**COMMUNION OF SAINTS** — Article of the Apostles' Creed
**SUMMARY:**
I. Form of the Creed
II. Nature of the Communion of Saints
III. Subject
IV. Object
V. Errors.I. FORM OF THE CREED
The clause “sanctorum communionem” was inserted into the Apostles’ Creed around the 5th century; it is not certain whether this occurred first in Gaul or elsewhere. In the East, the addition was never accepted. The principal sources for the history of this insertion are Nicetas of Remesiana (east of Nish, in Serbia), who died after 414 and wrote *Explanatio Symboli habita ad competentes* (PL 52, 871), and Faustus of Riez (in Provence), who died after 485 and authored *Duae homiliae de Symbolo* (Aug. and G. L. Hahn, *Bibliothek der Symbole und Glaubensregeln der alten Kirche*, 3rd ed., Breslau 1897, § 61).From an examination of these documents and those of the 5th and 6th centuries, it appears that the term *sanctorum* is ordinarily masculine, not neuter: it does not mean holy things, i.e., the Sacraments, but the saints in the specific sense of the saints in heaven, in addition to those on earth, namely, Christians, who are called saints by St. Paul (cf. O. Procksch, s.V. ἀγιος, in G. Kittel, *Theologisches Wörterbuch*, I, Stuttgart 1932, pp. 109-10) and by early ecclesiastical literature. The introduction of this formula into the Creed does not seem attributable to a reaction against the doctrines of Novatian, Vigilantius, or the Donatists (cf. A. D’Alès, *Saints*, in DFC, IV, cols. 52-56; J. De Ghellinck, *Patristique et moyen-âge*, I, *Les recherches sur les origines du Symbole des Apôtres*, Brussels 1946, p. 100).
II. NATURE OF THE COMMUNION OF SAINTS
“The Communion of Saints means that all the faithful, forming one body in Jesus Christ, benefit from all the good that exists and is done within that body, namely, in the universal Church, provided they are not hindered by affection for sin.” This definition is the answer to question 122 of the catechism attributed to Pius X. At times, this source will be cited again. The Communion of Saints thus resolves into the law of solidarity, by which the goods of one become the goods of all who belong to the Church.The Church CRISTO (v.).
1. **Scriptural Data.** — Solidarity already appears in the Old Testament: the salvation of Sodom depends on ten righteous men (Gen. 18:23-33); the victory of the Israelite people over the Amalekites at Rephidim is linked to the uplifted hands of Moses in prayer (Ex. 17:8-16); original sin itself is an indication of the solidarity of all men with Adam, since in him all sinned (Rom. 5:12).
In the New Testament, the Synoptics in particular (cf. Matt. 3:2; 4:23; 9:35; 13:1-53; 21:43; Mark 1:14; Luke 1:32-33; 16:16) describe the kingdom founded by Christ, a kingdom foretold by the prophets (cf. Isa. 9:6-7; Dan. 2:44; 7:14), to which all men must belong, where solidarity is cemented by charity, as implored by Jesus in His priestly prayer (John 17:21-24). This solidarity extended, in the early Church, even to the sharing of material goods (Acts 4:32-37). But the writer who most emphasized solidarity is St. Paul. The Church, as he often teaches (e.g., Eph. 1:23; Col. 1:24), is the body of Christ; the faithful are clothed in Christ, are incorporated into Christ; “in Christ Jesus” is his preferred, characteristic expression, repeated no less than 164 times (F. Prat, *La théologie de St Paul*, II, 28th ed., Paris 1941, pp. 476-77). In this body, though endowed with a variety of gifts, ministries, and operations, unity shines forth, effected by the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:4-12). From this unity arises solidarity: “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and in one Spirit we were all made to drink. For the body is not one member, but many... And if one member suffer any thing, all the members suffer with it; or if one member glory, all the members rejoice with it” (1 Cor. 12:12-14, 20-22, 26). “The ear,” comments St. Augustine, “sees in the eye, the eye hears in the ear... Thus, when the ear says, ‘The eye sees for me,’ and the eye says, ‘The ear hears for me,’ the eyes and ears say, ‘The hands work for us’” (*In Ps. 130*, no. 6; PL 37, 1707).
The Apostle applies this solidarity in the Church in many ways: he becomes weak if any are weak and burns with indignation and sorrow if any are scandalized (2 Cor. 11:29); the Christian husband sanctifies the unbelieving wife, and the believing wife sanctifies the pagan husband (1 Cor. 7:14); almsgiving in some way eliminates the inequality among disciples by the rich giving the surplus of their temporal goods to the poor, and the poor returning to the rich in goods of a higher order (2 Cor. 8:13-15); the Apostle asks for the prayers of his correspondents for himself and for all the saints (i.e., the faithful) (Rom. 15:30; Eph. 6:18-19), indeed “for all men, for kings and for all in high position, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:1-5). The prayers of the faithful are beneficial not only to the living but also to the dead: thus, the Apostle, grateful for the benefits received from the deceased Onesiphorus, a Christian of Ephesus, prays “that the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that day” (2 Tim. 1:18). St. James also recommends mutual prayer: “Pray for one another, that you may be saved; for the prayer of a righteous man has great power” (James 5:16).
2. **Data from Tradition.** — There is perhaps no doctrine more widespread in patristic literature than that of the mystical body of Christ. It was so popular that the Fathers spoke of it in their homilies and, more than expounding it, assumed it was already known and made practical applications of II. An immediate consequence of this doctrine was unity, the union of the brethren, the “communio,” which manifested itself in participation in the Eucharist and in epistolary correspondence; excommunication, on the other hand, was the breaking of such relationships, whether of a member of the community with the others and the bishop, or of bishops among themselves. The center of this “communio” is the Church of Rome (cf. L. Hertling, *Communio und Primat*, in *Miscellanea historiae pontificiae*, VII, Rome 1943, pp. 1-48).
a) **Apostolic Fathers.** — Traces of the bonds uniting the faithful of the Church are found in the Letter of St. Clement of Rome to the Corinthians, in the *Shepherd of Hermas*, in the Letter of St. Polycarp to the Philippians, in the Epistle of Barnabas, in the *Didache*, but especially in the letters of St. Ignatius of Antioch. For him, the Church is brotherhood, charity, agape, ἡ ἀγάπη (cf. *Ad Trall.*, 13, 1; *Ad Philadelph.*, 11, 2; F. X. Funk, *Patres Apostolici*, I, Tübingen 1901, pp. 250, 274); and the Church of Rome presides over charity, over brotherhood (*Ad Rom.*, inscr.; F. X. Funk, *ibid.*, p. 252), is “she who presides over the agape” (cf. I. Schuster, “Colei che presiede all’Agape” in a 2nd-century Priscillianist fresco, in *La Scuola Cattolica*, 77 [1949], pp. 130-32). This fraternity is nourished by a network of mutual prayers among the Churches (Eph. 21, 2; Magn. 14; Rom. 9, 1; F. X. Funk, *ibid.*, pp. 230, 240, 262), and the fruits of this fertility are seen in the Church of Antioch (Smyrn. 11, 1-3; Polyc. 7, 1; F. X. Funk, *ibid.*, pp. 284, 292). Ignatius repeatedly commends himself to the prayers of the faithful (e.g., *Rom.* 4, 2; F. X. Funk, *ibid.*, p. 256) and offers himself as a victim for the Ephesians (*Eph.* 8, 1; F. X. Funk, *ibid.*, p. 220). Nor does he forget to ask for prayers for heretics and for all men (*Smyrn.* 4, 1; *Eph.* 10, 1; F. X. Funk, *ibid.*, pp. 278, 220).
b) Fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries — In the apologetic literature of the 2nd century, which was engaged in other issues, we find very few references to our subject. The writers of the 3rd century are more prolific; in the East, the two Alexandrian masters Clement and Origen; in the West, the two Africans Tertullian and St. Cyprian, among whom the social efficacy—not only of prayer but also, in those times of persecution, of martyrdom—is emphasized. Origen and Tertullian also present the solidarity in evil (In lib. Jesu Nave, hom. V, n. 6; PG 12, 851 C; De paenit., c. X; PL 1, 1245 B). Clement describes with precision the Apostle St. John, ready to give his life to obtain the conversion of a robber chieftain: “I will give an account for you to Christ. If necessary, I would gladly endure death for you, as the Lord died for us. I will give my life in your place” (Quis dives salvetur, 42; PG 9, 649 C).
c) Fathers of the 4th and 5th centuries — The golden age of patristic literature is also the time of full maturity for the doctrine of the Communion of Saints, which indeed received its definitive formulation in the Creed in the 5th century. In the East, the Cappadocians, St. Cyril of Jerusalem and St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. Epiphanius of Salamis, but above all, for practical applications, St. John Chrysostom. Enthusiastic about St. Paul and, following in his footsteps, a preacher of the Mystical Body of Christ, which he sees as a giant seated at Rome and knowing the Indians to be one of its members (in Io. hom. 65; PG 59, 361), he could not fail to be concerned with the close bond uniting the various members of this body. He therefore treats of almsgiving (cf. E. Mersch, Le corps mystique du Christ, I, Louvain 1933, pp. 406–13), of the various forms of apostolate to which laymen and laywomen are called (cf. S. Tromp, De corpore Christi mystico et actione catholica ad mentem s. Iohannis Chrysostomi, in Gregorianum, 13 [1932], pp. 321–72), and urges sorrow for the sinner: he has sinned and I should weep? Yes, “because we are united together as the body and its members; in the body, though the foot is wounded, we see the head bowing to the ground” (De poenitentia, hom. I; PG 49, 280). Among the Western Fathers, St. Augustine stands out even above St. Ambrose and St. Jerome. No one indeed is more imbued with the doctrine of the Mystical Body, which very frequently becomes the subject of his sermons and writings. Against the Pelagian system, which suppresses in Christianity two mysteries of solidarity—the original sin and the Redemption—St. Augustine demonstrates that everything in Christianity is reduced to two masses, two bodies, two men. There is solidarity in evil: all sinned in Adam; there is solidarity in good: the Mystical Body of Christ (E. Mersch, op. cit., II, pp. 60–67). In this “total Christ,” solidarity unites heaven and earth and the faithful on earth with one another: the martyrs in heaven intercede for us (In ps. 85, n. 24; PL 37, 1099); we are the fruit of their labor (Serm., 28, 8, in nat. mart. Perpetuae et Felicitatis, I, n. 6; PL 38, 1283); he who works rests in him who lives a quiet life, and that man in him leads an active life: “Unum enim corpus sub uno capite sumus, ut et vos in nobis negotios, et nos in vobis otiosi simus, quia si patitur unum membrum, compatuntur omnia membra, et si glorificatur unum membrum, congaudent omnia membra” (Ad Eudoxium, ep. 48, 1; PL 33, 187). In Augustine’s wake are other Latin Fathers.
d) Scholastic theologians — The doctrinal tradition of the Mystical Body continues among the scholastics, though in a different form and with less vigor than among the Fathers. Nevertheless, the solidarity based on the unity of the Mystical Body is discussed, as in William of Auxerre, Alexander of Hales, St. Albert the Great, St. Bonaventure, and St. Thomas (cf. E. Mersch, op. cit., II, pp. 272–79). Denis the Carthusian (d. 1471), who in his copious works collected medieval thought, treats of the Mystical Body of Christ and of the solidarity uniting the various members. He also discusses the hierarchical theory handed down by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, in which the unity binding the celestial hierarchy to the ecclesiastical hierarchy is admitted, along with a beneficial influence descending from one to the other (cf. F. M. Baudoux, L'Illuminatrice nelle opere di Dionigi il Certosino, in Marianum, 10 [1948], pp. 191–210). The same hierarchical theory is also found widely in St. Bonaventure (cf. L. Di Fonzo, Doctrina s. Bonaventurae de universali meditatione B. V. M., Rome 1938, pp. 198–99).
e) Ancient monuments — The Church Militant is regarded as a great spiritual family whose members are called and are “brethren,” sharing a common origin, end, name, faith, sacraments, worship, martyrs, and saints; they pray for and assist one another mutually; martyrs and confessors in chains intercede for penitents. This spiritual commerce extends beyond the boundaries of earthly life: Abercius asks for prayers for himself in his epitaph. The living offer prayers and vows for their deceased brethren, as seen in many inscriptions: peace, in peace, peace to you, peace to your spirit, peace forever, in the Lord and in peace, in peace with the saints, may your soul find refreshment, eternal light to you, life in God, in Christ, in the Holy Spirit, in peace, forever, among the saints, with the martyrs, always in God, rise in Christ (cf. R. S. Bour, Communion des saints d'après les monuments de l'antiquité chrétienne, in DTHC, III, cols. 462). At other times, the faithful address proper prayers to God, to angels, and to martyrs for their deceased; sometimes they bury the dead near the relics of martyrs; they offer the divine Sacrifice, visit tombs praying and performing good works in suffrage for the dead. And the dead take an interest in the living, who commend themselves to them to obtain favors. Nor is it thought that the blessed in heaven are estranged from the fate of the deceased, but that they take a lively and effective interest in them.
The blessed are also in close union with the faithful on earth and become patrons of individuals, especially at the moment of death and of Judgment, and of cities. The faithful hold the powerful greatness of the saints, special friends of Christ, in high esteem. From this esteem spring various practices of veneration and worship: devotional medals are worn, images are reproduced, vows are made, inscriptions, shrines, altars, oratories, and churches are dedicated, feasts are established, their anniversaries are solemnly celebrated, and the liturgy is offered in their sanctuaries. Angels also share in this cult.
There is also a wealth of prayers addressed to the saints to implore safe navigation, a remembrance before God, the granting of their own prayers, assistance at the moment of Judgment, and Paradise for themselves and others (cf. R. S. Bour, ibid., cols. 454–80).
f) Excellent confirmation is provided by liturgy and indulgences.
III. SUBJECT
All the parts of the body are in solidarity and intercommunicate. The Church is the Mystical Body, of which Christ is the Head. There is therefore solidarity and intercommunion of the Head (v. CORPO MISTICO) and of the members.“He is outside the Communion of Saints who is outside the Church, namely, the damned, unbelievers, Jews, heretics, apostates, schismatics, and the excommunicated” (Catechism of Pius X, n. 124). Those who are in the Church Militant, Triumphant, or Suffering are instead within the Communion of Saints. Therefore, sinners are not excluded from the Communion of Saints, although they do not fully participate in it (cf. Catechism of Trent, part 1, c. 10, n. 26; P. Gasparri, Catechism for Adults, Brescia 1934, p. 79). “The blessed in Paradise and the souls in Purgatory are also in the Communion of Saints, because, united to one another and to us by charity, the former receive our prayers and the latter our suffrages, and all reciprocate with their intercession before God” (Catechism of Pius X, n. 123).
### IV. OBJECT
The communicable spiritual treasure consists in the contribution of the Head and the members of the mystical body.
a) Contribution of the Head. — Christ the Redeemer has satisfied for all our sins with a plenary, superabundant, and infinite satisfaction; He merited for us justification and all supernatural gifts; He prayed (Jn 17:6-26) and continues to pray for us (Rom 8:34; Heb 7:25; 1 Jn 2:1); He left to the Church, which He instituted, the means of holiness and eternal salvation: true faith, the sacrifice, the Sacraments; He gave us (which is a new title for us) His own Mother (Jn 19:26-27). This interpretation is expressed in the phrase “perpetuo sensit Ecclesia” (Leo XIII in the encyclical *Adiutricem populi* in *Acta S. Sedis*, 28 [1895-1896], p. 130; cf. J. Leal, *B. V. Io. 19, 26-27*, in *Verbum Domini*, 27 [1949], pp. 65-73).
b) Contribution of the members. — The mystical members of Christ the Redeemer are, in their own way, also redemptive and accomplish in their flesh “what remains of the sufferings of Christ for the sake of His body, which is the Church” (Col 1:24). This contribution is supplied by their works and prayers.
In the good works of the just, a threefold value can be distinguished: satisfactory, meritorious *ex congruo*, and meritorious *ex condigno*: V. MERIT.
Now: 1) the satisfactory value can be communicated to others, whether the dead (e.g., through the heroic act of charity [v.]) or the living (e.g., the confessor can grant that another fulfill part of the satisfaction in place of and for the sake of the penitent). Even in indulgences there is an application of this doctrine, for they are “the remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins already forgiven as to their guilt, which the ecclesiastical authority grants from the treasury of the Church, for the living by way of absolution, for the dead by way of suffrage” (*CIC*, can. 91). By the will of the Church, “no one who acquires indulgences may apply them to other living persons; instead, all indulgences granted by the Roman Pontiff are applicable to the souls in Purgatory, unless it is otherwise stated” (*CIC*, can. 930); 2) the meritorious value *ex condigno* is strictly personal and incommunicable; the only exception is the merits of Christ, Head of the Church; 3) the meritorious value *ex congruo*: a) of the just person is communicable; indeed, according to Suárez, the just person can merit *ex congruo* for another as much as he can merit for himself and even more. This “even more” is the first grace, which no one can merit for himself (*De gratia*, bk. 12, ch. 38, n. 21); b) that the meritorious value *ex congruo* of the sinner is communicable is by no means improbable (cf. H. Quilliet, *Congruo [de]*, in *Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique*, III, cols. 1144-45). The act of contrition (merit *ex congruo* infallible), however, must be excluded, for it, belonging to justification, can only be personal and incommunicable.
A special consideration is owed to prayer, understood here in the specific sense of petition, which is a begging, a pleading with God. Like any good work, it can have the threefold value of which we have spoken; but if it is considered in its characteristic aspect as petition, it possesses, when made with the requisite conditions, an infallible efficacy, resting on the divine promise (Lk 11:9; Jn 16:23). Setting aside the debated question among theologians whether this infallibility of prayer applies only to the one who prays or also in favor of others for whom one may pray, it is certain that prayer for others is always most useful (cf. 1 Tim 2:1-5; Jas 5:16).
The Sacraments confirm the communicable efficacy of the Church’s prayer. Finally, apostolate, to which all the faithful are called in some measure by the very solidarity of the mystical body, is nothing other than a communication, an irradiation of good; from the first apostolate, when Jesus sent the Eleven to evangelize the world (Mt 28:19-20), to the apostolate in its various forms, accessible to all: apostolate of prayer, of action (Catholic Action, good press, good example, etc.), of suffering.
Good works exercise an altruistic beneficial influence even without an explicit altruistic intention on the part of the one performing them. “This Catholic power of expansion, in the works of Christians, is not an accidental addition, nor does it require an explicit intention or a new intervention of grace. It arises, in the work itself, from that same thing which renders the work possible, because that same thing which makes the member live makes it live in the unity of all the members. Whatever they do, they are joined within with all the other members, communicating through the root, according to the magnificent expression of St. Thomas” (E. Mersch, op. cit., II, p. 275). “Even without thought, the saints have atoned for the whole Church. For, as Cajetan notes, the intention of Christ was to suffer for the whole Church in general, the passion of Christ being a universal cause of salvation. Therefore the intention of the saints was to suffer beyond their own expiation, for the whole Church. The passion of the saints, indeed, and that of the Savior are both of the same manner, a common thing and for all, because the passion of the saints is the completion of the passion of Christ” (ibid., p. 273). This does not mean that explicit offering for others is useless: it is always useful, being an act of exquisite charity; sometimes even necessary, when the altruistic intention is directed toward particular persons or purposes (cf. A. Taverna, *Sull’efficacia che l’offerta delle opere buone dà alle nostre preghiere*, in *Messaggero del S. Cuore*, 56 [1920], pp. 271-73).
Automatically, whoever is in the Church participates in some way in these common goods (this is the consequence of solidarity, that is, of the unity of the mystical body of Christ), though in varying measure, depending on the dispositions of the recipient subject and the laws of divine economy.
Even the supernatural world is traversed by waves of light, of sound, of life, which souls mutually transmit to one another, because in this order of providence they are saved in a social manner. Therefore the doctrine of the Communion of Saints, while on the one hand it is a great comfort, on the other imposes no small responsibilities. By this doctrine the problem of suffering may be illuminated, as may the importance of contemplative orders (cf., e.g., *Letters of St. Gemma Galgani*, Rome 1941, letter 85th; to Fr. Germano, pp. 215-20), the expiatory character of devotion to the Sacred Heart, ascetics, sociology, and the theology (as it is called today) of history.
### V. ERRORS
Before the 16th century, the doctrine of the Communion of Saints had opponents only with regard to some of its practical applications, e.g., the veneration of the saints (Vigilantius); but in Protestant individualism it met opposition to its very dogmatic principle. It is highly significant in this regard that Protestantism began precisely with the struggle
Against indulgences. Luther, while retaining the formula “sanctorum communionem,” emptied it of its most characteristic content, reducing it to the simple meaning of the Christian community. Calvin was more generous on this point and departed less from Catholic doctrine. The Anglican Church, in various circumstances, has at times approached Lutheran doctrine, at times Calvinist, and at times Catholic doctrine (cf. P. Bernard, ibid., cols. 447–50, 430–31). Modern liberal and rationalist Protestants have expressed disconcerting opinions on the doctrine of the Communion of Saints: it appears to them a return to pagan superstitions (M. Nicolas, Le Symbole des Apôtres, Paris 1867, p. 249), a purely mechanical system of justification (A. Viguie, Communion des saints, in Encyclopédie des sciences religieuses, III, Paris 1878, p. 286), or even an immoral thing, a cunning mixture of Pelagianism and magic, of harshness and superstition (J. A. Dorner, Histoire de la théologie protestante, trans. A. Paumier, Paris 1870, pp. 12, 28). “This practice of appealing to the saints and martyrs,” writes A. Harnack, “already existed for a long time, but Gregory had the merit of systematizing it and, at the same time, of providing it with abundant material both in his Dialogues and in other writings. A veritable host of ‘mediators’ came to interpose themselves between God and men: angels, saints, and Christ; and men began even then to calculate shrewdly what each of them could do for them, which of them would be best for their purposes. The uncertainty about God, perverse monastic humility, the terror of hearts not reconciled and thus burdened with all their sins—all contributed to cast Christians into the arms of purely pagan superstitions, introducing ‘mediators’ into dogma” (Manuale di storia del dogma, trans. it., V, Mendrisio 1914, p. 345).
The exposition given above of the traditional Catholic doctrine is already a sufficient refutation of such erroneous judgments.
S. Thomas, *In Symbolum Apostolorum expositio*, a. 10; *In IV Sent.* d. 20, q. unica, a. 2, quaestio, 3; *Sum. Theol.*, Suppl., q. 13, a. 2; *Catechismus Trident.*, part 1, c. 10, 23–27; N. Alexander, *Theologia dogmatico-moralis secundum ordinem catechismi Concilii Tridentini*, I, Paris 1759, pp. 109–111; J. P. Kirsch, *Die Lehre von der Gemeinschaft der Heiligen*, Mainz 1900; H. Hutter, *Theologia dogmatica compendium*, III, Innsbruck 1903, pp. 668–65; H. Ramírez, *L'apostolat de la prière*, 9th ed., Toulouse 1945, pp. 14–27; 230–38; J. F. Sollier, *Communion of Saints*, in *Cath. Enc.*, IV, pp. 171–74 (with bibl.); P. Bernard, *Communion des Saints, son aspect dogmatique et historique*, in *DThC*, III, cols. 429–54 (with bibl.); R. S. Bour, *Communion des Saints d'après les monuments de l'antiquité chrétienne*, ibid., cols. 454–48 (with bibl.); H. B. Swete, *The Holy Catholic Church. The Communion of Saints. A study in the Apostles’ Creed*, London 1916, pp. 147–69; A. D’Alès, *Saints*, in *DFC*, IV, cols. 1145–1156 (with bibl.); J. Rivière, *Communion des Saints*, in *Dict. pratique des connaissances religieuses*, II, cols. 330–33 (with bibl.); F. Prat, *La théologie de St Paul*, II, 28th ed., Paris 1941, pp. 355–359; J. De Ghellinck, *Patristique et moyen âge*, I, *Les recherches sur les origines du Symbole des Apôtres*, Brussels 1946, p. 100; E. Boudes, *Réflexions sur la solidarité des hommes avec le Christ*, in *Nouvelle revue théol.*, 71 [1949], pp. 589–596; R. Plus, *Genù Cristo nei nostri fratelli*, trans. it., Turin 1926 (popular work). Francesco Bauducco