly acknowledged. Innocent III presupposes it in his letter to Umberto, archbishop of Arles (1201). He distinguishes various cases and establishes the rule that the s. c. is impressed when there is no will opposed to the reception of the Sacrament: Tunc ergo characterem sacramentalis imprimit operatio, cum obicem voluntatis contrariae non invenit obsistentem (Denz-U, 411).
In the thirteenth century the theory of the s. c. was definitively established by Alexander of Hales, s. Bonaventure, and s. Thomas Aquinas. The latter devoted question 63 of part 3 of the Summa Theologica to the study of the character and subsequently discussed the related problems, arriving at the following conclusions: 1) the Sacraments imprint a character upon the soul; 2) the character is a deputation to the worship of God in the Christian religion and a participation in the priesthood of Christ; 3) it resides in the powers of the spiritual soul and is indelible; 4) only three Sacraments imprint the s. c.
From the thirteenth century onward, in the writings of the most eminent doctors belonging to the various theological schools, the doctrine later defined by the Council is affirmed beyond any doubt, although divergences and controversies may be noted concerning certain secondary points.
Finally, a little more than a century before the Council of Trent, the Council of Florence, in the Decree for the Armenians (the bull of Eugene IV, 22 November 1439), adopted the formula later taken up, with slight modifications, by the Council of Trent itself: «Among the other Sacraments, there are three—Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders—which imprint upon the soul a spiritual and indelible sign, distinguishing it from others» (Denz-U, 695).
Thus, when the Protestants in the sixteenth century denied the existence of the s. c., they were confronted by a doctrine long established, developed, and discussed in its various aspects. And at Trent the Church accepted and ratified the unanimous teaching then prevailing. According to the normative principles of divine-Catholic tradition, the dogmatic definition issued concerning the character is fully justified: for when a doctrine has been unanimously affirmed for so long—as belonging to the faith—under the vigilance of the infallible Church, it cannot fail to have been revealed by God.
In the period extending from the beginnings to the Middle Ages, the pre-eminent figure is that of s. Augustine, in the struggle which he began with his words and writings even before he was consecrated bishop in 396 and which he then continued vigorously against the Donatists. These schismatics of North Africa, who had separated from Catholic unity in the fourth century, claimed that the true Church had by then been reduced to the restricted sphere of their faction. They held that baptism administered by anyone who was not a Donatist was null and invalid. Consequently, anyone who had received such Baptism and wished to join their sect had, in their view, to be baptized again. Indeed, in such cases they customarily administered a second baptism. S. Augustine entered the field not simply to defend a personal opinion, but to uphold the doctrine of the Church itself, legitimate customs, and the Catholic mind of pastors scattered throughout the world. In the controversy with the Donatists, he represents and sums up the patristic tradition; he therefore enjoys, always according to the canons of divine-Catholic tradition, irrefragable authority. In his teaching, the Church itself speaks and teaches.
In perfect agreement with the Donatists, Augustine professes the non-repeatability of Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders; in opposition to them, however, he proclaims that, if conferred according to the form willed by Christ, even by a schismatic or heretical minister (bishop or priest), they must be regarded as valid and therefore must not be repeated. Those who administer or receive the Sacraments may, if conscious of their guilt, make themselves and remain guilty of grave sin before God; but their validity is not impaired, although the Sacrament does not go so far as to produce justification and sanctifying Grace. When the guilty person subsequently comes sufficiently to detest his own offense, he then receives Grace also by virtue of the Sacrament. From this body of doctrine Augustine was led to distinguish clearly, in the conferral of Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders, two effects: the one, Grace, common to all the Sacraments; the other, proper to the three in question. The first may be absent without affecting validity; the second can never be lacking, even though the Sacrament is administered, always in the proper form, outside the true Church. This latter effect, permanent and inadmissible, provides the objective reason for the non-repeatability of these Sacraments.
Augustine introduced into sacramental theology the word «character», which in the Latin of the time signified a sign or mark of belonging, impressed upon the living flesh of soldiers, slaves, and brute animals. Subsequently, character became a technical term in Western theology and in the official language of the Church.
Augustine’s doctrine is clear from the following texts, selected from among many others. He considers two cases. The first case is that of an apostate Catholic who receives a new baptism. This is simply of no value, since the character of the first baptism remains. If the apostate returns to the bosom of the Church, he cannot be baptized again. The second case is that of an individual who receives Baptism in schism. This is valid and imprints the character. The schismatic, who enters the true Church for the first time, must not receive a second baptism. «Ideo redeunti (to the Church) non redditur (Baptism), quia cum discederet (the apostate), non amisit. Quemadmodum autem Spiritum Sanctum sicut habent filii dilecti, non habent filii maligni, et tamen Baptismum habent; sic et Ecclesiam sicut habent catholici, non habent haeretici et tamen Baptismum habent... Itaque sicut potest baptisma esse et unde se aufert Spiritus Sanctus (through the deprivation of sanctifying Grace); ita etiam potest esse baptisma, ubi non est Ecclesia... Induunt autem (in Baptism) homines Christum, aliquando usque ad Sacramenti percepitionem, aliquando et usque ad vitae sanctificationem: atque illud primum et bonis et malis potest esse commune, hoc autem alterum proprium est bonorum et piorum» (De Baptismo, I, 5, nn. 33, 34: PL. 43, 193). «Cum et hi qui in ipsa unitate (of the Catholic Church) perversi sunt et perdite vivunt, appareant remissionem peccatorum nec dare posse nec habere... tamen et dare, et accipere Baptismi sacramentum, satis eluxit pastoribus Ecclesiae catholicae toto orbe diffusae, per quos postea plenarii concilii auctoritate originalis consuetudo firmata est; etiam ovem, quae foris errabat, et dominicum characterem a fallacibus depraedatoribus suis foris acceperat, venientem
ad christianae unitatis salutem, ab errore corrigi, a captivitate liberari, a vulnere sanari, characterem tamen in ea dominicum agnosci potius quam improbari » (ibid., I, 6, n. 1: PL 43, col. 197).
« Aut si quisquam sive desertor sive qui numquam omnino militavit, nota militari privatum aliquem signet, nonae ubi fuerit deprehensus ille signatus pro desertore punitur... Aut si forte illum militiae characterem in corpore suo non militana pavidus exhorruerit, et ad elementum imperatoris confugerit ac prece fusa et impetrata iam venia militare iam cooperit, numquid homine liberato atque correcto character ille repetitur, ac non potius agnitus adprobatur? An forte minus haerent Sacramenta christiana, quam corporalis haec nota, cum videamus nec apostatas carere baptismate, quibus utique per poenitentiam redeuntibus non restituitur, et ideo amitti non posse iudicatur » (Contra epistolam Parmeniani, I, 2, n. 29: PL 43, col. 71).
Concerning the sacrament of Confirmation, Augustine expresses himself as follows: « In genere visibilium signaculorum sacrosanctum est, sicut ipse Baptismus: sed potest esse et in hominibus pessimis, in operibus carnis vitam consumentibus, et regnum caelorum non possessuris... Discerne ergo visibile S. Sacramentum, quod esse et in bonis et in malis potest, illis ad praenium, istis ad iudicium, ab invisibili unctione charitatis, quae propria bonorum est » (Contra litteras Petiliani, I, 2, n. 239: PL 43, 312-13).
With regard to the sacrament of Orders, Augustine teaches that bishops converted from schism are not ordained again: « sed sicut Baptismus in eis, ita ordinatio mansit integra: quia in praecisione fuerat vitium, quod unitatis pace correctum est; non in Sacramentis, quae ubicumque sunt, ipsa sunt. Et cum expedire hoc iudicatur Ecclesiae, ut praepositit eorum venientes ad catholicam societatem honores suos ibi non administrat; non eis tamen ipsa ordinationis Sacramenta detrahuntur, sed manent super eos » (Contra epistolam Parmeniani, I, 2, n. 28: PL 43, col. 70).
Baptism and Orders are both Sacraments « et quadam consecratione utrumque homini datur, illud cum baptizatur, istud cum ordinatur; ideoque in catholica utrumque non licet iterari » (Contra epistolam Parmeniani, I, 2, n. 28: PL, 43, col. 70).
« Christiani Baptismi sacramentum etiam apud haereticus valet et sufficit ad consecrationem, quamvis ad vitae aeternae partecipationem non sufficiat, quae consecratio reum quidem facit haereticum extra Domini gregem habentem characterem, corrigendum tamen admonet sana doctrina, non iterum similiter consecrandum » (Epist. 98, ad Bonifacium, n. 5: PL 33, 362).
Before Augustine, patristic literature already contained germs and elements that foreshadowed and prepared the way for the subsequent development. The distinction between the two effects does not always appear clearly; but the non-repeatability is affirmed, and the terms « signaculum » and « seal » are used, in Greek σφραγίς. In some New Testament texts where the latter word occurs, certain theologians see allusions to the sacramental character (II Cor. 1, 21, 22; Eph. 1, 13; 4, 30). Catholic exegesis is not unanimous on this point. In any event, this is one of those cases in which Sacred Scripture is not sufficient to provide illumination; therefore one must have recourse to divine Tradition, of which the Church, under the assistance of the Holy Spirit, is the guardian and living expression.
II. FUNCTION AND RATIONALE OF THE SACRAMENTAL CHARACTER
With regard to the function and rationale of the sacramental character, the Church has issued no official definition or declaration. Nevertheless, various views and syntheses have gradually been developed, which may be said to be generally accepted in theological teaching.One begins with the observation that the character, although it does not necessarily imply absence of mortal sin and supernatural friendship with God, is nevertheless, according to patristic thought, a sign of belonging and perpetual consecration to Christ and of affinity with Him
and with His family of the redeemed. Proceeding further, one establishes the social and cultic function of the character: it distinguishes, assimilates, and disposes toward Grace (signum distinctivum, configurativum, dispositivum).
It distinguishes those belonging to the family of Christ, to the visible Church, from those who are not and have never been members of II.
And, within the family, it distinguishes three classes or states. The state of the simple faithful corresponds to the character of Baptism: incorporation into the mystical body of Christ takes place through the external baptismal rite, which, under the action of God, possesses the power to imprint the indelible character. The state of the faithful insofar as they are officially destined to profess and publicly defend the faith corresponds to the character of Confirmation. The state of the ministers of Christ, dispensers of the graces of the Redemption, corresponds to the character of the sacrament of Orders.
S. Thomas points out that, since the Sacraments form part of divine worship in the Christian religion, the character comes to possess a cultic function. In Baptism it confers the cultic power to approach the other Sacraments, which, without the baptismal character, would as such be entirely inoperative. In Confirmation it communicates the sacred power to profess ex officio and defend the faith; profession and defense which, in their own manner, within the sacramental organism, constitute acts of public worship. Through the character of Orders, the spiritual power is communicated to offer and administer the Body and Blood of the Lord, to remit sins, and to consecrate the ministers of the Church.
Moreover, every cultic power depends upon Christ, the supreme and perpetual Priest. Invested with priestly dignity in and through the Incarnation, He exercised its functions chiefly upon the Cross and continues to exercise them, in a different form, in heaven and in the Eucharist. Thus the idea of s. Thomas appears logical and coherent: that the character is a participation in the priestly power of Christ. « Character sacramentalis specialiter est character Christi, cuius sacerdotio configurantur fideles secundum sacramentales characteres, qui nihil aliud sunt, quam quaedam partecipationes sacerdotii Christi, ab ipso derivatae » (Sum. Theol., 3a, q. 63, a. 3). All the faithful, therefore, are priests in their own manner. In this light, the words of s. Peter are better understood, when he calls the ordinary faithful a chosen race and a royal priesthood (genus electum, regale sacerdotium: I Pt. 2, 9). Since the priesthood of Christ is eternal, the character, which is its participation and configuration, must likewise endure indelibly in the next life, as is the common opinion of theologians. And it endures after this life « nei buoni a loro gloria, nei reprobi a loro ignominia » (Sum. Theol., 3a, q. 63, a. 5, ad 3).
Finally, the character has some connection with Grace, at least of a moral order—though there are theologians who would have it be of a physical order—since God, for His part, wills and intends that the consecration proper to the character never be separated from participation in sanctifying Grace. If the two effects are at times separated, if the character is imprinted but Grace is not conferred, this occurs not through any defect on God’s part, but through grave fault on the part of man.
The sacramental character, which to a superficial observer might appear to be of secondary, almost negligible, importance, instead rises to a foremost place in the supernatural economy of salvation, as Christ, founder of the Church and institutor of the Sacraments, willed II. Through the baptismal character, the members of the visible mystical body of Christ are multiplied; through the character of Confirmation, the strong and open defenders of the faith are multiplied in the face of a corrupt and unbelieving world; through the character of Holy Orders, the priests and bishops who govern the Church and administer the Graces of sanctification are multiplied, so as to continue the Redemption of Jesus Christ throughout the centuries.
387: Alessandro di Hales, Sum. Theol., p. 4, q. 8; Sum. Theol., 3°, qq. 63 e 72, aa. 5, 6 con i luoghi paralleli: S. Bonaventura, Sententiarum, l. 4, dist. 6, p. 1 (articulus unicus); S. Roberto Bellarmino, De Sacramentis in genere, l. 2, capp. 18-22; H. Moureau, s. V. in DThC, II, coll. 1698-1708; O. Laake, Über den sakramentalen Charakter, Münster 1903; F. Brommer, Die Lehre vom sakramentalen Charakter in der Scholastik bis Thomas von Aquin inclusive, Paderborn 1908; J. Frantelin, Tractatus de Sacramentis in genere, 3° ed., Roma 1911, pp. 145-80; B. Durst, De characteribus sacramentalibus, in Sonia Thomistica, 2 (1925), pp. 541-81; L. Billot, De Ecclesiae Sacramentis, 7° ed., Roma 1931, pp. 149-68; A. Michel, Les décrets du Concile de Trente, in Hefele-Leclercq, X (1938), pp. 166-216; H. Lennerz, De Sacramentis N. L., Roma 1939, pp. 171-211; A. Piolanti, De Sacramentis, 2° ed., Torino 1947, pp. 70-85, 155-56.