Summa de Ecclesia

Since it has oftentimes been repeated above, from the opinion of blessed Aug., that the true body of Christ is a figure of the mystical body of Christ, and among the ancient doctors, upon that word of blessed Gregory introduced by the Master of the Sentences in Book IV, distinction 13, ch. 1, What is better than the body and blood of Christ, a question is found raised. ¹ Whether the true body of Christ is better than the mystical body of Christ, or the converse. It has pleased us in this place, for the amplifying of the doctrine of this treatise, to touch upon something, and because truth shines forth more by the discussion of arguments, we shall bring arguments into the light for either side. ² For the negative side it is argued first thus. The Gloss says, upon that word, 1 Cor. 10, all these things happened to them in figure, that among good things the reality itself figured through the figure is better than the figure itself: but the true body of Christ is a figure of the mystical body of Christ, as Augustine says, and as is deduced by the Master of the Sentences in Book IV, distinction 8; therefore the mystical body of Christ is better than the true body of Christ.

³ Second, thus. Aug., as has often been indicated above, says that the whole Christ is head and body, for he says: Head and body are one Christ; but it is established that the members with the head are something better than the head alone: therefore the mystical body of Christ is better than the true body of Christ.

On the contrary⁴ it is argued in many ways, and first thus. The cause is better than the effect, but the true body of Christ is said to be Christ himself, who is the cause of the mystical body: therefore it is better than it. Second, thus. The true body of Christ makes the price given for the redemption and salvation of the mystical body, whence it is said at Eph. 5: Christ loved the Church and delivered himself for her, that he might sanctify her, etc.; therefore the true body of Christ is better than the mystical body of Christ. The consequence is clear. Third, thus. The true body of Christ is united to the Godhead in unity of person according to that word, the Word was made flesh, etc.; but the mystical body of Christ is not joined to the Godhead by so great and such a unity: therefore it is much better and more excellent than it. The consequence is manifest.

I answer⁵ It is answered by saying that the true body of Christ is better than the mystical body, properly speaking. For the declaration of which, following Albert the Great and St. Thomas, who touch upon this matter in the aforementioned place, two things are to be noted. The first is that, as in the human body this name body is taken in various ways, for sometimes the remainder apart from the head is called body, and in this sense the body is one thing and the head another; but sometimes the whole itself consisting of head and remainder is called body, and in this sense head and member belong to the total body. So the mystical body is taken in many ways, for sometimes the Church consisting of all the faithful other than Christ is called the mystical body; but sometimes the very collection of all the faithful with their head Christ is called the mystical body. Second, it is to be noted that the true body of Christ is considered in two ways: in one way without the Godhead to which it is united; in another way, as conjoined to the Godhead. With these noted, we say that if the mystical body of Christ is taken in the first signification, which is its proper acceptation, as it denotes only the members cohering with the head, the true body of Christ is better than the mystical body of Christ, for the reasons assigned above. If, however, the mystical body is taken in the second way, namely as it denotes the members with the head, then the second distinction runs: for if the true body of Christ is taken without consideration of the Godhead to which it is united, then the mystical body of Christ is better or nobler than the true body of Christ. If, however, its true body is taken as united to the Godhead, then the mystical body of Christ is not better or nobler than the true body of Christ. The reason for this, which is that of St. Thomas, is that God and all creatures together are not anything better than God alone.

It must therefore be said to the arguments made to the contrary.

To the first⁶ it is answered, as Albert the Great says, that that Gloss speaks of those things which are figures only, whose whole use, namely, is in signifying and not in causing, as was the paschal lamb; but it is not to be understood to speak of those things which are sign and cause and reality, of which sort is the true body of Christ with respect to the mystical body of Christ.

To the second⁷ it is answered in two ways. First, that although the whole Christ is said to be head with members, yet when the comparison is made between the true body of Christ and the mystical body which is the members, the head is not understood to be included with the members, and therefore the argument does not proceed. Second, it is answered that, granted the head be understood to be included with the members, when the body of Christ is taken conjoined to the Godhead it is not true, as has been said, that the whole mystical body of Christ is better than the true body of Christ.