Summa de Ecclesia

These things notwithstanding, it must be said as before that this variety and difference of states, dignities, and offices was most fittingly placed in the Church by its founder Christ himself — who according to the Apostle, 1 Cor. 1, is the power of God and the wisdom — since, as we deduced in the preceding chapter, it pertains to the integrity, perfection, and adornment of the Church, and makes for the readier dispatch of the divine ministries. To the reasons on the contrary it must therefore be said. To the first it is answered that not every diversity is repugnant to every unity — whence the diversity of members in one body is not repugnant to the unity of the body; indeed its perfection results from their variety, as we said — hence the Apostle, Rom. 12: In one body we have many members — and so we say that the aforesaid diversity of states and offices in the Church in no way impedes the unity of the Church, which advances through unity of faith and charity and of mutual service, according to that of the Apostle, Eph. 4: From whom the whole body, that is, the Church, is compacted — the Gloss: by faith — and joined by the bonds of charity through every joint of service — namely while one serves another — and so this variety of states and offices in the Church stands with the unity of the Church. Hence the Gloss on that of 1 Cor. 12, For the body is not one member but many, says thus: The Apostle shows by the likeness of the human body that the unity of the body of Christ, that is, of the Church, has variety of offices and diversity, and that this does not take away unity — just as the unity of the human body does not consist in singularity but in many members, so that they render to one another what they owe — thus there.

¹

To the second it is answered that just as nature does not do through many what it can do through one, so also it does not confine to one that for which many are required, according to that of the Apostle, 2 Cor. 12: If the whole body were the eye, where would the hearing be? Hence also in the Church, which is the body of Christ, the members had to be diversified according to diverse offices, states, and degrees, because these could not fittingly be administered through one.

²

To the third it is answered, following St. Thomas in the place above, that just as in the natural body diverse members are held in unity by the power of the vivifying spirit — with whose departure the members of the body are separated — so also in the body of the Church the peace of diverse members is held together by the power of the Holy Spirit, who vivifies the body of the Church, as in John 6. Hence the Apostle also says, Eph. 4: Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. One departs from the unity of the Spirit, however, while seeking what is one's own — just as in the earthly city peace is taken away from this, that the individual citizens seek what is their own; otherwise, through the distinction of offices and states, as much of the mind as in the earthly city³ great peace is preserved, inasmuch as through this there are more who share in public acts. Hence the Apostle also says, 1 Cor. 12, that God so tempered it that there be no schism in the body, but that the members be solicitous for one another.

⁴

To the fourth it is answered that there is one principal and fundamental way of salvation common to all men, namely the faith of Christ with observance of the commandments of God, according to that of Matt. 19: If you will enter into life, keep the commandments. But on that royal way there are also other diverse ways, or paths, reckoned according to the diverse works of charity to which a man can devote himself, or according to the diversity of exercises by which some are exercised toward the perfection of charity. Hence there are certain modes of living and advancing in the way of the Lord, according to that of Aug.: In the way of God, in which one went thus, another thus. Of the variety of these ways or paths the prophet, speaking thus in Ps. 24, says: Show me your ways, Lord, and teach me your paths — where by ways the precepts are understood, but by paths, which are narrower, the evangelical counsels are designated. Hence on that of Ps. 23, He led me through the paths of righteousness, the Gloss says: The paths of righteousness are the narrower precepts and the more perfect counsels. Since therefore the private religious orders in the Church of God are not other ways of an alien diversity or contrariety from that principal way common to all desiring to tend to eternal beatitude, but contain it in themselves as fundamental, adding to it the more perfect counsels, it is clear that the reason of the adversaries does not proceed, since it is founded on a false imagination.

⁵

To the fifth it is answered by denying the consequence: for many things in process of time have been instituted in the Church of God, both concerning divine worship and concerning the use of the sacraments, and the distinction of ministers, and the variety of names, which were not in the very beginning of the nascent Church — as is manifest, with the Holy Spirit inspiring — which confer no small ornament and comeliness on the holy Church of God. Moreover, although the difference and variety of religious orders in habits and ceremonies was not in the primitive Church as great as now, nevertheless the substantial foundations of all religious orders — namely renunciation of all temporal things for Christ, chastity, and obedience — were in the primitive Church, and flourished above all in the Apostles.

⁶

To the sixth it is answered likewise by denying the consequence, for the reason already given. Second, it is answered following St. Thomas in book 4, dist. 24, that in the primitive Church, on account of the paucity of ministers, all the inferior ministries were committed to deacons, as is clear through Dionysius in his book on the ecclesiastical hierarchy; nevertheless the aforesaid powers existed, but implicitly in the one power of the deacon; but afterwards divine worship was amplified, and what the Church had implicitly in one order it handed down explicitly in diverse orders — and in this way the Master of the Sentences says that the Church instituted certain orders for itself.

⁷

To the seventh it is answered by denying the consequence, and the cause is this. Both because, just as she had authority to institute and depute various persons to various and distinct offices, so she had authority to name them and impose on them diverse names according to the diversity of offices. And because those whom we call patriarchs and archbishops are also bishops, while cardinals are either priests or deacons. Hence this is not to introduce new orders into the Church, but to call those constituted in orders by worthy names according to the variety of the offices to which they are deputed; but concerning names there ought to be no wrangling, since it is not forbidden for them to be so named.