|
1
|
1 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
|
|
|
2 <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="bi.xsl"?>
|
|
|
3 <!DOCTYPE div2
|
|
|
4 SYSTEM "../../dtd/ThML10.dtd">
|
|
|
5 <div2 id="FP.i" next="FP_Q1" prev="FP" progress="0.01%" n="i" title="Treatise on Sacred Doctrine (Q[1])">
|
|
|
6 <h2 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i-p0.1">TREATISE ON SACRED DOCTRINE <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.i-p0.2" href="#FP.i.FP_Q1">(Q[1])</a></h2>
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
8 <div3 id="FP.i.FP_Q1" next="FP_Q1_A1" prev="FP.i" progress="0.01%" n="i" title="Question. 1 - The Nature and Extent of Sacred Doctrine (Ten Articles)">
|
|
|
9 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p0.1">THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF SACRED DOCTRINE (TEN ARTICLES)</h3>
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
11 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
12 <div xml:lang="en">
|
|
|
13 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p1"> To place our
|
|
|
14 purpose within proper limits, we first endeavor to investigate the
|
|
|
15 nature and extent of this sacred doctrine. Concerning this there are
|
|
|
16 ten points of inquiry:</p>
|
|
|
17 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p2"> (1) Whether it is necessary?</p>
|
|
|
18 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p3"> (2) Whether it is a science?</p>
|
|
|
19 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p4"> (3) Whether it is one or many?</p>
|
|
|
20 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p5"> (4) Whether it is speculative or practical?</p>
|
|
|
21 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p6"> (5) How it is compared with other sciences?</p>
|
|
|
22 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p7"> (6) Whether it is the same as wisdom?</p>
|
|
|
23 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p8"> (7) Whether God is its subject-matter?</p>
|
|
|
24 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p9"> (8) Whether it is a matter of argument?</p>
|
|
|
25 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p10"> (9) Whether it rightly employs metaphors and similes?</p>
|
|
|
26 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p11"> (10) Whether the Sacred Scripture of this doctrine may be expounded in different senses?</p>
|
|
|
27 </div>
|
|
|
28 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 pr."><a name="28232"><span class="ref">[28232]
|
|
|
29 Iª q. 1 pr.</span></a> Et ut intentio nostra sub aliquibus
|
|
|
30 certis limitibus comprehendatur, necessarium est primo investigare
|
|
|
31 de ipsa sacra doctrina, qualis sit, et ad quae se extendat. Circa
|
|
|
32 quae quaerenda sunt decem. Primo, de necessitate huius doctrinae.
|
|
|
33 Secundo, utrum sit scientia. Tertio, utrum sit una vel plures.
|
|
|
34 Quarto, utrum sit speculativa vel practica. Quinto, de comparatione
|
|
|
35 eius ad alias scientias. Sexto, utrum sit sapientia. Septimo, quid
|
|
|
36 sit subiectum eius. Octavo, utrum sit argumentativa. Nono, utrum
|
|
|
37 uti debeat metaphoricis vel symbolicis locutionibus. Decimo, utrum
|
|
|
38 Scriptura sacra huius doctrinae sit secundum plures sensus
|
|
|
39 exponenda.</p>
|
|
|
40 </div>
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
43 <div4 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1" next="FP_Q1_A2" prev="FP_Q1" progress="0.01%" n="i" title="Article. 1 - Whether, besides philosophy, any further doctrine is required?">
|
|
|
44 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p0.1">Whether, besides philosophy, any further doctrine is required?</h4>
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
46 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
47 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
48 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that, besides
|
|
|
49 philosophical science, we have no need of any further knowledge. For
|
|
|
50 man should not seek to know what is above reason: "Seek not the things
|
|
|
51 that are too high for thee" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Sir.3.22"
|
|
|
52 parsed="vul|Sir|3|22|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p2.1"
|
|
|
53 passage="Ecclus. 3:22">Ecclus. 3:22</scripRef>). But whatever is not
|
|
|
54 above reason is fully treated of in philosophical science. Therefore
|
|
|
55 any other knowledge besides philosophical science is superfluous.</p>
|
|
|
56 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 arg. 1"><a name="28233"><span class=
|
|
|
57 "ref">[28233] Iª q. 1 a. 1 arg. 1</span></a> Ad primum sic
|
|
|
58 proceditur. Videtur quod non sit necessarium, praeter philosophicas
|
|
|
59 disciplinas, aliam doctrinam haberi. Ad ea enim quae supra rationem
|
|
|
60 sunt, homo non debet conari, secundum illud Eccli. III, <i>altiora
|
|
|
61 te ne quaesieris</i>. Sed ea quae rationi subduntur, sufficienter
|
|
|
62 traduntur in philosophicis disciplinis. Superfluum igitur videtur,
|
|
|
63 praeter philosophicas disciplinas, aliam doctrinam haberi.</p>
|
|
|
64 </div>
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
66 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
67 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
68 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, knowledge can
|
|
|
69 be concerned only with being, for nothing can be known, save what is
|
|
|
70 true; and all that is, is true. But everything that is, is treated of
|
|
|
71 in philosophical science---even God Himself; so that there is a part
|
|
|
72 of philosophy called theology, or the divine science, as Aristotle has
|
|
|
73 proved (Metaph. vi). Therefore, besides philosophical science, there
|
|
|
74 is no need of any further knowledge.</p>
|
|
|
75 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 arg. 2"><a name="28234"><span class=
|
|
|
76 "ref">[28234] Iª q. 1 a. 1 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
|
|
|
77 doctrina non potest esse nisi de ente, nihil enim scitur nisi
|
|
|
78 verum, quod cum ente convertitur. Sed de omnibus entibus tractatur
|
|
|
79 in philosophicis disciplinis, et etiam de Deo, unde quaedam pars
|
|
|
80 philosophiae dicitur theologia, sive scientia divina, ut patet per
|
|
|
81 philosophum in VI Metaphys. Non fuit igitur necessarium, praeter
|
|
|
82 philosophicas disciplinas, aliam doctrinam haberi.</p>
|
|
|
83 </div>
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
85 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
86 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
87 contrary,</b> It is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:2Tim.3.16"
|
|
|
88 parsed="vul|2Tim|3|16|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p4.1" passage="2
|
|
|
89 Tim. 3:16">2 Tim. 3:16</scripRef>): "All Scripture, inspired of God is
|
|
|
90 profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice."
|
|
|
91 Now Scripture, inspired of God, is no part of philosophical science,
|
|
|
92 which has been built up by human reason. Therefore it is useful that
|
|
|
93 besides philosophical science, there should be other knowledge,
|
|
|
94 i.e. inspired of God.</p>
|
|
|
95 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 s. c."><a name="28235"><span class=
|
|
|
96 "ref">[28235] Iª q. 1 a. 1 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
97 quod dicitur II ad Tim. III, <i>omnis Scriptura divinitus inspirata
|
|
|
98 utilis est ad docendum, ad arguendum, ad corripiendum, ad
|
|
|
99 erudiendum ad iustitiam</i>. Scriptura autem divinitus inspirata
|
|
|
100 non pertinet ad philosophicas disciplinas, quae sunt secundum
|
|
|
101 rationem humanam inventae. Utile igitur est, praeter philosophicas
|
|
|
102 disciplinas, esse aliam scientiam divinitus inspiratam.</p>
|
|
|
103 </div>
|
|
|
104
|
|
|
105 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
106 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> It was necessary for man's salvation that there should be a knowledge revealed by God besides philosophical science built up by human reason. Firstly, indeed, because man is directed to God, as to an end that surpasses the grasp of his reason: "The eye hath not seen, O God, besides Thee, what things Thou hast prepared for them that wait for Thee" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.66.4" parsed="vul|Isa|66|4|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p5.1" passage="Is. 66:4">Is. 66:4</scripRef>). But the end must first be known by men who are to direct their thoughts and
|
|
|
107 actions to the end. Hence it was necessary for the salvation of man that certain truths which exceed human reason should be made known to him by divine revelation. Even as regards those truths about God which human reason could have discovered, it was necessary that man should be taught by a divine revelation; because the truth about God such as reason could discover, would only be known by a few, and that after a long time, and with the admixture of many errors. Whereas man's whole salvation,
|
|
|
108 which is in God, depends upon the knowledge of this
|
|
|
109 truth. Therefore, in order that the salvation of men might be brought
|
|
|
110 about more fitly and more surely, it was necessary that they should be
|
|
|
111 taught divine truths by divine revelation. It was therefore necessary
|
|
|
112 that besides philosophical science built up by reason, there should be
|
|
|
113 a sacred science learned through revelation.</p>
|
|
|
114 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 co."><a name="28236"><span class=
|
|
|
115 "ref">[28236] Iª q. 1 a. 1 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
116 quod necessarium fuit ad humanam salutem, esse doctrinam quandam
|
|
|
117 secundum revelationem divinam, praeter philosophicas disciplinas,
|
|
|
118 quae ratione humana investigantur. Primo quidem, quia homo
|
|
|
119 ordinatur ad Deum sicut ad quendam finem qui comprehensionem
|
|
|
120 rationis excedit, secundum illud Isaiae LXIV, <i>oculus non vidit
|
|
|
121 Deus absque te, quae praeparasti diligentibus te</i>. Finem autem
|
|
|
122 oportet esse praecognitum hominibus, qui suas intentiones et
|
|
|
123 actiones debent ordinare in finem. Unde necessarium fuit homini ad
|
|
|
124 salutem, quod ei nota fierent quaedam per revelationem divinam,
|
|
|
125 quae rationem humanam excedunt. Ad ea etiam quae de Deo ratione
|
|
|
126 humana investigari possunt, necessarium fuit hominem instrui
|
|
|
127 revelatione divina. Quia veritas de Deo, per rationem investigata,
|
|
|
128 a paucis, et per longum tempus, et cum admixtione multorum errorum,
|
|
|
129 homini proveniret, a cuius tamen veritatis cognitione dependet tota
|
|
|
130 hominis salus, quae in Deo est. Ut igitur salus hominibus et
|
|
|
131 convenientius et certius proveniat, necessarium fuit quod de
|
|
|
132 divinis per divinam revelationem instruantur. Necessarium igitur
|
|
|
133 fuit, praeter philosophicas disciplinas, quae per rationem
|
|
|
134 investigantur, sacram doctrinam per revelationem haberi.</p>
|
|
|
135 </div>
|
|
|
136
|
|
|
137 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
138 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p6"><b>Reply
|
|
|
139 to Objection 1:</b> Although those things which are beyond man's
|
|
|
140 knowledge may not be sought for by man through his reason,
|
|
|
141 nevertheless, once they are revealed by God, they must be accepted by
|
|
|
142 faith. Hence the sacred text continues, "For many things are shown to
|
|
|
143 thee above the understanding of man" (<scripRef
|
|
|
144 osisRef="Bible.vul:Sir.3.25" parsed="vul|Sir|3|25|0|0"
|
|
|
145 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p6.1"
|
|
|
146 passage="Ecclus. 3:25">Ecclus. 3:25</scripRef>). And in this, the
|
|
|
147 sacred science consists.</p>
|
|
|
148 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 ad 1"><a name="28237"><span class=
|
|
|
149 "ref">[28237] Iª q. 1 a. 1 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
150 dicendum quod, licet ea quae sunt altiora hominis cognitione, non
|
|
|
151 sint ab homine per rationem inquirenda, sunt tamen, a Deo revelata,
|
|
|
152 suscipienda per fidem. Unde et ibidem subditur, <i>plurima supra
|
|
|
153 sensum hominum ostensa sunt tibi</i>. Et in huiusmodi sacra
|
|
|
154 doctrina consistit.</p>
|
|
|
155 </div>
|
|
|
156
|
|
|
157 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
158 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Sciences are differentiated according to the various means through which knowledge is obtained. For the astronomer and the physicist both may prove the same conclusion: that the earth, for instance, is round: the astronomer by means of mathematics (i.e. abstracting from matter), but the physicist by means of matter itself. Hence there is no reason why those things which may be learned from philosophical science, so far as they can be known by natural
|
|
|
159 reason, may not also be taught us by another science so far as they
|
|
|
160 fall within revelation. Hence theology included in sacred doctrine
|
|
|
161 differs in kind from that theology which is part of philosophy.</p>
|
|
|
162 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 ad 2"><a name="28238"><span class=
|
|
|
163 "ref">[28238] Iª q. 1 a. 1 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
164 dicendum quod diversa ratio cognoscibilis diversitatem scientiarum
|
|
|
165 inducit. Eandem enim conclusionem demonstrat astrologus et
|
|
|
166 naturalis, puta quod terra est rotunda, sed astrologus per medium
|
|
|
167 mathematicum, idest a materia abstractum; naturalis autem per
|
|
|
168 medium circa materiam consideratum. Unde nihil prohibet de eisdem
|
|
|
169 rebus, de quibus philosophicae disciplinae tractant secundum quod
|
|
|
170 sunt cognoscibilia lumine naturalis rationis, et aliam scientiam
|
|
|
171 tractare secundum quod cognoscuntur lumine divinae revelationis.
|
|
|
172 Unde theologia quae ad sacram doctrinam pertinet, differt secundum
|
|
|
173 genus ab illa theologia quae pars philosophiae ponitur.</p>
|
|
|
174 </div>
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
176 </div4>
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
178 <div4 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2" next="FP_Q1_A3" prev="FP_Q1_A1" progress="0.04%" n="ii" title="Article. 2 - Whether sacred doctrine is a science?">
|
|
|
179 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p0.1">Whether sacred doctrine is a science?</h4>
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
181 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
182 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
183 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that sacred
|
|
|
184 doctrine is not a science. For every science proceeds from
|
|
|
185 self-evident principles. But sacred doctrine proceeds from articles of
|
|
|
186 faith which are not self-evident, since their truth is not admitted by
|
|
|
187 all: "For all men have not faith" (<scripRef
|
|
|
188 osisRef="Bible.vul:2Thess.3.2" parsed="vul|2Thess|3|2|0|0"
|
|
|
189 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p2.1" passage="2 Thess. 3:2">2
|
|
|
190 Thess. 3:2</scripRef>). Therefore sacred doctrine is not a
|
|
|
191 science.</p>
|
|
|
192 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 arg. 1"><a name="28239"><span class=
|
|
|
193 "ref">[28239] Iª q. 1 a. 2 arg. 1</span></a> Ad secundum sic
|
|
|
194 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra doctrina non sit scientia. Omnis
|
|
|
195 enim scientia procedit ex principiis per se notis. Sed sacra
|
|
|
196 doctrina procedit ex articulis fidei, qui non sunt per se noti, cum
|
|
|
197 non ab omnibus concedantur, <i>non enim omnium est fides</i>, ut
|
|
|
198 dicitur II Thessalon. III. Non igitur sacra doctrina est
|
|
|
199 scientia.</p>
|
|
|
200 </div>
|
|
|
201
|
|
|
202 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
203 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
204 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, no science
|
|
|
205 deals with individual facts. But this sacred science treats of
|
|
|
206 individual facts, such as the deeds of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and
|
|
|
207 such like. Therefore sacred doctrine is not a science.</p>
|
|
|
208 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 arg. 2"><a name="28240"><span class=
|
|
|
209 "ref">[28240] Iª q. 1 a. 2 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
|
|
|
210 scientia non est singularium. Sed sacra doctrina tractat de
|
|
|
211 singularibus, puta de gestis Abrahae, Isaac et Iacob, et similibus.
|
|
|
212 Ergo sacra doctrina non est scientia.</p>
|
|
|
213 </div>
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
215 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
216 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
217 contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Trin. xiv, 1) "to this science alone
|
|
|
218 belongs that whereby saving faith is begotten, nourished, protected
|
|
|
219 and strengthened." But this can be said of no science except sacred
|
|
|
220 doctrine. Therefore sacred doctrine is a science.</p>
|
|
|
221 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 s. c."><a name="28241"><span class=
|
|
|
222 "ref">[28241] Iª q. 1 a. 2 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
223 quod Augustinus dicit, XIV de Trinitate, <i>huic scientiae
|
|
|
224 attribuitur illud tantummodo quo fides saluberrima gignitur,
|
|
|
225 nutritur, defenditur, roboratur</i>. Hoc autem ad nullam scientiam
|
|
|
226 pertinet nisi ad sacram doctrinam. Ergo sacra doctrina est
|
|
|
227 scientia.</p>
|
|
|
228 </div>
|
|
|
229
|
|
|
230 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
231 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> Sacred doctrine is a science. We must bear in mind that there are two kinds of sciences. There are some which proceed from a principle known by the natural light of intelligence, such as arithmetic and geometry and the like. There are some which proceed from principles known by the light of a higher science: thus the science of perspective proceeds from principles established by geometry, and music from principles established by arithmetic. So it is that
|
|
|
232 sacred doctrine is a science because it proceeds from principles
|
|
|
233 established by the light of a higher science, namely, the science of
|
|
|
234 God and the blessed. Hence, just as the musician accepts on authority
|
|
|
235 the principles taught him by the mathematician, so sacred science is
|
|
|
236 established on principles revealed by God.</p>
|
|
|
237 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 co."><a name="28242"><span class=
|
|
|
238 "ref">[28242] Iª q. 1 a. 2 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
239 sacram doctrinam esse scientiam. Sed sciendum est quod duplex est
|
|
|
240 scientiarum genus. Quaedam enim sunt, quae procedunt ex principiis
|
|
|
241 notis lumine naturali intellectus, sicut arithmetica, geometria, et
|
|
|
242 huiusmodi. Quaedam vero sunt, quae procedunt ex principiis notis
|
|
|
243 lumine superioris scientiae, sicut perspectiva procedit ex
|
|
|
244 principiis notificatis per geometriam, et musica ex principiis per
|
|
|
245 arithmeticam notis. Et hoc modo sacra doctrina est scientia, quia
|
|
|
246 procedit ex principiis notis lumine superioris scientiae, quae
|
|
|
247 scilicet est scientia Dei et beatorum. Unde sicut musica credit
|
|
|
248 principia tradita sibi ab arithmetico, ita doctrina sacra credit
|
|
|
249 principia revelata sibi a Deo.</p>
|
|
|
250 </div>
|
|
|
251
|
|
|
252 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
253 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p6"><b>Reply
|
|
|
254 to Objection 1:</b> The principles of any science are either in
|
|
|
255 themselves self-evident, or reducible to the conclusions of a higher
|
|
|
256 science; and such, as we have said, are the principles of sacred
|
|
|
257 doctrine.</p>
|
|
|
258 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 ad 1"><a name="28243"><span class=
|
|
|
259 "ref">[28243] Iª q. 1 a. 2 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
260 dicendum quod principia cuiuslibet scientiae vel sunt nota per se,
|
|
|
261 vel reducuntur ad notitiam superioris scientiae. Et talia sunt
|
|
|
262 principia sacrae doctrinae, ut dictum est.</p>
|
|
|
263 </div>
|
|
|
264
|
|
|
265 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
266 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p7"><b>Reply
|
|
|
267 to Objection 2:</b> Individual facts are treated of in sacred
|
|
|
268 doctrine, not because it is concerned with them principally, but they
|
|
|
269 are introduced rather both as examples to be followed in our lives (as
|
|
|
270 in moral sciences) and in order to establish the authority of those
|
|
|
271 men through whom the divine revelation, on which this sacred scripture
|
|
|
272 or doctrine is based, has come down to us.</p>
|
|
|
273 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 ad 2"><a name="28244"><span class=
|
|
|
274 "ref">[28244] Iª q. 1 a. 2 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
275 dicendum quod singularia traduntur in sacra doctrina, non quia de
|
|
|
276 eis principaliter tractetur, sed introducuntur tum in exemplum
|
|
|
277 vitae, sicut in scientiis moralibus; tum etiam ad declarandum
|
|
|
278 auctoritatem virorum per quos ad nos revelatio divina processit,
|
|
|
279 super quam fundatur sacra Scriptura seu doctrina.</p>
|
|
|
280 </div>
|
|
|
281
|
|
|
282 </div4>
|
|
|
283
|
|
|
284 <div4 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3" next="FP_Q1_A4" prev="FP_Q1_A2" progress="0.05%" n="iii" title="Article. 3 - Whether sacred doctrine is one science?">
|
|
|
285 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p0.1">Whether sacred doctrine is one science?</h4>
|
|
|
286
|
|
|
287 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
288 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
289 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that sacred
|
|
|
290 doctrine is not one science; for according to the Philosopher
|
|
|
291 (Poster. i) "that science is one which treats only of one class of
|
|
|
292 subjects." But the creator and the creature, both of whom are treated
|
|
|
293 of in sacred doctrine, cannot be grouped together under one class of
|
|
|
294 subjects. Therefore sacred doctrine is not one science.</p>
|
|
|
295 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 arg. 1"><a name="28245"><span class=
|
|
|
296 "ref">[28245] Iª q. 1 a. 3 arg. 1</span></a> Ad tertium sic
|
|
|
297 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra doctrina non sit una scientia. Quia
|
|
|
298 secundum philosophum in I Poster., <i>una scientia est quae est
|
|
|
299 unius generis subiecti</i>. Creator autem et creatura, de quibus in
|
|
|
300 sacra doctrina tractatur, non continentur sub uno genere subiecti.
|
|
|
301 Ergo sacra doctrina non est una scientia.</p>
|
|
|
302 </div>
|
|
|
303
|
|
|
304 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
305 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
306 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, in sacred
|
|
|
307 doctrine we treat of angels, corporeal creatures and human
|
|
|
308 morality. But these belong to separate philosophical
|
|
|
309 sciences. Therefore sacred doctrine cannot be one science.</p>
|
|
|
310 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 arg. 2"><a name="28246"><span class=
|
|
|
311 "ref">[28246] Iª q. 1 a. 3 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, in
|
|
|
312 sacra doctrina tractatur de Angelis, de creaturis corporalibus, de
|
|
|
313 moribus hominum. Huiusmodi autem ad diversas scientias
|
|
|
314 philosophicas pertinent. Igitur sacra doctrina non est una
|
|
|
315 scientia.</p>
|
|
|
316 </div>
|
|
|
317
|
|
|
318 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
319 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
320 contrary,</b> Holy Scripture speaks of it as one science: "Wisdom gave
|
|
|
321 him the knowledge [scientiam] of holy things" (<scripRef
|
|
|
322 osisRef="Bible.vul:Wis.10.10" parsed="vul|Wis|10|10|0|0"
|
|
|
323 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p4.1"
|
|
|
324 passage="Wis. 10:10">Wis. 10:10</scripRef>).</p>
|
|
|
325 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28247"><span class=
|
|
|
326 "ref">[28247] Iª q. 1 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
327 quod sacra Scriptura de ea loquitur sicut de una scientia, dicitur
|
|
|
328 enim Sap. X, <i>dedit illi scientiam sanctorum</i>.</p>
|
|
|
329 </div>
|
|
|
330
|
|
|
331 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
332 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> Sacred doctrine is one science. The unity of a faculty or habit is to be gauged by its object, not indeed, in its material aspect, but as regards the precise formality under which it is an object. For example, man, ass, stone agree in the one precise formality of being colored; and color is the formal object of sight. Therefore, because Sacred Scripture considers things precisely under the formality of being divinely revealed, whatever has been divinely
|
|
|
333 revealed possesses the one precise formality of the object of this
|
|
|
334 science; and therefore is included under sacred doctrine as under one
|
|
|
335 science.</p>
|
|
|
336 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 co."><a name="28248"><span class=
|
|
|
337 "ref">[28248] Iª q. 1 a. 3 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
338 sacram doctrinam unam scientiam esse. Est enim unitas potentiae et
|
|
|
339 habitus consideranda secundum obiectum, non quidem materialiter,
|
|
|
340 sed secundum rationem formalem obiecti, puta homo, asinus et lapis
|
|
|
341 conveniunt in una formali ratione colorati, quod est obiectum
|
|
|
342 visus. Quia igitur sacra Scriptura considerat aliqua secundum quod
|
|
|
343 sunt divinitus revelata, secundum quod dictum est, omnia quaecumque
|
|
|
344 sunt divinitus revelabilia, communicant in una ratione formali
|
|
|
345 obiecti huius scientiae. Et ideo comprehenduntur sub sacra doctrina
|
|
|
346 sicut sub scientia una.</p>
|
|
|
347 </div>
|
|
|
348
|
|
|
349 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
350 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p6"><b>Reply
|
|
|
351 to Objection 1:</b> Sacred doctrine does not treat of God and
|
|
|
352 creatures equally, but of God primarily, and of creatures only so far
|
|
|
353 as they are referable to God as their beginning or end. Hence the
|
|
|
354 unity of this science is not impaired.</p>
|
|
|
355 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 ad 1"><a name="28249"><span class=
|
|
|
356 "ref">[28249] Iª q. 1 a. 3 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
357 dicendum quod sacra doctrina non determinat de Deo et de creaturis
|
|
|
358 ex aequo, sed de Deo principaliter, et de creaturis secundum quod
|
|
|
359 referuntur ad Deum, ut ad principium vel finem. Unde unitas
|
|
|
360 scientiae non impeditur.</p>
|
|
|
361 </div>
|
|
|
362
|
|
|
363 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
364 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Nothing prevents inferior faculties or habits from being differentiated by something which falls under a higher faculty or habit as well; because the higher faculty or habit regards the object in its more universal formality, as the object of the "common sense" is whatever affects the senses, including, therefore, whatever is visible or audible. Hence the "common sense," although one faculty, extends to all the objects of the five senses. Similarly,
|
|
|
365 objects which are the subject-matter of different philosophical
|
|
|
366 sciences can yet be treated of by this one single sacred science under
|
|
|
367 one aspect precisely so far as they can be included in revelation. So
|
|
|
368 that in this way, sacred doctrine bears, as it were, the stamp of the
|
|
|
369 divine science which is one and simple, yet extends to everything.</p>
|
|
|
370 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 ad 2"><a name="28250"><span class=
|
|
|
371 "ref">[28250] Iª q. 1 a. 3 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
372 dicendum quod nihil prohibet inferiores potentias vel habitus
|
|
|
373 diversificari circa illas materias, quae communiter cadunt sub una
|
|
|
374 potentia vel habitu superiori, quia superior potentia vel habitus
|
|
|
375 respicit obiectum sub universaliori ratione formali. Sicut obiectum
|
|
|
376 sensus communis est sensibile, quod comprehendit sub se visibile et
|
|
|
377 audibile, unde sensus communis, cum sit una potentia, extendit se
|
|
|
378 ad omnia obiecta quinque sensuum. Et similiter ea quae in diversis
|
|
|
379 scientiis philosophicis tractantur, potest sacra doctrina, una
|
|
|
380 existens, considerare sub una ratione, inquantum scilicet sunt
|
|
|
381 divinitus revelabilia, ut sic sacra doctrina sit velut quaedam
|
|
|
382 impressio divinae scientiae, quae est una et simplex omnium.</p>
|
|
|
383 </div>
|
|
|
384
|
|
|
385 </div4>
|
|
|
386
|
|
|
387 <div4 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4" next="FP_Q1_A5" prev="FP_Q1_A3" progress="0.07%" n="iv" title="Article. 4 - Whether sacred doctrine is a practical science?">
|
|
|
388 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p0.1">Whether sacred doctrine is a practical science?</h4>
|
|
|
389
|
|
|
390 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
391 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
392 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that sacred
|
|
|
393 doctrine is a practical science; for a practical science is that which
|
|
|
394 ends in action according to the Philosopher (Metaph. ii). But sacred
|
|
|
395 doctrine is ordained to action: "Be ye doers of the word, and not
|
|
|
396 hearers only" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Jas.1.22"
|
|
|
397 parsed="vul|Jas|1|22|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p2.1" passage="James
|
|
|
398 1:22">James 1:22</scripRef>). Therefore sacred doctrine is a practical
|
|
|
399 science.</p>
|
|
|
400 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 4 arg. 1"><a name="28251"><span class=
|
|
|
401 "ref">[28251] Iª q. 1 a. 4 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quartum sic
|
|
|
402 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra doctrina sit scientia practica.
|
|
|
403 Finis enim practicae est operatio, secundum philosophum in II
|
|
|
404 Metaphys. Sacra autem doctrina ad operationem ordinatur, secundum
|
|
|
405 illud Iac. I, <i>estote factores verbi, et non auditores
|
|
|
406 tantum</i>. Ergo sacra doctrina est practica scientia.</p>
|
|
|
407 </div>
|
|
|
408
|
|
|
409 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
410 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
411 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, sacred
|
|
|
412 doctrine is divided into the Old and the New Law. But law implies a
|
|
|
413 moral science which is a practical science. Therefore sacred doctrine
|
|
|
414 is a practical science.</p>
|
|
|
415 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 4 arg. 2"><a name="28252"><span class=
|
|
|
416 "ref">[28252] Iª q. 1 a. 4 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, sacra
|
|
|
417 doctrina dividitur per legem veterem et novam. Lex autem pertinet
|
|
|
418 ad scientiam moralem, quae est scientia practica. Ergo sacra
|
|
|
419 doctrina est scientia practica.</p>
|
|
|
420 </div>
|
|
|
421
|
|
|
422 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
423 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
424 contrary,</b> Every practical science is concerned with human
|
|
|
425 operations; as moral science is concerned with human acts, and
|
|
|
426 architecture with buildings. But sacred doctrine is chiefly concerned
|
|
|
427 with God, whose handiwork is especially man. Therefore it is not a
|
|
|
428 practical but a speculative science.</p>
|
|
|
429 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 4 s. c."><a name="28253"><span class=
|
|
|
430 "ref">[28253] Iª q. 1 a. 4 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, omnis
|
|
|
431 scientia practica est de rebus operabilibus ab homine; ut moralis
|
|
|
432 de actibus hominum, et aedificativa de aedificiis. Sacra autem
|
|
|
433 doctrina est principaliter de Deo, cuius magis homines sunt opera.
|
|
|
434 Non ergo est scientia practica, sed magis speculativa.</p>
|
|
|
435 </div>
|
|
|
436
|
|
|
437 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
438 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> Sacred doctrine, being one, extends to things which belong to different philosophical sciences because it considers in each the same formal aspect, namely, so far as they can be known through divine revelation. Hence, although among the philosophical sciences one is speculative and another practical, nevertheless sacred doctrine includes both; as God, by one and the same science, knows both Himself and His works. Still, it is speculative rather than
|
|
|
439 practical because it is more concerned with divine things than with
|
|
|
440 human acts; though it does treat even of these latter, inasmuch as man
|
|
|
441 is ordained by them to the perfect knowledge of God in which consists
|
|
|
442 eternal bliss. This is a sufficient answer to the Objections.</p>
|
|
|
443 <div xml:lang="la">
|
|
|
444 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 4 co."><a name="28254"><span class=
|
|
|
445 "ref">[28254] Iª q. 1 a. 4 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
446 quod sacra doctrina, ut dictum est, una existens, se extendit ad ea
|
|
|
447 quae pertinent ad diversas scientias philosophicas, propter
|
|
|
448 rationem formalem quam in diversis attendit, scilicet prout sunt
|
|
|
449 divino lumine cognoscibilia. Unde licet in scientiis philosophicis
|
|
|
450 alia sit speculativa et alia practica, sacra tamen doctrina
|
|
|
451 comprehendit sub se utramque; sicut et Deus eadem scientia se
|
|
|
452 cognoscit, et ea quae facit. Magis tamen est speculativa quam
|
|
|
453 practica, quia principalius agit de rebus divinis quam de actibus
|
|
|
454 humanis; de quibus agit secundum quod per eos ordinatur homo ad
|
|
|
455 perfectam Dei cognitionem, in qua aeterna beatitudo consistit.</p>
|
|
|
456 <p title="I q. 1 a. 4 ad arg."><a name="28255"><span class=
|
|
|
457 "ref">[28255] Iª q. 1 a. 4 ad arg.</span></a> Et per hoc patet
|
|
|
458 responsio ad obiecta.</p>
|
|
|
459 </div>
|
|
|
460 </div>
|
|
|
461
|
|
|
462 </div4>
|
|
|
463
|
|
|
464 <div4 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5" next="FP_Q1_A6" prev="FP_Q1_A4" progress="0.08%" n="v" title="Article. 5 - Whether sacred doctrine is nobler than other sciences?">
|
|
|
465 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p0.1">Whether sacred doctrine is nobler than other sciences?</h4>
|
|
|
466
|
|
|
467 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
468 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
469 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that sacred
|
|
|
470 doctrine is not nobler than other sciences; for the nobility of a
|
|
|
471 science depends on the certitude it establishes. But other sciences,
|
|
|
472 the principles of which cannot be doubted, seem to be more certain
|
|
|
473 than sacred doctrine; for its principles---namely, articles of
|
|
|
474 faith---can be doubted. Therefore other sciences seem to be
|
|
|
475 nobler.</p>
|
|
|
476 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 arg. 1"><a name="28256"><span class=
|
|
|
477 "ref">[28256] Iª q. 1 a. 5 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quintum sic
|
|
|
478 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra doctrina non sit dignior aliis
|
|
|
479 scientiis. Certitudo enim pertinet ad dignitatem scientiae. Sed
|
|
|
480 aliae scientiae, de quarum principiis dubitari non potest, videntur
|
|
|
481 esse certiores sacra doctrina, cuius principia, scilicet articuli
|
|
|
482 fidei, dubitationem recipiunt. Aliae igitur scientiae videntur ista
|
|
|
483 digniores.</p>
|
|
|
484 </div>
|
|
|
485
|
|
|
486 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
487 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, it is the sign of a lower science to depend upon a higher; as music depends on arithmetic. But sacred doctrine does in a sense depend upon philosophical sciences; for Jerome observes, in his Epistle to Magnus, that "the ancient doctors so enriched their books with the ideas and phrases of the philosophers, that thou knowest not what more to admire in them, their profane erudition or their scriptural learning." Therefore sacred doctrine is inferior to
|
|
|
488 other sciences.</p>
|
|
|
489 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 arg. 2"><a name="28257"><span class=
|
|
|
490 "ref">[28257] Iª q. 1 a. 5 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
|
|
|
491 inferioris scientiae est a superiori accipere, sicut musicus ab
|
|
|
492 arithmetico. Sed sacra doctrina accipit aliquid a philosophicis
|
|
|
493 disciplinis, dicit enim Hieronymus in epistola ad magnum oratorem
|
|
|
494 urbis Romae, quod <i>doctores antiqui intantum philosophorum
|
|
|
495 doctrinis atque sententiis suos resperserunt libros, ut nescias
|
|
|
496 quid in illis prius admirari debeas, eruditionem saeculi, an
|
|
|
497 scientiam Scripturarum</i>. Ergo sacra doctrina est inferior aliis
|
|
|
498 scientiis.</p>
|
|
|
499 </div>
|
|
|
500
|
|
|
501 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
502 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
503 contrary,</b> Other sciences are called the handmaidens of this one:
|
|
|
504 "Wisdom sent her maids to invite to the tower" (<scripRef
|
|
|
505 osisRef="Bible.vul:Prov.9.3" parsed="vul|Prov|9|3|0|0"
|
|
|
506 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p4.1"
|
|
|
507 passage="Prov. 9:3">Prov. 9:3</scripRef>).</p>
|
|
|
508 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 s. c."><a name="28258"><span class=
|
|
|
509 "ref">[28258] Iª q. 1 a. 5 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
510 quod aliae scientiae dicuntur ancillae huius, Prov. IX, <i>misit
|
|
|
511 ancillas suas vocare ad arcem</i>.</p>
|
|
|
512 </div>
|
|
|
513
|
|
|
514 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
515 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> Since this science is partly speculative and partly practical, it transcends all others speculative and practical. Now one speculative science is said to be nobler than another, either by reason of its greater certitude, or by reason of the higher worth of its subject-matter. In both these respects this science surpasses other speculative sciences; in point of greater certitude, because other sciences derive their certitude from the natural light of human
|
|
|
516 reason, which can err; whereas this derives its certitude from the light of divine knowledge, which cannot be misled: in point of the higher worth of its subject-matter because this science treats chiefly of those things which by their sublimity transcend human reason; while other sciences consider only those things which are within reason's grasp. Of the practical sciences, that one is nobler which is ordained to a further purpose, as political science is nobler than military science; for the
|
|
|
517 good of the army is directed to the good of the State. But the
|
|
|
518 purpose of this science, in so far as it is practical, is eternal
|
|
|
519 bliss; to which as to an ultimate end the purposes of every practical
|
|
|
520 science are directed. Hence it is clear that from every standpoint, it
|
|
|
521 is nobler than other sciences.</p>
|
|
|
522 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 co."><a name="28259"><span class=
|
|
|
523 "ref">[28259] Iª q. 1 a. 5 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
524 quod, cum ista scientia quantum ad aliquid sit speculativa, et
|
|
|
525 quantum ad aliquid sit practica, omnes alias transcendit tam
|
|
|
526 speculativas quam practicas. Speculativarum enim scientiarum una
|
|
|
527 altera dignior dicitur, tum propter certitudinem, tum propter
|
|
|
528 dignitatem materiae. Et quantum ad utrumque, haec scientia alias
|
|
|
529 speculativas scientias excedit. Secundum certitudinem quidem, quia
|
|
|
530 aliae scientiae certitudinem habent ex naturali lumine rationis
|
|
|
531 humanae, quae potest errare, haec autem certitudinem habet ex
|
|
|
532 lumine divinae scientiae, quae decipi non potest. Secundum
|
|
|
533 dignitatem vero materiae, quia ista scientia est principaliter de
|
|
|
534 his quae sua altitudine rationem transcendunt, aliae vero scientiae
|
|
|
535 considerant ea tantum quae rationi subduntur. Practicarum vero
|
|
|
536 scientiarum illa dignior est, quae ad ulteriorem finem ordinatur,
|
|
|
537 sicut civilis militari, nam bonum exercitus ad bonum civitatis
|
|
|
538 ordinatur. Finis autem huius doctrinae inquantum est practica, est
|
|
|
539 beatitudo aeterna, ad quam sicut ad ultimum finem ordinantur omnes
|
|
|
540 alii fines scientiarum practicarum. Unde manifestum est, secundum
|
|
|
541 omnem modum, eam digniorem esse aliis.</p>
|
|
|
542 </div>
|
|
|
543
|
|
|
544 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
545 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p6"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> It may well happen that what is in itself the more certain may seem to us the less certain on account of the weakness of our intelligence, "which is dazzled by the clearest objects of nature; as the owl is dazzled by the light of the sun" (Metaph. ii, lect. i). Hence the fact that some happen to doubt about articles of faith is not due to the uncertain nature of the truths, but to the weakness of human intelligence; yet the slenderest knowledge that
|
|
|
546 may be obtained of the highest things is more desirable than the
|
|
|
547 most certain knowledge obtained of lesser things, as is said in de
|
|
|
548 Animalibus xi.</p>
|
|
|
549 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 ad 1"><a name="28260"><span class=
|
|
|
550 "ref">[28260] Iª q. 1 a. 5 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
551 dicendum quod nihil prohibet id quod est certius secundum naturam,
|
|
|
552 esse quoad nos minus certum, propter debilitatem intellectus
|
|
|
553 nostri, qui se habet ad manifestissima naturae, sicut oculus
|
|
|
554 noctuae ad lumen solis, sicut dicitur in II Metaphys. Unde
|
|
|
555 dubitatio quae accidit in aliquibus circa articulos fidei, non est
|
|
|
556 propter incertitudinem rei, sed propter debilitatem intellectus
|
|
|
557 humani. Et tamen minimum quod potest haberi de cognitione rerum
|
|
|
558 altissimarum, desiderabilius est quam certissima cognitio quae
|
|
|
559 habetur de minimis rebus, ut dicitur in XI de animalibus.</p>
|
|
|
560 </div>
|
|
|
561
|
|
|
562 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
563 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> This science can in a sense depend upon the philosophical sciences, not as though it stood in need of them, but only in order to make its teaching clearer. For it accepts its principles not from other sciences, but immediately from God, by revelation. Therefore it does not depend upon other sciences as upon the higher, but makes use of them as of the lesser, and as handmaidens: even so the master sciences make use of the sciences that supply their
|
|
|
564 materials, as political of military science. That it thus uses them
|
|
|
565 is not due to its own defect or insufficiency, but to the defect of
|
|
|
566 our intelligence, which is more easily led by what is known through
|
|
|
567 natural reason (from which proceed the other sciences) to that which
|
|
|
568 is above reason, such as are the teachings of this science.</p>
|
|
|
569 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 ad 2"><a name="28261"><span class=
|
|
|
570 "ref">[28261] Iª q. 1 a. 5 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
571 dicendum quod haec scientia accipere potest aliquid a philosophicis
|
|
|
572 disciplinis, non quod ex necessitate eis indigeat, sed ad maiorem
|
|
|
573 manifestationem eorum quae in hac scientia traduntur. Non enim
|
|
|
574 accipit sua principia ab aliis scientiis, sed immediate a Deo per
|
|
|
575 revelationem. Et ideo non accipit ab aliis scientiis tanquam a
|
|
|
576 superioribus, sed utitur eis tanquam inferioribus et ancillis;
|
|
|
577 sicut architectonicae utuntur subministrantibus, ut civilis
|
|
|
578 militari. Et hoc ipsum quod sic utitur eis, non est propter
|
|
|
579 defectum vel insufficientiam eius, sed propter defectum intellectus
|
|
|
580 nostri; qui ex his quae per naturalem rationem (ex qua procedunt
|
|
|
581 aliae scientiae) cognoscuntur, facilius manuducitur in ea quae sunt
|
|
|
582 supra rationem, quae in hac scientia traduntur.</p>
|
|
|
583 </div>
|
|
|
584
|
|
|
585 </div4>
|
|
|
586
|
|
|
587 <div4 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6" next="FP_Q1_A7" prev="FP_Q1_A5" progress="0.10%" n="vi" title="Article. 6 - Whether this doctrine is the same as wisdom?">
|
|
|
588 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p0.1">Whether this doctrine is the same as wisdom?</h4>
|
|
|
589
|
|
|
590 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
591 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
592 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that this
|
|
|
593 doctrine is not the same as wisdom. For no doctrine which borrows its
|
|
|
594 principles is worthy of the name of wisdom; seeing that the wise man
|
|
|
595 directs, and is not directed (Metaph. i). But this doctrine borrows
|
|
|
596 its principles. Therefore this science is not wisdom.</p>
|
|
|
597 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 arg. 1"><a name="28262"><span class=
|
|
|
598 "ref">[28262] Iª q. 1 a. 6 arg. 1</span></a> Ad sextum sic
|
|
|
599 proceditur. Videtur quod haec doctrina non sit sapientia. Nulla
|
|
|
600 enim doctrina quae supponit sua principia aliunde, digna est nomine
|
|
|
601 sapientiae, <i>quia sapientis est ordinare, et non ordinari</i> (I
|
|
|
602 Metaphys.). Sed haec doctrina supponit principia sua aliunde, ut ex
|
|
|
603 dictis patet. Ergo haec doctrina non est sapientia.</p>
|
|
|
604 </div>
|
|
|
605
|
|
|
606 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
607 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
608 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, it is a part
|
|
|
609 of wisdom to prove the principles of other sciences. Hence it is
|
|
|
610 called the chief of sciences, as is clear in Ethic. vi. But this
|
|
|
611 doctrine does not prove the principles of other sciences. Therefore it
|
|
|
612 is not the same as wisdom.</p>
|
|
|
613 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 arg. 2"><a name="28263"><span class=
|
|
|
614 "ref">[28263] Iª q. 1 a. 6 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, ad
|
|
|
615 sapientiam pertinet probare principia aliarum scientiarum, unde ut
|
|
|
616 caput dicitur scientiarum, ut VI Ethic. patet. Sed haec doctrina
|
|
|
617 non probat principia aliarum scientiarum. Ergo non est
|
|
|
618 sapientia.</p>
|
|
|
619 </div>
|
|
|
620
|
|
|
621 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
622 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
623 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, this doctrine
|
|
|
624 is acquired by study, whereas wisdom is acquired by God's inspiration;
|
|
|
625 so that it is numbered among the gifts of the Holy Spirit (<scripRef
|
|
|
626 osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.11.2" parsed="vul|Isa|11|2|0|0"
|
|
|
627 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p4.1"
|
|
|
628 passage="Is. 11:2">Is. 11:2</scripRef>). Therefore this doctrine is
|
|
|
629 not the same as wisdom.</p>
|
|
|
630 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 arg. 3"><a name="28264"><span class=
|
|
|
631 "ref">[28264] Iª q. 1 a. 6 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, haec
|
|
|
632 doctrina per studium acquiritur. Sapientia autem per infusionem
|
|
|
633 habetur, unde inter septem dona spiritus sancti connumeratur, ut
|
|
|
634 patet Isaiae XI. Ergo haec doctrina non est sapientia.</p>
|
|
|
635 </div>
|
|
|
636
|
|
|
637 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
638 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p5"><b>On the
|
|
|
639 contrary,</b> It is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Deut.4.6"
|
|
|
640 parsed="vul|Deut|4|6|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p5.1"
|
|
|
641 passage="Dt. 4:6">Dt. 4:6</scripRef>): "This is your wisdom and
|
|
|
642 understanding in the sight of nations."</p>
|
|
|
643 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 s. c."><a name="28265"><span class=
|
|
|
644 "ref">[28265] Iª q. 1 a. 6 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
645 quod dicitur Deut. IV, in principio legis, <i>haec est nostra
|
|
|
646 sapientia et intellectus coram populis</i>.</p>
|
|
|
647 </div>
|
|
|
648
|
|
|
649 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
650 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> This doctrine is wisdom above all human wisdom; not merely in any one order, but absolutely. For since it is the part of a wise man to arrange and to judge, and since lesser matters should be judged in the light of some higher principle, he is said to be wise in any one order who considers the highest principle in that order: thus in the order of building, he who plans the form of the house is called wise and architect, in opposition to the inferior laborers
|
|
|
651 who trim the wood and make ready the stones: "As a wise architect, I have laid the foundation" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.3.10" parsed="vul|1Cor|3|10|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p6.1" passage="1 Cor. 3:10">1 Cor. 3:10</scripRef>). Again, in the order of all human life, the prudent man is called wise, inasmuch as he directs his acts to a fitting end: "Wisdom is prudence to a man" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Prov.10.23" parsed="vul|Prov|10|23|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p6.2" passage="Prov. 10: 23">Prov. 10: 23</scripRef>). Therefore he who considers absolutely the highest cause of the whole universe, namely God, is most of all called wise. Hence wisdom is said to be the knowledge of divine things, as
|
|
|
652 Augustine says (De Trin. xii, 14). But sacred doctrine essentially
|
|
|
653 treats of God viewed as the highest cause---not only so far as He can
|
|
|
654 be known through creatures just as philosophers knew Him---"That which
|
|
|
655 is known of God is manifest in them" (<scripRef
|
|
|
656 osisRef="Bible.vul:Rom.1.19" parsed="vul|Rom|1|19|0|0"
|
|
|
657 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p6.3"
|
|
|
658 passage="Rom. 1:19">Rom. 1:19</scripRef>)---but also as far as He is
|
|
|
659 known to Himself alone and revealed to others. Hence sacred doctrine
|
|
|
660 is especially called wisdom.</p>
|
|
|
661 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 co."><a name="28266"><span class=
|
|
|
662 "ref">[28266] Iª q. 1 a. 6 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
663 quod haec doctrina maxime sapientia est inter omnes sapientias
|
|
|
664 humanas, non quidem in aliquo genere tantum, sed simpliciter. Cum
|
|
|
665 enim sapientis sit ordinare et iudicare, iudicium autem per
|
|
|
666 altiorem causam de inferioribus habeatur; ille sapiens dicitur in
|
|
|
667 unoquoque genere, qui considerat causam altissimam illius generis.
|
|
|
668 Ut in genere aedificii, artifex qui disponit formam domus, dicitur
|
|
|
669 sapiens et architector, respectu inferiorum artificum, qui dolant
|
|
|
670 ligna vel parant lapides, unde dicitur I Cor. III, <i>ut sapiens
|
|
|
671 architector fundamentum posui</i>. Et rursus, in genere totius
|
|
|
672 humanae vitae, prudens sapiens dicitur, inquantum ordinat humanos
|
|
|
673 actus ad debitum finem, unde dicitur Prov. X, <i>sapientia est viro
|
|
|
674 prudentia</i>. Ille igitur qui considerat simpliciter altissimam
|
|
|
675 causam totius universi, quae Deus est, maxime sapiens dicitur, unde
|
|
|
676 et sapientia dicitur esse divinorum cognitio, ut patet per
|
|
|
677 Augustinum, XII de Trinitate. Sacra autem doctrina propriissime
|
|
|
678 determinat de Deo secundum quod est altissima causa, quia non solum
|
|
|
679 quantum ad illud quod est per creaturas cognoscibile (quod
|
|
|
680 philosophi cognoverunt, ut dicitur Rom. I, <i>quod notum est Dei,
|
|
|
681 manifestum est illis</i>); sed etiam quantum ad id quod notum est
|
|
|
682 sibi soli de seipso, et aliis per revelationem communicatum. Unde
|
|
|
683 sacra doctrina maxime dicitur sapientia.</p>
|
|
|
684 </div>
|
|
|
685
|
|
|
686 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
687 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p7"><b>Reply
|
|
|
688 to Objection 1:</b> Sacred doctrine derives its principles not from
|
|
|
689 any human knowledge, but from the divine knowledge, through which, as
|
|
|
690 through the highest wisdom, all our knowledge is set in order.</p>
|
|
|
691 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 ad 1"><a name="28267"><span class=
|
|
|
692 "ref">[28267] Iª q. 1 a. 6 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
693 dicendum quod sacra doctrina non supponit sua principia ab aliqua
|
|
|
694 scientia humana, sed a scientia divina, a qua, sicut a summa
|
|
|
695 sapientia, omnis nostra cognitio ordinatur.</p>
|
|
|
696 </div>
|
|
|
697
|
|
|
698 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
699 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The principles of other sciences either are evident and cannot be proved, or are proved by natural reason through some other science. But the knowledge proper to this science comes through revelation and not through natural reason. Therefore it has no concern to prove the principles of other sciences, but only to judge of them. Whatsoever is found in other sciences contrary to any truth of this science must be condemned as false: "Destroying counsels
|
|
|
700 and every height that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God"
|
|
|
701 (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:2Cor.10.4-2Cor.10.5"
|
|
|
702 parsed="vul|2Cor|10|4|10|5" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p8.1" passage="2
|
|
|
703 Cor. 10:4,5">2 Cor. 10:4,5</scripRef>).</p>
|
|
|
704 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 ad 2"><a name="28268"><span class=
|
|
|
705 "ref">[28268] Iª q. 1 a. 6 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
706 dicendum quod aliarum scientiarum principia vel sunt per se nota,
|
|
|
707 et probari non possunt, vel per aliquam rationem naturalem
|
|
|
708 probantur in aliqua alia scientia. Propria autem huius scientiae
|
|
|
709 cognitio est, quae est per revelationem, non autem quae est per
|
|
|
710 naturalem rationem. Et ideo non pertinet ad eam probare principia
|
|
|
711 aliarum scientiarum, sed solum iudicare de eis, quidquid enim in
|
|
|
712 aliis scientiis invenitur veritati huius scientiae repugnans, totum
|
|
|
713 condemnatur ut falsum, unde dicitur II Cor. X, <i>consilia
|
|
|
714 destruentes, et omnem altitudinem extollentem se adversus scientiam
|
|
|
715 Dei</i>.</p>
|
|
|
716 </div>
|
|
|
717
|
|
|
718 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
719 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Since judgment appertains to wisdom, the twofold manner of judging produces a twofold wisdom. A man may judge in one way by inclination, as whoever has the habit of a virtue judges rightly of what concerns that virtue by his very inclination towards it. Hence it is the virtuous man, as we read, who is the measure and rule of human acts. In another way, by knowledge, just as a man learned in moral science might be able to judge rightly about virtuous
|
|
|
720 acts, though he had not the virtue. The first manner of judging
|
|
|
721 divine things belongs to that wisdom which is set down among the gifts
|
|
|
722 of the Holy Ghost: "The spiritual man judgeth all things" (<scripRef
|
|
|
723 osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.2.15" parsed="vul|1Cor|2|15|0|0"
|
|
|
724 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p9.1" passage="1 Cor. 2:15">1
|
|
|
725 Cor. 2:15</scripRef>). And Dionysius says (Div. Nom. ii): "Hierotheus
|
|
|
726 is taught not by mere learning, but by experience of divine things."
|
|
|
727 The second manner of judging belongs to this doctrine which is
|
|
|
728 acquired by study, though its principles are obtained by
|
|
|
729 revelation.</p>
|
|
|
730 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 ad 3"><a name="28269"><span class=
|
|
|
731 "ref">[28269] Iª q. 1 a. 6 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
|
|
|
732 quod, cum iudicium ad sapientem pertineat, secundum duplicem modum
|
|
|
733 iudicandi, dupliciter sapientia accipitur. Contingit enim aliquem
|
|
|
734 iudicare, uno modo per modum inclinationis, sicut qui habet habitum
|
|
|
735 virtutis, recte iudicat de his quae sunt secundum virtutem agenda,
|
|
|
736 inquantum ad illa inclinatur, unde et in X Ethic. dicitur quod
|
|
|
737 virtuosus est mensura et regula actuum humanorum. Alio modo, per
|
|
|
738 modum cognitionis, sicut aliquis instructus in scientia morali,
|
|
|
739 posset iudicare de actibus virtutis, etiam si virtutem non haberet.
|
|
|
740 Primus igitur modus iudicandi de rebus divinis, pertinet ad
|
|
|
741 sapientiam quae ponitur donum spiritus sancti secundum illud I Cor.
|
|
|
742 II, <i>spiritualis homo iudicat omnia,</i> etc., et Dionysius
|
|
|
743 dicit, II cap. de divinis nominibus, <i>Hierotheus doctus est non
|
|
|
744 solum discens, sed et patiens divina</i>. Secundus autem modus
|
|
|
745 iudicandi pertinet ad hanc doctrinam, secundum quod per studium
|
|
|
746 habetur; licet eius principia ex revelatione habeantur.</p>
|
|
|
747 </div>
|
|
|
748
|
|
|
749 </div4>
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
751 <div4 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7" next="FP_Q1_A8" prev="FP_Q1_A6" progress="0.13%" n="vii" title="Article. 7 - Whether God is the object of this science?">
|
|
|
752 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p0.1">Whether God is the object of this science?</h4>
|
|
|
753
|
|
|
754 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
755 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
756 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
|
|
|
757 not the object of this science. For in every science, the nature of
|
|
|
758 its object is presupposed. But this science cannot presuppose the
|
|
|
759 essence of God, for Damascene says (De Fide Orth. i, iv): "It is
|
|
|
760 impossible to define the essence of God." Therefore God is not the
|
|
|
761 object of this science.</p>
|
|
|
762 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 arg. 1"><a name="28270"><span class=
|
|
|
763 "ref">[28270] Iª q. 1 a. 7 arg. 1</span></a> Ad septimum sic
|
|
|
764 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus non sit subiectum huius scientiae. In
|
|
|
765 qualibet enim scientia oportet supponere de subiecto quid est,
|
|
|
766 secundum philosophum in I Poster. Sed haec scientia non supponit de
|
|
|
767 Deo quid est, dicit enim Damascenus, <i>in Deo quid est, dicere
|
|
|
768 impossibile est</i>. Ergo Deus non est subiectum huius
|
|
|
769 scientiae.</p>
|
|
|
770 </div>
|
|
|
771
|
|
|
772 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
773 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
774 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, whatever
|
|
|
775 conclusions are reached in any science must be comprehended under the
|
|
|
776 object of the science. But in Holy Writ we reach conclusions not only
|
|
|
777 concerning God, but concerning many other things, such as creatures
|
|
|
778 and human morality. Therefore God is not the object of this
|
|
|
779 science.</p>
|
|
|
780 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 arg. 2"><a name="28271"><span class=
|
|
|
781 "ref">[28271] Iª q. 1 a. 7 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, omnia
|
|
|
782 quae determinantur in aliqua scientia, comprehenduntur sub subiecto
|
|
|
783 illius scientiae. Sed in sacra Scriptura determinatur de multis
|
|
|
784 aliis quam de Deo, puta de creaturis, et de moribus hominum. Ergo
|
|
|
785 Deus non est subiectum huius scientiae.</p>
|
|
|
786 </div>
|
|
|
787
|
|
|
788 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
789 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
790 contrary,</b> The object of the science is that of which it
|
|
|
791 principally treats. But in this science, the treatment is mainly about
|
|
|
792 God; for it is called theology, as treating of God. Therefore God is
|
|
|
793 the object of this science.</p>
|
|
|
794 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 s. c."><a name="28272"><span class=
|
|
|
795 "ref">[28272] Iª q. 1 a. 7 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, illud
|
|
|
796 est subiectum scientiae, de quo est sermo in scientia. Sed in hac
|
|
|
797 scientia fit sermo de Deo, dicitur enim theologia, quasi sermo de
|
|
|
798 Deo. Ergo Deus est subiectum huius scientiae.</p>
|
|
|
799 </div>
|
|
|
800
|
|
|
801 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
802 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> God is the object of this science. The relation between a science and its object is the same as that between a habit or faculty and its object. Now properly speaking, the object of a faculty or habit is the thing under the aspect of which all things are referred to that faculty or habit, as man and stone are referred to the faculty of sight in that they are colored. Hence colored things are the proper objects of sight. But in sacred science, all things are
|
|
|
803 treated of under the aspect of God: either because they are God Himself or because they refer to God as their beginning and end. Hence it follows that God is in very truth the object of this science. This is clear also from the principles of this science, namely, the articles of faith, for faith is about God. The object of the principles and of the whole science must be the same, since the whole science is contained virtually in its principles. Some, however, looking to what is treated of in
|
|
|
804 this science, and not to the aspect under which it is treated, have
|
|
|
805 asserted the object of this science to be something other than
|
|
|
806 God---that is, either things and signs; or the works of salvation; or
|
|
|
807 the whole Christ, as the head and members. Of all these things, in
|
|
|
808 truth, we treat in this science, but so far as they have reference to
|
|
|
809 God.</p>
|
|
|
810 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 co."><a name="28273"><span class=
|
|
|
811 "ref">[28273] Iª q. 1 a. 7 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
812 quod Deus est subiectum huius scientiae. Sic enim se habet
|
|
|
813 subiectum ad scientiam, sicut obiectum ad potentiam vel habitum.
|
|
|
814 Proprie autem illud assignatur obiectum alicuius potentiae vel
|
|
|
815 habitus, sub cuius ratione omnia referuntur ad potentiam vel
|
|
|
816 habitum, sicut homo et lapis referuntur ad visum inquantum sunt
|
|
|
817 colorata, unde coloratum est proprium obiectum visus. Omnia autem
|
|
|
818 pertractantur in sacra doctrina sub ratione Dei, vel quia sunt ipse
|
|
|
819 Deus; vel quia habent ordinem ad Deum, ut ad principium et finem.
|
|
|
820 Unde sequitur quod Deus vere sit subiectum huius scientiae. Quod
|
|
|
821 etiam manifestum fit ex principiis huius scientiae, quae sunt
|
|
|
822 articuli fidei, quae est de Deo, idem autem est subiectum
|
|
|
823 principiorum et totius scientiae, cum tota scientia virtute
|
|
|
824 contineatur in principiis. Quidam vero, attendentes ad ea quae in
|
|
|
825 ista scientia tractantur, et non ad rationem secundum quam
|
|
|
826 considerantur, assignaverunt aliter subiectum huius scientiae, vel
|
|
|
827 res et signa; vel opera reparationis; vel totum Christum, idest
|
|
|
828 caput et membra. De omnibus enim istis tractatur in ista scientia,
|
|
|
829 sed secundum ordinem ad Deum.</p>
|
|
|
830 </div>
|
|
|
831
|
|
|
832 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
833 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p6"><b>Reply
|
|
|
834 to Objection 1:</b> Although we cannot know in what consists the
|
|
|
835 essence of God, nevertheless in this science we make use of His
|
|
|
836 effects, either of nature or of grace, in place of a definition, in
|
|
|
837 regard to whatever is treated of in this science concerning God; even
|
|
|
838 as in some philosophical sciences we demonstrate something about a
|
|
|
839 cause from its effect, by taking the effect in place of a definition
|
|
|
840 of the cause.</p>
|
|
|
841 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 ad 1"><a name="28274"><span class=
|
|
|
842 "ref">[28274] Iª q. 1 a. 7 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
843 dicendum quod, licet de Deo non possimus scire quid est, utimur
|
|
|
844 tamen eius effectu, in hac doctrina, vel naturae vel gratiae, loco
|
|
|
845 definitionis, ad ea quae de Deo in hac doctrina considerantur,
|
|
|
846 sicut et in aliquibus scientiis philosophicis demonstratur aliquid
|
|
|
847 de causa per effectum, accipiendo effectum loco definitionis
|
|
|
848 causae.</p>
|
|
|
849 </div>
|
|
|
850
|
|
|
851 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
852 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p7"><b>Reply
|
|
|
853 to Objection 2:</b> Whatever other conclusions are reached in this
|
|
|
854 sacred science are comprehended under God, not as parts or species or
|
|
|
855 accidents but as in some way related to Him.</p>
|
|
|
856 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 ad 2"><a name="28275"><span class=
|
|
|
857 "ref">[28275] Iª q. 1 a. 7 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
858 dicendum quod omnia alia quae determinantur in sacra doctrina,
|
|
|
859 comprehenduntur sub Deo, non ut partes vel species vel accidentia,
|
|
|
860 sed ut ordinata aliqualiter ad ipsum.</p>
|
|
|
861 </div>
|
|
|
862
|
|
|
863 </div4>
|
|
|
864
|
|
|
865 <div4 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8" next="FP_Q1_A9" prev="FP_Q1_A7" progress="0.15%" n="viii" title="Article. 8 - Whether sacred doctrine is a matter of argument?">
|
|
|
866 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p0.1">Whether sacred doctrine is a matter of argument?</h4>
|
|
|
867
|
|
|
868 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
869 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
870 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems this doctrine
|
|
|
871 is not a matter of argument. For Ambrose says (De Fide 1): "Put
|
|
|
872 arguments aside where faith is sought." But in this doctrine, faith
|
|
|
873 especially is sought: "But these things are written that you may
|
|
|
874 believe" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.20.31"
|
|
|
875 parsed="vul|John|20|31|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p2.1"
|
|
|
876 passage="Jn. 20:31">Jn. 20:31</scripRef>). Therefore sacred doctrine
|
|
|
877 is not a matter of argument.</p>
|
|
|
878 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 arg. 1"><a name="28276"><span class=
|
|
|
879 "ref">[28276] Iª q. 1 a. 8 arg. 1</span></a> Ad octavum sic
|
|
|
880 proceditur. Videtur quod haec doctrina non sit argumentativa. Dicit
|
|
|
881 enim Ambrosius in libro I de fide Catholica, <i>tolle argumenta,
|
|
|
882 ubi fides quaeritur</i>. Sed in hac doctrina praecipue fides
|
|
|
883 quaeritur, unde dicitur Ioan. XX, <i>haec scripta sunt ut
|
|
|
884 credatis</i>. Ergo sacra doctrina non est argumentativa.</p>
|
|
|
885 </div>
|
|
|
886
|
|
|
887 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
888 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
889 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, if it is a
|
|
|
890 matter of argument, the argument is either from authority or from
|
|
|
891 reason. If it is from authority, it seems unbefitting its dignity, for
|
|
|
892 the proof from authority is the weakest form of proof. But if it is
|
|
|
893 from reason, this is unbefitting its end, because, according to
|
|
|
894 Gregory (Hom. 26), "faith has no merit in those things of which human
|
|
|
895 reason brings its own experience." Therefore sacred doctrine is not a
|
|
|
896 matter of argument.</p>
|
|
|
897 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 arg. 2"><a name="28277"><span class=
|
|
|
898 "ref">[28277] Iª q. 1 a. 8 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, si sit
|
|
|
899 argumentativa, aut argumentatur ex auctoritate, aut ex ratione. Si
|
|
|
900 ex auctoritate, non videtur hoc congruere eius dignitati, nam locus
|
|
|
901 ab auctoritate est infirmissimus, secundum Boetium. Si etiam ex
|
|
|
902 ratione, hoc non congruit eius fini, quia secundum Gregorium in
|
|
|
903 homilia, <i>fides non habet meritum, ubi humana ratio praebet
|
|
|
904 experimentum</i>. Ergo sacra doctrina non est argumentativa.</p>
|
|
|
905 </div>
|
|
|
906
|
|
|
907 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
908 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
909 contrary,</b> The Scripture says that a bishop should "embrace that
|
|
|
910 faithful word which is according to doctrine, that he may be able to
|
|
|
911 exhort in sound doctrine and to convince the gainsayers" (<scripRef
|
|
|
912 osisRef="Bible.vul:Titus.1.9" parsed="vul|Titus|1|9|0|0"
|
|
|
913 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p4.1" passage="Titus 1:9">Titus
|
|
|
914 1:9</scripRef>).</p>
|
|
|
915 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 s. c."><a name="28278"><span class=
|
|
|
916 "ref">[28278] Iª q. 1 a. 8 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
917 quod dicitur ad Titum I, de episcopo, <i>amplectentem eum qui
|
|
|
918 secundum doctrinam est, fidelem sermonem, ut potens sit exhortari
|
|
|
919 in doctrina sana, et eos qui contradicunt arguere</i>.</p>
|
|
|
920 </div>
|
|
|
921
|
|
|
922 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
923 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> As other sciences do not argue in proof of their principles, but argue from their principles to demonstrate other truths in these sciences: so this doctrine does not argue in proof of its principles, which are the articles of faith, but from them it goes on to prove something else; as the Apostle from the resurrection of Christ argues in proof of the general resurrection (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.15" parsed="vul|1Cor|15|0|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p5.1" passage="1 Cor. 15">1 Cor. 15</scripRef>). However, it is to be borne in mind, in regard to the philosophical
|
|
|
924 sciences, that the inferior sciences neither prove their principles nor dispute with those who deny them, but leave this to a higher science; whereas the highest of them, viz. metaphysics, can dispute with one who denies its principles, if only the opponent will make some concession; but if he concede nothing, it can have no dispute with him, though it can answer his objections. Hence Sacred Scripture, since it has no science above itself, can dispute with one who denies its principles only if
|
|
|
925 the opponent admits some at least of the truths obtained through divine revelation; thus we can argue with heretics from texts in Holy Writ, and against those who deny one article of faith, we can argue from another. If our opponent believes nothing of divine revelation, there is no longer any means of proving the articles of faith by reasoning, but only of answering his objections---if he has any---against faith. Since faith rests upon infallible truth, and since the contrary of a truth can
|
|
|
926 never be demonstrated, it is clear that the arguments brought
|
|
|
927 against faith cannot be demonstrations, but are difficulties that can
|
|
|
928 be answered.</p>
|
|
|
929 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 co."><a name="28279"><span class=
|
|
|
930 "ref">[28279] Iª q. 1 a. 8 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
931 quod, sicut aliae scientiae non argumentantur ad sua principia
|
|
|
932 probanda, sed ex principiis argumentantur ad ostendendum alia in
|
|
|
933 ipsis scientiis; ita haec doctrina non argumentatur ad sua
|
|
|
934 principia probanda, quae sunt articuli fidei; sed ex eis procedit
|
|
|
935 ad aliquid aliud ostendendum; sicut apostolus, I ad Cor. XV, ex
|
|
|
936 resurrectione Christi argumentatur ad resurrectionem communem
|
|
|
937 probandam. Sed tamen considerandum est in scientiis philosophicis,
|
|
|
938 quod inferiores scientiae nec probant sua principia, nec contra
|
|
|
939 negantem principia disputant, sed hoc relinquunt superiori
|
|
|
940 scientiae, suprema vero inter eas, scilicet metaphysica, disputat
|
|
|
941 contra negantem sua principia, si adversarius aliquid concedit, si
|
|
|
942 autem nihil concedit, non potest cum eo disputare, potest tamen
|
|
|
943 solvere rationes ipsius. Unde sacra Scriptura, cum non habeat
|
|
|
944 superiorem, disputat cum negante sua principia, argumentando
|
|
|
945 quidem, si adversarius aliquid concedat eorum quae per divinam
|
|
|
946 revelationem habentur; sicut per auctoritates sacrae doctrinae
|
|
|
947 disputamus contra haereticos, et per unum articulum contra negantes
|
|
|
948 alium. Si vero adversarius nihil credat eorum quae divinitus
|
|
|
949 revelantur, non remanet amplius via ad probandum articulos fidei
|
|
|
950 per rationes, sed ad solvendum rationes, si quas inducit, contra
|
|
|
951 fidem. Cum enim fides infallibili veritati innitatur, impossibile
|
|
|
952 autem sit de vero demonstrari contrarium, manifestum est
|
|
|
953 probationes quae contra fidem inducuntur, non esse demonstrationes,
|
|
|
954 sed solubilia argumenta.</p>
|
|
|
955 </div>
|
|
|
956
|
|
|
957 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
958 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p6"><b>Reply
|
|
|
959 to Objection 1:</b> Although arguments from human reason cannot avail
|
|
|
960 to prove what must be received on faith, nevertheless, this doctrine
|
|
|
961 argues from articles of faith to other truths.</p>
|
|
|
962 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 ad 1"><a name="28280"><span class=
|
|
|
963 "ref">[28280] Iª q. 1 a. 8 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
964 dicendum quod, licet argumenta rationis humanae non habeant locum
|
|
|
965 ad probandum quae fidei sunt, tamen ex articulis fidei haec
|
|
|
966 doctrina ad alia argumentatur, ut dictum est.</p>
|
|
|
967 </div>
|
|
|
968
|
|
|
969 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
970 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> This doctrine is especially based upon arguments from authority, inasmuch as its principles are obtained by revelation: thus we ought to believe on the authority of those to whom the revelation has been made. Nor does this take away from the dignity of this doctrine, for although the argument from authority based on human reason is the weakest, yet the argument from authority based on divine revelation is the strongest. But sacred doctrine makes use
|
|
|
971 even of human reason, not, indeed, to prove faith (for thereby the merit of faith would come to an end), but to make clear other things that are put forward in this doctrine. Since therefore grace does not destroy nature but perfects it, natural reason should minister to faith as the natural bent of the will ministers to charity. Hence the Apostle says: "Bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:2Cor.10.5" parsed="vul|2Cor|10|5|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p7.1" passage="2 Cor. 10:5">2 Cor. 10:5</scripRef>). Hence sacred doctrine makes use
|
|
|
972 also of the authority of philosophers in those questions in which they were able to know the truth by natural reason, as Paul quotes a saying of Aratus: "As some also of your own poets said: For we are also His offspring" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Acts.17.28" parsed="vul|Acts|17|28|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p7.2" passage="Acts 17:28">Acts 17:28</scripRef>). Nevertheless, sacred doctrine makes use of these authorities as extrinsic and probable arguments; but properly uses the authority of the canonical Scriptures as an incontrovertible proof, and the authority of the doctors of the Church as one
|
|
|
973 that may properly be used, yet merely as probable. For our faith rests upon the revelation made to the apostles and prophets who wrote the canonical books, and not on the revelations (if any such there are) made to other doctors. Hence Augustine says (Epis. ad Hieron. xix, 1): "Only those books of Scripture which are called canonical have I learned to hold in such honor as to believe their authors have not erred in any way in writing them. But other authors I so read as not to deem everything
|
|
|
974 in their works to be true, merely on account of their having so
|
|
|
975 thought and written, whatever may have been their holiness and
|
|
|
976 learning."</p>
|
|
|
977 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 ad 2"><a name="28281"><span class=
|
|
|
978 "ref">[28281] Iª q. 1 a. 8 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
979 dicendum quod argumentari ex auctoritate est maxime proprium huius
|
|
|
980 doctrinae, eo quod principia huius doctrinae per revelationem
|
|
|
981 habentur, et sic oportet quod credatur auctoritati eorum quibus
|
|
|
982 revelatio facta est. Nec hoc derogat dignitati huius doctrinae, nam
|
|
|
983 licet locus ab auctoritate quae fundatur super ratione humana, sit
|
|
|
984 infirmissimus; locus tamen ab auctoritate quae fundatur super
|
|
|
985 revelatione divina, est efficacissimus. Utitur tamen sacra doctrina
|
|
|
986 etiam ratione humana, non quidem ad probandum fidem, quia per hoc
|
|
|
987 tolleretur meritum fidei; sed ad manifestandum aliqua alia quae
|
|
|
988 traduntur in hac doctrina. Cum enim gratia non tollat naturam, sed
|
|
|
989 perficiat, oportet quod naturalis ratio subserviat fidei; sicut et
|
|
|
990 naturalis inclinatio voluntatis obsequitur caritati. Unde et
|
|
|
991 apostolus dicit, II ad Cor. X, <i>in captivitatem redigentes omnem
|
|
|
992 intellectum in obsequium Christi</i>. Et inde est quod etiam
|
|
|
993 auctoritatibus philosophorum sacra doctrina utitur, ubi per
|
|
|
994 rationem naturalem veritatem cognoscere potuerunt; sicut Paulus,
|
|
|
995 actuum XVII, inducit verbum Arati, dicens, <i>sicut et quidam
|
|
|
996 poetarum vestrorum dixerunt, genus Dei sumus</i>. Sed tamen sacra
|
|
|
997 doctrina huiusmodi auctoritatibus utitur quasi extraneis
|
|
|
998 argumentis, et probabilibus. Auctoritatibus autem canonicae
|
|
|
999 Scripturae utitur proprie, ex necessitate argumentando.
|
|
|
1000 Auctoritatibus autem aliorum doctorum Ecclesiae, quasi arguendo ex
|
|
|
1001 propriis, sed probabiliter. Innititur enim fides nostra revelationi
|
|
|
1002 apostolis et prophetis factae, qui canonicos libros scripserunt,
|
|
|
1003 non autem revelationi, si qua fuit aliis doctoribus facta. Unde
|
|
|
1004 dicit Augustinus, in epistola ad Hieronymum, <i>solis eis
|
|
|
1005 Scripturarum libris qui canonici appellantur, didici hunc honorem
|
|
|
1006 deferre, ut nullum auctorem eorum in scribendo errasse aliquid
|
|
|
1007 firmissime credam. Alios autem ita lego, ut, quantalibet sanctitate
|
|
|
1008 doctrinaque praepolleant, non ideo verum putem, quod ipsi ita
|
|
|
1009 senserunt vel scripserunt</i>.</p>
|
|
|
1010 </div>
|
|
|
1011
|
|
|
1012 </div4>
|
|
|
1013
|
|
|
1014 <div4 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9" next="FP_Q1_A10" prev="FP_Q1_A8" progress="0.19%" n="ix" title="Article. 9 - Whether Holy Scripture should use metaphors?">
|
|
|
1015 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p0.1">Whether Holy Scripture should use metaphors?</h4>
|
|
|
1016
|
|
|
1017 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1018 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
1019 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that Holy
|
|
|
1020 Scripture should not use metaphors. For that which is proper to the
|
|
|
1021 lowest science seems not to befit this science, which holds the
|
|
|
1022 highest place of all. But to proceed by the aid of various similitudes
|
|
|
1023 and figures is proper to poetry, the least of all the
|
|
|
1024 sciences. Therefore it is not fitting that this science should make
|
|
|
1025 use of such similitudes.</p>
|
|
|
1026 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 arg. 1"><a name="28282"><span class=
|
|
|
1027 "ref">[28282] Iª q. 1 a. 9 arg. 1</span></a> Ad nonum sic
|
|
|
1028 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra Scriptura non debeat uti metaphoris.
|
|
|
1029 Illud enim quod est proprium infimae doctrinae, non videtur
|
|
|
1030 competere huic scientiae, quae inter alias tenet locum supremum, ut
|
|
|
1031 iam dictum est. Procedere autem per similitudines varias et
|
|
|
1032 repraesentationes, est proprium poeticae, quae est infima inter
|
|
|
1033 omnes doctrinas. Ergo huiusmodi similitudinibus uti, non est
|
|
|
1034 conveniens huic scientiae.</p>
|
|
|
1035 </div>
|
|
|
1036
|
|
|
1037 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1038 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
1039 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, this doctrine
|
|
|
1040 seems to be intended to make truth clear. Hence a reward is held out
|
|
|
1041 to those who manifest it: "They that explain me shall have life
|
|
|
1042 everlasting" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Sir.24.31"
|
|
|
1043 parsed="vul|Sir|24|31|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p3.1"
|
|
|
1044 passage="Ecclus. 24:31">Ecclus. 24:31</scripRef>). But by such
|
|
|
1045 similitudes truth is obscured. Therefore, to put forward divine truths
|
|
|
1046 by likening them to corporeal things does not befit this science.</p>
|
|
|
1047 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 arg. 2"><a name="28283"><span class=
|
|
|
1048 "ref">[28283] Iª q. 1 a. 9 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, haec
|
|
|
1049 doctrina videtur esse ordinata ad veritatis manifestationem, unde
|
|
|
1050 et manifestatoribus eius praemium promittitur, Eccli. XXIV, <i>qui
|
|
|
1051 elucidant me, vitam aeternam habebunt</i>. Sed per huiusmodi
|
|
|
1052 similitudines veritas occultatur. Non ergo competit huic doctrinae
|
|
|
1053 divina tradere sub similitudine corporalium rerum.</p>
|
|
|
1054 </div>
|
|
|
1055
|
|
|
1056 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1057 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
1058 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the higher
|
|
|
1059 creatures are, the nearer they approach to the divine likeness. If
|
|
|
1060 therefore any creature be taken to represent God, this representation
|
|
|
1061 ought chiefly to be taken from the higher creatures, and not from the
|
|
|
1062 lower; yet this is often found in Scriptures.</p>
|
|
|
1063 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 arg. 3"><a name="28284"><span class=
|
|
|
1064 "ref">[28284] Iª q. 1 a. 9 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, quanto
|
|
|
1065 aliquae creaturae sunt sublimiores, tanto magis ad divinam
|
|
|
1066 similitudinem accedunt. Si igitur aliquae ex creaturis
|
|
|
1067 transumerentur ad Deum, tunc oporteret talem transumptionem maxime
|
|
|
1068 fieri ex sublimioribus creaturis, et non ex infimis. Quod tamen in
|
|
|
1069 Scripturis frequenter invenitur.</p>
|
|
|
1070 </div>
|
|
|
1071
|
|
|
1072 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1073 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p5"><b>On the
|
|
|
1074 contrary,</b> It is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Hos.12.10"
|
|
|
1075 parsed="vul|Hos|12|10|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p5.1" passage="Osee
|
|
|
1076 12:10">Osee 12:10</scripRef>): "I have multiplied visions, and I have
|
|
|
1077 used similitudes by the ministry of the prophets." But to put forward
|
|
|
1078 anything by means of similitudes is to use metaphors. Therefore this
|
|
|
1079 sacred science may use metaphors.</p>
|
|
|
1080 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 s. c."><a name="28285"><span class=
|
|
|
1081 "ref">[28285] Iª q. 1 a. 9 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
1082 quod dicitur Osee XII, <i>ego visionem multiplicavi eis, et in
|
|
|
1083 manibus prophetarum assimilatus sum</i>. Tradere autem aliquid sub
|
|
|
1084 similitudine, est metaphoricum. Ergo ad sacram doctrinam pertinet
|
|
|
1085 uti metaphoris.</p>
|
|
|
1086 </div>
|
|
|
1087
|
|
|
1088 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1089 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> It is befitting Holy Writ to put forward divine and spiritual truths by means of comparisons with material things. For God provides for everything according to the capacity of its nature. Now it is natural to man to attain to intellectual truths through sensible objects, because all our knowledge originates from sense. Hence in Holy Writ, spiritual truths are fittingly taught under the likeness of material things. This is what Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. i):
|
|
|
1090 "We cannot be enlightened by the divine rays except they be hidden
|
|
|
1091 within the covering of many sacred veils." It is also befitting Holy
|
|
|
1092 Writ, which is proposed to all without distinction of persons---"To
|
|
|
1093 the wise and to the unwise I am a debtor" (<scripRef
|
|
|
1094 osisRef="Bible.vul:Rom.1.14" parsed="vul|Rom|1|14|0|0"
|
|
|
1095 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p6.1"
|
|
|
1096 passage="Rom. 1:14">Rom. 1:14</scripRef>)---that spiritual truths be
|
|
|
1097 expounded by means of figures taken from corporeal things, in order
|
|
|
1098 that thereby even the simple who are unable by themselves to grasp
|
|
|
1099 intellectual things may be able to understand it.</p>
|
|
|
1100 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 co."><a name="28286"><span class=
|
|
|
1101 "ref">[28286] Iª q. 1 a. 9 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
1102 quod conveniens est sacrae Scripturae divina et spiritualia sub
|
|
|
1103 similitudine corporalium tradere. Deus enim omnibus providet
|
|
|
1104 secundum quod competit eorum naturae. Est autem naturale homini ut
|
|
|
1105 per sensibilia ad intelligibilia veniat, quia omnis nostra cognitio
|
|
|
1106 a sensu initium habet. Unde convenienter in sacra Scriptura
|
|
|
1107 traduntur nobis spiritualia sub metaphoris corporalium. Et hoc est
|
|
|
1108 quod dicit Dionysius, I cap. caelestis hierarchiae, <i>impossibile
|
|
|
1109 est nobis aliter lucere divinum radium, nisi varietate sacrorum
|
|
|
1110 velaminum circumvelatum</i>. Convenit etiam sacrae Scripturae, quae
|
|
|
1111 communiter omnibus proponitur (secundum illud ad Rom. I,
|
|
|
1112 <i>sapientibus et insipientibus debitor sum</i>), ut spiritualia
|
|
|
1113 sub similitudinibus corporalium proponantur; ut saltem vel sic
|
|
|
1114 rudes eam capiant, qui ad intelligibilia secundum se capienda non
|
|
|
1115 sunt idonei.</p>
|
|
|
1116 </div>
|
|
|
1117
|
|
|
1118 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1119 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p7"><b>Reply
|
|
|
1120 to Objection 1:</b> Poetry makes use of metaphors to produce a
|
|
|
1121 representation, for it is natural to man to be pleased with
|
|
|
1122 representations. But sacred doctrine makes use of metaphors as both
|
|
|
1123 necessary and useful.</p>
|
|
|
1124 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 ad 1"><a name="28287"><span class=
|
|
|
1125 "ref">[28287] Iª q. 1 a. 9 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
1126 dicendum quod poeta utitur metaphoris propter repraesentationem,
|
|
|
1127 repraesentatio enim naturaliter homini delectabilis est. Sed sacra
|
|
|
1128 doctrina utitur metaphoris propter necessitatem et utilitatem, ut
|
|
|
1129 dictum est.</p>
|
|
|
1130 </div>
|
|
|
1131
|
|
|
1132 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1133 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The ray of divine revelation is not extinguished by the sensible imagery wherewith it is veiled, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. i); and its truth so far remains that it does not allow the minds of those to whom the revelation has been made, to rest in the metaphors, but raises them to the knowledge of truths; and through those to whom the revelation has been made others also may receive instruction in these matters. Hence those things that are taught
|
|
|
1134 metaphorically in one part of Scripture, in other parts are taught
|
|
|
1135 more openly. The very hiding of truth in figures is useful for the
|
|
|
1136 exercise of thoughtful minds and as a defense against the ridicule of
|
|
|
1137 the impious, according to the words "Give not that which is holy to
|
|
|
1138 dogs" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Matt.7.6"
|
|
|
1139 parsed="vul|Matt|7|6|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p8.1"
|
|
|
1140 passage="Mat. 7:6">Mat. 7:6</scripRef>).</p>
|
|
|
1141 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 ad 2"><a name="28288"><span class=
|
|
|
1142 "ref">[28288] Iª q. 1 a. 9 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
1143 dicendum quod radius divinae revelationis non destruitur propter
|
|
|
1144 figuras sensibiles quibus circumvelatur, ut dicit Dionysius, sed
|
|
|
1145 remanet in sua veritate; ut mentes quibus fit revelatio, non
|
|
|
1146 permittat in similitudinibus permanere, sed elevet eas ad
|
|
|
1147 cognitionem intelligibilium; et per eos quibus revelatio facta est,
|
|
|
1148 alii etiam circa haec instruantur. Unde ea quae in uno loco
|
|
|
1149 Scripturae traduntur sub metaphoris, in aliis locis expressius
|
|
|
1150 exponuntur. Et ipsa etiam occultatio figurarum utilis est, ad
|
|
|
1151 exercitium studiosorum, et contra irrisiones infidelium, de quibus
|
|
|
1152 dicitur, Matth. VII, <i>nolite sanctum dare canibus</i>.</p>
|
|
|
1153 </div>
|
|
|
1154
|
|
|
1155 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1156 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> As Dionysius says, (Coel. Hier. i) it is more fitting that divine truths should be expounded under the figure of less noble than of nobler bodies, and this for three reasons. Firstly, because thereby men's minds are the better preserved from error. For then it is clear that these things are not literal descriptions of divine truths, which might have been open to doubt had they been expressed under the figure of nobler bodies, especially for those who
|
|
|
1157 could think of nothing nobler than bodies. Secondly, because this is
|
|
|
1158 more befitting the knowledge of God that we have in this life. For
|
|
|
1159 what He is not is clearer to us than what He is. Therefore similitudes
|
|
|
1160 drawn from things farthest away from God form within us a truer
|
|
|
1161 estimate that God is above whatsoever we may say or think of
|
|
|
1162 Him. Thirdly, because thereby divine truths are the better hidden from
|
|
|
1163 the unworthy.</p>
|
|
|
1164 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 ad 3"><a name="28289"><span class=
|
|
|
1165 "ref">[28289] Iª q. 1 a. 9 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
|
|
|
1166 quod, sicut docet Dionysius, cap. II Cael. Hier., magis est
|
|
|
1167 conveniens quod divina in Scripturis tradantur sub figuris vilium
|
|
|
1168 corporum, quam corporum nobilium. Et hoc propter tria. Primo, quia
|
|
|
1169 per hoc magis liberatur humanus animus ab errore. Manifestum enim
|
|
|
1170 apparet quod haec secundum proprietatem non dicuntur de divinis,
|
|
|
1171 quod posset esse dubium, si sub figuris nobilium corporum
|
|
|
1172 describerentur divina; maxime apud illos qui nihil aliud a
|
|
|
1173 corporibus nobilius excogitare noverunt. Secundo, quia hic modus
|
|
|
1174 convenientior est cognitioni quam de Deo habemus in hac vita. Magis
|
|
|
1175 enim manifestatur nobis de ipso quid non est, quam quid est, et
|
|
|
1176 ideo similitudines illarum rerum quae magis elongantur a Deo,
|
|
|
1177 veriorem nobis faciunt aestimationem quod sit supra illud quod de
|
|
|
1178 Deo dicimus vel cogitamus. Tertio, quia per huiusmodi, divina magis
|
|
|
1179 occultantur indignis.</p>
|
|
|
1180 </div>
|
|
|
1181 </div4>
|
|
|
1182
|
|
|
1183 <div4 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10" next="FP.ii" prev="FP_Q1_A9" progress="0.21%" n="x" title="Article. 10 - Whether in Holy Scripture a word may have several senses?">
|
|
|
1184 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p0.1">Whether in Holy Scripture a word may have several senses?</h4>
|
|
|
1185
|
|
|
1186 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1187 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that in Holy Writ a word cannot have several senses, historical or literal, allegorical, tropological or moral, and anagogical. For many different senses in one text produce confusion and deception and destroy all force of argument. Hence no argument, but only fallacies, can be deduced from a multiplicity of propositions. But Holy Writ ought to be able to state the truth without any fallacy. Therefore in it there cannot be several senses to a
|
|
|
1188 word.</p>
|
|
|
1189 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 arg. 1"><a name="28290"><span class=
|
|
|
1190 "ref">[28290] Iª q. 1 a. 10 arg. 1</span></a> Ad decimum sic
|
|
|
1191 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra Scriptura sub una littera non habeat
|
|
|
1192 plures sensus, qui sunt historicus vel litteralis, allegoricus,
|
|
|
1193 tropologicus sive moralis, et anagogicus. Multiplicitas enim
|
|
|
1194 sensuum in una Scriptura parit confusionem et deceptionem, et
|
|
|
1195 tollit arguendi firmitatem, unde ex multiplicibus propositionibus
|
|
|
1196 non procedit argumentatio, sed secundum hoc aliquae fallaciae
|
|
|
1197 assignantur. Sacra autem Scriptura debet esse efficax ad
|
|
|
1198 ostendendam veritatem absque omni fallacia. Ergo non debent in ea
|
|
|
1199 sub una littera plures sensus tradi.</p>
|
|
|
1200 </div>
|
|
|
1201
|
|
|
1202 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1203 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
1204 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine
|
|
|
1205 says (De util. cred. iii) that "the Old Testament has a fourfold
|
|
|
1206 division as to history, etiology, analogy and allegory." Now these
|
|
|
1207 four seem altogether different from the four divisions mentioned in
|
|
|
1208 the first objection. Therefore it does not seem fitting to explain the
|
|
|
1209 same word of Holy Writ according to the four different senses
|
|
|
1210 mentioned above.</p>
|
|
|
1211 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 arg. 2"><a name="28291"><span class=
|
|
|
1212 "ref">[28291] Iª q. 1 a. 10 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
|
|
|
1213 Augustinus dicit in libro de utilitate credendi, quod <i>Scriptura
|
|
|
1214 quae testamentum vetus vocatur, quadrifariam traditur, scilicet,
|
|
|
1215 secundum historiam, secundum aetiologiam, secundum analogiam,
|
|
|
1216 secundum allegoriam</i>. Quae quidem quatuor a quatuor praedictis
|
|
|
1217 videntur esse aliena omnino. Non igitur conveniens videtur quod
|
|
|
1218 eadem littera sacrae Scripturae secundum quatuor sensus praedictos
|
|
|
1219 exponatur.</p>
|
|
|
1220 </div>
|
|
|
1221
|
|
|
1222 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1223 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
1224 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, besides
|
|
|
1225 these senses, there is the parabolical, which is not one of these
|
|
|
1226 four.</p>
|
|
|
1227 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 arg. 3"><a name="28292"><span class=
|
|
|
1228 "ref">[28292] Iª q. 1 a. 10 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
|
|
|
1229 praeter praedictos sensus, invenitur sensus parabolicus, qui inter
|
|
|
1230 illos sensus quatuor non continetur.</p>
|
|
|
1231 </div>
|
|
|
1232
|
|
|
1233 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1234 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p5"><b>On
|
|
|
1235 the contrary,</b> Gregory says (Moral. xx, 1): "Holy Writ by the
|
|
|
1236 manner of its speech transcends every science, because in one and the
|
|
|
1237 same sentence, while it describes a fact, it reveals a mystery."</p>
|
|
|
1238 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 s. c."><a name="28293"><span class=
|
|
|
1239 "ref">[28293] Iª q. 1 a. 10 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
1240 quod dicit Gregorius, XX Moralium, <i>sacra Scriptura omnes
|
|
|
1241 scientias ipso locutionis suae more transcendit, quia uno eodemque
|
|
|
1242 sermone, dum narrat gestum, prodit mysterium</i>.</p>
|
|
|
1243 </div>
|
|
|
1244
|
|
|
1245 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1246 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> The author of Holy Writ is God, in whose power it is to signify His meaning, not by words only (as man also can do), but also by things themselves. So, whereas in every other science things are signified by words, this science has the property, that the things signified by the words have themselves also a signification. Therefore that first signification whereby words signify things belongs to the first sense, the historical or literal. That signification
|
|
|
1247 whereby things signified by words have themselves also a signification is called the spiritual sense, which is based on the literal, and presupposes it. Now this spiritual sense has a threefold division. For as the Apostle says (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Heb.10.1" parsed="vul|Heb|10|1|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p6.1" passage="Heb. 10:1">Heb. 10:1</scripRef>) the Old Law is a figure of the New Law, and Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. i) "the New Law itself is a figure of future glory." Again, in the New Law, whatever our Head has done is a type of what we ought to do. Therefore, so far as the
|
|
|
1248 things of the Old Law signify the things of the New Law, there is the allegorical sense; so far as the things done in Christ, or so far as the things which signify Christ, are types of what we ought to do, there is the moral sense. But so far as they signify what relates to eternal glory, there is the anagogical sense. Since the literal sense is that which the author intends, and since the author of Holy Writ is God, Who by one act comprehends all things by His intellect, it is not unfitting,
|
|
|
1249 as Augustine says (Confess. xii), if, even according to the literal
|
|
|
1250 sense, one word in Holy Writ should have several senses.</p>
|
|
|
1251 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 co."><a name="28294"><span class=
|
|
|
1252 "ref">[28294] Iª q. 1 a. 10 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
1253 quod auctor sacrae Scripturae est Deus, in cuius potestate est ut
|
|
|
1254 non solum voces ad significandum accommodet (quod etiam homo facere
|
|
|
1255 potest), sed etiam res ipsas. Et ideo, cum in omnibus scientiis
|
|
|
1256 voces significent, hoc habet proprium ista scientia, quod ipsae res
|
|
|
1257 significatae per voces, etiam significant aliquid. Illa ergo prima
|
|
|
1258 significatio, qua voces significant res, pertinet ad primum sensum,
|
|
|
1259 qui est sensus historicus vel litteralis. Illa vero significatio
|
|
|
1260 qua res significatae per voces, iterum res alias significant,
|
|
|
1261 dicitur sensus spiritualis; qui super litteralem fundatur, et eum
|
|
|
1262 supponit. Hic autem sensus spiritualis trifariam dividitur. Sicut
|
|
|
1263 enim dicit apostolus, ad Hebr. VII, lex vetus figura est novae
|
|
|
1264 legis, et ipsa nova lex, ut dicit Dionysius in ecclesiastica
|
|
|
1265 hierarchia, est figura futurae gloriae, in nova etiam lege, ea quae
|
|
|
1266 in capite sunt gesta, sunt signa eorum quae nos agere debemus.
|
|
|
1267 Secundum ergo quod ea quae sunt veteris legis, significant ea quae
|
|
|
1268 sunt novae legis, est sensus allegoricus, secundum vero quod ea
|
|
|
1269 quae in Christo sunt facta, vel in his quae Christum significant,
|
|
|
1270 sunt signa eorum quae nos agere debemus, est sensus moralis, prout
|
|
|
1271 vero significant ea quae sunt in aeterna gloria, est sensus
|
|
|
1272 anagogicus. Quia vero sensus litteralis est, quem auctor intendit,
|
|
|
1273 auctor autem sacrae Scripturae Deus est, qui omnia simul suo
|
|
|
1274 intellectu comprehendit, non est inconveniens, ut dicit Augustinus
|
|
|
1275 XII confessionum, si etiam secundum litteralem sensum in una
|
|
|
1276 littera Scripturae plures sint sensus.</p>
|
|
|
1277 </div>
|
|
|
1278
|
|
|
1279 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1280 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The multiplicity of these senses does not produce equivocation or any other kind of multiplicity, seeing that these senses are not multiplied because one word signifies several things, but because the things signified by the words can be themselves types of other things. Thus in Holy Writ no confusion results, for all the senses are founded on one---the literal---from which alone can any argument be drawn, and not from those intended in allegory, as
|
|
|
1281 Augustine says (Epis. 48). Nevertheless, nothing of Holy Scripture
|
|
|
1282 perishes on account of this, since nothing necessary to faith is
|
|
|
1283 contained under the spiritual sense which is not elsewhere put forward
|
|
|
1284 by the Scripture in its literal sense.</p>
|
|
|
1285 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 ad 1"><a name="28295"><span class=
|
|
|
1286 "ref">[28295] Iª q. 1 a. 10 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
1287 dicendum quod multiplicitas horum sensuum non facit
|
|
|
1288 aequivocationem, aut aliam speciem multiplicitatis, quia, sicut iam
|
|
|
1289 dictum est, sensus isti non multiplicantur propter hoc quod una vox
|
|
|
1290 multa significet; sed quia ipsae res significatae per voces,
|
|
|
1291 aliarum rerum possunt esse signa. Et ita etiam nulla confusio
|
|
|
1292 sequitur in sacra Scriptura, cum omnes sensus fundentur super unum,
|
|
|
1293 scilicet litteralem; ex quo solo potest trahi argumentum, non autem
|
|
|
1294 ex his quae secundum allegoriam dicuntur, ut dicit Augustinus in
|
|
|
1295 epistola contra Vincentium Donatistam. Non tamen ex hoc aliquid
|
|
|
1296 deperit sacrae Scripturae, quia nihil sub spirituali sensu
|
|
|
1297 continetur fidei necessarium, quod Scriptura per litteralem sensum
|
|
|
1298 alicubi manifeste non tradat.</p>
|
|
|
1299 </div>
|
|
|
1300
|
|
|
1301 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1302 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> These three---history, etiology, analogy---are grouped under the literal sense. For it is called history, as Augustine expounds (Epis. 48), whenever anything is simply related; it is called etiology when its cause is assigned, as when Our Lord gave the reason why Moses allowed the putting away of wives---namely, on account of the hardness of men's hearts; it is called analogy whenever the truth of one text of Scripture is shown not to contradict the
|
|
|
1303 truth of another. Of these four, allegory alone stands for the three
|
|
|
1304 spiritual senses. Thus Hugh of St. Victor (Sacram. iv, 4 Prolog.)
|
|
|
1305 includes the anagogical under the allegorical sense, laying down three
|
|
|
1306 senses only---the historical, the allegorical, and the
|
|
|
1307 tropological.</p>
|
|
|
1308 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 ad 2"><a name="28296"><span class=
|
|
|
1309 "ref">[28296] Iª q. 1 a. 10 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
1310 dicendum quod illa tria, historia, aetiologia, analogia, ad unum
|
|
|
1311 litteralem sensum pertinent. Nam historia est, ut ipse Augustinus
|
|
|
1312 exponit, cum simpliciter aliquid proponitur, aetiologia vero, cum
|
|
|
1313 causa dicti assignatur, sicut cum dominus assignavit causam quare
|
|
|
1314 Moyses permisit licentiam repudiandi uxores, scilicet propter
|
|
|
1315 duritiam cordis ipsorum, Matt. XIX, analogia vero est, cum veritas
|
|
|
1316 unius Scripturae ostenditur veritati alterius non repugnare. Sola
|
|
|
1317 autem allegoria, inter illa quatuor, pro tribus spiritualibus
|
|
|
1318 sensibus ponitur. Sicut et Hugo de sancto Victore sub sensu
|
|
|
1319 allegorico etiam anagogicum comprehendit, ponens in tertio suarum
|
|
|
1320 sententiarum solum tres sensus, scilicet historicum, allegoricum et
|
|
|
1321 tropologicum.</p>
|
|
|
1322 </div>
|
|
|
1323
|
|
|
1324 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1325 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p9"><b>Reply
|
|
|
1326 to Objection 3:</b> The parabolical sense is contained in the literal,
|
|
|
1327 for by words things are signified properly and figuratively. Nor is
|
|
|
1328 the figure itself, but that which is figured, the literal sense. When
|
|
|
1329 Scripture speaks of God's arm, the literal sense is not that God has
|
|
|
1330 such a member, but only what is signified by this member, namely
|
|
|
1331 operative power. Hence it is plain that nothing false can ever
|
|
|
1332 underlie the literal sense of Holy Writ.</p>
|
|
|
1333 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 ad 3"><a name="28297"><span class=
|
|
|
1334 "ref">[28297] Iª q. 1 a. 10 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
|
|
|
1335 dicendum quod sensus parabolicus sub litterali continetur, nam per
|
|
|
1336 voces significatur aliquid proprie, et aliquid figurative; nec est
|
|
|
1337 litteralis sensus ipsa figura, sed id quod est figuratum. Non enim
|
|
|
1338 cum Scriptura nominat Dei brachium, est litteralis sensus quod in
|
|
|
1339 Deo sit membrum huiusmodi corporale, sed id quod per hoc membrum
|
|
|
1340 significatur, scilicet virtus operativa. In quo patet quod sensui
|
|
|
1341 litterali sacrae Scripturae nunquam potest subesse falsum.</p>
|
|
|
1342 </div>
|
|
|
1343
|
|
|
1344 </div4>
|
|
|
1345 </div3>
|
|
|
1346 </div2>
|
