Summa summae S. Thomae, Tomus III

You will ask 1° how manyfold the sense of Sacred Scripture is.

I answer. 1° That it is twofold in genus, namely the literal, which is also called the historical, and the mystical or spiritual: because, since God is the author of Sacred Scripture, and can accommodate not only words to signify, but also the things themselves, the first signification, by which words signify things, pertains to the literal sense; while the signification by which the things signified by the words again signify other things is the spiritual or mystical sense, which is founded upon the literal. Thus this word manna signifies literally light food; but this light food signifies mystically the Eucharist.

2° The literal sense is twofold: one proper and grammatical, the other improper and metaphorical. The proper and grammatical sense is that which the words signify from their primary signification: thus lion properly and grammatically signifies a roaring animal. The improper and metaphorical sense is when words are transferred to an improper signification on account of some likeness: thus in this proposition, The lion of the tribe of Juda has conquered, lion signifies improperly and metaphorically Christ.

3° The spiritual or mystical sense is threefold, namely the allegorical, the moral or tropological, and the anagogical: because either the things signified by the words signify something else pertaining to the Church militant, and this is the allegorical sense, corresponding to faith; or they signify something pertaining to morals, and this is the moral sense, corresponding to charity; or they signify something pertaining to the Church triumphant or eternal beatitude, and this is the anagogical sense, corresponding to hope. These three senses, together with the literal, are expressed in these three verses:¹

The letter teaches events; allegory, what you must believe, morality, what you must do; anagogy, where you must tend.

Among other examples take this word, Jerusalem. According to Jerome, on chapter XVI of Ezech., it signifies literally the city of Palestine; allegorically it signifies the Church militant; morally, the soul of the just; anagogically, the Church triumphant.

[Besides these senses of Sacred Scripture, another is called among theologians the accommodated sense, when words that signify some thing by the intention of the Holy Spirit, or are applied by him to some person, are accommodated to signify another thing, or applied to another person, on account of some congruity. This sense is more customary with sacred orators than with theologians, although it is employed even by the Church herself, as when that encomium of Noe, Eccli., XLIV, 17, He was found perfect and just, and in the time of wrath there was made a reconciliation, is applied in the liturgical office of confessors who were pontiffs to several saints of the New Testament.]

You will ask 2° whether every text of Scripture has a literal sense.

I answer. Affirmatively:² otherwise it would lack all sense, since the spiritual is founded upon the literal.

You will ask 3° which sense is more certain: the literal or the spiritual?

I answer. That the literal is more certain. For about that sense there can be certainty, not about the mystical, unless it is asserted by the sacred writer or declared by the Church; for the mystical senses which the holy Fathers bring forward are only probable. Hence from the literal sense alone, or from a mystical sense asserted by another Scripture or by the Church, an efficacious argument can be deduced.

Nevertheless the mystical sense is nobler, because as a rule it signifies things more excellent and is principally intended by

the Holy Spirit. Thus in the narration of the deeds done under the Old Testament, Christ was principally intended.

You will ask 4° whether the sense of Scripture is obscure.

I answer. That it is obscure in many places. This is against the heretics. It is evident from Scripture itself. St Peter, Epist. II, III, 16, speaking of the Epistles of St Paul, says: In which are certain things hard to be understood. Act., VIII, 30, when Philip asked the eunuch whether he understood Isaias, whom he was reading, the eunuch answers, 31: And how can I, unless someone show me? Luc., XXIV, 27, Christ interprets the Scriptures to the disciples going to Emmaus. Luc., XVIII, 51, the Apostles understood none of the things which Christ was saying; and many other passages besides.

The same is proved by the many commentaries of the holy Fathers and interpreters for explaining Scripture, and by the many contentions of heretics among themselves over the true sense of Scripture; for if it be open and clear, as they claim, why do not all agree? why do the Lutherans understand it one way and the Calvinists another?

You will ask 5° whose office it is to judge concerning the true sense of Scripture.

I answer. 1° Scripture cannot judge concerning its own sense: 1° Because, when the sense of Scripture is disputed, Scripture itself and its sense is the object and matter of the controversy. Therefore it cannot be the judge; for no one ever dreamed that the thing disputed should be the judge of the dispute.

2° A judge in any controversy ought to hear the litigating parties, to pronounce a sentence which they themselves must hear and accept, and to be able to compel them to acquiesce in the sentence; otherwise the judgment would be futile. Yet Scripture cannot perform these things. Therefore. 3° If Scripture were so clear and open that it suffices for eliciting its true sense, as the heretics pretend, why then have they been disputing for all these years over the true sense of very many texts of Scripture, among others over that celebrated one: This is my body? Either therefore they do not read Scripture, or they are obstinate against a recognized truth.

I answer. 2° The private spirit of anyone cannot be the judge of the true sense of Scripture: 1° Because it does not have the authority to compel the parties to acquiesce in its sentence. 2° Because it is various in various men, uncertain, and often self-contradictory. The Lutheran says this is the true sense; the Calvinist says the contrary; the Lutheran says he has a good spirit; the Calvinist denies it: who will decide the dispute? 3° There is no heretic, nor ever was there one, who does not pretend that he is led by a good spirit. If therefore the private spirit of anyone is the judge of the true sense of Scripture, all heresies must be admitted as true; for nothing but truth can proceed from a good spirit.

You will object. [with the innovators, several testimonies of Scripture, of which these are the chief: Ioann., VII, 17: If anyone wills to do his will, he shall know concerning the doctrine whether it is of God. Ibid., X, 27: My sheep hear my voice..., and follow me. I Ioann., II, 27: You have no need that anyone teach you, but as his unction teaches you concerning all things; and it is true, and is no lie. Ibid., V, 9 and 10: If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater... He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony of God in himself. 1 Cor., II, 15: The spiritual man judges all things, and he himself is judged by no one.

I answer. 1° In general, that these and similar passages prove only that both testimonies, namely the external and the internal, ought to be joined. For words sounding outwardly profit little the man whom the Holy Spirit does not teach within, as Augustine says, in Epist. I Ioann., tract. III, n. 13: « Behold a great sacrament, brethren. The sound of our words strikes the ears. The Master is within. Do not think that anyone learns anything from man. We can admonish by the noise of our voice: if there be not within him who teaches, our noise becomes vain. » Again, in Ioann. Evang. tract. XXVI, n. 7: « What do men accomplish who announce outwardly? What am I doing now, when I speak? I pour the noise of words into your ears. Unless therefore he who is within reveal it, what do I say, or what do I speak? » And so in many places. Since man consists of body and spirit, in order that he may come to faith and through it to salvation, Christ furnished him with the helps necessary, not only inward but also outward, so that he might perceive the truth both by authority speaking outwardly and by grace illuminating inwardly; which is expressed by the Apostle saying, Rom., X, 17: Faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. Therefore the truth is to be sought from those whom he left us as doctors and teachers.

I answer. 2° In particular, to the objected passages. The sense of the words of Christ, Ioann., VII, 17, is that a sure way for finding the truth is a sincere will of knowing and observing the commandments of God. For a perverse affection of the mind so corrupts the judgment of a man that he not only fails to understand the words of God, but does not even receive them with his ear, nor is he moved by the authority of the speaker, though it be confirmed by miracles and by testimonies of every kind, as is clear from the obstinacy of heretics and perverse men in repelling the truth. — If Christ says, ibid., X, 27, of his sheep that they hear his voice and follow not a stranger, the authority of the Church is not attacked by this; for those certainly are not strangers who feed not their own sheep, but Christ's, and lead them not to strange pastures, but to the pastures of Christ. — In the following text, I Ioann., II, 27, John directs such words not to the unlearned, but to the learned, and above all to the masters of the Church, and he exhorts them to remain steadfast in the faith, which, moved and enlightened by the Holy Spirit, they received with joyful heart. Thus also the other passage of John and the testimony of the Apostle brought forward, and others that could be adduced, are to be interpreted. For in those places there is question of the interior disposition of the soul, which is indeed necessary in order that the truth may strike roots in the heart and bring forth the fruit of good works.]

I answer. 3°. The judge concerning the true sense of Scripture is the Church; because, as we shall prove below, she is infallible both in proposing the canonical Scriptures and in judging their true sense. Concerning this answer there will be a fuller discussion in the following dissertation.

You will ask 6° whether there are not certain rules for discerning the literal sense of Scripture.

[I answer. The following are commonly assigned. First rule. The sense which the words bear when taken in their proper signification, if it be not absurd, nor repugnant to the dogmas of faith or to the honesty of morals, is the literal sense. It is gathered from Augustine, book III of the De Doctrina christiana, chapter 10, and from book VIII of the De Genesi ad litteram, chapter 7.

Second rule. The literal sense is that which the Church or the unanimous consent of the Fathers holds to be literal. From concil. Trid., session IV, Decree on the edition and use of the sacred books.

This rule was renewed and explained by the Vatican Council, constitution Dei Filius, chapter 2, on Revelation: « Since however what the holy Tridentine Synod decreed salubriously concerning the interpretation of divine Scripture, in order to restrain petulant minds, is wickedly expounded by certain men, we, renewing the same decree, declare this to be its meaning: that in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the building up of Christian doctrine, that is to be held as the true sense of Sacred Scripture which holy Mother Church held and holds, whose office it is to judge concerning the true sense and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures; and therefore that it is permitted to no one to interpret Sacred Scripture itself against this sense, or even against the unanimous consent of the Fathers. »

Third rule, arising from the first. The sacred text is to be taken in a figurative sense as often as an understanding according to the letter would evidently conflict with faith or good morals. Augustine sets down this rule, book III of the De Doctrina christiana, chapter 11, n. 17: « Whatever is read in the sacred Scriptures, from the person of God or of his saints, that is harsh and seemingly cruel in deed or in word, avails for destroying the kingdom of covetousness. But if it sounds plainly, it is not to be referred to anything else, as though it had been said figuratively. »

Fourth rule. The spiritual sense is founded upon the letter and supposes it. Thus all the Fathers and theologians. St Gregory the Great, book II in Evang., homily 40: « In the words of sacred eloquence, first the truth of history is to be preserved, and afterwards the spiritual understanding of the allegory is to be sought. For then is the fruit of allegory sweetly plucked, when it has first been grounded firmly in the root of truth by the history. »

Fifth rule. All the allegorical interpretations proposed by the sacred writers must be accepted without exception, and allegorical explanations received in the Church, or proposed by the Fathers as pertaining to the tradition of the Church, cannot be rejected without temerity. But the allegories must be natural, not forced.

Sixth rule. One must always stand by the interpretation which agrees better with the text of the Vulgate, which alone the Church declared authentic, although obscure passages can often, and even ought to, be elucidated from the other versions.

Other rules handed down by many fall back into the preceding ones.]