Summa de Ecclesia

¹ Moreover it comes to be seen what truth the third supposition of the adversaries has, who say that the sayings addressed to Peter, designating some authority or power, were spoken to him in figure of the Church. And since this supposition can be true in one sense, and in another sense not only false but even erroneous and heretical, there is need to discern in which sense it is true and in which it is not. For this it is to be noted that someone is found in multiple ways to figure or represent the person of another. In one way by similitude or identity of the same nature. In this way a son is said to be the figure of his father. For a son, as Chrysostom says on Matthew, is said to be as he, namely the father, and therefore it is said in Ecclus. 30: His father is dead, and he is as if not dead, for he has left one like himself after him, where the interlinear Gloss says: who represents him in words and deeds; of the Son of God also it is said in Heb. 1: Who being the brightness of glory and the figure of his substance, the Gloss: that is, of the Father. In a second way something is said to figure another by agreement or similitude of some property, as Augustine says on Ps. 130, treating the words: All the beasts of the field shall drink, that is, the nations, which are understood in figure of the beasts, as is clear from the ark of Noah, in which were all the beasts which figure the Church, in the unity of whose structure all nations are gathered, thus far Augustine. Behold that he says the beasts figure the nations and the ark the Church. In this way of figuring we find many things in sacred Scripture and in the sayings of the saints to figure or signify, as in Gen. 20 the Gloss holds that Abraham in many things signified Christ, and Sarah the Church. And in this way one and the same thing can signify several things in different respects. In a third way someone is said to figure or represent another by whose power or authority he does something: as ministers in the Church are said to represent or figure Christ, by whose authority they act. Hence the Apostle says in 2 Cor. 5: For Christ we discharge an embassy, and in 2 Col. 2: If I have pardoned anything, I have pardoned it in the person of Christ. For it is said in de pen. distinct. 3: Whom the priest judges, God judges, whose person he bears in the Church. In this way of representation the vicar is said to represent the bishop, the legate the Pope, whose place he holds, as in ch. sane de off. deleg., and thus the Pope represents Christ, insomuch that, as Hostiensis says in ch. quanto Extra de translat. praelat. Which of the Pope and of Christ is said to be the same. And the same is gathered quite plainly from what Origen says, adduced in the continuous Gloss on Matthew ch. 16: Thou seest how great power the rock has on which the Church is founded, that its judgments remain firm as though God were judging through it. But in this way of representation or figuring it cannot be said without error that Peter signified the Church: since he himself received power not from the Church but immediately from Christ, as shown above and as is had in ch. sacrosancta, dist. 22, he bears the offices not of the Church but of Christ, and discharges the embassy not of the Church but of Christ; he is vicar not of the Church but of Christ, as it is by his authority that he acts. And therefore in this way of figuring, the Roman pontiff represents the person not of the Church but of Christ in the Church.

In a fourth way someone is said to represent another in whose name he receives or does something, as a procurator in contracting marriage by words of the present represents the person of the lord in whose name he contracts, as in the last ch. de procur. lib. 6, whence he is said to act in whose name the action is done. Likewise a canon is said to represent the person of a canon who could not be present in the case of an election, and committed his place to him in electing. In which case he can elect one in his own person and another in the person of the mandant whom he represents. But in this way of representation or figuring it cannot be said without grave error that blessed Peter, when he received the keys, signified the holy Church, in which error many of the adversaries are entangled. This, however, is manifestly clear from the fact that, since one who acts or receives anything only in a procuratorial name acquires for himself no authority or dignity, but only for him in whose name he acts or receives, it would follow that blessed Peter, from the collation of the keys made to him, would have had no authority above the other apostles, but that no right of power at all would have been acquired to him from the collation of the keys made to him, nor any name of dignity, as that he was the head of the Church, or its prince and shepherd and Pope, would have been acquired to him, but only to the Church in whose name he is said to have received the keys. That all these things are heretical is manifest, since they are expressly against sacred Scripture and the faith of the holy fathers and the sacred definitions of the canons, as is clear from what was said above.

In a fifth way something is said to figure another which does not have the truth of it but only a similitude, as it is said that the paschal lamb and the manna were a figure of the body of Christ, as the Apostle says in 1 Cor. 11. And many other things which in the Old Testament were a figure of those things which in the New were fulfilled through Christ. According to the words in 1 Cor. 10: All these things happened to them in figure. But in this way of figuring it cannot be said without the greatest error that blessed Peter received the keys in figure, since, as figure in this way is distinguished against truth as shadow against body, it would follow from this that Peter received the keys not truly but figuratively. This is not only false but even heretical, since it is manifestly against the words in Matt. 16: To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind, etc. In a sixth way someone is said to figure another, or others, into whom, in the reception of some benefit of grace or authority, such grace or authority is to be derived by the intention of the donor, as one who receives a castle from the king for himself and for those descending from him is said in the reception of the castle to have figured all descending from him. But this way of figuring or representing befits blessed Peter in the reception of the keys. For since the Lord, as said above, willed the keys which he gave to Peter to remain in the Church even to the end of the age, it is manifest that Peter received the keys not only for himself but also for all into whom the power of the keys was to be derived. Hence blessed Ambrose says that we all received the keys in Peter as priests, and Augustine in the sermon that in the one Peter was figured the unity of all shepherds. In this way of figuring also is to be understood the chapter Quodcumque of the twenty-fourth question, where Augustine says that blessed Peter, when he received the keys, figured the holy Church, not indeed in all its members, but as the Gloss says, namely in the bishops and priests. In this way also is to be received what the Archdeacon says on the chapter quodcumque, that Peter received the keys in the name and sign of the Church, since he received them not only in his own name but in that of all those into whom through the whole posterity of the Church the power of the keys was to be derived. In a seventh way someone is said to figure or represent another into whose honor he succeeds equally, and dignity. In this way bishops are said to bear the figure of the apostles, and priests of the two of the seventy disciples, according to the Gloss on Luke 10 and according to the chapter in novo, distinct. 21, whence a successor is understood to be one person with his predecessor, as in the chapter quoniam abbas, in the Gloss on the word substitutum, de offic. deleg.

But in this way of figuring it is in no way to be said that Peter signified the Church, but Christ, whose place he held and whose offices he bore on earth, as the Roman pontiff is said to represent both Christ, whose vicar he is, and Peter, to whom he succeeds in honor and principate. Hence blessed Bernard, writing to Pope Eugene, says among other things: Thou in power Peter, in anointing Christ. In an eighth way a prince is said to represent the province, a king the kingdom, the head the body, and a bishop the Church; but princes are said to contain the peoples over whom they preside, whence in Wisd. 6 it is said: Hear, ye kings, the interlinear Gloss: prelates, understand, ye judges of the ends of the earth, give ear, you that contain the multitudes. Hence also blessed Augustine in the book of questions on the Old and New Testament says of blessed Peter that just as in Christ were all causes of the magisterium, so after the Savior all are contained in Peter, for he constituted him head that he might be shepherd of the Lord's flock, thus far Augustine. Hence also blessed Ambrose says that in the name of the elder, on whom the rest depend, the whole house is understood. By this reasoning also, as is said in the ninth book of the Ethics, what the ruler of the city does the whole city is said to do. And by like reasoning what the Pope does the Church is said to do, as in the chapter pia Extra de except. lib. 6. By this reasoning also, when the Pope and the greater prelates of the Church are gathered together, the universal Church is said to be gathered, and the things established there are said to be confirmed by universal consent, according to the chapter sicut, distinct. 15. In a ninth way someone is said to figure another as the council of the city is said to represent the whole people, as the Senate the Roman people, so holds the Gloss of the civil law on the rubric quae sit long. consuet. But in this way of figuring or representing, the consistory of the lord Cardinals, which is as it were the Senate of the universal Church, according to the chapter ecclesia 16 q. 1, is said to represent the universal Church. In a tenth way someone is said to represent others as the chapter represents the person of the bishop when the see is vacant in all the cases noted in ch. in his and in ch. cum olim de maiori et obe. and in the chapter episcopus and in the last chapter. In this way the college of the lord Cardinals is said to represent the Pope when the see is vacant in some things, as in ch. in nomine domini, distinct. 23, and in ch. ne Romani Extra de elect. in Clem., and in the case in necessary things whose expedition could not without great peril await the creation of the supreme pontiff, as the doctors note in the same place. With these points noted, an easy answer to each of the authorities brought in by the adversaries is clear, and to all like them, as will appear by running through them one by one.

² To the first, therefore, which is that of blessed Augustine on John and is put in ch. quocumque of the twenty-fourth q. 1, we say that the meaning of this saying of Augustine is not what the adversaries pretend, and on which for the greater part they found their dreams: since, as has often been repeated, blessed Peter is not said to have received the keys in the name or sign of the Church as its procurator or syndic: since he himself above all others received them more fully as head, nor also when he received the keys did he signify the Church in all its members, for this would be derisory, but only in the more principal ones, namely the bishops and priests, as we recalled above. But the true and sound understanding of that saying according to the catholic faith is this, that the power of the keys was given to Peter not only for himself but also as signifying and figuring all the prelates of the Church into whom his power was to be derived, just as one who receives a castle or some power in some city from the king for himself and those descending from him in the right line is said to have received such a castle or power in figure of them all. So in the matter proposed, because Peter received the keys for himself and for all his successors lawfully entering and for future prelates in the Church, Peter when he received the keys is said to have signified the Church, or in the name or sign of the Church in its more principal members, namely his members, the bishops and priests. But that this is the understanding of Augustine we can gather from many things. First from the letter of Augustine itself adduced whole, for blessed Augustine says on John in sermon 49 on the words: But me you shall not have always: It is to be so understood, But me you shall not have always, do not be afraid. It was said to Judas. Why did he not say thou hast, but you shall have, because Judas is not one man, one evil man signifies the body of the evil: how Peter the body of the good, the body of the Church, in the one body of the Church, but in the good, for if in Peter there were not the sacrament of the Church the Lord would not say to him: I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven, and what thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, if this was said to Peter only the Church does not do this, but if it is also in the Church, so that the things bound on earth are bound also in heaven, and the things loosed on earth are loosed in heaven, because when the Church excommunicates the excommunicated is bound in heaven, and when he is reconciled by the Church the excommunicated is loosed in heaven. If therefore Peter is in the Church, when he received the keys he signified the holy Church, if in the person of Peter the good in the Church are signed, in the person of Judas the evil in the Church are signed, to them it was said: But me you shall not have always. Thus far Augustine. From this it is manifestly gathered that the intention of Augustine is not what the adversaries interpret, but what we have explained. Secondly this same is clear from what the same blessed Augustine says in homily 13 on the words of the Lord, treating the words: Be it far from thee, Lord; may this not come to pass, where he says: In that which Peter said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God, signifies the firm; in that he trembles and wavers, and is unwilling for Christ to suffer, by fearing death and by not knowing life, he signifies the weak of the Church. In that one apostle therefore, that is Peter, first and chief in the order of the apostles, in whom the Church was figured, each kind was to be signified, of the firm and of the weak, since without each the Church does not exist: thus far Augustine. From these words it is most clearly gathered that Peter in signifying the Church sometimes figured it as to some only, not as to all, and thus in the matter proposed Peter, when he received the keys, signified the holy Church not as to all of the Church but as to some only: namely his successors and the other prelates to come in the holy Church into whom the power of the keys itself was to be derived from him. Thirdly, that this was the sentence of Augustine is clear through the Archdeacon, who expounding the words: If this was said to Peter only, says thus: That is, so that his person should not be passed beyond, the Church does not do this, that is, its authority: thus far he. Plainly this is the argumentation of blessed Augustine, as he expounds it. If the power given to Peter had been so given to him alone that his person would not be passed beyond, assuredly the power of binding and loosing would not be in the Church: since therefore it is in the Church, because binding and absolution are continually performed through the prelates, it manifestly follows that Peter, when he received the keys, signified the holy Church in his prelates. From all these things it is clear that that authority does not favor the adversaries.

³ To the second authority, which is that of the same blessed Augustine in a certain sermon on the apostles Peter and Paul, I answer that well understood it in nothing favors the adversaries. For as to what he first says, that Peter alone bore the person of the universal Church, this is true, since as he alone among the apostles was ordained by Christ as prince and head of the whole Church, it belonged to him alone to bear the person of the universal Church, as we expounded above in the eighth way of representing. And from this the great excellence of blessed Peter is commended, as will be said below. But as to what he consequently says, that not one man but the unity of the Church received the keys, he says truly in this understanding: since Peter did not receive the keys singularly for himself only, which the words designate: not one man, but also for all future prelates constituted in the unity of the Church, which the words designate: but the unity of the Church received them, as will be more fully declared below. But as to what he subjoins, hence the excellence of Peter is commended, because he bore the figure of its unity and of the universal Church, when it was said to him: To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven, which was handed to all, he says truly in the understanding given, namely in his successors and the other prelates of the Church. But as to what he infers, that the Church received the keys when the Lord said to the apostles: Whose sins you shall forgive, etc., this is true in the understanding given, not indeed in all its members but in those, and in their successors, to whom it was said: Whose sins you shall forgive, etc. It is most clear, moreover, that this cannot with truth be understood as said to all the faithful considered severally or jointly, but only to the disciples of Christ, as fully shown above. And although this suffices for the aforesaid authority, nevertheless for a fuller understanding of the mind of blessed Augustine in that authority and similar ones it is to be known that there were two principal and most pernicious errors concerning the keys of the Church which blessed Augustine in many of his books took care with the highest zeal to confute and eradicate. One error was that of the Novatians, who as Saint Thomas says in the third part q. 83 arg. 10 denied repentance after baptism. Most wickedly saying that there is no faculty in priests of absolving from sins. This error blessed Augustine touches upon and manfully impugns in the first book on penitence, at the beginning of the second chapter, where he says thus: There are some who believe that it avails until baptism, but abides void for those sinning afterwards. Likewise at the beginning of the third chapter he says thus: Still there are those who cry out that there is no remission of sins for the baptized. For eradicating this error from the root blessed Augustine, as a most subtle arguer, strove to show that the keys were not given to the person of Peter alone but in Peter were also given to the whole posterity of the Church in the prelates of the Church itself. Hence in chapter 40 of the aforesaid book he says thus: We know that both the first fathers and, in every age, the Church of God remit sins always, even unto seventy times seven, that is, always, which power these men strive to take away from the Church. Moreover concerning the error of these men at the end of book 2 on the Combat of the Christian he says thus: Nor let us listen to those who deny that the Church of God can remit all sins, therefore the wretched men, while in Peter they do not understand the rock, and refuse to believe that the keys of the kingdom of heaven were given to the Church, have themselves lost them out of their hands, thus far Augustine.

This, however, as has often been repeated, is not to be so received as though the universal Church itself, which is called the collection of all the faithful, had this power of remitting sins in members other than the priests, but so that the keys of the Church were given to the whole posterity of the Church in the priests. The second error was that of those who, constituted in heresy and schism, and thus divided from the unity of the Church, say that they can bind and absolve from sins, which error is commonly that of all schismatics. Against which error blessed Augustine in the aforesaid treatise on penitence, wishing to show the unity of the Church to be necessary both for the use and for attaining the fruit of the keys, says thus: No one can worthily repent whom the unity of the Church does not sustain, and therefore not through priests divided from the unity of the Church, thus far he. For destroying therefore the first error, saying that there is in the Church with the priests no faculty of remitting sins, Augustine says: Peter when he received the keys bore the figure of the universality of the Church in its prelates, namely and priests. But for excluding the second error, saying that the keys of the Church are with those divided from the unity of the Church, blessed Augustine said that Peter when he received the keys also bore the figure of the unity of the Church. And thus it is clear what was the understanding of blessed Augustine in his sayings.

But that this was also his meaning is shown from the process which blessed Ambrose used in the confutation of the aforesaid errors in his book on penitence, where in chapter 2 he says thus: But they say, namely the Novatians, that they defer reverence to the Lord, to whom alone they reserve the power of remitting crimes, nay they do no one greater injury than those who wish to rescind his mandates, to refund his vain gift, that is to empty it. For when he himself said in his gospel: Receive the Holy Spirit, and whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them, and whose you shall retain they are retained, who shudders at this more, whether he who obeys the mandates or he who resists. The Church observes obedience in each, so as both to bind sin and to loose it, heresy in the one cruel in the other disobedient wishes to bind what it does not loose, does not wish to loose what it has bound, in which it damns itself and its own by its sentence. For the Lord willed the right of loosing and of binding to be equal, who permitted each on equal ground, therefore he who has not the right of loosing has not that of binding either. Thus the assertion of these men strangles itself, and because they deny to themselves the right of loosing they must deny that of binding also, how can the one be lawful and the other not, for to whom each is given it is manifest that each is lawful, and to whom it is not given it is certain that each is not lawful, but to the Church each is lawful, but to heresy each is not lawful, for this right is permitted to priests alone. Rightly therefore the Church vindicates each for itself which has true priests, heresy cannot vindicate which has not priests of God, thus far Ambrose. From all these things it is clear both what was the mind of blessed Augustine in the aforesaid authorities and that the aforesaid authorities do nothing for the proposition of the adversaries.

^{4 5} To the third authority, which is that of blessed Augustine in the book on the one baptism, the answer is clear from what was said, since all those authorities of blessed Augustine have the same understanding, for he intends to persuade two conclusions against the two aforesaid errors. The first, that the keys are with the priests in the Church and must be through the whole posterity of the Church even to the end of the age, and this against the first error. The second conclusion of his is that the keys are not with all, but only with those constituted in the unity of the Church, and this against the second error. These two conclusions follow from his saying that the apostles, when it was said to them: Whose sins you shall forgive, etc., bore the person of the Church, for because they bore the person of the Church it would follow first that it was said to them by the Lord not only for themselves but for their successors: Whose sins you shall forgive, etc., and the first error is struck down. Moreover from their being said to bear the person of the Church when it was said to them: Whose sins you shall forgive, etc., since the Church is one, outside which there is no salvation, it necessarily follows that the keys are only with those constituted in the unity of the Church, and thus the second error is struck down. It is the same as if it were said to the Church itself: The peace of the Church remits sins, etc. And this is what the same Augustine says in the book on the remission of sins, as is found in the chapter ecclesiae charitas of de consecratione distinct. 40: The charity of the Church remits sins. But the unity or charity of the Church is said to remit sins, since neither does the penitent obtain the fruit of the keys, nor does the minister have their execution, unless both are constituted within the unity of the Church, as in ch. dicimus and in ch. scisma 24 q. 1.

To the fourth authority of Augustine on John, in the sermon, as is said, in the last chapter, the answer is as was said of the foregoing authorities. First, that when it was said to Peter: To thee I will give the keys, etc., he signified the whole Church, in the understanding given above; namely not in all its members but in the more principal ones, namely the bishops and priests. And to what Augustine says, that he signifies the whole Church, therefore in all, I answer, and this is to be well noted in such authorities of blessed Augustine, that the universality conveyed by the name of the universal Church is not a universality of the members of the Church so that distribution is made through each member of the Church or to the community proper of the faithful, since in what was said above it has been most openly demonstrated that it is impossible that the words spoken to Peter concerning the keys of the Church should belong to them whether considered severally or jointly, but it is a universality of places and of succession or course of the age of the Church. Hence also the sense that when Peter received the keys there is designated also for all his successors and the other prelates of the Church not only in one place or in one province or at one time, namely in the whole world and through the whole age of the Church, namely unto the end of the age, and this is to figure the Church universally, and in this way the Gloss on Matt. 16 understood the universality when it says that the keys were given to the whole Church in the bishops and priests. And in this way of universality the same blessed Augustine speaks in Homily 6 on the Apocalypse, expounding the words: The stars fell to the earth, saying thus: These are the stars of the Church, but the part is understood from the whole: for not the whole Church, but those who are evil in the Church fall from heaven. But he said the whole, because throughout the whole world there will be a great persecution, and then those who are just will remain in the Church as in heaven. Thus far he. Likewise on the first canonical epistle of John, in the fourth treatise, he says: The whole world is Christian, and the whole is impious, for throughout the whole world the impious, and throughout the whole world the pious. Behold that the totality of the Church is not received there from the totality of its members but from the totality of places. And so in the matter proposed it is plain to us that inadvertence to this division of universality gave the adversaries great occasion for wrongly understanding many sayings of the holy fathers, and above all of Augustine, when speaking of the universal or whole Church.