Summa summae S. Thomae, Tomus III

[Before we treat of the judicial rules of faith, namely the Church, the supreme Pontiff and the general council, it seems opportune not to pass over entirely the holy Fathers, who are witnesses of the faith, and to whose consensus appeal is made to establish what belongs to ecclesiastical tradition and to settle doctrinal questions

I say: The life of the soul is conferred through faith and baptism. Therefore those are called fathers who confer life of the soul on others, either through baptism or through instruction. Thus the Apostle Paul claimed for himself the name of father, writing to the faithful whom he had spiritually begotten, 1 Cor., IV, 15: You have not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus I begot you through the Gospel. Fathers of the Church, then, are called those who illustrated the whole Church by their writings, strengthening and spreading the faith, and whom the Church herself receives and venerates as such. For preserving tradition pure, no more fitting means is had than the unanimous consensus of the holy Fathers, namely of those holy doctors of the Church who taught not at one and the same time, nor in one and the same place. If even for a moment unbelievers were to use reason, it will be impossible for them to accuse men so great of the slightest fraud, and Catholics will marvel at the providence of God, by which at every time there were raised up distinguished witnesses of the faith who, holding perfectly the dogmas proper to their own age, handed down all things incorrupt to posterity in their writings.

You will ask 1° what conditions are required for an ecclesiastical writer to be called a Father of the Church.

I answer. The following conditions are required: 1° Distinguished doctrine, because by force of their name and office they must teach the whole Church, which holds them as its masters. Moreover, they handed down this doctrine not as their own and personal, but received it from the Apostles or from the successors of the Apostles, as handed on, as it were, from hand to hand, as the Vatican synod says, and diligently guarded it and recorded it in their writings. Hence sometimes several of them are called apostolic Fathers, inasmuch as, living in the apostolic age, they held and preached the doctrine of the Apostles. 2° It is required, not only communion with the Catholic Church down to the end, but also uncommon holiness of life; because, that they may be truly spiritual fathers, they must instruct others in the Christian life and lead them to salvation not only by their writings but also by a splendid example of virtue. If Tertullian and Origen are objected, who are counted among the Fathers although they fell into grave errors, it must be answered that they are not regarded as such except for the time during which, professing Catholic doctrine, they were also conspicuous for holiness. 3° A certain antiquity is required. Formerly certain bishops or priests, not so long deceased, illustrious for learning and sanctity, were soon numbered among the Fathers as soon as it was established throughout the universal Church that their doctrine was orthodox. Today, however, the period of the Fathers is so limited that St. Bernard, who died in the year 1153, is held to be the last of them. Indeed, to several, St. Bonaventure and St. Thomas Aquinas seemed to close the procession of the Fathers; but more commonly it is held that the patristic age was closed before the scholastic age, of which these are the more illustrious doctors. 4° To these is added the approbation of the Church, which takes place either through an ecumenical council, or through the supreme Pontiff, or through the consensus of the Church dispersed throughout the world. 5° Episcopal dignity is not required in a Father; for St. Jerome was a priest, St. Ephrem was a deacon, and St. Prosper of Aquitaine had, more probably, remained in the lay state.

You will ask 2° by what right some ecclesiastical writers have been honored with the title of Doctor.

I answer. Those are held as Doctors whose doctrine is preeminent and specially commended by the Church. Hence it belongs only to the teaching Church, and ordinarily to the supreme Pontiff, to confer this title authentically. The age of Doctors is restricted by no limits, because on account of admirable sanctity and preeminent doctrine men of distinction can at any time be declared Doctors by the Church. Therefore it has happened repeatedly that someone was proclaimed a Doctor of the Church without on that account being a Father, because antiquity was lacking. Already long ago, according to the number of the Evangelists, four great Doctors were recognized both in the Eastern and in the Western Church, namely: in the East, SS. Athanasius, Basil the Great, Gregory Nazianzen and John Chrysostom; in the West, SS. Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, Gregory the Great. To these there must be added by the same right: SS. Leo the Great, Peter Chrysologus, Isidore of Seville, John Damascene, Anselm, Bernard, Thomas Aquinas and Bonaventure. There were added by Pius IX, SS. Hilary of Poitiers, at the request of the last Council of Bordeaux, Alphonsus Liguori and Francis de Sales. Finally Leo XIII ordered that SS. Peter Damian and both Cyrils, of Alexandria and of Jerusalem, be honored as Doctors in the universal Church.

You will ask 3° with what authority the Fathers and Doctors prevail in the Church.

I answer. by distinguishing. Sometimes the Fathers and Doctors present monuments of tradition, and wrote as witnesses of the doctrine which prevailed in their time; sometimes, indeed, they take upon themselves the role of theologians and doctors, who defend the articles of the faith, illustrate doctrine, and speak from their own resources.

1° When they present themselves as witnesses of the tradition and faith of the Church, and teach in agreement in matters of faith and morals, their authority is infallible. Not, however, is this to be understood as if either separately or together they were infallible; but because they represent the magisterium of the Church, teaching what the Church teaches, which cannot err. For if all the Fathers and Doctors, whenever they agree in some opinion, were to err, the whole Church would err, seeing that she is bound to follow her doctors, and does follow them. Hence, when some doctrine is to be defined, the Fathers who wrote on it are consulted, so that through them it may be established what the Church has always and everywhere held.

2° Otherwise stands the matter when the consensus is not unanimous, or when the authority of individual Fathers is in question, or when the Fathers undertake the office of theologians. For it is certain and evident that neither sanctity nor learning excludes every danger of error, as the case of St. Cyprian concerning baptism conferred by heretics proves, and the opinion of others about the millennial kingdom. Hence the following rules are to be laid down: 1° If different Fathers seem to hold different views, it must be concluded that from their authority the truth of such a doctrine cannot be established. Yet it does not follow from this that the truth cannot be drawn from elsewhere, or that there is no divinely handed-down truth on this point; for it can happen that after a dissension among some doctors, later, once the question had been more fully aired, a perfect consensus followed. 2° The suffrage of several, yet distinguished, Fathers suffices, the others not objecting, to settle the dispute. This appears from the practice of the councils, which were content to have adduced ten or twelve Fathers in proving dogmas and condemning heresies. 3° The utterances of individual Fathers generally indeed carry great authority in matters of faith and morals, above all those of men who excelled the rest in wisdom; nevertheless they are not able to furnish an absolute argument. Hence we are bound neither to believe them free from error nor to follow them in everything; but where weighty reasons persuade, it is permitted, with due reverence, to abandon them and follow the opposite opinion. Imprudently, therefore, would act the man who would take any single one of the holy Fathers as his chosen guide in such a way that whatever he found in him he would proclaim as most certain truths placed beyond all controversy. Justly therefore Alexander VIII condemned, 4 Aug. 1690, this proposition, n. 30: « Where anyone finds a doctrine clearly grounded in Augustine, he can hold and teach it absolutely, without regard to any bull of the Pontiff. » 4° The writings of those carry greater authority who, defending the faith of the Church as leaders against heresy, undertook the especial defense of some dogma of the faith. For as soon as new errors came forth, divine providence raised up Fathers long before predestined, outstanding not only in love of guarding the truth but in acuteness of genius and abundantly illumined by the grace of God, whom therefore it is especially fitting to hear and follow in such and such a question. As examples, let there be, in the matter of grace, St. Augustine; on the incarnation, St. Cyril of Alexandria and St. Leo the Great. 5° The authority of the Fathers does not extend to profane sciences and human arts; because divine revelation does not embrace those disciplines, and in matters of this kind the Fathers for the most part followed profane or pagan authors.]