Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It would seem that it is not necessary for the salvation of all that they should believe explicitly in the mystery of Christ. For man is not bound to believe explicitly what the angels are ignorant about: since the unfolding of faith is the result of Divine revelation, which reaches man by means of the angels, as stated above (Article 6; 1, Question 111, Article 1). Now even the angels were in ignorance of the mystery of the Incarnation: hence, according to the commentary of Dionysius (Coel. Hier. vii), it is they who ask (Ps. 23:8): "Who is this king of glory?" and (Is. 63:1): "Who is this that cometh from Edom?" Therefore men were not bound to believe explicitly in the mystery of Christ's Incarnation.

Objection 2: Further, it is evident that John the Baptist was one of the teachers, and most nigh to Christ, Who said of him (Mt. 11:11) that "there hath not risen among them that are born of women, a greater than" he. Now John the Baptist does not appear to have known the mystery of Christ explicitly, since he asked Christ (Mt. 11:3): "Art Thou He that art to come, or look we for another?" Therefore even the teachers were not bound to explicit faith in Christ.

Objection 3: Further, many gentiles obtained salvation through the ministry of the angels, as Dionysius states (Coel. Hier. ix). Now it would seem that the gentiles had neither explicit nor implicit faith in Christ, since they received no revelation. Therefore it seems that it was not necessary for the salvation of all to believe explicitly in the mystery of Christ.

On the contrary, Augustine says (De Corr. et Gratia vii; Ep. cxc): "Our faith is sound if we believe that no man, old or young is delivered from the contagion of death and the bonds of sin, except by the one Mediator of God and men, Jesus Christ."

I answer that, As stated above (Article 5; Question 1, Article 8), the object of faith includes, properly and directly, that thing through which man obtains beatitude. Now the mystery of Christ's Incarnation and Passion is the way by which men obtain beatitude; for it is written (Acts 4:12): "There is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved." Therefore belief of some kind in the mystery of Christ's Incarnation was necessary at all times and for all persons, but this belief differed according to differences of times and persons. The reason of this is that before the state of sin, man believed, explicitly in Christ's Incarnation, in so far as it was intended for the consummation of glory, but not as it was intended to deliver man from sin by the Passion and Resurrection, since man had no foreknowledge of his future sin. He does, however, seem to have had foreknowledge of the Incarnation of Christ, from the fact that he said (Gn. 2:24): "Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife," of which the Apostle says (Eph. 5:32) that "this is a great sacrament . . . in Christ and the Church," and it is incredible that the first man was ignorant about this sacrament.

But after sin, man believed explicitly in Christ, not only as to the Incarnation, but also as to the Passion and Resurrection, whereby the human race is delivered from sin and death: for they would not, else, have foreshadowed Christ's Passion by certain sacrifices both before and after the Law, the meaning of which sacrifices was known by the learned explicitly, while the simple folk, under the veil of those sacrifices, believed them to be ordained by God in reference to Christ's coming, and thus their knowledge was covered with a veil, so to speak. And, as stated above (Question 1, Article 7), the nearer they were to Christ, the more distinct was their knowledge of Christ's mysteries.

After grace had been revealed, both learned and simple folk are bound to explicit faith in the mysteries of Christ, chiefly as regards those which are observed throughout the Church, and publicly proclaimed, such as the articles which refer to the Incarnation, of which we have spoken above (Question 1, Article 8). As to other minute points in reference to the articles of the Incarnation, men have been bound to believe them more or less explicitly according to each one's state and office.

Reply to Objection 1: The mystery of the Kingdom of God was not entirely hidden from the angels, as Augustine observes (Gen. ad lit. v, 19), yet certain aspects thereof were better known to them when Christ revealed them to them.

Reply to Objection 2: It was not through ignorance that John the Baptist inquired of Christ's advent in the flesh, since he had clearly professed his belief therein, saying: "I saw, and I gave testimony, that this is the Son of God" (Jn. 1:34). Hence he did not say: "Art Thou He that hast come?" but "Art Thou He that art to come?" thus saying about the future, not about the past. Likewise it is not to be believed that he was ignorant of Christ's future Passion, for he had already said (Jn. 1:39): "Behold the Lamb of God, behold Him who taketh away the sins of the world," thus foretelling His future immolation; and since other prophets had foretold it, as may be seen especially in Isaias 53. We may therefore say with Gregory (Hom. xxvi in Evang.) that he asked this question, being in ignorance as to whether Christ would descend into hell in His own Person. But he did not ignore the fact that the power of Christ's Passion would be extended to those who were detained in Limbo, according to Zach. 9:11: "Thou also, by the blood of Thy testament hast sent forth Thy prisoners out of the pit, wherein there is no water"; nor was he bound to believe explicitly, before its fulfilment, that Christ was to descend thither Himself.

It may also be replied that, as Ambrose observes in his commentary on Lk. 7:19, he made this inquiry, not from doubt or ignorance but from devotion: or again, with Chrysostom (Hom. xxxvi in Matth.), that he inquired, not as though ignorant himself, but because he wished his disciples to be satisfied on that point, through Christ: hence the latter framed His answer so as to instruct the disciples, by pointing to the signs of His works.

Reply to Objection 3: Many of the gentiles received revelations of Christ, as is clear from their predictions. Thus we read (Job 19:25): "I know that my Redeemer liveth." The Sibyl too foretold certain things about Christ, as Augustine states (Contra Faust. xiii, 15). Moreover, we read in the history of the Romans, that at the time of Constantine Augustus and his mother Irene a tomb was discovered, wherein lay a man on whose breast was a golden plate with the inscription: "Christ shall be born of a virgin, and in Him, I believe. O sun, during the lifetime of Irene and Constantine, thou shalt see me again" . If, however, some were saved without receiving any revelation, they were not saved without faith in a Mediator, for, though they did not believe in Him explicitly, they did, nevertheless, have implicit faith through believing in Divine providence, since they believed that God would deliver mankind in whatever way was pleasing to Him, and according to the revelation of the Spirit to those who knew the truth, as stated in Job 35:11: "Who teacheth us more than the beasts of the earth."

Articulus 7

Argumentum 1

Ad septimum sic proceditur. Videtur quod credere explicite mysterium christi non sit de necessitate salutis apud omnes.

Non enim tenetur homo explicite credere ea quae Angeli ignorant, quia explicatio fidei fit per revelationem divinam, quae pervenit ad homines mediantibus Angelis, ut dictum est.

Sed etiam Angeli mysterium incarnationis ignoraverunt, unde quaerebant in psalm., quis est iste rex gloriae? et Isaiae LXIII, quis est iste qui venit de edom? ut dionysius exponit, cap. VII cael. Hier..

Ergo ad credendum explicite mysterium incarnationis homines non tenebantur.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, constat beatum ioannem baptistam de maioribus fuisse, et propinquissimum christo, de quo dominus dicit, Matth. XI, quod inter natos mulierum nullus maior eo surrexit.

Sed ioannes baptista non videtur christi mysterium explicite cognovisse, cum a christo quaesierit, tu es qui venturus es, an alium expectamus? ut habetur Matth. XI.

Ergo non tenebantur etiam maiores ad habendum explicitam fidem de christo.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, multi gentilium salutem adepti sunt per ministerium Angelorum, ut dionysius dicit, IX cap. Cael. Hier..

Sed gentiles non habuerunt fidem de christo nec explicitam nec implicitam, ut videtur, quia nulla eis revelatio facta est. Ergo videtur quod credere explicite christi mysterium non fuerit omnibus necessarium ad salutem.

Sed Contra

Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit, in libro de Cor. Et gratia, illa fides sana est qua credimus nullum hominem, sive maioris sive parvae aetatis, liberari a contagio mortis et obligatione peccati nisi per unum mediatorem dei et hominum iesum christum.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, illud proprie et per se pertinet ad obiectum fidei per quod homo beatitudinem consequitur. Via autem hominibus veniendi ad beatitudinem est mysterium incarnationis et passionis christi, dicitur enim Act. IV, non est aliud nomen datum hominibus in quo oporteat nos salvos fieri.

Et ideo mysterium incarnationis christi aliqualiter oportuit omni tempore esse creditum apud omnes, diversimode tamen secundum diversitatem temporum et personarum. Nam ante statum peccati homo habuit explicitam fidem de christi incarnatione secundum quod ordinabatur ad consummationem gloriae, non autem secundum quod ordinabatur ad liberationem a peccato per passionem et resurrectionem, quia homo non fuit praescius peccati futuri. Videtur autem incarnationis christi praescius fuisse per hoc quod dixit, propter hoc relinquet homo patrem et matrem et adhaerebit uxori suae, ut habetur Gen. II; et hoc apostolus, ad Ephes. V, dicit sacramentum magnum esse in christo et ecclesia; quod quidem sacramentum non est credibile primum hominem ignorasse. Post peccatum autem fuit explicite creditum mysterium christi non solum quantum ad incarnationem, sed etiam quantum ad passionem et resurrectionem, quibus humanum genus a peccato et morte liberatur. Aliter enim non praefigurassent christi passionem quibusdam sacrificiis et ante legem et sub lege. Quorum quidem sacrificiorum significatum explicite maiores cognoscebant, minores autem sub velamine illorum sacrificiorum, credentes ea divinitus esse disposita de christo venturo, quodammodo habebant velatam cognitionem.

Et sicut supra dictum est, ea quae ad mysteria christi pertinent tanto distinctius cognoverunt quanto christo propinquiores fuerunt.

Post tempus autem gratiae revelatae tam maiores quam minores tenentur habere fidem explicitam de mysteriis christi; praecipue quantum ad ea quae communiter in ecclesia sollemnizantur et publice proponuntur, sicut sunt articuli incarnationis, de quibus supra dictum est.

Alias autem subtiles considerationes circa incarnationis articulos tenentur aliqui magis vel minus explicite credere secundum quod convenit statui et officio uniuscuiusque.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Angelos non omnino latuit mysterium regni dei, sicut Augustinus dicit, V super Gen. Ad litt..

Quasdam tamen rationes huius mysterii perfectius cognoverunt christo revelante.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod ioannes baptista non quaesivit de adventu christi in carnem quasi hoc ignoraret, cum ipse hoc expresse confessus fuerit, dicens, ego vidi, et testimonium perhibui quia hic est filius dei, ut habetur Ioan. I. Unde non dixit, tu es qui venisti? sed, tu es qui venturus es? quaerens de futuro, non de praeterito. Similiter non est credendum quod ignoraverit eum ad passionem venturum, ipse enim dixerat, ecce agnus dei, qui tollit peccata mundi, praenuntians eius immolationem futuram; et cum hoc prophetae alii ante praedixerint, sicut praecipue patet in Isaiae LIII.

Potest igitur dici, sicut Gregorius dicit, quod inquisivit ignorans an ad infernum esset in propria persona descensurus.

Sciebat autem quod virtus passionis eius extendenda erat usque ad eos qui in Limbo detinebantur, secundum illud Zach. IX, tu quoque in sanguine testamenti tui emisisti vinctos de lacu in quo non est aqua.

Nec hoc tenebatur explicite credere, antequam esset impletum, quod per seipsum deberet descendere.

Vel potest dici, sicut Ambrosius dicit, super Luc., quod non quaesivit ex dubitatione seu ignorantia, sed magis ex pietate.

Vel potest dici, sicut chrysostomus dicit, quod non quaesivit quasi ipse ignoraret, sed ut per christum satisfieret eius discipulis. Unde et christus ad discipulorum instructionem respondit, signa operum ostendens.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod multis gentilium facta fuit revelatio de christo, ut patet per ea quae praedixerunt.

Nam iob XIX dicitur, scio quod redemptor meus vivit.

Sibylla etiam praenuntiavit quaedam de christo, ut Augustinus dicit. Invenitur etiam in historiis Romanorum quod tempore Constantini augusti et Irenae matris eius inventum fuit quoddam sepulcrum in quo iacebat homo auream laminam habens in pectore in qua scriptum erat, christus nascetur ex virgine et credo in eum. O sol, sub Irenae et Constantini temporibus iterum me videbis.

Si qui tamen salvati fuerunt quibus revelatio non fuit facta, non fuerunt salvati absque fide mediatoris. Quia etsi non habuerunt fidem explicitam, habuerunt tamen fidem implicitam in divina providentia, credentes deum esse liberatorem hominum secundum modos sibi placitos et secundum quod aliquibus veritatem cognoscentibus ipse revelasset, secundum illud iob XXXV, qui docet nos super iumenta terrae.