CARATTERE SACRAMENTALE

CARATTERE SACRAMENTALE. — A spiritual and indelible sign imprinted on the soul by certain Sacraments.

I. THE DOCTRINE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT

According to the Tridentine definition, the character sacramentale is a sign, something that distinguishes the baptized from the unbaptized, the confirmed from the unconfirmed, and those who have received Holy Orders from those who have not. It is a spiritual sign, like that which is imprinted on the human soul, whose spiritual nature transcends the order of matter and the corporeal. It is an indelible sign, which

At least in this life, it is indelible. The definition of the Council of Trent does not oblige one to believe that the character persists even in the other life; however, it is common doctrine taught in Catholic schools that this is indeed the case: the sacramental character remains impressed for all eternity. Indelibility is objectively connected, by divine ordinance, with non-repeatability; an indelible character requires that the sacrament be received only once.

The Council returns to the sacramental character in Session XXII, where it concludes from the indelible character impressed in the sacrament of Order that the priests of the New Testament do not possess merely a temporary power and cannot return to the lay state (Denz-U, 960 and 964).

In the development of doctrine on the sacramental character throughout Catholic tradition, two periods can be distinguished: one extending from the 12th century to the Council of Trent, and another stretching from the Middle Ages back to primitive Christianity.

In the 12th century, 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 norm that the sacramental character is imprinted when there is no contrary will obstructing the reception of the sacrament: *Tunc ergo characterem sacramentali talis imprimit operatio, cum obicem voluntatis contrariae non invenit obsistentem* (Denz-U, 411).

In the 13th century, the theory of the sacramental character was definitively determined by Alexander of Hales, St. Bonaventure, and St. Thomas Aquinas. The latter devotes Question 63 of the Third Part of the *Summa Theologica* to the study of the character and discusses the related problems, arriving at the following conclusions: 1) Sacraments imprint a character on the soul; 2) the character is a deputization for 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 various theological schools, the doctrine—later defined by the Council—is affirmed without any shadow of doubt, although some secondary points remain subject to debate and controversy.

Finally, just over a century before Trent, the Council of Florence in the Decree for the Armenians (bull of Eugenius IV, 22 Nov. 1439) adopted the formula, slightly modified, later taken up by the Council of Trent: “Among the other sacraments, there are three—Baptism, Confirmation, and Order—that imprint on the soul a spiritual and indelible sign, distinct from the others” (Denz-U, 695).

Thus, when the Protestants in the 16th century denied the existence of the sacramental character, they found themselves confronted with a doctrine that had long been established, developed, and discussed in its various aspects. At Trent, the Church accepted and ratified the then-current unanimous teaching. According to the normative principles of divine-Catholic tradition, the dogmatic definition issued on the character is fully justified: for when a doctrine, long affirmed unanimously under the vigilance of the infallible Church as pertaining to faith, cannot but be revealed by God.

In the period from the early Church to the Middle Ages, the towering figure of St. Augustine stands out in the struggle he waged, both in word and in writing, even before his episcopal consecration in 396 and continued vigorously against the Donatists. These schismatics of North Africa, separated from Catholic unity in the 4th century, claimed that the true Church was now confined to the narrow bounds of their faction. They held that any baptism administered by someone outside the Donatist communion was null and void. Consequently, anyone who had received such a baptism and wished to join their sect had, in their view, to be rebaptized. Indeed, they would administer a second baptism in such cases. St. Augustine entered the fray not merely to defend a personal opinion but to uphold the doctrine of the Church itself, the legitimate customs, and the Catholic sense of the shepherds scattered throughout the world. In his controversy with the Donatists, he embodies and sums up patristic tradition; hence, according to the canons of divine-Catholic tradition, he enjoys irrefutable authority. In his teaching, the Church herself speaks and teaches.

In perfect agreement with the Donatists, Augustine affirms the non-repeatability of Baptism, Confirmation, and Order; in contrast to them, however, he declares that if these sacraments are conferred according to the form willed by Christ—even by a simoniacal or heretical minister—they must be considered valid and therefore not repeated. Those who administer or receive the sacraments may, if conscious of their guilt, render themselves liable to grave sin before God; yet the validity of the sacrament is not thereby impaired, even though it may fail to produce justification and sanctifying grace. When, however, the guilty party comes to detest his crime sufficiently, then, by virtue of the sacrament, he also receives grace. From such doctrinal premises, Augustine was led to distinguish clearly in the conferral of Baptism, Confirmation, and Order two effects: one, grace, common to all sacraments; the other, proper to these three. The former may be lacking without prejudice to validity; the latter can never fail, even when the sacrament is administered—always in due form—outside the true Church. This latter effect, permanent and ineradicable, provides the objective reason for the non-repeatability of these sacraments.

Augustine introduced into sacramental theology the word *character*, which in the Latin of his time meant a mark or brand of belonging, impressed upon the living flesh of soldiers, slaves, and branded animals. Subsequently, *character* became a technical term in Western theology and in the official language of the Church.

Augustine’s doctrine is clearly evident 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 (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 auferat Spiritus Sanctus (through the privation of sanctifying grace); ita etiam potest esse baptisma, ubi non est Ecclesia... Induunt autem (in baptism) homines Christum, aliquando usque ad sacramentum perceptionem, 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 diffusa, 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*”

for Christian unity’s sake, to be corrected from error, to be freed from captivity, to be healed of wound, yet the character itself in it is rather acknowledged as dominion than disapproved” (ibid., I, 6, no. 1: PL 43, col. 197).

“Or if someone, whether a deserter or one who never at all served in the army, should brand a private with a military mark, is he not, when that marked man is caught, punished as a deserter?... Or if perchance one who has not served in the army, trembling, should recoil from that military character upon his body and flee for refuge to the emperor’s clemency, and by pouring out prayers obtain pardon and already begin to serve in the army, is that character then sought again against the man once freed and corrected, or rather is it not acknowledged and approved? Do Christian Sacraments perhaps cling less than this bodily mark, when we see that apostates do not lack baptism, to whom, even when they return through penance, it is not restored, and therefore is judged unable to be lost?” (Contra epistolam Parmeniani, I, 2, no. 29: PL 43, col. 71).

On the sacrament of Confirmation, Augustine thus expresses himself: “In the genus of visible signs the most holy is like Baptism itself; yet it can exist even in very wicked men, in those who consume their life in works of the flesh and will not possess the kingdom of heaven... Therefore distinguish the visible sacrament, which can be both in the good and in the bad, for the former unto reward, for the latter unto judgment, from the invisible anointing of charity, which is proper to the good” (Contra litteras Petiliani, I, 2, no. 239: PL 43, 312-13).

Regarding the sacrament of Order, Augustine teaches that bishops converted from schism are not ordained again: “but just as Baptism in them, so the ordination remained intact: because the vice had been in the separation, which was corrected by the peace of unity; not in the Sacraments, which wherever they are, are themselves. And when it is judged expedient for the Church that their superiors, coming to Catholic communion, should not exercise their offices there, nevertheless the Sacraments of ordination themselves are not taken away from them, but remain over them” (Contra epistolam Parmeniani, I, 2, no. 28: PL 43, col. 70).

Baptism and Order are both Sacraments “and each is given to man by a certain consecration; the one when he is baptized, the other when he is ordained; and therefore in the Catholic Church neither may be repeated” (Contra epistolam Parmeniani, I, 2, no. 28: PL 43, col. 70).

“The sacrament of Christian Baptism is valid even among heretics and suffices for the consecration, although it does not suffice for participation in eternal life; this consecration indeed makes the heretic guilty, holding the character while being outside the Lord’s flock, yet sound doctrine admonishes that he should be corrected, not again similarly consecrated” (Epist. 98, ad Bonifacium, no. 5: PL 33, 362).

Before Augustine, in patristic literature there are contained germs and elements that foreshadow and prepare future development. The distinction between the two effects does not always appear clear; yet the non-repeatability is affirmed and the term “signaculo,” “seal,” in Greek σφραγίς is employed. In some of the New Testament texts where this latter word occurs, some theologians see hints of the c. s. (2 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 does not suffice to shed light; therefore recourse must be had to divine tradition, of which the Church, under the assistance of the Holy Spirit, is the depository and living expression.

II. FUNCTION AND REASON FOR THE C. S. — Regarding the function and reason for the c. s., the Church has issued no definition or official declaration. There have, however, been elaborated ways of viewing and syntheses that may be said generally to be accepted in theological teaching.

It starts from the observation that the character, although it does not necessarily imply the 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 His family of the redeemed. Proceeding further, the social and cultic function of the character is established: it distinguishes, assimilates, disposes to grace (signum distinctivum, configurativum, dispositivum).

It distinguishes those belonging to the family of Christ, to the visible Church, from those who are not and never were members.

And within the family it distinguishes three classes or states. To the state of simple faithful corresponds the character of Baptism: incorporation into the mystical body of Christ occurs through the external rite of baptism, which, under God’s action, possesses the power to impress the indelible character. To the state of the faithful, insofar as they are officially destined to profess the faith publicly and defend it, corresponds the character of Confirmation. To the state of ministers of Christ, dispensers of the graces of Redemption, corresponds the character of the sacrament of Order.

St. Thomas notes 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 be, as such, absolutely inoperative. In Confirmation it communicates the sacred power to profess and defend the faith ex officio; profession and defense which, in their manner, within the sacramental organism, constitute acts of public worship. Through the character of Order is communicated the spiritual power to offer and administer the Body and Blood of the Lord, to remit sins, to consecrate ministers of the Church.

Moreover, any cultic power depends on Christ, the highest and eternal Priest. He, invested with priestly dignity in and through the Incarnation, exercised its functions principally on the Cross and continues to exercise them, in a different manner, in heaven and in the Eucharist. Hence it is logical and coherent the idea of St. Thomas, that the character is a participation in the priestly power of Christ.

“The sacramental character is specially the character of Christ, to whose priesthood the faithful are configured according to the sacramental characters, which are nothing else than certain participations of Christ’s priesthood, derived from Him” (Sum. Theol., III, q. 63, a. 3). All the faithful therefore, in their manner, are priests. Under this light are better understood the words of St. Peter, who calls the common faithful a chosen race and a royal priesthood (genus electum, regale sacerdotium: 1 Pt 2:9). Since then the priesthood of Christ is eternal, the character, which is its participation and configuration, must endure indelibly even in the next life, as the common sense of theologians holds. And it endures after this life “in the good to their glory, in the reprobate to their ignominy” (Sum. Theol., III, q. 63, a. 5, ad 3).

Finally, the character has some connection with grace, at least of moral order—though some theologians would wish it to be of physical order—inasmuch as God, as far as He is concerned, wills and intends that the consecration proper to the character should never be separated from the communion of sanctifying grace. If the two effects are sometimes separated, 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 c. s., which to a superficial observer might seem of secondary, almost negligible, importance, rises instead to a position of primary significance in the supernatural economy of salvation, as Christ willed it, founder of the Church and institutor of the Sacraments. Through the baptismal character the members of the visible mystical body of Christ are multiplied; through the character of Confirmation the strong and open assertors of the faith are multiplied in the face of 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, to continue through the ages the Redemption of Jesus Christ.