← Back to Distinction 9

Dist. 9, Art. 1, Q. 5

Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 9

Textus Latinus
p. 209

Quaestio V. Utrum latria exhibenda sit membris Christi.

Quinto quaeritur, utrum latria exhibenda sit membris Christi. Et quod sic, videtur:

1. (Ad oppositum.) Primo auctoritate et exemplo ipsius Abrahae, qui, in Genesis decimo octavo1, tres viros vidit et unum adoravit, et Augustinus exponit, quod viri illi Angeli fuerunt; sed tamen in illis adoravit Deum et obtulit eis adorationem latriae: ergo si Deus habitat in membris Christi, videtur, quod eis cultus latriae debeat exhiberi.

2. Item, in Apocalypsi2 dicitur, quod Ioannes cecidit in faciem suam, ut adoraret Angelum, et ibi dicitur, quod Angelus non permisit; aut ergo Ioannes adorare voluit adoratione latriae, aut duliae. Si latriae: ergo cum Ioannes recte fecerit nec reprehendatur tanquam idololatra, adoratio latriae potest exhiberi rationali creaturae: ergo si paris dignitatis sunt Angeli et membra Christi, videtur, quod membris Christi exhibendus sit cultus latriae. Si dicas, quod Ioannes voluit adorare adoratione duliae; contra: dulia debetur Angelis bonis: ergo male faciebat Angelus, quod3 prohibebat ab adoratione, quam debebat; quodsi Angeli nunquam male faciunt, restat, quod praecedens membrum est verum.

3. Item, Deus adorandus est adoratione latriae in templo sancto suo, secundum quod dicit Psalmus4: Introibo in domum tuam et adorabo etc.; sed quodlibet membrum Christi est templum Spiritus sancti, secundum quod dicitur primae ad Corinthios tertio: ergo quodlibet Christi membrum adorandum est adoratione latriae.

4. Item, corpus Christi verum refertur ad corpus Christi mysticum tanquam signum ad signatum: ergo si signatum sit nobilius signo, corpus Christi mysticum est magis vel aeque nobile quam corpus Christi verum; sed verum corpus Christi adoratur latria5: ergo et corpus Christi mysticum.

5. Item, eadem adoratione adoratur caput regis, et alia membra; sed Christus est caput Ecclesiae6 et adoratur adoratione, quae est latria: ergo et alia eius membra.

6. Item, quodlibet membrum Christi est imago Christi, nec imago tantum, sed etiam imago assimilata per gratiam; sed « honor imaginis, sicut vult Damascenus7, refertur ad prototypum »: ergo si prototypum adoratur adoratione latriae, videtur quod et membra Christi, in quibus est reperire imaginem naturae et similitudinem gratiae.

Sed contra: 1. (Fundamenta.) Non sumus membra Christi nisi quantum ad humanitatem: ergo si latria est cultus Deo debitus8, videtur, quod latria membris Christi non communicetur.

2. Item, membra Christi ad invicem habent societatem9; sed adoratio latriae ponit habitudinem et gradum dominii et servitutis inter adorantem et adoratum: ergo non videtur, quod unum membrum debeat alteri cultum latriae.

3. Item, non est eadem adoratione et honore venerandus dominus et servus; sed membra Christi sunt subiecta servituti Christi et Dei10: ergo adoratione latriae non debent adorari.

p. 210

4. Item, maior est auctoritas et potestas in malo praelato quam in bono subdito, ergo maior debetur ei reverentia11; sed constat, quod malo praelato non debetur latriae adoratio: ergo multo minus subdito, qui est membrum Christi.

Conclusio.

Membris Christi cultus latriae nullatenus est exhibendus.

Respondeo: (Conclusio.) Dicendum, quod absque dubio cultus latriae membris Christi non est exhibendus; pro eo quod membra Christi sumus secundum humanam naturam; et sic sumus membra, ut tamen ratio membri non tollat rationem servitutis nec ponat aequalitatem dignitatis. Et quoniam latria debetur Creatori ratione suae maiestatis et excellentiae; hinc est, quod membris Christi non competit cultus latriae. Multa enim distantia distat caput a corpore ratione divinitatis unitae. — Unde concedendae sunt rationes ad hanc partem inductae.

Ad argumenta pro parte affirmativa:

Ad 1. (Solutio oppositorum.) Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod Abraham adoravit tres Angelos; dicendum, quod isti Angeli et creaturae rationales erant, et tamen ad repraesentationem Trinitatis ipsi Abrahae apparuerunt; et utrumque horum ipsi Abrahae notum erat. Et (Notandum.) in quantum creaturae rationales erant, exhibuit eis Abraham non adorationem latriae, sed reverentiam duliae12 et ministerium honorificentiae. In quantum autem signum Trinitatis erant, exhibuit Abraham cultum latriae, non in quantum signo, sed ipsi signato; ad hoc enim specialiter apparebant. Non sic autem est de membris Christi, quoniam, etsi in eis possit cognosci Trinitas, non tamen sic repraesentant ex speciali institutione vel missione divina; et ideo non est eis exhibenda latria, nec quantum ad illud quod sunt, nec quantum ad illud quod per eos intelligitur.

Ad 2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod Ioannes voluit adorare Angelum; dicendum, quod noluit adorare eum adoratione latriae, sed duliae. Et quod obiicit, quod non debuit eum13 prohibere; dicendum, (Triplex ratio.) quod immo, triplici ratione. Prima quidem est propter dignitatem ipsius Ioannis, qui excellentior erat multis Angelis. Secunda vero propter vitationem erroris, ne aliquis ex hoc crederet, quod Angeli adoratione latriae deberent adorari. Tertia vero ratio est propter manifestationem exaltationis dignitatis generis humani. Genus enim humanum exaltatum fuit per Christum supra naturam angelicam. Unde (Notandum.) quamvis Angeli in veteri Testamento paterentur, se dulia adorari ab hominibus; in novo tamen post glorificationem humanae naturae in Christo non patiuntur, sibi illam naturam subiici, quam vident consedere ad dexteram Patris; et haec est ratio specialis beati Gregorii14.

Ad 3. Ad illud vero quod obiicitur, quod Deus est adorandus in templo15; dicendum, quod secus est de templo ab homine fabricato et de templo a Spiritu sancto sanctificato; quia templum illud solum est inductivum in aliud et institutum propter aliquid aliud, ita quod in se non habet aliquam rationem, quare debeat adorari, sed ratione solum eius quod in eo colitur; non sic autem est de templo animae fidelis. Habet enim aliquid in se, ratione cuius potest esse capax et particeps honoris.

Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur de corpore mystico16, quod nobilius est etc.; (Notandum.) dicendum, quod si loquamur de corpore Christi vero, prout Deitati unitum est, dicendum, quod sermo ille non habet veritatem, immo multo nobilius est corpore mystico. Nam corpus mysticum non est Divinitati unitum in unitatem personae, sicut corpus Christi verum; et ideo non tanta est ei exhibenda honoris excellentia. Et si (Notandum.) obiicias, quod signatum est nobilius signo; dicendum, quod illud verum est, quando signatum est causa signi17. Non sic autem est in proposito. Praeterea, corpus Christi non dicitur esse signum, nisi in quantum latet sub Sacramento et ratione ipsarum specierum continentium et sensibus apparentium18.

Ad 5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod eadem adoratione adoratur caput regis, et alia membra; dicendum, quod non est simile, quia caput regis cum membris aliis simpliciter est eiusdem naturae; Christus autem, qui est caput nostrum, praeter naturam humanam, in qua communicat nobiscum, naturam habet divinam, in qua superexcellit omnem creaturam: et ideo ratione illius talis honor ei competit, qualem nulli creaturae est decens exhiberi19.

Ad 6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod in membro Christi est assimilatio per gratiam; dicendum, quod verum est; ex hoc tamen non sequitur, quod debeat adorari adoratione latriae, sicut in imagine

p. 211

sculpta; et hoc, quia imago illa non se offert tantum ut ductivam in aliud, sed ut rem rationalem et excellentem et dignam honore; et ideo honor sibi exhibitus non totaliter refertur ad prototypum, id est ad principale figuratum, sicut in imagine sculpta. Unde propter duplex periculum iunctum, et a parte adorantis et a parte adorati, non debet Deus in imagine, quae est homo, latria adorari, videlicet ne adoratus superbiat et extollatur per inanem gloriam, quasi honor ille sibi impendatur et fiat; et ne adorans cadat in idololatriam aspiciendo tantum ad formam humanam20.

Scholion

I. Haec quaestio per se est ita manifesta, ut non egeat disputatione, nisi ut solvantur quaedam difficultates ex s. Scriptura depromptae. Attamen utilis est ad confundendam impudentiam eorum qui manifesto mendacio Ecclesiae crimen imponunt, quasi Sanctos honorando idololatriam committat. — De hac quaestione unanimiter agunt: Alex. Hal., S. p. III. q. 30. m. 3. a. 1. §2. (quoad Angelos) et a. 2. §1. 4. — S. Thom., hic a. 2. quaestiunc. 5. — B. Albert., hic a. I. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. I. a. 2. quaestiunc. 5. — Aegid. R., hic q. 2. a. 5.

II. Sequens (6.) quaestio solvit casum ad moralem disciplinam spectantem, qui non est pure fictus. Saepius enim, et etiam in ipsis Sanctorum vitis, narrantur falsae apparitiones sub figura Christi crucifixi. Communiter hic casus distinguitur ab altero, quando populus, errore facti deceptus, adorat hostiam non consecratam; tunc enim ad eum excusandum sufficit conditio habitualiter apposita; in primo autem casu antiqui Scholastici cum S. Thoma et Bonav. requirunt, quod ipsa actualiter fiat. — De hac re agunt: Alex. Hal., loc. cit. a. I. §3. — S. Thom., loc. cit. quaestiunc. 6. — B. Albert., hic a. II. — Petr. a Tar., loc. cit. quaestiunc. 6. — Aegid. R., loc. cit. a. 6.

---

English Translation

Question V. Whether latria is to be shown to the members of Christ.

Fifth, it is asked whether latria is to be shown to the members of Christ. And that it is so, it seems:

1. (To the opposite.) First, by the authority and example of Abraham himself, who, in Genesis the eighteenth chapter1, saw three men and adored one, and Augustine explains that those men were Angels; yet nonetheless in them he adored God and offered them the adoration of latria: therefore if God dwells in the members of Christ, it seems that the cult of latria ought to be shown to them.

2. Likewise, in the Apocalypse2 it is said that John fell on his face to adore the Angel, and there it is said that the Angel did not permit it; either, then, John wished to adore with the adoration of latria, or of dulia. If of latria: then since John acted rightly and is not censured as an idolater, the adoration of latria can be shown to a rational creature: therefore if Angels and the members of Christ are of equal dignity, it seems that the cult of latria is to be shown to the members of Christ. If you say that John wished to adore with the adoration of dulia; on the contrary: dulia is owed to the good Angels: therefore the Angel did wrong in that he3 forbade the adoration which was owed; but if Angels never do wrong, it remains that the preceding member [of the disjunction] is true.

3. Likewise, God is to be adored with the adoration of latria in his holy temple, according to what the Psalm says4: I will enter into thy house and will adore, etc.; but every member of Christ is a temple of the Holy Spirit, according to what is said in the first to the Corinthians, chapter three: therefore every member of Christ is to be adored with the adoration of latria.

4. Likewise, the true body of Christ is referred to the mystical body of Christ as a sign to the thing signified: therefore if the thing signified is nobler than the sign, the mystical body of Christ is more or equally noble as the true body of Christ; but the true body of Christ is adored with latria5: therefore also the mystical body of Christ.

5. Likewise, the head of a king and the other members are adored with the same adoration; but Christ is the head of the Church6 and is adored with an adoration that is latria: therefore also his other members.

6. Likewise, every member of Christ is an image of Christ, and not only an image, but also an image made like [him] through grace; but « the honor of an image, as Damascene holds7, is referred to the prototype »: therefore if the prototype is adored with the adoration of latria, it seems that the members of Christ also [are], in whom there is found the image of nature and the likeness of grace.

On the contrary: 1. (Foundations.) We are not members of Christ except as to [his] humanity: therefore if latria is the cult owed to God8, it seems that latria is not to be communicated to the members of Christ.

2. Likewise, the members of Christ have fellowship with one another9; but the adoration of latria posits a relation and degree of lordship and servitude between the one adoring and the one adored: therefore it does not seem that one member ought [to render] to another the cult of latria.

3. Likewise, a lord and a servant are not to be venerated with the same adoration and honor; but the members of Christ are subjected to the servitude of Christ and of God10: therefore they ought not to be adored with the adoration of latria.

4. Likewise, there is greater authority and power in an evil prelate than in a good subject, therefore greater reverence is owed to him11; but it is established that the adoration of latria is not owed to an evil prelate: therefore much less to a subject, who is a member of Christ.

Conclusion.

The cult of latria is in no way to be shown to the members of Christ.

Respondeo: (Conclusion.) It must be said that without doubt the cult of latria is not to be shown to the members of Christ; for the reason that we are members of Christ according to [his] human nature; and we are members in such a way that nevertheless the character of a member does not take away the character of servitude nor posit an equality of dignity. And since latria is owed to the Creator by reason of his majesty and excellence; hence it is that the cult of latria does not befit the members of Christ. For the head is far distant from the body by reason of the divinity united [to it]. — Hence the reasons adduced for this side are to be conceded.

To the arguments for the affirmative side:

To 1. (Solution of the opposing arguments.) To that which is objected, that Abraham adored three Angels; it must be said that those Angels were also rational creatures, and yet they appeared to Abraham for the representation of the Trinity; and both of these were known to Abraham. And (Note.) insofar as they were rational creatures, Abraham showed them not the adoration of latria, but the reverence of dulia12 and the ministry of honor. But insofar as they were a sign of the Trinity, Abraham showed the cult of latria, not insofar as [they were] a sign, but to the thing signified itself; for it was for this that they specially appeared. But it is not so concerning the members of Christ, since, even if the Trinity can be known in them, they nevertheless do not represent [it] thus by a special institution or divine mission; and therefore latria is not to be shown to them, neither as to that which they are, nor as to that which is understood through them.

To 2. To that which is objected, that John wished to adore the Angel; it must be said that he did not wish to adore him with the adoration of latria, but of dulia. And as to what he objects, that he ought not to have forbidden him13; it must be said (Threefold reason.) that on the contrary [he ought], for a threefold reason. The first indeed is on account of the dignity of John himself, who was more excellent than many Angels. The second is on account of the avoidance of error, lest anyone should from this believe that Angels ought to be adored with the adoration of latria. The third reason is on account of the manifestation of the exaltation of the dignity of the human race. For the human race was exalted through Christ above the angelic nature. Hence (Note.) although the Angels in the Old Testament permitted themselves to be adored with dulia by men; in the New, nevertheless, after the glorification of human nature in Christ, they do not permit that nature to be subjected to them which they see to sit at the right hand of the Father; and this is the special reason of blessed Gregory14.

To 3. But to that which is objected, that God is to be adored in [his] temple15; it must be said that it is otherwise with a temple built by man and with a temple sanctified by the Holy Spirit; because that temple is only inductive toward another and instituted for the sake of something else, so that in itself it has no character by which it ought to be adored, but only by reason of that which is worshiped in it; but it is not so with the temple of the faithful soul. For it has something in itself, by reason of which it can be capable and a participant of honor.

To 4. To that which is objected concerning the mystical body16, that it is nobler, etc.; (Note.) it must be said that if we speak of the true body of Christ, inasmuch as it is united to the Deity, it must be said that that statement does not hold true, but rather it is much nobler than the mystical body. For the mystical body is not united to the Divinity in unity of person, as the true body of Christ is; and therefore so great an excellence of honor is not to be shown to it. And if (Note.) you object that the thing signified is nobler than the sign; it must be said that this is true when the thing signified is the cause of the sign17. But it is not so in the case at hand. Moreover, the body of Christ is not said to be a sign, except insofar as it lies hidden under the Sacrament and by reason of the very species that contain [it] and appear to the senses18.

To 5. To that which is objected, that the head of a king and the other members are adored with the same adoration; it must be said that it is not similar, because the head of a king with the other members is simply of the same nature; but Christ, who is our head, besides the human nature, in which he shares with us, has a divine nature, in which he super-excels every creature: and therefore by reason of that, such honor befits him as it is fitting to show to no creature19.

To 6. To that which is objected, that in a member of Christ there is a being-made-like [him] through grace; it must be said that it is true; nevertheless from this it does not follow that it ought to be adored with the adoration of latria, as in a sculpted image

and this, because that image does not offer itself only as leading toward another, but as a rational and excellent thing and worthy of honor; and therefore the honor shown to it is not totally referred to the prototype, that is, to the principal thing figured, as in a sculpted image. Hence, on account of a twofold danger joined [to it], both on the part of the one adoring and on the part of the one adored, God ought not to be adored with latria in the image which is man, namely lest the one adored grow proud and be exalted through empty glory, as if that honor were paid and rendered to himself; and lest the one adoring fall into idolatry by looking only at the human form20.

Scholion

I. This question is in itself so manifest that it does not need disputation, except that certain difficulties drawn from sacred Scripture may be resolved. Nevertheless it is useful for confounding the impudence of those who by a manifest lie lay a charge against the Church, as though it commits idolatry by honoring the Saints. — On this question all agree: Alexander of Hales, Summa p. III, q. 30, m. 3, a. 1, §2 (as to the Angels) and a. 2, §1, 4. — St. Thomas, here a. 2, quaestiuncula 5. — Bl. Albert, here a. I. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. I, a. 2, quaestiuncula 5. — Giles of Rome, here q. 2, a. 5.

II. The following (6th) question resolves a case pertaining to moral discipline, which is not purely fictitious. For often, and even in the very lives of the Saints, false apparitions under the figure of Christ crucified are recounted. Commonly this case is distinguished from another, [namely] when the people, deceived by an error of fact, adore an unconsecrated host; for then a condition habitually added suffices to excuse them; but in the first case the old Scholastics, with St. Thomas and Bonaventure, require that it be done actually. — On this matter there treat: Alexander of Hales, loc. cit. a. I, §3. — St. Thomas, loc. cit. quaestiuncula 6. — Bl. Albert, here a. II. — Peter of Tarentaise, loc. cit. quaestiuncula 6. — Giles of Rome, loc. cit. a. 6.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Vers. 2. — Augustini de hoc loco expositio habetur in eius Serm. 7. (alias 6.) n. 6. et XVI. de Civ. Dei, c. 29. Cfr. ibid. X. c. 8.
    Verse 2. — Augustine's exposition of this passage is found in his Sermon 7 (elsewhere 6), n. 6, and in On the City of God XVI, c. 29. Cf. ibid. X, c. 8.
  2. Cap. 19, 10. Et cecidi ante pedes eius, ut adorarem eum. Et dixit mihi: Vide, ne feceris etc.
    Chapter 19, 10. And I fell down before his feet to adore him. And he said to me: See thou do it not, etc.
  3. Pro quod cod. Z quando. Edd. post quod subiiciunt eum.
    For quod (that) codex Z [reads] quando (when). The editions, after quod, add eum (him).
  4. Psalm. 5, 8. — Seq. Scripturae testimon. est loc. cit. v. 17. Cfr. ibid. 6, 19, nec non II. Cor. 6. 16.
    Psalm 5, 8. — The following scriptural testimony is at the place cited, v. 17. Cf. ibid. 6, 19, and also 2 Cor. 6, 16.
  5. Vide supra q. 1.
    See above, q. 1.
  6. Cfr. infra d. 13. a. 2. — De maiori vide supra q. 1. in corp.
    Cf. below, d. 13, a. 2. — On the major [premise] see above, q. 1, in the body.
  7. Libr. IV. de Fide orthod. c. 16. Cfr. supra pag. 202, nota 2. — Subinde post prototypum edd. addunt id est ad principale significatum.
    Bk. IV On the Orthodox Faith c. 16. Cf. above p. 202, note 2. — Then after prototypum the editions add id est ad principale significatum (that is, to the principal thing signified).
  8. Vide infra a. 2. q. 1. seqq., ubi et illustrationem eius invenies, quod in minori arg. seq. proponitur.
    See below, a. 2, q. 1 and following, where you will also find the illustration of that which is proposed in the minor [premise] of the following argument.
  9. Cfr. I. Ioan. 1, 3. et 7.
    Cf. 1 John 1, 3 and 7.
  10. Vide I. Cor. 15, 27; Eph. 1, 22; Hebr. 2, 8.
    See 1 Cor. 15, 27; Eph. 1, 22; Heb. 2, 8.
  11. Cfr. Rom. 13, 1. seqq.; Coloss. 3, 18. seqq.; I. Petr. 2, 13. seqq.
    Cf. Rom. 13, 1 ff.; Col. 3, 18 ff.; 1 Pet. 2, 13 ff.
  12. Edd. 1, 2 hic — cum codd. K (1 a secunda manu) et infra in solut. ad 2. cum aliis codd. — pro duliae substituerunt hyperduliae. Cfr. supra pag. 206, nota 3. Subinde pro ministerium edd. cum nonnullis codd. mysterium. Paulo inferius pro exhibuit Abraham cod. K exhibuit eis, et post pauca pro non in quantum Vat. bene non inquam. Demum pro etsi in eis edd. etsi ab eis, codd. A G L N O V X aa etsi eis.
    Editions 1, 2 here — with codex K (the first [word] by a second hand) and below in the solution to 2 with other codices — substituted hyperduliae for duliae. Cf. above p. 206, note 3. Then for ministerium the editions with some codices [read] mysterium. A little further down, for exhibuit Abraham codex K [reads] exhibuit eis, and shortly after, for non in quantum the Vatican edition rightly [reads] non inquam. Finally, for etsi in eis the editions [read] etsi ab eis, codices A G L N O V X aa etsi eis.
  13. Vat. post eum supplet Angelus.
    The Vatican edition after eum supplies Angelus (the Angel).
  14. Libr. I. Homil. in Evang. homil. 8. n. 2. — Paulo superius pro dulia, ut iam observavimus, edd. 1, 2 cum pluribus codd., inter quos A N R S T cc, hyperdulia. Deinde pro adorari cod. K venerari, et pro post glorificationem idem cod. K propter glorificationem.
    Bk. I Homilies on the Gospels, homily 8, n. 2. — A little above, for dulia, as we have already observed, editions 1, 2 with several codices, among which A N R S T cc, [read] hyperdulia. Then for adorari codex K [reads] venerari, and for post glorificationem the same codex K [reads] propter glorificationem.
  15. Codd. Z bb adiiciunt sancto.
    Codices Z bb add sancto (holy).
  16. Cod. Z de corpore Christi mystico.
    Codex Z [reads] de corpore Christi mystico (concerning the mystical body of Christ).
  17. Nam, ut Avicenna, Metaph. tr. 6. c. 3, ait, causa dignior est causato. — Paulo superius pro honoris excellentia edd. honoris reverentia et excellentia.
    For, as Avicenna, Metaphysics tr. 6, c. 3, says, the cause is more worthy than the thing caused. — A little above, for honoris excellentia the editions [read] honoris reverentia et excellentia (the reverence and excellence of honor).
  18. Cfr. IV. Sent. d. 8. p. II. a. 2. q. 1.
    Cf. Bk. IV of the Sentences, d. 8, p. II, a. 2, q. 1.
  19. Cod. K decet exhiberi.
    Codex K [reads] decet exhiberi (it is fitting to show).
  20. Cfr. supra q. 2. ad 4. et q. 3. — Paulo superius pro quasi honor... et ne non pauci codd. perperam et quasi honor... ne.
    Cf. above, q. 2, to 4, and q. 3. — A little above, for quasi honor... et ne not a few codices wrongly [read] et quasi honor... ne. ---
← Dist. 9, Art. 1, Q. 4Dist. 9, Art. 1, Q. 6→