Summa de Ecclesia

Against what has been said, namely that the Church began from Abel, objections are raised in many ways. And first it is argued¹ that the Church began from Adam. Adam was the first believer; therefore the Church began from him — the consequence seems evident, and the antecedent is clear. For Adam had faith in the incarnation when he said in Gen. 2: this now is bone of my bones, etc., which the Apostle expounds of the incarnation, saying: this is a great sacrament, but I speak in Christ and in the Church. Moreover he was created in virtues and gratuitous gifts, as is gathered from the Gloss on Luke 10, where it is said that man through sin was wounded in his natural endowments and despoiled of the gratuitous. Nor can it be said that he had only unformed faith, since, as blessed Augustine testifies in 14. On the City of God, Adam in the state of innocence had charity from a pure heart and unfeigned faith. Secondly² it is argued to the same point. Adam seems to have professed his faith by some sacrifice or sensible sign, because, as the Master says in his Histories, Adam taught his sons to offer firstfruits and tithes; therefore it seems that the Church, which has a sacrament, began from Adam.

Third³, to the same point, thus: Hugh of St Victor says it was fitting that the medicine should always run together with the disease; but the disease for which Christ, the true sacrifice whose figure were the sacrifices offered of old, was offered, began from Adam; therefore sensible sacrifices should be believed to have begun from him.

Fourth⁴, thus: a sinner is bound to more things than an innocent person, because he is bound to works of satisfaction, of which kind were the sacrifices; therefore Adam, who was a sinner, was more bound to offer sacrifices than the innocent Abel; therefore it follows that the Church, which has sacraments, began from Adam himself.

Fifth⁵, to the same point, thus: before Abel was born, Adam was a member of Christ; therefore a member of some body — but of none but the Church, which is the body of Christ, as the Apostle says in Eph. 1; therefore the Church began from Adam himself, not from Abel. The consequence is clear; what is assumed is known, since Adam had formed faith, as was adduced above. But if it be said that Adam did not continue his holiness, and therefore ought not be called the beginning of the Church.

Against this⁶: this ought not stand in his way, because he who is finally good is to be reckoned as persevering in the good. Hence when the Church prays for the faithful she says: that they may obtain by pious supplications the indulgence which they always desired. Since therefore they finally desired, they are said to have always desired. By the same reasoning it seems should be said of Adam, that he is to be held as persevering in the good, because finally he was good.

And this is confirmed⁷ by the likeness of Peter, to whom the Lord said in Matt. 16: upon this rock, that is, upon the confession of faith, I will build my Church. And although Peter afterwards denied Christ, this nevertheless did not prevent him from being the foundation of the Church; therefore by the same reasoning it seems that Adam's sin does not prevent the Church from being said to have begun from him.

Sixth⁸, thus: the Church believes that Adam repented before he begot Abel. Hence of his liberation from sin it is said in Wisdom 10: she who preserved him who was first formed by God, the father of the world, when he alone was created, and brought him out of his sin. But true repentance is not without faith and charity; therefore the same follows as before.

Seventh⁹: when Abel died, the Church stood in Adam and Eve, because the saints say that once the Church began, she never ceased to be. But it is agreed that when Abel died, the Church did not stand in Cain but in Adam and Eve; therefore even before Abel's birth the Church stood in them.

Eighth¹⁰: Adam was the active principle through which the human race descends. Hence in Wisdom 10 he is named father of the world; but from Abel no one was propagated; therefore Adam is rather to be called the principle from which the Church began than Abel himself.

Ninth¹¹, confirming the preceding reason, it is argued thus: the principle on the side of the evil was active, that is, propagative of others after itself — namely Cain: for he begot sons and daughters, and there was a multiplication of the evil; therefore by the same reasoning, on the side of the good an active principle must be posited; therefore Adam, or Seth, or Enos is rather to be called the principle of the Church than Abel.

Tenth¹²: if Abel is called the principle from which the Church began, this seems to be because he had more eminent faith than those who were in the first age; but the sign of faith is seen to have shone forth more in Enos, of whom it is said that he began to invoke the name of the Lord, Gen. 4; therefore Enos or Seth is more rightly to be called the principle from which the Church began than Abel.

Eleventh¹³, it is argued that Abraham is such a principle from which the Church began: for it is said in Rom. 4 that Abraham received the sign of circumcision, the seal of the justice of faith which is in uncircumcision, that he might be the father of all believers; and thus he seems to be the father of the faithful — hence he is also read to have been called by the Lord the father of many nations, Gen. 17; therefore it seems that the Church is to be said to have begun from him as from a principle.

Twelfth¹⁴, thus it is argued: the Gloss on that verse of psalm. lxxix, a vineyard thou hast brought out of Egypt, says: that is, the Church, which began from the Jews and is perfected in the Gentiles; therefore the Church is to be said to have begun from the Jews, and not from Abel.

Thirteenth¹⁵, thus: in 2 Thess. 2, God chose us that we might be the firstfruits of all believers; therefore it seems that the Church is to be said to have begun in the apostles, who are said to be the firstfruits of all believers, and not in Abel.

Fourteenth¹⁶, it is argued by this reasoning: the Church began from Abel; therefore the Church existed when Abel existed — this consequence seems good: this house began here, therefore this house is here; but in Abel alone the Church could not exist; therefore Abel is not to be called the principle from which the Church began.