Scholastica commentaria in Primam Partem Summae Theologicae

IT IS DOUBTED eighth, which sense is more excellent, the literal or the spiritual?

To this I briefly answer, and let this be the first conclusion: every literal sense is more certain as regards us than the spiritual. It is proved: because only from the literal sense can we make a certain argument, as we shall say at once.

SECOND conclusion. The literal sense which at the same time has a mystical sense conjoined to it is, for the most part, inferior in dignity to the spiritual. This is proved from that of 1 Cor 9: «Is God concerned about oxen, or is it said for our sake, etc.» Where he openly signifies that formerly in that letter God more intended that the Apostles, the preachers of the Gospel, be fed by the people. Further, Origen, bk. 4 of Periarchon, ch. 2, says that the spiritual sense is like the soul, the literal like the body. And the same says St. Cyril on Leviticus, in the prologue. But I would have said for the most part, since if the literal sense contains some zealous action of Christ, through which Christ signifies that we ought to imitate him — as for example, when sitting on a lowly ass he entered Jerusalem — I would not dare to say, nor does it seem to be said, that the spiritual sense, which is the moral, is more excellent than the literal, since that very action of Christ pleased God infinitely more than all our actions.

THIRD conclusion. A certain literal sense which is about the same thing about which there is elsewhere a spiritual sense is more excellent than the spiritual, both in certitude and in utility, although the spiritual is more delightful, since it is understood under the figures of things done.

FOURTH conclusion. When in Sacred Scripture it is said in the literal sense that a certain other passage written elsewhere is to be understood spiritually, then the certitude of that spiritual passage pertains to the literal. Whence consequently.