 |
|
| A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z |
(communo sanctorum, a fellowship of, or with, the saints).
Thedoctrine expressed in the second clause of the ninth article in the received text of theApostles' Creed: "Ibelieve . . . theHolyCatholicChurch, the Communion of Saints". This, probably the latest, addition to the old RomanSymbol is found in:
On these facts critics have built various theories. Some hold the addition to be a protest against Vigilantius, who condemned theveneration of the saints; and he connects that protest with Faustus in Southern Gaul and probably also with Nicetas in Pannonia, who was influenced by the "Catecheses" ofSt. Cyril of Jerusalem. Others see in it at first a reaction against the separatism of theDonatists, therefore anAfrican and Augustinian conception bearing only on church membership, the higher meaning of fellowship with the departed saints having been introduced later by Faustus. Still others think that it originated, with an anti-Donatist meaning, inArmenia, whence it passed to Pannonia,Gaul, the British Isles,Spain, etc., gathering new meanings in the course of its travels till it finally resulted in theCatholic synthesis ofmedievaltheologians. These and many other conjectures leave undisturbed thetraditionaldoctrine, according to which the communion of saints, wheresoever it was introduced into the Creed, is the natural outgrowth ofScriptural teaching, and chiefly of thebaptismal formula; still the value of thedogma does not rest on the solution of that historical problem.
The communion of saints is the spiritual solidarity which binds together thefaithful on earth, thesouls inpurgatory, and the saints inheaven in the organic unity of the samemystical body under Christ its head, and in a constant interchange ofsupernatural offices. The participants in that solidarity are called saints by reason of their destination and of their partaking of the fruits of theRedemption (1 Corinthians 1:2 — Greek Text). The damned are thus excluded from the communion of saints. The living, even if they do not belong to the body of thetrueChurch, share in it according to the measure of their union with Christ and with thesoul of theChurch.St. Thomas teaches (III:8:4) that theangels, though not redeemed, enter the communion of saints because they come underChrist's power and receive of Hisgratia capitis. The solidarity itself implies a variety of inter-relations: within theChurch Militant, not only the participation in the samefaith,sacraments, and government, but also a mutual exchange of examples,prayers,merits, and satisfactions; between theChurch on earth on the one hand, andpurgatory andheaven on the other, suffrages, invocation,intercession, veneration. These connotations belong here only in so far as they integrate the transcendentidea of spiritual solidarity between all the children ofGod. Thus understood, the communion of saints, though formallydefined only in its particular bearings (Council of Trent, Sess. XXV,decrees on purgatory; on the invocation, veneration, andrelics of saints and of sacred images; onindulgences), is, nevertheless,dogma commonly taught and accepted in theChurch. It istrue that theCatechism of the Council of Trent (Pt. I, ch. x) seems at first sight to limit to the living the bearing of the phrase contained in theCreed, but by making the communion of saints an exponent and function, as it were, of the preceding clause, "the HolyCatholicChurch", it really extends to what it calls theChurch's "constituent parts, one gone before, the other following every day"; the broad principle it enunciates thus: "everypious and holy action done by one belongs and is profitable to all, through charity which seeketh not her own".
In this vastCatholic conceptionrationalists see not only a late creation, but also an ill-disguised reversion to a lower religious type, a purely mechanical process ofjustification, the substitution of impersonal moral value in lieu of personal responsibility. Such statements are met best, by the presentation of thedogma in its Scriptural basis and itstheological formulation. The first spare yet clear outline of the communion of saints is found in the"kingdom of God" of theSynoptics, not the individualistic creation of Harnack nor the purelyeschatological conception of Loisy, but an organic whole (Matthew 13:31), which embraces in the bonds of charity (Matthew 22:39) all the children ofGod (Matthew 19:28;Luke 20:36) on earth and inheaven (Matthew 6:20), theangels themselves joining in that fraternity ofsouls (Luke 15:10). One cannot read theparables of the kingdom (Matthew 13) without perceiving its corporate nature and the continuity which links together the kingdom in our midst and the kingdom to come. The nature of that communion, called by St. John a fellowship with one another ("a fellowship with us"--1 John 1:3) because it is a fellowship with the Father, and with his Son", and compared by him to the organic and vital union of the vine and its branches (John 15), stands out in bold relief in the Pauline conception of the mystical body. RepeatedlySt. Paul speaks of the one body whose head is Christ (Colossians 1:18), whose energizing principle is charity (Ephesians 4:16), whose members are the saints, not only of this world, but also of the world to come (Ephesians 1:20;Hebrews 12:22). In that communion there is no loss ofindividuality, yet such an interdependence that the saints are "members one of another" (Romans 12:5), not only sharing the sameblessings (1 Corinthians 12:13) and exchanging good offices (1 Corinthians 12:25) andprayers (Ephesians 6:18), but also partaking of the same corporate life, for "the whole body . . . by what every joint supplieth . . . maketh increase . . . unto the edifying of itself in charity" (Ephesians 4:16).
Recent well-known researches inChristian epigraphy have brought out clear and abundantproof of the principal manifestations of the communion of saints in the early Church. Similar evidence, is to be found in theApostolic Fathers with an occasional allusion to the Pauline conception. For an attempt at the formulation of thedogma we have to come down to the Alexandrian School.Clement of Alexandria shows the "gnostic's" ultimate relations with theangels (Stromata VI.12.10) and the departedsouls (Stromata VIII.12.78); and he all but formulates thethesaurus ecclesiae in his presentation of the vicariousmartyrdom, not of Christ alone, but also of theApostles and othermartyrs (Stromata IV.12.87).Origen enlarges, almost to exaggeration, on theidea of vicariousmartyrdom (Exhort. ad martyr., ch. 1) and of communion betweenman andangels (De orat., xxxi); and accounts for it by the unifying power ofChrist's Redemption),ut caelestibus terrena sociaret (In Levit., hom. iv) and the force of charity, stronger inheaven than upon earth (De orat., xi). WithSt. Basil andSt. John Chrysostom the communion of saints has become an obvious tenet used as an answer to such popular objections as these: what, need of a communion with others? (Basil,Epistle 203) another hassinned and I shall atone? (Chrysostom, Hom. i, de poenit.).St. John Damascene has only to collect the sayings of the Fathers in order to support thedogma of the invocation of the saints and theprayers for the dead.
But the complete presentation of thedogma comes from the later Fathers. After the statements ofTertullian, speaking of "commonhope,fear,joy, sorrow, and suffering" (On Penance 9-10); ofSt. Cyprian, explicitly setting forth the communion of merits (De lapsis 17); of St. Hilary, giving the Eucharistic Communion as a means and symbol of the communion of saints (inPsalm 64:14), we come to the teaching ofAmbrose andSt. Augustine. From the former, thethesaurus ecclesiae, the best practical test of the reunion of saints, receives a definite explanation (On Penance I.15; De officiis, I, xix). In the transcendent view of theChurch taken by the latter (Enchiridion 66) the communion of saints, though never so called by him, is anecessity; to theCivitas Dei must needs correspond theunitas caritatis (De unitate eccl., ii), which embraces in an effective union the saints andangels inheaven (Enarration on Psalm 36, nos. 3-4), the just on earth (On Baptism III.17), and in a lower degree, the sinners themselves, theputrida membra of the mystic body; only the declaredheretics,schismatics, andapostates are excluded from thesociety, though not from theprayers, of the saints (Serm. cxxxvii). The Augustinian concept, though somewhat obscured in thecatechetical expositions of the Creed by theCarlovingian and latertheologians (P.L., XCIX, CI, CVIII, CX, CLII, CLXXXVI), takes its place in themedieval synthesis ofPeter Lombard,St. Bonaventure,St. Thomas, etc.
Influenced nodoubt by early writers likeYvo of Chartres (P.L., CLXII, 6061),Abelard (P.L. CLXXXIII, 630), and probablyAlexander of Hales (III, Q. lxix, a, 1),St. Thomas (Expos. in symb. 10) reads in the neuter the phrase of the Creed,communio sanctorum (participation of spiritual goods), but apart from the point of grammar his conception of thedogma is thorough. General principle; the merits of Christ are communicated to all, and the merits of each one are communicated to the others (ibid.). The manner of participation: both objective and intentional,in radice operis, ex intentione facientis (Supplement 71:1). The measure: the degree of charity (Expos. in symb., 10). The benefits communicated: not thesacraments alone but, the superabundant merits of Christ and the saints forming thethesaurus ecclesia (ibid. and Quodlib., II, Q. viii, a. 16). The participants: the three parts of theChurch (Expos. in symb., 9); consequently the faithful on earth exchanging merits and satisfactions (I-II:113:6, andSupplement 13:2), thesouls inpurgatory profiting by the suffrages of the living and the intercession of the saints (Supplement 71), the saints themselves receivinghonour and giving intercession (II-II:83:4,II-II:83:11,III:25:6), and also theangels, as noted above. LaterScholastics and post-Reformationtheologians have added little to theThomistic presentation of thedogma. They worked rather around than into it, defending such points as were attacked byheretics, showing the religious,ethical, and social value of theCatholic conception; and they introduced the distinction between the body and thesoul of theChurch, between actual membership and membership in desire, completing the theory of the relations between church membership and the communion of saints which had already been outlined bySt. Optatus of Mileve andSt. Augustine at the time of theDonatist controversy. One may regret the plan adopted by theSchoolmen afforded no comprehensive view of the wholedogma, bur rather scattered the various components of it through a vast synthesis. This accounts for the fact that a compact exposition of the communion of saints is to be sought less in the works of our standardtheologians than in ourcatechetical,apologetic, pastoral, and even ascetic literature. It may also partly explain, without excusing them, the gross misrepresentations noticed above.
That the Anglo-Saxons held thedoctrine of the communion of saints may be judged from the following account given byLingard in his "History and Antiquities of the Anglo-Saxon Church." They received the practice of venerating the saints, he says, together with the rudiments theChristian religion; and they manifested their devotion to them both in public and private worship: in public, by celebrating the anniversaries of individual saints, and keeping annually thefeast of All-Hallows as asolemnity of the first class; and in theirprivate devotions, by observing the instructions to worshipGod and then to "pray, first toSaint Mary, and the holy apostles, and theholymartyrs, and allGod's saints, that they would intercede for them toGod". In this way they learned to look up to the saints inheaven with feelings of confidence and affection, to consider them as friends and protectors, and to implore their aid in the hour of distress, with the hope thatGod would grant to thepatron what he might otherwise refuse to the supplicant.
Like all otherChristians, the Anglo-Saxons held in special veneration "the most holy mother ofGod, the perpetualvirginSaint Mary" (Beatissima Dei genitrix et perpetua virgo.-Bede, Hom. in Purif.). Her praises were sung by theSaxon poets;hymns in herhonour werechanted in the public service; churches andaltars were placed under her patronage;miraculous cures were ascribed to her; and four annual feasts were observed commemorating the principal events of her mortal life: her nativity, theAnnunciation, herpurification, andassumption. Next to the Blessed Virgin in the devotion was Saint Peter, whom Christ had chosen for the leader of the Apostles and to whom he had given thekeys of thekingdom of Heaven, "with the chief exercise of judicial power in theChurch, to the end that all mightknow that whosoever should separate himself from the unity ofPeter'sfaith or of Peter's fellowship, that man could never attainabsolution from the bonds ofsin, nor admission through the gates of theheavenly kingdom" (Bede). These words of theVenerable Bede refer, it istrue, toPeter's successors as well as to Peter himself, but they also evidence the veneration of Anglo-Saxons for the Prince of the Apostles, a veneration which they manifested in the number of churches dedicated to his memory, in thepilgrimages made to histomb, and by the presents sent to the church in which his remains rested and to thebishop who sat in his chair. Particular honours were paid also to SaintsGregory andAugustine, to whom they were chiefly indebted for theirknowledge ofChristianity. They calledGregory their "foster-father in Christ" and themselves "his foster-children inbaptism"; and spoke ofAugustine as "the first to bring to them thedoctrine offaith, thesacrament of baptism, and theknowledge of their heavenly country". While these saints werehonoured by the whole people, each separate nation revered the memory of its own apostle. ThusSaint Aidan in Northumbria,Saint Birinus in Wessex, and Saint Felix in East Anglia werevenerated as the protectors of the countries which had been the scenes of their labours. All the saints so far mentioned were of foreign extraction; but the Anglo-Saxons soon extended their devotion to men who had been born andeducated among them and who by theirvirtues andzeal in propagatingChristianity had merited the honours ofsanctity.
This account of the devotion of the Anglo-Saxons to those whom they looked up to as their friends and protectors inheaven is necessarily brief, but it is amply sufficient to show that they believed andloved thedoctrine of the communion of saints.
Sporadicerrors against special points of the communion of saints are pointed out by theSynod ofGangra (Mansi, II, 1103),St. Cyril of Jerusalem (P.G., XXXIII, 1116),St. Epiphanius (ibid., XLII, 504),Asteritis Amasensis (ibid., XL, 332), andSt. Jerome (P.L., XXIII, 362). From the forty-second proposition condemned, and the twenty-ninth question asked, byMartin V atConstance (Denzinger, nos. 518 and 573), we alsoknow thatWyclif andHus had gone far towards denying thedogma itself. But the communion of saints became a direct issue only at the time of theReformation. TheLutheran churches, although commonly adopting theApostles' Creed, still in their original confessions, either pass over in silence the communion of saints or explain it as theChurch's "union withJesus Christ in the onetruefaith" (Luther's Small Catechism), or as "the congregation of saints andtrue believers" (Augsburg Confession, ibid., III, 12), carefully excluding, if not the memory, at least the invocation of the saints, because Scripture "propoundeth unto us one Christ, the Mediator, Propitiatory,High-Priest, and Intercessor" (ibid., III, 26). TheReformed churches generally maintain theLutheran identification of the communion of saints with the body of believers but do not limit its meaning to that body.Calvin (Inst. chret., IV, 1, 3) insists that the phrase of the Creed is more than a definition of theChurch; it conveys the meaning of such a fellowship that whatever benefitsGod bestows upon the believers should mutually communicate to one another. That view is followed in the Heidelberg Catechism, emphasized in the Gallican Confession, wherein communion is made to mean the efforts of believers to mutually strengthen themselves in the fear ofGod.Zwingli in his articles admits an exchange ofprayers between the faithful and hesitates to condemnprayers for the dead, rejecting only the saints' intercession as injurious toChrist. Both the Scotch and Second Helvetic Confessions bring together the Militant and the Triumphant Church, but whereas the former is silent on the signification of the fact, the latter says that they hold communion with each other: "nihilominus habent illae inter sese communionem, vel conjunctionem".
The double and often conflicting influence ofLuther andCalvin, with a lingering memory ofCatholicorthodoxy, is felt in theAnglican Confessions. On this point the Thirty-nine Articles are decidedlyLutheran, rejecting as they do "the Romish Doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping and Adoration as well of Images as of Relics, and also Invocation of Saints", because they see in it "a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God". On the other hand, the Westminster Confession, while ignoring the Suffering and the Triumphant Church, goes beyond theCalvinistic view and falls little short of theCatholic doctrine with regard to the faithful on earth, who, it says, "being united to one another inlove, have communion in each other'sgifts andgraces". In theUnited States, theMethodist Articles of Religion, 1784, as well as the Reformed Episcopal Articles of Religion, 1875, follow the teachings of the Thirty-nine Articles, whereas the teaching of the Westminster Confession is adopted in the Philadelphia Baptist Confession, 1688, and in the Confession of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church, 1829.Protestanttheologians, just asProtestant confessions, waver between theLutheran and theCalvinistic view.
Thecause of the perversion byProtestants of the traditional concept of communion of saints is not to be found in the alleged lack of Scriptural and earlyChristian evidence in favour of that concept; well-informedProtestant writers have long since ceased to press that argument. Nor is there any force in the oft-repeated argument that theCatholicdogma detracts fromChrist's mediatorship, for it is plain, asSt. Thomas had already shown (Suppl., 72:2, ad 1), that the ministerial mediatorship of the saints does not detract from, but only enhances, the magisterial mediatorship of Christ. Some writers have traced that perversion to theProtestant concept of theChurch as an aggregation ofsouls and a multitude of units bound together by a community offaith and pursuit and by the ties ofChristian sympathy, but in no way organized or interdependent as members of the same body. This explanation is defective because theProtestant concept of theChurch is a fact parallel to, but in no way causative of, their view of the communion of saints. Thetrue cause must be found elsewhere. As early as 1519,Luther, the better to defend his condemned theses on thepapacy, used the clause of the Creed to show that the communion of saints, and not thepapacy, was theChurch: "non ut aligui somniant, credo ecclesiam esse praelatum . . . sed . . . communionem sanctorum". This was simply playing on the words of theSymbol. At that timeLuther still held the traditional communion of saints, little dreaming that he would one day give it up. But he did give it up when he formulated his theory on justification. The substitution of theProtestant motto, "Christ for all and each one for himself". In place of the old axiom ofHugh of St. Victor, "Singula sint omnium et omina singulorum" (each for all and all for each--P.L., CLXXV. 416), is alogical outcome of their concept of justification; not an interior renovation of thesoul, nor a veritable regeneration from a common Father, the second Adam, nor yet an incorporation with Christ, the head of the mystical body, but an essentially individualisticact of fiducialfaith. In such atheology there is obviously no room for that reciprocal action of the saints, that corporate circulation of spiritualblessings through the members of the samefamily, that domesticity and saintly citizenship which lies at the very core of theCatholic communion of saints. Justification and the communion of saints go hand in hand. The efforts which are being made towards reviving inProtestantism the old and still cherisheddogma of the communion of saints must remain futile unless thetruedoctrine of justification be also restored.
APA citation.Sollier, J.(1908).The Communion of Saints. InThe Catholic Encyclopedia.New York: Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04171a.htm
MLA citation.Sollier, Joseph."The Communion of Saints."The Catholic Encyclopedia.Vol. 4.New York: Robert Appleton Company,1908.<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04171a.htm>.
Transcription.This article was transcribed for New Advent by William G. Bilton, Ph.D.In memory of Sister Ignatia, OSH.
Ecclesiastical approbation.Nihil Obstat. Remy Lafort, Censor.Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is webmasterat newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can't reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.