Article 4 — Whether the grace of headship belongs to Christ according to human nature

Fourth, it is asked whether the grace of headship belongs to Christ according to human nature. (Parallel texts: In III Sent., d. 13, q. 2, a. 1; ST III.8.1; Commentary on Ephesians, ch. 1, lect. 8; Commentary on Colossians, ch. 1, lect. 5; Commentary on I Corinthians, ch. 11, lect. 1; Compendium Theologiae, ch. 214.)

Obj. 1: It seems that it does not, for it belongs to the head to have an influence over the members; but Christ does not influence men with respect to human nature by a spiritual influence, which pertains especially to the soul, for as Augustine's Gloss on John 5 says: (Glossa ordinaria, at John 5:26–27, 5.1110; from Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John, tract. 19, ch. 5, para. 15 (PL 35:1552–53); tract. 23 (PL 35:1590–91).) souls are animated by God's Word, but bodies are animated by the Word made flesh; therefore Christ is not the head of the Church according to human nature.

Obj. 2: But one might say that Christ has an influence upon souls effectively according to divine nature, but dispositively according to human nature.

On the contrary, inasmuch as the Church's ministers dispense the sacraments, they dispose to spiritual life, for a sacrament is a disposing cause of grace; but the Church's ministers are not called the head of the Church; therefore, neither is Christ called the head of the Church in this respect.

Obj. 3: Furthermore, (Cf. William of Auxerre, Summa aurea, bk. 3, tract. 1, ch. 4, q. 2; Bonaventure, In III Sent., d. 1, a. 2, q. 2, s.c. 7.) the Church would have existed even if man had not sinned; however, God's Word would not have assumed human nature, as a Gloss on 1 Timothy 1:15 says, (Augustine, Sermon 175, ch. 1 (PL 38:945); vide tamen Sermon 174, ch. 2 (PL 38:940).) Jesus Christ came into the world and so on; however, the Church cannot exist without a head; therefore, Christ is not the Church's head according to human nature.

Obj. 4: But it has been argued that Christ would be the Church's head without man sinning inasmuch as he is God's Word; but after sin inasmuch as the Word was made flesh.

On the contrary, it is necessary for the full restoration of humankind that man not be indebted for his own salvation to anyone to whom he was not first indebted. It is for this reason that, as Anselm says in Why God Became Man, (Anselm, Why God Became Man, bk. 1, cc. 5, 51 (PL 158:365C).) restoration could not happen by means of an angel; but if Christ were head of the Church before sin only inasmuch as he is the Word, man would not be indebted for his salvation to any creature before sin; but he is indebted after sin to Christ according to human nature, if he is the head with respect to it; therefore, it seems that a full restoration of human nature would not have occurred, which is inadmissible.

Obj. 5: Furthermore, the good angels and men pertain to one Church; however, there is one head of the one Church; thus, since Christ is not the head of the good angels, who never sinned, and neither are they conformed to him in nature, (Cf. William of Auxerre, Summa aurea, bk. 3, tract. 1, ch. 4, q. 2.) it seems that neither is he the head of men with respect to human nature.

Obj. 6: Furthermore, the head is a member of the body; but it seems that Christ is not a member of the Church, for to be a member implies a certain partiality, and imperfection as a consequence; therefore, Christ is not the Church's head.

Obj. 7: Furthermore, according to the Philosopher in On the Parts of Animals: the heart is the principle of sensation, motion, and life; (Aristotle, On the Parts of Animals 3.3–4, 665a11; cf. Albert the Great, De animalibus, bk. 13, tract. 1, ch. 1, n. 8 (St 2:896).) thus, if some name were due to Christ by reason of spiritual influence, the name of "heart" would be more due to him than that of "head," especially since the head receives from the heart, but Christ receives from no member.

Obj. 8: Furthermore, the Church is the gathering of the faithful; (Cf. Isidore of Seville, Etymologies, bk. 8, ch. 1 (PL 82:295B); William of Auxerre, Summa aurea, bk. 3, tract. 1, ch. 4, q. 1.) but Christ did not have faith; therefore, if Christ is the head of the Church, he will not be a head conformed to the members, which is against the notion of a head.

Obj. 9: Furthermore, a head is not after the members; but many members of the Church preceded Christ; therefore, Christ is not the Church's head.

Obj. 10: But one might say that although Christ was not really the head then, yet he was in the faith of the fathers.

On the contrary, Christ imparts grace to the members inasmuch as he is the Church's head; therefore, if it is sufficient for the notion of headship that Christ be the head in the faith of believers, it seems that there would be an equal copy of grace in the Old Testament as in the New, which is false.

Obj. 11: Furthermore, what does not exist cannot act; but when Christ only existed in the faith of the fathers, he did not have existence in himself according to human nature; therefore, he was unable to exert an influence, and so he was not able to be the head.

Obj. 12: Furthermore, every proposition whose subject is a being of reason and whose predicate is a being of nature, is false: as when one says that a genus or a species runs; but inasmuch as Christ exists in faith, he is a being of reason; therefore, since to be head or to influence means to be a thing of nature, it seems that this proposition is false: Christ, inasmuch as he exists in faith, is head of the Church.

Obj. 13: Furthermore, there is one head of one body; but Christ is the Church's head according to his divinity; (Cf. Glossa ordinaria, at Eph 1:22, 6.532; Peter Lombard, Commentary on Ephesians, at Eph 1:22 (PL 192:178D).) thus not according to his humanity.

Obj. 14: Furthermore, there is not a head of a head; but God is Christ's head, as in 1 Corinthians 11:3; therefore, Christ is not the Church's head.

Obj. 15: Furthermore, it belongs to the notion of head that it have all the senses that are in the body, as Augustine says in the Letter to Dardanus; (Augustine, Letter to Dardanus, Epistle 187, ch. 13, ch. 58 (PL 33:847); according to Peter Lombard, Sentences, bk. 3, d. 13, ch. 1.) but there is a spiritual sense in the Church which is not in Christ, namely faith and hope; therefore, Christ is not the Church's head.

Obj. 16: Furthermore, commenting on Ephesians 1:22: he gave him as head and so on, the Gloss says, (Glossa ordinaria, at Eph 1:22, 6.532; Peter Lombard, Commentary on Ephesians, at Eph 1:22 (PL 192:178D); from Pseudo-Ambrose, Commentary on Ephesians, ch. 1, verse 22 (PL 17:398A).) they are made subject to him as to a head, from which they have their origin; but men and angels do not have their origin from Christ according to human nature, but rather according to divine nature; therefore, Christ is not the head of the Church according to human nature, but rather according to divine nature.

Obj. 17: Furthermore, Augustine says in the book Eighty-Three Questions (Augustine, Book of Eighty-Three Different Questions, q. 53, q. 61 (PL 40:36).) that to illuminate souls is an act belonging to God alone; therefore, it does not belong to Christ according to human nature; therefore, Christ is not head of the Church according to human nature.

On the contrary (1), commenting on Ephesians 1:22, he gave him as head over the whole Church, the Gloss says: according to his humanity. (Glossa ordinaria, at Eph 1:22, 6.532; Peter Lombard, Commentary on Ephesians, at Eph 1:22 (PL 192:178D).)

Furthermore (2), the union of the head with the body is according to a conformity of nature; however, there is no conformity of Christ with the Church according to divine nature, but according to human nature; therefore, Christ is head of the Church according to human nature.

I answer that it must be said that something is called a head in spiritual things by transferal from the head of a natural body; and thus one must consider the relationship of a head to its members, so that it might become clear how Christ is the Church's head.

However, two relations are found to exist between a head and its other members, namely of distinction and of conformity. It is of distinction with respect to three things: first with respect to dignity, since the head possesses all the senses in full, though not the other members; (Cf. Albert the Great, Summa de homine, q. 20 sqq.) second by reason of governance, for the head governs and rules all the other members in their acts both through the exterior senses as well as through the interior ones, which have their seat in the head; third by reason of causality, for the head exerts an influence of motion and sensation over all the members, hence also doctors say that the nerves draw their origin from the head and whatever pertains to the apprehending and moving animal powers. (Cf. Avicenna, Canon medicinae, bk. 1, fen. 1, doctrine 3, ch. 2; De natura animalium [De animalibus], bk. 12, ch. 8.)

Likewise, one finds three kinds of conformity of the head with the members: first according to nature, for the head and the other members are parts of one nature; second by reason of order, for there is a union of order between the head and the members, inasmuch as the members serve one another according to what it says in 1 Corinthians 12:25; (cf. I Cor. 12:14.) the third is by reason of continuity, for the head is continuous with the other members in a natural body. Thus, with respect to these marks of conformity and distinction, the name of head is attributed in different manners to different things according to metaphor. For there are some things between which there exists a conformity according to nature, and the name "head" is attributed to some of these by reason of eminent dignity alone; as when a lion is said to be the head of the animals (Exemplum Summae fr. Alexandri III pars n. 102 (p. 148), cf. Isidore of Seville, Etymologies, bk. 12, ch. 2 (PL 82:434A).) or else a city to be the capital or head of a kingdom by reason of its dignity, as in Isaiah 7:8: the head of Syria is Damascus. But some things have a conformity with one another according to a union of order, namely because they are ordered to one end, and the name of head is attributed to these by reason of governance, which occurs by means of an order to an end; and in this way princes are called heads of the people according to Amos 6:1: the noblemen, heads of the people. But where there is a continuity, a thing is called head by reason of influence, as when a spring is called the head of a river. (Cf. Isidore of Seville, Etymologies, bk. 13, ch. 21 (PL 82:490B).)

Christ is said to be the head of the Church with respect to his human nature in these three ways. For he is of the same nature according to species as other men; and so being the head belongs to him by reason of dignity inasmuch as grace is found to be in him more abundantly. One likewise finds in the Church a unity of order, according to which the members of the Church serve one another and are ordered to God; and so Christ is called head of the Church as governor. There is also a continuity in the Church by reason of the Holy Spirit, who being one and the same in number fills and unites the whole Church; and thus Christ is also called head according to human nature by reason of his influence.

But something can be understood to have an influence over spiritual sensation and motion in two ways: in one way as a principal agent, and in this way it belongs to God alone to pour grace into the Church's members; in another way in the manner of an instrument, and in this way Christ's humanity is also a cause of the previously mentioned influence, for as Damascene says, (Cf. John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith, bk. 3, cc. 8, 15, 18–19 (PG 94:1080B–1081A); see also ch. 15 (PG 94:1060A).) just as iron burns because of the fire joined to it, so also were the actions of Christ's humanity on account of the divinity united to it, of which the humanity itself was, as it were, a tool. This seems to suffice for the notion of being a head, for even the head of a natural body does not influence its members except by reason of a hidden power.

Nevertheless, Christ can be called the head of the angels according to human nature with respect to the two last conditions of headship, and also the head of both with respect to the divine nature; but not according to the first condition, unless one understands there to be a community according to the nature of a genus, in respect of which both man and angel agree in a rational nature, and furthermore a community of analogy according to which it is common to the Son together with all creatures to receive from the Father, as Basil says, (Cf. Basil the Great, Homily on Faith, 15, n. 2 (PG 31:468A); Rufino interprete (PG 31:1783B).) for which reason he is also called the firstborn of every creature in Colossians 1:15.

Therefore, that we might speak properly, the whole Christ is at the same time and according to each nature the head of the whole Church with respect to the three previously mentioned conditions; and the Apostle proves that Christ is the head of the Church by means of these three conditions in Colossians 1:18–20, saying that he is the head of the body of the Church, who is the firstborn from the dead, that he might hold the primacy in all things, with respect to governance; for it was pleasing that fullness should dwell in him, with respect to dignity; and reconcile all things through him, with respect to influence.

Reply Obj. 1: To the first it must be said that to animate both souls and bodies is attributed to the Word's divinity as to one who acts principally, but to the humanity as to an instrument. Nevertheless, the life of souls is attributed to the Word's divinity and the life of bodies to the humanity by a certain appropriation, so that one understands there to be a conformity between the head and members, just as it is also said that the Passion is the cause of the remission of guilt, and the Resurrection is the cause of justification.

Reply Obj. 2: To the second it must be said that some ministers of the Church do not dispose nor do they work to produce spiritual life by their own power, but by an outside power; however, Christ does so by his very own power. This is why Christ was able to bring about the effect of the sacraments by himself, for the entire efficacy of the sacraments existed in him as in their origin; however, others who are the Church's ministers were not capable of this; hence, they cannot be called the head, except perhaps by reason of governance, as when a prince is called a head.

Reply Obj. 3: To the third it must be said that, supposing the opinion that Christ would not have become incarnate had man not sinned, (Cf. Bonaventure, In III Sent., d. 1, a. 2, q. 2.) Christ would have been the Church's head before sin according to divine nature alone; but it is necessary that after sin he be the Church's head also according to human nature. For human nature was wounded by sin and submerged in sensible things, so that it is not sufficiently suited to the Word's invisible governance. Hence, it is necessary that medicine be applied to the wound by means of Christ's humanity, through which Christ made satisfaction; and he also had to assume a visible nature so that man might be recalled to invisible things by means of a visible governance.

Reply Obj. 4: To the fourth it must be said that human nature is given a certain infinitude from the fact that it is united to the divine nature in the person of Christ, so that it is not harmful to man that he be made a debtor to Christ for his salvation with respect to human nature, for his human nature acts through the power of the divine nature, as has been said; hence, we venerate Christ in each nature by one veneration, namely with that of latria.

Reply Obj. 5: To the fifth it must be said that Christ is the head of the angels not only according to divine nature but also according to human nature, for he also illuminates them according to human nature, as Dionysius says in On the Divine Names 7: (It is actually Psuedo-Dionysius, Celestial Hierarchy, ch. 7, para. 3 (PG 3:209B); ch. 4, para. 4 (PG 3:182).) hence, it also says in Colossians 1:16 that he is the head of every principality and power. Yet Christ's humanity is related differently to the angels and to men in two ways: first with respect to a conformity of nature, by which he is in the same species with men, but not with the angels; second with respect to the end of the Incarnation, which was primarily accomplished for the sake of man's liberation from sin; and in this way Christ's humanity is ordered toward the influence that it causes in men as toward an intended end, however, it is not ordered toward an influence over the angels as the purpose of the Incarnation, but rather as following upon the Incarnation.

Reply Obj. 6: To the sixth it must be said that Christ is expressly called a member of the Church by the Apostle in 1 Corinthians 12:27: you are the body of Christ and members of a member. But, he is called a member by reason of a distinction from the other members of the Church; however, he is distinguished from the other members by reason of his own perfection, for grace is in Christ in a universal manner, though not in any of the others; in the same way that a head of a natural body is distinguished from the other members; hence, it is not necessary that an imperfection be attributed to Christ.

Reply Obj. 7: To the seventh it must be said that the heart is a hidden member, but the head is an apparent one, and so the heart can signify either Christ's divinity or the Holy Spirit; but the head signifies Christ himself according to the visible nature, into which the nature of the invisible divinity flows.

Reply Obj. 8: To the eighth it must be said that Christ possessed perfect knowledge of the things about which others had faith, and so with respect to knowledge he is conformed to others as the perfect to the imperfect; however, such a conformity is understood to exist between the head and its members.

Reply Obj. 9: To the ninth it must be said that Christ as man is mediator between God and men, as it says in 1 Timothy 2:5. Hence, just as God is said to justify us in two ways, namely primarily by his own action inasmuch as he is the efficient cause of our salvation, and by our action inasmuch as he is the end known and loved by us; so also is Christ said to justify us in two ways inasmuch as he is man: in one way according to his own action, inasmuch as he merits for us and satisfies for us, and in this respect he could not be called the head of the Church before the Incarnation; in another way by our action toward him, inasmuch as we are said to be justified by faith in him; and he was also able to be the Church's head in this manner with respect to his humanity before the Incarnation: however, he is head of the Church in both ways with respect to his divinity, both before and after.

Reply Obj. 10: To the tenth it must be said that since neither Christ's merit nor his satisfaction existed in act before the Incarnation, therefore, there was not as much fullness of grace as there is after.

Reply Obj. 11: To the eleventh it must be said that the notion of head belongs to Christ not only through his own action, but also through our action toward him, and so the argument does not follow.

Reply Obj. 12: To the twelfth it must be said that to be the head or else to influence by our action toward Christ, inasmuch as we believe in him, is not predicated in such a way to be a thing of nature, but rather to be a thing of reason, and so the argument does not follow.

Reply Obj. 13: To the thirteenth it must be said that God and man is one Christ; (Symb. Quicumque (Mansi 2, 1355 B).) and so it does not follow from the fact that Christ is head according to both his humanity and his divinity that the Church has two heads.

Reply Obj. 14: To the fourteenth it must be said that God is not called Christ's head and Christ the Church's head according to the exact same account, and so the objection argues as though from an equivocation.

Reply Obj. 15: To the fifteenth it must be said that whatever there is of perfection in faith and hope, all of it belongs to Christ; however, it is denied of him only inasmuch as it pertains to imperfection.

Reply Obj. 16: To the sixteenth it must be said that although Christ is head in one sense according to his divinity, yet this does not prevent him from being head in another way according to his humanity: for we draw our spiritual origin from Christ himself according to his humanity, according to John 1:16: from his fullness we have all received.

Reply Obj. 17: To the seventeenth it must be said that it belongs to God alone to illuminate souls primarily and effectively; however, Christ's humanity does not spiritually influence us in this way, but in another manner, as has been said.