Summa summae S. Thomae, Tomus III

[Praenotandum. The word Ecclesia is Greek, ἐκκλησία, in Latin evocatio. So much for the etymology of the name. As to its meaning, however, the word Church taken most generally signifies any assembly or congregation, whether civil, as Psal. cvi, 32 : Praise him in the church of the people; or evil, as Psal. xxv, 5 : I have hated the church of the malignant; or good, as Rom., XVI, 16 : All the churches of Christ salute you. But by the common usage of Scripture and the holy Fathers, the word Church is taken in a good sense for the Church of Christ, that is, for the society which adheres to Christ as its head.

Among the Jews the word Synagogue signified what Ecclesia signifies among us, with this difference, that the Church is the congregation of the sons of God through grace, while the Synagogue is the congregation of servants through fear.

It must be observed further that, by metonymy, taking the container for the content, the word Church also signifies the place where the faithful assemble for the sake of religion, and in the same sense the place where the Jews assembled was called the Synagogue.

I answer. The Church has existed at every time. Thus Augustine affirms, book I Retract., cap. 13, num. 3 : « That thing which is now called the Christian religion existed among the ancients, nor was it absent from the beginning of the human race until Christ himself came in the flesh; whence the true religion, which already existed, began to be called Christian. » The same is taught by Epiphanius, saying in book I adv. Haeres., cap. 5 : « The beginning of all things is the holy and catholic Church. »

It is proved. As the Apostle teaches, Ephes., I, 9 and 10, God has made known to us the sacrament of his will... to re-establish all things in Christ, which are in heaven and on earth, in him. Christ therefore, the eternal Son of God, who was made to him of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was predestinated the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of sanctification, Rom., I, 3 and 4, is the true and only Savior of men who had perished by the sin of our first parent. Hence the same Apostle affirms that he has been present at all times and will be present forever, saying, Hebr., XIII, 8 : Jesus Christ, yesterday and today, himself also for ever. He was yesterday by promise; he is today in the Catholic Church which he founded and in which he will remain all days, even to the consummation of the world, Matth., XXVIII, 20 ; he will be in eternity, namely in heaven, where he will reign for ever and ever, Apoc., XI, 15, together with the redeemed, who will reign with him for ever and ever, ibid., XXII, 5.

Christ first appears in the promise by which God, when Adam had fallen and been stripped with his whole posterity of the highest divine benefits, promised him a restorer, when the Lord God said to the serpent...: I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed. He shall crush thy head, Gen., III, 14 and 15.¹ The prediction in this passage of a restorer who would avenge us upon the seducer is evident, if with the Fathers we understand by these words the devil who had deceived Eve, and had cast her with Adam and his posterity into the penalty of a double death. For the seed of the woman, that is, Christ the son of Mary, must crush the power of the demons, repair the harms inflicted on men, and lead back the human race to God.

But lest the memory of this promise should slip from the minds of men, it was breathed forth by the divine Spirit and renewed again and again by the prophets down to the coming of the Savior, whose oracles we shall weigh in the treatise on the Incarnation.

Moreover, after the fall of man there is one way of salvation for all. Therefore, just as under the New Testament the faith by which we begin to adhere to Christ the Savior is « the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, » as the Tridentine synod teaches, sess. VI, on Justification, cap. 8; so too always, even in the beginnings of the world, only those could be saved who believed in the promised restorer and that he would come. This appears from what is said of Abraham in the book of Genesis, xv, 6, and alleged by Paul, Rom., IV, 3 : Abram believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice. That the promise of the redeemer was the object of this faith of Abraham and of his sons, whether according to the flesh or according to the spirit, the same Apostle testifies, saying, ibid., 13, 16 : For not by the law was the promise to Abraham, or to his seed...; but through the justice of faith. Therefore by faith, that the promise might be firm according to grace to every seed, not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all.

Although the promise was made to all the posterity of Adam, since the spirit of God would not remain in man forever, because he is flesh, Gen., VI, 3, even after the human race had been renewed by the flood, God therefore decreed to choose for himself a people who would be constituted by special title heir and custodian of this promise, and from whom the Messiah would arise at the appointed time. Therefore he said to Abraham, ibid., XVII, 7: I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and between thy seed after thee in their generations, by an everlasting covenant, that I may be thy God and the God of thy seed after thee. From Abraham, through Isaac and Jacob, arose this people set apart from the other nations, to whom God afterward gave his law through Moses the mediator on mount Sinai, and in whose midst he instituted true worship, whose rites he willed himself to prescribe even in the smallest details, that all things might fittingly prefigure and announce the restorer. In the Mosaic worship appear all things that pertain essentially to religion, namely priesthood, sacrifice, sacraments, and generally whatever exhibits due honor to God and confers grace upon man and procures eternal salvation. All these things, however, happened to them in figure, as the Apostle testifies, I Cor., x, 11. But the end of the law is Christ, unto justice to every one that believeth, as the same teacher says, Rom., x, 4. Christ therefore was the type prefiguring and foretelling, and was awaited as the salvation of God, Gen., XLIX, 18, in whom all nations should be blessed, according to the promise sworn three times by God to Abraham. Thus Christ pre-existed within the people of God, which already from that time was the truly Christian Church, to which the posterity of Abraham were enrolled through circumcision, just as men are now incorporated into the typical Christian Church through baptism. The body of the Church then coalesced from the seed of Abraham, that is, from the Israelitic people. Because Christ, however, is the universal redeemer, as many as believed in him could be saved through him. Thus Job the Idumean, who did not belong to the people of God by his race, breathed forth by the Holy Spirit, professed his faith and his hope born of faith in these words, Iob, XIX, 25-27 : I know that my Redeemer liveth..., and in my flesh I shall see my God: whom I myself shall see, and my eyes shall behold, and not another. This my hope is laid up in my bosom. There were many others also, among foreigners, who, living spiritually by the same faith, belonged to the soul of the primitive Church, just as there can now belong to the new Church those who, not yet enlightened by the preaching of the Gospel, not rebellious against the graces of the Redeemer, hope that they will attain eternal salvation from God through the means established by himself, and show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them, Rom., II, 15.

Therefore before the coming of Christ there already existed through him a truly Christian Church, which from Adam to Moses consisted of essential elements alone, then amplified divinely through the ministry of Moses, remained up to Christ, who came not to dissolve it, but to fulfill it, Matth., v, 17.]

I answer. The primeval religion, observed from Adam to Moses, consisted of these three things, which are essential to all religion, namely dogmas, moral precepts, and divine worship,

1° Since man was constituted from the beginning heir of eternal life, destined to enjoy the clear vision of God in heaven, while the supernatural life, which takes its beginning on earth, has its first origin from faith — although God, in creating the first man, adorned his mind with natural reason, by which he could discern the Creator of all things in his works, and, addressing him as a friend, revealed himself to him in the manner said above as the one God, most perfect, omnipotent, maker of all things and supreme governor — so that Adam, just as now, knew God by the natural light of reason and by supernatural faith. Besides the divinely infused knowledge of all the things that men can know naturally, Adam received from God by revelation so much knowledge of supernatural things as was necessary for the governance of life in order to the supernatural end, as is proved by D. Thomas, Ia p., q. 94, aa. 2, 3, c. He was therefore conscious of the state of perfection which he had received first. He knew the condition laid down by God, that he might persevere in this state, and the punishment he was to suffer by transgression of the divine commandment. After the fall and the ruin anticipated for all his posterity, Adam received from God the promise of the reparation of the human race, that is, of the covenant of reconciliation to be entered upon through the merits of a mediator, the Lord saying to the serpent, that is, to the devil, Gen., III, 15 : I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed : he shall crush thy head. In this is intimated, at least implicitly, the mystery of the divine incarnation. The Angelic Doctor teaches, IIa IIae, q. 7, a. 1, c, that this mystery was then known and believed explicitly, because « the way for men to come to beatitude is the mystery of the incarnation and passion of Christ. » Moreover, if Adam had the explicit faith of the incarnation, consequently he had the same faith of the Trinity, since the incarnation cannot be believed explicitly without the explicit faith of the Trinity ¹ There were also to be made known to man the conditions of the aforesaid covenant, namely faith in the mediator, the practice of penance, and obedience in keeping the divine laws.

These things, however, though not all proposed explicitly, some rather more obscurely, since divine providence, on account of reasons most lofty, reserved them to be revealed more openly in the fullness of time, were nevertheless from the beginning and at all times the sum of doctrine upon which true religion is founded. These dogmas, since public doctrinal authority did not then exist, were handed down by oral tradition; and when divine faith together with the dictate of natural reason seemed wholly abolished, because all flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth, Gen., VI, 12, man having been blotted out from the face of the earth, ibid., 7, by the flood, Noe, who found grace before the Lord, ibid., 8, and his family preserved the pristine tradition incorrupt for themselves and their posterity. Then the promise of the mediator to come unfolded successively, chiefly in those words which Abraham heard from God, ibid., XXVI, 4 : In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. And in this promise were included all the truths enunciated above.

2° To natural reason pertains the moral law; for, as the Apostle testifies, Rom., II, 14 and 15, the Gentiles, who have not the law, do naturally those things that are of the law... Who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them. From the aforesaid dogmas indeed many duties follow, both toward God, and toward our neighbor, and toward ourselves. It is beyond doubt that God positively revealed these duties to our first parents besides. From these duties was afterwards woven together the decalogue, if we except the third precept, which is not

² necessarily included in the natural law and is to be referred to the ritual law. Added to these was the negative precept of not eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; by the observance of which, as of the other commandments, man would render to God the honor due him, testifying his dependence toward his Creator. Because the primitive divine law, natural and positive, had fallen into oblivion through manifold transgressions, so that man was becoming flesh, Gen., VI, 3, the human race, except one family, was destroyed by the flood, so that the law was renewed and religiously observed by the patriarchs.

3° Worship is owed to God as most powerful creator of all and supreme lord. But since man, guided by natural reason alone, would not know how and by what external acts the Lord is to be fittingly honored, God himself had to determine the religious rites, and without doubt did determine them. What these rites were, however, all at least in the state of original justice, it is not so easy to define. It seems certain that God, having placed Adam in the paradise of pleasure to till and keep it, Gen., II, 15, commanded that on the seventh day he cease from labor, even if not laborious, in imitation of the creator who rested on the seventh day from all the work he had accomplished, ibid., 2, and that with duties of piety he sanctify this day and himself more fully. This law survived sin, and was solemnly sanctioned on mount Sinai. Hence it is that everywhere among the peoples the weekly order of days is kept and has always flourished, and the seventh is held sacred, doubtless because God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, ibid., 3.

Since sacrifice is the principal and also essential act of every religion, it was owed to God from innocent Adam, in the manner that befitted the primeval condition, to the threefold end of adoration, petition, and thanksgiving. Moreover the expiatory sacrifice, that is, the bloody sacrifice, by which after sin man confessed that he had himself merited death and destruction in punishment of rebellion, was not then necessary. Sufficiently therefore did Adam acknowledge and reverence the supreme dominion of God, by offering and consecrating to the Lord the fruits of the earth, in testimony of subjection and gratitude, thus referring his gifts to the author of all.

After the fall of Adam sacrifice appears expressly, Gen., IV, 3 and 4. For it came to pass, after many days, that Cain offered of the fruits of the earth gifts to the Lord. Abel also offered of the firstlings of his flock and of their fat. And because it did not befit individuals to offer external worship to God according to their own liking and their own judgment, Enos, son of Seth, led by heavenly light, began to call upon the name of the Lord, ibid., 26, that is, according to the common interpretation, he was the first who determined the time, place, and ceremonies of worshipping the deity, and the nature of the offerings to be presented to him. Among these rites, before and after the flood, bloody sacrifices hold the chief place, as is proved by the examples of Abel and Noe. Now sacrifices of this kind were not adopted with nature alone as guide; for the death of an irrational animal has no natural connection with gratitude for benefits received, or with expiation of sin. It must be said, therefore, that these sacrifices took their origin from the institution of God himself. For surely the destruction due to man for sin was transferred to a victim, which by vicarious lot expiated sin, because it figuratively foretold the immolation of Christ, in whom they who offered such hosts believed and hoped. For although, as the Apostle says, Hebr., X, 4, it is impossible for sins to be taken away by the blood of bulls and goats, that is, by the proper power of that blood itself, men then had confidence in entering into the holies by the blood of Christ prefigured, ibid., 19. And thus was fulfilled the law proclaimed by the same apostle, ibid., IX, 22 : Almost all things, according to the law, are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission. This law was observed even among infidels and idolaters, the devil so mocking them that they were persuaded they professed the true religion.

For many centuries no people is found politically constituted, paternal authority governing men in each family. Therefore from the beginning the priesthood was not public, but domestic, as is shown by the example of Noe, Gen., VIII, 20, Abraham, ibid., XXI, 13, and Job, who among

the Idumaeans worshipped the true God, Iob., I, 5. Yet the office of sacrificer was not then so reserved to the father that private persons were forbidden to offer the hosts; for Cain offered to the Lord of the fruits of the earth, and Abel of the firstlings of his flock, and the Lord respected Abel and his offerings, Gen., IV, 3 and 4. The priesthood does not become public except when the people of God has already been separated from the other nations. Then Aaron, even before the departure of the Israelites from Egypt, is acknowledged priest by God himself, Exod., IV, 14, and his sons are invested with the same dignity, Ibid., XXIX, 43, XXIV, 9 and 10 ; Levit., I, 5; so that from that time it is called the Aaronic priesthood.

Moreover certain sacraments ought then to have been given to men. For, as Augustine says, book XIX contra Faustum, cap. 11, « into no name of religion, whether true or false, can men be banded together, unless they are gathered by some fellowship of signs or visible sacraments : whose sacraments have an ineffably great power, and therefore, when despised, make men sacrilegious. For impiously is despised that without which piety cannot be made perfect. » The reason brought forward by the Saint, Ibid., is that « the observance of such figures was a foretelling of Christ. »

Ought any sacrament to have been given even before sin ? We judge that it must be answered affirmatively, because it befits the condition of man walking by faith upon the earth to be led through sensible signs to goods invisible and eternal. Yet no sacrament seems to have existed in the state of innocence besides the tree of life in the midst of paradise, Gen., II, 9. And this sufficed, both for preserving the unfailing vigor of the body, which it could not effect naturally, and for signifying the supernatural grace by which the soul lives spiritually, as St. Thomas says, 1 p., q. 102, a. 1, ad 4 : « The tree of life, he says, is a certain material tree, so called because its fruit had the power of preserving life, as was said q. 97, a. 4. And yet it signified something spiritually; just as the rock in the desert was something material, and yet signified Christ. » Not improbably, therefore, man being then ignorant of it, but God already disposing all things toward repairing the ruin of man which he had foreseen, this tree presignified the cross of Christ, which is the true tree of life planted in the earthly paradise of the Christian Church.

But what sacraments were in use after sin ? Augustine answers, book V contra Iulianum, cap. 11, num. 45, where he again asserts that certain sacraments were necessary : « It is not to be believed that, before circumcision, the servants of God — since the faith of a mediator to come in the flesh dwelt in them — were without any sacrament to aid their little ones : although sacred Scripture, for some necessary cause, willed that what that was should lie hidden. For we read also of their sacrifices, by which certainly that blood was figured which alone takes away the sins of the world. » Indeed the ancient sacrifices seem to be reckoned among the sacraments of this age, which namely shadowed forth and foretold the immolation of Christ on the cross, and stirred up faith in the mediator. To these was afterwards added circumcision, which was given by God as a sign of the covenant begun by him with the people to arise from Abraham, Gen., XVII, 10 and 11, just as now the new members of the Church of Christ are enrolled through baptism. These sacraments produced a spiritual effect, not ex opere operato, like the sacraments of the new law, but ex opere operantis, that is, by reason of the dispositions of those who used them.

These are the principal features of primitive religion, which the Mosaic law enlarged and the Christian law perfected.]

[Resp. The Mosaic religion consisted of the same essential elements as the primitive religion, those elements neither suppressed nor fundamentally changed, but only amplified. Hence the Israelite people, politically constituted by God himself, was a continuation of the primitive Church and a preparation for the Church instituted by Christ.

Although the Mosaic Church consisted of the same elements as the primitive Church, a great difference between the two must be noted with regard to its external constitution. For the primitive Church coalesced from all those men who, preserving the oral tradition, awaited the redeemer to come, promised by God immediately after the ruin of the human race, and worshipped the true God in the manner of their fathers. The Church at that time was therefore dispersed among various nations, bound and united solely by the bond of religion. But the Mosaic Church was divinely constituted not only religiously but also politically, so that the Israelite nation, distinct and wholly separated from the other nations, might truly be the people of God, in whom the divine promise was preserved, through whom the redemption of mankind was prepared, and from whom, at the appointed time, the universal Savior would arise, of whom dying Jacob prophesied, Gen., XLIX, 10, that he would be the expectation of the nations.

This election and separation is affirmed by God himself. For he says, Exod., XIX, 5 : If therefore you will hear my voice, and keep my covenant, you shall be my peculiar possession above all peoples; for all the earth is mine. Deuter., VII, 6 : Because you are a holy people to the Lord your God, the Lord your God has chosen you, that you may be his peculiar people of all the peoples who are upon the earth. Lest this people be mingled with others and confused with them, by the Lord's command all the neighboring nations were to be treated as enemies, and the Israelites are forbidden to contract marriages with them, ibid., VII, 3.

That God might perfectly attain his highest end, he gave his people a purely theocratic government, ruling it monarchically even in civil matters through ministers deputed by himself, so that he reserved to himself the exercise of royal authority. The Lord therefore directly chose the leaders of his people, Moses, Josue, etc. When afterwards the people demanded a king and God granted their petition, he designated to Samuel whom he should anoint: Saul first, then David, from whose family the scepter shall not be taken away..., until he come who is to be sent, Gen., XLIX, 10. Since legislative power is an essential attribute of monarchical authority, God himself ordered the administration of temporal affairs through manifold decrees recorded in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, whose observance he prescribed in these words, Deuter., IV, 1 et 2 : And now, O Israel, hear the commandments and judgments which I teach you; that doing them, you may live... You shall not add to the word which I speak to you, neither shall you take away from it. Keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. Graver causes were referred to the divine judgment and settled by God answering, Num., XXVII, 4. He presided over military affairs, as is evident from the column of fire directing the army in the desert, and from the many battles which were undertaken only at the Lord's command. By all this and much else it is shown that God kept the government of his people to himself, even in matters profane by their nature, lest the danger arise that anything should be decreed by a human lawgiver repugnant to the special vocation of this nation.

If it seemed expedient to God that inferior matters be so provided for by himself, much more did he have to order spiritual things, by which he had decreed to procure his glory and the salvation of the human race. Moreover, three things were necessary for obtaining this twofold end, as was said in the preceding article, namely dogmas, moral precepts and divine worship. In these, therefore, divine authority intervened positively.

1° The dogmas revealed from the origin of the world were never changed, but day by day illustrated with a clearer light, as happens before our eyes in these last days in the Catholic Church. So it came about while the Mosaic law was in force. The promise of the redeemer to come is often renewed. Prophets are raised up by God who, illumined by his Spirit, announce the Messiah in repeated oracles. He is the one who is to be sent, and he will be the expectation of the nations, Gen., XLIX, 10. He is the one whom the Lord designated to Moses, saying, Deuter., XVIII, 18 : I will raise them up a prophet out of the midst of their brethren like unto you, and will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him. He is the one whose history David, Isaias, Jeremias, Zacharias and the other prophets wove together, so that their writings were rightly and justly called the anticipated Gospel, and Philip could say to Nathanael, Ioann., I, 45 : Whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write, we have found Jesus, the son of Joseph of Nazareth. That his coming may be most certainly established, the number of years is precisely determined through Daniel, whose prophecy will be examined in the treatise de Incarnatione, after which Christ the leader will appear and be put to death, Dan., IX, 24-27. The Apostle recalls this prophetic preparation, saying, Hebr., I, 1 : At sundry times and in divers ways formerly God speaking to the fathers in the prophets, last of all in these days has spoken to us in the Son, whom he appointed heir of all things.

Christ was foretold besides, either through those men whom God raised up to snatch his people from frequently imminent dangers, such as Moses, Josue, Gedeon and others, or through symbolic things which foreshadowed him, among which the sacrifices taken generally hold the chief place, together with the paschal lamb and the other sacraments. And thus, as the Apostle says, 1 Cor., X, 11, all these things happened to them in figure.

To the future divine incarnation all the dogmatic truths enunciated in the preceding article were referred, or proceeded from it.

2° The moral law given originally to man likewise underwent no change, as regards its essentials, nor could it undergo one. But because it had to be observed most perfectly by the chosen people, God solemnly promulgated it, with terrifying pomp, on Mount Sinai, through his angel, and handed it over to Moses engraved on two stone tablets, adding, as has already been said, the precept on the sanctification of the sabbath, Exod., XX. And because the Israelites were already stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, Act., VII, 51, Moses afterwards again proclaimed the decalogue before the people, Deuter., V. All the things God further commanded, whether for establishing the political regime or for ordering public worship, pertained accessory to the same law, because the supreme Lord spoke, to whom obedience and adoration are owed; and the ritual precepts were nothing but the practical rule by which the observance of the first mandate was determined. And in all these things Christ was announced, of whom Isaias prophesies, XXIII, 22 : The Lord our judge, the Lord our lawgiver, the Lord our king: he himself will save us;¹ who said of himself, Matth., V, 17 : Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets : I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.

3° Because the Israelite people had already been politically constituted, public worship had to be instituted; for honor must be shown to God not only by the private individual, but also by society taken collectively, especially since a nation was divinely elected to prepare the way for the Messiah, about to come in order to establish among men the most perfect religion, he who would himself say, Ioann., IV, 23 : The hour cometh, and now is, when true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth.

Moreover, public worship could not be ordered unless an authentic public priesthood were first instituted, whose functions would be committed to certain persons. Therefore, when the tabernacle, which was a portable temple, had been constituted in form and arrangement at the Lord's command through Moses speaking, together with everything that looked to the sacrifices and the other sacred ceremonies, Exod. and Levit., Aaron is consecrated pontiff according to the rite prescribed by God, and his sons as priests, Levit., VI. This election is confirmed by the miracle of the rod of Aaron flowering and bearing fruit, by which sign the tribe of Levi is singularly assigned to the divine worship, the others being excluded, Num., XVII et XVIII. Where it must be observed that, although Moses had been placed by God over the governing of the people, it was not therefore lawful for him to assume the priesthood ; for he is told only, Exod., XVIII, 19 et 20 : Be you to the people in those things that pertain to God, that you may bring back to him what is said, and show the people the ceremonies and the rite of worship; but Aaron and his sons, and their successors, are commanded to observe all the ritual laws given by the Lord with perpetual cult and rite throughout their generations, Levit., XXIV, 3. But because this priesthood, these sacrifices and all the rites were thus divinely established as figurative, and foretold him who was made pontiff forever, Hebr., VI, 20, and his immolation, and the perfect worship ordered by him in the Church with which he promised he would remain until the consummation of the age, Matth., XXVIII, 20, it was foretold through Daniel that all these things would endure until Christ the leader, by whose death the city and the sanctuary would be laid waste, and the people destroyed together with the leader to come;... and the victim and the sacrifice shall fail, and there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation, and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation and the end, Dan., IX, 26-27.

If at least one sacrament was given to man in innocence, it was no less, indeed more, fitting or necessary that certain sacraments be instituted after sin. Having set forth the reasons which demonstrate the moral necessity of the sacraments (3 p., q. 61, a. 1, c.), the Angelic Doctor says, a. 3, c. : « Sacraments are necessary for man's salvation, inasmuch as they are certain sensible signs of invisible things by which man is sanctified. Now no one can be sanctified after sin except through Christ, whom God proposed as a propitiator through faith in his blood, to the showing forth of his justice, that he may himself be just and the sanctifier of him who is of the faith of Jesus Christ, Rom., III, 24-26. And therefore there had to be before the coming of Christ certain visible signs by which man would profess his faith concerning the future coming of the Savior; and signs of this kind are called sacraments. And thus it is clear that before the coming of Christ it was necessary that certain sacraments be instituted. »

But what were these sacraments ? The first place is held by circumcision, which was given to Abraham as a sign of the covenant between God and his initiated people, Gen., XVII, 12 et 13, just as baptism is now the indelible sign of the covenant by which the Christian people is united to God through the redeemer Jesus.

Since the other sacraments were necessary for stirring up and preserving faith in Christ to come, there follow next the sacrifices, which foreshadowed the unique sacrifice of the new law, by which Christ offered himself for the salvation of the world on the altar of the cross, and is immolated unbloody daily in the sacrifice of the Mass. The same was foretold by the slaughter of the paschal lamb, whose eating besides prefigured Eucharistic communion. The manna, which the children of Israel ate for forty years, until they came into the land of habitation, and of which, by the command of God, one measure called a gomer was kept for future generations, Exod., XVI, 32-35, was a sign of the Eucharistic sacrament, as Christ himself testified, Ioann., VI, 49-52 : Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. This is the bread descending from heaven, that if any man eat of it, he may not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever : and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world. Many other things could be recounted among the sacraments, and it must be said that all the things done then in honor of God, and the Israelite nation itself, were sacraments of those which exist now, the Apostle saying, Galat., II, 16 et 17, that festival days, or new moons, or sabbaths were shadows of things to come, just as the Church present is the shadow of the Church triumphant in heaven.²

These ancient sacraments were shadows of the sacraments instituted by Christ himself, not only because, these arriving, they had to vanish away, but also because, since they did not contain inherent grace, they could not sanctify men except by the worth of the one working (ex opere operantis). Hence Paul calls them, Galat., IV, 9, weak and needy elements, which it is not permitted to serve again. And Augustine says, book XIX contra Faustum, chap. 13 : « The first sacraments which were observed and celebrated under the Law were foretellings of the Christ to come : which when Christ had fulfilled by his coming, they were taken away, and therefore taken away, because fulfilled; for he did not come to dissolve the Law, but to fulfill it. And others were instituted, greater in power, better in usefulness, easier in act, fewer in number, as though the justice of faith having been revealed, and the sons of God called to liberty, the yoke of servitude being removed which befitted a hardened people given over to the flesh. »

To public worship are likewise referred the feast days to be celebrated solemnly, among which the chief are Pascha, Pentecost and the feast of Tabernacles, on which the best-known events were recalled and the mysteries of the New Testament announced in figure.

With everything briefly described by which the Israelite nation, elected as the peculiar people of God, was religiously constituted not only in spirituals but also in civils and politicals, and which personated and announced Christ the redeemer to come, it is clear that this people was truly the Christian Church, whereby the way was paved for the Church instituted by Christ himself and destined to last until the consummation of the age.

[Resp. affirmative.

Proof. 1° from what has been said in the preceding articles, whereby it is demonstrated : 1° that this religion was constituted directly by God himself ; 2° that all things were ordered to preparing the advent of the redeemer promised to mankind after the fall ; 3° that the Israelite people was truly the anticipated Christian Church.

Proof. 2° from miracles, both in the physical order and in the intellectual order.

1° The miracles of the physical order were wrought first to establish the Mosaic religion, then to confirm it. 1° Many and most illustrious miracles were done, by which the divine mission of Moses was most evidently demonstrated. Of these let it suffice to recount the ten plagues of Egypt, the crossing of the Red Sea, the manna descending from heaven, with which the Israelites were nourished for forty years in the desert, the destruction of Core, Dathan and Abiron, whom, at the command of Moses, the earth swallowed up, in punishment of their rebellion, etc. Moses himself, before these rebels went down alive into hell, said to the people, Num., XVI, 28 et 29 : In this you shall know that the Lord has sent me to do all things that you see, and that I have not brought them forth of my own heart. If these men die the common death of men, and are visited by a plague such as the others are wont to be visited by, the Lord did not send me. By the same right he could have invoked the other miracles which he himself worked in favor of his mission. 2° Countless are the miracles which Josue, the Judges and the prophets afterwards worked, especially Elias and Eliseus. Moreover, by all these the Mosaic religion was confirmed, since they were accomplished for no other end. But these miracles are historically certain facts and evidently divine, as exceeding the laws and powers of nature. Therefore the religion which they champion is divine.

2° The miracles of the intellectual order are the prophecies. And indeed the history of the people of God was prophesied long beforehand far in advance of the individual events. 1° Before Moses, God promises Abraham, already advanced in age, Gen., XV, 16 et 18, that his seed or posterity shall not be numbered for multitude. The people sprung from him will be a stranger in a land not his own, that is, in Egypt, where he will be subjected to servitude and afflicted four hundred years, after which he will go out with great substance. From him kings will come forth, and the land of his sojourning will be given to him, and all the land of Chanaan, for a possession. Jacob, dying, promulgates this most illustrious prophecy, confirmed by an event which he could not naturally foreknow, Gen., XLIX, 10 : « The scepter shall not be taken away from Juda, nor a leader from his thigh, until he come who is to be sent, and he will be the expectation of the nations. » 2° Moses himself announces to the Israelites, Num., XIV, 29 et 30, that all who were numbered from twenty years old and upward, and murmured against the Lord, shall not enter into the promised land, except Caleb and Josue. Which came to pass, as is narrated ibid., XXVI, 65 ; Deuter., I, 35 seqq.; Iosue, XIV, 6 seqq. He promises to Phinees and his sons the priesthood forever, Num., XXIV, 13, and the fulfillment of this promise is noted Psal. CV, 13 ; Eccli., XLV, 30 ; 1 Machab., II, 54. Many other predictions could be cited. 3° There are prophecies published after Moses well-nigh innumerable. Foretold : by Ahias, the division of the kingdom of Solomon; by Osee and Amos, the devastation and destruction of the Israelite kingdom after forty years. More stupendous are the prophecies which concern the Babylonian captivity, in which both the time and the duration of this captivity are determined, and Cyrus is designated by name as the liberator of the people. Isaias, Ieremias and Daniel describe so clearly the overthrow of Babylon, the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the fates of empires, that they seem to narrate past things rather than announce future ones : whence Porphyrius did not hesitate to assert that these prophecies, or at least many of them, were composed after the event. But all these prophecies, uttered directly or indirectly in favor of the Mosaic religion, are evidently divine. Therefore.

It is necessarily supposed that the books in which the aforesaid miracles are narrated and the prophecies enunciated above are read, are authentic and intact, and were divinely inspired. But this is demonstrated by the writers who devote themselves to sacred hermeneutics.

The divinity of the Mosaic religion can moreover be proved from the nature of the constitution of the people, both political and religious, and from the excellence of the doctrine which that nation professed, whence neither can come except from God. But these things have been sufficiently set forth above.]

More recent Jews contend not only that the promised Messiah has not yet come, but also that the Mosaic law is so perfect in every respect as to be essentially immutable, and that neither is it to be abrogated by the Messiah himself when he shall appear on earth. Whence they infer that Christ is not the true Messiah whom the people of God was expecting, because he presumed to abolish the ancient law.

Four things are to be distinguished in the Mosaic religion : moral matters, dogmatic matters, judicial matters and ceremonial matters. The moral precepts, which pertain to the natural law, are intrinsically immutable. Only in this sense could they be abrogated, namely that, the old law ceasing, they would no longer bind as a part of this law, but by the force of the natural law, which is adapted to all times and conditions of men. The dogmas by which the existence and nature of God are expressed likewise undergo no change. This part could vanish away only in this respect, that what happened in figure, as the Apostle says, 1 Cor., X, 11, insofar as they foretold the redeemer to come, were made void by his advent. The judicial matters and everything by which the people of God was politically constituted could stand only while the figurative Church lasted, which had to give place to the Church about to be instituted by the Savior and destined to remain until the consummation of the age. The ceremonial matters, which foreshadowed redemption in figure, would not only be vain once redemption was accomplished, but false, as promising as future what is already done. These things premised,

I say : the Mosaic religion or law was to be abrogated. And this is proved from the old law itself.

Proof. 1° from the prophecies which promise a new mediator or lawgiver, and a new covenant : 1° A new lawgiver is announced by Moses himself, when he says, Deuter., XVIII, 15-18 : « A prophet of your own nation and of your fathers will the Lord your God raise up to you like me; him you shall hear... And the Lord said to me : ... I will raise them up a prophet out of the midst of their brethren like unto you : and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him. But whoever will not hear his words which he shall speak in my name, I will be the avenger. » After Moses had finished his life, it is said, ibid., XXXIV, 10 : « And there arose no more a prophet in Israel like unto Moses. » Therefore the prophet designated in this place will not appear while the Mosaic law is in force. He will be like unto Moses, not indeed as regards dignity, for Moses was only a figure of this prophet, but as regards the office of lawgiver; which is intimated in the words related above : I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him. More expressly such a one is afterwards described, Is., XLII, 1-4 : « Behold my servant, I will uphold him... I have given my spirit upon him, he shall bring forth judgment to the gentiles... In truth he shall bring forth judgment,... and the islands shall wait for his law. » — 2° Through the coming lawgiver, God will enter into a new covenant with a new people, the old law vanishing away, since its end will be fulfilled, Ierem. XXXI, 31-33 : « Behold the days come, saith the Lord ; and I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Juda, not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt ; the covenant which they made void... But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord : I will give my law in their bowels and I will write it in their heart, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. » To this promise the Apostle alludes, II Cor., III, 3, saying that the new law is written, not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not on tables of stone, but on the fleshy tables of the heart. Whence, having related the prophecy of Isaias, he concludes the same thing, Hebr., VIII, 13 : « In saying a new thing, he hath made the former old. And that which decayeth and groweth old is near its end. » What clearer could be desired ?

Proof. 2° from the prophecies which concern the calling of the gentiles. From what has been said in the preceding articles it must be concluded that the Israelite nation was not elected by God into a peculiar people except so that the Messias, about to spring from her, might be certainly recognized when he should come, and so that the way might be paved for the Church about to be instituted by him, which had truly to be catholic or universal. It was necessary therefore that the calling of the gentiles be clearly foretold in the ancient Scriptures, and so indeed it was foretold. For already this calling is expressed in the text of Isaias just cited, where it is said that a new covenant is to be entered into by God with the house of Israel. Moreover this house of Israel is the same as the seed of Abraham, which indeed carnally coalesces from the Jewish people, but spiritually embraces all who have imitated the faith of the holy patriarch. For of Abraham it was said, Gen., XVIII, 18 : « All nations shall be blessed in him », and once and again the Lord said to him, ibid., XXII, 18 et XXVI, 4 : « All the nations of the earth shall be blessed in thy seed. » That this promise is to be understood thus is clear from the Apostle testifying to it, Rom., IV, 13 et 16 : « For not by the law was the promise to Abraham, or to his seed, that he should be heir of the world; but through the justice of faith... Therefore it is of faith, that according to grace the promise may be firm to all seed; not to that only which is of the law, but also to that which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all », that is, not of the Jews only, but of those who from the gentiles believe themselves to have been redeemed by Christ. To Christ, who was the expectation of the nations anticipated, this testimony is rendered, Psal. II, 7 et 8 : « The Lord has said to me : You are my son, this day have I begotten you. Ask of me, and I will give you the gentiles for your inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for your possession. » Of the same it is said, Psal. LXXI, 11 : « And all kings of the earth shall adore him, all nations shall serve him. » Isaias cries out announcing him, XLIX, 6 : « Behold I have given you to be the light of the gentiles, that you may be my salvation even to the uttermost part of the earth. » In Osee it is read, II, 24 : « And I will say to that which is not my people : You are my people; and it shall say : You are my God. » The other prophets accord, Ierem., III, 17 ; Soph., II, 11 ; Zach., IX, 9 et 10. Therefore all nations will be gathered spiritually into one people, with Christ as leader. Therefore to the new people a new law will be given, whereby, the promise being fulfilled, all figures will be evacuated. Therefore the Mosaic law, in which all things were contained in figure, necessarily had to be abrogated.

Proof. 3° from the prophecies which foretell a new priesthood, a new sacrifice, the ark forgotten, the everlasting overthrow of the temple; from which follows the abrogation of the ritual or ceremonial law, in which the chief place in the Mosaic constitution was held.

1° The new priesthood. Psal. CIX, 4 : « The Lord hath sworn, and he will not repent : You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech. » Thus the Lord decreed that the Messias would be a priest forever, no longer according to the order of Aaron, but according to the order of Melchisedech king of Salem, who, although a gentile, offered forth bread and wine; for he was priest of the most high God, Gen., XIV, 18 ; of whom the Apostle says, Hebr., VII, 1 et 3, that, since he was priest of the most high God,... but assimilated to the Son of God, he remains a priest forever. By which words the Christian priesthood is signified, whose chief function is mystically to renew and perpetuate, under the species of bread and wine, the bloody sacrifice by which Christ offered and immolated himself upon the altar of the cross. Priests of the new law will be chosen not only from outside the family of Aaron, but even from outside the Israelite people, Isaias saying, LXVI, 19-21 : I will send from among those who have been saved,... and they shall bring all your brethren from all nations for a gift to the Lord,... and I will take some of them for priests and levites, saith the Lord. » Moreover the Aaronic priesthood excelled all institutions among the Jews, and when it fell, the whole law had to fall with it, as Paul teaches, speaking of the future priesthood, Hebr., VII, 11 et 12 : « If then the consummation, that is, the fulfillment of the divine secret concerning the salvation of mankind, was through the levitical priesthood — for under it the people received the law — what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchisedech, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? For when the priesthood is translated, it is necessary that a translation of the law also be made. »

2° The new sacrifice. While the Mosaic law was in force, it was lawful for the priests alone, sprung from the stock of Aaron, to offer sacrifices, and in one place only, namely in the temple of Jerusalem, and these sacrifices were of many kinds, each of which in some respect figured specifically some perfection of the future and unique sacrifice to be instituted. Moreover all these were to be abolished when the Messias substituted one perfect sacrifice for the old ones, which is announced in the remarkable prophecy of Malachias, I, 10 : « I have no will in you, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will not receive a gift of your hand. For from the rising of the sun even to the going down my name is great among the gentiles, and in every place there is sacrificed and offered up to my name a clean oblation; because my name is great among the gentiles, saith the Lord of hosts. » But this abolition of the old sacrifices Daniel had already predicted before, IX, 26 et 27 : « And after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be slain, and the people that shall deny him shall not be his. And a people with their leader that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary... And in the half of the week the victim and the sacrifice shall fail, and there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation, and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation and the end. » These things are clearer than light.

3° The ark forgotten. At the command of the Lord, the ark had been fabricated by Beseleel of setim wood, Exod., XXV, 10 ; XXXVII, 1. It is several times called the ark of the testimony, ibid., XXV, 22 and elsewhere,

It was the ark of the testament, ibid., XXX, 26 ; the ark of the covenant, Num., X, 33 ; Iosue, III, 3 and elsewhere. God had said to Moses, Exod., XXV, 16 : « You shall put in the ark the testimony which I will give you. » But what this testimony was appears from this place, Deuter., X, 1 et 2 : « The Lord said to me : Hew yourself two tables of stone like the former ones, and come up to me into the mount. And you shall make an ark of wood, and I will write on the tables the words that were on those which you broke before, and you shall put them in the ark. » Moses therefore laid up in the ark the tables on which the ten commandments of God had been written, which were the testimony of the covenant between the Lord and his initiated people. The covenant itself therefore was connected with this sign. Moreover, this sign was to pass into oblivion at the time when the covenant was to come to an end, as appears from these words, Ierem., III, 15 et 16 : « I will give you pastors according to my own heart... They shall say no more : The ark of the testament of the Lord, neither shall it come upon the heart, neither shall they remember it, neither shall it be visited, neither shall it be done any more. » Then will be what is said ibid., VII, 15 : « And I will cast you off from my face, as I have cast off all your brethren, the whole seed of Ephraim. » Therefore, the ark of the covenant perishing, the covenant itself, that is, the whole Mosaic law and religion, was to be abrogated.

4° The everlasting overthrow of the temple. The temple which Solomon built at the command of the Lord, and in which the ark of the covenant was kept, had supplied the place of the portable tabernacle, and was the house of God and the place where the legal sacrifices were offered. It was acceptable to the Lord, as he himself testified, saying, III Rey., IX, 3 : « I have sanctified this house which you have built, that I might put my name there forever, and my eyes and my heart shall be there all days », that is, as long as the figurative worship lasts, and until there comes, as Christ said, Ioann., IV, 23, the hour when true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth. But the destruction of this temple was clearly predicted, Ierem., VII, 14 et 15 : « I will do to this house, in which my name has been invoked, and in which you trust, and to the place which I gave to you and to your fathers, as I did to Silo. And I will cast you off from my face. » Moreover, for a long time the tabernacle of the Lord had remained in Silo, in which the ark of the covenant had been stored away and sacrifices were offered, and the Lord had forsaken this place, as is related Psal. LXXVII, 60 : « And he repelled the tabernacle of Silo, his tabernacle, where he dwelt among men. » Therefore in like manner the temple of Jerusalem was to be rejected. And not only was it to be rejected, but overthrown, as having now become useless, when the new worship was instituted, as appears from Daniel, where it is said, IX, 26, that, Christ being slain, a people with their leader that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary, and the end thereof ruin, and after the end of the war the abomination of desolation shall stand.

Many places of Scripture can be objected, where the law is said to endure forever, Levit., XVI, 29 ; to last forever, Deuter., XXIX, 29 ; to be destroyed by no oblivion, ibid., XXXI, 21 ; founded forever, Psal. CXVI, 18.

Resp. 1° If the phrases forever and for eternity were taken strictly, it would follow that the Mosaic law would be truly eternal, and since this can be said only absurdly, it must be said that it was destined to last a long time, and ought not to be abrogated before he should come who was to be sent to redeem mankind. 2° This interpretation is shown true by the text of Jeremias cited above in the first proof, from which it follows that the old law was to be observed as long as the Israelite people itself subsisted, that is, until the fulfillment of the divine promise. 3° Christ himself declared in what sense the perpetuity of this law is to be understood, when he said, Matth., V, 17 : « Do not think that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets : I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. » The old law was abrogated inasmuch as it was figurative; it was confirmed inasmuch as it was fulfilled; it is eternal, inasmuch as the Mosaic Church paved the way for the Christian Church, in which the heavenly Church, destined to remain forever, is prepared. In this threefold state Christ appears diversely, who was yesterday, is today, the same also forever, Hebr., XIII, 8.]

[Resp. Affirmative.

Proof. 1° from the present state of the Jews. For that covenant has been abrogated whose conditions are no longer observed by God, and could by no means be observed by the Jews, even if they wished. But so it is. Therefore.

Proof. of the first part of the minor. By the covenant which he had entered into with the Israelite people, God had bound himself to protect that nation and to govern it with a special providence, giving it laws, appointing ministers for it, heaping temporal goods upon it : on this condition, that the people faithfully carry out the law, or repent of the violated law, Deuter., XXVIII et XXX. Moreover, for eighteen centuries and more God has plainly abandoned the affairs of this people; nor has he ever renewed the miracles by which he was once wont to turn their hearts to himself ; he has not sent them even one prophet; according to the prophecy of Daniel related above, he permitted the overthrow of the city and the temple, the abolition of the ancient worship, the destruction of the whole nation, nor did he revive the spirits of the Jews with any consolation, nor leave them any hope of restoration. And yet the Jews are not seen to have given themselves over to idolatry, but retain the dogma of one God, whom they adore according to their powers ; they have not consigned the precepts of the Mosaic law to oblivion, but even keep its most minute observances.

Nay more, far from God having deserted the conditions of the covenant entered into with the Israelite people on Mount Sinai, he has rather visited the Jews as enemies, for nearly a thousand years and more, and has signified in manifold ways that their race is hateful to him and their offerings ungrateful; they lead an ignoble life, expelled from their fatherland, without a prince, without a fixed seat, made a reproach to all nations. In proof of this certain signs of divine indignation must opportunely be recalled to memory. 1° While the temple of Jerusalem still stood, some forty years before it was overthrown, specters were seen in it and prodigious things happened, as the Jewish doctors themselves relate, and Josephus and Tacitus narrate that a voice was heard from the priests at the feast of Pentecost resounding in the Holy of holies and crying out clearly : « Let us depart, let us depart. » — 2° Nor should that marvelous fact related by Josephus be omitted, namely that a certain man, named Jesus, went about the city for years crying aloud : « Woe to Jerusalem! woe, woe to the city! », who finally exclaimed : « Woe also to me ! » and, immediately struck by a stone hurled by the enemy, expired. — 3° Who does not know how mournful was the lot of the Jews during the siege of Jerusalem, in which eleven hundred thousand perished, and again under the Roman emperor Hadrian six hundred thousand were slain? — 4° Let that event bear still nobler witness of the divine indignation against that nation which all Christian and pagan historians report to have happened in the times of Julian the Apostate, and to which the Jews themselves consent, namely that when Julian had decided to restore the temple of the Jews, so as to demonstrate by patent fact that the divine oracles were lies, an immense flame burst forth from the foundations and consumed the work begun and the workmen together with it.

From these things, others being passed over, it is expressly shown that the conditions of the old covenant entered into with the Israelite people are no longer observed by God.

Proof. of the second part of the minor. The Jews cannot observe this covenant, even if they would. For, by the Mosaic law, sacrifices could not be offered to God except first in the tabernacle, and afterwards in the temple of Jerusalem, by priests taken from the house of Aaron, the rest of the tribe of Levi being assigned to the sacred ministry; which supposes the distinction of tribes and families. Three times a year the Jews were bound to go up to Jerusalem, that they might celebrate in the temple the feasts of Pascha, Pentecost and Tabernacles. Besides, the Israelite nation could not be called the people of God except while, politically constituted, it possessed the land of Chanaan as its own. But since the city of Jerusalem was captured and subverted, the temple has been demolished, the distinction of tribes forgotten, the Aaronic priesthood vanished away, and the Jews, exiles everywhere on earth, cannot carry out the ceremonial precepts according to the law. Therefore the old covenant can no longer be observed by them.

It is perhaps objected that the Jews were in an equal condition at the time of the Babylonian captivity, and yet that covenant was not abolished.

Resp. no parity can be established between the two conditions. 1° The Babylonian captivity had been foretold, not as the political overthrow of the constitution of the Jewish people, but as a punishment, whose duration God had limited to seventy years, after which that nation was to be restored to its former state. 2° In Babylon the Jews had their own judges, who administered justice to them according to the Mosaic law, and in Jerusalem a great part of the people had remained, which possessed this city as its own. 3° During the captivity, the prophets added courage to the Jews; Jeremias promised them liberation after the appointed time, and the restoration of the temple, XXX, 18, and Isaias before him had designated by his own name Cyrus, the future liberator. But the present state of the Jews leaves them no hope; nay rather it is the desolation decreed and predicted by Daniel, IX, 26. Scattered everywhere, strangers everywhere, they are without a fatherland, without a temple, without a priesthood, without sacrifice, without law, witnesses of the ancient promises, but excluded from their fulfillment, which however God uses to demonstrate their fulfillment, as Augustine observes, book III contra duas epist. Pelagian., c. 4, n. 9 : « The Jews, according to the prophecies which they read, are dispersed through every land everywhere, so that even from their codices Christian testimony may not be wanting to the truth. »

Proof. 2° from the advent of the promised Messias, that he truly came is proved in the tract. de Incarnatione, dissert. I, art. 2 et 3.]

THE CHURCH

Second part

ON THE CHURCH INSTITUTED BY CHRIST

1° : The Church of Christ taken generally, according to every state, place and time, is « the Congregation of the faithful united in the true worship of God, under Christ their head. » And thus it embraces the faithful of the Old Testament, not only those who belonged to the Synagogue, namely the Jews, but also other faithful outside the Synagogue, such as Job, Melchisedech, etc. Likewise it embraces the blessed, even the angels in heaven, the suffering souls in Purgatory, and the faithful wayfarers. In the blessed it is called the Church triumphant; in the souls of Purgatory, the Church suffering; in wayfarers, the Church militant : not that they are different Churches, but different parts or different states of the same Church.

Nor does it stand in the way that at the time of the Old Testament Christ had not yet come; for the faithful of the Old Testament believed that Christ would come, and in view of his future merits attained salvation. And therefore Christ was their head.

I say 2° : The Church of Christ militant is « the society of baptized faithful, united among themselves by the profession of the same faith, by the participation of the same sacraments, by the same worship, under one head, Christ in heaven, and under his Vicar on earth, the supreme Pontiff. » This definition is commonly received.

I say 3° : Neither all nor only the predestined are in the Church.

The first part is clear. For Paul, while he persecuted the Church, was not in the Church, and yet he was predestined. He says the same of many Jews and pagans.

Proof. of the second part. 1° John the Baptist, Matth., III, 12, compares the Church to the threshing floor in which are wheat and chaff to be burned with fire unquenchable. In the same place XIII, 47, Christ compares it to a net cast into the sea gathering fish of every kind, in which not only good ones are contained, but also bad ones to be thrown out ; in the same place, XXII, 2 seqq., to a marriage feast, into which enter those who have not the wedding garment, and who therefore are to be cast into the exterior darkness. The Apostle, II Tim., II, 20 et 21, compares it to a great house in which are vessels, some unto honor, others unto dishonor. But it is certain that the predestined are not to be burned with fire unquenchable, are not to be thrown out, are not to be cast into the exterior darkness, nor are they vessels unto dishonor. Therefore not only the predestined are in the Church.

2° All those are in the Church who have entered it through the sacrament of faith, that is, Baptism. But not only the predestined are baptized. Therefore.

3° Since predestination is known to no one, if the Church consisted only of the predestined, the Church would be invisible, the opposite of which we shall prove below; neither could the pastors recognize their sheep, nor the sheep their pastor.

I say 4° : Not only the just, but sinners, even manifest ones, are in the Church.

Proof. 1° from the three comparisons of the threshing floor, the net and the marriage feast, concerning the preceding conclusion. For they prove equally of sinners.

2° Christ, Matth., XVIII, 17, commands that a sinner corrected privately and not amended be denounced to the Church, and if he does not hear her, be cast out by her. Therefore he supposes sinners to be in the Church. 1 Cor., V, 1, in the Church of Corinth the incestuous man is found.

3° Christ instituted in the Church the sacrament of Penance, by which sinners would rise again and be healed. Therefore he supposes there to be sinners in the Church; otherwise this sacrament would be in vain.

4° The Church is the society of baptized faithful ordered in the same faith, under the same head. But sinners who are neither heretics, nor schismatics, nor excommunicated, are baptized faithful ordered in the same faith, under the same head. Therefore.

The same doctrine the holy Fathers hand down. Chrysostomus, in Psal., XXXIX; Hieron., contra Lucifer., c. 8; Aug., in many places, expressly Tract. VI in Ioann., n. 12, where he says : « We confess that in the Church there are both the good and the evil, but as grain and chaff. »

Dices 1° : Many Fathers, Cyprian., Epist. ad Magnum.; Hieron., ad Ephes., 5; Aug., lib. I contra Petilian., last chapter, and elsewhere, say that the evil are not members of the Church, nor do they pertain to the Church. Therefore.

Resp. either the praised Fathers speak of the perfect members of the Church, who live the perfect life through charity; or understand by the name of the evil the unfaithful; or take the Church in a restricted sense, as it is the congregation of the nobler members, or of the just alone.

Dices 2° : Sinners belong to the Babylonian city, according to Aug. Therefore not to mystical Jerusalem, namely the Church.

Resp. Dist. of the consequence. Therefore not to mystical Jerusalem, under the same aspect, conc.; under a diverse aspect, nego. They belong to the Babylonian city by reason of sin, to the Church by reason of faith.

Whence you will infer that the propositions 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77 et 78 in Quesnel were rightly condemned.¹

Proof. 5° None enters into the Church and becomes its member except through baptism. Therefore. 2° All who are in the Church are capable of the sacraments of the Church. But catechumens are not capable of these, since Baptism is the door of the other sacraments, as will be said when we treat of Baptism.

Nor does it stand in the way that Christ influences them; for although Christ influences all the members of the Church, he does not influence them in it alone, as appears in the excommunicated, if they repent.

I said, « really and properly ; » because, since catechumens ask to enter the Church, and already have faith and sometimes charity, they can be said to be in the Church proximately, inchoatively and in vow, and thus to be saved.

I say 6° : Heretics, not only manifest, but also occult and internal, are not so in the Church as to be its true members.

Thus I state the conclusion on account of occult and internal heretics, concerning whom the difficulty principally lies, who although they are in the Church in a certain respect, that is, exteriorly and apparently, we judge more probable, however, that they are not of the Church, nor its true members; just as, if a wolf covered with a sheepskin were found among the sheep, he would be in the sheepfold, but would not be of the sheepfold, as its true part.

Proof. 6° 1° The Church is the society of the faithful. But heretics, even occult ones, are not faithful. Therefore.

2° The Church is a body having union, not only external, but also internal of the members among themselves and with the head. But heretics, even occult ones, have no internal union among themselves and with the head; for faith is the first uniter, and the foundation of the rest.

3° Christ is not the actual head of heretics, even occult ones. Therefore. — Proof. of the antecedent. He infuses nothing vital supernatural into heretics, even occult ones; for faith is the foundation and beginning of supernatural life. Therefore.

Nor say that he influences into them the baptismal character; for the baptismal character is not something vital supernatural uniting in one believed or loved object, and otherwise Christ would have to be called the head of damned baptized persons, which St. Thomas denies, IIIa p., q. 8, a. 3, ad 3°.

Nor even say that he influences actual graces; because 1° these are not vital, but only dispositions to life. 2° They are not permanent; but the bond uniting the members of a body ought to be something permanent. 3° Because otherwise Christ ought also to be called the head of infidels, into whom he likewise influences actual graces.

I say 7° : Schismatics and the excommunicated by major excommunication are not in the Church.

Proof. Although both can retain faith, nay, the excommunicated can have charity, if they truly repent, yet de facto they are cut off from the Church; because schismatics voluntarily separate themselves from the head and from the members, for schism is a voluntary rent; the excommunicated are separated by legitimate authority from the same body. Therefore neither are any longer associates or conjoined; but the Church is a society.

It is confirmed. The Church in Parasceve prays for schismatics, as for heretics, that they may return to the Church. And Christ, Matth., XVIII, 17, speaking of the excommunicated, says : Let him be to you as the heathen and the publican.

Lutherans and Calvinists seemed at first to acknowledge the visibility of the Church, whose marks were, according to them, the pure preaching of the word of God and the sincere administration of the sacraments. But when Catholics asked them to declare where this visible Church was before their reformation, they did not know how to answer. They could not assign the Roman Church, from which they had withdrawn as from the synagogue of Satan, and they could not find, nor can they find, another in which visibly all the dogmas which they hold would be taught. Therefore to extricate themselves from this snare, some contrived a twofold Church, one invisible of the predestined, the other visible composed of the predestined and the reprobate. Others said that the Church, although visible, was then almost extinct, so that it no longer appeared.

The question concerns the visibility of the present Church through bodily eyes, with the judgment and certain persuasion that it is the Church of Christ : otherwise it would be visible materially, and not formally under the aspect of Church.]

I say : The Church is perpetually visible.

Proof. 1° from Scripture. Matth., V, 14, it is said : A city cannot be hidden that is set on a mountain. Of which text Aug., lib. II contra Crescon., c. 36, n. 45, says : « The Church exists clear and conspicuous to all, inasmuch as it is a city which cannot be hidden, established on a mountain. » Likewise the parables of the threshing floor, the field, the net, by which Christ expressed the Church, openly signify that it is visible.

Act., XX, 28, bishops are said to be appointed to rule the Church of God. Paul ad Galat., I, 13, confesses that he persecuted the Church of God. Act., VII, 1, it is read that a persecution was raised against the Church. But they could not rule and persecute the Church unless it were visible. And Matth., XVIII, 17, the incorrigible brother is to be denounced to the Church, and if he does not hear her, he is to be held as the heathen and the publican. But how can one be denounced to the Church and hear the Church, if the Church is invisible?

Proof. 2° from theological arguments : 1° All are bound to come to the Church, outside of which there is no salvation, as the heretics themselves confess. But this would be impossible if the Church were invisible. 2° The Church is a society of men, and these are visible. 3° In the Church there is made an exterior profession of faith, the sacraments are administered, the word of God is preached, jurisdiction is exercised by superiors over inferiors, councils are gathered, definitions of faith are issued, laws are enacted. But all these things are visible. Therefore.

For the solution of the objections, note that two things can be attended to in the Church : one internal, which some call the soul of the Church, and this is the faith by which the members of the Church are internally bound together among themselves and with the head; the other external, which they call the body of the Church, namely the exterior society of those who are joined together by the public profession of the same faith, by the communion of the same sacraments and pastors. But although what is internal is in itself invisible, nevertheless the Church is said to be visible through its exterior: just as, although the soul of man is in itself invisible, man nevertheless is said to be visible from his face.

[Petes whether visibility belongs to the sects of heretics. Resp. it does not belong to them in that degree in which it belongs to the Church of Christ, because they are not conspicuous to the whole world, as the Church of Christ is. Nor were they always visible; for before Luther and Calvin, where were they seen? Nor are more notable things beheld in them, as in the true Church, namely the perpetual and undisturbed succession of its Pontiffs, the gathering of councils, the casting out of heretics, etc.]

[The marks of a thing must be proper to it, and not common; otherwise they designate that thing no more than another: not that each one taken separately must be proper to it, but at least all of them collectively. Likewise they must be better known than the thing they demonstrate.]

Against the pagans, who do not admit the Scriptures, we prove the truth of our Religion and Church by the motives of credibility, spoken of above. Against the heretics, however, who do admit the Scriptures, we prove it by the marks of the true Church expressed in the Scriptures: not that these marks make the true Church evident in itself, but evidently credible.

§ I. — Are there marks of the true Church, and what are they?

I say: There are four marks of the true Church, namely that it is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. Such is the Constantinopolitan Creed.

The true Church is one.

[That the Church is one is not understood in this sense, that it is unique. It is indeed true that Christ instituted a unique Church, but this uniqueness, if it be permitted to use this word, is not invoked as a mark of the true Church. But in what the unity of the Church of Christ consists is declared below.]

Proof. The Apostle, 1 Cor., XII, 12 et 13, says: For as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, yet are one body; so also is Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.

[This unity Cyprian proves at length, in his book de Unitate Ecclesiae and epistle 76, and Augustine in his writings against the Donatists, and elsewhere.]

The Church is said to be one, 1° by the unity of concord or consensus in the same last end and in the same means to it, namely especially in the same faith, the same sacraments, the same worship and the same precepts necessary for salvation: One Lord, one faith, one Baptism, Ephes., IV, 5. 2° By the unity of order, that is, the ordered ordering of many under the same government of one head: One sheepfold, one Shepherd, John, X, 16.

[You will say: The Apostle, Rom., XVI, 18, writes: All the churches of Christ salute you. Therefore.

I answer. that these are several particular churches, which are parts of one universal church, united under one common government; just as several provinces are parts of one kingdom.]

The true Church is holy.

Proof. In Cant., VI, she is called beautiful, a dove, fair as the moon, elect as the sun; 1 Petr., II, 9, a chosen generation, a holy nation; Ephes., V, 25 et 26: He delivered himself up for her, that he might sanctify her.

It is holy: 1° by reason of its head and spouse, who is Christ, the Holy of holies and the fount of all holiness; 2° by reason of its end, namely divine worship, to which it is consecrated through Baptism; 3° by reason of the other sacraments, offices, ceremonies and laws, all of which breathe forth holiness; 4° by reason of its doctrine, which leads to acquiring or increasing holiness.

[Note that the holiness of the Church does not imply that each of its members possesses holiness in act, since in it, as has already been said, good men and bad are found; but only that the Church is holy from the manifold reasons assigned here.]

The true Church is catholic, or universal.

[Catholic comes from the Greek καθὰ, secundum, and ὅλον, totum, and signifies universal. The true Church is called catholic because it is universal under the fourfold reason soon to be declared, but chiefly by reason of places, according to that saying of Augustine, Epist. 52¹, n. 5: « This is the catholic Church; whence it is called καθολικὴ in Greek, because it is spread abroad through the whole world. » Hence Optatus presses Parmenian thus, book II contra Parmen.: « Where, then, is the property of the catholic name? Since the Church was called catholic from the fact that it is diffused everywhere. »]

It is said to be catholic: 1° by reason of place, because it is spread abroad through the whole world, Marc., XVI, 15: Going into the whole world; 2° by reason of persons, because it calls and embraces to itself, not indeed all and every person, but persons of every nation and condition, ibid.: Preach the gospel to every creature; 3° by reason of duration, Matt., ult., 20: Behold I am with you even to the consummation of the world; 4° by reason of doctrine, because it teaches whatsoever is either to be believed, or to be done, or to be avoided.

Concerning the universality of place, it must be observed that it can be taken in two ways: either for a simultaneous and permanent diffusion through the whole world, or for a successive diffusion only.

If taken in the first way, the universality must be understood not in the metaphysical rigor, but morally, for a diffusion into many and principal parts of the globe, so that the Church is more widely diffused than any other sect whatsoever: in which sense Daniël II, 38 and VIII, 9 et 10 says that Nabuchodonosor occupied all the kingdoms of the world, and that Alexander commanded the whole earth; not that these kings truly ruled the whole globe, but many and principal provinces. If taken in the second way, the universality is to be understood rigorously, so that the Church, now diffused through many and principal parts, gradually and successively spreads into other parts, until at length it is received everywhere, according to that saying of Coloss., I, 6: The gospel is in the whole world, and bringeth forth fruit and groweth. Where, following Augustine, Epist. 199², the present is put for the future on account of the certainty of the effect, as is frequent in the Scriptures; for it is clear that at that time the Church was not yet diffused everywhere.

The true Church is apostolic.

By reason, namely, of its origin and an uninterrupted succession; because founded by Christ, who is called the Apostle of our confession, Hebr., III, 1, and propagated and confirmed by the Apostles, and derived from them, it perseveres even unto now. Whence Ephes., II, 20, the faithful are said to be built up upon the foundation of the Apostles.

[There is, then, a twofold foundation of the Church. The primary is Christ, from the Apostle, 1 Cor., III, 11: Other foundation no man can lay, besides that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus. The secondary is made up of the Apostles taken collectively, as appears from Paul's text cited above, and from these words, Apoc., XXI, 14: The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the twelve names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb. And this mark for discerning the true Church the Fathers urge everywhere. Tertullian, de Praescript., c. 32: « If any churches, he says, dare to insert themselves into the apostolic age, because they were founded under the Apostles, we may say to them: Let them then produce the origins of their churches, unroll the order of their bishops, running on through successions from the beginning, so that that first bishop should have for his author or predecessor someone of the Apostles or of apostolic men, one who, moreover, persevered with the Apostles. » Jerome, contra Lucifer., last chapter, says that « one ought to remain in that Church which, founded by the Apostles, endures to this day. »]

§ II. — To which Church do these four marks belong?

I say: These four marks belong to the Roman Church alone, not to the sects of the heretics.

Proof. 1°. The Roman Church is One by the unity of consensus in the last end and in the same means, namely the same faith, the same sacraments, the same worship, etc. It is also one by the unity of order, that is, of the ordered ordering of all Catholics under the same government of one head, the Roman Pontiff. This is evident in itself.

But the sects of the heretics do not possess the unity of consensus in one faith: which is plain both from their variations and oppositions concerning the chief dogmas, as concerning the Eucharist; and because, for the rule of faith, they follow the private spirit, and thus among them there are as many opinions of faith as there are heads. Neither do they possess the unity of ordered ordering under one head; for among them there are as many heads as there are ministers, inasmuch as they are subordinate to no single one, and are without mission and jurisdiction, as I shall say presently.

2° The Roman Church is Holy by reason of its head, Christ; of its other founders, namely the Apostles and their successors; of the holy Fathers, who defended it against the heresies; and of its martyrs, who sealed it with their blood. It is holy by reason of its end, namely divine worship, to which it is wholly consecrated; by reason of its sacraments, laws, offices, sacrifices and ceremonies, it forbids naught but vices.

But the sects of the heretics possess no holiness. 1° They do not possess it on the part of their authors. For it is well known that Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, etc., were not saints, but were liable to many vices. 2° They do not possess it on the part of doctrine. For they make God the author of sin; nay, they say that he himself compels men to sin and commands impossibilities. Likewise they teach that faith alone justifies, and that no sin, however grave, even though it be adultery, murder or sodomy, is imputed to those who have faith, and therefore that however criminal a man may be, so long as he believes himself to be elected of God, he never loses grace. So Luther, de Captiv. Babyl., the chapter on Baptism, and Calvin, book III of the Instit., c. 19: which two principles alone open the way to all vices, and close it against the virtues. Moreover, it is well known that they condemn the celibacy of priests and monastic vows, tear down cloisters and temples, seize the goods of monasteries, break images, and reject the invocation of saints, satisfactions and good works, fastings and abstinences, and whatsoever savors of mortification.

3° The Roman Church is Catholic by reason of place and the condition of persons. If we speak of a permanent and simultaneous catholicity, which, as we observed, must be understood morally of a diffusion into more and principal parts of the globe than any other sect, it is certain that this belongs to the Roman Church; for it flourishes in Europe, in America, in many kingdoms, provinces and islands of the East; and although it does not now flourish there as it once did in Africa, and in certain provinces of Asia and of the north of Europe, nevertheless more worshippers of the true faith and of the Roman Church are still found in those regions, so that it is far more widely extended than any sect whatsoever.³ If we speak of a successive catholicity or universality, it is clear that this also belongs to the Roman Church.

For this Church alone, from the beginning even unto now, has announced and still announces the name and the Gospel of Christ among foreign and far-distant nations, which it daily gathers to itself, sending missionaries whithersoever it can, until at length, at the end of the world, the diffusion and universality be completed, according to that saying of Matt., XXIV, 14: And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world, for a testimony to all nations; and then shall come the consummation. It is also catholic by reason of persons, because it calls and embraces to itself all persons of whatsoever nation and condition. It is likewise catholic by reason of doctrine: for it condemns all errors, and teaches none. Finally, it is so catholic that it has always borne this name, and is still so called.

But the sects of the heretics have no catholicity. 1° They do not have it by reason of place. For they lie hidden in a corner of Europe; in other parts of the world, in Asia, in Africa, in America, they are not; or if certain ones are found in these foreign nations, they are accounted heretics. 2° Not by reason of persons; for since they teach that everyone can be saved in his own religion, provided he at least errs not concerning the fundamental truths, they do not call all men to themselves. 3° They do not have it by reason of time; for before Luther and Calvin their church did not exist, nor have they any ground for holding that it shall at no time fail; nay, that it has already failed in France and in many provinces of the Low Countries is well known.

4° The Roman Church is Apostolic, 1° by reason of its doctrine, derived from the Apostles. That the Church of the earlier centuries was apostolic and held the doctrine of the Apostles, the heretics themselves confess. If, then, any change has arisen since that time in the Roman Church, and it has fallen away from this apostolic doctrine, it can be shown what occurs in every notable change: what this new dogma is and of what kind, who was the author of the change and of its detection, in what place and at what time it began, what opponents it met with. All this let the heretics show us in the Roman Church. 2° The Roman Church is apostolic by reason of the unbroken succession of its pastors from the Apostles.

Not so, in truth, the sects of the heretics. For 1° they do not possess apostolicity by reason of doctrine derived from the Apostles, since they teach several errors which the ancient Church condemned, as Calvin himself confesses, book III of the Instit., c. 4 et 5, concerning satisfactions, the celibacy of priests, prayers for the dead and the fast of Lent. 2° Not by reason of apostolic succession in their pastors. To whom, indeed, did Luther succeed? to whom Calvin? Finally, not by reason of a legitimate mission; from whom, indeed, did they receive it, or do they hold it?

[Obi.: The Protestants, perceiving how much danger from this question hangs over their churches, deny the true marks of the Church and have devised others, which the true Church neither has nor can have, namely the sincere preaching of the word of God and the legitimate administration of the sacraments. These, they say, are drawn from the very essence of the Church; for nothing is more essential to the Church than true doctrine and the legitimate use of the sacraments. Therefore.

*I answer. I deny the consequent.*Inst. Scripture, in which the doctrine of the true faith and of the sacraments is contained, is better known than the Church, for the Church is proved from Scripture. Therefore.

Inst. Scripture, in which the doctrine of the true faith and of the sacraments is contained, is better known than the Church, for the Church is proved from Scripture. Therefore.

Resp. I deny the antecedent. Scripture becomes known to us in a twofold sense: 1° when it is made certain to us that the Sacred Scriptures exist, that this or that book pertains to the Scriptures; 2° when we understand the true and genuine sense of Scripture; but neither can be better known than the Church. For we receive the Scriptures from the Church, which separates the true from the apocryphal, the human from the divine. Likewise the sense of Scripture, from which true doctrine and the use of the sacraments are elicited, can be determined only by the authority of the Church. — It has been proven elsewhere that the tradition by which the doctrine of the Church has come down to us is older than the Scriptures of the New Testament. Whence, with Augustine, it must be said, against the epistle Fundamenti, chapter 5: « For my part, I should not believe the Gospel, did not the authority of the catholic Church move me. »]

The Church can be considered in two ways: 1° as the congregation of all the faithful, both prelates and subjects; 2° as it is a congregation of prelates and doctors alone. This is called the Church representative and teaching; the first is called the Church believing. The question is whether each is infallible, the first in believing, the second in teaching, or, as others say, whether the Church has infallibility both active and passive. The heretics concede infallibility to the invisible Church; they deny it to the visible one. But we attacked the supposition of this distinction above, asserting one perpetually visible Church. Hence

I say: the visible Church cannot fail or err in matters of faith and morals to be believed.

Omitting various texts of the Old Testament, I prove it 1° most clearly from the New Testament. Matt., XVI, 18: Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, namely one visible founded upon a visible man, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Ibid., XXVIII, 20: Behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. Upon these words St. Thomas says in the Catena: « He does not say he will be with those men alone, but with all who believe after them; for the Apostles were not going to remain until the consummation of the world: but he speaks as to one body of believers. » Luke, I, 32: He shall reign in the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end. Other testimonies will be brought forward in the following conclusion.

It is proved 2°. The holy Fathers concur: Chrysostom, serm. de Pentecost.; Ambrose, lib. de Salomon.; Jerome, in cap. 4. Isa.; Augustine, lib. de Symbolo ad Catechum., c. 6, and others.

It is proved 3° by reason. 1° Outside the Church there is no salvation. Therefore, if the visible Church should fail, salvation becomes impossible; for who can enter an invisible Church? 2° If the Church could fail, no one would be sure about his faith, not even the Lutherans and Calvinists themselves; for their Church can equally fail, and how do they know that it has not failed, since the failure, as they say, happens to men who do not notice it? 3° As we argued in the preceding article, if the Roman Church had failed, as the heretics contend, they ought to assign wherein it failed, by what author, in what place, at what time; for all these things are marked out in so notable a change as this would be. At these things, however, they fall silent.

I say 2°: the Church represented in her pastors, whether spread through the world or gathered into one, cannot err in matters of faith and morals proposed and defined.

It is proved from the preceding conclusion. If the Church represented in her pastors, whether spread through the world or gathered together, could err in matters of faith and morals proposed and defined, it would follow that all the faithful, or the Church taken for the congregation of all the faithful, could err in believing and fail. The consequent is false, as has been proved. Therefore also the antecedent. It is proved 2° from consequence, because the faithful do not believe, nor ought they to believe anything other than what all the pastors propose to them; for Christ instituted them to feed, govern and teach the subject flock in matters of faith and morals. Acts, XX, 28: The Holy Spirit has placed bishops to rule the Church of God. Matt., XXVIII, 19: Teach all nations. He commanded that all hear them and obey them. Luke, X, 16: He who hears you hears me. Matt., XVIII, 17: If he will not hear the Church, let him be to you as a heathen and a publican. Hence whatever we said concerning the infallibility of the Church in believing proves its infallibility in teaching.

To these add the following passages from Scripture. Christ addressing the Apostles, and in them their successors the bishops, says John, XIV, 16 and 17: I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you forever, the Spirit of truth. Ibid., 26: He will teach you all things and suggest to you all things whatsoever I have said to you. Likewise, ibid., XVI, 13: When he, the Spirit of truth, has come, he will teach you all truth. And the Apostle, 1 Tim., III, 15: That you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth.

I said 1°: « The Church, whether dispersed or gathered together; » because, since the promises of infallibility were made to the Church, and it is ever the same Church, whether dispersed or gathered together, in either state it enjoys the privilege of infallibility. And certainly Christ was not speaking of the Church gathered in councils when he said: Behold I am with you all days, since councils are not gathered on all days, but most rarely.

I said 2°: « In matters of faith and morals. » With regard to morals, the conclusion must be understood of morals pertaining to the common salvation of all the faithful. Hence the Church cannot err, either by defining something to be good and honorable which is evil and dishonorable, and conversely something to be dishonorable and evil which is good and honorable, or by commanding something harmful to the common salvation of the faithful, or forbidding what is necessary or useful to it. The reason is 1° because this would be to err in faith; for faith approves every virtuous and honorable thing and reproves every vicious and shameful thing. 2° It would be against the holiness of the Church. 3° The Church would feed the flock badly; for the faithful are fed not only with the doctrine of faith but also of morals.

With regard, however, to morals concerning private persons and particular facts, whose knowledge depends on the fallible testimony of men, the Church can err by an error of fact, not of law.

[On the canonization of saints and on the sense of the books, that is, on dogmatic facts, there are special and serious difficulties, of which below. But also

You will ask whether the Church is infallible in the approval of religious Orders.

I answer. In the approval of a religious Order two judgments intervene. The first is that this Religion is good, conformed to the Gospel and useful for acquiring perfection. In this judgment the Church cannot err: otherwise she would err in the common doctrine of morals, since she proposes this Religion to all as good and as a way to perfection. The other is the judgment whether here and now it is expedient to admit this order. It is not so established that this judgment is infallible, because it depends not on knowledge alone, but on prudence. But at least one who asserted, against the common sense of the Church, that this judgment were erroneous, would not escape the mark of rashness.]

You will object several things from the Old Testament, from which it appears that the ancient Church or Synagogue sometimes failed. Therefore.

I answer: these do not stand against our conclusion, which concerns the Church of Christians after Christ was born, and not the Church of the Old Testament. And this for two reasons: 1° because promises such as Christ made to the Church of the New Testament were not made to the Church of the Old Testament; for it was not said to it: Behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world, nor: The gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 2° Because the Church of the Old Testament was not confined within the Synagogue; for salvation could be had outside it, as is clear from Job, Melchisedech, the Ninevites and others. Outside the Church of the New Testament, however, salvation cannot be had. Hence it is necessary that it always subsist visibly. Moreover, we do not concede that the Church of the Old Testament or the Synagogue perished except at that time when it ought to cease and be changed into a new one; for it was not destined to endure forever. Hence to each of the things objected we answered in our greater Work.

I insist 1°: The very Church of the New Testament itself perished at the time of Christ's passion, since not only the Synagogue and the whole Jewish nation but even the Apostles themselves fell away from Christ, as Christ had foretold to them, Matt., XXVI, 31: All of you will be scandalized in me on this night. Therefore.

I answer: 1° our conclusion concerns the Church of Christ formed. Now it was formed only on the day of Pentecost. 2° I deny the antecedent and its proof. For many at the time of Christ's passion believed in him; and as for the Apostles, they suffered scandal not by losing their faith but by not confessing it outwardly as they ought.

I insist 2°: In the time of Arianism, especially at the council of Rimini, the Church fails. Hence Jerome, in his dialogue against Lucifer, says: « The whole world groaned and marveled to find itself Arian. » Therefore.

I answer: I deny the antecedent. To prove it: Jerome said this hyperbolically, so as to mean nothing other than that many bishops and laity inadvertently and unintentionally admitted a formula of faith which, though it sounded pious and, the circumstances being attended to, bore before it a Catholic sense, nevertheless contained latently the Arian poison through the intention of its authors. Hence he says « marveled, » because it happened unintentionally and inadvertently. On this argument I discoursed at length in the third Digression of the history annexed to the prefatory question de Trinitate, in the greater Work.

The very controversies that arise daily concerning the things of faith prove the need of some supreme and infallible judge in matters of faith, to whom all are bound to defer. For the things of faith are abstract, sublime, hidden; not all are capable of examining and discussing matters so sublime and not self-evident. Hence, if there were not some supreme judge by whose infallible authority men might be held in check, nothing would be fixed in religion; we should be forever wavering, carried away by every wind of doctrine; disputes would be endless; and while each man abounded in his own opinion, there would be as many dogmas as heads.

Among heretics, some assign Scripture itself as supreme judge, which they wish to be clear and open; others assign the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to each private individual, or Scripture itself as understood according to this private spirit; others, like Brentius, the secular princes.

I say : The supreme and infallible judge of controversies of faith is not sacred Scripture, nor the private spirit, nor the secular prince, but the Church.

This conclusion already follows from dissertation I of the tractate On Faith, art. 2, where we showed that the rule for discerning revealed things is not Scripture itself, nor the private spirit, but the Church; and from dissertation I of this tractate, art. 3, where we proved that the meaning of Scripture is obscure, and that neither Scripture itself nor the private spirit, but the Church, is its judge. But because this question is of the highest importance, the arguments already given are renewed.

Proof of the first part. 1° In Scripture there are two things, the letter and the meaning. About the letter there are very many controversies : is what we have truly the word of God? Is it conformed to its autograph? Are these or those books canonical, or not? Luther rejects the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of St. James, and the Apocalypse; Calvin admits them. Who will decide the controversy? Not Scripture itself; for nowhere does it say that these books are or are not canonical, and even if it did say so, we should not be bound to believe it unless it were first established from another source that it is canonical. About the meaning, Scripture is drawn into various and contrary meanings, and about these there are the chief controversies. Among others, famous is that about the meaning of these words : This is my body. Calvinists understand it in a figurative sense, Lutherans and Catholics in the literal sense. Who will be judge between them? Not Scripture itself, which is the object and matter of the controversy. Therefore another judge must be sought, otherwise it will be disputed until the end of the world. Let the Calvinist say the Lutheran understands badly; the Lutheran will retort the same to the Calvinist.

It is confirmed. The judge of some controversy ought to hear the litigating parties, pronounce sentence, and be able to compel the parties to acquiesce in the sentence; otherwise the judgment would be futile. But Scripture cannot perform these things. Ergo.

Proof of the second part. 1° A judge in any cause must be public, known to the litigating parties, hear them, be heard by them, and have the authority to compel them to stand by his judgment; otherwise nothing will avail. But these things do not belong to the private spirit of each one, as is evident. Ergo.

2° A judge in some controversy must be one, not variable, not uncertain, not self-contradictory. But the private spirit is variable in different persons, uncertain, and often self-contradictory, dictating one thing to one man and the contrary to another. Thus it dictates to a Lutheran that these books are canonical, to a Calvinist that they are not canonical; it dictates to a Lutheran that these words, This is my body, are to be understood of the real presence, and to a Calvinist that they are to be understood of a spiritual and figurative presence. The Calvinist will tell the Lutheran that he is not led by a good spirit; the Lutheran will return the same answer to the Calvinist. Who will be judge? They will dispute forever, as they have now been disputing for two hundred years.

3° In every well-ordered commonwealth there is a public judge who interprets the law and decides by it all controversies, nor is any private person permitted to interpret the law according to his own spirit and pleasure; otherwise everything would be turned topsy-turvy and subverted. The heretics themselves know this. How much more, then, must this be admitted in the Church, which Christ instituted and ordered ! Unless you wish there to be as many dogmas of faith as heads, and those for the most part contrary to one another, and that all heresies must be tolerated; than which nothing is more absurd. Ergo.

4° Not all are capable of examining and discussing the things of faith, which are obscure, abstract, and sublime. Therefore neither can they define them by their own private spirit. If you say that each private man holds this from the Holy Spirit inspiring and revealing to him what is of faith or not : on the contrary, all claim to have this inspiration and revelation, and yet not all think the same thing. Therefore the Holy Spirit reveals contraries.

Proof of the third part. Nowhere in Scripture do we read that Christ constituted secular princes judges of controversies of faith; for it was not to them, but to the Apostles and their successors that he said : Going forth, teach, etc., or anything similar. Indeed the prince, according to the Apostle, Rom., XIII, 4, is the minister of God, not that he may judge the Church, but that he may defend her. Hence the celebrated Hosius wrote to the emperor Constantius : « Do not mingle yourself in ecclesiastical affairs, nor impose commands on us about these matters; rather learn these things from us. God has handed over the empire to you, the affairs of the Church he has entrusted to us. »

The fourth part follows from what has been said. It is necessary to acknowledge a living rule and supreme judge of controversies of faith, as we showed at the beginning of the article. But this is not sacred Scripture, not the private spirit, not the secular prince. Therefore the Church; for nothing else is assignable.

It is confirmed. 1°. He is rightly assigned supreme judge of controversies who is infallible in defining them. But such is the Church, as was proved in the preceding article. Ergo.

It is confirmed. 2° from the practice of the Church in the time of the Apostles. When a controversy arose about the legal observances to be kept by converted Gentiles, it was not settled by Scripture alone, nor by the private spirit, nor by the secular prince, but by the Church gathered at Jerusalem. Ergo.

What concerns the obscurity of Scripture, which the heretics deny, see diss. I of this tractate, art. 3, petitio 4. What they object about the sufficiency of Scripture you have answered in the preceding dissertation, art. 2. As to what they object against us, namely that we commit a vicious circle in proving the infallible veracity of the Church through Scripture, and the truth of Scripture through the Church, you have it fully discussed in the tractate On Faith, dissertation I, art. 2.