Summa de Ecclesia

Truly, just as, with the bodily presence of our Saviour withdrawn, someone necessarily came to be instituted by divine providence to preserve the unity of the Christian religion, bearing the place of the same Saviour, to rule the Church and preserve and nourish the faithful in unity of faith and obedience to the divine law, so after the death of the apostles it seemed fitting, both for the good rule of the Church and for the ampler brightness of her beauty and splendour of comeliness, that the apostolic college should always continue in the Church. Hence it is that when Judas had prevaricated from the apostolic college, blessed Peter, the head of the apostolic college, and the other apostles, divinely inspired, took care at once by common election to set up another in his place, as the history of the Acts of the Apostles teaches us, ch. 1. It is therefore to be held that the state of the Cardinals, which succeeds the apostolic state, continues in the Church not by human but by divine disposition, distinguished by the prerogative of apostolic dignity. It remains therefore to answer the reasons to the contrary.

¹

To the first is answered by denying the antecedent; for we say that although of the Cardinals under the name of the cardinalate no mention is made in sacred scripture, just as neither of the Roman pontiff under the name of the Papacy, nevertheless mention is made under the name of the apostles, to whom, as we have said, in the apostolic dignity as to the assistance by which they assist the vicar of Christ and the successor of Peter, namely the Roman pontiff, they succeed.

²

To the second is answered by denying the consequence; for in like manner it can be argued that the Papal state is from God in the Church, though such a name neither in the time of Christ nor of the apostles existed. We say therefore that although the names of the Papacy and the cardinalate were not in use in the time of Christ or of the apostles, but afterward, with the Church growing in titles and honours from the devotion of the faithful, nevertheless the dignities themselves and the states were designated in the apostles: in Peter the Papal, and in the other apostles the state of the cardinalate. For so the names of patriarchs, primates, archbishops, although they were not first in use, afterward came into use approved by the holy fathers, especially since they agree with their offices, according to the exposition of the offices and ecclesiastical grades which Isidore sets down in ch. Cleros, dist. 21. To the third is answered by denying the minor. For we say that the figure of the state of the lord Cardinals went before in the old testament, both in those elders whom Moses, the leader of the people of God, is read to have chosen with him for the assistance of the rule of the people of Israel, of whom in Exodus 18, and in the priests of the Levitical kind, of whom is had in Deut. 18, where it is said: If thou perceive a difficult and doubtful matter with thee between blood and blood, cause and cause, leprosy and not leprosy, and thou seest the words to vary within thy gates, arise and go up to the place which the Lord thy God shall choose, and thou shalt come to the priests of the Levitical kind and to the judge, etc. Which text Innocent III, presiding in the general council, so expounds to the purpose, as is had in the Extra, on who are legitimate children, in ch. Per venerabilem, saying thus. Truly, since Deuteronomy is proved to be the second law from the force of the word, for what is discerned there ought to be observed in the new testament. For the place which the Lord chose is known to be the apostolic see. For when Peter, fleeing the city, wishing to go into exile, the Lord recalled him to the place which he had chosen, and when he asked him: Lord, whither goest thou? he answered: I come to Rome to be crucified again; which understanding as said for himself, he straightway returned to the very place. But the priests of the Levitical kind are our brethren, who in the Levitical right exist as coadjutors in the execution of the priestly office; this much there. From which it evidently appears that the state and dignity of the lord Cardinals was evidently represented in the old testament. To the fourth reason is answered by denying the assumption; for we say that the state of the Cardinals as to its office and dignity was instituted in the time of Christ and of the apostles, although as to the word cardinalate it is not then read to have been instituted: but as some say, in the time of the aforesaid Pope, namely Pontian; others in the time of blessed Pope Marcellus; but others that in the time of blessed Silvester this name was imposed upon that state according to the propriety of its office and dignity, as was said above in ch. 80. For in their time the name of the cardinalate shone forth clearly; but before, the priests and deacons of the city of Rome were called Cardinals. To the fifth reason is answered by denying the assumption; for we say that after the dispersion of the apostles, as is openly gathered from the histories, blessed Peter had some coadjutors assisting at his side in the judgment of greater causes and in the rule of the universal Church, although not under the name of Cardinals, namely Linus, Cletus, and Clement, who after his death succeeded him in succession in the Papacy, and so other supreme pontiffs are believed to have assumed some to themselves for such office. Hence Linus, who immediately succeeded Peter, is read to have made two ordinations, namely 11 bishops, 18 priests. Cletus following is said to have instituted 25 titles. Anacletus also, who succeeded blessed Clement, as Godfrey of Viterbo asserts, is said to have instituted 7 Cardinal deacons in the city: and so of the others it is to be believed. To the sixth reason is answered that the Cardinals, just as they succeed the apostles in apostolic dignity, so in the authority of assistance and cooperation to the supreme pontiff and vicar of Christ in the rule and government of the universal Church, as was said above. But what was adduced concerning blessed Marcellus, that on account of baptism, etc., does not oppose the dignity of the lord Cardinals, since for these things to be performed their institution was not principal: although, with the multitude both of those converted to the faith and of martyrs dying for the name of Christ occurring, they were deputed also to other offices of piety, especially considering that to attend to the burial of the martyrs, who were founders of the Christian religion, and to the conversion of the faithful and the spreading of the faith, does not diminish but rather seems to increase the dignity of the state of the lord Cardinals, since among the chief praises which are attributed to blessed Eutychian, that was judged not the least, that he buried 342 martyrs with his own hand. What more splendid work then, and more acceptable to God, could they effect than to call the nations to baptisms and penance: were not these also the works of the apostles, were not the apostles co-workers with Christ in such holy offices, and also the disciples, whom he sent before his face into every city and place whither he himself was to come, as is had in Luke 10? Moreover, although the Cardinals are sometimes read to have been deputed by the supreme pontiffs to such offices of piety, nevertheless on this account they are not to be believed absolved from their proper dignity or office; they plainly fulfilled both, namely both the office of their proper dignity by assisting the supreme pontiff in the dispatch of greater causes, and the office of piety by insisting upon the conversion of unbelievers, the burial of martyrs, and holy works of this sort. To the seventh is answered that although the whole order of bishops, which is distinguished fourfold by blessed Isidore in ch. Cleros, dist. 21, as patriarchs, primates, archbishops, and bishops, is greater than Cardinal priests and deacons in sublimity of order, since the episcopal order is more sublime, as blessed Dionysius says, nevertheless in eminence or sublimity of administration, in which they assist the Roman pontiff in the rule of the universal Church and the decision of greater causes, the Cardinals are greater and superior to bishops who are not Cardinals. But these can stand together, that one be superior to another in administration and dignity who is inferior in order, or equal. It is plain in blessed Peter, who although he was equal to the other apostles in power of order, yet was greater than them in administration and dignity, 2, q. 7, ch. Puto. It is also plain in the archpriest and the archdeacon; for although the archpriest is greater in order, because a priest, than the archdeacon, yet in administration the archdeacon is greater than the archpriest, as is plain in ch. Perlectis, dist. 25, and also on the office of the archpriest. In this same way can be understood what Augustine says in ch. Quanquam, 2, q. 7: Although the bishop be greater than the priesthood in order, namely, yet Augustine is less than Jerome, namely in administration and dignity, since Jerome was a Cardinal priest, and every Cardinal priest is greater than any bishop who is not Cardinal, as some say, as Hugh reports in the gloss, and the same seems to us.

³

To the eighth is answered by denying the assumption for the minor; for we say that perfection of life is also required for the state of the cardinalate just as for the episcopal state, which is manifestly gathered from what blessed Bernard writes to Eugenius III, describing what sort they ought to be who are to be assumed to the summit of the cardinalate; for he says thus. It is the counsel of a wise man: do all things with counsel, and after the deed thou shalt not repent; and persuade thyself of this, that those who are to be admitted can with difficulty be proved in the court, and therefore if it can be done, proven men ought to be chosen, not men to be proved: and so truly are they to be sought, in whom neither defect may be feared nor progress desired, as being already perfect; this much Bernard.