The Senses of Scripture: St. Thomas' Practical Guide

In QVII.Q6, St. Thomas treats the senses of scripture. In his treatment of the question, he deals with an interesting objection against there being four senses, i.e., “If those four senses were to belong to Sacred Scripture necessarily, every part of Sacred Scripture would need to have those four senses.” (A2.Obj5)

In the response to this objection, he concedes that not all four senses are found in every passage in sacred scripture, but that, depending on the passage, it can have anywhere between one and four senses. Yet, how do we determine how many senses are contained? St. Thomas answers by giving an extraordinarily helpful taxonomy of the different kinds of texts in sacred scripture, describing which texts contain which senses. 

FIRST NOTE. The senses of scripture are divided into the "literal sense" and the "spiritual senses." The "literal sense" concerns the signification of the thing by the word ("letter"), e.g., the word "eagle" signifies some sort of bird. In this way, every single passage has a "literal sense," whether proper ("God is Spirit") or improper ("God's strong right arm"). When we consider what is signified by the word (i.e., "the thing"), such a thing can itself be a sign for other things, e.g., "Lion" is a sign of Christ. In this way, the spiritual sense is "based on" the literal sense, i.e., insofar as the thing signified by the words (i.e., the literal sense) is itself a sign of other things (i.e., the spiritual senses). 

Since a thing can signify multiple other things (e.g., a lion can signify either Christ and the Devil), unlike the literal sense, the spiritual sense does not have authority to establish doctrine on its own. Yet, since the spiritual senses are real senses, they do have authority from the Holy Spirit as intended by God. Therefore, if one were to have the proper signification established (e.g., through another text of scripture, tradition, authority of the Church, etc.), one would be able to make such an argument, as we see throughout the works of the Doctors of the Church. 

There are three spiritual senses (into which all others resolve), allegorical (which concerns Christ or those things related to Christ), moral (which concerns things to be done), and anagogical (which concerns heavenly things).

SECOND NOTE. It is important to note that when the term "Old Testament" is used, it refers to those things which are expounded as being in the dispensation of the Old Testament rather than anything whatsoever expounded in the books of the Old Testament. Thus, e.g., if there is something spoken about morals or beatitude in the Old Testament, it would fall under the fourth or fifth theses and not the first thesis.

FIRST THESIS. Things in the Old Testament can be expounded with all four senses. 

Explanation. We need to distinguish between realities that can point forward and those that cannot. Since the spiritual senses concern those things as they signify future things, there is a limitation on those future things that are not on those past things. As to the senses of scripture, this concerns the coming of Christ and the realization of eternal life in beatitude. Now, when it comes to the Old Testament, if it expounds on matters of history (i.e., to be a “thing” in the Old Testament), then it is before the coming of Christ and the realization of beatitude. Therefore, they are apt to signify both of these things, securing the widest possible distribution of senses. 

St. Thomas states, “in Sacred Scripture, later things especially are figured from prior ones. And for this reason, when in Sacred Scripture something is said according to the literal sense that concerns a prior thing, it can be expounded spiritually concerning later things, but not conversely. Yet amongst all those things which are narrated in Sacred Scripture, the first are those which pertain to the Old Testament, and for this reason, those things which according to the literal sense look to the deeds of the Old Testament can be expounded by the four senses.”

SECOND THESIS. Things spoken of Christ can be expounded with all four senses. 

Explanation. Things spoken about Christ can be spoken about him in two ways. First, we can speak of Christ in Himself. Second, we can speak of Christ in His mystical body, i.e., the Church. Here, we are speaking of Christ in the first way. Christ in Himself is prior to Christ in His mystical body. Therefore, we can expound those things concerning Christ in Himself allegorically since to speak allegorically is to speak about that which is posterior by that which is prior. Further, Christ is both the example of our moral acts and foreshadows the glory that will be present to us. Therefore, we can expound those things about Christ in both a moral and anagogical sense as well. 

St. Thomas states, “the second are those which pertain to the state of the present Church, in which those which pertain to the head are prior in respect of those which pertain to the members, because the true body of Christ itself, and those things which are in it, have been borne by figure of the mystical body and of those which are borne in it. From Christ himself we ought also to assume an example of living; in him also future glory is foreshadowed for us. Hence those things which according to the letter are told concerning Christ the head can be expounded allegorically as referring to his mystical body, and morally as referring to our acts which ought to be informed according to him, and anagogically inasmuch as the path of glory has been demonstrated for us in Christ himself.” 

THIRD THESIS. Things spoken about the Church can be expounded in the literal, moral, and anagogical senses properly speaking and the allegorical sense improperly and in a broad sense. 

Explanation. Those things said about the Church are those things said about Christ in His mystical body. Hence, they are posterior to Christ and cannot refer to him allegorically. Rather, the opposite is said, as stated above. Now, properly and in a strict sense, those things are allegorical which refer to Christ. Yet, improperly and in a broad sense, those things which are allegorical can refer to those things which stand in some relation to Christ, e.g., the gospel, scriptures, Apostles, Our Lady, etc. Now, there is nothing which prohibits the Church from being expounded allegorically in this way, principally, the early Church from representing the latter Church. Beside the allegorical sense, those things about the Church can be expounded in the moral and anagogical sense. 

St. Thomas states, “but when according to the literal sense something is said concerning the Church, it cannot be expounded allegorically, unless perhaps that those things said about the primitive Church should be expounded as much as to the future state of the present Church. Nevertheless, they can be expounded morally and anagogically.”

FOURTH AND FIFTH THESES. Things spoken about morals can only be expounded literally or anagogically and those things spoken about beatitude can only be expounded literally. 

St. Thomas states, “whereas those things which are said morally according to the literal sense are only accustomed to be expounded anagogically. Whereas those which according to the literal sense pertain to the state of glory are accustomed to be expounded by no other sense, since they themselves are not a figure of other things, but are figured by all other things.”