SACRAMENTAL CHARACTER. - A spiritual, indelible mark imprinted on 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 Order, imprint on the soul the sacramental character, that is, a spiritual and indelible sign, from which it follows that 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 sacramental character is a sign, something that distinguishes the baptized from the non-baptized, the confirmed from the non-confirmed, the one who has received Holy Order from the one who has not received it. A spiritual sign, as that which is imprinted on the human soul, whose spiritual nature transcends the order of matter and of the corporeal. An indelible sign, not cancellable at least in this life. The definition of the Council of Trent does not oblige one to believe that the character also persists in the next life; it is, however, the common doctrine taught in Catholic schools that this is so: the sacramental character remains imprinted for all eternity. With indelibility there is objectively connected, by divine disposition, non-repeatability; the indelible character requires that the Sacrament be received only once.
The Council returns to the sacramental character in the twenty-second session, where from the indelible character imprinted in the sacrament of Order it concludes that the priests of the New Testament do not possess a merely temporary power and that they cannot become laymen again (Denz-U, 960 and 964).
In the development of the doctrine on the sacramental character through Catholic tradition, two periods are distinguished: one that runs from the 12th century up to the Council of Trent; the other that extends from the Middle Ages back toward primitive Christianity.
In the 12th century the terminology is fixed and the existence of the character is explicitly admitted. Innocent III presupposes it in the letter to Humbert, archbishop of Arles (1201). He distinguishes various cases and establishes the norm that the sacramental character is imprinted when there exists no will contrary to the reception of the Sacrament: Tunc ergo characterem sacramentalis imprimit operatio, cum obicem voluntatis contrariae non invenit obsistentem (Denz-U, 411).
In the 13th century the theory of the sacramental character is definitively determined with Alexander of Hales, St. Bonaventure, and St. Thomas Aquinas. The latter devotes to the study of the character the 63rd question of the third part of the Summa Theologica and successively discusses the related problems, arriving at the following conclusions: 1) the Sacraments imprint a character on 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 sacramental character.
From the 13th century onward, in the writings of the most distinguished doctors, belonging to the various theological schools, the doctrine later defined by the Council is found affirmed without a shadow of doubt, although divergences and controversies are noted regarding certain secondary points.
Finally, a little more than a century before Trent, the Council of Florence in the Decree for the Armenians (bull of Eugene IV, 22 Nov. 1439), adopts the formula, taken up with slight modifications by the Council of Trent itself: «Among the other Sacraments, there are three: Baptism, Confirmation, and Order, which imprint on the soul a spiritual and indelible sign, distinguishing it from the others» (Denz-U, 695).
Thus, when the Protestants in the 16th century denied the existence of the sacramental character, they found themselves faced with a doctrine long since established, developed, and discussed under its various aspects. And at Trent the Church accepted and ratified the then prevailing unanimous teaching. According to the normative principles of the divine-Catholic tradition, the dogmatic definition issued on the character is fully justified: for when a doctrine is thus for so long — under the vigilance of the infallible Church — affirmed unanimously as belonging to the faith, it cannot but be revealed by God.
In the period that runs from the earliest beginnings up to the Middle Ages, the figure of St. Augustine stands out supreme in the struggle that, by word and by writing, he began even before he was consecrated bishop in 396 and then continued relentlessly against the Donatists. These schismatics of North Africa, having broken away from Catholic unity in the 4th century, claimed that the true Church was by then reduced to the narrow confines of their faction. They held as null and invalid the baptism administered by anyone who was not a Donatist. Anyone, consequently, who had received such Baptism, wishing to join their sect, had, in their view, to be baptized again. Indeed, in this case they were accustomed to administer a second baptism. St. Augustine entered the field, not simply to defend a personal opinion of his own, but to uphold the very doctrine of the Church, the legitimate customs, and the Catholic sense of the pastors scattered throughout the world. In the controversy with the Donatists, he represents and sums up in himself the patristic tradition: he therefore enjoys, always according to the canons of the divine-Catholic tradition, irrefragable authority. In his teaching the Church herself speaks and teaches.
In perfect agreement with the Donatists, Augustine professes the non-repeatability of Baptism, Confirmation, and Order; in contrast with 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 considered valid and therefore not to be repeated. Those who administer or receive the Sacraments can, if conscious of their guilt, make themselves and remain guilty of grave sin before God; but the validity does not suffer from this, although the Sacrament does not succeed in producing justification and sanctifying Grace. When, however, the guilty person comes to detest his crime sufficiently, then, by virtue of the Sacrament, he would also receive Grace. From such a body of doctrine, Augustine was led to distinguish clearly, in the conferral of Baptism, Confirmation, and Order, two effects: one, Grace, common to all the Sacraments; the other, proper to the three in question. The first can be lacking, without prejudice to validity; the second can never be lacking, even though the Sacrament is administered, always in the due form, outside the true Church. This latter effect, permanent and inadmissible of removal, gives the objective reason for the non-repeatability of the said Sacraments.
Augustine introduced into sacramental theology the word "character," which, in the Latin of the time, meant a sign or mark of belonging, imprinted on 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 emerges clearly from the following texts, chosen from among many others. He considers two cases. First case: that of a Catholic apostate 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 rebaptized. Second case: 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 (alla Chiesa) non redditur (il Battesimo), quia cum discederet (l'apostata), 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 (per la privazione della Grazia santificante); ita etiam potest esse baptisma, ubi non est Ecclesia... Induunt autem (nel Battesimo) 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 (della Chiesa cattolica) 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).
On the sacrament of Confirmation, Augustine expresses himself thus: « 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 Order, Augustine teaches that bishops converted from schism are not ordained anew: « 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 Order 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 contains seeds and elements that prelude and prepare the future development. The distinction between the two effects does not always appear clearly; but the non-repeatability is affirmed, and the term "signaculum," "seal" in Greek σφραγίς, is used. In some of the texts of the New Testament where this last word occurs, some 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 case, this is one of those cases in which Sacred Scripture is not sufficient to shed light; therefore one must have recourse to divine tradition, of which the Church, under the assistance of the Holy Spirit, is the depositary and living expression.
II. FUNCTION AND RAISON D'ÊTRE OF THE SACRAMENTAL CHARACTER
With regard to the function and purpose of the sacramental character, the Church has issued no official definition or declaration. Nevertheless, ways of seeing and syntheses have come to be elaborated that may be said to be generally accepted in theological teaching.
The starting point is the observation that the character, although it does not necessarily imply the absence of mortal sin and of supernatural friendship with God, is nonetheless, according to patristic thought, a sign of belonging and perpetual consecration to Christ and of affinity with Him and His family of the redeemed. Proceeding further, one establishes the social and cultic function of the character: it distinguishes, assimilates, disposes to Grace (signum distinctivum, configurativum, dispositivum).
It distinguishes the members of Christ's family, of the visible Church, from those who are not and never were members of it.
And, within the family, it distinguishes three classes or states. To the state of the simple faithful corresponds the character of Baptism: aggregation to the mystical body of Christ takes place through the external baptismal rite, which, under God's action, possesses the power to imprint the indelible character. To the state of the faithful, insofar as they are officially destined to profess publicly and to defend the faith, corresponds the character of Confirmation. To the state of the ministers of Christ, dispensers of the graces of the Redemption, corresponds the character of the sacrament of Order.
St. Thomas notes that, since the Sacraments are part of divine worship in the Christian religion, the character comes to possess a cultic function. In Baptism it confers the cultic power of access to the other Sacraments, which, without the baptismal character, would, as such, be absolutely inoperative. In Confirmation it communicates the sacred power to profess ex officio and to defend the faith; a profession and defense that, in their own manner, within the sacramental organism, constitute acts of public worship. With the character of Order is communicated the spiritual power to offer and administer the Body and Blood of the Lord, to forgive sins, to consecrate the ministers of the Church.
On the other hand, any cultic power depends on Christ, the supreme and eternal Priest. He, invested with the priestly dignity in and through the Incarnation, exercised its functions principally on the Cross and continues to exercise them, in a different form, in heaven and in the Eucharist. Hence the idea of St. 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 in their own manner priests. In this light one better understands the words of St. Peter, who calls the ordinary faithful a chosen race and a royal priesthood (genus electum, regale sacerdotium: I Pt. 2, 9). Since, moreover, Christ's priesthood is eternal, the character, which is its participation and configuration, must endure indelibly even in the next life, as the common view of theologians holds. And it endures after this life « in the good unto their glory, in the reprobate unto their ignominy » (Sum. Theol., 3a, q. 63, a. 5, ad 3).
Finally, the character has some connection with Grace, at least of a moral order - there is no lack of theologians who would have it of a physical order - since God, as far as it depends on Him, wills and intends that the consecration proper to the character never be separated from the fellowship of sanctifying Grace. And if the two effects are at times dissociated, if the character is imprinted but Grace is not conferred, this happens not through any defect on God's part, but through grave fault on man's part.
The sacramental character, which to a superficial observer might seem of secondary, almost negligible, importance, rises instead to the rank of a foremost element in the supernatural economy of salvation, such as Christ willed it, the founder of the Church and institutor of the Sacraments. Through the baptismal character the members of Christ's visible mystical body are multiplied; through the character of Confirmation the strong and open defenders of the faith are multiplied before a corrupt and unbelieving world; through the character of Holy Order priests and bishops are multiplied, who govern the Church and administer the Graces of sanctification, in order to continue through the centuries the Redemption of Jesus Christ.
Bibliography2 works
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.