UNIVERSITY

OF FLORIDA

LIBRARIES

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in

Lyrasis

2011 with funding from

Members and Sloan Foundation

http://www.archive.org/details/thomasaquinashisOOgrab

THOMAS AQUINAS

(TW^"2) (T^WD (P^WT) <TW^"S

(TW^ (TW^>

THO MAS

AQUINAS
His Personality and Thought

By
Dr.

MARTIN GRABMANN

AUTHORIZED TRANSLATION

By VIRGIL MICHEL,

O.S.B.,

Ph.D.

NEW YORK
RUSSELL & RUSSELL

INC

1963

CL^W^J) (LMb%J) Z*Mb%> <L^m9 Z*W%J) <L^W*J)

^tif)il

0bitat: Arthur

3lmprtmatut:

New

**

J.

Scanlan, S.T.D., Censor Librorum

Patrick Cardinal Hayes, Archbishop, New York

York, July 31, 1928

FIRST PUBLISHED IN

928

REISSUED, I963, BY RUSSELL & RUSSELL, INC.

L. C.

CATALOG CARD NO 63 15160

MADE

IN

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE

HE

translation of this

book was un-

dertaken as a labor of love. As the

work progressed, the love never di-

minished though the labor increased

beyond

all

translation

due

That the
was undertaken at all was
expectation.

to the belief that a small introductory

volume,

written by the foremost Thomistic student and research scholar of

modern

times, should be a wel-

come addition to the growing body of English literature on what has been called the Scholastic Revival
of our day.

In verifying the numerous texts quoted from the

works of

German

St.

Thomas,

it

was necessary

translation with the original

available English translations.

It has

compare the
Latin and with
to

been the trans-

endeavor to give an English version that

most faithfully renders the thought of Thomas.

lator's

Whether the

result

is

more

intelligible expression

of that thought, others must judge.

[vl

While the non-

THOMAS AQUINAS

&
Scholastic

mind

is

probably not set for the task of

translating any part of St.

lastic is

^5

Thomas, the modern Schohis words variations

very prone to read into

of meaning that have developed in Scholastic tradi-

Where on a
Dr. Grabmann

tion only after the thirteenth century.

few

occasions the

German

texts of

contained elucidating terms or phrases, rendering

the thought of St.

Thomas more

mind, the translator followed

clear to the
suit,

modern

since there

is

probably no living scholar better versed in the study

of

St.

Thomas and of

Scholastic sources than Dr.

Grabmann.
It

is

scarcely necessary to state that the present

pages constitute a mere introduction to the philosophy

of

St.

They

Thomas.

are consequently quite in-

adequate for a full appraisal of the true value of his

thought.

Still,

many may

find neither time nor lei-

sure to go beyond such an introductory work.

presumptuous

to

remind them that

thought of another there

that does not try to be

is

in

Is

it

judging the

no acceptable

wholly objective?

criterion
It

is

the

simplest things that are most true and at times most

in

need of emphasis.

to suggest to

Hence

it

accept one or both premises of an

itself

may

be pardonable

non-Thomistic readers that inability to

argument

is

not of

an unfailing indication that the statement given

as conclusion

pathetic to St.

is

false ;

Thomas

and

to

remind readers sym-

that belief in a conclusion

[vi]

is

TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE

et#

J$a

of itself no guarantee that the premises or the reasoning are therefore beyond all cavil.

While the work of

was going on, the

its

fifth revised edition.

The

small changes and

additions, necessitated

by the

original appeared in

many

translation

historical

research carried on so vigorously today

especially in Scholastic sources,

in the present

have been embodied

volume.

An acknowledgment

of thanks to the Reverend

Dr. Gerald B. Phelan of

St.

Michael's College, Uni-

versity of Toronto, scarcely suffices to indicate either

the patient care with which he read the translated

manuscript or the numerous corrections resulting

therefrom.

more

Many

improvements

accurate rendition are

due

in

language and in

to his valuable sug-

gestions.

V.

[ vii ]

M.

CONTENTS
CHAPTER

PAGE

Translator's Preface

I.

II.

III.

IV.

PART ONE: PERSONALITY OF ST. THOMAS

Life of St. Thomas
Literary Labors of St. Thomas ....
St. Thomas as Scholar
Sources of Thomistic Thought ....

18

28
53

V. Struggle for Leadership in Scholastic

VI.

Thought
PART TWO: THE THOMISTIC SYNTHESIS
Thought and Being. Faith and Knowledge

68

and Essence of God

VIII. God and the World
IX. Nature of the Human Soul
VII. Existence

....

122
.

...

136
150
161

the

Church

173

Method of Acquiring a

Scientific Understanding of

Aquinas

97

no

X. Intellectual Knowledge of Man

XI. System of Ethics
XII. Political and Social Philosophy
XIII. Thoughts
on Christianity and

XIV. Conclusion.

57

Thomas
182

THOMAS AOUINAS

THOMAS

AQUINAS
PART ONE
Personality of St. Thomas
CHAPTER
LIFE OF

HE

THOMAS

ST.

of

figure

great

the

Thomas Aquinas,

thinker,

peers out

from

comparatively modest framework of

life.

Rocca

the

Sicca,

hereditary

castle of the counts of

Aquino

Neapolitan

can

province,

in the

boast

of

having given to the world the greatest theologian of

the

Middle Ages.

Thomas was born

there at the end

of 1224 or the beginning of 1225, the son of Count

Landulph of Aquin and of Theodora, born countess

of Theate. At the age of five Thomas was brought
to the monastery of Monte Cassino, nearby, where
he received

his education

his uncle, the

Abbot

under the watchful eye of

Sinibald.

[1]

The

sacred solitude of

THOMAS AQUINAS

the holy mountain of Cassino

jSjfe

may have permanently

influenced the susceptible heart of the ideally-minded

boy, and have developed in

tion,

him

contemplation, and the inner

Monte

his

bent for reflec-

Thomas

life.

left

Cassino in 1239 in order to pursue the study

His teacher in the

dialectic) was Master

of the liberal arts in Naples.

trivium (grammar, rhetoric,

Martin.

ium

His teacher

in the subjects of the quadriv-

and music)

(arithmetic, geometry, astronomy,

was Peter of Ireland (Petrus Hibernus).

Being the

author of unpublished commentaries on Aristotle, he

probably gave the youthful

Thomas his first acquaintWith his increase of

ance with writings of Aristotle.

knowledge the young nobleman grew

and zeal for
of the

virtue.

No wonder

new Order of Preachers

also in piety

that the white garb

attracted

him

strongly.

In 1244 the son of the count of Aquin received the

habit of St.

Dominic

in

S.

Domenico Maggiore,

Thomas Agni. In
superiors sent him to Paris

Naples, at the hands of the Prior,

the same year his religious
for higher studies.

Landulph, incensed
cibly interrupted his

But

his brothers,

Rainald and

at his entry into the order, for/-

journey and held him captive

for a year in the paternal castle of S. Giovanni.

again attaining his freedom,

After

Thomas was accom-

panied to Paris by no less a person than John the

Teuton of Wildhausen, General of the Order.
It was in 1 245 that Thomas for the first time set

[2]

LIFE OF

&&

THOMAS

ST.

^5

foot in the capital of France, called " the city of

philosophers " by Albert the Great and praised by

of Bellovisu as " the greatest centre of theo-

Armand
logical

knowledge."

Surely he did not suspect at the

time that he would become the most famous professor

of the University.

It

was now the

meeting took

first

Thomas, the young Sicilian Dominican,

and Albert the German, surnamed the Great, who by

place between

this

time was a highly esteemed theologian of the

order.

For three

years,

1245 1248, Thomas

When

the feet of Albert in Paris.

ter of the order,

held

at Paris in

sat at

the general chap-

1248, charged Al-

bert with the task of instituting a general house of

studies in

Cologne for the German province of the

Dominicans,

Thomas followed

his

beloved teacher

to

and there spent four years of serious study.

that city

Albert the Great exerted a powerful influence on the\

intellectual

of

Thomas

development of Aquinas.

Albert's lectures on Pseudo-Dionysius

is

preserved in Naples.

copy of

from the pen

Vatican text

(Cod. Vat. lat. 722) and other manuscripts discovered

by A. Pelzer contain: " Questiones fratris Alberti
ordinis

fredkatorum quas

collegit magister frater

Thomas de Aquino: Questions of Brother Albert of

the order of preachers, collected by Master Brother

Thomas

of Aquin."

They

are unpublished lectures

of Albert on the Nichomachean Ethics edited by

Thomas.

[3]

'

THOMAS AQUINAS

In 1252

Thomas was

^5

again in Paris, where he be-

by lecturing on
Books
Peter the Lombard's
of Sentences. It was just
at the outbreak of the bitter conflict between the progan

his teaching career as a bachelor

fessors of the University belonging to the secular

clergy (headed by William of St.

Amour) and

their

colleagues of the Dominican and Franciscan orders,

who excelled them in

scholarly attainments.

Thomas

entered into the fray and defended the rights of his

order in a treatise " Contra imfugnantes Dei cultum
et religionem: Against those

God and the

of

eral disorders,

position of
ders,

who

attack the worship

Because of the gen-

religious life."

which were only ended by the

Pope Alexander VI

Thomas was not

officially

inter-

of the or-

received into the ranks

of the masters at the time set

of the University.

in favor

down

in the statutes

The same is true of Bonaventure,

who defended the rights

the Franciscan theologian,

of the Friars Minor.

In 1256 Thomas, together with Bonaventure, obtained his licentiate, the licentia docendi,

Chancellor Heimericus.

He

could

now

from the
deliver his

inaugural lecture (principium), and teach on his

1

The

name of

chancellor of the Church of Notre

Pope gave the

Dame

own

in Paris in the

him,
proper requirements. The licentiate was a
permission for the independent exercise of the academic power of
teaching. The candidate thus promoted was now admitted into the
ranks of the college of professors, and began his public teaching
career as Master with an inaugural lecture, called the frincifium.

who had

the

licentiate to the bachelor presented to

fulfilled the

[4]

LIFE OF

$^

ST.

THOMAS

^5

responsibility as master of theology, as ordinary professor.

Nevertheless the opposing teachers for some

time continued their refusal to receive him formally

into the college of professors.

Thomas'

was now the explanation

which formed the regular

task as teacher

of the Sacred Scriptures,

textbook of theological instruction.

his

duty

He

looked upon

of theology with a serious mind.

as professor

had

He

a high conception of the position of the

teacher of theology.

In a passage of his (Quodl.

14), he touches upon the question, whether the

pastors of souls or the professors of theology have
1.

more important position in the life of the Church,

and he decides in favor of the latter. He gives the
a

following reason for his view: In the construction of a

building the architect,

who

conceives the plan and di-

rects the construction, stands

actually put

up the building.

above the workmen

who

In the construction of

the divine edifice of the Church and the care of souls,

the position of architect

is

held by the bishops, but

also

by the theology professors, who study and teach

the

manner

in

which the care of souls

ducted.

How

work can

also be seen

is

to be con-

Thomas looked upon his

from various utterances in the

seriously

occasional writings which, in his ever-ready spirit

of service, he composed at the request of persons

seeking his advice.

In the work he addressed to the

On the Treatment of Jews M

Duchess of Brabant "

[5]

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^

)$*>

he speaks of the " many labors connected with the

In the

profession of teaching."

(On Lots) he

he

states that

is

This serious

to his profession, a devotion

endowed

exercised with the full energy of a richly

mind rendered ever more

means of

sortibus

using the time of vaca-

tion in order to give a desired solution.

and exclusive devotion

De

treatise

and intense by

fruitful

a tireless literary activity, brought

As

into high repute at the University.

Thomas

competent

his

biographer, William of Tocco, relates, he was praised

especially for the originality, the progressiveness,

the independence of his lectures

"

He

articles into his lectures, instituted a

method of

scientific investigation

developed new

and

and

brought new

new and

clear

synthesis,

and

Every

proofs in his argumentation.

one

who

thus heard

doubts and

difficulties

not but believe that

with rays of a
fessor

who

new

new things and solve

with new arguments, could

him

teach

God hacLUlumined
light."

this thinker

V^homas was not

paths and satisfying himself with old ideas?)

the present there has been

number of

We

shall

a pro-

could perform his task by walking in old

pupils that

show

Up

to

some question about the

Thomas

attracted to himself.

in another place that his

high gift

of teaching and his devotion to his calling resulted in

a large

number of

faithful

and inspired

disciples, a

fact hitherto not sufficiently appreciated.

taught, in Paris

till

Thomas

1259, during part of that time

[6]

LIFE OF

&

THOMAS

ST.

together with his fellow Dominican, Peter of Tarantasia, later

Pope Innocent V.

In 1259

Thomas attended

where

his order at Valenciennes,

perience was well

the general chapter of

employed

in

worked out the

ex-

helping to organize

the curriculum of studies for the

He

his teaching

Dominican

schools.

ideas of this curriculum in con-

Bonushomo, Florentius,

junction with the masters

Albert the Great, and Peter of Tarantasia, leaving

room

in the curriculum for the

profane studies.

At

this

proper treatment of

same chapter

was de-

it

cided to erect schools for the Dominican missions

In connection with

in Spain.

Raymond

the instigation of

Summa

wrote his

and

this decision

of Penafort,

contra gentes in Italy

at

Thomas

from about

This work was to be the teaching

259-1 264.
and study manual of the Dominican missionaries of
1

Spain.

For the greater part of the decade

Thomas

260-70

taught theology in his native Italy, from

From 1261Urban IV. The cities

which he had been absent fifteen years.

64 he was
in

which

at the papal court of

this court

was held, Orvieto and Viterbo,

have retained memories of

day.

Some of

his

his stay

down

to

our

own

works {Catena aurea y Contra

er-

composed for Urban IV or

During this time he also took part

rores Grcecorum) were

dedicated to him.

in the institution of the feast of

[7]

Corpus Christi by

THOMAS AQUINAS

ggtf

composing the
eucharistic

Thomas

that

of the feast, and the wonderful

office

hymns.

}fy

was

It

also at the court of

know

learned to

Urban

his confrere, the lin-

William of Moerbeke, and induced him to transworks of Aristotle into Latin directly from the

guist
late

way his commentaries on Aristotle,

mainly from this Italian sojourn, as well as
In

Greek.
dating

this

his later studies of Aristotle, attained a

philological reliability

and accuracy

degree of

that could not

be found in the Aristotelian translations from the

Arabian of Gerard of Cremona, Michael Scot,

The

following remark, from the curial

master,

Henry

poem

etc.

of the

the Poet, of Wuerzburg, edited by

Grauert, seems to apply to the sojourn of

St.

Thomas

at the court of Urban IV: " There (at the house of

the Pope)

new

one

is

who would become

philosophy,

in ruins.

As

if

new

the founder of

the old philosophy were lying

would rebuild

editor he

it

in a

would excel the old philosophers

fame of his learning."
Clement IV, the successor of Urban, also esteemed
the talent and virtue of Thomas, and offered him the

better fashion; he

by the

By dint of prayers
humility of Thomas conquered, and he

archiepiscopal chair of Naples.

and

tears the

was allowed to retain the position of a simple religious

and

to devote himself exclusively to the profession

In 1265 the provincial chapter of the

of learning.

Dominicans

at

Anagni called him

[

8 ]

to

Rome

to super-

LIFE OF

ST.

THOMAS
Roman

vise the studies of the order for the

He

Jfy
province.

taught with his customary zeal in the quiet con-

vent of Santa Sabina on the Aventine, where Dominic

From 1267

himself had labored.

presumably again active

court of

more

it

for the composition of

literary works, especially for the

most

the

in Italy left

leisure than his teaching in Paris

him, and he used

his

Thomas was

as lector at Viterbo, at the

His labors

Clement IV.

on,

first

mature

work,

the

him

had given
numerous

commencement of

Summa

theologica>

part of which was written at S. Sabina in

Rome.

A
fall

larger field of labor was assigned to

of 1268,

when

his superiors recalled

him
him

in the

to the

This
268-1 272 marks the high-

University of Paris as professor of theology.

second sojourn in Paris

est scientific
It

is

achievement

a period of

as well as

at Paris for the

in the career of

most fruitful

one of severe

The aversion
since 1256,

Thomas.

literary labor for

him,

conflicts.

of the professors of the secular clergy

two mendicant orders, smouldering

was again

in

high flame.

The

attacks

on

Dominican professors were led

by Gerard of Abbeville, a very able man, whose
Qucestiones quodUbetales give good testimony of his
the Franciscan and

learning,

and by Nicholas of Lisieux.

By

the force

of his high scholarly repute and by means of two

counter attacks

{Contra doctrinam retrahentium a

[9]

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^
religione;

De

^5

ferjectione vitce spiritualis)

Thomas

stood out against these enemies as an impenetrable

wall.

Much more
Thomas had

important was another battle that

to fight out in Paris.

It

was

his victori-

ous struggle as leader of a Christian Peripateticism

against the Averroistic Peripateticism of the Paris
university.

Under the

leadership of Siger of Brabant

and Boethius of Dacia, Averroism had arisen within

the ranks of the faculty of arts as a powerful current of thought.

For the Averroists, Averroes' inwas normative.

terpretation of Aristotelean thought

They made

their very

own even

those teachings of

the Arabian philosopher which ran counter to theological doctrine.

Among

such teachings were the

doctrine of the eternity of the world, the denial of

providence, the denial of free will and, especially,

the doctrine of the numerical unity of the intellectual
soul in all men.

teemed

The

study of philosophy was es-

human life, in total

and revelation. The picture of

as the highest value in

disregard of faith

movement, portrayed by
P. Mandonnet in his monumental work, is now better
understood in the light of the unpublished and hiththis

gigantic intellectual

unknown Questions of Siger of Brabant, which

I discovered in the Munich library (Clm. 9559).
Over against this Averroistic Aristotelianism Thomas

erto

>i

/y^set up a Christian Aristotelianism} that

[10]

is,

an Aris-

LIFE OF

&&

ST.

THOMAS

judged, purged,, and corrected on

totelian philosophy

the basis of the teaching of the Church.

tract,

"

De

}&>

In a special

unit ate intellectus contra Averroistas :

On

the Unity of the Intellect against the Averroists " (or,

according to a

Munich manuscript, Clm. 8001

29r: " Tract of Brother

Thomas

against

fol.

Master Siger

on the Unity of the Intellect "), he most decidedly

rejects monopsychism, the momentous error of Siger,

and shows that on

this point Aristotle

The matter was

interpreted.

had been mis-

a theological question

of the greatest importance at the time, as can be

gathered from the emotion apparent

words of Thomas, who

tempered: "This
is

is

in the closing

otherwise so calm and mild-

is

our refutation of the error.

It

not based on the documents of faith, but on the

reasons and the pronouncements of the philosophers

themselves.
self

on

his

who

If anyone,

against our exposition, let

ner nor before boys

ment

boastfully prides him-

supposed wisdom, desires to say anything

who

him not do

it

in

some

cor-

are entirely without judg-

in such difficult matters.

Let him rather write

against this our tract, if he has the requisite courage.

He

will then find not only myself, the least of

all,

but

step

up against

edge."

many

others, cultivators of truth,

his error,

Thomas

and attack

witnessed

the

his lack

them

who

of knowl-

condemnation of

Averroism by the Bishop of Paris on December

1270.

will

10,

Siger of Brabant, in fact, did not hold un-

["J

THOMAS AQUINAS

(JM

^5

'

Thomas himarts.
had many devoted disciples among its members.
Thus Peter of Auvergne, a professor of that faculty,
is designated as " the mo9t faithful disciple " of
Thomas. It was he who completed Thomas' commentaries on Aristotle's " Concerning Heaven and
the World " and his " Politics." The scientific refudisputed sway in the faculty of

self

tation of Averroistic Aristotelianism

in the art of the

Middle Ages

standing achievements.

de Bonaiuto
pictures

one of Thomas' out-

Andrea

large fresco by

in the Spanish chapel at Florence, altar

by Filippino Lippi

sopra Minerva in

church of

as

was celebrated

St.

in the

Church of

Rome, and by

S.

Maria

Fr. Traini in the

Catherine in Pisa, and a tempera paint-

ing by Benozzo Gozzoli in the Louvre, significantly

represent " the

Triumph of

St.

Thomas " over Aver-

roes, the latter sprawling at the feet of the former.

For Thomas there was still a third battle to fight

one that was probably the most distasteful

in Paris,

to his noble

mind, the

Franciscan theologians.
Averroistic

scientific altercation

with the

The condemnation

Peripateticism

also

cast

of the

shadow on

the Christian Aristotelianism championed by Albert

and Thomas. For a long time the latter had

been viewed askance by rigorously conservative theo-

the Great

logians of the secular clergy,

and particularly of the

Franciscan order.

Even some fellow-Dominicans,

among

the English (Robert Kilwardby),

especially

[12]

LIFE OF

opposed the new

For

Thomas.

all

THOMAS

ST.

^5

tendency taken up by

scientific

of these theologians,

St.

Augustine

was the master thinker, not only in theological but

and they used the
also in philosophical questions
j

and

ideas

texts of Aristotle rather as

methodological

aids.

Thomas,

ornaments and

too, considered

Au-

gustine beyond all doubt the greatest of the Church

Tatfiers, and the most esteemed authority in theology.

But he

also

gave Aristotle an important position.

Aristotle furnished

view that aided

in

him with

ideas

and points of

developing and constructing theo-

logical speculation 5

and

in

philosophy, especially in

psychology and epistemology, he was the master

The Augustinian tradition was

mind.

to

be reconciled

with his thought by a concordistic interpretation wher-

ever possible or necessary.

Hence

a heated dispute

arose between the conservative Augustinianism of the

above-mentioned theologians and the progressive

Aristotelianism of Albert the Great and

The

Thomas.

Franciscan theologian, John Peckam, chief of

the opponents of

The

ously.

Thomas, attacked the

latter vigor-

principal point of contention

was the

Thomistic doctrine of the unity of the substantial

form

ham

in

man.

Throughout

John Peckdating from 1284 and

this time, as

subsequently (in letters

1285) stated with admiration, Thomas explained his

views and his orthodoxy to his colleagues with the
greatest calmness

and humility, and

[

13

finally submitted

THOMAS AQUINAS

gg^

^5

judgment of the college of

the entire matter to the

theological professors at Paris.

The

various controversies and disturbances in no

way deprived Thomas of

his

by

to all these activities

called

him away from

His

1272.

successor

holy peace of soul and

An end

his love for literary labor.

was however put

who

his religious superiors

Paris after Easter of the year

was Fr. Romanus, O.Pr., whose

unprinted commentary on the Sentences

is

more Au-

The recall of Thomas caused

among the Paris professors, and
found no favor with them, as we can see from the

gustinian in tendency.

the greatest surprise

petitions they vainly addressed to the general chapter of the

to

Dominicans meeting

have Thomas
Thomas again

in

Florence June 1272,

sent back to his chair at Paris.

set foot

on

The

his native soil.

Dominican chapter of the Roman province of the

order, which had also met at Florence in 1272,
charged him with the erection and organization of
general theological curriculum.
to choose his

powers

own

location

Thomas was

its

free

and was given the widest

in the exercise of his task.

He

decided on

Naples, partly, at least at the instance of the king,

Charles of Anjou.

made

Here

his first studies,

the youthful

Thomas had

God

here his soul had sought

in the peace of the conventual life of St.

Dominic and

was Naples that now attracted him

at the height

it

of his mature age, of his ascetic

[

14

life,

of his intel-

LIFE OF

$ft

lectual labors.

few years of
In 1274

Did he have any

life

were

left

Thomas was

quiet labors in Naples.

him

THOMAS

ST.

^5

inkling that only

him?

away from his

Pope Gregory X summoned
again called

to attend the Council of

Lyons, which was to

Church union. In this question

Pope did not want to be without the expert counof the famous theologian. Thomas had proved

treat the question of

the
sel

himself a thorough student of the problem both in

his

larger works as also in

err ores

Grcecorum:

Against

monographs {Contra
Errors

the

of

the

Greeks).

The road to the council was for Thomas the road

The source accounts of the last years of
to death.
Thomas indicate clearly that he was exhausted and
overworked, that
to

keep pace with

his bodily vigor

his

had not been able

astounding mental energy.

The

hand of death stretched out for him before he could

reach Rome. He stopped for rest in the Cistercian
monastery of Fossanuova, near Terracina, and there
he died the death of a

saint,

March

7,

1274.

At the

reception of the Eucharist on his death-bed, he

made

this statement: " I receive Thee, redeeming Price of

my

soul.

my

views.

Out of love for Thee have I studied,

watched through many nights, and exerted myself;
Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said
aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in
If I have ever expressed myself er[

15

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^

roneously on this Sacrament,

$fc

submit to the judg-

ment of the holy Roman Church, in the obedience

of which I now part from this world." Reginald of
Piperno, the inseparable friend and companion of
Thomas, than whom none had a deeper insight into
his pure, childlike soul,

and who heard the confession

of his dying teacher and friend, later on testified

that he

had found Thomas

child of five years.

as

pure and innocent as a

The monks of Fossanuova,

to

whom Thomas

explained the Canticle of Canticles on

his death-bed,

were under the impression of having

witnessed the departure of a saint.

by

Bernini,

now

gracing

Thomas, represents the

the

A beautiful relief
death-chamber

of

latter in the act of explain-

ing this canticle of love to the reverently absorbed

monks.

The news
tant Paris.

of his death aroused deep sorrow in dis-

The

University mourned the premature

death of a genial, assiduous, and noble scholar,

had been

their

honor and their pride.

The

who
Paris

faculty of arts, writing to the general chapter of the

Dominicans, held in Florence

1274, dedicated a

touching In NLemoriam to their departed colleague.

In terms

Thomas

almost extravagant

as the beacon, the

they commemorate

sun of the century, and

they deeply deplore that his death has deprived the

Church of the rays of such a

laudatory words

is

brilliant light.

added the

[16]

To

these

petition, that the re-

LIFE OF

gjft

ST.

THOMAS

mains of Thomas be given a

Paris j

for

it

is

)fo

final resting place in

and unbecoming

entirely unfitting

that any other city should bury

and preserve

his re-

mains than that Paris which reared him, nourished

and cultivated him, and which later received such

inexpressible advancement through him. His memory,

which would indeed endure forever by reason of

should then be

his writings at the Paris university,

implanted more firmly in the hearts of following

generations by a worthy

monument

This request of the faculty of

The remains of Thomas were

to

arts

him.

was not granted.

after various vicissi-

tudes finally interred in the Dominican church of

Toulouse, 1368.
lie in

Since the French revolution they

the church of St. Sernin of the same city.

[17]

CHAPTER
LITERARY LABORS OF

II

ST.

THOMAS

HE literary labors of St. Thomas are

astonishing in their extent j the
so, since
fifty,

more

he never reached the age of

and

since

much of

his

time was

taken up by teaching and by the various practices of his religious

life.

As

often happens with Scholastic writers, some apoc-

ryphal works have been included in the traditional

list

of the writings of Thomas.

been done

in the critical investigation of the texts

writings, notably

times by P. A. Uccelli,

The

H.

and

Denifle,

is

made

in

more

recent

and P. Mandon-

task of sifting the genuine

ous works

from the

spuri-

possible through the preservation

of old and reliable catalogues of the writings of

Thomas, and the examination of the

down

and

by Barbavara, Anthony of Sena,

Nicolai, J. Echard, de Rubeis,

net.

But much work has

tradition

St.

handed

in manuscripts.

Accordingly

lowing

list

it is

possible to put together the fol-

of works as certainly genuine.

[IS]

Since a

LITERARY LABORS

(^

^5

judgment on the views of Thomas must be greatly

guided by the dates of composition, the

latter will

be indicated as far as possible.

A. Philosophical Writings
I.

Commentaries on

Aristotle:

3.

On
On
On

4.

On

5.

On

6.

On the three books On the Soul (1270-

7.

On

8.

On

2.

Perihermeneias (1269-1271?).
the second two Analytics.

the ten books of Ethics (1261-

1264).
the twelve books of Metaphysics

(1271-1272).
the eight books of Physics

(1261-

1264).

1272).
the treatise

(De

On

Sense Perception

sensu et sensato).

the book

On Memory and Reminis-

cence.
9.

On the first three books of the treatise

On Heaven and Earth up to L. III.
lect. 8

10.

On

(1272).

the books

On

Generation and Cor-

ruption of the things of nature L.

11.
12.

I.

On
On

1-17 (1272).
the Politics (Books 1-3, 6) (1272).
the books On Meteorology up to

L.

II. lect.

lect.

10 (1269-1271?).

[19]

THOMAS AQUINAS

(^
II.

Commentary on

)fo

the Liber de causis (after

1268).
III. Smaller philosophical writings (Opuscula):
1.

De

occultis operationibus natura?

the hidden

(On

of nature).

activities

2.

De principiis nature? (On the principles

3.

De

of nature).

mixtione elementorum

(On

the

mixture of the elements).

4.

De motu

cordis

(On

the motion of the

heart).
5.

De

ente et essentia

(On

existence

and

essence).
6.

De

ceternitate

tes

(On

mundi

contra

mumuran-

the eternity of the world, writ-

ten about 1270).

7.

De
stas

unitate intellectus contra Averroi-

(Polemic on the unity of the

against

intellect

on

De

commentary

the

anima by Siger of Brabant.

1270).
8.

De

substantiis separatis

(On

the spirit-

ual substances existing independently

of matter.
9.

De

After 1268).

quattuor oppositis

(On

the four-

fold opposition of propositions).

10.

De

propositionibus

modal

propositions).

[20]

modalibus

(On

LITERARY LABORS
11.

De

demonstratione

(On

^5

scientific

dem-

onstration).

13.

De
De

14.

De

15.

De natura verbi intellectus (On

16.

De

12.

(On

jallacils

fallacies).

natura accidentis

(On

the nature

of accident).

(On

natura generis

the notion of

genus).
the na-

ture of the mental word).

differentia verbi divini et

(On

humani

the difference between the divine

and the human word).

17.

De

natura materia?

(On

the nature of

matter).
18.
19.

De
De

instantibus
principle)

(On

the instantaneous).

individuations s

(On

the

principle of individuation).
20.

De fato (On

fate

perhaps by Albert

the Great).

B.

Works Chiefly Theological

I.

in

Content

General expositions of systematic theology:

1.

Commentary on

Four Books of
Lombard ( 12531255). A later commentary of Thomas
the

Sentences of Peter the

on the
been
2.

first

book of the Sentences has

lost.

Compendium theologian ad Reginaldum

[21]

THOMAS AQUINAS

g$(

^5

(brief, incomplete outline of theology,

written after 1260).

Summa

3.

The

theologka.

first

(Prima)

and the second (Secunda) parts of the

theological summa date from the years
1 266-1 272.
The third part (Tertia), written 127 2- 1273, remained unfinished.

Its

completion (the so-called

Swp-plementum)

is

from the hand of

Reginald of Piperno.
II.

The

Qucestiones:
1

1.

Qucestiones quodlibetales' (Books 1-6

1 269-1 272 j Books 7
265-1 267).

written in Paris,
11, in Italy,
2.

Qucestiones disfutata?.*
(a)

De

veritate

(On

truth,

(On

the power of

1256-

1259).
(b)

De

potentia

God, 1260-1268).
2

The

Qucestiones quodlibetales are the literary resumes of the

free disputations held twice a year, before Christmas and Easter,

and were made by the master of theology who

presided at them.

instituted

In these disputations questions

from

them and
the entire

Hence there is no systematic

of philosophy were discussed.
arrangement of matter in the scholastic literature of the Quodlibeta.
3
The Qucestiones disfutatce are the literary resumes of the ordinary disputations conducted at regular intervals by a theology
In them important theological problems were treated
professor.
more thoroughly and profoundly than usual. The Qucestiones disfutatce of Thomas, as of other scholastics, e.g., of Matthew of Aquasparta, are therefore more complete, coherent, and profound expoLater on the distinction between
sitions of theological questions.
the Quastiones quodlibetales and the Quastiones disputatce was lost.
field

22

LITERARY LABORS
(c)

De

^5

spiritualibus creaturis

(On

1260-

the spiritual creatures,

1268).
(d)

De

(e)

De

anima (On the

1260-

soul,

1268).

the

untone

Verb'i incarnati

Incarnation

of

(On

Christ,

1260-1268).
(f)

De

malo

(On

1260-

evil,

1268).
(g)

De

virtutibus in

communi (On
1269-

the virtues in general,

1272).
(h)

De
the

virtutibus cardinalibus

cardinal

(On

1269-

virtues,

1272).
(i)

De

caritate

(On

1269-

charity,

1272).
(k)

De

correctione

fraternal

fraterna

correction,

(On

1269-

1272).
(1) De
(m) De

III.

(On hope 1269-1272).

beatitudine (On happiness,

spe

1269-1272).
Smaller works (Opuscula),
of

chiefly

on points

dogma:
1.

De

articulis fidei et sacramentis

the articles of faith

[23]

(On

and the sacraments).

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^
2.

ftfe

In Dionysium de divinis nominibus

(Exposition of the work of Dionysius
the Areopagite on the

3.

names of God).

In Boethium de

trinitate

of

of

the

treatise

(Exposition

Boethius

on the

Trinity).
4.

In Boethium de hebdomadibus (Exposition of the treatise of Boethius on

the axioms).
5.

In primum decretalem (Explanation

of the

6.

In

decretal).

first

secundum decretalem

(Explana-

tion of the second decretal).

7.

Responsio de

XXXVI

articulis

swers to questions directed to

8.

Responsio de

articulis

(An-

Thomas)

XLII

(Idem,

1271).
9.

Responsio de

10. Articuli

Responsio
(Letter to

Monte

CVIII (Idem).

articulis VI (Idem).
ad Bernardum abbatem
Abbot Bernard Ayglerius of

de

11. Responsio
12.

articulis

iterum remissi (Idem).

Cassino).

IV. Apologetic works

1.

Summa

contra gentes

the heathens,
Arabians,

i.e.,

(Summa

chiefly against the

259-1 264.

Autograph pre-

served in the Vatican library).

[24]

against

LITERARY LABORS
1.

De

^5

rationibus fidel contra Saracenos,

Grcecos et

Armenos (The foundations

of faith established against the Sara-

and Armenians).

cens, Greeks,
3.

Contra

Gr&corum

error es

the errors of the Greeks,

(Against

2611264).

V. Practical theology, philosophy of right, social right,

1.

2.

De
De

the state:

(On

sortibus
judiciis

casting lots).

(On

astrorum

astrology.

After 1260).
3.

De forma ab solutionis (On the

formula

of absolution).
4.

5.

De emptlone
and

selling).

et vendltlone

(On buying

De

reglmlne princlpum ad regem Cy-

prl

(On

and

II,

about

the rule of princes.

c.

14, are by

266

the rest

Books

Thomas, probably
is by Ptolomy of

Lucca).
6.

De

reglmlne Judceorum ad duclssam

Brabantlce

by

(On

civic rulers,

the treatment of Jews

1263 1267?).

VI. Asceticism and religious

1.

Exposltlo

planation of the
2.

life:

Orationls

Our

domlnicce

(Ex-

Father).

Exposltlo Symboll Apostolorum (Analysis

of the Apostles' Creed).

[25]

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^
3.

De

duobus

prceceptis caritatis et decern

prceceptis

legis

)fo

(On

the

Command-

ments of Love, and the Decalogue).

4.

Officium Corporis Christi

(The

office

of Corpus Christi, with the eucharistic

hymns, 1264).
5.

Collationes dominicales

(Sunday

ser-

mons).
6.

Epistola ad

quendam fratrem de modo

studendi (Letter to a religious confrere

on a fruitful method of study).

7.

Contra impugnantes Dei cultum

et re-

ligionem (In defense of the religious

state,

1256 or 1257).

8.

De

9.

Contra retrahentes a religioso

perfectione vitce spiritual!* (Idem,

1269).

10.

cultu

(Idem, 1270).
Expositio de Ave Maria (Explanation
of the Hail Mary).

11.

Two

newly discovered Principia (In-

augural addresses, as bachelor 1252,

and

as

master 1256).

VII. Exegetical writings:

1.

2.

On the Book of Job.

On the first four nocturns

of the Psal-

ter (to Ps. 54).

3.

On

the Canticle of Canticles (lost).

1

26

LITERARY LABORS

e8#

6.

On
On
On

7.

Catena

aurea

(Golden

chain.

4.
5.

J$5

Isaias.

Jeremias.
the Lamentations.

super

An

IV

Evangelia

explanation of the

four Gospels by linking together quotations

of

The

from the Fathers.

Matthew was

catena

written between 1261

and 12645 tne others were completed

before 1272).
8.

Lectures on the Gospel of Matthew,

9.

Lectures on the Gospel of John (put

held in Paris.

together

by

Reginald

of

Piperno,

1269-1272).
10. Explanations of the Letters of St.

(Commentary on
Romans, and on

Thomas himself

the
I.

Letter to
Cor.

Paul
the

1-10 by

is

a faithful

transcription of his lectures

by Regi-

nald of Piperno.

1269-1273).

[27]

the rest

Approximately from

CHAPTER
ST.

THOMAS

AS

III

SCHOLAR

N HIS contemporaries Thomas made

the

impression

of

most gifted

and powerful personality.

Bartholomew of Lucca calls him the
" ark of philosophy and theology "j

scholar

John of Colonna, the " incomparable

teacher "j Fra Remigio de Girolami calls him " The
light of our eyes, the crown of our heads." Other
members of his order, Bernard of Clermont, Armandus of Bellovisu, and especially William of
Tocco, speak of his eminent personality in terms of

enthusiasm bordering on the extreme.

men

impression confined to the

Even

men

Nor was this

own order.

of his

Siger of Brabant speaks of " the outstanding

in philosophy, Albert

and Thomas."

The

sec-

Godfrey of Fontaines, professor at Paris,

from Thomas on many points. But he is
full of the highest praise for this " most famous
teacher," and says that the teaching of Thomas is

ular priest,
differed

28

ST.

ffi{

THOMAS

AS

SCHOLAR

^5

the most useful and praiseworthy after that of the

Fathers, and that the teachings of other theologians

attain their correct perspective, their agreeableness,

and

their spice only

It

is

through him.

therefore no easy task to attempt an analysis

of the personality of Thomas, and especially of his

There

individual character as a scholar.

no extant correspondence, such

all,

is,

above

as gives us the

Anselm of CanWilliam of Tocco, is

surprising glimpses into the soul of

Then

terbury.

by no means so
mer,

the

his biographer,

fine a depicter of the soul as

biographer

Thomas had

little

practical nature,

Anselm.

of

is

Ead-

Furthermore

occasion for writings of a

more

which would inevitably have more

personal color in them, such as

St.

Bonaventure had

to write extensively as

General of the Franciscans.

The works of Thomas

furnish the chief basis for a

delineation of his erudite personality j and they were

written in such a rigorously matter-of-fact and im-

personal

manner

that only an extended

and profound

study of them will reveal something of the personal

character of their author.
tific

In any study of the scien-

mentality of Thomas, account must also be taken

of the spiritual

traits

of his soul everywhere in

evidence.

Like Augustine, Anselm of Canterbury, and

of

St.

Victor before him,

Thomas

Hugo

called attention to

the importance of an ethical and religious disposition

[

29

THOMAS AQUINAS

$/(

)$$

of soul for the deeper study of supersensory and supernatural truths.

Even

Plato had recognized and as-

serted that the full knowledge of the true and the

eternal

is

possible only to the soul that

the sensuous.
relation of

What Thomas

is

free

from

taught concerning the

moral purity, love of God, and the

gifts

Holy Ghost to theological speculation, he also

in his own person. The picture of Thomas the

of the
lived

ethical

and

Thomas

can-

Thomas the saint.

With unmistakable love did Fra Angelico,

con-

scholar cannot be separated

religious personality.

The

from

his

student in

not be understood without

frere of

Thomas, and of kindred soul, paint the perFor him Thomas is ever the pro-

son of Thomas.

found thinker, standing above the

affairs

of earthly

occupied with the sublimest mysteries j not a

life,

cold and rigid intellectual figure, but an attractive

charming amiability.

personality, breathing a

same

portrait peers out of the biographies of

of Tocco, Bernard Guido, and Peter Calo.

The

William

The

tes-

timonies of the witnesses at the canonization, based

on Reginald of Piperno and John of Caitia,

two disciples and friends of Thomas, agree almost
chiefly

to a

word in presenting

number of

traits that

readily

combine into a truthful and impressive characterization.

According
tirely free

to these testimonies

from worldly

Thomas was

inclinations

[30]

en-

and ambitions,

ST.

ggft

THOMAS

AS

SCHOLAR

^5

and purity and of

ideal devotion of heart and mind to God.
Only a
short time was set aside by him for eating and sleep.
a picture of stainless innocence

He read

Mass

at a

very early hour and thereupon asIf he did not himself celebrate, he

sisted at another.

His whole day was occupied

with prayer, teaching, and writing. He never took
up his pen without a preliminary prayer to God,
attended two Masses.

often in tears.

In order to employ his time to the ut-

most, he would dictate to several scribes at once.

was ever collected and contemplative.

escaped his

lips.

No

idle

He
word

So far was he removed from worldly

occupation, that even at table the divine occupied his

thought, and he was not aware of what went on about

him.

Thus, William of Tocco

tells us,

even

at the

King of France, Thomas

environment, and suddenly pounded on

table of Louis the Saint,

forgot his

the table exclaiming:

ment

"Now

have a decisive argu-

against the Manichasans."

For

this reason his

same biographer reports,

appointed Reginald of Piperno as his companion

solicitous superiors, as the

(socius),

who was

to

keep a watchful eye on the

learned professor ever moving in the upper regions

of thought, and to see that he would properly take
the required food and, in general, keep his bearings
in the contingencies

In

Thomas

of practical

life.

the exclusive devotion to a higher

world was accompanied by an extraordinary amiabil-

[31]

THOMAS AQUINAS

&ft
ity

These

and astounding humility.

who came
much opposition.

in contact with

tivated all
to soften

)$5
qualities cap-

him, and helped

In his Banquet (Convivio) Dante

the " good Brother

Thomas," and

calls

this

is

Thomas

in full con-

formity with the picture of humility and kindness

which the oldest biographers and the

tion paint for us.

He

acts

of canoniza-

was never angry because of

In disputations, in which the

untoward happenings.

participants so readily became heated, he was mild

and humble and never guilty of an overbearing word.

His scholarly opponent, John Peckham, praises this

In a letter of 1285 he relates that he had attacked Thomas vigorously, but that the latter had
answered " with great mildness and humility." Antrait.

other indication of this disposition

that he earnestly

main a simple

begged of God

religious.

is

in

Many

found

in the fact

prayer ever to re-

traits

ings attest to his kindness of heart.

and happen-

In his smaller

writings he answers problems directed to him, with

Often the introductory or

the greatest willingness.

the concluding remarks of these treatises

For

ideal unselfishness.

served a
of his
tiful

warm

family he always pre-

place in his heart, even at the height

scientific labors

and Christian

friendship.

his

show an

and reputation.

trait

Another beau-

of his soul was his fidelity in

His friendly

relation with Bonaventure,

narrated in the oldest sources, has often been praised.

[32]

ST.

ffi{

More

THOMAS

touching

still is

AS

^5

SCHOLAR

his friendship with

Reginald

of Piperno, his constant companion especially in later

years,
to

and the trusted witness of

whom Thomas

Thus

his

words

To

panions."

lowed

dedicated some of his writings.

Compendium

"

his rich interior life,

theologize

is

prefaced by the

Brother Reginald, most dear of com-

It

is

regretful, indeed, that Reginald fol-

his teacher, friend,

and charge to the grave so

soon, and thus lost the opportunity of depicting the

and the soul of Thomas for posterity. Albert

the Great, teacher of Thomas, seems to have been

life

very close

to

him

of canonization

also in his later years.

it is

In the

acts

related that after the death of

Thomas, Albert could not hear his name pronounced

without bursting into tears, and that in his ripe old
age he made the long journey from Cologne to Paris
in order to

defend the views of

the lives of

many

In

his great disciple.

thinkers of the

Middle Ages we

find indications of a nobility of soul that

is

often

sought in vain in the lives of modern savants.

We have now glimpsed Thomas the saint.

Let us

review the outstanding features of the savant.

fundamental

traits

The

of Thomas, devotion to the super-

sensory and the divine, and his humble peace of soul,

also

had

their influence

on

his scientific pursuits,

on

the nature of his scholarly personality.

We

shall perhaps get the clearest notion of the

scientific

mentality of

Thomas by examining

[33]

the goal

THOMAS AQUINAS

^5

of his laborious study and the means he used to attain

it.

For Thomas the aim of his life of study and intellectual endeavor is the profound penetration into the

domain of the supersensory and supernatural

truths,

the universal eager search for the causes, relations,

and

laws,

forces, of the natural

The

world.

and supernatural

entire order of the universe

and of

its

upon the soul (De verit.

knowledge of the highest things, even if
imperfect here on earth, gives to the human mind its
highest perfection {Contra gentes I, 5). Theology,
the sacred science, is considered a qucedam impressio
causes should impress itself

2, 2).

divine
the

scientlce

human

the stamp of divine knowledge in

mind " (S.

tion in the very

the

th. I, 1, 3 ad 2), a participaknowledge of God and a foretaste of

knowledge of God

in

the Christian teaching on

heaven,

God

a conception of

that received a majestic

expression in the Disputa of Raphael.

For the attainment of

Thomas walks
reflection,

this

high goal of erudition

the road of independent speculative

using the materials of previous study and

taking into account also the ethico-religious aspects

of the problems.
as a

mind

Thomas

therefore reveals himself

characterized by independent speculation

and metaphysical foundations, by a

historical method of scrutiny and research,

that seeks logical

positive

and by

a deeply religious

and mystical bent.

[34]

THOMAS

ST.

The work
logical

of

Thomas

is

methodology and

AS SCHOLAR
above

its

all

^5

indepedent in

its

metaphysical speculation.

His labors were guided by strictly impersonal motives

and dominated only by his high ideal of truth. " In
accepting or rejecting opinions, a man must not be
influenced by love or hatred of him who proffers the
opinions but only by the certainty of the truth " (In

Everywhere Thomas walks

the narrow path of truth, and to the utmost of his
ability seeks light and clarity on the problems before
him. He starts out from previous results, utilizes the

XII Metaph.y

lect. 9).

conclusions already attained, adds proof to proof, observation to observation, until the solution sought

stands out clearly.

Everywhere he

separates real

from apparent knowledge, the certain from the probfrom hypotheses. Pierre

able, definite conclusions

Duhem,

historian of the Copernican cosmic system,

considers

it

the high merit of

Thomas

to

have taken

the following stand in regard to the Ptolemaic as-

tronomy (In

II.

De coelo

et

mundo

lect.

17 j

Summa

ad 2): The hypotheses on

which an astronomical system is based do not become
theologica

I,

32,

a.

demonstrated truths by the very fact that their deductions agree with observations.

In his search for truth and clarity

avoided
1

P.

difficulties.

Duhem,

Thomas never

It lay in the scholastic

method

Essai sur la notion de Theorie fhysique de Platon a

Galilei, Paris, 1908, p.

46 S.

[35]

THOMAS AQUINAS

$/(

^5

of presentation to give all the pros and cons of a

Thereupon it stated a definite position of

its own, and then refuted the opposing views (Statement: Videtur quod non; counter statement: Sed
contra; main body or corpus articuli: Respondeo dicendum; criticism of rejected views: Ad primum dicendum, etc.). For Thomas this scheme did not tend
towards dialectical artificiality, but was employed in

problem.

The

the interests of a practical methodical doubt.

replies to objections often contain

remarks that would

have disturbed the trend of argument

In

many

of his works, as in the

in the body.

Summa contra gentes

and the Opuscula, Thomas abandons the scholastic

technic entirely and presents his views and arguments
with complete freedom of expression.

Thomas

avoids

strictly

questions, that admit of

aside.

Subtle

exaggerations.

no true answer, he leaves

Printed and unprinted Sentences (a type of

theological textbook) of the twelfth century contain

very

many

subtleties,

which were taken over into the

literature of the thirteenth century as a precious heri-

tage, but

Nor

which are dropped by him.

is

he a

friend of the tendency to exaggerated dogmatism.

" Nothing

may

be asserted as true that

is

opposed to

the truth of faith, to revealed dogma.

neither permissible to take whatever
true,

and present

it

as

an

But

we hold

article of faith.

is

For the

truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule

[36]

it

to be

among

ST.

($f(

THOMAS

AS

SCHOLAR

^5

the infidels, if any Catholic, not gifted with the neces-

sary scientific learning, presents as a

shows

scientific scrutiny

to

In his search for truth

plemented, or retracted his
ever

4, 1).

Thomas corrected, supown earlier views, when-

new matter or deeper knowledge proved them

be inadequate or erroneous.
earliest extensive

mature summary of

many

comparison of

to

his

work, the commentary on the Books

of Sentences, and his

This

dogma what

be false " (De fot.

Summa

theologlca> the most

his theological thought, reveals

such internal steps of progress in his thought.

is

also seen in the collections of discrepancies be-

tween the above commentary and

come down

to us

summa

that

have

from the beginning of the four-

teenth century.

In his research

Thomas admirably combined

servation and speculation, analysis

strikes a

and

synthesis.

ob-

He

middle course between a one-sided emphasis

on the factual

at the

expense of ideal truth, and a

one-sided emphasis of the ideal at the expense of the

factual

between

a positivistic empiricism and an ex-

His view on the nature of feelcharacterized by a considerable measure of psy-

aggerated idealism.
ing

is

chological observation.

experience that cause

It

him

is

precisely the facts of

to

adhere closely to the

Aristotelian theory of knowledge,

and

to recede

from

the Augustinian views championed by the Franciscan

school.

In observation and knowledge of the nat-

[37]

THOMAS AQUINAS

ural sciences, he

is

But

Roger Bacon.

)fo

inferior to Albert the Great

in his ethical, social,

and

and

political

studies he brings in a noteworthy collection of ob-

Simon Deploige has shown

served data.

in detail

how Thomas displayed a true sense for the reality of

things and made surprisingly rich observations in
2
ethical and sociological questions. Thomas does not

He

stop at observation.

always endeavors to attain

the real nature, causes, laws, and purposes of things.

Observation

is

in the service of metaphysical specu-

lation.

Thomas was
logical

not only capable of a steadfast and

method of arriving at the

truth of things.

He

could also present the trend of his thought and his

arguments

in a clear

summa

logical

and summary form.

His sense of the

ity.

is

didactic

is

in particular

gem

The

theo-

of didactic abil-

well expressed in the

brief prologue: " Since the teacher of Catholic truth

must

instruct not only the

ginners, according to the

advanced but also the be-

word of

St.

Paul (II Cor.

As unto little ones in Christ, I gave you milk

meat J
therefore the aim we have set
for ourselves in this work is, to present the entire
content of the Christian religion in such a way as to
tend to the instruction of beginners. For we have
observed that beginners are greatly impeded (in
3, i)

to drink, not

Le

confl.it

1914, p. 272

de la Morale

et

de la Sociologie, 2d ed.

ff.

[38]

Louvain,

ST.

$rt

THOMAS

their progress)

AS

SCHOLAR

^5

by the writings of various authors,

partly because of the heaping up of useless questions,

and arguments partly because the knowledge

articles,

necessary for beginners

not presented in a strictly

is

methodical sequence, but in an order dictated by the

demands of disputaand partly because the frequent repetition of

the same matter causes disgust and confusion in the
explanations of books, or by the

tions j

audience.

we

In trying to avoid these and similar faults,

shall, trusting in

God, endeavor

to present the

contents of the sacred science as briefly

as the matter allows."

The promise

and

clearly

of these words,

which indicate a clear eye for the didactic defects in

the contemporary commentaries on the Sentences

and

in the Qucestiones quodlibetales,

a masterly way.
of thorough

The

theological

he fulfilled

summa

is

model

The arrangement

orderliness.

in

into

hundred thirtyabout three thousand articles, and ten

three parts, thirty-eight treatises, six

one questions,

thousand objections exhibits a remarkable constructive skill.

ment

is

The development

simple and clear.

of thought and argu-

Repetitions are avoided as

far as possible, superfluous questions are omitted ; no

explanations are
later,

There

made

but the best use

is

to
is

depend on what follows

made of

all that precedes.

not merely system in the arrangement, an ex-

viewed at a glance, but also

and organic development of subject-

ternal grouping that can be

a systematic

[39]

THOMAS AQUINAS

fjtf,

matter that

is

based on inner coherence of meaning.

Lacordaire compared the

cause of

parison of

dle Ages

it
is

the

pyramids be-

to the

The

frequent com-

with the Gothic cathedrals of the

Mid-

The more a person

more he examines its de-

entirely justified.

summa and

studies the
tail,

summa

majestic simplicity.

its

)fo

the

more does he admire the architectonic strucwhole and the better does he recognize

ture of the

the structural laws running through the entire work.

Thomas

did not only display independent power of

investigation, the ripe

mental energy of the logician

and metaphysician, but he also knew how to make

good use of the scientific results of earlier thinkers.
" His mind," says Willman, " is like a lake that takes
up the waters of the inflowing

ment

sink to the bottom,

and

rivers, lets the sedi-

retains a placid crystal

surface, in which the blue of the sky

flected."

The work

of

signs of a positivistic-historical mind.

moved from an

He

is

far re-

apriorism that disregards all pre-

viously attained results, and spins a

own inner self.

Thomas had a special regard

out of

joyously re-

is

Thomas shows unmistakable

web of

theories

its

for the organic de-

velopment and progress of knowledge, of profane

as well as theological science,

and absorbed the specu-

lations both of the past centuries

3

and of

Willmann, Geschichte des Idealismus,

1907. P- 458.

[40]

his

own

time.

vol. Ill, Braunschweig.

THOMAS

ST.

tffy{

^5

AS SCHOLAR

In a number of passages he stressed the gradual

growth of the

man

sciences.

"It

the nature of hu-

lies in

reason to proceed step by step from the imper-

fect to the perfect.

Hence we

see that those occupied

with the speculative sciences inherited views that

were imperfect, but which were

more developed form.

So

sciences" (S. th. I II,

q.

later transmitted in a

it is

also in the practical

Time

1).

97,

plays an

important role in the development of knowledge.

" Time is, so to say, a discoverer and kind cooperator " {In I. Eth.y lect. n).
must give

"We

ear to the opinions of the ancients, no matter

that

made

the statements.

We

There

is

who

it is

a twofold benefit

own use whatever was correctly said by them; and we avoid that
in which they erred." {Inl.De anima, lect. 2 )
"In
establishing truth we are aided by others in two
ways. We receive direct assistance from those who
in this.

thereby acquire for our

have already discovered truths.

earlier thinkers has

found an element of

these elements taken together

later investigators a

If every one of the

truth, then

and unified are

to the

powerful help towards a com-

prehensive knowledge of truth.

helped by earlier investigators

We

are indirectly

in so far as their errors

after diligent discussion give us the opportunity of

a clearer exposition of the truth in these matters.
is

therefore proper that

have aided us

we be

grateful to all

in the pursuit of truth

[41]

" {In

II.

It

who
Met-

THOMAS AQUINAS

$^

The

i).

a-ph.y lect.

^b

opinions of earlier writers are

necessary for a better knowledge of a problem and

" Just as in court no judg-

the solving of doubts.

ment can be passed before the arguments for both

sides are heard, so also

is it

necessary for the philos-

opher to heed the opinions and doubts of different

authors in the formation of a more definitive judg-

ment " {In

Thomas

III.

Metaph.,

lect. i).

expresses his view on development and

theology in the prologue to the polemic against the

Greeks {Contra err ores Grcecorurn) : " There are two

reasons for the fact that the writings of the Greek

Fathers contain things that appear doubtful to

ern theologians.

mod-

First of all, the rise of errors in

matters of faith gave the holy doctors of the Church

an occasion for presenting the content of faith with

greater care, in order to obviate these errors.

we

can understand

how

Thus

the doctors, before the ap-

pearance of the Arian heresy, did not express themselves so exactly

on the unity of the divine Essence

as in the post-Arian period.

gard

to other errors.

The same

is

true in re-

We see this not only in various

doctors, but also clearly in the greatest of them,

gustine.

Au-

In the works that Augustine wrote after

the appearance of Pelagianism, he expressed himself with

will,

much more

caution on the scope of free

than he had done in his previous works.

latter

In the

he defended free will against the Manichasans,

[42]

THOMAS

ST.

AS

SCHOLAR

}fy

and made some statements which the Pelagians, deniers of divine grace, quoted in justification of their
error.

We

modern

theologians, writing after the existence of so

many

should therefore not be surprised

heresies, express themselves

and exactly on matters of

heresy.

From

this

it

more

if

cautiously

faith in order to avoid all

follows that

we should

not

readily despise or reject passages in which the ancient doctors

as

do not express themselves so carefully

do the modern theologians.

pret

them too

The

second reason for

Nor should we

inter-

rigorously, but rather with reverence.

difficulties in

the Greek Fa-

from the fact that many statements sound

Greek garb, but become less safe in
their Latin translation, because the Latins and the
Greeks use different words in defining one and the
same truth of faith. Thus among the Greeks it is
both correct and Catholic to say that the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three hypostases,
while it would be wrong to say in Latin that they are
three substances, although the Greek hypostasis is
etymologically the same word as the Latin substanBut the Latins more frequently use the word
tia.
thers arises

correct in their

substance in the sense of essencey which the Greeks

one in God.

like ourselves confess to be

while the Greeks speak of three hypostases,

of three persons.

many

There

is

And

so,

we speak

no doubt that there are

other cases of this type.

[43]

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^
"

It

is

}fo

therefore the duty of a good translator to

adhere faithfully to the sense, but also to be guided

by the idiom of the language

into

which he

is

trans-

lating."

Thomas used the accumulated materials of former centuries and of his own time, and displayed a
considerable historical sense in his

ing his sources.

torical

He

method of employ-

never thought of a

study as an end in

philosophy and theology.

itself,

The

strictly his-

in the sphere of

historical

knowledge

of former opinions and currents of thought was for

him purely a means of

establishing truth.

"The

study of philosophy does not aim merely to find out

what others have thought, but what the truth of the

matter is " (In I. De coslo et mundo, lect. 22). In
the pursuit of this objective, he presents several surveys of the historical development of a question, but
always examines

it

for the sake of determining the

truth of the matter.

Thomas also studied sources systematically. Many

of the quotations from the Fathers were, in accordance with the custom of the time and the lack of
books, taken

from

collections of quotations,

glosses of the Sacred Scriptures, the

tian,

from

Decretum of Gra-

the decretals, and the works of former theolo-

gians.

In the dedication of his Catena aurea (on

Matthew)

to

Urban IV, he acknowledges

that he

is

indebted to the glosses for quotations from the Fa[

44

$^

ST.

THOMAS

But he

thers.

also

made

AS

SCHOLAR

^5

systematic studies of texts,

notably in philosophy and in

patristics.

An

anec-

dote in the acts of canonization indicated his desire

for the complete works of the Fathers. " One day
as

Brother

Thomas was

returning to Paris from

St.

Denis with several confreres, and the panorama of

the city spread out before them, one of the com-

panions said to Thomas:

this city of Paris!

The

were yours!

this city

What

to the

should

do with

should rather have

other continued:

If only

which Thomas answered:

it?

'

You

could

sell

it

In

all truth,'

St.

Thomas

replied,

Chrysostom's homilies on

Montfaucon, editor of the works of

Matthew.' "
St.

King of France, and build Dominican convents

with the proceeds.'

(

To

'

how beautiful is
Thomas answered: In-

Father,

Brother

'

deed, very beautiful.'

Chrysostom, considered

this

remark highly credit-

The manuscripts at Paris must

have served Thomas well in his study of sources. St.

able to

Thomas.

Louis had erected a library adjacent to the Saint

Chapelle, out of which Vincent of Beauvais gathered
the materials for his famous encyclopedia of learn-

ing (the Speculum

tre

Dame

and

St.

able materials.

magnum).

The

libraries

of

No-

Victor likewise contained consider-

At the papal

court,

the growing

collection of manuscripts in possession of the popes

was

at the disposal of

instance,

it is

Thomas.

But

as to details, for

impossible to determine in which libraries

[453

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^

Thomas gathered
Latin and

the quotations

fifty-seven

^5

from twenty-three

Greek Fathers for his Catena

aurea.

Thomas also showed a

The text he used was by

In the use of these sources

sense of historical criticism.

no means a matter of indifference

to him.

For

his

study of Aristotle he was not satisfied with the Latin

versions

from the Arabian. He induced his linand friend, William of Moerbeke, to

guistic confrere

undertake a faithful Latin translation of the physical,

metaphysical, and ethical writings of Aristotle directly out of the

Greek

have a reliable text for

original, so that

his

commentaries.

he might

We

may

hold that Thomas himself had some knowledge of

In

Greek.

proper

patristic literature

texts.

he likewise sought

In the dedication to Urban IV of his

catena on Matthew, he complains of the vicious trans-

and says he could often give

only the sense and not the exact words of passages

lation of Chrysostom,

because of the defective text.

catena on

Mark

to Cardinal

In the dedication of his

Hannibaldus, he points

out that he had taken care to have the Greek text

translated into reliable Latin.

many a happy
ticity,

Again Thomas makes

decision in solving questions of authen-

thus indicating a sound

critical

sense,

which

merited the praise of the Maurists and of Angelo

Mais.

A few indications will be given here.

declared the treatise

Thomas

De infantia Salvatoris to be apoc[46]

6^

ST.

THOMAS

ryphal (5. ^. III,

He

VI, 10).

De

^5

SCHOLAR

4 ad 35 q. 43, a. 3 ad
Gennadius the book De

q. 36, a.

correctly assigned to

clesiasticis

AS

1).

ec-

dogmatis imputed to Augustine (Quodl.

Similarly he denied to Augustine the works

mirabilibus sacra? Scripture (S. th. Ill, q. 45,

3 ad 2) and

He

De spiritu et anima {De anima>

intimated that a Cistercian

ad

monk might

a.

1 ).

be the

author of the latter; and the Maurists actually attribute

it

to the Cistercian

Alcher of Clairvaux.

he denied the authenticity of the

which had been attributed

De

to Boethius,

out the divergent character of

its

Again

unitate et uno,

style

and pointed

(De

spirituali-

His most important critical

achievement is his judgment on the origin of the
Liber de causis. He considered it an excerpt from
ties creaturis 3,

ad 9).

the Institutio theologica of Proclus.

"

No

one

in the

Middle Ages spoke of the origin of the Liber de

4
causis so clearly as Thomas."

Thomas approaches

his

sources with sympathy,

but with independent judgment.

way

in questions

He

esteems Aris-

Nevertheless he goes his

very highly.

totle

which according to

his conviction

are not correctly solved by the Stagirite.

th. I, q.

46,

a.

own

Thus

(S.

he departs from the Aristotelian

1)

position of the eternity of creation, but adds the re-

mark

that Aristotle

lectical
* Cl.

proof for

had intended

this thesis,

Baeumker, Witelo.

to give only a dia-

not an apodictical one.

Muenster, 1908, p. 189.

[47]

THOMAS AQUINAS

&
Thomas

^5

more severe with the Arabian and Jewish

philosophers, especially Averroes and Avencebrol.

The

is

treatise

De unitate

intellectus contra Averroistas,

against Siger of Brabant,

based on an examination

is

of Averroes' conception of Aristotle, that

exposition

Thomas
ence,

The monograph De

and independent.

objective

substantias separates

of

is

a very thorough

and objective

with

Avencebrol.

differences

his

Church Fathers with great rever-

treats the

whence Cardinal Cajetan says of him: "Be-

cause he

showed the

greatest respect for the Fathers

of the Church, he was, as

profundity of

all

it

" (In S.

But Thomas never

loses his

were, endowed with the

th.

IIII,

from the Fathers, he does

Thus he

(De

says

q.

148,

a.

4).

independent judgment by

Wherever he de-

reason of his respect and modesty.

parts

strictly

is

pot. q. 3,

a.

so with forbearance.

"As

18):

this

is

the

Nabe condemned as

opinion of great teachers, of Basil, of Gregory

zianzen, and others,

erroneous."

it

is

not to

In regard to Augustine,

whom

he con-

sidered the greatest of the Church Fathers, he like-

wise retains his indeperdence.

This

pecially in questions of psychology

in

which he seeks

the

less

as possible,

and epistemology,

Aristotle.

frequent here.

between Augustine and Aristotle

much

evident es-

his solutions in accordance

method pointed out by

Augustine are

is

is

Citations

The

with

from

opposition

levelled

down

as

by doubting the apodictical char[

48

THOMAS

ST.

AS

SCHOLAR

)$$

acter of the Augustinian statements, pointing to the

Platonic viewpoint of the great Church Father, and

bringing the exuberant spiritualism back to a more

Often Augustine

moderate position.

quoted by

is

occasion of mentioning the opinions of others, or of

The

Franciscan reaction to the

is strict

evidence of the fact that

stating the problem.

views of

Thomas

Thomas*

position in regard to Augustine

was con-

sidered an independent one by his contemporaries.

The
is

third characteristic of

Thomas'

life

and labor

the ethico-religious foundation, which never be-

came

obtrusive,

and therefore shines forth the more

" A sacred mood,"

effectively out of his writings.

writes Eucken,

a pervades throughout.

gantic cathedral,

world

we go from

As

in a gi-

the vestibule of the

to the sanctuary in expectation of the all-holy.

The lower

contains implicitly a desire for the higher,

and strengthens
presentiments.

this desire

The

by mysterious

signs

and

entire series of purposes finally

points to the one goal of divine glory.

Erudition

takes on the appearance of a service in the temple."

This religious atmosphere reveals

in the

The

question, "

motive of the
of

God
5

itself

primarily

longing for ever deeper knowledge of God.

that

What

is

God? "

scientific labors

He exists, is

is

of his

the motto and the

life.

"

We know

the cause of all being, and

is

Eucken, Die Philosofhie des Thomas von Aquin und die Kultur
Bad Sachsa, 1910, p. 15.

der Neuzeit.

[49]

THOMAS AQUINAS

&ft
infinitely

higher than

all else.

This

is

^5
the ultimate

peak of our knowledge here on earth " {Contra gentes III,

In his desire for knowledge of God,

49).

Thomas was

gratefully happy to receive the teaching

of Christian revelation on the nature and life of God.

" Not one of the pre-Christian philosophers," he said

in his explanation of the Apostolic Creed, " could with
all his

power of thought know

a simple

woman

through faith."

so

much about God

since the advent of Christ

as

knows

This firm devotion to the contents

of supernatural revelation explains Thomas' rever-

Church, in which he saw

the mediator and guardian of revealed truth. " The

ential attitude towards the

practice of the

Church possesses the highest authority,

and we must be directed by

it

in all things.

the doctrine of the Catholic teachers has

its

Even

authority

from the Church. Hence we must hold the custom of

the Church in higher esteem than the authority of an
Augustine or a Jerome " (Quodlib. II, a. 7). He is
ever intent upon being true to the teaching and the
spirit of the Church.
For the authority of the Pope
he shows the highest respect. His admiration for the
Christian antiquity

is

glowing

uity, the flourishing

age of a

(S. th. Ill, q. 80, a.

10 ad 5).

The keen
its

effect

on

desire for

his efforts

"

warm

Christian antiqChristian faith "

knowledge of God

toward a virtuous

life.

had
Moral

also

purity and holiness he considers a valuable aid to the

[50]

THOMAS

ST.

gg$

AS

SCHOLAR

fathoming of divine truths and mysteries.

ideal

embraced by Thomas

in this

regard

)fy

The
is

high

evident

who had asked

good method of study and acquiring knowledge: " Since you have asked me in
Christ, dear John, to tell you how you must study for

from
him for

a letter to the novice Friar John,

advice on a

the attainment of a treasury of knowledge,

mention the following points of advice.

arrive at

I shall

Prefer to

knowledge over small streamlets, and do

not plunge immediately into the ocean (of wisdom),

must go from the easier to the more

That is my admonition and your instruc-

since progress
difficult.

tion.

exhort you to be chary of speech, and to go

into the conversation

room

sparingly.

heed of the purity of your conscience.

the practice of prayer.
cell, if

dom.

Love

Take great
Never cease

to be diligent in

your

you would be led to the wine cellar of wisEver be loving towards all. Do not bother

yourself about the doings of others.

familiar with

Nor

be too

anyone, since too great familiarity

breeds contempt and easily leads away from study.

Do not engage
worldly.

in the doings

Above

monastery.

Do

all

not

and conversations of the

shun roaming about outside the

fail to

walk

in the footsteps of

Do

not consider from

the saintly and the good.

whom you
memory

hear anything, but impress upon your

everything good that

is

fort to understand thoroughly

[51]

said.

Make

an ef-

whatever you read

THOMAS AQUINAS

&
and hear.

In

Try always

all

doubts seek to penetrate to the truth.

away

to store

do not now

you

much

as

What

chambers of your mind.

tions

^5

strive after.

is

as possible in the

too far above you,

you follow these direcand fruits in

If

will produce useful blossoms

Lord of Hosts,

you
live.
If you do all this, you will attain what you
desire.
Farewell." This letter contains some valuable hints on method, and in particular some splendid
the vineyard of the

as

long

as

ideas on the relation between moral purity of heart

and true knowledge.

ideas that

were

We here

by Thomas a Kempis

plicity

and

find exhortations

later voiced with such impressive simin

the Imitation of

Christ.
It

may have been greatly because of the ethicoThomas and his writings, that the
German mysticism, inspired also by Albert

religious bent in
later

the Great, attached itself so intimately to him.

the

Summa

theologica (II II, qq.

In

179-182), the

mystics found the profoundest and the clearest exposition

of the contemplative

refers to

guide " the clear

teacher."
tences

life.

Tauler frequently

Henry Suso calls

beloved St. Thomas

Master Thomas.
light,

The newly found commentary on

by the mystic John of Sterngassen

is

the

the Sen-

an

illu-

minating introduction into Thomistic speculation.

[52]

his

CHAPTER

IV

THE SOURCES OF THOMISTIC THOUGHT

HE range of sources

Uh7T>T a T'

drawn upon by

Thomas is astounding, especially if

we take into consideration the means
and the conditions of mental research
existing at this time.

In philosophy

Thomas shows

better

knowledge of Aristotle than any other person

in the

Middle Ages.

He wrote

commentaries on the

greater and most important part of Aristotle's works,

using the reliable translation of William of

Moer-

As Bartholomew of Lucca said, his

commentaries were " in a very individual and new
manner of interpretation." They aimed at a clear,

beke as a

summary

basis.

exposition of the complicated theories of

the Stagirite.

In Scholastic circles

ignated as the expositor

stance,
like

(i.e.

Thomas was

des-

of Aristotle), for in-

by Giles of Rome, Henry Bate,

etc.

Moderns

Ch. Jourdain, Fr. Brentano, G. v. Hertling, and

others, have esteemed his

very highly.

method of commenting

His own systematic works, large

[53]

as

THOMAS AQUINAS

$K

fcS&

well as small, philosophical and theological, show a

rare acquaintance with the works of the Philosopher

Thomas knew

(Aristotle).
critical

Plato chiefly through the

him in Aristotle, but was thereby

from taking up into his system the theory

references to

not deterred

He

of ideas as interpreted by Augustine.

frequently

Greek commentators of Aristotle, Porphyry>

Themistius, Simplicius, Alexander of Aphrodisias.
cites

the

Boethius, the last

quently used.

Roman and

Thomas was

Scholastic,

first

is

fre-

also well acquainted with

the Arabian and Jewish philosophy, and was a sharp

judge of

its

lights

and shadows.

He

seemed

teem Avicenna more highly than Averroes.

to es-

He

ex-

plained his points of disagreement with the Fons

The More
vita? of Avencebrol more than once.
Nebuchim of Moses Maimonides was to him a
familiar book.

Of

Neoplatonic writings, apart from theological

and
" Theological Elements" (2rotx tco-

sources (Pseudo-Dionysius), the Liber de causis

after 1268 the

QeoXoyucfj)

eris

of Proclus

(in

the translation of

William of Moerbeke) were available

also

knew and

cited the

treatise

De

to

him.

He

intelligentiis,

which was Neoplatonic in tendency.

In theology,

Thomas

displayed an extraordinary

familiarity with the entire Scriptures, which he seems

to

have quoted by heart very often.

use of the biblical glosses of

[54]

He made

good

Walafrid Strabo and

THOMISTIC THOUGHT

ftfe

Anselm of Laon. Especially numerous are his quotations from the Fathers. Besides the patristic works
that were readily available to

his

contemporaries

John Damascene,
Pseudo-Dionysius, Hilary of Poitiers, Gregory the
Great, Isidore of Seville, etc.), his later writings show
(Ambrose, Augustine,

Jerome,

John Chrysostom, and

St. Cyril of Alexandria, which knowledge considerably influenced his Christology and his sacramentalism.
Of the earlier Scholastics he knows and cites
Anselm of Canterbury, Rupert of Deutz, Bernard of

an intimate knowledge of

St.

Clairvaux, Gilbert de la Porree,

whom

Joachim of Flora.
Lille

Hugh

of

he esteems highly, Richard of

unknown

Nor were Abelard and

this

Victor,

Alain de

But the most frequently

to him.

quoted author of

St. Victor,

St.

period

is

naturally the Magister

Sententiarum, Peter the Lombard, who, however,

must submit

to

more than

occasional correction.

In accordance with the custom of his day,

Thomas

referred to theologians of the thirteenth century by

means of the quidam

"a

certain one."

He

men-

and William of Auxerre by

were at Paris in the first third

tions only Pr&fositinus

name, both of

whom

of the century, and wrote summce.

sons referred to by the

The

quidam can be

various per-

identified only

after the unprinted pre-Thomistic literature

known, and after the

relation of

Thomas

is

well

to the

printed sources, to Alexander of Hales, Albert the

[55]

THOMAS AQUINAS

$((

J$5

Great, Bonaventure, has been established in detail.

As

number of views,
were passed on from genera-

in Scholastic tradition a great

questions,

and objections

tion to generation,

it

will often be very difficult to

determine the identity of the quidam.

mark, by the way, that there

is

We

may

re-

evidence for Thomas*

employment of the unprinted summa of Robert of

Melun (d. 1167) and of the Sentences of Peter of
Poitiers (d. 1205).

Thomas

also possessed a

thorough knowledge of

the older conciliar decisions, as

larly

from

his Christology.

law, which

we

can see particu-

His knowledge of canon

evident from the frequent citation of

is

Gratian and the decretals, exceeds that of the maj ority

In his day canon law and

of doctors of his time.

theology were accepted

faculties.

Roman

as

Occasionally

law.

two

and
from

distinct disciplines

Thomas

also

quotes

Finally he not infrequently intersperses

his expositions

with passages from the ancient

also the poets.

In

fact, quotations

classics^

from Horace,

Ovid, Csesar, Cicero, Seneca, Terence, Sallust, Livy,

Strabo, Valerius

Maximus, and the

like,

give a hu-

manistic atmosphere to the source materials used by

Thomas.

[56]

CHAPTER V

THE STRUGGLE FOR LEADERSHIP

THOUGHT

IN SCHOLASTIC

T WAS

ended the

tireless scientific labors

premature

death

that

of

An Oxford manuscript of
Summa theologica (Balliol Col-

Thomas.
the

lege 44,

s.

XIV)

contains the remark:

" Here Thomas dies. O Death, how

accursed! " But the product of his energy

thou art

has outlived the great theologian, and has given

him

a leading position in the intellectual life of the Cath-

His views indeed met with opposition

his death
and they had to go
through many a battle before they established them-

olic

Church.

immediately after

selves definitely.

It is

quite contrary to historical

truth to speak as if the views of

Thomas had been

own

order or by Scho-

incontestably accepted by his

lastics in

The

general shortly after his death.

opposition of the conservative Augustinian

tendency to the Aristotelianism of Thomas, which

had already embittered

his last stay at Paris,

[57]

became

THOMAS AQUINAS

&

^5

On March 7, 1 277 Bishop

Stephen Tempier of Paris condemned 219 propositions, among them the theory of Thomas on the prin-

acute soon after his death.

ciple of individuation.

year Archbishop

On March

18 of the same

Robert Kilwardby, a theologian

of renown, who represented a

circle

of learned

Do-

minicans quite out of sympathy with the Aristotelian-

ism of Albert the Great and Thomas, put some of

Thomas' statements into the list of proscribed propositions.

But the most severe opponent of Thomas

among

the Dominicans of the

first

decades of the

fourteenth century was Durandus of

(d-

St.

Pourcain

1332).

During

his last stay at Paris

Thomas had had

dif-

Mention
was already made of the attack by John Peckham on
the Aristotelianism of Thomas. Matthew of Aquaferences with the Franciscan theologians.

sparta (d.

1302), pupil of Bonaventure, takes ex-

ception in his Qucestiones disputatce to various points

of Thomas' teaching.

This opposition between the

Franciscan Augustinianism and the Aristotelianism

of

Thomas was continued

in the conflict

liam of

Ware

between
is

with increased vehemence

Scotists

and Thomists.

Wil-

the connecting link between the older

Duns Scotus. Soon after him

came the two most important Franciscan critics of the
Thomistic doctrines, Duns Scotus (d. 1308) and
William de la Mare (in Oxford ca. 1285). The
Franciscan school and

[58]

6^

STRUGGLE FOR LEADERSHIP

latter,

not long after the death of Thomas, put to-

gether a long

Thomas and
tris

list

of points of difference between

the Franciscans in his Correctorium fra-

Thomce (Polemic

disciples of

^5

against

Thomas).

Thomas produced

When

the

counter-treatises, an-

other Franciscan, as indicated in a Berlin manuscript,

composed

a second tract

defending the points of

at-

had been made against Thomas.

The latter's doctrine also found important op-

tack that

ponents in the ranks of the secular clergy

who

taught

Henry of Ghent (d. 1293).

Even Godfrey of Fontaines (d. after 1306), who
gives the highest praise to Thomas, opposes many of
theology, in particular

From

his views.

this condition

Thomistic philosophy had

difficulties,

before

it

to

it is

evident, that the

overcome numerous

could arrive at a position of

leadership in the Dominican order, and

so, in the

learned

outside the latter.

circles

acuteness of the situation

still

is

seen strikingly

more

The

from the

well-authenticated fact, that Albert the Great did

not shun setting out on foot from Cologne to Paris in

his

old age, in order to defend the doctrines of his re-

cently deceased,

The

famous

disciple.

difficulties raised against

were successfully vanquished.

ciples of

Thomas were

Thomism, however,

The

friends and dis-

specially active in setting

up

a strong defence against the manifold opposition.

Thomas had drawn

a large

number of

[59]

disciples to his

THOMAS AQUINAS

^5

views j and after his death they defended their scien-

In miniatures and manu-

heritage valiantly.

tific

and

scripts,

in a panel painting in the

academy of

Florence (of the school of Fiesole), the school of

Thomas
It

is

and

cans

Domini-

disciples,

others, are listening intently to his words.

in fact, a

is,

Numerous

depicted.

St.

good

illustration for the following

Thomas, Peter
Calo (ca. 1320): "When Thomas had taken up his
work as teacher, and had begun the disputations and
words of the

reliable biographer of

lectures, such a multitude of pupils flocked to his

school, that the lecture

who were

all

a master
suit

attracted

and inspired by him

Under

of learning.

many

room could hardly

contain

by the word of so renowned

to progress in the

pur-

the light of his teaching

masters flourished, both of the Dominicans

and of the secular clergy. The reason for

synthetic, clear,

tures."

If

we

and

this

method of

intelligible

was the
his lec-

are to mention the most noteworthy

who represented and

we must begin with the Augus-

of the disciples and followers

defended

his views,

tinian theologians Giles of

tinus

Rome

Triumphus of Ancona

(d.

Capocci of Viterbo (d. 1307).

eral,

Gerard of Bologna

lished theological
1

mer.

Vita S.

(d.

(d. 13 16),

The Carmelite gen13 17), whose unpub-

summa shows

so

many

Thomce Aquinatis auctore Petro Calo.

Tolosae, 1911, p. 30.

[60]

Augus-

1328), and James

points of

Ed. D. Pruem-

Thomas, seems

contact with the masterpiece of

have

Among

sat at the latter's feet.

of the secular clergy Peter of

was an enthusiastic

disciple,

Among the

(d.

who completed
on

1305)

the un-

Aristotle.

Dominicans there were naturally many

faithful disciples

and

friends, enthusiastic followers,

studied his writings, explained his teaching, de-

veloped

it

further,

and preserved and defended

a precious treasure.

The works

of

evident

from the numerous manuscripts,

abridgments, tables, concordances,

which

his

as

etc.,

This

excerpts,

by means of

works were made more available for pur-

poses of instruction, and

study.

it

Thomas were

used in the schools of his order at an early date.

is

to

the professors

Auvergne

finished commentaries of his master

who

STRUGGLE FOR LEADERSHIP

gty{

more

accessible for ready

Paris manuscript, containing an abridg-

ment (Abbreviation of the Secunda secundce (a part

of the Summa theologicd) from the pen of the Dominican Galienus de Oyto, dates from 1288. Of the
most faithful Dominican disciples and followers, the
Italians,

John of

Cajatia, Reginald of Piperno, Peter

of Andria, and Bartholomew of Lucca (d. 1327),

have left touching expressions of their attachment.

The

last

three

continued

incomplete

works

of

Thomas.
Bartholomew of Lucca, famous as a
Church historian, whose Hexaemeron is proof of his
thorough knowledge of the psychology of his master,
says of the latter: " Thomas excels all modern doc-

[61]

THOMAS AQUINAS

tors in

philosophy and in theology, as

recognized 5 and he
tor

^5

is

is

generally

therefore today called the Doc-

communis (universally known and recognized)

at the

great

Similar testimonies and

University of Paris."

enthusiasm are found

among

An

theologian.

other disciples of the

enthusiastic

follower,

who

further developed the Thomistic epistemology in

particular, is Bernard of Trilia (d. 1292). Another
admiring disciple of Thomas was Remigio de Giro-

lami (d. 13 19), who, as the teacher of Dante, acquainted the great poet with the Thomistic synthesis.

Of

Dominican theologians

special interest are the

who defended

the views of their teacher against the

attacks of the opponents.

special treatise

{De

Giles of Lessines in a

unitate forma?),

defended the

Thomistic position on the unity of substantial form

against Robert Kilwardby,
licly

May

took his stand in opposition to the condemnation

of Oxford.

Against the condemnation by the Bishop

of Paris, Stephen Tempier,

by John of Naples
still

1278, and thus pub-

unpublished.

Thomas was defended

1325), whose treatises are

Correctorium fratris Thomce

(d. ca.

The

of the Franciscan William de la

Mare was answered

number of

disciples in a series

point for point by a

of counter-tracts entitled: Correctorium corruftorii

Thomce (Correction of the distortion of

Brother Thomas). Most of this controversial liter-

fratris

ature, generally

anonymous, has been sifted only re-

[62]

STRUGGLE FOR LEADERSHIP

$&
cently.

One

of the tracts against William de la

Mare

was published under the name of Giles of Rome.

It

was probably the work of Richard Clapwell.

Correctorium corrwptorii fratris

Quidort of Paris

of

John

preserved in several

1306)
Further defences were composed

(d.

manuscript copies.

Thomes

The

is

by Ramberto de Primadizzi and John of Parma.

Thomas was also defended against other opponents

by

Bernard of Clermont

his faithful followers.

after 1303)

defended

his teacher against

Henry

(d.

of

Ghent, Godrey of Fontaines, and even against Giles

of

Rome.

Similar defences of Thomistic views,

which have apparently been

lost, were written by the

Englishmen Robert of Hereford and William of
Macclesfield.
An enthusiastic defender and a reliable interpreter of Thomas was Thomas of Sutton,
likewise an Englishman.
Besides the Neoplatonic

tendency represented by Ulric of Strasburg, Dietrich

of Freiburg, Master Eckhart and Berthold of
burg, there

is

Thomistic trend

man

lands.

Moos-

evidence of a powerful and rigorously

among

Of

the Dominicans of the Ger-

those living at the end of the thir-

teenth and the beginning of the fourteenth centuries,

I

may mention

sen,

burg

the three mystics,

John of Sterngas-

Gerard of Sterngassen and Nicholas of Stras-

of all of

whom

have discovered extensive

cardi of Lichtenberg

spirit
and John Picand Henry of Lubeck.

Latin writings, Thomistic in

[63]

THOMAS AQUINAS

(^

^5

The most important adherent and defender of

Thomism at the beginning of the fourteenth century
is

Hervasus of Nedellec (Hervaeus Natalis,

d.

1323),

Thomas, who as General of the

Dominicans promoted and witnessed the latter's canindirectly a pupil of

onization.

large part of his writings, mainly un-

published,

is

devoted

Henry

against

the defence of

to

of Ghent,

Duns

Scotus,

Aureolus, Godfrey of Fontaines,

doubtedly very influential

in

etc.

Thomas

Durandus,

He

was un-

giving a recognized posi-

tion to the system of Aquinas, not only as the ac-

cepted teaching within the order, but also as the most

Another inThomist of the fourteenth century was Peter

de Palude (d. 1342), who frequently mentions
important general Scholastic synthesis.
fluential

" doctor noster frater

Thomas).

Thomas " (our

teacher brother

Against the attacks of Durandus of

St.

Pourgain a defence was written by Durandus of Aurillac (d.

But the most comprehensive, de-

13 80).

John Capreolus (d. 1444), the "prince of Thomists."

His
Defensiones theologies divi Thomce Aqutnatls (Decisive,

and thorough defence

is

that of

fence of the theology of the saintly

gives us the

first

Thomas Aquinas)

general codification of the teachings

of Aquinas, and constitute a general defence against

the opponents of Thomistic thought (especially
Scotus, Aureolus,

Duns

Durandus, Occam, Gregory of Ri-

mini).

[64]

STRUGGLE FOR LEADERSHIP

gty(

Gradually,

therefore,

teaching

the

)$

Thomas

of

was accorded the position and the respect that

served by reason of

its

endeavors of followers, which

was due

Dominicans both

two

The

lectors

we have

few

and

at

indications will

general chapter at Milan in 1278 sent

to

England, that they might proceed

rigorously against the brothers

who were

posing the writings of Brother Thomas.

lutions

here de-

to the energetic action of the

their provincial gatherings.

suffice.

Besides the

their general chapters

at

de-

inner value, not only within

the Dominican ranks but also outside.

scribed, this

it

and measures were repeated

there op-

Similar resoat the general

chapters of Paris, in 1279 and 1286.

The

general

chapter at Saragossa in 1309 designated the teaching

of Thomas as the norm for the studies of the order.

The

general chapter at

" the

teaching

of

the

Metz

in

venerable

13 13 designated

doctor

Brother

Thomas of Aquin " sanlor et communior, " the

sounder and more common teaching," and ordained
that no Dominican should be sent to Paris for any
academic degrees until he had studied Thomas three
years.
Such regulations and laudations were increased at the general chapters of Bologna, 1315 and
1329, Carcassonne 1342, and Madrid 1346. Similar
action

was taken

at the provincial chapters.

the gathering of the

Roman

Thus

at

province of Arezzo in

13 1 5, to mention but one, a Brother Ubertus Guidi

[65]

THOMAS AQUINAS

$#

Jjfe

was suspended from teaching for two years and con-

demned

to a ten days' fast

cause he had spoken against

on water and bread be-

Thomas.

It

need hardly

be remarked that these events, extending into the

middle of the fourteenth century, gave Thomism the

leading position within the Dominican order.
Finally, another very important factor in the vic-

tory of

Thomism was

in favor of

Thomas.

the intervention of the popes

The most

important act of the

highest authority of the Church was his canonization

by Pope John XXII, July 18, 1323. " He wrought

as many miracles as he wrote articles," said the Pope
on that occasion.
canonization

An

immediate consequence of the

undoubtedly was the

act

of Bishop

Stephen de Borreto of Paris, February 14, 1424, retracting the condemnation of Thomistic propositions
passed by his predecessor Stephen Tempier on

March

In 1327 John XXII commissioned the

Dominican William Dulcini to undertake a more
7, 1277.

Thomas.
The successors of John XXII up to the present
time have honored and protected the person and the
teaching of Thomas.
A description of the history
of Thomistic theories down to our own day is beyond
the scope of this enterprise. " The fate of the theoexact compilation of the writings of

logical

summa was

that of ecclesiastical learning."

We are concerned only with presenting the

2

Fr, Ehrle,

Stimmen aus Maria Laach, XVIII,

[66]

p.

struggles

298.

STRUGGLE FOR LEADERSHIP

(^
and

difficulties

^5

which Thomas' views had to en-

counter after his death before establishing themselves

definitely.
It

the

may

be worthy of remark, that

at the close

of

Middle Ages Thomas enjoyed esteem also in

His Summa theologka y the

Byzantine theology.

Summa
totle's

contra gentes, his commentaries

on Aris-

psychology and physics, and various smaller

works, were translated into the Greek by Georgios

Scholarios, Demetrios Kydones,

and

others.

The

li-

brary of Athos, the Ambrosian Library of Milan,

and the Laurentian Library of Florence, the library

of St. Mark's in Venice, and especially the Vatican
Delibrary, contain a number of such manuscripts.
metrios Kydones even left a letter in which he presents a methodical instruction

on the study of the

theology of Thomas, and a convincing defence of

the latter against Nilus Kabasilas.
tention has also been directed to
tions of

Thomas.

[67]

Very recently atArmenian transla-

PART TWO

The Thomistic Synthesis

CHAPTER

THOUGHT AND

FAITH AND KNOWLEDGE

BEING.

HE
tic

VI

foundations on which the gigan-

of Thomistic synthesis

edifice

erected are

formed of

The

viction.

is

a twofold con-

deepest foundation

is

the conviction that our thought can

know and

attain being, the,

and laws,

essences, causes, purposes,

the world of appearances.

reality

It

is

realm of

that lies

beyond

a conviction of the

and the knowability of the supersensory order,

a definite adherence to the possibility

and

reality of

metaphysics.

The

second foundation of the Thomistic system

is

the firm conviction that over and beyond the scope

of the supersensory, of the metaphysical, which

cessible to natural thought, there

is

is

ac-

an endless horizon

of the supernatural, of the Christian mysteries re-

vealed by God, a horizon that

opened

to

man by means
[

is

even here on earth

of the light of faith.

68

THOUGHT AND BEING

6^

At the beginning of

^5

this exposition, therefore,

it is

necessary to give a brief account of the principles of

St. Thomas on the question of Thought and Being
and of Faith and Knowledge.

I.

Thought and Being

Thomas was ever metaphysical in his

The profound grasp, the development, and

thought.
the

com-

prehensive employment of the metaphysics of Aristotle, also

truths,

for a better understanding of theological

his great

is

His teacher Albert

achievement.

way for him

Thomas Aquinas "

the Great paved the

in this respect.

Rolfes

the best

calls

tator of the Aristotelian metaphysics, that

Thomas' metaphysical genius pervades

tematic works.
treatises

more

E.

commenwe have."

his great sys-

It reveals itself particularly in his

on God, and shows

itself

strictly theological treatises

even amidst the

on grace, on the

As perfect minimetaphysical powers we have many

Incarnation, and on the sacraments.

atures of his

smaller
treatise

monographs;

De

for instance,

ente et essentia.

mere accident

It

that metaphysical

erably treated by his disciples.

is

the

profound

probably not by

problems were pref-

Only

few

central

points of his theory of being can be emphasized here,

those that are of special importance for his complete

synthesis.

We shall meet with his metaphysical prin[

69

THOMAS AQUINAS
and again

ciples again
tion, in his

in his teaching

psychology and

Human

Objectivity of

on

}&&

God and crea-

ethics.

Thought.

Justification of

"

Some persons have upheld the opinknowing powers know only their own

Metaphysics.
ion that our

modifications, that the senses, for instance, perceive

nothing but the alteration, the stimulation of their

own

Accordingly

organs.

knows only

own

the

intellect

likewise

subjective modifications, that

is,

the intelligible species, the concept taken up by

it.

Hence

its

these species are both object

and content of

knowledge, a merely subjective modifica-

intellectual

tion of the intellect.

"But

view must be rejected for two reasons.

this

First of all, that

that of

which we know intellectually and

which the branches of knowledge

one and the same.

only what

is

treat are

If then our thought could attain

merely subjective, the species

in the

mind, the sciences could not refer to any objects existing

beyond the mind.

limited

these

to

Their entire scope would be

subjective,

intellectual

concepts.

Secondly, from such a subjective interpretation of hu-

man knowledge,

would follow that all we are conand that two contradictory statements would both be true at the same time. For if
the mind knows only its own subjective determinascious of

tions,

is

then

it

it

true,

The subnorm of the

can judge only about these.

jective modification

is

then the only

[70]

THOUGHT AND BEING

6^

^5

Hence every judgment

to truth.
For instance,
own modification, then he

content of a judgment.

would have the same claim

if taste perceives

only

its

who has a normal healthy sense of

taste will

judge:

and judgment would be

of
already
sour and
judgment would be

Honey is sweet
He who has his
judge: Honey is

his

sense

true.

affected will

taste

his

Each one
equally true on the above supposition.
would here judge according to the condition of his
sense of taste.
As a consequence of this one-sided

human knowledge,

subjective interpretation of

ac-

cording to which the subjective concept, the intelligible species,

all difference

is

the object of intellectual knowledge,

between the true and the false would

vanish.

" These two unacceptable consequences, the denial

of the objective, real character and value of knowledge, and the disappearance of all distinction of true

and

false, of yes

and no, justify

us,

nay force us

to

adhere to the objectivity of our knowledge and

thought, and to realize that the intelligible species, the
subjective impressions and determinations of our intellect, are

not the direct objects, the contents of our

These mental forms are rather the means

through which we are led to a knowledge of the real-

thought.

ity external to us.

jective

The

intelligible species are sub-

forms that determine our

edge of the objective

reality.
[

71

intellect to a

knowl-

That of which we

are

THOMAS AQUINAS

6?

primarily aware
species

speak

is

the external object, of which the

Only secondarily can we

a mental sign.

is

of

the

intelligible

thought, in so far as the

contemplates
as principle

^5

own

species

as

a content of

mind is reflexly
and thus also

active

and

activity

the species

of this activity."

(S. th. I, q. 85, a. 2.)

its

Thus our minds attain objective reality, reach out beyond the confines of the subjective.
The Subjective Character of Human Thought.
Thus does Thomas construct his bridge from thought
to being, from subject to object. Outside our minds
there

is

a reality corresponding to our intellectual

concepts, a reality

forming the essence and core of

the things and activities of the world of appearances

perceived by the senses.

Our concepts of the

of things, of laws and purposes, causes and

not mere subjective
ing,

fictions,

essences

effects, are

but signify the grasp-

on the part of thought, of a reality that

outside us.

In the relation of the content of our

lies

act

of thought to this reality consists the truth of our

intellectual
Still,

knowledge.

according to Thomas, this character of truth

and of the

real in our

thought

in

no way demands

that there be a mechanical similarity between the

manner of knowing and the manner of being of the

object: " The intellect knows things not according to
the manner of being they have in themselves, but according to

its

own

nature.

[72]

The

material objects,

THOUGHT AND BEING

6^

which are below the level of our

J$5

intellect in their

manner than
On the other hand our in-

being, are in our thought in a simpler

they are in themselves.

tellect

knows pure

substances,

spiritual

which are

above the level of our thought, not according

to the

simple manner of their being, but in the manner in

which it knows compound things " (S. th. I, q. 50,
a.

2).

Awareness of the subjective

General Concepts.
element

in

between a nominalism that

to find the right position

and an extreme realism

denies all value to universals

that objectifies the universal as such:

"That which

we designate by names can be divided

The

classes.

first class

are outside the

man, the

Thomas

our intellectual concepts enables

mind

in their entire being, e.g., the

The second

stone.

into three

comprises those things that

class

is

formed of the

things that exist only in our mind, as dreams, image

of a chimera,

To

etc.

the third class belong those

things that have a foundation in the reality outside

the mind, but receive their

the activity of the mind.

Humanity

cepts.

'

reality,

but

For

it

is

'

'

versality

mind.

common
is

to

is

its

in the

from

realm of

formal universality.

no one general, abstract

many.

The

given to the concept

By means

character

Such are the general con-

something

not real in

in reality there

manity

is

own formal

hu-

character of uni-

humanity

'

by our

of the activity of our intellect

[73]

hu-

THOMAS AQUINAS

ettf

manity

which

it

>fe

gets the logical relation (intentio) through

The same

appears as a class concept.

of the concept of time.

is

true

This concept has a real foun-

dation in motion, in the before and after of motion j

but the formal element in time, the measuring by

number,

the product of the numbering activity of

is

our intellect " {In I Sent. d. 19,

Thomas

i).

q. 5, a.

Thus

clearly distinguishes between the content,

the actual core of the universal concept, to which

something real outside our minds corresponds, and the

form of the universal and the

which

abstract,

is

product of our thought.

The Meanings

of Being.

Thomas

set forth the

meanings of being with inimitable brevity and

ness

(De

clear-

veritate I, 1), thereby giving the simplest

" Just

expression to his whole teaching on being.

in

demonstrative proof

to

some self-evident
For

finally

come down

principles (not capable of or in

need of proof), so too

of anything.

we must

as

else

in the search for the essence

we should

in both cases be

obliged to proceed indefinitely, and consequently all

science

and

possible.

all

knowledge of things would be im-

But that which our

intellect attains pri-

marily as the best known, and into which

all its concepts, is

beginning of his Metaphysics.

sary that

we

it

resolves

being, as Avicenna explains at the

It

is

therefore neces-

acquire all other intellectual concepts by

addition to being.

But nothing can be added

[74]

to be-

THOUGHT AND BEING

$&
ing, that

is

of a different nature (from being), such

added

as holds for the difference

accident to the substance ;

sentially a being,

Aristotle

^5

shows

to the genus, or the

for every nature

something that

in the third

that being cannot be a class

For

is.

book of
name.

his

is

es-

this reason

Metaphysics

But we can speak

of the addition of something to being in this way,

that

what we add

that

to

being expresses a

mode

of being

not explicitly indicated by the term being.

is

may happen in two ways: First of all, the expressed mode of being may be any special mode of
This

For there are

being.

accordance with which

different grades of being, in

we speak

of different modes of

According to these modes of being we dis-

being.

tinguish the different genera (categories) of things.

Substance does not add a difference to being such as

would imply a nature superadded to being. The

term substance rather expresses a certain definite
mode of being, namely that of being-in-itself (per
se ens).
The same holds of the other categories.
Secondly, the expressed
tion that

is

mode may be

a determina-

true in general of all being.

And

this

mode

again can be viewed in two ways: First, in so

far as

it is

found per

another.

se in every being;

and secondly,

found in every being in relation to

The mode found in every being per se is

in so far as

it is

either an affirmation or a negation in the thing.

there

is

Now

only one thing that can be affirmed absolutely

[75]

THOiMAS AQUINAS

^5

and that can be accepted for every being, and

its

In this sense

essence {essentia).

from being

is

we

use the term

is

distinguished

This word thing {res)

thing {res).

that

in this that being {ens) expresses the act

of being (existing), while thing {res) expresses the

essence {quiditas sive essentia).
is

The

absolutely found in all things

This

division {indivisio).

one {unum), for the one

If

being.

we

is

negation which
the absence of

is

expressed by the term

is

nothing but the undivided

further examine the modes of being

existing in all things, in the second aspect

above,

i.e.,

as the

mentioned

mode existing in any thing

we again have a twofold

relation to another,

First, in so far as a thing

this

is

is

distinct

in its

view:

from another and

3

expressed by the term something {aliquid),

As

for something means, so to say, another thing.

being

is

said to be one in so far as

itself, so it is called

far as

it is

as a thing

distinct
is

it is

others.

Secondly, in so far

and that

we have something

of being identical with

all that

is.

that

Now we

is

way

all things.

knowing and

In the soul there

willing.

tendency of will

is

The

is

the

is

not

capable

have just

that in the soul, which according to Aristotle

a

in

something, a single thing, in so

from

identical with another}

conceivable unless

undivided

is

in

power of

thing as object of the

designated by the term good.

The good is, as Aristotle says at the beginning of his

Nichomachean Ethics, what all strive for. The thing

[76]

THOUGHT AND BEING

68#

as object of the intellect

^5

expressed by the term

is

true."

The Highest

Thought and Being.

Principles of

Intimately connected with the derivation of the different meanings of being, with this insight into the
basic roots of metaphysics,

Thomas' theory of the

is

" In every-

highest principles of thought and being.

known by the mind of man order reigns. What

known first by our intellect is being. Intellectual

thing
is

grasp of being

is

included in every thought of man.

Thence we have the

that

we cannot

This principle

at

first

indemonstrable principle,

once both affirm and deny a thing.

rests

on the concept of being and of

non-being and is the primary basis for all other principles " (S. th. I II, q. 94, a. 2).
This principle
consequently has two characteristics:

hand, objective validity, since

cept of being

and non-being.

it is

It

is

at the

a principle of thought and of being.

hand,

it

is

indemonstrable, since

back to a higher principle and

is

On

the

it

On

same time
the other

cannot be led

at the

same time

the support and the point of departure for all

onstration, since the other

thought can without

finally since all

dem-

supreme laws of being and

difficulty

be led back to

it,

and

demonstration must ultimately stop

at this principle as in its first

The

one

based on the con-

norm.

Reality of Substances.

of the Thomistic theory of being

[77]

fundamental truth
is

the conviction of

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^

There

the reality of substances.

dependent things, subjects of the

activities,

changes, such as

There

about us.

ciple, the basis

and root of

mental and bodily

supreme substance
not to have
thing,

IX,

a.

its

all

God,

perceive in the world

the

an enduring prin-

phenomena

of our

The

creator of all other sub-

a thing,

is

firm, self-

exist

actions, motions,

the substantial soul.

life,
is

" Substance

stances.

we

in ourselves

is

}fy

whose essence

is,

it

being in another thing ; accident

is

another "

whose nature it is to be in
Quodl.
(
5 ad 2). The character of not having its be-

ing in another thing, of having being on

count, self-subsistence,

element
true of

is

in the notion of substance.

God

in the

its

own

ac-

the primary and essential

This element

The

most eminent degree.

is

char-

acter of being the possessor of accidents, or of having

also that

which

is

not self-subsisting,

is

the secondary

element of the notion of substance, found only

in

the concept of created substances.

Like Aristotle, Thomas distinguishes a

first

sub-

stance, the real concrete individual being (Socrates),

and

a second substance, the essence of the individual

being (humanity).

For him there was no

for attacking theories that are

1 It

common

occasion

today, such

may

not be superfluous to remark that almost all of the

non-Thomistic definitions of substance and soul met with today are
The soul is
little more than caricatures of the Thomistic concept.

for the Scholastic essentially a self-moving principle

a notion that
for the Scholastic is also highly expressive of what is today often
Tr.
referred to as a vital urge, elan vital, tendency to develop, etc.

78

(^

THOUGHT AND BEING

fcfo

phenomenalism, which deny

as that of actualism or

the reality of a body or a soul substance, and try to

resolve reality into motions, actions, representations,

phenomena without a firm substantial basis. But he

showed the way to various proofs of the reality of
substances, and, as we shall see, emphasized the real
distinction between the substance of the soul and its
powers more sharply than the other Scholastics, and
attributed the phenomena of mental life to the subFrom the becoming and the
stance of the soul.
action of things

he concludes the existence of sub-

and is convinced that the world would be

mere appearance and not reality, if all were motion,
and there were no permanent enduring being. He is
stances,

so convinced of the reality of substances, that

precisely to the substances, things existing in
selves,

he attributes being

sense of the term (S. th.

90,

is

them-

proper and truest

in the

I, q.

it

a.

2).

Substantial being, being-in-and-f or-itself , has vari-

An

individual substance,

self-sufficient

and incommunicable,

ous degrees of perfection.

independent and
is

called a suppositum or hypostasis.

If this hypostasis

Hence the
concept of person gives us the highest form of beingBy the
in-itself, of possessing one's own being.
is

a rational being,

it is

called a person.

possession of reason the independence of the hypostasis is increased.

For

it is

by means of reason,

self-

consciousness, that the intellectual substance shows

[79]

THOMAS AQUINAS

$&

)$$

self-dependent being, existing-for-itself, the

subject of free actions, of rights and duties. " As it
itself a

is

proper to a substance to

capable of acting by

nature of a thing.

exist in itself, so

itself.

And

the

is it

For action follows the

power of acting by it-

of independent action (per se agere), exists in a

self,

more

excellent

manner

endowed with
For only rational

in a substance

a rational nature than in others.

substances have mastery over their actions.

The

are free to act or not to act.

more

are

also

They

irrational substances

passive in their actions than active.

These

make it advisable to give the rational

hypostases a name of their own, namely person"
(Depot, q. 9 a. i ad 3). Even if the ontological aspect is treated and emphasized primarily in the Thoconsiderations

mistic conception of person, the latter

is

not without

references to the psychological and the ethico-

its

juridical

meanings of person and personality.

2.

Thomas

is

Faith and Knowledge

convinced that the

human

intellect can

reach into the realms of the supersensible and behind

phenomenal world,
tain and understand the
the

that in

its

thought

it

can at-

essence, the proper being, of

things.

Nevertheless the metaphysical order does not represent the highest point of
is

world

rising

human knowledge. There

above the cosmos of metaphysical

[

so

(K
truths, the
lives

and

THOUGHT AND BEING

^5

realm of the supernatural, in which

God

reigns.

This realm

is

not attainable here

below by the mere exercise of our natural powers

of mind, but rather through revelation and faith.

There

is

question here of truths that the

human mind

cannot glean out of nature, not of intra-mundane

truths, but of supernatural truths, revealed to us by-

God, which we accept with the conviction of

because

we understand them,

but because

faith, not

God

has

revealed them to us.

The Twofold Way of the Knowledge of God.

The Reality of Supernatural Truth. God is the content of a twofold knowledge, natural

and supernat-

There are truths about God which lie entirely

beyond the reach of human reason e.g., the truth
But there are
that there are three persons in God.
ural.

also truths about

tain of

its

God which human

own accord, as God's

reason can at-

existence,

monotheism.

That there should be truths about God that are

unattainable by the human mind when dependent entirely on its own powers, can be seen from a consideration of the peculiar nature of

Our

objects, as faint reflections

tell

own

human

thought.

thinking is dependent on sense experience.

us that a

God

exists,

inner nature and

Sense

and works of God, only

but do not reveal to us His*

life.

In

fact,

the gradation

of intellectual powers permits us to hold a priori that

there are truths accessible to a higher mind, but not

[81]

THOMAS AQUINAS
Thus

lower one.

to a

^5

human mind

the

tain to all that the angelic spirit

in turn cannot with the intellectual

his nature attain to all that

is

cannot at-

The

knows.

angel

power peculiar

known by

to

the divine

Intellect ever actively intuiting the divine Essence.

Just as

it

would be

folly for the peasant to consider

the theories of a philosopher false merely because

he does not understand them, so

ish for

vealed

man to consider
by God as errors

just because he has no full

The

insight into these truths.

man mind

in the

evidently fool-

it is

the supernatural truths re-

limitation of the hu-

realm of natural truth

is

likewise a

sign of the possibility

and

supra-rational truths.

There are many qualities of

we do not know, and in many

the things about us that

we

cases

are unable to find the deeper explanation of

the qualities

and phenomena which we perceive

How much

them.

reality of supernatural,

in

more, then, does not the infinitely

superior, divine substance, ranking infinitely above the

knowable things of
of natural

human

this

world, transcend the scope

Thomas

reason!

here refers to

the Aristotelian idea, that our intellect

est

and

as the

an

first

being, which

is

eye of the night bird

idea also used

in itself
is

is

most knowable,

to the light

We

of the sun

by German mysticism (Henry

Suso) to indicate the insufficiency of the

in matters of

to the high-

human mind

God.

have then two ways leading to God, the way

[82]

THOUGHT. AND BEING

gty?

^5

of natural reason proceding from the works of

in nature,

and the way of

faith,

which reaches higher,

into the regions of the inner essence

God

{Contra gentes

I,

God

and

life

of

3).

The Natural Truths about God as Content of Supernatural Revelation. The truths about God that
can be attained by natural reason are to a great ex-

and faith. This is a

wisdom and purpose. If men were

tent also content of revelation

matter of

infinite

exclusively dependent on their natural abilities for

attaining these truths, only

few men would

The

a natural knowledge of God.

would for various reasons be unable

to

selves sufficiently to energetic thought,

these truths as the fruits of their

Weaker mental

Only

God

in the

devote them-

and

to attain

own mental

arriving at the peak of

few would,

men

labor.

for family and tem-

gifts, care

poral well-being, and again indolence,

many from

possess

majority of

would prevent

human

thought.

urge to knowledge which

has implanted in every soul, undertake the as-

cent.

Besides, a

knowledge of God, attained only

through natural powers, would always require a long

time.

Profound truths demand a more practiced

mental

ability.

The

period of youth, so full of ex-

citement and emotion, would be least given to a

searching scrutiny of such profound truths.
a purely natural knowledge of
to error, to a distortion of the

[83]

God

is

Finally

always liable

image of God.

Many

THOMAS AQUINAS

gfy(

)fe

proofs of this are furnished in the history of preChristian philosophy.

and wise Providence

it

was well for a kind

to include also natural truths

Thus

sphere of revelation and faith.

in the

may

Hence

with more ease possess a knowledge of

void of doubt and error {Contra gentes

I,

men
God deall

4).

Purpose of the Revelation of Purely Supernatural

Truths. We may ask ourselves whether there was

any purpose

purely supernatural,

in the revelation of

supra-rational truths.

Would

not the revelation of

the above-mentioned natural truths have been suf-

and quite

ficient,

of

To

man?

in

this

harmony with the

we must answer

supernatural end for man,

He

him the realm of supernatural

No

that if

God

set a

also to reveal to

truths.

one strives with ardent longing for a goal un-

known

God

had

peculiar nature

to

him.

Now man

is

by the providence of

called to a goal, the possession of a good, that

transcends the experience of our limited

mundane

human mind had

to be di-

existence.

Hence the

rected and led to something higher, something tran-

For only thus

scending the powers of natural reason.

could

man

direct his desires

and

efforts to a goal su-

premely above the demands and conditions of

world.
natural
eternal

Christianity holds out an eternal

this

and super-

good therefore man had to be equipped with

and supernatural knowledge.
j

Furthermore, the notion of

[84]

God

is

brought out

THOUGHT AND BEING

gfy{

more

^5

clearly through the revelation of supra-rational

truths.

For our notion of God is the more true and

more we think of God as a being tran-

adequate, the

By means

scending the natural powers of our mind.

of the revelation of supra-rational truths about God,

knowledge of

this

rendered more

There

God

in us

stable.

also an ethical

is

greatly promoted and

is

advantage in the revela-

tion of supra-rational truths in so far as pride, the

father of error,

is

There are

thereby suppressed.

men who, presuming on

their

own

genius, think they

can measure the entire divine being by the scope of

They

their minds.

they

deem

telligible to

think only that

and that

true,

all is false

Such vanity

them.

is

is

true which

which

put in

is

not in-

its

proper

place by the revelation of supra-rational truths.

nally, the

human

soul attains

lime truths.

In this also

and most enduring

highest perfection in

its

the knowledge, feeble though

Fi-

it

be, of the

most sub-

the source of the purest

lies

spiritual

joy

(Contra gentes

I, 5)-

The Reasonableness of Faith

Truths.
part that

It

is

Supernatural

not through lack of thought on our

we hold

fast to the truths of revelation be-

yond our understanding.

in so doing.

in

We

are quite reasonable

Christian truth indeed transcends natural

reason and contains unfathomable mysteries.

in order to lead

men

But

to the acceptance of these truths,

[85]

THOMAS AQUINAS
Wisdom made

divine

use of wonderful

beyond the ordinary course of

things.

)fo
means going
These are in

part physical, like healing of the sick, or raising

the dead, and in part psychological.

miracles in t^e realm of the

The

mind and

from

latter are

consist par-

ticularly in extraordinary illuminations of the soul,

by which uncultured and simple men, especially

in

primitive Christian times, were filled with the gifts

Holy

of the

Spirit,

and received the highest

of wisdom and of tongues.

these works was in no

The

gifts

convincing force of

way supported by the

force of

arms or by the alluring prospect of worldly pleasure.

On

the contrary, the greatest obstacles

had
of

to be

overcome.

all is, that in spite

and

difficulties

Indeed, the greatest miracle

of the fury of -tyrannical per-

secutions, a numberless host both of simple

men

and of

entered upon the Christian

most

intellectual

faith,

which preaches truths beyond the understand-

ing of man, forbids the pleasures of the

disparages all that the world esteems.

adherence to such a religion

acles.

It is

was not the

upon the

visible

result of a

but the work of divine providence.

tianity

Enthusiastic

the greatest of mir-

and strive
This turning of the world to

their backs

only after the invisible.

exists in

and

an evident work of divine intervention,

when men turn

Christianity

is

flesh,

sudden accident,

Proof of

this

the fact that this wonderful spread of Chris-

was foretold by the mouths of the prophets.

[86]

THOUGHT AND BEING

6^
The

^5

miracle of the conversion of the world to Chris-

tianity

the surest proof of the antecedent signs and

is

miracles, which later

were no longer necessary because

they are seen best in their

effects.

It

would be

miracle greater than all other miracles, if the world

had been converted

to a belief in such elevated truths

without the aid of miracles, and to the performance

of such
things

difficult

and

works and the hope for such high

that through the instrumentality of

Even

simple and uninfluential men.

not

now

centuries,

God

through His

Thomas
elation

if

miracles do

occur in the same numbers as in the

still

works them

in

our

first

own days

saints for the sake of faith.

therefore proves the divine origin of rev-

and Christianity from the

historic miracle

of

the wonderful spread of the Christian faith, and thus

shows the reasonableness of our

revelation.

We

faith in the data of

find these considerations

mentioned

by the contemporaries of Thomas, esby Cardinal Matthew of Aquasparta, and

in detail also

pecially

by the Franciscan Bartholomew of Bologna recently

discovered by E. Longpre, O.F.M.
Thomas reinforces

them by pointing

of Islam.

The

latter

to the causes of the spread

owes

its

to entirely different motives.

incentive of the laws

of

Mohammed.

miracles, but

It

origin

and

its

Sense pleasure

spread
is

the

and prescriptions of the religion

was spread, not by supernatural

by force of arms.

[87]

Its first

followers

THOMAS AQUINAS

gg^

consisted, not of wise

human
its

well versed in divine and

lore, but of crude inhabitants of the desert.

no prophetic announcements

It can point to

of

men

^5

claims {Contra gentes

Harmony between
Christian truth

is

I,

as

proof

6).

Even

Faith and Reason.

supra-rational,

it is

if

not irrational.

There can be no human contradiction between the

truths of faith and the truths of natural knowledge.

human thought, which

are immediately evident to the human mind in its
first activities, and which contain in germ all natural

The

highest principles of

Now

knowledge, are true beyond doubt.

way

of faith in no

the truths

contradict these highest principles

or the truths derived

from them.

For the true can

be opposed only to the false, never to another truth.

Now

human thought

are

true, as are also the truths of divine revelation

and

the highest principles of

by God.

faith because confirmed

tion

between the two

is

Hence a

impossible.

contradic-

Such a contra-

diction

would revert back upon God Himself.

God

the

is

common

is

from

as He is the author of our nature.

Di-

Knowledge of

God

in so far

vine

wisdom

the self-evident

first

principles

itself thinks these principles.

contrary to these principles

of God,

But

source of both series of truths.

is

Anything

contrary to the

wisdom

and therefore cannot come from God.

Hence what we

accept on the basis of divine revela-

tion cannot be in real opposition to natural knowledge.

[88]

THOUGHT AND BEING

^
From

this

it

^5

follows that arguments raised by

reason against the data of faith cannot be derived

consistently

from the

highest,

self-evident

They have no

ciples of thought.

prin-

apodictical value,

but are problematic or sophistic in character.

Hence

the possibility of showing the weakness of such ar-

guments {Contra gentes I, 7). Thomas firmly upheld the harmony between supernatural and natural
truth, faith and knowledge, at a time when Averroism
was spreading the doctrine of double truth
According

in Paris.

to the latter a statement could be philo-

sophically true

from the standpoint

way some persons
complete separation of faith and

and quite

false

of faith, and vice versa.

attempted the

rational knowledge.

reason, philosophy

In this

In bringing together faith and

and theology, Thomas accorded

to profane knowledge, philosophy, a sphere of

own,

as

well as

its

own

principles

thereby showed himself

and method.

its

He

a far-seeing pioneer in the

question of the independence and self-sufficiency of

" His thought,

2
therefore," says E. Gilson writing of Thomas, " does

philosophy

among

the Scholastics.

not aim at achieving as economically as possible a superficial

harmony wherein

the doctrines most easily

reconcilable with the traditional teaching of theology

may

find room, but he insists that

2 E. Gilson, The
Trans., pp. 31-32.

Philosophy

of

[89]

St.

Reason should deThomas Aquinas,

Eng-.

THOMAS AQUINAS

&
own

content in full liberty and should set

velop

its

out

demands

its

utmost stringency j the value

in their

of his philosophy
tian,

^5

lies

not in the fact that

but in the fact that

the whole secret of

it is

true.

Thomism,

...

in this

it is

In

Chris-

this lies

immense

effort

of intellectual honesty to reconstruct philosophy on

a plan which exhibits the de facto accord with the-

ology as the necessary consequence of the demands of

Reason

itself,

and not

as the accidental result of a

mere wish for conciliation."

Reason in the Service of Faith. Conviction of the
harmony between faith and knowledge shows itself
particularly in this, that reason, philosophy,
a service to

perform

in behalf of faith

is

given

and of the

science of faith, theology.

In theology
ways.

First,

we can make use of philosophy in three

we can philosophically establish the

rational truths that

sitions

of faith j

Secondly,

we

e.g.,

form the necessary presuppoexistence of God, monotheism.

can use the analogies of reason in order

to render the mysteries of faith

St.

more

clear.

Thus

Augustine, for instance, attempts to bring the

dogma of the Trinity nearer to our minds by means

of many analogies taken from the realm of philosophical ideas. Thirdly, we can show that the arguments brought against the truths of

On

or at least inconclusive.

faith are false,

this last point

Thomas

gives the following suggestion for the defence of

[

90

^
faith

THOUGHT AND BEING

against unbelief:

call

your attention par-

ticularly to this, that in disputations with infidels

do not attempt

you

prove the truths of faith by con-

arguments of reason.

clusive

from

to

the sublimity of faith.

transcend the natural

abilities

That would detract

The

truths of faith

human mind,

of the

indeed also of that of the angels, and are accepted by

As they derive from the

us as revealed by God.

highest Truth,

What

is

God

Himself, they cannot be

false.

not false, cannot be successfully attacked by

On

a conclusive rational argument.

the other hand,

our faith, being supra-rational, cannot be proved with

conclusive arguments of reason j but likewise

not in any

way be overthrown by cogent

gument, just because

against reason.

The

is

it

true

it

can-

rational ar-

and therefore not

efforts of the Christian apologist

must not be directed

to

proving the truths of faith

by laying bare

philosophically, but rather to showing,

the inconclusiveness of the objections of opponents,

that the Catholic faith

is

fidei contra Saracenos, etc.

not false.

Procem.)

(De

rationibus

Anselm of Can-

terbury had inaugurated Scholasticism proper and

had pointed

to the true essence of the Scholastic

method by espousing the programme

gustine Credo ut intelligam
:

on the platform of

I place

Au-

myself firmly

faith in order to penetrate further

into the content of faith

ideas of

inspired by

by means of reason.

Thomas regarding

The

the function of reason in

[91]

THOMAS AQUINAS

$${

^5

the service of faith are nothing but a further develop-

ment of

this position.

Thomas

took up this idea of

Anselm, which was transmitted and lived on

thought of

Hugo and

Richard of

St. Victor,

in the

Robert

of Melun, Simon of Tournai, and especially William

it more clearly and exfrom the standpoint of a better developed
conception of faith and of knowledge. The emphatic
theological idealism and spiritualism of Anselm and

of Auxerre, and formulated

plicitly

the Victorines was conducted into the sober channel of

precise

and

clear concepts.

Value of Observation of Creatures for the ChrisFully convinced of the

tian Philosophy of Life.

harmony between

Thomas

is

natural and supernatural truth,

not satisfied with having reason function

only in the service of faith, but warmly espouses the

development of natural knowledge based on created

nature.

He

does not share the aversion to profane

study so frequently noticeable in the well-meaning

but short-sighted theologians of the pre-Scholastic

and early Scholastic periods. A thorough study, a

profound examination of creation is for him not a
hindrance to Christian views, but a powerful aid.

Contemplation of the works of

God

brings us to

knowledge of and admiration for divine Wisdom.

As the genius of the

is

artist is

the seal of divine

whole of

creation.

revealed in his works, so

Wisdom

impressed upon the

Contemplation of creation

[92]

fills

us

THOUGHT AND BEING

gg^

^5

with wonderment at the power of God, and evokes a

sentiment of reverence for

we must

God

For

our souls.

in

reasonably conceive the power of God, of

the efficient

principle

of things, as incomparably

greater than the greatness of creation.

Contempla-

human heart with love

The goodness and perfection we find scattered among creatures is completely
and perfectly united in God, who is the source of all
tion of creatures inflames the

for the divine Goodness.

If the goodness, beauty, and lovableness of

good.

human mind, how much more

God draw human hearts unto Himself,

creatures bewitch the

must not

He is the prime source and fountain of all good,

comparison with whom the types of goodness

since
in

found

in creatures are

but miserable bubbling springs.

Finally, the contemplation of creatures gives

man

some resemblance to the perfection of God Himself.

God, in comprehending Himself, sees also all other
beings.

The human mind, watching

in the belfry of

Christian life (Weltanschauung), recognizing

and then steeping

itself

the divine

Thomas

contemplation of

in the

creatures, develops in itself as

it

were, a likeness of

wisdom (Contra gentes

here says in an abstract

God

II, 2).

way on

All that

the religious

value of contemplating nature, the mirror of divine

perfections,

is

found with more color and feeling

German mystics, especially Henry Suso.

The contemplation of creatures is also helpful

in

the

[93]

for

THOMAS AQUINAS

($&

the Christian by pointing the

way

erroneous notions about God.

^5

to a refutation of

Errors in the domain

of the natural often oppose and do harm to the true

knowledge of God and the truth of faith. Misapprehension of the true nature of creatures has led to

ground of

their being taken for the ultimate

for

God

things,

Himself, so that the existence of any supra-

mundane, supreme being was denied. Any one who

does not gauge the nature and value of creatures
correctly,

is

easily led to erroneous views

and government of God

dualism

in the world.

Thus

arose

the theory of two ultimate world prin-

one good and one evil

ciples,

on the action

freedom of divine

creation,

the denial of the

and the

tations of divine providence.

It

is

false interpre-

a complete mis-

take to say that our notions about creatures are a

matter of purest indifference as to the truths of

faith, so

long as we have a correct notion of God.

Error

regard to creatures only too readily also

in

leads to false views regarding

God

{Contra gentes

11, 3).

Difference between the Philosophical and Theological Attitudes in

Regard to Creatures.

Philosophy

views creatures in themselves, in their natures and

activities,

and arranges them

into different levels

according to the classes of things.

Christian faith

does not view creatures in themselves

not as

fire

simply but

in their relation to

[94]

e.g.,

fire

God,

i.e.,

THOUGHT AND BEING

gty{

in so far as they reflect the greatness of

related to

Him. The philosopher

in things that

which belongs

garding

the fact of

fire,

^5

God and

are

accordingly studies

to their nature ; e.g., re-

its

rising upwards.

Faith

views creatures from the standpoint of God, in so far

were created by God, are subject to Him, and

are ordained unto Him.
No argument against the
as they

knowledge of

faith can be derived

the latter disregards

many

from the

fact that

characteristics of things,

such as the shape of the heavens, the nature of motion,

Hence

etc.

faith

the aspects under which philosophy and

view the things of nature are quite

different.

Likewise are the starting points of both, the prin-

The

ciples, different.

philosopher's arguments are

based on the intramundane causes peculiar to nature

and natural phenomena. The beginning of faith is

God, the first, supramundane cause. The supernatural revelation of God, His glory, and His infinite
power, are the principles, the guiding ideas of the
theological contemplation of nature.

From

this

it is

evident that the sequence of thought, the method,

also different in the

two

sciences.

is

Philosophy, meta-

physics, views creatures primarily in their

own proper

being and by means of the principle of causality attains to a

first

knowledge of God;

and God

last.

it

treats

of creatures

In theology the opposite

is

true.

Since theology views creatures in their relation to

God,

it

treats of

God

first

and descends from a con-

[95]

&ft

THOMAS AQUINAS

templation of

God

to creatures.

perfect than philosophy, because

It is
it

therefore

more

sembles the manner of God's knowledge.

knows
self

all

Jtyfe

closely re-

He

being outside of Himself by knowing

(Contra gentes

II, 4).

[96]

more
also

Him-

CHAPTER

VII

EXISTENCE AND ESSENCE OF GOD

HE notion of God

is

at the centre of

the ideology of Thomas.

Knowl-

edge of a supramundane, personal

God

is

the proud

acme of metaphys-

ics.

Insight into the mysterious inner

life

of God, opened to the

faith in the doctrine of the Trinity,

"

theological speculation.

ology.

... In

God

The

this sacred science

God
is

con-

in part

God

God

as

unto their beginning

" Almost all phil-

(S. th. I, q. i, a. 7).

osophical inquiry leads to the

{Contra gentes
the thought of

I,

4).

Thomas

The
is

knowledge of God "

theocentric character of

the reason and the source

of the peculiar genius of his writings.

we

is

{sub ratione

in part other beings in so far as the lat-

ter are ordained unto

and end "

the climax of

everything

content of this science

Himself, and

of

the object of the-

is

templated from the standpoint of

Dei).

is

man

best understand the objectivity

ness, the limpid clarity, the

In

its

light

and dispassionate-

modesty and moderation,

the peace and truth, that breathe

[97]

from

his works.

THOMAS AQUINAS

Out of
synthesis

proofs of

the rich storehouse of

^5

Thomas'

theological

we shall here select his exposition of the

God and his notion of the divine essence.
I.

Existence of

God

Knowability of the Existence of God. Proofs.

The proposition " God exists " is indeed in itself

and objectively a self-evident one,

is

contained in the subject.

But

since the predicate

it is

subjectively, for

us and for our finite minds, not a self-evident, analytic

For we do not comprehend the

judgment.

es-

sence of God, and therefore do not understand a

friori that the predicate existence

subject God.
is

Hence

is

included in the

the truth of God's existence

not known immediately and intuitively, but can and

must be derived from other knowledge.

It

is

con-

sequently capable of and in need of demonstration.

Nor

can

we speak of an innate idea of God, accordThe desire for happiness, with which

ing to Thomas.

man

is

naturally endowed, does not yet necessarily

imply an immediate knowledge of the

God

who

alone

can satisfy this desire.

striving for happiness does not

of God,

it

fact that

it is

But

the

if

imply an innate idea

can nevertheless serve as a premise for a

proof of God.

In bringing the desire for happiness

and the need of God

intuition of

God

into relation with the blissful

in the next

world,

Thomas seems

desirous only of showing that such an intuition of

[98]

EXISTENCE OF GOD

gg^

God

is

)fo

not impossible in itself and that there

is

sort of natural basis for the highest perfection of the

supernatural
nate idea of

We could at

life.

God

and the self-evident highest

and of being can readily lead
In

all

most speak of an

in the sense that

in-

our natural reason

principles of thought
to a

knowledge of God.

of us there has been implanted by nature some-

thing that leads to a knowledge of the existence of

God

(S. th. I, q. 2, a. 1).

God

Since the existence of

is

therefore not an im-

mediately self-evident, nor an innate truth, but

truth attained only

is

by means of conclusion from

premises, a question arises regarding the nature of this

demonstration. There

is

no question here of the Aris-

totelian demonstration propter quid.

tablishes

The

quate knowledge of the cause of this thing.

is

latter es-

knowledge of a thing by means of an ade-

no cause above God.

Hence His

proof
by proceeding from

be proved by a demonstration quia

the existence of a thing

But there

existence can only

the

known effects about us to a first and highest cause

the way of causal thought (S. th. I, q. 2, a. 2).

to

the

This emphasis on the a posteriori nature of our

knowledge shows that Thomas did not accept the

so-

argument of St. Anselm of Can" Here Thomas of Aquin," says Baeum-

called ontological

terbury.
ker,

" does not feebly put together the old and the
1

Witelo, p. 302.

[99]

THOMAS AQUINAS

(^

new even where

)fe

the old has become untenable, but

decisively relinquishes the inadequate old

conceptual proof of
it

God

the new, the proof

from

purely

in order to substitute for

causality."

God Thomas

In his arguments for the existence of

has given clear expression to his conviction of the

demonstrability of this existence.

arguments
of

in the

definite,

summa

Especially are the

(I, q. 2, a. 3) a masterpiece

and

conclusive,

clear

argumentation.

Even if he makes use of previous formulations,

among them Aristotle, Augustine and Moses Maimonides, " the construction of the thought
theless built

We

classic."
ticle,

The

up quite independently.

telling formulation

is

concise,

and the lucid synthesis are really

cannot refrain from giving this ar-

which the Dominican Thomas Pegues

" magnificent

never-

article,

and

calls a

in a certain sense the

most

beautiful article, richest in content, of the theological

summa"

even

if

the precision of the original must

needs suffer by translation.

" The existence of God can be proved in five ways.
li

The

motion.

first

and clearer way

It is certain,

that something in this

thing that
2

is

moved,

and

world
is

Baeumker, Archiv fuer

the one taken

is

testified to
is

by the

moved.

But every-

moved by something
Geschichte

from

senses,

der Philosofhie,

other
1908,

p. 132.^
3
Pegues, Commentaire frangais litteral de la Somme Theologique de Saint Thomas d'Aquin. I. Toulouse, 1907, p. no.

IOO]

EXISTENCE OF GOD

$#
than

itself.

it

in

is

Now a
to

For nothing

is

moved

except in so far as

precisely to

moved.
For
lead some-

And

a thing can

potency towards that to which

thing moves in so far as

move (something) means

ftfo

it is

it

is

in actuality.

thing out of potency into actuality.

be educed from potency to actuality only by something that

say

fire,

is

itself in actuality ; as the actually

causes the

wood

that

is

warm

warm,

only potentially

become actually warm, thereby moving and effecting a change in it. But it is not possible for one and
to

from one and the same standpoint at once in actuality and in mere potentiality
that can happen only from different standpoints.
What is actually warm cannot at the same time be
only potentially warm, it is potentially cold. It is
therefore impossible that anything can be from the
same standpoint both mover and moved, or that it
move itself. Hence everything that is moved must
be moved by another. Now if the thing moving the
other is itself moved, this must be effected by still
the same thing to be

another, and this again by another.

We cannot pro-

ceed ad infinitum in this matter, for then there would

first mover, and consequently never any
mover for the second and later movers move

never be a
other

only by reason of their having been impelled by the

first

mover

just as the stick can

only by reason of being

moved by

consequently necessary to arrive at a

[101]

move something
the hand.
first

It

is

mover who

^
is

THOMAS AQUINAS

moved by no

And by

other.

)fo

this all

men

under-

stand God.

"

The second way

efficient causes.

impossible, that anything

it

is

series

it

of

own

is its

itself,

possible to proceed

efficient causes,

causes the

first is

we

But we never

were then existing before

Nor

from the nature of

In our sensible world

ficient cause.

order of

starts

for in

ef-

all see

an

and

it is

efficient cause;

for

which

find,

impossible.

is

ad infinitum in the
any series of efficient

the cause of the intermediary and the

intermediary the cause of the

last,

the intermediary consists of one or

no matter whether
more causes. Now

away the cause and there will be no effect.

if in any series there were no first cause, there
should also be no last and no intermediary. And if in
the series we proceed ad infinitum, there will be no
first efficient cause, and so neither a last effect or interwhich is evidently false. Hence
mediary causes
it is necessary to accept a first efficient cause
and
take

Hence,

this

"

men
The

call

God.

third

way proceeds from

the necessary, and

in the

is

as follows.

the possible and

We see some things

world that could either be or not be,

since things

come into being and disappear, whence it is

for them to be and likewise not to be. But

possible
it is

im-

possible that everything of such a nature exist for-

ever, since that which can also not be, at

is

not.
[

102]

some time

"

EXISTENCE OF GOD

gg^

Now

if all

things whatsoever are capable of not

being, then there was at one time nothing actual.

But

if

would there be any-

that were true then neither

For that which

thing at present.

not, begins to be

is

only by means of something that

come

possible for anything to

would be imexistence and there

into

that

is
is

is,

there must be a necessary being

it

would now be nothing, which

Hence not everything

In the case,

is.

then, of there being nothing actual,

evidently false.

merely possible;

among

things.

every necessary being has the ground of

from elsewhere

either

or not.

For

its

But

necessity

this, it is

again

impossible to proceed ad infinitum in regard to the

necessary beings that have the ground of their necessity

elsewhere, just as this

we have

efficient causes, as

quently
itself,

we must

is

impossible in regard to

just explained.

accept something that

is

and has not received the ground of

Conse-

necessary in
its

necessity

elsewhere, being rather the cause of necessity in

others.

"

And

this all call

God.

The fourth way is taken from

we find in things. For we find

grades

which
etc.

is

more and

that

But more and

which

is

less

the different
in things that

good, true, noble,

less are predicated of different

things, in so far as in different degrees they approach

that which

more

is

warmer when it is
most warm. Hence some-

most; as a thing

like that

which

thing exists that

is

is

is

the truest, best, noblest,

[

103

and con-

THOMAS AQUINAS

$#

For what

sequently also the greatest being.

supremely true

is

which
in

in

is

is

the supremest degree,

warmest,

thing that

is

that

is

also the cause of all

which

fire,

Hence

there must be some-

the cause of being, of goodness, and

every perfection in
" The fifth way

all things,
is

and

this

we

call

God.

taken from the subjection of

We

many

things pos-

no knowledge, namely physical

objects, act

things to guidance.
sessing

is

the cause of all warmth, as Aristotle

same passage.
is

as

called such-and-such a thing

others pertaining to that genus j just as

says in the

most

Now

book of Metaphysics.

any genus

is

most supremely being,

also

stated in the second

^5

see that

towards a goal} which follows from the fact that

they are always or almost always active in the same

way
it

which

in order to attain that

is

best.

From

this

follows that they attain their goal not by accident

but purposively.

But

that which has

no knowledge

tends towards a goal only through guidance by a be-

ing that has knowledge and reason, like the arrow

Hence an

of the archer.

whom
goal,

all things

and

this

we
1.

Thomas

intelligent being exists

by

of nature are directed towards their

call

God."

The Essence

strives to

make

of

God

clear for himself

whether

and how we know the essence of God and give verbal

expression to this knowledge.
[

104]

The knowledge

of the

EXISTENCE OF GOD

&

^5

some knowledge
Hence the knowledge of God's ex-

existence of a thing already includes

of

essence.

its

istence gives us a bridge over

knowledge of what

to a

God

which we can proceed

The

is.

proofs of God's

existence give us, as fruitful results, the concepts of

God
act
all

as first

unmoved mover and

therefore purest

without a shade of potentiality, as

being and therefore an ens a

and of

itself, as a

fect being,

se, a

first

cause of

being existing by

purely necessary and absolutely per-

governing the world

as

supreme

intel-

ligence.

Before we can give a sketch of the concept of

as

it

existed in the

mind of Thomas,

God

or definitely an-

swer the question he had already asked in his youth,

" What is God? " it will be necessary to mention his
views on the nature, methods, and value of the

knowledge of God attainable on

this earth.

For deciding the manner in which we know God

and can speak of Him, Thomas could fall back on
some excellent preceding works, both among the
Fathers (Augustine, Pseudo-Dionysius, theological
writings of Boethius,
as

among

John of Damascene),

Auxerre, Alexander of Hales).

and developing
a middle

as well

the Scholastics (Praspositinus, William of

this

In skilfully using

ready material,

Thomas

strikes

way between an anthropomorphism

that

reads the conditions of creatures into God, and symbolism, according to which
[

God

105

ever remains, for our

THOMAS AQUINAS

&ft

^5

knowledge and our language, the absolutely unattainable, the

unknowable.

For Thomas our knowledge of God

is

mediate, de-

rived from the effects and the impress of

God in crea-

tion.

It

is

concepts which in their

creatures

formed by means of
proper meaning apply to

analogical, that

is,

and hold of God only

in a higher sense

based on the relation of similarity between cause and

God and creatures. Furthermore our knowledge of God is made up of many inadequate coneffect,

cepts,

which try

in different

ways

to give expression

to the infinitely perfect, infinitely simple essence of

Our ideas and expressions concerning God are

formed by way of affirmation or causality, of negation and of transcendence, in so far as we affirm the
God.

real perfections
first

cause, then

found

found

in creatures

God

as

of their

deny of God all the imperfections

and think of the positive perfec-

in creatures,

tions attributed to

God

(S. th. I, q. 13).

Although

tion of

God

is

tributes,

God

it is

in

a supereminent degree
this

mundane concep-

mediate, analogical, and composite,

and only imperfectly

in

of

reflects

God's essence and

There

not false, but true.

is

at-

something

objectively corresponding to all these in-

adequate ideas taken together, the absolute plenitude

of divine perfection (/ Sent. d.

2,

1,7).

After an exposition of the nature and the manner

of our knowledge of God, a question arises.

[106]

In what

EXISTENCE OF GOD

^5

God

consist, that

does the metaphysical essence of

fundamental determination of the divine substance,

which according

from

all creatures,

and from which

God must

of

Thomas

explain his position differently.

one

to

derive?

(Capreolus,

class

Bannez,

Gonet, Billuart),

and

it is

of God.

If

we

metaphysical essence

(John of

sentia

c.

Thomas himself

Jahwe
in

is

"The

being "

(De

being

his

is

therefore truly the proper

whom there

He

speak, the

essence of

ente et es-

his

essence"

8, 1, 1).

(S. th. I, q. 13, a. 11).

being,

his

"In God

6).

Thomas,

St.

simply being, pure reality

is

none other than

{I Sent. d.

is,

etc.),

Godoy), the absolute immatelet

with no admixture of potentiality:

in

Molina,

the absolute actual knowledge}

others (Ferre,

still

God

According

designated God's aseity as the metaphysical

essence j according to others

riality

other at-

all the

Commentaries on

tributes

Thomas

God

our concept distinguishes

to

is

is

As God

is

name

simply

of

God

He who

not the slightest possibility of not

entirely distinct

from

which possesses a received being

all created being,

(i.e.

ing restricted into definite classes.

imparted), be-

Creatures possess

being, but are not unqualifiedly being} in comparison

with the plenitude of God's being, they are rather

non-being than being.

If

Thomas

designates the If sum esse as the meta-

physical essence of

God,
[

this

must not be understood

107]

THOMAS AQUINAS

$#

J$

NeoJohn Huber, Oischinger, J. Delitzsch,

d'Ercole, and others, have wrongly accused Thomas
as the universal abstract being, to 6v, of the

platonists.

The Ipsum esse,

of pantheism.

God, represents a

the absolute being of

real content, concrete, personal.

Universal being, on the other hand,

of abstraction, and as such

is

is

the product

formally only some-

thing thought by the mind, having a foundation in

reality only because

concepts derived

a last

it is

from

common element
by

reality

therefore predicable of all things.

drew

of

all

and

is

Thomas himself

a clear line between the being of

God and

this

we say, he remarks, that God is

no way guilty of the erroneous view
If

abstract being.

we are in
God is abstract

being,
that

analysis,

constituted that

it

being.

This abstract being

so

is

cannot exist in objective reality

without addition and more definite determination,

while the absolutely subsistent being of

God

of

is

such a nature that nothing whatever in the realm of

actuality can be

The Ipsum

added

to

it

(De

ente et essentia

esse therefore distinguishes

created being, raises

Him

high above

gories of finite being, safeguards

scendence.

and the

the cate-

His absolute tran-

God

richest being, separates

God

6).

This esse subsistens} as the most actual

abstract being,

esse in

all

c.

God from

is

infinitely

most devoid of content.

the basic element

divine attributes are derived.

[108]

from

This Ipsum

from which

Just because

all

the

God

is

EXISTENCE OF GOD

unlimited and absolute being,

If

God

into

of

Thomas
In

his

we analyze
its

He must unite in Him-

being (S.

self all the perfection of

and 3).

this

historical

^5

th. I, q. 4, a. 2,

concept of the essence

components, we shall see

as a theologian of

vast synthetic powers.

formative mind we find united and harmonized

the thought of Aristotle and the speculation of Avicenna, the teaching of the Fathers (Pseudo-Dionysius,

Augustine, Hilary of Poitiers, John Damascene),

and the early Scholastic notions of Anselm of Canterbury, Bernard of Clairvaux, etc. Under the skilful

hand of

a master these various historical threads

were woven into such a unified picture that only the

practised eye of a master can distinguish the special

coloring and character of the various historical com-

ponents.

Thomas' concept of God was not a mere

tion, offering

we

can see

abstrac-

human will or life. This

German mystics of the Do-

nothing for

from the

minican order,

who

appropriated the Thomistic con-

God and applied it in their pursuit of ChrisThe " Usrithunge was got ist und wie
tian virtue.
got ist " of Henry Suso is nothing but Thomas' and
Bonaventure's concept of God in the charming garb
cept of

of mysticism.

109]

CHAPTER

VIII

GOD AND THE WORLD

HE

The No-

Divine Creative Act.

The relation exGod and the world is

tion of Creation.
isting

between

determined by the divine

act

of crea-

by the concept of creation.

Thomas, whose mind had been ention,

riched by the creationist theism of Christianity,

clearer

and goes much farther than

never arrived

at a notion

able approaches to

of creation despite remark-

creation

his concept of

is

under the complete

God.

His proof of the

origin of the

world by divine creation

this concept.

It

is

is

who

it.

Thomas' theory of
dominion of

Aristotle,

is

based on

necessary for us to accept that all

beings were created by God.

Whatever

exists in a

thing as something that has been imparted, must be

caused by a principle in which that something exists

essentially.

Now God

by virtue of His

is

essence,

essentially being.

and

[no]

He

alone

is

He

is

thus es-

GOD AND THE WORLD

All being outside of

sential being.

Hence

being.

all things

God

^5
imparted

is

have been produced by God.

In his exposition of the relation of participated being

to essential being,
tion of the

is

uses a Neoplatonic no-

He

causis.

also believes himself

agreement with Plato, according

to be in

unity

Liber de

Thomas

prior to all multiplicity

orean notion

and with

Aristotle,

this is a

who

the supreme being and highest truth

being and truth (S.

all

According

th. I, q.

Thomas

to

tion of a thing in

its

44,

Hence

the cause of

is

entire substance, of

creation

is

Pythag-

taught that

a. 1).

is

which there

uncreated or that

was created by a non-divine principle

3).

whom

means the produc-

creation

was no previous substrate that

to

(S. th. q. 65, a.

the bringing forth of sub-

stance, of being, production of being in so far as

being (S.

th. I, q.

44,

a.

Creation, as the bringing forth of being,

proper

to

Of

God.

most universal

is

all effects, the

being.

Hence

Being

as

is

an act

most extensive and

the latter can only

and most universal

such can be produced only by God,

be the peculiar effect of the

cause.

it is

2).

and created causes can

effect

first

only a

specific

mode

being, a determination or delimitation of being,

of

and

that, in

dependence on and under the sustaining hand

of the

first

cause (S. th.

I, q.

stresses creation as the exclusive

to such

Thomas
prerogative of God

45,

a.

5).

an extent that he will not admit

[mi

God

could

THOMAS AQUINAS

g^

)$$

allow a creature to take part in creation as instru-

mental cause.

Time-Character of the World. In regard to the

beginning of the world, Thomas teaches that, as a

work of free divine

was actually not from eter-

it

nity but created in time as

(S. th. I, q. 46, a.

world did not need to

will, the

be eternal, and that

and

is

2).

known from revelation

So much being under-

stood, he asks the question whether the world-in-time

necessarily

had

whether

to be such, or, in other words,

reason can prove apodictically that the world necessarily

had

have a beginning and could not possibly

to

have been created from

The

all eternity.

Arabian

Motacallinim, as also Bonaventure and the majority

of the Scholastics, denied the possibility of an eternal

creation of the

world on the ground that

it

was

self-

But Thomas taught that we know of

contradictory.

the world's beginning in time only through revelation,

and that pure reason could not prove conclusively

that an eternal creation

is

impossible.

this conclusion under the influence of

monides, and
sideration.

argument

still

For

more because of an

if

we

in favor of

He

came to
Moses Mai-

apologetic con-

proclaim as decisive a rational

an

article of faith,

reality not convincing, respect for faith

diminished (S.

first

is

is

in

thereby

th. I, q. 46, a. 3).

The Divine Idea of

the

which

the World.

God

is

not only

cause in the sense of being the efficient cause

[112]

GOD AND THE WORLD

gg#

brought

that

also the

substance

forth

exemplary cause of

and

substance

all

God

being,

fcfo

and being j He is
In creating
being.

realizes

His

divine

ideas.

The

idea

is

the exemplar according to which an ef-

endowed with reason and

ficient cause

duces anything.

and

as such

edge.

It

retical

We

idea

is

the principle of activity,

belongs in the realm of practical knowlalso the principle of

is

this respect

The

knowledge, and

is

knowledge (S. th. I, q. 15).

see the world as an orderly phenomenon, not

have

definite, fixed forms.

forth anything, a prototype

have a

effect

Thus

in

likewise the point of departure of theo-

as a chaos of accidental happenings.

jects

free will pro-

is

Mundane

ob-

In order to bring

necessary, so that the

definite, strictly circumscribed

form.

the artist brings his materials into definite forms

on the

basis of the

that either

guiding idea in his mind, an idea

comes from the external world or

Now

in his

mind.

forms

in the universe

lives

and definiteneses of
must be traced to a first prin-

the order

namely divine Wisdom, which thought out the

order found in the variety of earthly things. Hence
ciple,

the prototypal forms, the ideas of all things, exist

in the divine

Thomas,

Wisdom

(S. th. I, q. 44, a. 3).

therefore, admitted the theory of the

divine ideas into his theodicy.

the

theologian

of synthesis
[

113]

In this again he

and mediation.

is

He

THOMAS AQUINAS

$/(

^5

agrees with Aristotle's criticism of the Platonic theory

of ideas, but accepts the theory of ideas as corrected

and developed by Augustine.

exemplarism Thomas

In teaching the divine

one with the older school of

is

Franciscans, even if as an Aristotelian he holds back

on the question of the epistemological application of

this divine

exemplarism.

Finality in the

The

World.

universe

of all created beings, as a whole

is

is

made up

made up

of

its

we now
parts, we arrive at the following position.
all, we see that the parts exist for their own

parts.

If

and of

its

First of

examine the purpose of the whole

peculiar functions ; e.g., the eye primarily for the

function of sight.

we

Secondly,

parts serve the higher

see that the lower

and more noble parts

e.g.,

the senses serve reason, and the lungs serve the heart.

Thirdly,

it

cannot be denied that all the parts taken

together function towards

the

whole, just as matter has

goal in form.

parts are, as
nally,

man

it

its

exists because of

perfection.

Then

Thus,

first

man were

in the entire

of all for

its

own

the lower creatures are

there for the higher and nobler.

ferior to

Fi-

an end outside himself,

universe, every creature exists

and

For the

were, the matter of the whole.

namely the possession of God.

activity

of the

perfection

created for man.

The

beings in-

Again,

all

the

individual creatures likewise function for the perfection of the entire universe.

[in]

Finally, the entire

GOD AND THE WORLD

universe in all

aspects

its

In

last goal.

ordained towards

is

all creatures the

as

its

is

reflected unto the glorification of

God

divine goodness

God.

In addi-

tion to this reflection of divine goodness, there

special

manner

in

which

God

is

creatures, since they can attain unto

activity,

by knowledge and love

God by

their

own

(S. th. I, q. 6$, a. 2).

Divine Conservation of the

shows the vigor of

is

the end of rational

Thomas

World.

his concept of creation

sequential nature of his conception of

and the con-

God

in his

views on the divine conservation of the world and

on the divine co-operation with the

It is a truth

creatures.

that creatures are

Nor

God.

both of faith and of reason,

conserved in their existence by

merely negative or
mere non-destruction, but a direct,

positive conservation, which, in

its

continuous im-

parting of the being given in creation,

God

of

this conservation

is

indirect, not a

creation.

activities

The

being of

in such a

way

all creatures is

is

a continued

dependent on

would not be able to

moment, and would sink back

that they

continue to exist even a

into absolute nothing, without the sustaining activity

of the divine power.

The

inner reason for this

is

to be

found

in the es-

sence of all created being as imparted being, that of

ens ab alio (being from another).

dependent on
its

cause.

its

Every

effect

is

cause, just in so far as the latter is

If a thing

is

only the cause of the changes

[115]

THOMAS AQUINAS
6^
)fe
m another, the latter dependent on the former only
is

at the
is

moment

For

of changing.

dependent on the builder only

Now God

building.

coming

in creatures,

ated being

and

that,

is

instance, a house

time of

at the

its

the cause not only of the be-

is

but of their very being.

Cre-

imparted being, ens ab

essentially

not only at the

moment

being, but also in all following

of

alio,

coming

its

into

Hence

moments.

this

dependent being has need of the essential and absolute being as of the sufficient

not only in the

first

moment

ground of
of

God

the sun

is

its

existence,

existence, but also

Every creature

at every subsequent instant.

lated to

its

is

re-

As

as the air to the illuminating sun.

essentially light,

and the atmosphere be-

comes bright and illuminated only by participation

in the light

of the sun, so

God

alone

is

essentially be-

ing by virtue of His essence, simply because

His essence

to be; while creatures

is

it

on the other hand

are beings only by participation since their essence

not to-have-to-be (S. th.

God

to the

world

emphasizes the
sential

being,

is

I, q.

104,

a. 1).

For Thomas the

Divine Concourse.

is

relation of

one of transcendence, since he

infinite

and the

contrast between
creature,

God,

es-

imparted being.

Nevertheless his concept of the divine conservation of

the world bridges the infinite span between
the world and brings

timate contact.

them

into an inner

This immanence of

["6]

God and

and most

God

in

in-

the

GOD AND THE WORLD

6^

^5

world becomes more emphatic and intimate

in the

light of the Thomistic teaching on the concourse of

God

with the

activities

of free and unfree creatures.

Thomas here

strikes a

middle way between the oc-

casionalistic interpretation

and the

of the action of creatures

deistic repression or elimination of the di-

vine factor.

God

co-operates with every act performed by a

creature.

that

He is coactive in every created activity, and

from the threefold

under which anything

aspect

can be a principle of activity:

formal

causality.

As

final,

cause

final

with every creature in so far as

its

efficient,

God

and

co-operates

action takes place

because of a real or apparent good; and as nothing

or can

seem

to

with the highest good, God.

is

is

be good, except through similarity

As

efficient

cause

God

active with every created action, because in a total-

ity

of interrelated principles of activity, the sec-

ondary agent always operates by virtue of the pri-

mary

For the

agent.

first

agent moves the second

Hence all things are active by virtue of

the power of God, who is thus the cause of all the
activities of creatures.
As formal cause, God is the
to action.

cause of created activities, in so far as

the forms, the

serves them,

form

is

immanent

furnishes

principles of activity, pre-

and applies them

immanent

He

to action.

in the active being;

of immanence increases as the

["7]

form

Now

the

and the degree

more funda-

is

THOMAS AQUINAS

e^

The

mental and general.

therefore most immanent

And

since

God

is

in the

cause of this being,

we

first,

form

^5

most universal, and

in all things

is

being.

proper sense of the term the

see again

how He

timately active in all things (S. th.

is

I, q.

most

105,

in-

a. 4.

Ci. Depot. 3,7).

For Thomas the free actions of rational creatures

way outside the range of this divine causalNor does he see an insoluble contradiction between the sovereign universal causality of God and
are in no

ity.

"

the self-determination of creatures.

the cause of
will

its

own

moves himself

man by

action, because

But

to action.

A free will

it is

is

his free

by no means

necessary to the concept of freedom that the free

creature be the
little as

the

first

first

cause of

its

own

activity, just as

a thing, to be the cause of another, must be

cause of the latter.

God

the

is

first

cause,

moving both the causes that act by nature and without freedom, and those that are freely active. And
just as God, in moving causes that act by necessity of
their natures, in no way takes away their natural activity, so his moving influence on free causes in no way
implies that their actions lose the character of free-

dom.

On

the contrary,

it is

precisely

by

his causal

motion that he effects in them the character of voluntariness " (S. th. I, q. 83, a. 1 ad 3).
Divine Providence and Government of the World.

By divine

providence

Thomas means

[n8]

the eternal plan

GOD AND THE WORLD

e8#

in the divine intellect, according to

time of this eternal plan

which mundane

The

things tend to their final end.

^5

realization in

God's government of the

is

world.

The

reality of providence

truth that

God

is

But God

of God.

Hence
vine mind an

lect.

in the

good

the

work

through His

intel-

world

in the

creates things

is

there must be ever-present in the dieternal plan, an eternal picture of the

He

good which

good

the cause of everything

All that

world.

tells us

is

derived from the

is

Contemplation of the world

effects.

not only that things are good as substances, as

individuals, but also that the tendency of things to

an end, to the

last

end,

is

good.

Hence the goodness

work of God.

of this final order must also be the

And

of this there must also be an eternal plan in the

mind of Godj

that

there must be a divine prov-

is,

idence.

The

universality of this providence follows

from

the universality and the efficacy of the divine causality.

Since every active principle acts for an end, the

direction of things to their

that

is,

the divine providence

far as the divine causality}

to

whatever

is

in

of divine providence,
surprise,

it

must extend

as

must, therefore, extend

any way a being, to everything

that exists in the world.

no

end on the part of God

it

Because of

this universality

follows that there

is

for

God

no accident, no crossing of plans, such

[119]

THOMAS AQUINAS

gty(

we

as

^5

experience in the activities of particular, cre-

ated causes.

Through the

we

universality of the divine providence,

can understand the existence of evil in the world.

For God's providence extends to the totality of existing things, and can therefore permit a deficiency in
this or that being, by which the perfection of the
totality is brought about or promoted.
If there were
no evil in the world, much good would also never
come about. The life of the lion is impossible without the death of other animals, and the heroic virtue of the martyrs would never have existed without
the fury of persecution.

The freedom of the human

will can be

harmonized

with the universal character of divine providence in

like

as

For the

manner.

from

act springing

a particular cause

is

versal order of all things towards

cause,

and

is

from

free will

an element in the uni-

God, the

first

therefore also within the scope of di-

vine providence.

There

is

a more excellent prov-

idence reigning over the just than over the godless

from the former God holds

initely destroy their welfare.

off all that

If

God

bly snatch the godless from their

serves

does not forci-

sins, this

exclude them from His providence.

them

could def-

For

does not

He

pre-

in their existence.

Again, the universal extent of providence in no

way

excludes

its

immediacy.
[

120]

The

divine plan

em-

GOD AND THE WORLD

$K

^5

braces not only the system of created causes, but also

their effects.

In the execution of the divine plan, in

the government of the world,

created intermediaries.

the higher.

In

this

God makes

He directs the lower through

he shows the superabundance

of His goodness, in so far as

He

imparts also to

creatures the higher dignity of causal

I, q.

use of

22).

[121]

efficacy (S. th.

CHAPTER

IX

NATURE OF THE HUMAN SOUL

AN,

a unified nature

composed of

and matter, is on the dividing

between two worlds.
For
Thomas, man is a favorite object of
spirit

line

philosophical

He

lation.
ticles

of his theological (S.

and theological specudevoted extensive ar-

75-905 I II,
philosophical {Contra gentes II,
th. I, qq.

2248) and his

46-90) summ&y and of the Qucestiones
qq.

etc.,

to psychology.

The

latter

is

disputatce

considered the

masterpiece of his system, and at the same time that

part of his speculation in which he most successfully
established
against

and

the

justified the

contemporary

philosophy of the soul

in trend,

and

is

philosophy of Aristotle
counter-currents.

His

indeed chiefly metaphysical

in this respect offers ideas of

value, but an empirical basis

is

permanent

by no means wanting.

His theory of the emotions (S. th. I II, qq. 2244),

memory and the exercise of memory (Commentary

of

122]

THE HUMAN SOUL

$
on Aristotle's

De memoria

^5

et remtniscentid) , his re-

marks on the process and the progressive develop-

ment of teaching and learning {De

verit.

11), are

very remarkable proofs of an introspective analysis

of mental

The

life.

entire structure of his psychology

ently and consistently built

up on

the essence of the soul and of

The Essence of

its

the Soul.

is

coher-

his conception

of

relation to the body.

In examining and de-

human soul, Thomas

that we mean by soul

termining the essence of the

be-

gins with the consideration

the

first

principle of the

immanent

phenomena and activities of life,

whose noblest acts are

in all living beings,

From

self-movement and knowledge.

ation he

is

not be corporeal.

be a principle of
the

first

Indeed, something corporeal can

life, as

the eye or the heart, but not

principle, the ultimate,

immanent

basis

of

For, to be a principle of life and a living being

life.
is

this consider-

led to the conclusion that the soul can-

not the property of bodies in so far as they are

corporeal.

Else everything corporeal should have

and a principle of

life.

being shows manifestations of

life

to be living

way

If a corporeal

and

is

in

some

a principle of life, the only explanation for this

can be found in that which makes this body to be just

this

kind of a body, namely, a living body.

is its

Hence

act (entelechy).

the soul, as the

principle of life in living things,

[

123]

And

is

this
first

not a body, but

THOMAS AQUINAS

the act, the

first actuality,

of the body.

Thus Thomas

subscribes to the Aristotelian definition of the soul as

the

actuality (entelechy), the basic act (actus)

first

of a physical organism capable of life (S. th.

75,

I, q.

a. i).

From a contemplation of the soul in general,

Thomas proceeds to a more specific determination of
the essence of the human soul. By human soul we
mean

first immanent principle of intellectual acThereupon he proves the immateriality and

the substantiality of the human soul. For the former,
he starts from the nature of human thought. It

the

tivity.

is

know the natures of

The knowing principle can have nothing
known objects in itself as physical determina-

a fact that man's intellect can

all things.

of the
tions

of

edge of

its

own.

objects.

something

bitter,

things as bitter.
principle, the

bodies, if

it

For that would prevent the knowlThus the tongue, when affected by
tastes no sweetness, but tastes all
In the same way the intellectual

human

were

soul, could impossibly

itself

know

of the nature of a body.

all

For

every corporeal being has a determinate nature.

Were

the soul corporeal by nature, or were

its

intel-

performed through corporeal orwould be determined and limited to such an

lectual activities

gans,

it

extent that
all

it

man thought

know the essences of

The unhampered range of hu-

could not possibly

corporeal things.
is

therefore a proof that the soul, the

[

124]

THE HUMAN SOUL

$&
and

principle

(S. th. I, q. 50, a.

Thomas

power,

basis of this intellectual

corporeal, immaterial (S. th.

where

^5

I, q.

Contra gentes

is

in-

Else-

2).

a.

75,

II, a.

49)

established the fundamental difference be-

tween the intellectual soul and bodies from the fact

of self-consciousness, the ability of the intellect to reflect

upon

The
its

itself

and

its activities.

The

substantiality.

of mental activities

which

soul leads us to

subsistence of the principle

evident from the fact that

is

performs a function

Now

human

immateriality of the

it

which the body has no share.

in

by

by itFor the manner of action corresponds to the

manner of being, and vice versa (S. th. I, q. 75, a. 2).
that

is

active

itself also exists

self.

When we

say that the mental activity

is

one

in

which

the body has no share, we mean that for thinking

and willing, the body is not necessary as the organ

of mental

The

activities.

body, however, plays a

part in regard to the content of intellectual

knowledge

intellectual

that

is,

in furnishing the materials of

knowledge

The human

{Ibid, ad 3).

soul differs profoundly

mal soul by reason of

subsistence.

its

to Aristotelian doctrine
tivities

human

from the

thought alone of

all

the ac-

of life occurs without a corporeal organ.

soul that

is

exclusively the principle of sensory

not of intellectual activities

mal soul

performs

no
[

ani-

For according

and such

is

A
and

the ani-

acts that are subjectively

125

THOMAS AQUINAS

gttf

Hence

independent of matter.

75

a 3)'

possesses no sub-

independent of matter (S.

sistent existence,
j

it

^5

Thomas

th. I, q.

therefore a decided champion

is

of the immateriality and substantiality of the

For him there

soul.

no thought of an

is

By emphasizing

conception of the soul.

stantiality

and for

from the animal

soul

is

made

soul.

clearer

is

fundamental difference

its

The

spiritual nature of the

by the view

substances capable of

soul

the sub-

of the soul he rounds out the proof for

spirituality

its

that, like all spiritual

knowing general forms, the

not composed of matter and form.

This

ready evident from the soul considered in

For
is

it is

the

ter, as

is

al-

itself.

contained in the very concept of soul that

act,

the

first actuality,

of the body.

potency, can never be a part of

phatically, however,

is

stances, evident

from the

universal forms.

that

is

And matMost em-

all spiritual

sub-

fact that the intellect can

Were

matter part of the soul,

known

then these forms would be

For anything

act.

it

the absence of a composition

of matter and form in the soul, as in

know

human

actualistic

as individuals.

received in a subject,

is

re-

ceived according to the peculiar state of this subject.

The

sensory powers, which

make

use of corporeal

organs, can take up only individual forms (S. th.

i,q. 75,

a.

5).

From the spirituality and substantiality of the human soul, we can conclude to its indestructibility and
[126]

THE HUMAN SOUL

($$

The

immortality.
cident; that

is,

soul cannot be destroyed per ac-

not by reason of the destruction of an

other thing with which the soul

cidents

being

is

fcS&

is

linked up.

'Ac-

and material forms perish when the whole

destroyed. Animal souls perish as soon as

their bodies are destroyed} for they are not subsist-

ent essences.

The human

soul,

on the other hand,

subsistent being,

and therefore does not cease

when something

else

bound up with

it,

is

to be

the body,

is

destroyed.

Nor
its

human soul perish per

own nature. This again

can the

reason of

its

is

istence belongs to the

act, first actuality.

that

follows

by
from

is,

For that which per se

from it. Now ex-

nature as a subsistent form.

belongs to a form

se>

inseparable

form per

se, since

Hence matter

the latter

receives

its

is

being

and actuality from the fact of being united with the

form; and it is destroyed by being separated from
the form.
Now it is impossible for a form to be
separated from itself. Hence it is also impossible for
a subsistent form to cease to exist. To this ontological argument a psychological one is added. There
is

in the

human

soul a natural desire to live forever.

Such a natural longing cannot be vain.

human

soul

is

immortal

Hence

the

(S. th. I, q. 75, a. 6).

Relation of Soul and Body. A further development of the nature of the soul is met with in the question of the relation of soul and body.
It is in the
[

127

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^

^5

concept of the relation of soul and body that

historically with a characteristic phase of

speculation.

Through

Thomas' psychological
and

consistency.

of knowledge.

This

we

it

we meet

Thomistic

can get the best survey of

edifice in all its orderliness

is

especially true of his theory

Thomas

has here departed from the

Platonic path walked by Augustine,

Hugo

of

St.

Victor, and, to a great extent, the older Franciscan

school.

human

According

to

them

the emphasis in defining

nature was put on the soul to the extent of

ultimately making the soul the true

sidering the

body merely

as

man and

con-

an organ of the soul, and

not as an essential constituent of the whole man.

Over

against this view,

Thomas,

in close

adhe-

rence to Aristotle, stressed the position that the soul

For sensory perception is certainly a

human activity, and at the same time not an activity
purely of the soul. Hence man is not only a soul,
but a composite of soul and body (S. th. I, q. 75, a.
Here Thomas strikes a middle way between
4).
spiritualism and materialism.

is

not the man.

In order to indicate the true relation between soul

and body, Thomas makes use of hylomorphism, the

Aristotelian theory of matter and form. Albert the
Great had already adopted
way, and

view of
It

this

theory in a general

Thomas developed and

systematized the

his teacher.

may

be well to recall the basic lines of the Aris[

128

THE HUMAN SOUL

(^

totelian theory of matter

and form

Matter and

are the essential constituents of all physical ob-

Everything

jects.

and form.

Matter

in nature
is

is

a synthesis of matter

the purely undetermined, but

therefore the determinable ;

is

it

strate of all things of nature.

line

as reflected in the

Thomas.

philosophical speculation of

form

^5

It

between reality and nothing;

common

the

sub-

on the dividing

is

not the really

it is

existing, but the possibility of being;

the pure,

it is

but real, potentiality of the totality of physical nature. Therein its " entity " is exhausted.

That which makes matter

latter

be an actual and

to

specifically differentiated being

is

the principle of specific being.

is

the activities flow

from the

being,

principle of activities of the thing.

it

And
is

the

since

also

The form

Through

us the ideal factor in things.

The

the form.

the

gives

form the

objects of nature are reflections of the divine idea;

in their

The

forms things are knowable.

relation of these

two

ments can be defined more

tency)

is

Matter (po-

passive, the principle receiving being

action; while

form

(act)

ing being and action.

monized

constituent, basic ele-

precisely.

is

and

active, the principle giv-

These two opposites are har-

in the substance of the physical thing, the

Neither matter nor form

composite of the two.

alone constitute the essence of the physical object,

but both together.

Matter by
[

129]

itself

has no existence;

THOMAS AQUINAS

gttf
it

)fo

possesses reality only in union with the form.

just as

And

has no existence, so also matter in itself can-

it

known only through the form.

While matter cannot exist apart from the form, not
not be

known

it

is

even through the causality of God,

possible for

it is

form to exist by itself without the support of matter;

and it actually happens. Accordingly a distinction
is made between subsistent and non-subsistent forms.
The first are spiritual beings, pure spirits and human

The

souls.

second are the formal principles of

all ir-

from the animal and plant

souls

rational beings,

we have in
form." From

In speaking of matter and form,

down.

mind "

first

matter n and " substantial

we must carefully distinguish the accidental

form. The substantial form, the essential form, conthe latter

stitutes the substance in its essential being, gives pri-

mary and
is,

as

it

specific

being to

The

it.

accidental

form

were, superadded to a substance already con-

stituted in

Thomas
morphism

its

being,

and gives

it

secondary being.

applies the theory of Aristotelian hyloto the relation

which he expresses

between soul and body,

as follows: "

The

tellectual activity, the rational soul,

principle of inis

the essential

form of the human body."

This proposition
ities

of intellectual

first

and most

thing

is

also

its

is

based,

life.

first

of

all,

That which

on the

activ-

constitutes the

basic principle of the activities of a

substantial form, the essential

[

130]

form

THE HUMAN SOUL

6^

of the thing, to which these

The

reason for this

so far as
is

active,

which

it is

active except in

is

Hence everything

in act.

is

in action,

by reason of the same principle through

it is

being.

activities are attributed.

that nothing

is

^5

in act or possesses

Thus

the soul

the

is

its

first

primary and

and most

specific

basic prin-

ciple of activity in all the levels of living beings.

and phenomena of vegetative, sensory,

man have their ultimate basis

All

activities

and

intellectual life in

human soul.
Hence the principle of

in the

intellection,

whether we

call it intellect or intellectual soul, is the essential

form of man, the form of the body.

If any one wishes to deny the force of this argument and refuses to accept the soul as the form of
the body, he must furnish another explanation of

how we

can conceive the intellectual act as the act

of man, as the function of the

human

sciousness of each one tells

him

which performs the

amines in their

act

self.

that

it

The
is

his self

Thomas

of thought.

con-

ex-

historical order the various attempts

at explaining, without admitting the soul to be the

essential

form of the body, how the

can be that of the

fies

him.

Only

him, shows

human

of these

satis-

the Aristotelian theory, according to

satisfactorily

man who performs

argument for

intellectual act

None

self.

how

it

is

" this individual

the act of thinking."

his theory

is

further

based on the specific nature

[131]

THOMAS AQUINAS

gg^

^5

The

of man.

Now

activities.
is

nature of a thing

is

manifested in

the activity peculiar to

man

as

its

man

rational thought, since therein he transcends all

Hence

other living beings.

thought that determines the

That which

specifies the

it

is

the principle of

specific

nature of man.

nature of a thing

is its

es-

form and so the principle of intellectual acman, his rational soul, is the essential form

sential

tivity in

of

man

(S. th. I, q. 76, a. 1).

human soul as the essential form

no way argues against the spiritual and

Acceptance of the
of the body, in

For the higher and

nobler a form, the greater is its dominion over corporeal matter, the less is it also immersed in matter,
substantial nature of the soul.

and the better does it preserve activities removed

from matter. The human soul, representing the
highest level of substantial forms, by
excels corporeal matter, in so far as

power and
has no part.

possesses a

it

which the corporeal matter

activity in

That

own powers

its

is its

intellectual ability {Ibid.).

Various other considerations help to define and

lumine

this

basic thesis of

Thomas.

il-

Against the

monopsychism of Averroes he shows that there are

many

as

intellectual principles, or substantial forms, as

there are

human

bodies (S. th.

he speaks up for a single soul

a spiritual soul.

The

latter,

I, q.

76,

2).

Again

in the individual

numerically one,

principle of the intellectual, sensory,

[

a.

132]

man,
is

the

and vegetative

THE HUMAN SOUL

life in the individual

life

of

man

substantial

man;

it is

and perceptual

intellectual

It

(a. 3).

form

in

is

man.

the one source of the

faculties, of the physical

at the

same time the only

As the

intellectual soul vir-

tually contains in itself the sensory

souls, so

it

Jijfe

and vegetative

also virtually contains in itself all lower

substantial forms,
tions exercised

and alone performs

by the animal soul

all

in the animal,

the vegetative soul in the plant (a. 4).

tellectual soul

is

the func-

the only substantial

and

Since the in-

form of man,

and soul is an immediate one, and

is not effected by means of accidental determinations
or a corporeal form (a. 6 and 7). Since the soul is
the essential form of the body, it exists whole in the
entire body, and whole in every part of the body.
For the essential form is at the same time the perBut if the
fection of the whole and of its parts.
the union of body

soul

is

essentially in the entire body, this does not

preclude that

it

develops and exercises

activities in special parts, as in

organs

its

powers and

the brain and sensory

(a. 8).

Thus Thomas applies the notion of the substantial

form to the relation of soul and body in man in a
thoroughly consistent manner, thereby bringing the
essential unity of

man

Thomas' theory,

into clear relief.

particularly his emphatic insist-

ence on the oneness of the substantial

was attacked

as

form

in

man,

an innovation by the Franciscan theo[

133]

THOMAS AQUINAS

g?^
logians.

The

biographical sketch in preceding pages

has already indicated that

Thomas
rium

ticle in

John Peckham opposed

vigorously on this point.

In the Correcto-

Thomce of William de

fratris

^5

la

Mare, the

which Thomas defends the oneness of the

substantial

form

in

man

one of the principal points

is

who wrote

of attack j while the Dominicans,

William de

la

The

objective of the tracts

of Hotun,

against

Mare, defended Thomas energetically

just on this point.

Thomas

latter

De

is

also the principal

unitate formce

by William

of Sutton, and especially Giles

of Lessines and Hervseus Natalis.

Likewise does the

literature of the Qucestiones quodlibetales of the

was made

Thomas by

to

these attacks on

the psychology of

the definition of the Council of Vienna

declaring that the rational soul

form of the body

is

which

rected against the Franciscan Peter

teaching of

body

Thomas on

certainly

the immediate es-

John Andrea

(d.

to the text

it

in the

of the Council

The

1348) refers directly

to

canonist

Thomas

of the text of the council:

one desiring further

summa

di-

The

Olivi.

the relation between soul and

comes closer

in his exposition

was

definition

John

than the teaching of his opponents.

find

Do-

An end

minican school treat the point thoroughly.

sential

ar-

knowledge on

of

St.

Thomas' doctrine of the

"Any

this point,

can

Thomas."
relation of soul

and body

continues in the Thomistic philosophy of today.

[134]

In

THE HUMAN SOUL

<^

the psychology of Cardinal Mercier, which takes full

modern research, the quesbody and soul is developed in complete harmony with Thomas, and the latter is found to agree
account of the results of
tion of

well with the assured results of experimental psychology.

In

fact, as

the Cardinal pointed out,

it is

we can

best

precisely in the light of this theory that

understand the peculiar nature of

[135]

human

thought.

CHAPTER X
INTELLECTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF MAN

CCORDING
a

spiritual

Thomas

to

the soul

is

immediately

substance,

united with the body as

its

true and

only essential form, and as the ulti-

mate

The

life.

soul does not exercise these functions

immediately, through

means of

human, intellectual,
and vegetative functions of

basis of all

sensory,

essence as such, but by

its

real powers, with

which are really

distinct

which

it is

from

its

endowed, and
essence.

powers of the soul are determined and

cording to their respective
cording to their objects.

acts,

classified ac-

and these

In the

The

in turn ac-

last analysis, there-

fore, the faculties are distinguished

by the formal

objects of their activities (S. th.

77,

By proclaiming
ulties of the soul

I, q.

a.

1-3).

a real distinction between the fac-

and

its

substance,

Thomas

parts

company with Augustine, William of Auvergne, and

others,
ties,

and adhers

to Aristotle's theory of the facul-

which had been further developed by Avicenna.

[136]

KNOWLEDGE OF MAN

gg#

Like Aristotle, Thomas accepts

J$5

five basic classes

of faculties: vegetative powers, powers of sense perception, the sensory appetency, spontaneous

ment, and the intellectual powers (S.

1).

As

knowledge process

far as the

move-

th. I, q. 78, a.

concerned,

is

the powers of sense perception are divided into the

five external

ter are the

judgment

and the four internal

common

senses.

The

lat-

sense, the imagination, sensory

and memory

(instinct),

(S. th. I, q. 78).

Just as this division adheres closely to Aristotle

and Avicenna,

so does the classification of the higher

faculties of the soul

In

fact,

it is

powers and

in the

remain faithful

manner

activities

of

in

to the Stagirite.

which he analyzes the

human thought

that

we

can

best see the Aristotelian character of the espistemol-

ogy of Thomas over against the Augustinian theory of

The thorough difference betwo tendencies, which we may label Aris-

the Franciscan school.

tween the

and Augustinianism, can be indicated in

the following way. Plato, Augustine, and the Frantotelianism

ciscans,

Bonaventure, Matthew of Aquasparta, John

Peckham, Roger Marston, William of Falgar,

etc.,

very decidedly stress the activity of the faculty of

knowledge, the

vital

and subjective element

in the

genesis of

human knowledge. Thomas and his school

(Thomas

of Sutton, Bernard of Trilia, John of

Na-

ples, etc.), following Aristotle, stress the passive

and

receptive character of knowledge, and see in knowl[

137]

THOMAS AQUINAS

^5

edge an assimilation of the knowing subject with the

object

known,

a figurative grasping of the reality.

second point of opposition between the two

closely related to the

theJ

and

Franciscans, sense perception

knowledge

exist side

The

loosely.
tellectual

is

In Plato, Augustine, and

first.

intellectual

by side rather externally and

importance of sense knowledge for in-

knowledge

is

minimized.

cording to the Franciscans

The soul, acMatthew of

especially

Aquasparta, their most keen-minded representative

does not
from the

acquire

knowledge of the incorporeal

its

senses, but rather

or else in the divine ideas.

from reflection on itself

Thomas, on the other

hand, in close agreement with Aristotle, defends an

intimate, internal relation between sensory perception

and

intellectual

knowledge,

content of higher knowledge

is

in so far as the total

ultimately furnished

medium of the senses. Thomas considers

the manner in which man knows the corporeal intellectually as the norm and standard of human inthrough the

tellectual

knowledge

in general, therefore also of

our intellectual understanding of incorporeal beings

and

values.

tion

between sense and

Evidently

this conception

intellectual

of the rela-

knowledge

is

an

echo of the Thomistic theory of the soul as the substantial

form of the body.

The

Franciscan school

represents the predominant spiritualistic conception

of

human

nature derived from Augustine.

[138]

Let us

now
this

KNOWLEDGE OF MAN

&&
see

how

the epistemology of

Thomas

maintains

general characteristic in detail.

At the very beginning of

tellectual powers,

his

treatment of the in-

Thomas emphasizes

the passive, re-

He

ceptive character of our intellect very decisively.

recalls the statement of Aristotle, that thinking

is

in

a certain sense something passive, that the intellect

is

like

an empty slate on which " nothing

Passivity does not here

mean

is

written."

the purely receptive

undergoing of a physical alteration, but rather the

condition of being in potency to something.

man

intellect

and

farthest

purest

act,

on the lowest level of

is

The hu-

spiritual beings

removed from the divine intellect, the

and is in potency to all intelligible things,

to everything that can be an object of intellectual hu-

man knowledge. The

th. I, q.

79,

a.

and

intellect

is

a passive

power

(S.

2).

In close conformity with Aristotle, again, according

to

whom

there

and likewise

is

to

in the soul the

make

power

to

be

all

things

Thomas assumes an
intellect.
The latter is a

all things,

tntellectus agens, an active

power of the human mind, which prepares intelligible (intellectually knowable) contents by means
of the abstraction of the universal, the ideal, out of
the materials presented through the senses.

The

perceptual contents of the outer world, which are

brought to the portals of the

inner senses, are

still

intellect

by the outer and

material and individual in char[

139]

THOMAS AQUINAS

$ft
acter,

and therefore not yet

^5

actually, but only poten-

In order that they

tially, intelligible.

actually intelligible, that

an object proportionate to the

the universal and the ideal,
in the intellect itself

may become

capable of presenting

is,

intellect's capacity for

we must assume

which can

power

strip these materials

of their corporeal and individual determinations.

This active power

is

the active intellect.

J.

Maus-

bach brings out this function of the active intellect

by a modern comparison: "

It is as if

the sensory image and projected

on

X-rays

immaterial form

its

the sensitive plate of the intellect."

stractive intellect
ciple can lift

is

something else out of a

into actuality (S. th. I, q. 79, a. 3).

is

The

ab-

only an active prin-

active, since

of an active intellect

on

fell

state

of potency

This acceptance

by no means a retraction of
For the passive intel-

the passivity of the intellect.

lect

in

(intellectus fossibilis), the intellectual faculty

which intellectual knowledge

passive.

It

is

forms (species
intellect,

is

consummated,

is

receptive in regard to the intelligible

intelligibiles)

prepared by the active

and by means of these

is

led to know.

For

Bonaventure, on the other hand, the abstractive intellect is

not alone in being active ; the passive intel-

lect, too, is

not purely passive, but endowed with a

natural activity (In II Sent. d. 24, p.

1, a. 2, q.

1 Grundlage and Ausbilding des Characters nach dem

von Aquin. Freiburg, 191 1, p. 11.
[

HO]

hi.

4).

Thomas

'

KNOWLEDGE OF MAN

^5

In contrast with the Averroistic interpretations and

their obscuring of the Aristotelian conception of the
intellectus agens>

which

is

itself

not too clear, and

their maintaining that the active intellect

men

a single intelligence separate

human

and

is

for all

distinct

from

Thomas declares emphatically that the intellect is in the human soul, is a

faculty of the soul, whence there are as many active
intellects as there are human souls (S. th. I, q. 75,
the individual

a.

4 and

souls,

5).

In the Thomistic discussion of the intellectual faculties, that is,

emphasis

is

of the subjective factor in knowledge,

put on the passivity of knowledge.

In

the discussion, however, of the objects of knowledge,

that
stress

of the objective factor in knowledge, the

is,

is

on the intimate relation between sensory

perception and intellectual knowledge, and on the

decisive influence of the intellectual apprehension of

the corporeal on all our intellectual knowledge in

general.

We

the fact that

jects of

have an external indication of

Thomas

this in

begins his treatment of the ob-

knowledge with the corporeal

objects.

In de-

termining the manner in which sensory objects are

intellectually

degrees.

He

apprehended by
first sets

us,

he proceeds by

up the proposition that the

knows material objects in

soul, through the intellect,

an immaterial, necessary, and universal

manner.

Plato removed the physical objects from the reach

]
[

141

THOMAS AQUINAS

^5

of intellectual knowledge because he could not har-

monize the universal, necessary character of intelknowledge with the individual and contin-

lectual

gent nature of sensory objects.

Against him

maintains both that our intellects do

rial,

and that

this

know

Thomas

the mate-

knowledge bears the stamp of the

immaterial, the universal, and the necessary.

It is

not necessary that the object of knowledge be received into the intellect in the ontological status
possesses in itself outside the intellect.

up the

lects take
jects, in a

species of
is

Our

intel-

images of corporeal ob-

manner corresponding

to their immaterial

If even our sensory organs take up the

nature.

gold

species, the

it

gold without the actual gold, so that the

manner than
more take up
which are in theman immaterial and

in the sense faculties in another

outside them, the intellect must all the

the species of the material things

selves corporeal

and mutable,

immutable form, such

material nature.

This

temological principle:

as
is

is

in

proportionate to

its

im-

expressed in the basic epis-

Whatever

is

received,

is

re-

ceived according to the nature of the receiver (S. th.

I,q. 84,

To

a. 1).

the question of the reality of an immaterial

knowledge of material objects by man, another must

Whether the essence of the soul in itself

Here
is the sufficient medium of this knowledge.
Thomas sets up a proposition that illumines his en-

be added:

H2]

KNOWLEDGE OF MAN

g8#
tire

epistemology:

means of His

God

^5

alone knows everything by

essence, since

He

alone, as the

Himself.

cause, has the ideas of all things in

created spiritual substance, not even an angel,

soul as such

is

its own essence.

In man
medium of knowledge neither

material nor for immaterial objects (S. th,

a.

No

knows

means of

things by

first

I, q.

the

for
84,

Furthermore, the soul does not know the

2).

material or the immaterial by means of innate ideas.

This

is

contradicted by the potential character of our

lower and higher faculties of knowledge, as experience reveals

jects the

them

to us (a. 3).

Thomas

likewise re-

Neoplatonic theory that our souls receive

the intelligible species of material objects, in fact of

all objects,

we cannot
and soul

from other

way

(a. 4).

Another question
jects,

intelligences j for in that

explain the purpose of the union of body

and a

cetemcBy that

is

whether we know material ob-

fortiori the immaterial, in the ratlones

in the eternal ideas of

is,

God.

Thomas

here takes the opportunity to explain his position

over against the Augustinian-Franciscan conception

The

of knowledge.

Matthew

of

Franciscan school (Bonaventure,

Aquasparta,

John

Peckham, Roger

Marston, William of Falgar, Fr. Eustachius, Walter

of Bruges,

etc.,

with

of Abbeville and

whom we

Henry

must

associate

Gerard

of Ghent), pointing to

gustine, base the certainty of

Au-

human knowledge on

[143]

THOMAS AQUINAS

(^

^5

human intellect and

The eternal light of the

contact between the

supreme

truth.

moves our

intellects

them, so that

in,

divine ideas

and sheds a ray of

and by the influence

we formally know

the light of

the truth.

light into

of, this light

Thomas

accepts the

concept of a knowledge in the eternal ideas, but interprets

He

it

in the light of his Aristotelian epistemology.

rejects the

everything
a

medium

view that

man

here below knows

known object, in
we know all things

in the divine ideas as in a

of knowledge; he says

in the divine ideas as in the first principle of

edge only

knowl-

in so far as the light of reason in us

participation in the divine light,

and

is

in so far as

things, being fashioned after the divine ideas, are

true

and knowable

There can

(S. th. I, q. 84, a. 5).

be no question here of an actual agreement between

the Augustinian-Franciscan and the Thomistic conceptions of a

knowledge

in the divine ideas.

ternal facts also indicate the contrary.

ham

Ex-

John Peck-

brings up just the theory of the regulce ceternce

as a point of difference

between the Franciscan school

and Thomas. Roger Marston expressly combats

Thomas' exposition of Augustine. The Franciscans
believed that
ently

Thomas

from them in

this

interpreted Augustine differ-

matter and that he depreciated

the latter.

The mind

of man, therefore, draws

its

knowledge

of material as well as immaterial objects neither out

[

144]

KNOWLEDGE OF MAN

6^

of the depths of

own

its

nor out of

spiritual being,

the light of the divine ideas.

mind derive

^5

the plenitude of

Whence,
its

then, does our

Thomas

knowledge?

answers that the contents of our knowledge are de-

He

rived from experience.

and deciand employs

consciously

up the position of Aristotle,

the latter's dictum: " Our knowledge starts in the

sively takes

The

senses."

truth of f his statement he rests on the

fact that the images,

abstractive

power

wnich the active

raised to ideational

intellect

and

edge

is

from the

Consequently our intellectual knowl-

dependent on sensory experience for

But

terials.

its

intelligible

species or forms, are as to content derived

world of sense.

by

as the

its

ma-

images acquire their intelligible

character only through the functioning of the active

intellect,

and

we cannot call sense knowledge

total cause

experience

is

6).

Sense

the cause of our intellectual knowledge

only materially, in regard to content (S.

a.

the exclusive

of our intellectual knowledge.

th. I, q. 84,

These explanations of Thomas mark a notable

own

difference between his

Franciscans.

theory and that of the

According to the

of immaterial objects

is

latter

our knowledge

not derived from the senses,

but arises either out of a contemplation of the soul

itself

or out of the divine ideas j intellectual knowl-

edge of the material world, on the other hand,

is

at-

tained through the senses.

Thomas

rigorously develops the consequences of

[145]

THOMAS AQUINAS

(^

)fo

his thesis, that the senses are the original sources of

all

He

our intellectual knowledge.

considers

it

im-

body here
knowledge without

possible for our intellect, in union with the

on earth, to perform any

He

recourse to images.

stantiation of this claim.

which

act of

refers to experience in sub-

Injury to a corporeal organ,

affects the imagination, also causes disturbances

in intellectual life

a proof that the latter pre-

supposes the former.

Experience furthermore shows

that, in order to grasp

something

intellectual,

ploy corresponding images, analogies,

the same

when we

others.

We

etc.

we em-

We

do

try to explain difficult matter to

them examples,

give

comparisons,

which evoke the corresponding images and thereby

initiate

and

call

up a

point in question.

understanding of the

spiritual

The deeper

metaphysical basis

for this relation between the activities of higher

thought and of imagination

lies in

the proportionality

between the knowing subject and the known object.

The proper

object of the

human

forms one nature with the body,

intellect,
is

which

the essense of

corporeal things (guidkas in materia corporali exi-

In the realm of actual existence the

stens).

object of

There

is

human knowledge
outside the

is

mind no

always individual.
universal nature of

stone, only this or that definite stone.

sence of ^corporeal things can be

specific

known

Hence

the es-

intellectually

only after the concrete material individual things

[146]

KNOWLEDGE OF MAN

gg^

known. Now it is precisely the part of the senses

and the imagination to know the individual things.
The intellect must therefore, turn to the images in
order to know its proper object, namely the essence
are

inherent in individual things, the

common

nature ex-

isting in individuals (S. th. I, q. 84, a. 7).

This turning of the

images

intellect to the

neces-

is

sary not only for our intellectual knowledge of material objects,

but for our intellectual knowledge of any

For we can think of incorporeal

objects, of which no images exist, only by analogy
and by aid of the corporeal of which we have images
objects whatsoever.

(S. th. I, q. 84, a. 7

ad 3).

Pure

spiritual substances

manner and the

think of the material after the

anal-

ogy of the immaterial j we, on the other hand, think

of the immaterial after the manner and the analogy
of the material (S. th.
live here

I, q.

85,

a.

passive intellect can enable us to

in

1).

on earth, neither our active

themselves (S.

As long

intellect

as

we

nor our

know pure

spirits

th. I, q. 88, a. 1).

A brief sketch must

also be given of the Thomistic

conception of the intellectual knowledge of individual

things and of the self-knowledge of the soul.

Here,

again, Thomas departs from the Franciscan school.

Thomas teaches that the individual material things
as such

cannot be the immediate and

intellectual

knowledge.

The

first

object of our

reason for this

is

that

material objects are individuated by their matter.

[147]

THOMAS AQUINAS

gSK

Now

our intellect knows just by abstracting the in-

from

That which is
Hence our intellect can know only universals directly.
But it can
recognize individuals indirectly, and by a sort of reflection, since they can become the objects of knowledge by means of the intelligible forms only when
telligible species

this matter.

thus abstracted, however,

is

universal.

the intellect turns to the images (S. th.

This theory aroused the

I, q.

Matthew of Aquasparta,

can school.

86,

a. i).

criticism of the Francis-

teaches expressly that our intellect can

for instance,

know

the in-

dividual thing directly, by means of singular species.

He

Thomas, whose teaching he cites litername, calling it difficult

attacks

ally without mentioning a

to understand.

Thomas

solves the question of the self-knowledge

Our intelway in which it knows

It does not know itself by means
all other things.
of its essence, but by means of its acts. The reason
of the soul in full accord with Aristotle.

lect

knows

for this

itself in

is

mind.

For

is act.

Our

the same

the passive, potential character of our

a thing

is

only in the degree in which

eyes do not see that which

sibly a color, but that

also our intellect.

which

It can

is

know

Thus

material things only

Prime matter,

known only in its relation to subOur intellect is potential, is Intel-

for example, can be

form.

only pos-

actually colored.

in so far as they are actual being.

stantial

is

it

[148]

KNOWLEDGE OF MAN
In itself

lectus fossibil'ts.

things j but
is

it

can itself be

As every

in act.

it

^5

has the ability to

known only

in so far as

only

when

it is

set in action

by the

know

intelligible

forms abstracted out of the images by the active

tellect.

acts

In

Hence our

and not through

this

we

it

act of the intellect takes place

only by a turning to images, the intellect can

itself

know

intellect

knows

itself

essence (S. th.

its

can see the consistency with

through

I, q.

87,

inits

a. 1).

which Thomas

develops his conceptions of the potential, passive

character of our intellect,

and of the origin of

intel-

both

knit closely

into a solidary epistemological synthesis.

The Fran-

lectual

knowledge

in the senses

ciscan school rejected the

Thomistic explanation of

Matthew of Aquasparta comThomas also on this point, citing the latter's

views word for word. He defends the theory that
self-consciousness.

bated

mind knows itself, its inner being, not by means

of its acts, by way of logical conclusion, but directly
through itself, by way of intuition.

the

H9]

CHAPTER

XI

SYSTEM OF ETHICS

HE

moral speculation? of Thomas

form
also

a gigantic achievement that

is

lauded by non-Catholics (among

by

others,

Gass).

The

ethics

of

Thomas, forming the second and

^^^ "
i

greatest

summay and

part

of

the

theological

carefully treated also in other works,

is

highly important from the standpoint of an analysis

of sources, of

its

systematic synthesis, and of the

actual value of

its

contents.

Thomas made an abundant and

Nicomachean ethics of
with

its

Aristotle.

skilfull use of the

He became familiar

contents while writing his

commentary on

it,

for which he used the direct translation of his con-

William of Moerbeke. Earlier Scholastics,

William of Auxerre in his Summa aurea x being the
frere,

first,

had drawn upon

parts of the ethics of the Stagi-

1 Golden Summa
a work used extensively by Alexander of
Hales and subsequent Scholastics; a summary exposition of theology,
of high importance for the history of dogma.
[

150

SYSTEM OF ETHICS

tffy(

jRjfo

But no theologian before Thomas used the con-

rite.

and terminology of

tents

book so extensively for

this

the formulation, foundation, and investigation of the

Christian moral synthesis.

It

would, however, not

Thomas nothing
Thomas inideas.

be true to fact to consider the work of

but a repetition of Aristotelian

tended to write a Christian, supernatural, and not a

purely philosophical
extensively

upon

ethics,

and therefore

biblico-patristic

especially as the latter

also

drew

moral speculation,

was developed and formulated

by Augustine with the aid of

Stoic ideas.

The moral

speculations of the earlier Scholastics, especially as

contained in the Sentences and summce y particularly

the

Summce de

virtutibus et vitiis (Peter Cantor,

Robert of Courcon, John de

their influence

la

on Thomas.

Rochele,

etc.)

exerted

In an unpublished, sys-

tematic ethics of his teacher Albert the Great

(De

bono) he had a prototype of a well organized moral

philosophy.

In the moral theology of Thomas the

mystic writings of Richard of

also find their echo.

a considerable

St.

Victor in particular

Finally the Secunda also shows

amount of

canonical

and

liturgical

knowledge.
This great variety of source materials made considerable

demands on Thomas' powers of \sysWhile the earlier Scholastics in

tematization.

general, particularly after the example of Peter the

Lombard, worked out

their

moral problems rather

[151]

THOMAS AQUINAS

gift

on occasions furnished by
tions,

Thomas

their

^5

dogmatic specula-

created a complete unified system

of morals in the second part of his summa.

where,"

Baumgartner,

writes

"

his

is

"

No-

power of

synthesis so resplendently evident as in the field

of ethics."

All morality

ment of

is

conceived by

Thomas as the moveGod {motus ra-

rational creatures towards

tionalis creaturce

logica) this

ad Deum).

In the Prima secunda?

of the second part of the

(first section

movement

is

Summa

theo-

treated in general ; in the

Secunda secundce (second section of the second part)

the particular phases of this

movement

are treated.

At the beginning of his general treatment we find

the goal of this movement: happiness, which is the
This
final end of creatures (S. th. I II, qq. 1-5).
happiness, the final end of man, is essentially and
basically the

world.

immediate vision of

It constitutes

highest

human

God

in the

next

the highest exercise of the

faculty, the intellect, in regard to the

supremest object, God, Himself pure intelligence.

From

this

immediate and unveiled vision of

God

follows secondarily an unspeakable love and joy on

the part of the

human

terprets the final

end

While Thomas thus

will.

in

in-

an intellectual direction,

Scotus, in opposition to him, gives the primacy to the

2

M. Baumgartner, T/iomas von

Denker

I.

Aqu'in in

Leipzig, 19 11, p. 311.

[152]

E. von Aster, Grosse

SYSTEM OF ETHICS

$ft

^5

sees the happiness of the will as the

will

and

and

essential

The means
tions of man

leading to this end are the moral ac-

(actus humarii).

good part of the

general ethics (S. th. I II, qq. 6-48)

given over

is

to a psychological analysis of these acts.

is

primary

element of our ultimate end.

Especially

the role of the will in moral actions properly de-

fined,

and an acute psychological description of the

various forms and steps of voluntary action given.

The freedom
is

of the will, the backbone of morality,

The

especially emphasized.

choice

is

necessarily attracts the will;

The idea
the human

will always

universale, the general aspect of happiness,

naturally impels our wills,

man

choose this or that.

The

is

free with respect

He can choose or not,

to individual objects of choice.

different levels of value

not force the will; the latter decides for

termines

To

and

of the good

But while the

under the aspect of the good.

bonum

freedom of

reason, which presents objects of desire

motives of action to the will.

acts

root of

itself,

moves

itself

itself,

do
de-

towards an object.

the treatment of voluntary processes as such,

of freedom of will as the objective presupposition of

human

acts in

their objective nature, in their character of

moral

moral

actions,

is

added

goodness or badness.
as

it

a treatment of

Every

participates in being, as

required of

it;

it

action

is

good

in so far

possesses the perfection

while deficiency in

[153]

its

being, in the

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^
perfection

The

it

}fe

should have, constitutes moral

evil.

presence or absence of this due being or per-

more closely determined by the object, the

circumstances, and the end of the action, which are
therefore determinants of moral good and evil. The
fection

is

aspect of end, finally, leads the goodness of

volition

and

action back to a

human

harmony with the divine

will, the cause of all created good.

In

this conception

of the moral good, ethics and metaphysics come into

intimate contact.

Reason and will are the chief sources of moral

action. But besides them, the emotional life plays an
important role in the sphere of morality.
is

For man

a synthesis of soul and body; and as sense experi-

ence

is

of the greatest importance, even indispensable,

for intellectual knowledge, so the ups and

downs of

our emotional nature are of immense influence in

our moral
life that

life

and endeavors.

It is

our emotional

shows the intimate contact between our

tellectual

and our sensory natures, the

in-

interrelation

between the higher and lower phases of our human

nature

the echo of intellectual representations in

sensory strivings as well as the conative and inhibiting

human

influences of our passions on

will.

Thomas

well understood the importance of the emotions in

and devoted twenty-seven questions of

theological summa to this topic (S. th. I II,

ethics,

22-48).

This

"On

treatise
[

his

qq.

the Passions" contains

154]

SYSTEM OF ETHICS

6^
the

results

of

careful

" Here," says Morgott, "

psychological

we

learn to

who
human

^5
observation.

know

the ex-

perienced saint and mystic,

took note of the

slightest stirrings of the

heart,

and could

detect the finest whisperings of the soul's harp, and

who

more

difficult still

found words and

for the seemingly inexpressible and rendered

cessible to

human understanding."

ideas
it

ac-

Moral acts, which receive their human coloring

from their emotional character, presuppose internal
and external principles. The inner principles are
the natural and supernatural habits of virtue which
equip the soul's energies for their tendency towards
the last end, and keep

made

them

directed to

it.

Thomas

extensive use of the Aristotelian views on hab-

and applied them to the Christian teaching on

and grace (S. th. I II, qq. 49-70). The
contrary of good habits is furnished by sin, which

its,

virtues

leads

man away from

his last

end

(S. th.

I II, qq.

71-89).

The
outside

external principle of moral action, which

is

and above man, is God; and that, in a twoIn His law He gives us the norm, di-

fold manner.

rection, content,

and sanction of moral action

I II, qq. 90 1 08)

and then

He

and supports us through His grace

3

(S. th.

moves,

elevates,

(S. th.

I II, qq.

Morgott, Die Theorie der Gefuekle im System des HI. Thomas.

Eichstaett i860, p. 5.

[155]

THOMAS AQUINAS

$ft
1

The

09- 1 14).

of divine

directive

^5

and obligatory influence

law here Thomas follows Augustine

traces back to the lex ceterna, to the great plan of the

world rooted

in

God's holiness and wisdom.

All

laws are derived from this eternal idea of the divine government of the world, which has the char-

Both rational and

acter of law.

are subject to
eternal

irrational creatures

Irrational creatures take part in the

it.

law by naturally and unconsciously follow-

ing the innate impulses and mechanical laws of their

being,

whereby they are incorporated

purpose of creation.

In man, however, because of

his rational free will, the eternal

knowledge of
suit

of

it.

his

end and

in free

fulfilled with

and conscious pur-

It

is

promulgated

in

the development of reason.

Man

easily

moral

action,

which

recognizes the

first

principles of

are reducible to the proposition

The

is

the law written in the heart of man,

called the natural moral law.

him with

law

This impress of the eternal law in the

mind of man,
is

into the general

intellect's

ready

moral principles

is

Do

good, avoid

evil.

ability to recognize the basic

called synteresis

by Thomas and

the other Scholastics, sometimes also spark of the

soul, scintilla animcey a

the

German

mystics

term that found favor among

of

the

fourteenth

century.

These highest principles of moral conduct are for

practical reason, which judges in moral questions,
what the supreme, indemonstrable, self-evident laws

[156]

SYSTEM OF ETHICS

gg^

)fo

of being and thought are for theoretical reason.

teresis

cJ eve lP s

m to

conscience,

moral principles to the individual

manner God

is

Syn-

which applies the

In

actions.

this

through the natural law the external

principle of morality.

His

legislative activity

is

fur-

and developed in the positive relation

of the Old and New Testaments, which presents us
with supernatural ends, values, and motives.
If God is, through the natural and the positivether extended

supernatural law, the external normative principle

of moral conduct,

moving,

comes

to

macy of

assisting,

He

is,

as dispenser of grace, the

and elevating

principle,

which

man from without, but enters into the intihis soul.

God implants a system of super-

natural energies in the soul, by which the latter

is

elevated to an existence and activity conformable to

God, and ultimately to an immediate contemplation

of God.
On this general background of morality contained
in the Prima secundce, the Secunda secundce paints
the picture of a Christian life of virtue.

It deals

with two grand themes: the virtues themselves in

their various ramifications

and

effects,

and the

ferent stations and forms of Christian life.

skilfull

hand Thomas groups the Christian

dif-

With

efforts

for a virtuous life about the three divine virtues, and

the four cardinal virtues.

In the centre of

group, as queen of the virtues,

[157]

is

this

charity, the super-

THOMAS AQUINAS

)fo

God and neighbor. The

natural love of

presentation

of the Christian life of virtue, especially the teaching

on charity (S.
(ibid. q.

and

th.

and on prayer
of warmth and feeling,

II II, qq. 23

82 and 83),

is

full

ff.),

indicates a practical acquaintance with Christian

asceticism

and mysticism.

Important

in his teach-

ing on the different stations and walks of life

theory of the religious

life,

which he was the

to incorporate into theology.

the religious state a higher

is

He

his

first

does not assign to

form of

Christian perfec-

would disrupt the unity of the Christian

consists in the love of God. In
his judgment of the merits of the religious life, the
emphasis is on the internal disposition and on selfoblation. The evangelical counsels and the practices
tion, such as

ideal,

which for him

of monastic

life

are important as instruments of

means
and unhampered

Christian perfection in so far as they are special

and

special opportunity for a free

devotion to the life of grace and love (S. th. II II,

qq.

186-189).

This rapid sketch of the Thomistic moral theory,

which gives us a mere glimpse of the rich content of

the second part of the theological

summa shows

us

the architectonic talent, the systematizing genius of

Thomas.

But

it

also indicates the practical values

can hope to find in his exposition of moral

we

life.

Thomistic ethics stresses the subjective and the objective, each in

due measure.

[158]

The moral

action

is

SYSTEM OF ETHICS

ggrf

^5

man, bearing
But
destined for an end high above man him-

said to spring out of the inner nature of

the stamp of his sensory-intellectual free nature.

this action

and

self,

is

is

therefore teleologieally regulated

by

norms and laws that are likewise above the free

choice of man, that are, consequently, reflections of a
Finally all moral action and life

metaphysical order.
is

rooted in God, just as our knowledge of truth has

deepest and last basis in God.

its

Thomistic ethics

theocentric, but without surrendering the

is

inely

human, psychological

side of conduct.

Thomas
Even if

In the moral speculation of

and morality are harmonized.

of happiness
his

is

no

is

it

happiness
the hope

a strong urge in striving for virtue,

utilitarian

he conceives

genu-

eudasmonism.

as final end,

is

For happiness, as
same time the

at the

highest development of morality.

Thomas

and an empirical
The method of
sense for realities work together.
observation, especially the careful scrutiny and analIn

ysis

a speculative bent

of the processes of the soul, plays an important

part.

General moral considerations, he

says, are less

useful than special investigations, since

tions are individual

ac-

and concrete (Prologus

is not infrequently emphasized
in S. th.

Experience

II II).

by him

human

as

an excellent way towards the derivation of

general moral principles.

Finally the ethics of

Thomas

[159]

is

a harmonious syn-

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^

thesis of the natural

was an adept

^5

and the supernatural.

Thomas

at discovering the points of contact of-

fered by nature for the supernatural, and at showing

how

the supernatural adapts itself so admirably to

the laws and needs of the

skill

he draws

human

his parallel

soul.

With

fitting

between the organism of

the seven sacraments and the stages of the devel-

opment

in natural

human

life.

He

never wrote an

autobiography, or confessions like Augustine.

in his ethics

But

he unwittingly gives us an insight into

his rich and unified soul-life, bent on seeking God.

His ethics contains not only ancient and Christian
wisdom, not only the results of his own speculative
efforts ; it also bears the stamp of his own inner ex-

periences.

He

tried to realize in his

ideal of the Christian life,

own person

the

and for that reason he

could depict the beauty and grandeur of Catholic

ethics so truly

and

clearly, so

sively.

[160]

simply and impres-

CHAPTER

XII

POLITICAL AND SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY

HERE

is

Thomas

no part of the teaching of

that has attracted the atten-

of non-Catholic thinkers to
such an extent as his political and sotion also

cial

If^feg

philosophy.

It

now known

is

that his theory of state

is

no pure

apriorism, but reveals a close contact with

human

based on concrete materials and facts drawn

life

from
clear

observation.

and

reason.

many

practical,

Modern

His presentation of it is both

making its appeal to sane human
thinkers have acknowledged that

ideas of social, political,

and

juridical philos-

ophy, which have been celebrated as attainments of

our

own

times, are to be

Thomas.

found

in the writings of

Ihering, for instance, says in the second

1
work Der Zweck im Recht: " This
great mind (Thomas) correctly understood the realistic-practical and the social factors of moral life, as
In amazement I ask
well as the historical.

edition of his

Ihering,

Der Zweck im Recht,

[161]

II, p.

161

f.

"

THOMAS AQUINAS

gift

myself

how

it is

possible that such truths, once they

were uttered, could be forgotten so completely by

What

our Protestant savants?

false roads

have been spared, had they taken them

For

my part,

book, had I

would

to heart!

should probably not have written

known them;

my

for the basic ideas I occu-

pied myself with are to be found in that gigantic

thinker in perfect clearness and in most pregnant

formulation."

From

the standpoint of historical examination this

part of Thomistic thought

it

is

noteworthy, because in

the Augustinian conception of state of pre-Tho-

mistic theology

is

for the

telian theories of state

thesis in

first

and

time united with Aristo-

society.

It

is

new

syn-

which many one-sided notions of the earlier

teachings were excluded

and

given to the natural needs of

full consideration
life

and

of the individual as well as of society.

had such an

influence

was

to the purposes

"

No

on the acceptance of

one has

Aristotle's

philosophy as Thomas. The comprehension

and the independent mastery of this doctrine are his

social

own

personal merit."

We

meet with Thomas' social and political

philosophy in the form of an exposition and evaluation of Aristotle, namely, in the commentary on the
latter's Politics, which had been translated into Latin
first

2
Baeumker, " Die eurofaeische Philosofhie des Mittelalters
(Kultur der Gegenwart, I, 5 ed.), p. 403.

162

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

6^

Thomas
many parts

^5

own

by William of Moerbeke.

develops his

views independently in

of his systematic

summa

masterpieces, especially in the theological

also in various opuscula or

De regimine Judceorum
De regimine principum
treatise in the

monographs.

but

Besides the

ad ducissam Brabantice, the

ad regem Cypri, a political

form of an

instruction to a prince,

important here, despite the fact that

it is

is

only partly

from the pen of Thomas himself. This treatise,

completed by Bartholomew of Lucca, led to similar
We shall only recall the De
works by others.
regimine principum of Giles of Rome. Nor is it
mere accident that the exhortations of King Louis
the Saint to his son Philip re-echo the ideas of this

monograph of Thomas.
Because of the present value and the historical

and political theories, it is

in place to present his main views verbatim, on the
origin, nature, purpose, and forms of civil power.
significance of his social

Thomas derives the origin of the state and of civil

power from the nature of man: "Wherever men
strive after a goal and can proceed in various ways,
a directing mind is needed to* show the right way to
Man has an end to which his whole
the goal.
.

life

and

activity are directed.

acting through reason.

to act for a purpose.

after their

end

For him

For he
it is

Now it is a

a creature

therefore proper

men

strive

can see

from

fact that

in different ways, as

[163]

is

we

THOMAS AQUINAS

(jfa

the differences in

man

that reason

He

his end.

J$Q

human endeavors and

actions.

has need of what will guide

For

him

to

has indeed received the light of reason

from nature, and should be guided to his end by

means of it. And if man lived in total isolation, as so
many animals do, he would not have need of any
other directing factor.
Each man would then be
his own king, and under God the highest king, in
so far as he would guide himself by means of the
light of reason he received from God.
It is, however, a

demand of man's

life in society

and

state

nature that he incline to

{animal sociale

et politicum),

many

that he live in social fellowship with

This

is

a greater natural need in

other living beings.

man

others.

than in any

Nature supplies the animals

with food, a protective dress of fur, and means of defence against enemies, like teeth, horns, nails or fleet-

Man

ness of foot.

any of
with

its

these, but

he received reason instead, so that

aid his hands

for him.
able to

was not equipped by nature with

do

might procure

all these

things

But the individual man would never be

that, if dependent solely on himself

hence the natural need of living in fellowship with

others.

similar conclusion results

than

ful in life.
deficiency

fact

have a much more highly developed

that animals
instinct

from the

man
.

has for

The

useful or harmmust supply the

reason, which is only

all that is

latter again

by means of

his

[164]

gg#

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

possible for

him

^5

he lives together with others.

if

a social fellowship one

man

In

helps the other, and

various persons help by the invention of various

means.
to

One

devotes himself to medicine, another

something

else,

etc.

the social nature of

man

The
is

clearest indication of

his

power of speech, the

ability to express his ideas clearly to others,

while

the animals can express their feelings only in a very

general way.
" If, then,

it is

natural for

man

to live in society,

some way in which the many are

governed. In a large body of men, with the egoistic
interest of each one to work for his private benefit,
human society would be disrupted, unless there were
some one who had care of the general good of the
there must also be

body of man and of every other

would be dissolved if there were
no common energies guiding the body, and directing
.
all to the common good of all the members.
There is a deeper rational ground for this.
" The individual or the personal, and the common
society, just as the

living organism

are not the same.

ment of

In the personal

distinction

we have

and separation,

the basis of unity and harmony.

the ele-

in the

common

Now

whatever

things are distinct and different must have different

causes.

Hence

there must be over and above the ten-

dency of each one towards

that works towards

his

own good, something

good common to

the general
[

165

THOMAS AQUINAS

(jfa

many.

We

^5

see a guiding principle wherever

things tend towards one end.

many

In the corporeal world

the highest celestial body guides the other bodies in

accordance with the orderly plan of divine providence.

Again

As

creature.

all bodies are

in the

In the individual

and among the

governed by the rational

macrocosm, so in the microcosm.

man

the soul governs the body,

faculties of the soul the irascible

and

by reason. Among the membody there is likewise one that is the

most noble, is guide of the others, namely the heart
In every manifold there must be a
or the head.
concupiscible are guided

bers of the

governing principle " (De regimine fnncifum

1).

Thus

the very nature of

man

I,

points out the

formation, justification, and need of the social authority which

we meet

at various levels in the father

of the family, the head of a community, and in

its

highest and truest sense in the ruler, the king of

the land.

This derivation of

and

civil

ethical in character,

receives

its

is

authority, psychological

essentially Aristotelian

and

metaphysical support from the Platonic

must precede multiplicity. With this

view we can readily harmonize the theological explanation of civil power which Thomas gathers from
idea that unity

the Scriptures and which holds that

is,

like the spiritual, instituted

creator of

human

civil

by God.

authority

God

is

the

nature ; and since society and state

[166]

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

gt^
are

demands of

source of

is

likewise institutor

For Thomas the

consequent upon the

civil authority.

not merely a necessity

He

of man.

He

nature,

^5
and

state

is

first sin

holds expressly that there would have

been a state and society, a dominion over free

men

{dominium politicum), also in the state of innocence,

that is, even if man had not fallen. There are two
reasons for

man,

this.

The

first is

the social nature of

accordance with which

in

men would have

lived in society even in the state of innocence 3 and

such a societal life

in

not possible without an authority

upon the common weal. A second

it would have been without purpose
have a situation in which men, far surpassing others
knowledge and justice, would not have been able

that

is

reason
to

is

intent

is,

that

to use their gifts for the benefits

of others as rulers

(S. th. I, q. 96, a. 4).

Types of Civil Authority.

The Best Form of
Following Aristotle Thomas distin-

Government.

guishes between a good and just government, and a

bad, unjust one.

The former

modern good sense), arisand monarchy

the distin-

polity (democracy, in the

tocracy

(optimates)y

has three types: the

guishing factor being whether the government

is

in

good hands of many, of a few, or of one. In a

similar way unjust government divides into tyranny,
oligarchy, and democracy (demagogy), that is, the
the

unjust government of one man, of several, or of the

[

167

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^

De

people (rabble) (Cf.

}fy

regimine frinci-pum

I, i).

For Thomas the best form of government is the

There is a greater advantage in having
government over the many in the hands of one man,
monarchical.

because in this

way peace

is

most

secure.

It

is

also

the best form because the most natural, and nature

always does what

All directivity in nature

best.

is

proceeds from unity j in the multitude of members

of our body there

one that moves the others, the

is

heart j and in the life of the soul one faculty rules

Bees have a royal ruler and in

the others, reason.

the entire universe there

ruler of all {Ibid.

is

one God, creator and

2).

I,

As monarchy, the just rule of one man, is the

best form of government, so tyranny, the unjust rule
of one,

is

the worst (I, 3).

In order to forestall

tyranny, Thomas advises a " mixed " form,

in

which

besides the monarchical principle, that of the aris-

form and the democratic are

tocratic

to enter into

the constitution of the state (S. th. I II, q. 105,

a. 1).

If a monarchy has developed into a tyranny,

patience

must be

greater evil.

exercised, for the sake of avoiding

If the tyranny becomes unbearable, the

people, as far as

it is

practicable,

may

proceed to ac-

tion, especially in case

of an elective monarchy.

rannicide, however,

never permissible (I, 6).

is

statement

In

Thomas there is no justifirst made by the Parisian

the expressions and ideas of

fication for the

Ty-

[168]

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

g^

and often repeated,

theologian, Jean Petit (1407),

Thomas

that

)fo

Thomas

taught or favored tyrannicide.

and deterring picture of the person of

paints a dark

the tyrant (I, 3-6, 10); but he

is

equally vigorous

in picturing the glorious character

of a good king.

No

perishable earthly goods, neither honor nor fame,

are his incentives for action and rule (I, 7)

motive

is

the reward he

God

happiness,

good king
heaven

is

(I, 9).

himself (I, 8).

his chief

from God,

eternal

The reward

of the

to expect

is

the highest degree of happiness

As an earthly reward he

will reap

More-

the love and gratitude of his subjects (I, 10).

over, temporal goods, riches, power,

in

and fame,

will

accrue to the just ruler rather than to the tyrant

Thomas

(I, 11).

gives us the most ideal picture of

the manner of government and of the ruling quali-

of the good king.

ties

dom what
world.
flect

the soul

The

is

The king must be in

body and God

in the

rule of the

good and

just king

his kingis

in the

must re-

the divine government of the world (I, 12-14).

The Mission of
means
proper end
rule

the State.

to lead that
in a fitting

State

which

manner.

is

and Church.

being ruled to

The

To
its

mission of the

happy and virtuous

life.
If life in general were the sole end of civic
society, then animals and slaves would also be parts
of a political fellowship. If riches were the aim of
the state, then the merchants together would consti-

state

is

to lead the citizens to a

[169]

THOMAS AQUINAS

&ft

Hence

tute a state.
state

and of

its

the immediate mission of the

authority

zens to a truly good

regimine principum

In order to attain

^5

that of leading the

citi-

a virtuous one

(De

is

life, that is,

I,

14).

this end, the king, as the posses-

sor of the civic authority,

must use several means,

must realize, as it were, various secondary ends.

Above all, he must see that peace is firmly established
in the civic

community.

In his emphasis on peace as

the chief aim of the state,

second duty of the

happy and virtuous

Thomas

state, for

among

life

follows Augustine.

the attainment of a
its

citizens,

is

the

fostering of favorable economic conditions, of an ex-

(De regimine principum I, 15).

attainment of this end, Thomas stresses ag-

ternal prosperity

For the

riculture (Ibid. II, 3), but without depreciating trade

and commerce.
ownership.
etc.,

The

basis

of economic weal

A. Ritschl, Gottschik, Wendt,

J.

is

private

Werner,

attributed a communistic theory of ownership to

Herding, F. Walter, F. Schaub, and

Deploige, on the contrary, came to his defence, and
have shown conclusively the difference between the
theory of Thomas and that of communism.

Thomas.

G.

v.

While the immediate, proper, and general mission

of the state is the virtuous life of its citizens, and the
special ends are the preservation of peace and the
promotion of material welfare, we have not yet
reached the highest and
[

last

end of man.

170]

There

is

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

g^

^5
God

an end outside and above man, given him by

the possession of

This

is

Hence

in eternal

happiness in heaven.

the divinely willed end of

civic society

order of things.
is,

God

must conform

man and

of society.

itself to this

The highest and last end

higher

of the state

therefore, not only the virtuous life of the in-

dividuals, but ultimately the attainment of

God.

If

end were

attainable by the purely natural powers

would be the task of the king to lead man
to this final end. But the eternal union of man with
God in heaven cannot be attained by mere human
endeavors it can be had only with the aid of God.
Hence it is not the task of human authority, but of

this

of man,

it

divine, to lead

men

of

power

this divine

to this end.
is

Now

the possessor

not a mere man, but also

God, namely Jesus Christ, who made men children

of God and opened eternal glory to them. To Him
a kingdom was given that shall never be destroyed.
He is therefore called king in Holy Writ,- and not
only

From Him
The government

priest.

hood.

is

derived a royal priest-

of this kingdom

trusted, not to earthly kings, but to priests,

He
and

infirst

of all to the supreme pontiff, the successor of Peter

and the representative of Christ, the Bishop of Rome

so that the distinction between the worldly and the

spiritual

of

realms be thus kept in mind.

Rome

To

the Bishop

kings of the earth must be subject as to

Christ himself.

For those who have charge of the

[171]

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^

)fo

aims and ends preparatory to the highest end must

be subject to and guided by him

Authority

the highest end.

its

end.

He who

above those

who

is

who

has care of

the nobler, the higher

represents the highest

end

is

ever

are concerned for the partial ends

leading up to the highest

(De reglmme frincifum

I,i 4 ).

Thomas

thus teaches subordination of the earthly

authority to the spiritual, of the state to the Church.

But

since this relation

is

guided by that of the dif-

ferent ends, he cannot be called a sponsor of the

fotestas directa

and

upheld by Augustinus Triumphus

others, of an absolute

temporals and spirituals.

indirect

power of the Pope

Thomas

power of the Church

in both

taught only an

in matters temporal,

according to which the Church has a

word

to say in

temporals only in so far as these are related to the

supernatural.

The Thomistic theory was

pounded by the

best commentators,

Francis of Vittoria,

e. a.

[172]

thus ex-

Conrad Koellin,

CHAPTER

XIII

THOUGHTS ON CHRISTIANITY AND THE CHURCH

VEN

if

Thomas nowhere wrote

special treatise

on the Church and

never gave an independent exposition

of his conception of the Church,

we

may

nevertheless obtain a practical

and

sympathetic

ideas on Christianity

synthesis

and the Church by

various occasional utterances.

It

is

of

his

collating his

particularly the

dogmatic and ethico-mystic trends that give charm

and beauty to his picture. His conception of Christianity and the Church bears a Pauline and Augustinian stamp, and is based on a speculative penetration of the Pauline conception of Christ as the

of the Church.

The

head

intimate and real presentation

of the relation between Christ and the Church also

shows the influence of Greek

Chrysostom and

The guiding
the Church

is

St.

patristics,

of

St.

John

Cyril of Alexandria.

basis of the

Thomistic conception of

dogmatic in character.

It

is

the dog-

matic conception of the inner essence of Christianity,

as

developed in the

treatise
[

173

De
]

lege evangelica (S.

THOMAS AQUINAS

e^

>fe

I II, qq. 106-108) under the inspiration of St.

Paul and St. Augustine. The primary basic force
th.

in the

Church,

its

entelechy,

Everything

Ghost.

is

the grace of the

in Christianity

is

Holy

either an ex-

pression or effect of this interior grace or a means, a

direction towards or preparation for
II, q.

institutions, but rather

"Grace and

truth have

Therefore

Christ.

(S. th.

it is

come

demands them.

to us

through Jesus

behooving that grace, on the

one hand, flow upon us from the incarnate

means of

sensible signs, and,

Word by

on the other hand, that

external sensible effects proceed

grace through which the flesh

spirit.

I-

does not exclude visible

(principalitas novce legis)

forms and

it.

This interior energy of Christianity

106.)

is

from the

internal

subordinated to the

This gives us a double relation between ex-

ternal works
grace, as

and grace.

Either our works lead to

the case with the sacraments of the

is

Law, Baptism,

Eucharist,

etc.

New

or external works are

performed under the influence of grace " (S. th.

I II, q. 108, a. 1). Thomas embodies the sacramental factor in

his notion

of the Church.

" Thus

the sacraments form a main element in the Thomistic

view of

life j

through them the

acquires a mystical background

nificance."
1

R.

ecclesiastical

and

system

religious sig-

Eucken,

Die Lebensancshauungen der grossen Denker.

Leipzig, 1896, p. 157.

[174]

6^ THOUGHTS ON CHRISTIANITY
Co-ordinate with the sacraments

ment of
namely

his

is

)$5

another ele-

dogmatic conception of the Church,

faith, the continuation of the truth of Christ

Church. " Christianity, the law of the faith

and of grace " (Quodlib. iv, 13).
in the

These two
most

life

basic elements,

which signify the inner-

and being of the Christian

an external, divinely juridical

ture.

If the Church

and truth of

Christ,

is

to

religion,

demand

ecclesiastical

struc-

be mediator of the grace

and bring them

to

men, such an

overflow of supernatural life must take place by

means of certain organs united among themselves and

with Christ. The idea of the Church necessarily demands for its realization a constitution and organization.

The dogmatic and

divinely juridical aspects in

Thomas' conception of Christianity and the Church

show an ethico-mystical trend and character. The
bond between Scholasticism and mysticism is seen
in its fulness in the Thomistic teaching on the
This is evident from the picture which
Church.

Thomas

paints of the Christian,

tion of Pauline writings:

who

"He

belongs entirely to Christ.

under the inspirais

called Christian

A man

belongs to

Christ not only by belief in Christ, but by being im-

bued with the spirit of Christ unto works of virtue

(Rom. 8, 9) and dying to his sins in the following
of Christ " (S. th. II II, q. 124, a. 5 ad 1).

[175]

"

THOMAS AQUINAS

6^

Christianity

for

is

Thomas

the religion of love,

freedom, perfection j an interior

the Christian.

}fo

life

This aspect of interior

proper to

is

life

is

a favor-

" The beauty of the Church

ite point of emphasis.
Exconsists chiefly in the inner life, in inner acts.
ternal activities belong to this beauty in so far as they

proceed from within and carefully preserve the in-

IV

ner beauty" {In

Love

Sent. d. 15, q. 3,

1, sol.

a.

4).

the motive, the basic character of the Chris-

is

tian life j

it is

the

common head

bond

that unites the

members of

among themselves and

the mystic body

with their

Christ {S. th. II II, q. 39,

a.

1).

Closely related to this emphasis of the ethico-

Thomas' sympathetic
understanding for mysticism and its importance in
mystic element in the Church

The

the life of the Church.

tains a

is

theological

summa

profound study of mysticism (II II,

q.

con179,

In glowing words Thomas gives the preference

fif.).

to the contemplative life over the active

From the

1).
spirit

ministers of the

(7.

c, 182,

Church he demands a

of recollection and contemplation, and he in-

demands according to the ranks of

For the higher ranks of the Church

creases his ethical

the hierarchy.

not only the virtues of active life are presupposed j

" they must also shine

(S. th.
sess

II II,

q. 182,

in the contemplative life

a. 1

ad

1).

"They must

pos-

an eminent degree of divine love {eminentia di-

vine? dilectionis)

"

(S. th.

II II,

[176]

q.

185,

a.

3 ad 1).

In the inner

Thomas

also

II-II,

th.

THOUGHTS ON CHRISTIANITY

$/{

q.

devotion to the things of God,

spirit, in

saw the deepest motive of

152,

a.

celibacy (S.

4-5).

All these elements are fused into an intimate unity

Thomistic conception of the Church.

in the

harmony Thomas again shows himself

In

this

a master of

synthesis,

the theologian of mediation and recon-

ciliation.

His theory

skilfully avoids being one-

By emphasizing

sided.

the inner values of Chris-

tianity, especially grace, the inner

supernatural

and loving fellowship with God, he does

the ideal, subjective

justice to

By

element in the Church.

proper estimate of the

life,

ecclesiastical organization,

by

emphasis on the objective character of the teaching

office

of the Church and the sacramental mediation

of grace, he places the objective aspect in

Thus he

light.

its

correct

occupies a middle position between

an external and purely juridical conception of the

Church, and a too subjective conception of the essence of the Church, one that

would

dissolve into a

nebulous subjectivism.
Into this general picture of Christianity and the

Church

they

ception of the primacy

day

it

same for Thomas

are the

fits

his con-

harmoniously. In our

has again been said that

Thomas was

the

own
first

to introduce the idea of papal authority into Catholic

dogmatic theology.
earlier

theologians,

Apart from the teaching of

this
[

is

177]

false

because

before

THOMAS AQUINAS

Thomas

had

treated the question Bonaventure

ready written a profound treatise "

ence

^5

Due

Roman

the

On

Pontiff," which

thorough exposition of

this

the Obediis

the most

of the

out

doctrine

Some persons

golden period of Scholasticism.

al-

also

claim that the spiritual and the hierarchical concepts

of the Church are parallel or even opposed to each

Thomas, and that his theory of the papacy

was inspired by canon law and church politics. But
other in

Thomas

against this stands the fact that

concept of the ecclesiastical power

Christ as the head of the
6).

Especially

manner

is

this

Church

derives his

from the idea of

(S. th. Ill, q. 8, a.

view also contradicted by the

which Thomas establishes and develops

in

the papal primacy in his

IV, ch. 76).

Here he

Summa

first

contra gentes (Bk.

shows that the highest rul-

ing authority over the faithful belongs to the bishops.

Then he adds

his theological evidence for the

by establishing the
the Pope,

who

is

fact that there

highest

primacy

must be one, namely

His
the bishops.

among

proofs for this are as follows:

(a)

The

concept of the Church as a Church of

the whole world and of all nations.

Even

the

if

Christian peoples are divided into various dioceses,

there must ultimately be one Christian people, as

also one Church.

As there must be one bishop

each of the individual Christian nations,

head of a part of the people, so

[

178

who

in the total

is

in

the

union of

6^ THOUGHTS ON CHRISTIANITY

^5

Christian people there must be one head of the entire

Church.
(b)

The

demands

the faith

matters of faith.

would bring

unity of

that all the faithful agree in their

But many questions may

creed.

The

unity and purity of faith.

arise

concerning

Diverse decisions in such questions

Only final
decision by a single person can preserve unity. Hence
follows the necessary demand for a single person at
the head of the Church; and this essential demand of
essence and unity of the Church has been realized.
For

it is

division into the Church.

clear that Christ did not

anything that

is

necessary to

and shed His blood for

doubt that Christ actually

as

He

it.

it.

deny

His Church
loved His Church

Hence
set

to

there can be no

up a single person

head of the Church.

Monarchy

as the most perfect form of govThere can be no doubt that the constitution of the Church is the most ideal and the best,
since it comes from him by whom " kings reign, and
(c)

ernment.

lawgivers decree just things " (Proverbs

many

8, 15).

The

are best governed by one, since the purpose of

government

is

peace and unity.

One

individual can

naturally attain unity better than many.

constitution of the

Hence

the

Church must be monarchical, and

the Church must have a single head.

(d)
to the

The

relation of the

Church Triumphant
[

Church Militant on earth

In the Church

in heaven.

179]

THOMAS AQUINAS

tfBft

Triumpant the

ideal of

monarchy

is

^5

realized in the

greatest degree, since all things are subject to

Lord of

the universe.

God,

Accordingly there must also

be a single head over the Church Militant.

It

were specious

pastor,

is

Church.
is

to say that this head, this single

Christ the one Bridegroom of the one

For the governing authority of the Church

in a position analagous to that of the sacramental

means of
all the

who

Christ Himself, indeed, produces

grace.

sacramental effects in the Church.

baptizes, forgives sins,

the true priest

is

It is

He

who

of-

fered Himself on the altar of the cross and in whose

power the consecration of His body and blood takes

But as Christ no
place day by day on the altar.
longer willed to remain here corporally and visibly,

He

chose servants to administer these sacraments to

In a similar

the faithful.
reason,

He

had

to entrust

way and

for the same

His governing power over

He

the entire Church to a representative.

gave

this

power

to the apostle Peter, as

Matthew

16, 19,

purpose of

this

actually
see

from

and John 21, 17. It lies in the

power that it continue in the successors

of Peter after the latter's death.

His Church

we

so that

it

Christ instituted

continue to exist

till

the end of

the world.

Thus Thomas

builds up the reality and necessity

of the primacy speculatively out of the concept of

the Church.

He

also has a high conception of the

[180]

& THOUGHTS ON CHRISTIANITY

fcfe

content and the extent of the papal power, as can be

from a large number of passages. Still he is far

from considering this power as unlimited. " There

seen

are things," he says {In

"

in

which

man

can perform

Pope,

The

is

IV

Sent. d. 38, q.

so strictly his

them even

against

1, a.

4),

own master, that he

the command of the

continence and other divine counsels."

as, e.g.,

positive divine

commands of

revelation,

and the

natural moral law are irremovable boundaries for

These ideas of Thomas on the Church

all authority.

and Church authority had an inspiring effect on sub-

Many of his

sequent times.
ciples

wrote

treatises

Thus we have
first

of

immediate and

on the

later dis-

power.

ecclesiastical

in the thirteenth century

and

in the

years of the fourteenth the Augustinians Giles

Rome, Augustinus Triumphus, James of

the Dominicans Hervseus Natalis,

Godin, Guido Vernani;

Viterbo,

William Peter de

in the fifteenth century, the

Dominicans Henry Kalteysen, John Stojcovic of Ragusa, John of Montenegro, e.a. At the Council of

Torquemada compiled a monograph containfrom Thomas bearing on the papal

power and he was the first to present a complete exposition of the subject in his big work " On the
Basil

ing all the texts

j

Church,"

in

which there are many references

Thomas.

181

to

CHAPTER XIV
CONCLUSION.

METHOD OF ACQUIRING A

SCIENTIFIC

UNDERSTANDING OF THOMAS AQUINAS

HE leading position held by Thomas

for

centuries

in

theology

Catholic

and philosophy helps us

stand

the

fathom the

increasing
full

to

under-

endeavor

to

meaning and interand the in-

relation of his writings,

numerable commentaries that resulted therefrom.

The Summa

contra gentes has

commenArmandus

its classical

tator in Francis a Sylvestris of Ferrara.

de Bellovisu, Gerard de Monte, Versorius, Peter

Crockart, and Cardinal Cajetan expounded the

ente et essentia.

The

part interpreted by Xantes Mariales.

taries

The

on the

Summa

De

Qucestiones dh'putatce were in

The commen-

theologica are almost endless.

era for this style of treatise set in towards the

end of the Middle Ages, when

this

maturest work of

Thomas gradually displaced the Sentences of Peter

the Lombard as the theological text of the higher
schools of learning. The series of commentaries was

[182]

CONCLUSION

<^
commenced

German

in

J$3
by Caspar Grun-

countries

wald (Freiburg), Cornelius van Sneck (Rostock),

Hieronymus Dungersheim (Leipzig), and especially

Conrad Koellin (Cologne) j in Paris, by the Belgian
Peter Crockartj in Italy by Cardinal Cajetanj in
Spain by the disciple of Crockart, Franciscus de Victoria,

and

ber of the

his influential school.

first

The

greater

num-

commentators were Dominicans, soon

followed by theologians of the Society of Jesus, of

the Carmelites,
versities

etc.,

and by professors of the uni-

of Paris, Louvain, Douai,

etc.

In our own

day there has been a revival of commentaries on

We

Thomas.

Summa

have Latin commentaries on the

theologica in whole or in part, by Satolli,

Del Prado, Buonpensiere, L. Janssens, Paquet, Tabarelli, etc.

An extensive commentary in French has been undertaken by Pegues.
Billot, Lepicier,

This rich store of commentaries on the

summa

has

method of interpreting Thomas. We may call it the method of dialectical commentary.

It proceeds by way of a logical
analysis of the text of Thomas, aiming at separating
naturally also created a distinct

the Thomistic doctrines into their conceptual ele-

ments.

The main emphasis

is

directed towards indi-

and inner coherence of the articles,

treatises, and parts, and towards explaining

cating the order

questions,
all the

elements of the individual articles in as close

adherence to the words of

Thomas

[183]

as possible.

For

THOMAS AQUINAS

e^
this

purpose a

treatise

is

^5

introduced by indicating

its

sutnma and its

At the beginning of every

position in the respective part of the

division into questions.

question the sequence of the articles

and

an

in the discussion of

mentioned,

is

article its title

is first

plained and thus the point at issue stated.

ex-

Then

in

the body of the article the solution of .the question

begins with a general outline of the philosophical

and theological principles and concepts that Thomas

used in his answer, whereupon the content and argumentation of his solution

presented in clearly de-

is

The

fined conclusions, generally in syllogistic form.

and refuted by Thomas are

objections mentioned

generally given in forma, that

Often

too, especially

parallel texts

when

from other

is,

in

the passage
writings of

syllogisms.
is

less clear,

Thomas

cited according to the principle formulated

Massoulie:

Thomas

is

his

own

best

are

by A.

interpreter.

There are undoubtedly great advantages in this exegetical method, which was specially fostered by the
general chapters and the constitutions of the
minicans,

and became

logians of the order.

traditional

among

Do-

the theo-

It leads to great familiarity

with the texts of Thomas, to a deep insight into the

coherence of his teachings, shows the rigorous consistency of his system,

and gives a good picture of

the structure and architectonic of his theological

summa.

[184]

CONCLUSION

gt#

^5

method of dialectical commentary

only one view of the teachings of Thomas.
But

this

and

lyzes

gives us
It ana-

a completely given

dissects the latter as

whole.
It

is

a just

demand

of the

modern

scientific

mind

that the genesis of a theory out of previous elements

Such an

be investigated.
light

historical

method sheds

on the position of a theory in the general de-

velopment of the

science,

and

tries

to

understand

mind from its relation to its own time and environment. The method is all the more appropriate

a great

who

with regard to an author

tem a

has not spun his sys-

"prion out of his inner consciousness, but has

rather like

Thomas absorbed

all

previous learning and synthesized

system of thought.

The

therefore, be supplemented

the elements of

them into a unified

method must,

dialectical

and corrected by the

his-

The task of the latter would

to analyze the thought of Thomas into its historical

torico-genetic method.

be

components, and to indicate

its

development out of

the philosophy and theology of previous and con-

temporary thinkers, and

at the

same time

to point

out the sources indicating the influence of Thomistic

thought on contemporary and subsequent minds.

Various means are applicable in the solution of this
task.

Above

all

there

is

the study of sources, which

must answer the question: What materials did

Thomas have at his disposal and what use did he

[i8 5

THOMAS AQUINAS

$K

make of them?
Scriptures

In

study his relation to the

this

and the Fathers,

to Aristotle

^5

especially to Augustine,

and the Arabian-Jewish philosophy, the

Neoplatonic theories, to the thinkers of early Scho-

immediate predecessors, and to

lasticism, to his

The

contemporaries, must be investigated.

his

study of

unpublished sentences or summce in particular, like

those of Robert of

mon

Melun, Martin of Cremona,

of Tournai, Prsepositinus, Philip of Greve,

Roland of Cremona,
the antecedents

There are
of

still

Thomas

etc.,

will shed

much

light

to the printed

the use

on

of many a Thomistic viewpoint.

many obscure points on the relation

works of William of Aux-

Alexander of Hales, Albert the Great,

erre,

And

Si-

Thomas made

etc.

of Aristotle can be ap-

praised completely only after clear knowledge has

been attained on the different aspects of the acceptance and the translations of Aristotle.
entire teaching of
relief

Thomas

will

come out

Again the
in bolder

by comparative study with the views of con-

Good service for the historical

Thomas will also be rendered by a

temporary thinkers.
understanding of

more

detailed knowledge of the external conditions

that were influential in the scientific life

of the time.

and endeavor

Such factors would be, for instance, the

development of higher studies and teaching

in Paris,

and disputes that occupied

the minds of the day, the history of the Dominican

the theological questions

[186]

conclusion

e^

and Franciscan orders,

etc.

In this way

appears,

and

it

will be pos-

background

sible to delineate the historical

Thomas

j$a

which

in

especially to reconstruct, in

part at least, a bibliography of the works on which

he drew.

Another aim of the

historical investigation

be to outline the development of

Thomas

Thomas improved and

thought

clarified his

should

himself.
in

many

points, perfected earlier ideas in later works, cor-

rected them, or even retracted

There are several noteworthy

his

own

statements, as also in

them when

necessary.

indications of this in

some compilations by

his pupils preserved to us in manuscript

form.

In

order better to establish and adjudge such a devel-

opment

in him,

it

will be necessary to keep in

the chronology of his writings.

tainly genuine

separated

works of Thomas will have

from the dubious or even spurious

Another task for the

historical

mind

Naturally the cer-

study of

to be

ones.

Thomas

will be to establish the opinions his contemporaries

had of

and especially to learn the

and
immediate
mediate disciples. It is

his various views,

views of his

evident that the polemical literature that arose be-

tween the
ciples

of

scientific

Thomas

opponents and the faithful disafter his death will shed

light on his exact teaching.

literature, of

In

much

this controversial

which some mention was made above,

just those points of his teaching are brought out which

[187]

THOMAS AQUINAS

ftfe

are characteristic of

him and represent new and

dependent work on

his part.

master the disciples of

in-

In defence of their

Thomas had

to clear up all

possible misunderstandings of his thought,

and

to

present the most definite picture possible of his views.

There can be no doubt that their personal contact with

him makes them more reliable interpreters of the
meaning and spirit of his teachings than the commentators living some centuries

pendent entirely on the dead

later,

who were

should, therefore, be able to get

much

the immediate and mediate disciples of

some

light

de-

We

letter of the text.

from

Thomas on

points that are controverted because of the

brevity and difficulty of his text.

Such are

in short the chief roads

on which the

his-

method must proceed in order to find

out the manner and circumstances of the origin, the
development, and the later influence of his writ-

torico-genetic

It is not necessary to

ings.

work

familiarity with

mention that for such

modern

philological-historical

method, especially knowledge of palaeography,

indispensable.
its

The

champions also

historical

is

Thomas had
The Dominicans

study of

in earlier times.

Antonius Senensis, Nocolai, Quetif, Echard, de Rubeis,

and

others, deserve

much

credit for their studies

and questions of authenticity.

Many works of former days show that the need of a
comparative study of Thomas and other Scholastics
on textual

criticism

[188]

CONCLUSION

6fy(

was also

feltj e.g., the great

^5

works of Macedo, Rada,

and others, on Thomas and Scotusj of Bonherba a

S.

Rome; of
Lardico and Saenz d'Aguirre on Thomas and AnPhilippo on Thomas, Scotus, and Giles of

selmj of Bonaventura Lingonensis, Marcus de Bau-

Thomas and Bonaventure. In

we cannot omit the outstanding

dunio, and others, on

more

recent times,

merit of the Italian priest Pietro Uccelli (d. 1880)

in the
nifle

examination of Thomistic manuscripts.

Summa

tary on the

standpoint and

from

Even

materials.

if

theologica

from the

historical

that of a critical study of source

he did not realize

occasional contributions
ter

De-

long considered the plan of writing a commen-

this plan, his

added considerably

to a bet-

understanding of the speculative thought of

Much

Thomas.

and research

of the present ever-increasing study

in this field dates

back to the inspiration

of Denifle.

The

method of studying Thomas,

and ways of which we have mentioned, possesses real advantages.
It is a welcome
complement to the method of dialectical commentary,
and a reliable guide to a more profound and unihistorico-genetic

the purpose, means,

and
the teachings of Thomas.

versal understanding,

We

to a correct appraisal, of

have already stated that a knowledge of the

manner

in

poraries

and

which

his

thought affected his contem-

especially his followers, will be a great

[189]

THOMAS AQUINAS

#K

^5

help in defining the more obscure and controverted

Such a study leads us into

points of his writings.

the intellectual workshop of Aquinas, into the ideals

and the means of

it

were, a

his scientific study,

new and

and gives

us, as

living picture of the life-work of

the great thinker.

In the light of an investigation

of sources and of a comparative study,

method and

see his development in

we

can best

content,

and the

degree of his dependence as of his originality.

We

Thomas as a theologian who was modtime, who made use of the results of
past and present, and in many questions saw far beyond his contemporaries. The historical method also
thus get to see

ern in his

own

permits us to draw a clearer line between that which

was of importance rather for

his

own

time, con-

ditioned by the circumstances and questions of his

own

day, and that which

It will also reveal to us the

for systematization.

detail

threads, so

immensity of

work only

shown us the

rials that his

interwoven

also see the genial architectonic

of Aquinas completely only

sources has

we

after examining

the innumerable variety of

we

his genius

Just as in an artistic fabric

see the great skill of the

in

of more lasting value.

is

when an

powers

analysis of

different elements

and mate-

harmonizing and synthetic mind formed

into a great whole.

final

advantage of the his-

method is a negative one, in so far as it guards

us from the danger of falsely projecting the ideas,

torical

190]

CONCLUSION

gt^
questions,

and phraseology of

)$$

later schools back into

the medieval Scholasticism and especially into the

Thomas.
way the methods of

speculation of

In

and

this

of historic origins

dialectic

commentary

supplement each other and

give us a broad, scientific conception of the ideas of

the greatest philosopher and theologian of the

dle Ages.

[191]

Mid-

Date Due

m$ M93& Returned
AtM

2 5 afflL

16
HAY

" 1986

M -^06
W

&

ifr

1383

*'

IEEE

SEP

12
T

T~T

OCT 2 6

NOV

1968

\W

6 1989
DEC 2 3

HARJ 9

B9A

^^

1988

Due

Returned

Thomas von Aqum. main

189T463Yqr 1963 C.2

12b2 0331A Mb71

KEEP

CARD

IN

POCKET

^esLib
IMPORTANT THAT
CARD BE KEPT IN POCKET
IT

IS