590. In order that we may complete this question concerning the constitution of the Church, it remains only that we discuss something concerning the members of the Church. But since this question is very complex, in order to consult both clarity and brevity, we divide it, as it were, into two parts. One of these includes questions either debated among Catholic doctors or to be treated directly below; the other includes those heads of doctrine which we all here defend against heretics. We briefly weigh the former in this first section; the rest we shall establish in the following section.
591. I. No one is unaware that there are several different opinions among Catholics when the members of the Church are being discussed. In order that the cause of this disagreement may become known, and at the same time that the way may be indicated for reconciling discordant opinions, although the discrepancy seems to be rather of name than of reality, certain things must be noted beforehand.
592. And first, it must be recalled that, in number 421, from St. Thomas and Bellarmine, we established this: among those who in some way are of the Church, some pertain to it more perfectly, others less perfectly, according as they participate more or less in those elements by which the Church itself is constituted. For understanding this better, that also helps which we then touched upon concerning the definitions of the Church, in number 400 and following, and which we established beforehand concerning the soul and body of the Church, in number 410 and following.
593. Now secondly, when in the present question it is asked who are, and ought to be reckoned, members of the Church, the discourse is not properly about living and perfect members. For such, according to all Catholics, are only those who have sanctifying grace and through Baptism have entered the Church and have not been cut off from it by legitimate authority. Rather, the discourse is principally about those who pertain to the body of the Church, which alone, properly and strictly speaking, can have members, and these either living through charity, or imperfect and in a certain way dead. Indeed, it has been noted in numbers 403 and 463 that the Church, named simply and without addition, is understood according to the body, or according to that which is per se visible; for things are denominated simply according as they are external and appear. Hence in this sense, namely according to the body, the Church is taken in Matthew 3.12; 13.47; 22.2; and elsewhere passim; and among the Fathers: Cyprian, book 3, letter 3; Augustine, in the Breviculus Collationis, book 3, chapter 9; Nazianzen, in oration 1; Chrysostom, on Psalm 39; Fulgentius, book On Faith, chapter 43; Gregory, homilies 11 and 38 on the Gospels; and in the sacred canons almost everywhere, since they were composed to govern the Church insofar as it is an external body, which is subject to external government.
594. But thirdly, even when the question is restricted to the members of the body of the Church, there can still be some disagreement. For the body of the Church, as we said in number 415, consists of several elements, as it were, of which some can possess all, others only some. Yet the principal ones which must be attended to here are reduced to three: namely, to the faith authentically announced and received in baptism; to the communion of the same sacraments; and to subjection to legitimate pastors, especially the Roman Pontiff.
595. Nevertheless, fourthly, in order that we may keep the correct manner of speaking when the members of the body of the Church are under discussion, we must remember that the Church is, from the institution of Christ, a true society. Hence that seems to be required and sufficient in order that someone be called a member of the Church which is required and sufficient in order that someone be called a member of any society. Now in any society, in order that someone be reckoned to pertain to it in some way, this one thing suffices: that he not break the external bonds by which he is bound to that society. Imagine someone positively, but only internally, wholly falling away from the very end of the society; suppose also that in the hidden places of his soul he pursues the society with hatred and plots rebellions against it. Not for this reason does he seem to have become wholly foreign to the society, namely internally and externally, although he certainly is a member not only useless and dead, but even rebellious. But if he also externally withdraws his former association, by renunciation or by manifest rebellion, then he will be held as altogether separated from the society. And rightly indeed is the matter so judged. For if judgment concerning the persevering association of the members of a society depended upon some merely internal element, we would be ignorant of the true members of the society, or at least we would be in doubt concerning them. But who does not see that from this the mutual rights and duties of the members would totter, the exercise of power would be rendered difficult or impossible, and the whole order of society would be overturned from the foundations?
596. Therefore one must reason similarly concerning the Church of Christ. For although all things are naked and open to the eyes of God, and men cannot scrutinize the internal thoughts and affections of others, nevertheless, in the matter with which we are dealing, it is not enough that God cannot err or be confused. Rather, it is altogether necessary that neither should those be able to err in whom, and for whom, the Church has been instituted. That is to say, men must visibly govern the Church in the place of Christ, and men must embrace the Church and obey it. Therefore the true members of the Church must also become known to men.
597. II. Having these principles before our eyes, we approach the individual questions. Therefore it is asked first concerning catechumens. Suarez, On Faith, disputation 2, section 1, number 20, simply affirms that they are members of the Church; Bellarmine teaches that they are members of the Church only potentially; Valentia, according to merit; Billuart, in vow; Tanner, by vow and merit; etc.
598. But if the discourse is about the soul of the Church, it seems that it must be said that catechumens pertain to it perfectly or imperfectly, according as they are adorned with faith alone, or also with hope and charity. St. Augustine favors this opinion; in tractate 12 on John and book 1 On the Creed, he says that catechumens are in the Church. And in tractate 12 on John and book 2 On the Creed, he affirms that catechumens are considered by the Church as children conceived and not yet born, but afterwards to be brought forth into the light through baptism.
599. But if the discourse is about the body of the Church, catechumens are excluded from the Church, and accordingly, according to the principles established, they cannot properly be called members of the Church. For this: 1. is insinuated by the Council of Florence, in the decree for the Armenians, saying: “Baptism holds the first place of all the sacraments, which is the gate of spiritual life; for through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church.” And the Council of Trent, session 14, chapter 2: “It is certainly established that the minister of Baptism ought not to be a judge, since the Church exercises judgment upon no one who has not first entered into it through the gate of Baptism.” 2. The Fathers teach the same; among whom St. Gregory Nazianzen, oration 40, says: “As long as you are in the number of catechumens, you are in the vestibule of piety. You must enter, pass through the court, behold the holy things, see through into the Holy of Holies, be joined with the Trinity.” St. Chrysostom, homily 34 on John: “A catechumen is foreign to a believer: he does not have the same principle, not the same parent, not food, not clothing, not table, not camp, not house, nothing common.” St. Cyril of Alexandria, book 12 on John, says that catechumens are among Christians what the uncircumcised were among the Jews, who could not eat the Paschal lamb. 3. Reason confirms the same. For none of the three principal bonds by which, as we said in number 594, we are joined to the body of the Church exists in catechumens. But especially Baptism is the gate through which access to the Church is opened to the faithful, according to that saying in 1 Corinthians 12.13: “In one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether slaves or free.” Therefore catechumens, who certainly have not yet received Baptism, have not yet entered the Church, and therefore do not pertain to it.
600. III. Public heretics certainly are not members of the Church. This is established: 1. From the Scriptures. For concerning them it is said in 1 John 2.19: “They went out from us… if they had been of us, they would surely have remained with us”; that is, they have been placed outside the congregation of the faithful. And in Titus 3.10 Paul commands: “A heretical man, after one and a second correction, avoid, knowing that one who is such is subverted and sins, being condemned by his own judgment.” But the Apostle would not command a heretic to be avoided by a bishop if that man still in any way pertained to his flock. 2. It is established from the Fathers; among whom St. Jerome, in the dialogue against the Luciferians, writes: “If anywhere you have heard that those who are said to be of Christ are named not from the Lord Jesus Christ, but from someone else, as for example Marcionites, Valentinians, Montanists, etc., know that it is not the Church of Christ, but the synagogue of Antichrist.” St. Augustine, sermon 5: “There are certain of those who are called Christians, and are not, whom the Church has partly digested, as dung; such are all heresies and all schisms.” And in sermon 1 On the Creed to the Catechumens, chapter 1: “All heresies have gone out from that Church, as useless branches cut off from the vine.” 3. It is established from reason. For, with faith lost, hope and charity also are lost; and therefore, first of all, heretics certainly are not of the soul of the Church. But since the question concerns public heretics, they do not have the external bond of profession of the same faith, of subjection to legitimate pastors, etc.; and therefore they must not be said to be of the body of the Church either.
601. Yet you will say: The Church has a right over heretics, and has sometimes exercised it by punishing them, as in number 567; but no one can have jurisdiction over outsiders; therefore heretics are of the Church. I respond: The Church has jurisdiction over heretics not because they are actually members of the Church, but because through Baptism they have been made subjects of the Church, and their crime ought not to furnish them protection. Just as a sheep pertains to the sheepfold from which it has fled, insofar as it is to be led back to it; a military deserter pertains to the king under whose standard he fought; a fugitive slave ought to return to the master whom he deserted: so also the heretic. Hence St. Augustine, book 1 On Baptism, chapter 15, says: “Indeed the Church brings forth all through Baptism, whether with herself, that is, from her own womb, or outside herself from the seed of her husband; whether from herself, or from the handmaid.” He declares this by examples of those born from the handmaids of Abraham and Jacob, and then adds: “Just as among them, whoever are born are born by the right of the Church, which is in Baptism; but if they agree with their brothers, through the unity of peace they come to the land of promise, not to be cast again from the maternal womb, but to be acknowledged in the paternal seed. But if they persevere in discord, they pertain to the lot of Ishmael.”
602. You will also say: Even public heretics who have been initiated in the Church of God by Baptism and sacred Orders retain the proper character of these sacraments. Therefore they are of the Church. I respond by denying the consequence; for otherwise even the damned, who in life professed the Catholic religion and retain the character of Baptism and Confirmation, would pertain to the Church. But these certainly are members of Christ neither actually nor potentially; nor can one who is in no way a member of Christ be a member of the Church, which is the body of Christ. Therefore the sacramental character by itself does not have the force of uniting a man with Christ the Head, but is only a sign of a power and of a certain union which certainly preceded, although it no longer perseveres.
603. You will say further: Those who have true sacraments are in the Church of Christ, for Christ handed true sacraments to this alone. But heretics have true sacraments. Therefore they are in the Church of Christ. I respond: Those sacraments which heretics retain in their sect are like spoils which they carried away with them when departing from the Church, but which pertain to the Church. A fugitive slave can carry off with him the money of his master; a soldier can carry away the standard of the emperor. But as these are not for that reason of the household or army, so neither are heretics of the Church. But now enough concerning public heretics, concerning whom the discourse will return below.
604. IV. With regard to hidden heretics there are three opinions. The first, which Suarez follows in On Faith, disputation 9, section 1, number 3, with others, denies that they are members of the Church. The second, which Dens holds, number 71, 5, affirms that they are members of the Church, provided they are not also external heretics. The third, by far the more common, which Bellarmine teaches, book 3, chapter 10, Cornelius a Lapide on Ephesians 6.16, etc., affirms it.
605. According to this third opinion hidden heretics are members of the Church, but dead and dry ones. In this, however, they differ from impious believers: that these are not only of the body of the Church, but also in some way of the soul, since, although lacking charity, they nevertheless retain faith; whereas hidden heretics can in no way at all be said to be of the soul of the Church, and are only as dead and dry parts of the body, utterly destitute of the sense of spiritual life. They are not members of the Church in the order of its life, which they do not participate in; but they are members of the Church in the order of an instrument, insofar as, if, for example, they have jurisdiction, they do not lose it until their heresy becomes manifest.
606. They prove this opinion: 1. From Scripture; for it is read in 1 John 2.19: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would surely have remained with us.” The discourse here is about heretics, for the appellation “antichrists” is proper to them, and certainly in this epistle it is attributed to those who are opposed to the faith. But St. John says that they, before they went out, were not of us, that is, were not Catholics in mind and will; and yet he says that they went out from us. Therefore they were in some way in the Church, namely through the external profession of faith and subjection to legitimate pastors. Hence St. Augustine, tractate 61 on John, number 2, says: “Both are true, both from us and not from us; according to one thing from us, according to another thing not from us.” 2. From the manner of speaking of the Fathers. St. Augustine, tractate 3 on the epistle of John, says: “Many are inside, they have not gone out, and yet they are antichrists… those who are inside certainly are in the body of our Lord Jesus Christ, while his body is still being healed, and perfect health will not be until the resurrection of the dead,” etc. And in the book On Catechizing the Uninstructed, chapter 7: “There are those who for this reason wish to be Christians, so that either they may gain favor with men from whom they expect temporal advantages, or because they do not wish to offend those whom they fear,” that is, those who become Christians feignedly and not sincerely, and therefore remain hidden unbelievers. “But these are reprobate; although for a time the Church bears them, just as the threshing floor supports the chaff until the time of winnowing. If they do not correct themselves and begin to be Christians on account of the future eternal rest, in the end they will be separated. Nor should they flatter themselves because they can be on the threshing floor with the wheat of God; because they will not be in the barn with it, but are destined for the fire due to them.” Bellarmine collected more passages in the same place. 3. From reason, which follows from the principles established above, number 594. For hidden heretics retain the external profession of faith once authentically received, and external subjection to legitimate pastors; but each person is reckoned to adhere to the Church, a visible society, through these external bonds. Therefore, just as one who is a hidden schismatic does not cease absolutely to be a member of the Church, so neither does a hidden heretic. 4. Hence it is that if a bishop, for example, were a hidden heretic, he would still retain and validly exercise his ordinary jurisdiction. This seems conformable to the things which Celestine wrote to the clergy and people of Constantinople, letter 14 in Gallandi, volume 9: “The authority of our See has openly decreed that no bishop or cleric, or Christian of any profession, who from the time Nestorius or his like began to preach such things were cast down or expelled from their place or communion by Nestorius or by his like, should be seen as either cast down or excommunicated… because one who, preaching such things, did not stand firm, could cast down no one.” Nicholas I has the same, letter 8 to the emperor Michael. 5. Hence there is nothing surprising if this third opinion is common among the Fathers, as Bellarmine shows; more common among the theologians, as all confess; conformable to the principles established, as is clear; and sometimes used by the Church itself, as is inferred from the documents just cited. Nevertheless, a difficulty arises from the bull Ineffabilis Deus, in which, after the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mother of God has been defined, the Holy Father Pius IX proceeds in this way: “Wherefore, if any should presume, which God avert, to think in their heart otherwise than has been defined by us, let them know and furthermore understand that they are condemned by their own judgment, have suffered shipwreck concerning the faith, and have fallen away from the unity of the Church; and for this reason, by their very own deed, they subject themselves to the penalties established by law, if they should dare to signify by word or writing or any other external mode what they think in their heart.” But only incidentally does the Holy Father indicate that those have fallen away from the unity of the Church who have presumed to think in their heart otherwise than has been defined; and therefore he does not seem to have wished to settle the question debated among theologians. Indeed, with the judgment of the wiser preserved, that phrase “to have fallen away from the unity of the Church” can be understood of a disposition of mind with respect to the body, and of actual falling away with respect to the soul of the Church.
607. V. With regard to schismatics, there is no doubt to anyone that they are not members of the Church. For this is: 1. The constant doctrine of the Fathers. St. Cyprian, On the Unity of the Church, writes: “God is one, and Christ one, and his Church one, faith one, and the people joined together into the solid unity of the body by the glue of concord.” The same, letter 59 to Pupianus: “You ought to know that the bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the bishop; and if any are not with the bishop, they are not in the Church.” St. Jerome, commentary on chapter 3 of the epistle to Titus: “We judge this to be the difference between heresy and schism: that heresy has a perverse dogma, while schism, on account of episcopal dissension, likewise separates itself from the Church.” St. Augustine, book On Faith and the Creed, chapter 10: “We believe also the Holy Church, certainly the Catholic Church. For heretics and schismatics also call their congregations churches. But heretics, by thinking false things about God, violate the faith itself; schismatics, however, by unjust divisions, leap away from fraternal charity, although they believe the things which we believe. Wherefore neither do heretics pertain to the Catholic Church, which loves God, nor schismatics, since it loves the neighbor.” St. Fulgentius, book On Faith, chapter 37: “Hold most firmly… that heretics and schismatics, who finish the present life outside the Catholic Church, are going to go into eternal fire.” 2. Reason confirms the same. For the societies of schismatics certainly are not the universal Church, since they were never diffused everywhere; nor can they be held as a part of the universal Church, since at the beginning of the schism either they departed from it or were expelled, and they remain separated. 3. Nor does it stand in the way that mere schismatics retain the true faith. For, from the principles established beforehand, that does not suffice for someone properly and simply to be called a member of the Church. Certainly one who rises up against some human society and withdraws himself from its legitimate authority is in no way reckoned a member of such a society, even if otherwise he does not cast aside its proper end and all its means; indeed, even if he sometimes uses them. Nor is the reasoning concerning catechumens who would have faith alone equal to that concerning schismatics. For although catechumens are outside the body of the Church, they are nevertheless kept from it not contrarily, but negatively, so that by desire they already pertain to the body of the Church; for this reason, as candidates of the society and as already, so to speak, conceived by it, they can rightly be numbered among the soul of the Church. But those who are kept contrarily from the body of the Church can have no agreement or affinity with the Church. But we shall say more concerning schismatics when the discourse will be about the unity of the Church.
608. VI. Now excommunicates must be discussed. It should be noted: 1. the discourse is about major excommunication; 2. it is now almost commonly admitted that those excommunicated by major excommunication, but tolerated, are members of the Church; 3. the question therefore concerns excommunicates to be avoided. Suarez, with others, simply affirms that excommunicates of this kind are members of the Church, in On Faith, disputation 9, section 1, number 14; but Bellarmine, chapter 6, Liberius, number 156, etc., deny it. To others this seems to be a question rather of name than of reality; and Valentia, volume 3, disputation 1, question 1, point 7, section 15, warns: “From that same foundation, namely that there are many and diverse parts of the Christian Church, it can be understood by what reasoning excommunicates, although they are believers, are nevertheless said to have been cut off from the Church, and not to be its members. This indeed is most true if they are understood to have been cut off from that part of the Church which is joined not only by faith, but also by the mutual communication of solemn prayers and suffrages.” Nevertheless, since the proper manner of speaking itself must be retained, it seems that one must adhere to the second opinion.
609. In reality it is certain: 1. The Church has the power of cutting off and casting wholly outside itself not only heretics and schismatics, but also other sinners who are guilty of some very grave crime. Therefore it can only be asked whether in fact the Church intends to cut off a member through excommunication. This, however, seems to have to be affirmed. For in the sentence of excommunication issued by the Council of Orange, these words are read: “Violators of the Churches of God, by the authority of God and the judgment of the Holy Spirit, we eliminate from the bosom of Holy Mother Church and from the fellowship of all Christianity until they come to their senses and satisfy the Church.” Now here violators of the Churches are expressly said to be eliminated from the bosom of Holy Mother Church; but here no new penalty is inflicted, but an excommunication is pronounced, the effect of which alone is declared more expressly. Therefore, according to the mind of the Church, excommunication eliminates, or separates, from the Church. 2. It is confirmed from Scripture. For it is read in Matthew 18.17: “If he will not hear the Church, let him be to you as a heathen and a publican.” Now all confess that the penalty of excommunication is being treated here. But Christ signifies that those who incur this penalty are not of the Church in the way that heathens and publicans are not of the Church; these certainly do not pertain to the Church at all. 3. The Fathers assert this very thing. St. Cyprian, letter 62 concerning Pomponius, writes: “The proud and contumacious are slain by the spiritual sword, when they are cast out of the Church. For neither can they live outside, since the house of God is one, and there can be salvation for no one except in the Church.” St. Jerome, on chapter 2 of the epistle to Titus: “A fornicator, adulterer, murderer, and the other vices are driven from the Church by priests. But heretics pronounce sentence upon themselves, departing from the Church by their own choice.” St. Augustine, book On Correction and Grace, chapter 15, says: “Through excommunication a diseased sheep is separated from the healthy sheep, lest dire contagions creep through more of them.”
610. VII. These things having been touched upon, the errors of heretics must now be refuted, as we proposed. These, as we said in number 404 and following, reckon that to the true Church of Christ there pertain either the predestined alone, or the perfect alone, or the just alone. From this principle indeed they easily adorn their rebellion with an honorable appearance; for one who is not of the Church cannot obtain power in the Church. But to no one is it established with certainty that someone, a superior, is predestined, perfect, or just. But if it is shown that sinful believers also are members of the true Church, by that very fact the error of those is overturned who invent a double Church: insofar as one would be composed of the just, the other of sinners. Compare Bellarmine, book 3, chapter 2; also, from the thirty articles of John Hus condemned by the Council of Constance and Martin V, articles 1, 3, and 5; from the propositions condemned in Quesnel, propositions 72-77; and censure 15 from the bull Auctorem Fidei. Section II The Catholic Doctrine concerning the Members of the Church Is Established Proposition XXVI. Once the genuine nature of the Church of Christ has been perceived, it ought to be established for all that it is composed as of members: 1. neither of all and only the predestined; 2. nor of the perfect alone; or 3. of the just alone. For with the idea of a visible society, which all are bound to enter lest they perish, all those things can in no way be made to agree.
611. The first part is proved. I. Not all the predestined are always members of the Church. For: 1. In no way can one be called a member of the Church who participates in nothing of those things which constitute the soul and body of the Church. But there are many predestined from Jews, Turks, and idolaters, who at some time, before, namely, they acknowledge supernatural revelation or are aggregated to the body of the Church through Baptism, have nothing of those things which constitute the soul or body of the Church. Therefore. 2. Hence it is abhorrent from the whole of Scripture to call all those persons members of the Church as long as they remain in unbelief, Judaism, or even hatred of Christianity. For St. Peter thus addresses the members of the Church, 1 Peter 2.9-10: “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people of acquisition, that you may announce the virtues of him who has called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. You who once were not a people, but now are the people of God; who had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.”
612. II. Not only the predestined are members of the Church. For from the things soon to be said in the third part of the thesis, all the faithful of the particular churches of Rome, Ephesus, Corinth, etc., to whom St. Paul gave his epistles, both good and bad, most certainly and most truly were members of the Church of Christ. But nevertheless it cannot be said that all of them were predestined; for this is opposed to the whole tenor of those epistles, in which the Apostle, sharply reproving sinners, not only gives no indication that they are predestined, but manifests his greatest anxiety concerning his own final perseverance and that of the good.
613. III. From the Fathers let us hear one here, St. Augustine, since below we shall present the testimonies of many. The holy Doctor, tractate 45 on John, writes: “According to the foreknowledge of God and predestination, how many sheep are outside, how many wolves inside.” And in tractate 122 on John: “By another fishing the Lord signified the Church as it now is. But because he did that at the beginning of his preaching, and this after his resurrection, by this he showed that that catch of fish signified the good and the bad, whom the Church now has; but this one signified only the good, whom it will have eternally, once the resurrection of the dead has been completed at the end of this age.” And in book 2 against the letters of Petilian, chapter 47: “Under the same pastures and under one shepherd, both sheep and goats are pastured, until they are separated in order to receive what is due.”
614. IV. If the Church were constituted of the predestined alone, it would be invisible and could not be known by men. Hence, since no one is bound to impossibilities, no obligation would urge one to seek the true Church, much less to enter it. Therefore to all the most wicked persons an occasion would be given for withdrawing themselves from the obedience due to legitimate pastors; for they would say that these are not predestined, or at least that this is not established. But those who are not members of the Church cannot possess any authority of commanding and feeding in the Church. These things indeed are opposed to all those things which we established above concerning the true constitution of the Church.
615. The second part is proved. The true Church of Christ must be an assembly of the faithful diffused everywhere and truly catholic. But if imperfect believers, who sin venially, were excluded from it, the Church would not be an assembly of the faithful diffused everywhere or catholic. Therefore. The minor is proved. Christ excepted, who was not capable of sin, and his most blessed Mother, who by a special privilege certainly was immune from every, even the slightest, stain of sin, all the rest, on account of human frailty, sometimes fall into venial sins, according to that saying of James 3: “In many things we all offend”; and 1 John 1: “If we should say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Hence St. Augustine rightly says in book 1 against two letters of the Pelagians, chapter 14: “No minister could rightly be ordained in the Church if the Apostle had said, ‘if anyone is without sin,’ where he said, ‘if anyone is without crime’; or if he had said, ‘having no sin,’ where he said, ‘having no crime.’ For there are many baptized believers without crime; but without sin I would say no one in this life.” We have dealt with this matter in the treatise On Grace, disputation 2, article 5; and furthermore this part of the thesis will be confirmed from the following part.
616. The third part is proved. I. From Scripture. We select two special testimonies. And: 1. It is read in Matthew 18.15 and following: “If your brother shall sin against you, go, correct him… if he will not hear them, tell the Church. If he will not hear the Church, let him be to you as a heathen and a publican.” Here certainly the discourse is about the Church which is both visible and the true Church of Christ. But nevertheless sinners are said to be in it, and such sinners that fraternal correction does not suffice for amending them. Indeed they are said to remain in the Church until they are cast out from it by the sentence of the prelate. Therefore. 2. The Corinthian fornicator, in 1 Corinthians 5, certainly sinned gravely; and in the same place the Apostle seems not obscurely to insinuate that there were also other fornicators among the Corinthians. Certainly those many who had unworthily received the Eucharist, eating and drinking judgment to themselves, were sinners, 1 Corinthians 11.29-30. But all these were members of the Church. Therefore. The minor is proved: 1. Certainly the Apostle and the rest of the just faithful were in the Church. But the Apostle himself speaks of those sinners and of the rest as united together among themselves and with himself in one and the same Church: “It is altogether heard among you,” he says, “that there is fornication… When you come together into one… one indeed is hungry, but another is drunk… therefore among you many are weak and feeble, and many sleep… therefore, my brothers, when you come together,” etc. The Apostle wished that the fornicator be taken away from the midst of the Corinthians, “that he may be taken away from your midst,” and he himself ordered him to be excommunicated. Therefore up to that time the fornicator still pertained to the Church.
617. Against this argument they oppose the words of the Apostle, verses 3-5: “I… have already judged… him who has so acted… to hand such a one over to Satan”; from which, they say, it seems to be gathered that the Apostle held the incestuous Corinthian as already cut off from the Church. But the response is: 1. Even if it were said that the Corinthian fornicator was cut off from the Church through the sentence of Paul, nevertheless it would be true that before that sentence, although a known fornicator, he still remained in the Church. 2. But in reality that phrase “I have already judged” does not mean “I have passed sentence,” but “I have determined to pass it.” For that sentence was passed then when the Corinthian was handed over to Satan. But the Apostle judged that he should hand him over, but had not yet handed him over; afterwards, in the congregation of the Corinthians, he handed him over. Here is the whole context: “I indeed, absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged as though present, him who has so acted, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you and my spirit have been gathered together, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to hand over to Satan unto destruction.” Hence the Protestant interpreters themselves understand the matter in this way, such as Bloomfield, Parkhurst, Robinson, Whitby, etc. Let Rosenmuller stand for all, who writes on this place: “The Apostle did not immediately punish the guilty man, but says that it was his purpose, if the Corinthians continued to fail in their duty, to use his apostolic power, as if he were present, and by the authority of the Lord to drive out the wicked man whom the Church itself was refusing to cast out.”
618. II. From Scripture again, by recalling the parables which we indicated in number 463. For the Church is compared: 1. to a threshing floor, Matthew 3.12: “He will thoroughly cleanse his floor, and will gather his wheat into the barn; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire”; 2. to a dragnet, Matthew 13.47: “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet cast into the sea, and gathering fish of every kind. When it was filled, drawing it out and sitting by the shore, they chose the good into vessels, but cast the bad outside. So shall it be at the consummation of the age”; 3. to a wedding banquet, into which good and bad entered, who afterwards, when they did not have a wedding garment, were sent into the outer darkness, Matthew 22; 4. to ten virgins, of whom five were prudent and five foolish, Matthew 25. Therefore in the Church there are also sinners and reprobates, who are signified by the chaff, by the bad fish, by the man not clothed with the wedding garment, and by the foolish virgins. So great was the force of this argument against the Donatists that, according to the testimony of St. Augustine in the Breviculus Collationis, chapters 8-9, having been overcome by it, they at last confessed that the bad exist in the Church mixed with the good.
619. III. From the Fathers. And: 1. The Fathers commonly teach the doctrine which we defend here. St. Cyprian, letter 51, writes: “Our faith or charity ought not to be impeded, so that, because we perceive tares to be in the Church, we ourselves withdraw from the Church.” St. Chrysostom, on Psalm 39: “Not even the whole Church consists of the perfect; but it also has those who give themselves to leisure and sloth, and embrace a soft and dissolute life, and willingly serve pleasure. And because it is one body, it pronounces these things and those things as from one person.” St. Jerome, in the dialogue against the Luciferians: “The ark of Noah was a type of the Church. As in it there were the kinds of all animals, so also in this one there are men of all nations and ways of life. As there were the leopard and kids, wolf and lambs, so here also the just and sinners, that is, vessels of gold and silver dwell together with those of wood and clay.” St. Fulgentius, On Faith to Peter, chapter 43: “Hold firmly and in no way doubt that the Catholic Church is the threshing floor of God, and that within it, until the end of the age, chaff mixed with wheat is contained; that is, the bad are mingled with the good by the communion of the sacraments.” St. Gregory the Great, homily 12 on the Gospels: “In this Church, because the bad are mingled with the good and the reprobate with the elect, it is rightly said to be like the prudent and foolish virgins.” 2. But since the adversaries especially abuse the authority of St. Augustine, it is useful to cite at least a few of the innumerable testimonies of the holy Doctor. Therefore in sermon 264, number 5, St. Augustine says: “For forty days the ark floated in the flood, which ark is the Church; made of incorruptible wood. The incorruptible woods are the souls of the saints and of the just. Yet it had clean and unclean animals, because as long as one lives in this age, and the Church is purified through Baptism as through a flood, it cannot but have good and bad; therefore that ark had both clean and unclean. But after Noah went out from there, he made sacrifice to God only from the clean animals. From this we ought to understand that in that ark there are clean and unclean animals, but after this flood God accepts only those who have cleansed themselves. Therefore, brothers, consider this whole time which is seen as standing for forty days. This whole time, as long as we are here, the ark is in the flood: as long as Christians are baptized and are cleansed through water, the ark seems to swim upon the waves.” And on Psalm 8, number 13: “Let there come to mind… the threshing floor containing chaff and wheat; and the nets, in which good and bad fish are enclosed; and the ark of Noah, in which there were both unclean and clean animals; and you will see the Church in the meantime during this time until the final time of judgment, containing not only sheep and oxen, that is, holy laymen and holy ministers, but also ‘the beasts of the field, the birds of heaven, and the fish of the sea, which walk through the paths of the sea.’ For the beasts of the field are most fittingly understood as men rejoicing in the pleasure of the flesh, where they ascend to nothing high, nothing laborious. For the field is the broad way which leads to destruction.” And on Psalm 48, number 8, he says: “‘As a lily in the midst of thorns, so is my neighbor in the midst of daughters.’ Did he say, in the midst of strangers? No, but in the midst of daughters. Therefore there are bad daughters, and among them is the lily in the midst of thorns. And so those who have the sacraments and do not have good morals are both called God’s and not God’s, and are called his and alien: his, on account of the sacrament; alien, on account of their own vice. So also alien daughters: daughters, on account of the form of piety; alien, on account of the loss of virtue.” And in sermon 4 on Jacob and Esau, number 31: “There are bad persons in the Church pertaining to Esau; because they too are children of Rebecca, children of mother Church, born from her womb, and persevering as hairy in carnal sins, yet born from her womb. Therefore they have from the dew of heaven and from the fertility of the earth: from the dew of heaven, all the Scriptures, every divine discourse; from the fertility of the earth, all the visible sacraments. For the visible sacrament pertains to the earth. All these things the good and the bad have in common in the Church.” And in sermon 137, number 1: “Jesus Christ… is the Head of the Church, and his body is the Church, and in his body the unity of members and the joining together of charity exists as health. But whoever has grown cold in charity is sick in the body of Christ. Yet he who has already exalted our head is powerful also to heal sick members, provided that they are not cut off by excessive impiety, but cling to the body until they are healed. For whatever still clings to the body is not of desperate health; but what has been cut off can neither be cared for nor healed.” And in book 4 On Baptism against the Donatists, chapter 7: “Let us distinguish between those who are evil outside and those who are evil inside.”
620. IV. From theological reason. For: 1. Sinners pertain to the body of the Church; for they profess the faith authentically received in Baptism, retain the communion of the same sacraments, and are subjected to the legitimate power of the Church. But these are the bonds by which the body of the Church is joined together, as we said in number 594. 2. They pertain, although imperfectly, to the soul of the Church; for they retain faith, and also hope, unless they have sinned by despair. 3. There exists in the Church the power of remitting sins, which is exercised in the sacrament of penance, through a true judgment and true jurisdiction. But the sacraments are for those who pertain to the Church, and jurisdiction is exercised over subjects. Therefore it is supposed that sinners can be in the Church. But although the very sin of heresy can be remitted through the sacrament of penance, it is nevertheless required that heresy first be abjured, since faith is a necessary disposition for the sacrament. But the state of grace is not required in order that someone receive absolution of sins.
621. Scholion. I. In order that the adversaries may prove that only the predestined pertain to the Church, they bring forward many testimonies of Sacred Scripture and of the holy Fathers, especially of St. Augustine. If the things said in the exposition and proof of the thesis are well retained, almost all of them are easily solved. It will help only to note these things: 1. The Church is compared to the ark of Noah insofar as no one is saved except in the Church, but not insofar as in the Church there are none except those who are to be saved. This latter sense is excluded by the clean and unclean animals which were in the ark and represented the just and sinners. 2. Someone can pertain to some society without truly being informed by its spirit; and according to this he is said not to be of that society, although he adheres to it by external bonds and also by some internal bond, namely faith. 3. Someone can be of the Church, a son of God, a sheep of Christ, either according to predestination or according to present justice; or either by the truth of the end or by the truth of the essence. According to predestination, only those who are to be saved are such; by the truth of the essence all the just are such, and also sinners, although imperfectly. Hence if at some time Christ the Lord, speaking of his sheep in John 10.2, perhaps understands only the predestined, elsewhere all who are in the Church are called sheep, even sinners, according to that saying, for example, in John 21: “Feed my lambs, feed my sheep”; and in Psalm 73: “Your anger was kindled against the sheep of your pasture.” Hence also in Matthew 25.32 sheep are separated from goats on the day of judgment. Thus St. Augustine, tractate 45 on John, says: “What is it that I said, how many sheep outside? How many live luxuriously,” who will be chaste? “How many blaspheme Christ,” who will believe in Christ? “And these are sheep. Nevertheless now they hear an alien voice; they follow strangers. Again, how many inside praise,” who will blaspheme? “They are chaste,” who will fornicate? “They stand,” who will fall? “And they are not sheep: for we are speaking of the predestined.” 4. Christ is truly called the Head of the Church, which he will save; but this must be understood: a. in many members, not in all; b. if the discourse is about all, he will save sufficiently, not efficaciously.
622. II. But in order that those things may be solved by which they strive to show that the Church consists either of the perfect alone or of the just alone, besides the things already said, these things must be kept before the eyes. 1. The Church is indeed called wholly beautiful, not having spot or wrinkle, etc.; but this must be understood: a. By reason of its essence, not of all individuals. For just as any commonwealth can be called perfect if it preserves an honorable end, suitable government, just laws, and duly promotes public happiness, although in it there are many members who do not conduct themselves rightly, so the Church can be said to be wholly beautiful, etc., although some of its members deflect from the right path. b. It must be understood by reason of the term, not by reason of the way. Hence St. Thomas, third part, question 8, article 3, reply to objection 3, says: “It must be said that for the Church to be glorious, not having spot or wrinkle, is the ultimate end to which we are led through the passion of Christ. Hence this will be in the state of the homeland, but not in the state of the way… Such persons, however, sinners, receive from Christ a certain act of life, which is to believe, just as if a mortified member were moved in some way by a man.” And St. Augustine, Retractions, book 4, chapter 18: “Wherever in these books I have mentioned the Church not having spot or wrinkle, it is not to be taken as if it already is such, but as being prepared to be such, when it will also appear glorious.” 2. In a similar way, the Church is called holy; but it is not holy because all its members are holy, as the arguments already given prove. Therefore it is called holy by reason of its end, doctrine, means, invisible Head, some members, destination, etc. Below the proper account of holiness which must be attributed to the Church will be explained better. 3. If at any time St. Augustine, and the same should be said of the other Fathers, seems to restrict the body of the Church to the assembly of the just, this must not be understood of the body of the Church taken adequately, but insofar as it is living and informed by sanctifying grace; that is to say, the Church is denominated from the nobler part. Certainly when the Donatists calumniated the Catholics, saying that they invented two churches, one which contained only the good, another which contained the good mixed with the bad, the Catholics responded, and St. Augustine in the Breviculus Collationis, book 3, assented to them, that they in no way set up two churches, but distinguish either parts or times of one Church: parts indeed, because the good pertain to the Church in one way, the bad in another; times, however, because one thing is the state of the Church on earth, another in heaven.
623. III. They also say: 1. It is an axiom: “He who does not have God as father does not have the Church as mother.” But sinners do not have God as father, since they are not sons of God. 2. As it is said in Romans 8.9: “If anyone does not have the spirit of Christ, he is not his”; but sinners do not have the spirit of Christ; nor can those who are not Christ’s, the Head of the Church, be of the Church. To the first the response is made: Those who in no way have God as father certainly cannot have the Church as mother. But sinners, although they are not actually sons of God by adoption, are nevertheless sons through instruction and doctrine. Hence under one respect they are called sons of the devil, under another, sons of God. Therefore just as they are imperfectly sons of God, so they are imperfectly of the Church. To the second: One who does not have the spirit of Christ is not Christ’s insofar as Christ gives life through charity. But if he retains the faith of Christ, he in some way has the spirit of Christ, or receives some influence from Christ the Head, and thus also in some way pertains to the Church. Indeed, insofar as he adheres by external bonds to the mystical body of Christ, which is the Church, he receives some external motion from Christ together with others, just as dry members of a body, because of continuity with the rest of the living and perfect body, have some external motion from the head, or at least do not wither.
624. Since from the preceding disputation the intimate constitution and essence of the Church has become known to us, we now make a step toward investigating its essential properties; for that which follows the investigation of the essence in the examination of any subject is the essential properties which flow from it.
625. But the properties of the Church, as we know from the Constantinopolitan Creed, are reduced to Unity, Sanctity, Catholicity, and Apostolicity. Yet these can be considered under a double respect: namely, insofar as they are merely intrinsic, proceeding from the very essence of the Church; and thus they are called properties, from which we are led to the knowledge of the Church of Christ in the abstract. They can be considered insofar as they are also extrinsic and manifest the true Church of Christ; and thus they are called notes, from which we are led to the knowledge of the Church in the concrete. That is to say, first of all it is asked what properties belong to the true Church of Christ; and the response is that it ought to be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. Then, however, it is asked to which one out of so many societies that boast themselves to be the true Church of Christ the said properties belong; and the response is that they can belong only to one, and that the one which is endowed with them is, in the concrete, the true Church of Christ.
626. But in order to acquire an adequate knowledge of the Church for ourselves, it greatly helps to investigate those things which they call endowments, and which are conceived as superinduced upon the Church and adorning it. Such are Indefectibility, Authority, and Infallibility. When these, together with the properties, have been duly established, at the end we shall deal with the notes.
627. Yet it is necessary that we warn one thing: these things which are called properties and endowments truly pertain to the very essence of the Church, if this is considered not a priori, as it could have been, but a posteriori, as it was instituted by Christ. But that manner of speaking, which has obtained almost commonly, and according to which properties and endowments are distinguished, as it were, from the essence of the Church, we willingly use for a certain equitable distribution of this treatment; for this itself helps not a little the distinct understanding of the whole subject and the memory of all the things which are handed down.