De Ecclesia Christi

« The patriarchal Church, from Adam onward, was contained as a less conspicuous beginning, in the profession of the true faith and in the true worship of God; compared with this state the form of the Church, not universal for all nations but peculiar in the people of Israel instituted by God through Moses, appears more expressed in the unity of the sacred ministry, of rule, and of the magisterium; yet even this was only a foreshadowing and an introduction to the Church of Jesus Christ in the perfect state of the New Testament. »

As long as we consider the Church of God on earth, setting aside for the moment the consideration of the final state in the heavenly consummation, according to the more general notion declared above, namely the society of the faithful, or of those who worship God in true worship, the members of this society are understood to be joined by true faith and true supernatural worship of God, with God and with one another; for unless they were associated by some common bond, there would be no communion or society; unless this bond were constituted by faith and the worship of God, there would be no religious society, and therefore no Church. Nevertheless, everyone sees that this notion, precisely because it is generic, is too indeterminate and abstract. For it does not say by what safeguards the one true faith is kept and propagated in the society of the faithful through the succession of generations; by what form of government this city of God is ruled; by what common rite of divine worship, which among men must be not only internal but also external, the same communion of saints honors God and is itself sanctified ¹; it does not say, I repeat, by what teaching authority of faith, what rule of sacred government, what ministry of sanctification or priesthood the religious society itself is formed and shaped. By how much more perfect, in universality, is the unity, the perpetuity, and the holiness to be formed and maintained through the magisterium, the sacred rule, and the ministry for the sanctification and salvation of the members (of all these, namely the profession of faith, of government, and of divine worship), by so much more perfect is the religious society itself; or, by so much more perfect is the state of the Church.

Now indeed, just as generally in the economy of the revelation and salvation of the human race through Christ the Redeemer, divine omnipotence and wisdom, justice and mercy distinguished a threefold stage, by which it continually advanced from the less perfect to the more perfect until the fullness of time; so also specifically in the state of the Church, which is formed and perfected through this very economy of revelation and salvation as its concrete expression, the same degrees of advancing perfection are observed, from the beginning to growth and to fullness. For the threefold state is clearly distinguished: the Church patriarchal, or (as it is commonly called) of the law of nature; the Church Mosaic; and the Church of Jesus Christ, of the Word now incarnate, which, remaining now an unshaken kingdom (Heb. XII. 28), awaits no other consummation of its state than from faith to vision in the heavenly Church.

I. The Church in the state of beginning was instituted for the restoration of the human race immediately after the fall, through the promised seed of the woman, which for her, and she who through it, shall crush the head of the serpent ² (Gen. III. 15). For the supernatural revelation made to the first parents about God, about his law and worship, about the angels and about eternal life, above all about the future Restorer and the expiation of sins, together with internal grace joined to the external graces, and thus faith and hope in God and in the Redeemer, and their greater perfection, charity: these supernatural gifts, I say, from the merciful will of God, on account of the future merits of Christ as head, were prepared for all the posterity of Adam in the state of redemption, and were conferred on those who cooperated in act (cf. Heb. XI.). By faith therefore, not only of the heart but, according to the condition and the exigence of human nature, also by the profession of the mouth (Rom. X. 10), by worship of the true God not only internal but also visible and external, by sacrifices and sacraments ³ were gathered into a religious society and a communion of « the sons of God », distinct and separated by religion from the impious « sons of men » (Gen. VI. 2, 4).

Augustine describes the city of God, or the Church of that first age, both before and after the flood, thus: « Therefore among those peoples of men of that time... we shall seek, if we can find it, that city of God which is wandering on earth, which was led down to the flood and the ark, and which is shown to have persisted in the sons of Noah through their blessings, especially in the greatest of them, who is called Shem... The series of generations, therefore, must be held from Shem himself, so that it may show the city of God after the flood, just as the series of generations from him who is called Seth showed it before the flood... When therefore we seek the city of God among those seventy-two nations (Gen. X), we cannot affirm that at the time when they had one lip, that is one speech, the human race had already become estranged from the worship of the true God, so that only in those generations true piety remained, which descend from the seed of Shem through Arphaxad and tend toward Abraham; but from that pride of building the tower up to heaven... an earthly city appeared, that is, a society of the impious; whether therefore it was not before, or was hidden, or rather both persisted, the pious indeed in the two sons of Noah who were blessed and in their posterity, and the impious in him who was cursed and in his progeny... is not an easy judgment. For perhaps, which is indeed more credible, already in the sons of those two, even before Babylon began to be built, there were despisers of God, and among the sons of Ham worshippers of God; yet we must believe that both kinds of men have never been lacking on earth » — Aug., civ. Dei L. XVI, c. 9, 10.

But just as revelation itself, both about God and about the moral and liturgical law and about the future Redeemer, was less ample and less distinct in those beginnings (see St. Thomas, 2-2, q. 174, a. 6; cf. Tract. de Tradit. th. XXVI), so also the Church, which is the concrete expression and sum of revelation itself, was less conspicuous. It had indeed, as its forming principle, the priesthood, religious rule, and the magisterium of the patriarchs, who, as it is written of Noah (2 Pet. II. 5), were « heralds of justice » (Tract. de Trad. th. XX; cf. Mauclerus, de Monarch. eccles. T. I, p. 226; Phillips, Ius eccles. T. II, p. 347; Haneberg, Histor. revel. sect. I, c. 4); and God himself calls them « his prophets and anointed ones » (Gen. XX. 7; Ps. CIV (CV) 15; 1 Chron. XVI. 22), which St. Augustine also notes. « And Noah himself, the patriarch... and others above and below, up to this time, when kings (namely, from Samuel onward, in the time of the kings properly so called, the prophets) began to be in the people of God, on account of certain things done or signified or foretold by them, which pertained to the city of God and the kingdom of heaven, we can not unreasonably call prophets, especially because we read that some of them were expressly named so » — Aug., civ. Dei L. XVII, c. 1. Yet in all these offices both the divine institution and the perpetual succession, and the function itself, were determined not so much by positive laws as by an internal divine instinct. Whence also sacrifices and sacraments and the whole ritual worship, in general, indeed were instituted by God, but in species and in particulars, especially up to the immediate preparation of the peculiar people of God in the calling of Abraham, appear to have been left to the determination of the heads of families or patriarchs themselves. To this specific determination applies what St. Thomas says: « just as in the state of the law of nature men were moved to worship God by no law given outwardly but only by an inner instinct, so also by an inner instinct it was determined for them what sensible things they should use for the worship of God » — St. Thomas, 3, q. 50, a. 5, ad 3.

Hence the visible unity of the Church, still looser and only begun, was for the most part reduced to one profession of the true faith and to the truth of divine worship; and by this very fact the body of the Church, which is held together by unity, was constituted, as it were, in its first formation and still imperfect. Yet in this Church, or city of God, « above and below Noah », the truth of faith and of divine worship was preserved both by perennial tradition through the ordinary patriarchal ministry, and was explained by increments of new revelations, through the extraordinary prophetic ministry. For to all of them, in their office of « heralds of justice », there belonged in their own way what God said expressly of Abraham: « I know that he will command his sons and his house after him, that they keep the way of the Lord, and do judgment and justice » Gen. XVIII. 19. But the extraordinary office of the prophets is to be recognized in them for the further explanation of revelation « on account of certain things done or signified or foretold by them (namely, by the supernatural illumination and motion of the Holy Spirit, either together with an external divine locution or without it), which pertained to the city of God, the kingdom of heaven. » Cf. Suarez, de Legibus L. I, a. 3, n. 12; L. IX, c. 6, n. 21; c. 7, n. 5, 6.

II. Since the whole old economy was preparation and type for the incarnate Word and for his Church, and prophecy for the gospel, for this purpose God chose a peculiar people for himself and instituted it through the ministry of Moses; in which, as prophetic revelation became clearer day by day and the meaning of the types more manifest, so the form of the Church would be more expressed.

1°. Divine worship was instituted by God himself through the hand of the mediator (Gal. III. 19), and was determined singly in sacrifices, sacraments, ceremonies, and solemnities, in the very unity of the sacred tabernacle or temple, in which alone the public worship of God by sacrifices was ordinarily to be celebrated, for the visible union of the whole Church of Israel.

2°. For the administration of this divine worship and its perpetual preservation, ministers were consecrated by God's command and instituted in a certain succession fixed by God's law, according to the threefold hierarchy of one high priest, the priests of the second order (4 Kings XXIII. 4), and the Levites ministering (λειτουργούντων) (1 Chron. XVI. 4, etc.).

Through these very priests the whole people was to be governed and judged in sacred matters. « If you perceive that the judgment is difficult and ambiguous with you... arise and go up to the place which the Lord your God shall choose; and you shall come to the priests of the Levitical race and to the judge who shall be in that time, and you shall ask them, and they will declare to you the truth of the judgment; and you shall do whatever they say, who preside in the place which the Lord shall choose, and who teach you according to his law... but he who is proud and refuses to obey the command of the priest who in that time ministers to the Lord your God, and the decree of the judge, that man shall die, and you shall take away the evil from Israel » Deut. XVII. 8 ff.

3°. From these very things it is clear that not only the right of government, but also, consequently, the ordinary magisterium of the priests follows, for the preservation and interpretation of the divine law and doctrine. « And you shall know that I have sent this command to you, that it might be my covenant with Levi (and with his posterity), says the Lord of hosts... For the lips of the priest shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law at his mouth, because he is the angel (messenger) of the Lord of hosts » Mal. II. 4–7; Lev. X. 10, 11. The priest is indeed the angel of the Lord, a name by which the prophets too are sometimes called (Hagg. I. 13; Mal. III. 1), so that they seek the teaching of the divine law from his mouth; for this is what the Hebrew name תורה, teaching, expresses.

Eminent in the threefold office of sacred ministry, rule, and magisterium, the high priest held together the unity both of the hierarchy and of the whole people in divine worship, in sacred discipline, and in doctrine.

4°. Nevertheless, that ancient economy was only a preparation for the New Testament, « a pedagogue leading to Christ, a guard toward that faith which was to be revealed, an introduction to a better hope; there the law given through Moses, here grace and truth made through Jesus Christ; there the spirit of bondage, here the spirit of the adoption of sons » (John I. 17⁴; Rom. VIII. 15; Gal. III. 23, 24; IV. 24–26; Heb. VII. 19). And so the old economy, compared with the new to which it led, was imperfect both in worship and in sacrifices, which are called shadows of future goods (Heb. IX, X); and in discipline, which, accommodated to a carnal people in the « works of the law », was so far the « law of carnal commandment » (ibid. VII. 16); and in doctrine, which was yet to be completed and finally consummated through the incarnate Word himself. Wherefore also the priesthood, as an essential part of the whole economy, was imperfect in the efficacy of its ministry, in the power of sacred rule, and in the truth of its magisterium; and so the priesthood itself, with its sacrifices, in the Mosaic Church was an introduction and prefiguration of the perfect priesthood and sacrifice in the Church of Jesus Christ. « If the consummation was through the Levitical priesthood... why was it still necessary that another priest should arise according to the order of Melchisedech, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? For when the priesthood is transferred, it is necessary that the law also be transferred » Heb. VII. 11, 12.⁵ « You have drawn all things to yourself, O Lord, for when the veil of the temple was torn, the holy of holies departed from the unworthy high priests, so that figure might be changed into truth, prophecy into manifestation, law into gospel. You have drawn all things to yourself, O Lord, so that what was done under shadowy signs in the one temple of Judea, the devotion of all nations everywhere might celebrate in full and open sacrament. For now both the clearer order of the Levites (deacons), and the greater dignity of the Elders (presbyters), and the more sacred anointing of the priests (bishops)... Now also, with the variety of carnal sacrifices ceasing, one offering of your body and blood fulfills all the differences of victims... and so you bring all mysteries to perfection in yourself, so that as there is one sacrifice for every victim, so there is one kingdom from every nation » — St. Leo, sermo 59 (al. 57), c. 7.

5°. This imperfection of the old priesthood, namely in the magisterium, about which not all theologians think alike, requires a more careful explanation. Certainly in that Church of Israel, to which « the oracles of God were entrusted » (Rom. III. 2), which was specially chosen and destined by God to preserve the integrity of revelation already given, and to perfect it day by day with new revelations of divine truth and of the divine counsels, so that the fullness of time might be prepared, in which from this very people, as from a thirsty land and from the root of Jesse, as a flower, the expectation of the nations would rise as a sign of the peoples (Gen. XLIX. 10; Is. XI. 1, 10; LIII. 2; Rom. IX. 6); in this Church, I say, a magisterium suited and necessary to so exalted an end, and therefore equipped with supernatural charisms for infallibility (cf. Tract. de Tradit. th. VII), could not be lacking. Whence several theologians hold that infallibility in preserving and proposing the doctrine of faith is to be asserted for the Aaronic priesthood itself, simply, or at least until the coming of the promised Christ himself (cf. Bellarmine, de Concil. L. II, c. 8). But this opinion has so many contrary difficulties, in either form, that it cannot be demonstrated by firm arguments. Some affirm that the priests, even in Christ's time and in Christ's very condemnation, erred not in doctrine but only about a fact (what fact, pray? namely that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised Christ, which, as the end, embraced the whole preceding doctrine, and, as the foundation, the whole subsequent doctrine); or that they erred indeed in mind as private men, but not in publicly proposed doctrine by sacerdotal power, since the high priest, as John testifies (XI. 51), prophesied and so taught divine truth by a divine instinct. But these things are manifestly refuted from the whole evangelical history, and especially from the solemn and judicial sentence by which the high priests and their whole council pronounced that Christ was to be rejected and condemned, because he made himself the Son of God (Matt. XXVI. 63–66; XXVII. 1; Mark XIV. 53, 61–64; Luke XXII. 66–77; John XIX. 6, 7, 15); cf. Stapleton, De principiis fidei L. II, c. 12. But if, with Bellarmine in the same place, you concede that the priests erred by a doctrinal error in designating to the people the very person of the Messiah already present, when by solemn judgment they pronounced that Christ was to be rejected as an « impostor » and a « blasphemer, because he made himself the Son of God »; then you cannot demonstrate from the very end of the magisterium in the Church of Israel that a charism of infallibility was attached to the Aaronic priesthood considered in itself before the coming of Christ, which nevertheless ceased when the Messiah came, while that same priesthood still remained legitimate. For the end of the magisterium, at least by far its principal end, was to prepare the ways of the Lord, and to show forth the « desired of all nations » (Hagg. II. 8), both proximately to the peculiar people of Israel and to all the nations themselves. If therefore it is established that the magisterium with the charism of infallibility was not connected with the Aaronic priesthood, considered in itself, in the recognition and showing forth of Christ already present, by which the whole preceding preparation had to be completed and finished; then we cannot demonstrate from the very end of the magisterium in the Mosaic Church that a perfection of infallibility belonged to the magisterium of the Aaronic priesthood considered in itself before Christ, which certainly was lacking, with Christ present, in the principal acts of recognizing and showing forth the Savior promised and already sent. This so essential difference in the ordinary magisterium of the Old Testament, that it was infallible before Christ and became fallible when Christ was already present, would have to be demonstrated by express testimonies of Scripture or of Christian tradition. But that such testimonies cannot be brought forward for the infallibility of the ordinary magisterium of the synagogue, while luminous ones stand for the infallibility of the magisterium in the Church of Christ, Bellarmine himself (in the same place, ch. 6) admits quite clearly. For when Calvin objected the fallibility of councils in the Old Testament, he replied, among other things, that it is not permitted to transfer the imperfection of the magisterium of the Old Testament to the magisterium of the Church of Christ: « For the Church has more certain and greater promises of God than the synagogue; nor do we read anywhere about the synagogue what Christ says of the Church (Matt. XVI.): upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; nor what the Apostle says (1 Tim. III.): that it is the pillar and ground of the truth; nor is it written of Caiaphas (or of his predecessors), but of Peter (and his successors): I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail (Luke XXII.) » — Bellarmine, l. c.

Therefore the charism of infallibility, which it is not right to deny also in the magisterium of the Church of the Old Testament, seems to be conceived in another way, from the very proper character of that economy. Since there the divine truth was to be explained by continual new revelations, from this very fact the extraordinary mission of the prophets, who were namely to be ministers of revelation, is understood to be intimately bound and joined with the proper end of that economy. Whence to the magisterium of divine religion (in doctrine and morals) pertained not only the ordinary sacerdotal office but also the extraordinary prophetic office. To this prophetic office belonged no less the guarding and true declaration of revelation and law already promulgated, than its further explanation and increase through new revelations. If therefore the ordinary magisterium at any time failed through its own fault, the prophetic charism of the extraordinary magisterium supplied the defect, for the infallible preservation of divine doctrine and faith in the Church of Israel. Hence the prophets are also shepherds of the people (Jer. XVII. 16, Hebrew; cf. Zech. XI. 4), and watchmen set upon the walls of Jerusalem, who « shall not keep silent all day and all night forever... until (God) sets Jerusalem as praise in the earth » (namely the Church of the New Testament), Is. LXII. 6, 7; cf. XXI. 11. Indeed, the extraordinary prophetic charism, in certain singular causes and occasions, was connected with the high priesthood, as when the high priest was commanded to seek the answers of the Lord through the Urim and Thummim, which in the Vulgate (Lev. VIII. 8) is rendered « teaching and truth » (cf. Num. XXVII. 21; 1 Kings XIV. 18; XXII. 10; XXIII. 9, etc.). The evangelist John indicates this connection of the freely given charism, for certain extraordinary occasions, with the high priesthood (XI. 51), when he says that Caiaphas, at that very time when he was prevaricating in his ordinary office of magisterium, also, though unknowing, prophesied by an extraordinary instinct, « since he was high priest of that year. »

Therefore the infallible custody of the deposit existed indeed also in the Mosaic Church; but not through the promised perpetual assistance of the Spirit of truth for the ordinary magisterium (as in the New Testament); rather, insofar as both offices, the ordinary of the priesthood and the extraordinary of prophecy, are considered as joined. Hence the mission of the prophets constituted an intrinsic element, and as it were an integral part, by the character of that economy; and so their succession was not only morally continuous and manifest until the return from the Babylonian exile, but also under the second temple the charism of inspiration did not cease, as both the books written by inspiration and other facts demonstrate (see Tract. de Scriptura, thes. XI, corollary 2). Wherefore, considering only perpetuity, the prophetic office in the Old Testament could be called ordinary; but since by this name, in divine institutions, is understood not only perpetuity but rather an order of succession or propagation according to a certain and fixed law, whereas the spirit of prophecy, bound to no certain law or means of communication, as a gift freely given, breathes where it wills; therefore also in that economy the prophetic office was and ought to be called extraordinary.

6°. From what has been said it is understood how God was able to permit the transgression of the old priesthood in the magisterium, even then, and most of all, when « the end of the law, Christ, » came, so that in him the law and the prophets might be fulfilled as in their end, to which they were ordered, and by him, as the consummator of faith, might be fulfilled in the ultimate perfection of revelation and of divine institutions. Just as those who infallibly foretold Christ as to come were prophets with an extraordinary magisterium, so he who showed Christ as present (now let us say nothing of Simeon, Anna, and others) was a prophet with an extraordinary magisterium, and more than a prophet, of whom it was written by the ancient prophets: « behold, I send my angel before your face, who shall prepare your way before you » (Matt. XI. 9, 10). « The law and the prophets until John; from then the kingdom of God is evangelized (now present) » (Luke XVI. 16). Indeed, what is infinitely greater, the Word himself made flesh, through whose divinity, as inspiring cause, and to whose divinity and humanity, as final cause, the prophets spoke the words of the Lord, he himself, I say, now the Lord of the prophets, who is ὁ προφήτης (John I. 21; VI. 14; VII. 40; Matt. XXI. 11) and the one master (Matt. XXIII. 8, 10; John XIII. 13, 14), being present, bore witness by himself and of himself, consummating in his divine person the fullness of the prophetic office and of divine teaching (Deut. XVIII. 15; Acts III. 22). He was himself shown to all the people, the preceding prophecies of the law and the prophets having been fulfilled, which fulfillment Moses and Elijah, the law and the prophets, witnesses of his divine magisterium in the transfiguration, also exhibit sensibly (Matt. XVII. 3, 5; see St. Leo, sermo 51, c. 4); attested by works and miracles as by divine seals, designated by the preaching of the forerunner, and declared by the heavenly Father in the solemn initiation of his magisterium as the Son to be heard before all others (Luke III. 22; IX. 30–35; John V. 33–37, 39, 46; X. 38; XV. 24, etc.).

By this magisterium Christ, now that the revelations of faith and the divine institutions have been completed by himself and, once the Holy Spirit was sent, through the Apostles, remains perpetually in his Church, for the custody and explanation of the whole deposit, himself the one master, through his legates, instituted by himself in perpetual succession, furnished with the charism of truth and always protected by his presence, teaching in his own name and authority. All of this shall be explained and demonstrated more distinctly in its place. It is recalled here in passing, so that it may be clear on how many grounds the ordinary magisterium of the Church surpasses the ordinary magisterium of the synagogue: by reason of the incarnate Word, from whom the magisterium itself and its whole authority is derived and shared; by reason of the doctrine now consummated; and by reason of the indefectible assistance of the Spirit of truth. From this very perfection it is understood why the extraordinary prophetic magisterium, intrinsic to the old economy because of its imperfect state and still to be perfected, is by no means among the perpetual institutions of the economy now perfected (cf. Matt. XI. 11–13; 1 Pet. I. 10–12). There Moses and the prophets were as servants in the house of God, inspired many times and in many ways (as through successive parts and different degrees: πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως) to cultivate the old Testament and to prepare the new; here the Son of God, in his own house, has already completed the New Testament and the unshaken kingdom, and he remains the author and perfecter of faith with his Church all the days until the consummation of the age (Heb. I. 1; III. 3–6; XII. 2, 27, 28).

The sum of all that we have demonstrated in this thesis is finally recalled here. The whole preceding state of the Church, both primitive, from Adam, by its destination universal for all nations, and Mosaic, for the peculiar people of God, as a real prophecy in types, as a verbal prophecy in announcements and foretellings, and generally as preparation and introduction of a better hope in all institutions and laws, was ordained to the Church of Jesus Christ, as to the real gospel in the mysteries and things fulfilled, as to the verbal gospel in the doctrine of mysteries and things now present, and finally to the consummation of the mercies of God in grace and truth. « The redemption of the Savior... has so arranged the sacrament of its great piety that, until the consummation of the world, the appointed fullness of generations should run its course, but the renewal of the origin through the justification of undiscriminating faith should pertain to all the ages past... Nothing in the Christian religion differs from the ancient signs, nor has salvation ever been hoped for by the just who went before except in the Lord Jesus Christ; the dispensations, indeed, varied according to the reason of the divine will, but shining forth in the same thing, both in the testimonies of the law, and in the oracles of prophecy, and in the offerings of victims; for so it was fitting that those peoples be instructed, that what they could not grasp when revealed they might receive veiled, and that the authority of the Gospel might be greater, to which so many signs and so many mysteries of the pages of the Old Testament have served... Nothing of the legal institutions, nothing of the prophetic figures has remained which has not wholly passed over into the sacraments of Christ... so that the messengers have rightly ceased, now that the things announced have come, nor is the reverence for the promises emptied, because the fullness of graces has been manifested » — St. Leo, sermo LXVI (de passion. Dni XV), c. 12. Certainly the fullness has been manifested in the Church of Jesus Christ; indeed the Church itself is called by Paul (Eph. I. 23) the fullness of Christ, also in this present state of the Church, in which it still militates on earth, teaching and believing in faith, ruling and obeying in hope, sanctifying and being sanctified in charity: « a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for acquisition » (1 Pet. II. 9).