|
1
|
1 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
|
|
|
2 <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="bi.xsl"?>
|
|
4
|
3 <!DOCTYPE div1
|
|
1
|
4 SYSTEM "../../dtd/ThML10.dtd">
|
|
3
|
5 <div1>
|
|
|
6 <!-- Prooemium and Latin added by HST -->
|
|
|
7 <div2 id="Prooemium" title="Introduction">
|
|
|
8 <h2>Introduction</h2>
|
|
|
9 <div3 id="Prooemium-p0">
|
|
|
10 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
11 <p xml:lang="en">
|
|
|
12 Because the doctor of Catholic truth ought not only to teach the
|
|
|
13 proficient, but also to instruct beginners (according to the Apostle:
|
|
|
14 As unto little ones in Christ, I gave you milk to drink, not meat -- 1
|
|
|
15 Corinthians 3:1-2), we purpose in this book to treat of whatever
|
|
|
16 belongs to the Christian religion, in such a way as may tend to the
|
|
|
17 instruction of beginners. We have considered that students in this
|
|
|
18 doctrine have not seldom been hampered by what they have found written
|
|
|
19 by other authors, partly on account of the multiplication of useless
|
|
|
20 questions, articles, and arguments, partly also because those things
|
|
|
21 that are needful for them to know are not taught according to the
|
|
|
22 order of the subject matter, but according as the plan of the book
|
|
|
23 might require, or the occasion of the argument offer, partly, too,
|
|
|
24 because frequent repetition brought weariness and confusion to the
|
|
|
25 minds of readers.
|
|
|
26 </p>
|
|
|
27 <p xml:lang="la">
|
|
|
28 Quia Catholicae veritatis doctor non solum provectos debet instruere,
|
|
|
29 sed ad eum pertinet etiam incipientes erudire, secundum illud apostoli
|
|
|
30 I ad Corinth. III, tanquam parvulis in Christo, lac vobis potum dedi,
|
|
|
31 non escam; propositum nostrae intentionis in hoc opere est, ea quae ad
|
|
|
32 Christianam religionem pertinent, eo modo tradere, secundum quod
|
|
|
33 congruit ad eruditionem incipientium. Consideravimus namque huius
|
|
|
34 doctrinae novitios, in his quae a diversis conscripta sunt, plurimum
|
|
|
35 impediri, partim quidem propter multiplicationem inutilium
|
|
|
36 quaestionum, articulorum et argumentorum; partim etiam quia ea quae
|
|
|
37 sunt necessaria talibus ad sciendum, non traduntur secundum ordinem
|
|
|
38 disciplinae, sed secundum quod requirebat librorum expositio, vel
|
|
|
39 secundum quod se praebebat occasio disputandi; partim quidem quia
|
|
|
40 eorundem frequens repetitio et fastidium et confusionem generabat in
|
|
|
41 animis auditorum.
|
|
|
42 </p>
|
|
|
43 </div>
|
|
|
44 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
45 <p xml:lang="en">
|
|
|
46 Endeavouring to avoid these and other like faults, we shall try, by
|
|
|
47 God's help, to set forth whatever is included in this sacred doctrine
|
|
|
48 as briefly and clearly as the matter itself may allow.
|
|
|
49 </p>
|
|
|
50 <p xml:lang="la">
|
|
|
51 Haec igitur et alia huiusmodi evitare studentes, tentabimus, cum
|
|
|
52 confidentia divini auxilii, ea quae ad sacram doctrinam pertinent,
|
|
|
53 breviter ac dilucide prosequi, secundum quod materia patietur.
|
|
|
54 </p>
|
|
|
55 </div>
|
|
|
56 </div3>
|
|
|
57 </div2>
|
|
1
|
58 <div2 id="FP.i" next="FP_Q1" prev="FP" progress="0.01%" n="i" title="Treatise on Sacred Doctrine (Q[1])">
|
|
|
59 <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>
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
61 <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)">
|
|
|
62 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p0.1">THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF SACRED DOCTRINE (TEN ARTICLES)</h3>
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
64 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
65 <div xml:lang="en">
|
|
|
66 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p1"> To place our
|
|
|
67 purpose within proper limits, we first endeavor to investigate the
|
|
|
68 nature and extent of this sacred doctrine. Concerning this there are
|
|
|
69 ten points of inquiry:</p>
|
|
|
70 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p2"> (1) Whether it is necessary?</p>
|
|
|
71 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p3"> (2) Whether it is a science?</p>
|
|
|
72 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p4"> (3) Whether it is one or many?</p>
|
|
|
73 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p5"> (4) Whether it is speculative or practical?</p>
|
|
|
74 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p6"> (5) How it is compared with other sciences?</p>
|
|
|
75 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p7"> (6) Whether it is the same as wisdom?</p>
|
|
|
76 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p8"> (7) Whether God is its subject-matter?</p>
|
|
|
77 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p9"> (8) Whether it is a matter of argument?</p>
|
|
|
78 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1-p10"> (9) Whether it rightly employs metaphors and similes?</p>
|
|
|
79 <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>
|
|
|
80 </div>
|
|
|
81 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 pr."><a name="28232"><span class="ref">[28232]
|
|
|
82 Iª q. 1 pr.</span></a> Et ut intentio nostra sub aliquibus
|
|
|
83 certis limitibus comprehendatur, necessarium est primo investigare
|
|
|
84 de ipsa sacra doctrina, qualis sit, et ad quae se extendat. Circa
|
|
|
85 quae quaerenda sunt decem. Primo, de necessitate huius doctrinae.
|
|
|
86 Secundo, utrum sit scientia. Tertio, utrum sit una vel plures.
|
|
|
87 Quarto, utrum sit speculativa vel practica. Quinto, de comparatione
|
|
|
88 eius ad alias scientias. Sexto, utrum sit sapientia. Septimo, quid
|
|
|
89 sit subiectum eius. Octavo, utrum sit argumentativa. Nono, utrum
|
|
|
90 uti debeat metaphoricis vel symbolicis locutionibus. Decimo, utrum
|
|
|
91 Scriptura sacra huius doctrinae sit secundum plures sensus
|
|
|
92 exponenda.</p>
|
|
|
93 </div>
|
|
|
94
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
96 <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?">
|
|
|
97 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p0.1">Whether, besides philosophy, any further doctrine is required?</h4>
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
99 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
100 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
101 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that, besides
|
|
|
102 philosophical science, we have no need of any further knowledge. For
|
|
|
103 man should not seek to know what is above reason: "Seek not the things
|
|
|
104 that are too high for thee" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Sir.3.22"
|
|
|
105 parsed="vul|Sir|3|22|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p2.1"
|
|
|
106 passage="Ecclus. 3:22">Ecclus. 3:22</scripRef>). But whatever is not
|
|
|
107 above reason is fully treated of in philosophical science. Therefore
|
|
|
108 any other knowledge besides philosophical science is superfluous.</p>
|
|
|
109 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 arg. 1"><a name="28233"><span class=
|
|
|
110 "ref">[28233] Iª q. 1 a. 1 arg. 1</span></a> Ad primum sic
|
|
|
111 proceditur. Videtur quod non sit necessarium, praeter philosophicas
|
|
|
112 disciplinas, aliam doctrinam haberi. Ad ea enim quae supra rationem
|
|
|
113 sunt, homo non debet conari, secundum illud Eccli. III, <i>altiora
|
|
|
114 te ne quaesieris</i>. Sed ea quae rationi subduntur, sufficienter
|
|
|
115 traduntur in philosophicis disciplinis. Superfluum igitur videtur,
|
|
|
116 praeter philosophicas disciplinas, aliam doctrinam haberi.</p>
|
|
|
117 </div>
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
119 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
120 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
121 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, knowledge can
|
|
|
122 be concerned only with being, for nothing can be known, save what is
|
|
|
123 true; and all that is, is true. But everything that is, is treated of
|
|
|
124 in philosophical science---even God Himself; so that there is a part
|
|
|
125 of philosophy called theology, or the divine science, as Aristotle has
|
|
|
126 proved (Metaph. vi). Therefore, besides philosophical science, there
|
|
|
127 is no need of any further knowledge.</p>
|
|
|
128 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 arg. 2"><a name="28234"><span class=
|
|
|
129 "ref">[28234] Iª q. 1 a. 1 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
|
|
|
130 doctrina non potest esse nisi de ente, nihil enim scitur nisi
|
|
|
131 verum, quod cum ente convertitur. Sed de omnibus entibus tractatur
|
|
|
132 in philosophicis disciplinis, et etiam de Deo, unde quaedam pars
|
|
|
133 philosophiae dicitur theologia, sive scientia divina, ut patet per
|
|
|
134 philosophum in VI Metaphys. Non fuit igitur necessarium, praeter
|
|
|
135 philosophicas disciplinas, aliam doctrinam haberi.</p>
|
|
|
136 </div>
|
|
|
137
|
|
|
138 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
139 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
140 contrary,</b> It is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:2Tim.3.16"
|
|
|
141 parsed="vul|2Tim|3|16|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p4.1" passage="2
|
|
|
142 Tim. 3:16">2 Tim. 3:16</scripRef>): "All Scripture, inspired of God is
|
|
|
143 profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice."
|
|
|
144 Now Scripture, inspired of God, is no part of philosophical science,
|
|
|
145 which has been built up by human reason. Therefore it is useful that
|
|
|
146 besides philosophical science, there should be other knowledge,
|
|
|
147 i.e. inspired of God.</p>
|
|
|
148 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 s. c."><a name="28235"><span class=
|
|
|
149 "ref">[28235] Iª q. 1 a. 1 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
150 quod dicitur II ad Tim. III, <i>omnis Scriptura divinitus inspirata
|
|
|
151 utilis est ad docendum, ad arguendum, ad corripiendum, ad
|
|
|
152 erudiendum ad iustitiam</i>. Scriptura autem divinitus inspirata
|
|
|
153 non pertinet ad philosophicas disciplinas, quae sunt secundum
|
|
|
154 rationem humanam inventae. Utile igitur est, praeter philosophicas
|
|
|
155 disciplinas, esse aliam scientiam divinitus inspiratam.</p>
|
|
|
156 </div>
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
158 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
159 <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
|
|
|
160 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,
|
|
|
161 which is in God, depends upon the knowledge of this
|
|
|
162 truth. Therefore, in order that the salvation of men might be brought
|
|
|
163 about more fitly and more surely, it was necessary that they should be
|
|
|
164 taught divine truths by divine revelation. It was therefore necessary
|
|
|
165 that besides philosophical science built up by reason, there should be
|
|
|
166 a sacred science learned through revelation.</p>
|
|
|
167 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 co."><a name="28236"><span class=
|
|
|
168 "ref">[28236] Iª q. 1 a. 1 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
169 quod necessarium fuit ad humanam salutem, esse doctrinam quandam
|
|
|
170 secundum revelationem divinam, praeter philosophicas disciplinas,
|
|
|
171 quae ratione humana investigantur. Primo quidem, quia homo
|
|
|
172 ordinatur ad Deum sicut ad quendam finem qui comprehensionem
|
|
|
173 rationis excedit, secundum illud Isaiae LXIV, <i>oculus non vidit
|
|
|
174 Deus absque te, quae praeparasti diligentibus te</i>. Finem autem
|
|
|
175 oportet esse praecognitum hominibus, qui suas intentiones et
|
|
|
176 actiones debent ordinare in finem. Unde necessarium fuit homini ad
|
|
|
177 salutem, quod ei nota fierent quaedam per revelationem divinam,
|
|
|
178 quae rationem humanam excedunt. Ad ea etiam quae de Deo ratione
|
|
|
179 humana investigari possunt, necessarium fuit hominem instrui
|
|
|
180 revelatione divina. Quia veritas de Deo, per rationem investigata,
|
|
|
181 a paucis, et per longum tempus, et cum admixtione multorum errorum,
|
|
|
182 homini proveniret, a cuius tamen veritatis cognitione dependet tota
|
|
|
183 hominis salus, quae in Deo est. Ut igitur salus hominibus et
|
|
|
184 convenientius et certius proveniat, necessarium fuit quod de
|
|
|
185 divinis per divinam revelationem instruantur. Necessarium igitur
|
|
|
186 fuit, praeter philosophicas disciplinas, quae per rationem
|
|
|
187 investigantur, sacram doctrinam per revelationem haberi.</p>
|
|
|
188 </div>
|
|
|
189
|
|
|
190 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
191 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p6"><b>Reply
|
|
|
192 to Objection 1:</b> Although those things which are beyond man's
|
|
|
193 knowledge may not be sought for by man through his reason,
|
|
|
194 nevertheless, once they are revealed by God, they must be accepted by
|
|
|
195 faith. Hence the sacred text continues, "For many things are shown to
|
|
|
196 thee above the understanding of man" (<scripRef
|
|
|
197 osisRef="Bible.vul:Sir.3.25" parsed="vul|Sir|3|25|0|0"
|
|
|
198 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A1-p6.1"
|
|
|
199 passage="Ecclus. 3:25">Ecclus. 3:25</scripRef>). And in this, the
|
|
|
200 sacred science consists.</p>
|
|
|
201 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 ad 1"><a name="28237"><span class=
|
|
|
202 "ref">[28237] Iª q. 1 a. 1 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
203 dicendum quod, licet ea quae sunt altiora hominis cognitione, non
|
|
|
204 sint ab homine per rationem inquirenda, sunt tamen, a Deo revelata,
|
|
|
205 suscipienda per fidem. Unde et ibidem subditur, <i>plurima supra
|
|
|
206 sensum hominum ostensa sunt tibi</i>. Et in huiusmodi sacra
|
|
|
207 doctrina consistit.</p>
|
|
|
208 </div>
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
210 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
211 <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
|
|
|
212 reason, may not also be taught us by another science so far as they
|
|
|
213 fall within revelation. Hence theology included in sacred doctrine
|
|
|
214 differs in kind from that theology which is part of philosophy.</p>
|
|
|
215 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 1 ad 2"><a name="28238"><span class=
|
|
|
216 "ref">[28238] Iª q. 1 a. 1 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
217 dicendum quod diversa ratio cognoscibilis diversitatem scientiarum
|
|
|
218 inducit. Eandem enim conclusionem demonstrat astrologus et
|
|
|
219 naturalis, puta quod terra est rotunda, sed astrologus per medium
|
|
|
220 mathematicum, idest a materia abstractum; naturalis autem per
|
|
|
221 medium circa materiam consideratum. Unde nihil prohibet de eisdem
|
|
|
222 rebus, de quibus philosophicae disciplinae tractant secundum quod
|
|
|
223 sunt cognoscibilia lumine naturalis rationis, et aliam scientiam
|
|
|
224 tractare secundum quod cognoscuntur lumine divinae revelationis.
|
|
|
225 Unde theologia quae ad sacram doctrinam pertinet, differt secundum
|
|
|
226 genus ab illa theologia quae pars philosophiae ponitur.</p>
|
|
|
227 </div>
|
|
|
228
|
|
|
229 </div4>
|
|
|
230
|
|
|
231 <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?">
|
|
|
232 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p0.1">Whether sacred doctrine is a science?</h4>
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
234 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
235 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
236 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that sacred
|
|
|
237 doctrine is not a science. For every science proceeds from
|
|
|
238 self-evident principles. But sacred doctrine proceeds from articles of
|
|
|
239 faith which are not self-evident, since their truth is not admitted by
|
|
|
240 all: "For all men have not faith" (<scripRef
|
|
|
241 osisRef="Bible.vul:2Thess.3.2" parsed="vul|2Thess|3|2|0|0"
|
|
|
242 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p2.1" passage="2 Thess. 3:2">2
|
|
|
243 Thess. 3:2</scripRef>). Therefore sacred doctrine is not a
|
|
|
244 science.</p>
|
|
|
245 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 arg. 1"><a name="28239"><span class=
|
|
|
246 "ref">[28239] Iª q. 1 a. 2 arg. 1</span></a> Ad secundum sic
|
|
|
247 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra doctrina non sit scientia. Omnis
|
|
|
248 enim scientia procedit ex principiis per se notis. Sed sacra
|
|
|
249 doctrina procedit ex articulis fidei, qui non sunt per se noti, cum
|
|
|
250 non ab omnibus concedantur, <i>non enim omnium est fides</i>, ut
|
|
|
251 dicitur II Thessalon. III. Non igitur sacra doctrina est
|
|
|
252 scientia.</p>
|
|
|
253 </div>
|
|
|
254
|
|
|
255 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
256 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
257 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, no science
|
|
|
258 deals with individual facts. But this sacred science treats of
|
|
|
259 individual facts, such as the deeds of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and
|
|
|
260 such like. Therefore sacred doctrine is not a science.</p>
|
|
|
261 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 arg. 2"><a name="28240"><span class=
|
|
|
262 "ref">[28240] Iª q. 1 a. 2 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
|
|
|
263 scientia non est singularium. Sed sacra doctrina tractat de
|
|
|
264 singularibus, puta de gestis Abrahae, Isaac et Iacob, et similibus.
|
|
|
265 Ergo sacra doctrina non est scientia.</p>
|
|
|
266 </div>
|
|
|
267
|
|
|
268 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
269 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
270 contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Trin. xiv, 1) "to this science alone
|
|
|
271 belongs that whereby saving faith is begotten, nourished, protected
|
|
|
272 and strengthened." But this can be said of no science except sacred
|
|
|
273 doctrine. Therefore sacred doctrine is a science.</p>
|
|
|
274 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 s. c."><a name="28241"><span class=
|
|
|
275 "ref">[28241] Iª q. 1 a. 2 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
276 quod Augustinus dicit, XIV de Trinitate, <i>huic scientiae
|
|
|
277 attribuitur illud tantummodo quo fides saluberrima gignitur,
|
|
|
278 nutritur, defenditur, roboratur</i>. Hoc autem ad nullam scientiam
|
|
|
279 pertinet nisi ad sacram doctrinam. Ergo sacra doctrina est
|
|
|
280 scientia.</p>
|
|
|
281 </div>
|
|
|
282
|
|
|
283 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
284 <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
|
|
|
285 sacred doctrine is a science because it proceeds from principles
|
|
|
286 established by the light of a higher science, namely, the science of
|
|
|
287 God and the blessed. Hence, just as the musician accepts on authority
|
|
|
288 the principles taught him by the mathematician, so sacred science is
|
|
|
289 established on principles revealed by God.</p>
|
|
|
290 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 co."><a name="28242"><span class=
|
|
|
291 "ref">[28242] Iª q. 1 a. 2 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
292 sacram doctrinam esse scientiam. Sed sciendum est quod duplex est
|
|
|
293 scientiarum genus. Quaedam enim sunt, quae procedunt ex principiis
|
|
|
294 notis lumine naturali intellectus, sicut arithmetica, geometria, et
|
|
|
295 huiusmodi. Quaedam vero sunt, quae procedunt ex principiis notis
|
|
|
296 lumine superioris scientiae, sicut perspectiva procedit ex
|
|
|
297 principiis notificatis per geometriam, et musica ex principiis per
|
|
|
298 arithmeticam notis. Et hoc modo sacra doctrina est scientia, quia
|
|
|
299 procedit ex principiis notis lumine superioris scientiae, quae
|
|
|
300 scilicet est scientia Dei et beatorum. Unde sicut musica credit
|
|
|
301 principia tradita sibi ab arithmetico, ita doctrina sacra credit
|
|
|
302 principia revelata sibi a Deo.</p>
|
|
|
303 </div>
|
|
|
304
|
|
|
305 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
306 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p6"><b>Reply
|
|
|
307 to Objection 1:</b> The principles of any science are either in
|
|
|
308 themselves self-evident, or reducible to the conclusions of a higher
|
|
|
309 science; and such, as we have said, are the principles of sacred
|
|
|
310 doctrine.</p>
|
|
|
311 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 ad 1"><a name="28243"><span class=
|
|
|
312 "ref">[28243] Iª q. 1 a. 2 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
313 dicendum quod principia cuiuslibet scientiae vel sunt nota per se,
|
|
|
314 vel reducuntur ad notitiam superioris scientiae. Et talia sunt
|
|
|
315 principia sacrae doctrinae, ut dictum est.</p>
|
|
|
316 </div>
|
|
|
317
|
|
|
318 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
319 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A2-p7"><b>Reply
|
|
|
320 to Objection 2:</b> Individual facts are treated of in sacred
|
|
|
321 doctrine, not because it is concerned with them principally, but they
|
|
|
322 are introduced rather both as examples to be followed in our lives (as
|
|
|
323 in moral sciences) and in order to establish the authority of those
|
|
|
324 men through whom the divine revelation, on which this sacred scripture
|
|
|
325 or doctrine is based, has come down to us.</p>
|
|
|
326 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 2 ad 2"><a name="28244"><span class=
|
|
|
327 "ref">[28244] Iª q. 1 a. 2 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
328 dicendum quod singularia traduntur in sacra doctrina, non quia de
|
|
|
329 eis principaliter tractetur, sed introducuntur tum in exemplum
|
|
|
330 vitae, sicut in scientiis moralibus; tum etiam ad declarandum
|
|
|
331 auctoritatem virorum per quos ad nos revelatio divina processit,
|
|
|
332 super quam fundatur sacra Scriptura seu doctrina.</p>
|
|
|
333 </div>
|
|
|
334
|
|
|
335 </div4>
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
337 <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?">
|
|
|
338 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p0.1">Whether sacred doctrine is one science?</h4>
|
|
|
339
|
|
|
340 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
341 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
342 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that sacred
|
|
|
343 doctrine is not one science; for according to the Philosopher
|
|
|
344 (Poster. i) "that science is one which treats only of one class of
|
|
|
345 subjects." But the creator and the creature, both of whom are treated
|
|
|
346 of in sacred doctrine, cannot be grouped together under one class of
|
|
|
347 subjects. Therefore sacred doctrine is not one science.</p>
|
|
|
348 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 arg. 1"><a name="28245"><span class=
|
|
|
349 "ref">[28245] Iª q. 1 a. 3 arg. 1</span></a> Ad tertium sic
|
|
|
350 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra doctrina non sit una scientia. Quia
|
|
|
351 secundum philosophum in I Poster., <i>una scientia est quae est
|
|
|
352 unius generis subiecti</i>. Creator autem et creatura, de quibus in
|
|
|
353 sacra doctrina tractatur, non continentur sub uno genere subiecti.
|
|
|
354 Ergo sacra doctrina non est una scientia.</p>
|
|
|
355 </div>
|
|
|
356
|
|
|
357 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
358 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
359 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, in sacred
|
|
|
360 doctrine we treat of angels, corporeal creatures and human
|
|
|
361 morality. But these belong to separate philosophical
|
|
|
362 sciences. Therefore sacred doctrine cannot be one science.</p>
|
|
|
363 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 arg. 2"><a name="28246"><span class=
|
|
|
364 "ref">[28246] Iª q. 1 a. 3 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, in
|
|
|
365 sacra doctrina tractatur de Angelis, de creaturis corporalibus, de
|
|
|
366 moribus hominum. Huiusmodi autem ad diversas scientias
|
|
|
367 philosophicas pertinent. Igitur sacra doctrina non est una
|
|
|
368 scientia.</p>
|
|
|
369 </div>
|
|
|
370
|
|
|
371 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
372 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
373 contrary,</b> Holy Scripture speaks of it as one science: "Wisdom gave
|
|
|
374 him the knowledge [scientiam] of holy things" (<scripRef
|
|
|
375 osisRef="Bible.vul:Wis.10.10" parsed="vul|Wis|10|10|0|0"
|
|
|
376 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p4.1"
|
|
|
377 passage="Wis. 10:10">Wis. 10:10</scripRef>).</p>
|
|
|
378 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28247"><span class=
|
|
|
379 "ref">[28247] Iª q. 1 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
380 quod sacra Scriptura de ea loquitur sicut de una scientia, dicitur
|
|
|
381 enim Sap. X, <i>dedit illi scientiam sanctorum</i>.</p>
|
|
|
382 </div>
|
|
|
383
|
|
|
384 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
385 <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
|
|
|
386 revealed possesses the one precise formality of the object of this
|
|
|
387 science; and therefore is included under sacred doctrine as under one
|
|
|
388 science.</p>
|
|
|
389 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 co."><a name="28248"><span class=
|
|
|
390 "ref">[28248] Iª q. 1 a. 3 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
391 sacram doctrinam unam scientiam esse. Est enim unitas potentiae et
|
|
|
392 habitus consideranda secundum obiectum, non quidem materialiter,
|
|
|
393 sed secundum rationem formalem obiecti, puta homo, asinus et lapis
|
|
|
394 conveniunt in una formali ratione colorati, quod est obiectum
|
|
|
395 visus. Quia igitur sacra Scriptura considerat aliqua secundum quod
|
|
|
396 sunt divinitus revelata, secundum quod dictum est, omnia quaecumque
|
|
|
397 sunt divinitus revelabilia, communicant in una ratione formali
|
|
|
398 obiecti huius scientiae. Et ideo comprehenduntur sub sacra doctrina
|
|
|
399 sicut sub scientia una.</p>
|
|
|
400 </div>
|
|
|
401
|
|
|
402 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
403 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A3-p6"><b>Reply
|
|
|
404 to Objection 1:</b> Sacred doctrine does not treat of God and
|
|
|
405 creatures equally, but of God primarily, and of creatures only so far
|
|
|
406 as they are referable to God as their beginning or end. Hence the
|
|
|
407 unity of this science is not impaired.</p>
|
|
|
408 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 ad 1"><a name="28249"><span class=
|
|
|
409 "ref">[28249] Iª q. 1 a. 3 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
410 dicendum quod sacra doctrina non determinat de Deo et de creaturis
|
|
|
411 ex aequo, sed de Deo principaliter, et de creaturis secundum quod
|
|
|
412 referuntur ad Deum, ut ad principium vel finem. Unde unitas
|
|
|
413 scientiae non impeditur.</p>
|
|
|
414 </div>
|
|
|
415
|
|
|
416 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
417 <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,
|
|
|
418 objects which are the subject-matter of different philosophical
|
|
|
419 sciences can yet be treated of by this one single sacred science under
|
|
|
420 one aspect precisely so far as they can be included in revelation. So
|
|
|
421 that in this way, sacred doctrine bears, as it were, the stamp of the
|
|
|
422 divine science which is one and simple, yet extends to everything.</p>
|
|
|
423 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 3 ad 2"><a name="28250"><span class=
|
|
|
424 "ref">[28250] Iª q. 1 a. 3 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
425 dicendum quod nihil prohibet inferiores potentias vel habitus
|
|
|
426 diversificari circa illas materias, quae communiter cadunt sub una
|
|
|
427 potentia vel habitu superiori, quia superior potentia vel habitus
|
|
|
428 respicit obiectum sub universaliori ratione formali. Sicut obiectum
|
|
|
429 sensus communis est sensibile, quod comprehendit sub se visibile et
|
|
|
430 audibile, unde sensus communis, cum sit una potentia, extendit se
|
|
|
431 ad omnia obiecta quinque sensuum. Et similiter ea quae in diversis
|
|
|
432 scientiis philosophicis tractantur, potest sacra doctrina, una
|
|
|
433 existens, considerare sub una ratione, inquantum scilicet sunt
|
|
|
434 divinitus revelabilia, ut sic sacra doctrina sit velut quaedam
|
|
|
435 impressio divinae scientiae, quae est una et simplex omnium.</p>
|
|
|
436 </div>
|
|
|
437
|
|
|
438 </div4>
|
|
|
439
|
|
|
440 <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?">
|
|
|
441 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p0.1">Whether sacred doctrine is a practical science?</h4>
|
|
|
442
|
|
|
443 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
444 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
445 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that sacred
|
|
|
446 doctrine is a practical science; for a practical science is that which
|
|
|
447 ends in action according to the Philosopher (Metaph. ii). But sacred
|
|
|
448 doctrine is ordained to action: "Be ye doers of the word, and not
|
|
|
449 hearers only" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Jas.1.22"
|
|
|
450 parsed="vul|Jas|1|22|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p2.1" passage="James
|
|
|
451 1:22">James 1:22</scripRef>). Therefore sacred doctrine is a practical
|
|
|
452 science.</p>
|
|
|
453 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 4 arg. 1"><a name="28251"><span class=
|
|
|
454 "ref">[28251] Iª q. 1 a. 4 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quartum sic
|
|
|
455 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra doctrina sit scientia practica.
|
|
|
456 Finis enim practicae est operatio, secundum philosophum in II
|
|
|
457 Metaphys. Sacra autem doctrina ad operationem ordinatur, secundum
|
|
|
458 illud Iac. I, <i>estote factores verbi, et non auditores
|
|
|
459 tantum</i>. Ergo sacra doctrina est practica scientia.</p>
|
|
|
460 </div>
|
|
|
461
|
|
|
462 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
463 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
464 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, sacred
|
|
|
465 doctrine is divided into the Old and the New Law. But law implies a
|
|
|
466 moral science which is a practical science. Therefore sacred doctrine
|
|
|
467 is a practical science.</p>
|
|
|
468 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 4 arg. 2"><a name="28252"><span class=
|
|
|
469 "ref">[28252] Iª q. 1 a. 4 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, sacra
|
|
|
470 doctrina dividitur per legem veterem et novam. Lex autem pertinet
|
|
|
471 ad scientiam moralem, quae est scientia practica. Ergo sacra
|
|
|
472 doctrina est scientia practica.</p>
|
|
|
473 </div>
|
|
|
474
|
|
|
475 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
476 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A4-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
477 contrary,</b> Every practical science is concerned with human
|
|
|
478 operations; as moral science is concerned with human acts, and
|
|
|
479 architecture with buildings. But sacred doctrine is chiefly concerned
|
|
|
480 with God, whose handiwork is especially man. Therefore it is not a
|
|
|
481 practical but a speculative science.</p>
|
|
|
482 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 4 s. c."><a name="28253"><span class=
|
|
|
483 "ref">[28253] Iª q. 1 a. 4 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, omnis
|
|
|
484 scientia practica est de rebus operabilibus ab homine; ut moralis
|
|
|
485 de actibus hominum, et aedificativa de aedificiis. Sacra autem
|
|
|
486 doctrina est principaliter de Deo, cuius magis homines sunt opera.
|
|
|
487 Non ergo est scientia practica, sed magis speculativa.</p>
|
|
|
488 </div>
|
|
|
489
|
|
|
490 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
491 <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
|
|
|
492 practical because it is more concerned with divine things than with
|
|
|
493 human acts; though it does treat even of these latter, inasmuch as man
|
|
|
494 is ordained by them to the perfect knowledge of God in which consists
|
|
|
495 eternal bliss. This is a sufficient answer to the Objections.</p>
|
|
|
496 <div xml:lang="la">
|
|
|
497 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 4 co."><a name="28254"><span class=
|
|
|
498 "ref">[28254] Iª q. 1 a. 4 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
499 quod sacra doctrina, ut dictum est, una existens, se extendit ad ea
|
|
|
500 quae pertinent ad diversas scientias philosophicas, propter
|
|
|
501 rationem formalem quam in diversis attendit, scilicet prout sunt
|
|
|
502 divino lumine cognoscibilia. Unde licet in scientiis philosophicis
|
|
|
503 alia sit speculativa et alia practica, sacra tamen doctrina
|
|
|
504 comprehendit sub se utramque; sicut et Deus eadem scientia se
|
|
|
505 cognoscit, et ea quae facit. Magis tamen est speculativa quam
|
|
|
506 practica, quia principalius agit de rebus divinis quam de actibus
|
|
|
507 humanis; de quibus agit secundum quod per eos ordinatur homo ad
|
|
|
508 perfectam Dei cognitionem, in qua aeterna beatitudo consistit.</p>
|
|
|
509 <p title="I q. 1 a. 4 ad arg."><a name="28255"><span class=
|
|
|
510 "ref">[28255] Iª q. 1 a. 4 ad arg.</span></a> Et per hoc patet
|
|
|
511 responsio ad obiecta.</p>
|
|
|
512 </div>
|
|
|
513 </div>
|
|
|
514
|
|
|
515 </div4>
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
517 <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?">
|
|
|
518 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p0.1">Whether sacred doctrine is nobler than other sciences?</h4>
|
|
|
519
|
|
|
520 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
521 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
522 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that sacred
|
|
|
523 doctrine is not nobler than other sciences; for the nobility of a
|
|
|
524 science depends on the certitude it establishes. But other sciences,
|
|
|
525 the principles of which cannot be doubted, seem to be more certain
|
|
|
526 than sacred doctrine; for its principles---namely, articles of
|
|
|
527 faith---can be doubted. Therefore other sciences seem to be
|
|
|
528 nobler.</p>
|
|
|
529 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 arg. 1"><a name="28256"><span class=
|
|
|
530 "ref">[28256] Iª q. 1 a. 5 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quintum sic
|
|
|
531 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra doctrina non sit dignior aliis
|
|
|
532 scientiis. Certitudo enim pertinet ad dignitatem scientiae. Sed
|
|
|
533 aliae scientiae, de quarum principiis dubitari non potest, videntur
|
|
|
534 esse certiores sacra doctrina, cuius principia, scilicet articuli
|
|
|
535 fidei, dubitationem recipiunt. Aliae igitur scientiae videntur ista
|
|
|
536 digniores.</p>
|
|
|
537 </div>
|
|
|
538
|
|
|
539 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
540 <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
|
|
|
541 other sciences.</p>
|
|
|
542 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 arg. 2"><a name="28257"><span class=
|
|
|
543 "ref">[28257] Iª q. 1 a. 5 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
|
|
|
544 inferioris scientiae est a superiori accipere, sicut musicus ab
|
|
|
545 arithmetico. Sed sacra doctrina accipit aliquid a philosophicis
|
|
|
546 disciplinis, dicit enim Hieronymus in epistola ad magnum oratorem
|
|
|
547 urbis Romae, quod <i>doctores antiqui intantum philosophorum
|
|
|
548 doctrinis atque sententiis suos resperserunt libros, ut nescias
|
|
|
549 quid in illis prius admirari debeas, eruditionem saeculi, an
|
|
|
550 scientiam Scripturarum</i>. Ergo sacra doctrina est inferior aliis
|
|
|
551 scientiis.</p>
|
|
|
552 </div>
|
|
|
553
|
|
|
554 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
555 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
556 contrary,</b> Other sciences are called the handmaidens of this one:
|
|
|
557 "Wisdom sent her maids to invite to the tower" (<scripRef
|
|
|
558 osisRef="Bible.vul:Prov.9.3" parsed="vul|Prov|9|3|0|0"
|
|
|
559 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A5-p4.1"
|
|
|
560 passage="Prov. 9:3">Prov. 9:3</scripRef>).</p>
|
|
|
561 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 s. c."><a name="28258"><span class=
|
|
|
562 "ref">[28258] Iª q. 1 a. 5 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
563 quod aliae scientiae dicuntur ancillae huius, Prov. IX, <i>misit
|
|
|
564 ancillas suas vocare ad arcem</i>.</p>
|
|
|
565 </div>
|
|
|
566
|
|
|
567 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
568 <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
|
|
|
569 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
|
|
|
570 good of the army is directed to the good of the State. But the
|
|
|
571 purpose of this science, in so far as it is practical, is eternal
|
|
|
572 bliss; to which as to an ultimate end the purposes of every practical
|
|
|
573 science are directed. Hence it is clear that from every standpoint, it
|
|
|
574 is nobler than other sciences.</p>
|
|
|
575 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 co."><a name="28259"><span class=
|
|
|
576 "ref">[28259] Iª q. 1 a. 5 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
577 quod, cum ista scientia quantum ad aliquid sit speculativa, et
|
|
|
578 quantum ad aliquid sit practica, omnes alias transcendit tam
|
|
|
579 speculativas quam practicas. Speculativarum enim scientiarum una
|
|
|
580 altera dignior dicitur, tum propter certitudinem, tum propter
|
|
|
581 dignitatem materiae. Et quantum ad utrumque, haec scientia alias
|
|
|
582 speculativas scientias excedit. Secundum certitudinem quidem, quia
|
|
|
583 aliae scientiae certitudinem habent ex naturali lumine rationis
|
|
|
584 humanae, quae potest errare, haec autem certitudinem habet ex
|
|
|
585 lumine divinae scientiae, quae decipi non potest. Secundum
|
|
|
586 dignitatem vero materiae, quia ista scientia est principaliter de
|
|
|
587 his quae sua altitudine rationem transcendunt, aliae vero scientiae
|
|
|
588 considerant ea tantum quae rationi subduntur. Practicarum vero
|
|
|
589 scientiarum illa dignior est, quae ad ulteriorem finem ordinatur,
|
|
|
590 sicut civilis militari, nam bonum exercitus ad bonum civitatis
|
|
|
591 ordinatur. Finis autem huius doctrinae inquantum est practica, est
|
|
|
592 beatitudo aeterna, ad quam sicut ad ultimum finem ordinantur omnes
|
|
|
593 alii fines scientiarum practicarum. Unde manifestum est, secundum
|
|
|
594 omnem modum, eam digniorem esse aliis.</p>
|
|
|
595 </div>
|
|
|
596
|
|
|
597 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
598 <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
|
|
|
599 may be obtained of the highest things is more desirable than the
|
|
|
600 most certain knowledge obtained of lesser things, as is said in de
|
|
|
601 Animalibus xi.</p>
|
|
|
602 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 ad 1"><a name="28260"><span class=
|
|
|
603 "ref">[28260] Iª q. 1 a. 5 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
604 dicendum quod nihil prohibet id quod est certius secundum naturam,
|
|
|
605 esse quoad nos minus certum, propter debilitatem intellectus
|
|
|
606 nostri, qui se habet ad manifestissima naturae, sicut oculus
|
|
|
607 noctuae ad lumen solis, sicut dicitur in II Metaphys. Unde
|
|
|
608 dubitatio quae accidit in aliquibus circa articulos fidei, non est
|
|
|
609 propter incertitudinem rei, sed propter debilitatem intellectus
|
|
|
610 humani. Et tamen minimum quod potest haberi de cognitione rerum
|
|
|
611 altissimarum, desiderabilius est quam certissima cognitio quae
|
|
|
612 habetur de minimis rebus, ut dicitur in XI de animalibus.</p>
|
|
|
613 </div>
|
|
|
614
|
|
|
615 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
616 <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
|
|
|
617 materials, as political of military science. That it thus uses them
|
|
|
618 is not due to its own defect or insufficiency, but to the defect of
|
|
|
619 our intelligence, which is more easily led by what is known through
|
|
|
620 natural reason (from which proceed the other sciences) to that which
|
|
|
621 is above reason, such as are the teachings of this science.</p>
|
|
|
622 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 5 ad 2"><a name="28261"><span class=
|
|
|
623 "ref">[28261] Iª q. 1 a. 5 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
624 dicendum quod haec scientia accipere potest aliquid a philosophicis
|
|
|
625 disciplinis, non quod ex necessitate eis indigeat, sed ad maiorem
|
|
|
626 manifestationem eorum quae in hac scientia traduntur. Non enim
|
|
|
627 accipit sua principia ab aliis scientiis, sed immediate a Deo per
|
|
|
628 revelationem. Et ideo non accipit ab aliis scientiis tanquam a
|
|
|
629 superioribus, sed utitur eis tanquam inferioribus et ancillis;
|
|
|
630 sicut architectonicae utuntur subministrantibus, ut civilis
|
|
|
631 militari. Et hoc ipsum quod sic utitur eis, non est propter
|
|
|
632 defectum vel insufficientiam eius, sed propter defectum intellectus
|
|
|
633 nostri; qui ex his quae per naturalem rationem (ex qua procedunt
|
|
|
634 aliae scientiae) cognoscuntur, facilius manuducitur in ea quae sunt
|
|
|
635 supra rationem, quae in hac scientia traduntur.</p>
|
|
|
636 </div>
|
|
|
637
|
|
|
638 </div4>
|
|
|
639
|
|
|
640 <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?">
|
|
|
641 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p0.1">Whether this doctrine is the same as wisdom?</h4>
|
|
|
642
|
|
|
643 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
644 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
645 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that this
|
|
|
646 doctrine is not the same as wisdom. For no doctrine which borrows its
|
|
|
647 principles is worthy of the name of wisdom; seeing that the wise man
|
|
|
648 directs, and is not directed (Metaph. i). But this doctrine borrows
|
|
|
649 its principles. Therefore this science is not wisdom.</p>
|
|
|
650 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 arg. 1"><a name="28262"><span class=
|
|
|
651 "ref">[28262] Iª q. 1 a. 6 arg. 1</span></a> Ad sextum sic
|
|
|
652 proceditur. Videtur quod haec doctrina non sit sapientia. Nulla
|
|
|
653 enim doctrina quae supponit sua principia aliunde, digna est nomine
|
|
|
654 sapientiae, <i>quia sapientis est ordinare, et non ordinari</i> (I
|
|
|
655 Metaphys.). Sed haec doctrina supponit principia sua aliunde, ut ex
|
|
|
656 dictis patet. Ergo haec doctrina non est sapientia.</p>
|
|
|
657 </div>
|
|
|
658
|
|
|
659 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
660 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
661 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, it is a part
|
|
|
662 of wisdom to prove the principles of other sciences. Hence it is
|
|
|
663 called the chief of sciences, as is clear in Ethic. vi. But this
|
|
|
664 doctrine does not prove the principles of other sciences. Therefore it
|
|
|
665 is not the same as wisdom.</p>
|
|
|
666 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 arg. 2"><a name="28263"><span class=
|
|
|
667 "ref">[28263] Iª q. 1 a. 6 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, ad
|
|
|
668 sapientiam pertinet probare principia aliarum scientiarum, unde ut
|
|
|
669 caput dicitur scientiarum, ut VI Ethic. patet. Sed haec doctrina
|
|
|
670 non probat principia aliarum scientiarum. Ergo non est
|
|
|
671 sapientia.</p>
|
|
|
672 </div>
|
|
|
673
|
|
|
674 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
675 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
676 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, this doctrine
|
|
|
677 is acquired by study, whereas wisdom is acquired by God's inspiration;
|
|
|
678 so that it is numbered among the gifts of the Holy Spirit (<scripRef
|
|
|
679 osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.11.2" parsed="vul|Isa|11|2|0|0"
|
|
|
680 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p4.1"
|
|
|
681 passage="Is. 11:2">Is. 11:2</scripRef>). Therefore this doctrine is
|
|
|
682 not the same as wisdom.</p>
|
|
|
683 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 arg. 3"><a name="28264"><span class=
|
|
|
684 "ref">[28264] Iª q. 1 a. 6 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, haec
|
|
|
685 doctrina per studium acquiritur. Sapientia autem per infusionem
|
|
|
686 habetur, unde inter septem dona spiritus sancti connumeratur, ut
|
|
|
687 patet Isaiae XI. Ergo haec doctrina non est sapientia.</p>
|
|
|
688 </div>
|
|
|
689
|
|
|
690 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
691 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p5"><b>On the
|
|
|
692 contrary,</b> It is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Deut.4.6"
|
|
|
693 parsed="vul|Deut|4|6|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p5.1"
|
|
|
694 passage="Dt. 4:6">Dt. 4:6</scripRef>): "This is your wisdom and
|
|
|
695 understanding in the sight of nations."</p>
|
|
|
696 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 s. c."><a name="28265"><span class=
|
|
|
697 "ref">[28265] Iª q. 1 a. 6 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
698 quod dicitur Deut. IV, in principio legis, <i>haec est nostra
|
|
|
699 sapientia et intellectus coram populis</i>.</p>
|
|
|
700 </div>
|
|
|
701
|
|
|
702 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
703 <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
|
|
|
704 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
|
|
|
705 Augustine says (De Trin. xii, 14). But sacred doctrine essentially
|
|
|
706 treats of God viewed as the highest cause---not only so far as He can
|
|
|
707 be known through creatures just as philosophers knew Him---"That which
|
|
|
708 is known of God is manifest in them" (<scripRef
|
|
|
709 osisRef="Bible.vul:Rom.1.19" parsed="vul|Rom|1|19|0|0"
|
|
|
710 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p6.3"
|
|
|
711 passage="Rom. 1:19">Rom. 1:19</scripRef>)---but also as far as He is
|
|
|
712 known to Himself alone and revealed to others. Hence sacred doctrine
|
|
|
713 is especially called wisdom.</p>
|
|
|
714 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 co."><a name="28266"><span class=
|
|
|
715 "ref">[28266] Iª q. 1 a. 6 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
716 quod haec doctrina maxime sapientia est inter omnes sapientias
|
|
|
717 humanas, non quidem in aliquo genere tantum, sed simpliciter. Cum
|
|
|
718 enim sapientis sit ordinare et iudicare, iudicium autem per
|
|
|
719 altiorem causam de inferioribus habeatur; ille sapiens dicitur in
|
|
|
720 unoquoque genere, qui considerat causam altissimam illius generis.
|
|
|
721 Ut in genere aedificii, artifex qui disponit formam domus, dicitur
|
|
|
722 sapiens et architector, respectu inferiorum artificum, qui dolant
|
|
|
723 ligna vel parant lapides, unde dicitur I Cor. III, <i>ut sapiens
|
|
|
724 architector fundamentum posui</i>. Et rursus, in genere totius
|
|
|
725 humanae vitae, prudens sapiens dicitur, inquantum ordinat humanos
|
|
|
726 actus ad debitum finem, unde dicitur Prov. X, <i>sapientia est viro
|
|
|
727 prudentia</i>. Ille igitur qui considerat simpliciter altissimam
|
|
|
728 causam totius universi, quae Deus est, maxime sapiens dicitur, unde
|
|
|
729 et sapientia dicitur esse divinorum cognitio, ut patet per
|
|
|
730 Augustinum, XII de Trinitate. Sacra autem doctrina propriissime
|
|
|
731 determinat de Deo secundum quod est altissima causa, quia non solum
|
|
|
732 quantum ad illud quod est per creaturas cognoscibile (quod
|
|
|
733 philosophi cognoverunt, ut dicitur Rom. I, <i>quod notum est Dei,
|
|
|
734 manifestum est illis</i>); sed etiam quantum ad id quod notum est
|
|
|
735 sibi soli de seipso, et aliis per revelationem communicatum. Unde
|
|
|
736 sacra doctrina maxime dicitur sapientia.</p>
|
|
|
737 </div>
|
|
|
738
|
|
|
739 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
740 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p7"><b>Reply
|
|
|
741 to Objection 1:</b> Sacred doctrine derives its principles not from
|
|
|
742 any human knowledge, but from the divine knowledge, through which, as
|
|
|
743 through the highest wisdom, all our knowledge is set in order.</p>
|
|
|
744 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 ad 1"><a name="28267"><span class=
|
|
|
745 "ref">[28267] Iª q. 1 a. 6 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
746 dicendum quod sacra doctrina non supponit sua principia ab aliqua
|
|
|
747 scientia humana, sed a scientia divina, a qua, sicut a summa
|
|
|
748 sapientia, omnis nostra cognitio ordinatur.</p>
|
|
|
749 </div>
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
751 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
752 <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
|
|
|
753 and every height that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God"
|
|
|
754 (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:2Cor.10.4-2Cor.10.5"
|
|
|
755 parsed="vul|2Cor|10|4|10|5" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p8.1" passage="2
|
|
|
756 Cor. 10:4,5">2 Cor. 10:4,5</scripRef>).</p>
|
|
|
757 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 ad 2"><a name="28268"><span class=
|
|
|
758 "ref">[28268] Iª q. 1 a. 6 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
759 dicendum quod aliarum scientiarum principia vel sunt per se nota,
|
|
|
760 et probari non possunt, vel per aliquam rationem naturalem
|
|
|
761 probantur in aliqua alia scientia. Propria autem huius scientiae
|
|
|
762 cognitio est, quae est per revelationem, non autem quae est per
|
|
|
763 naturalem rationem. Et ideo non pertinet ad eam probare principia
|
|
|
764 aliarum scientiarum, sed solum iudicare de eis, quidquid enim in
|
|
|
765 aliis scientiis invenitur veritati huius scientiae repugnans, totum
|
|
|
766 condemnatur ut falsum, unde dicitur II Cor. X, <i>consilia
|
|
|
767 destruentes, et omnem altitudinem extollentem se adversus scientiam
|
|
|
768 Dei</i>.</p>
|
|
|
769 </div>
|
|
|
770
|
|
|
771 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
772 <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
|
|
|
773 acts, though he had not the virtue. The first manner of judging
|
|
|
774 divine things belongs to that wisdom which is set down among the gifts
|
|
|
775 of the Holy Ghost: "The spiritual man judgeth all things" (<scripRef
|
|
|
776 osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.2.15" parsed="vul|1Cor|2|15|0|0"
|
|
|
777 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A6-p9.1" passage="1 Cor. 2:15">1
|
|
|
778 Cor. 2:15</scripRef>). And Dionysius says (Div. Nom. ii): "Hierotheus
|
|
|
779 is taught not by mere learning, but by experience of divine things."
|
|
|
780 The second manner of judging belongs to this doctrine which is
|
|
|
781 acquired by study, though its principles are obtained by
|
|
|
782 revelation.</p>
|
|
|
783 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 6 ad 3"><a name="28269"><span class=
|
|
|
784 "ref">[28269] Iª q. 1 a. 6 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
|
|
|
785 quod, cum iudicium ad sapientem pertineat, secundum duplicem modum
|
|
|
786 iudicandi, dupliciter sapientia accipitur. Contingit enim aliquem
|
|
|
787 iudicare, uno modo per modum inclinationis, sicut qui habet habitum
|
|
|
788 virtutis, recte iudicat de his quae sunt secundum virtutem agenda,
|
|
|
789 inquantum ad illa inclinatur, unde et in X Ethic. dicitur quod
|
|
|
790 virtuosus est mensura et regula actuum humanorum. Alio modo, per
|
|
|
791 modum cognitionis, sicut aliquis instructus in scientia morali,
|
|
|
792 posset iudicare de actibus virtutis, etiam si virtutem non haberet.
|
|
|
793 Primus igitur modus iudicandi de rebus divinis, pertinet ad
|
|
|
794 sapientiam quae ponitur donum spiritus sancti secundum illud I Cor.
|
|
|
795 II, <i>spiritualis homo iudicat omnia,</i> etc., et Dionysius
|
|
|
796 dicit, II cap. de divinis nominibus, <i>Hierotheus doctus est non
|
|
|
797 solum discens, sed et patiens divina</i>. Secundus autem modus
|
|
|
798 iudicandi pertinet ad hanc doctrinam, secundum quod per studium
|
|
|
799 habetur; licet eius principia ex revelatione habeantur.</p>
|
|
|
800 </div>
|
|
|
801
|
|
|
802 </div4>
|
|
|
803
|
|
|
804 <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?">
|
|
|
805 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p0.1">Whether God is the object of this science?</h4>
|
|
|
806
|
|
|
807 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
808 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
809 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
|
|
|
810 not the object of this science. For in every science, the nature of
|
|
|
811 its object is presupposed. But this science cannot presuppose the
|
|
|
812 essence of God, for Damascene says (De Fide Orth. i, iv): "It is
|
|
|
813 impossible to define the essence of God." Therefore God is not the
|
|
|
814 object of this science.</p>
|
|
|
815 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 arg. 1"><a name="28270"><span class=
|
|
|
816 "ref">[28270] Iª q. 1 a. 7 arg. 1</span></a> Ad septimum sic
|
|
|
817 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus non sit subiectum huius scientiae. In
|
|
|
818 qualibet enim scientia oportet supponere de subiecto quid est,
|
|
|
819 secundum philosophum in I Poster. Sed haec scientia non supponit de
|
|
|
820 Deo quid est, dicit enim Damascenus, <i>in Deo quid est, dicere
|
|
|
821 impossibile est</i>. Ergo Deus non est subiectum huius
|
|
|
822 scientiae.</p>
|
|
|
823 </div>
|
|
|
824
|
|
|
825 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
826 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
827 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, whatever
|
|
|
828 conclusions are reached in any science must be comprehended under the
|
|
|
829 object of the science. But in Holy Writ we reach conclusions not only
|
|
|
830 concerning God, but concerning many other things, such as creatures
|
|
|
831 and human morality. Therefore God is not the object of this
|
|
|
832 science.</p>
|
|
|
833 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 arg. 2"><a name="28271"><span class=
|
|
|
834 "ref">[28271] Iª q. 1 a. 7 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, omnia
|
|
|
835 quae determinantur in aliqua scientia, comprehenduntur sub subiecto
|
|
|
836 illius scientiae. Sed in sacra Scriptura determinatur de multis
|
|
|
837 aliis quam de Deo, puta de creaturis, et de moribus hominum. Ergo
|
|
|
838 Deus non est subiectum huius scientiae.</p>
|
|
|
839 </div>
|
|
|
840
|
|
|
841 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
842 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
843 contrary,</b> The object of the science is that of which it
|
|
|
844 principally treats. But in this science, the treatment is mainly about
|
|
|
845 God; for it is called theology, as treating of God. Therefore God is
|
|
|
846 the object of this science.</p>
|
|
|
847 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 s. c."><a name="28272"><span class=
|
|
|
848 "ref">[28272] Iª q. 1 a. 7 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, illud
|
|
|
849 est subiectum scientiae, de quo est sermo in scientia. Sed in hac
|
|
|
850 scientia fit sermo de Deo, dicitur enim theologia, quasi sermo de
|
|
|
851 Deo. Ergo Deus est subiectum huius scientiae.</p>
|
|
|
852 </div>
|
|
|
853
|
|
|
854 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
855 <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
|
|
|
856 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
|
|
|
857 this science, and not to the aspect under which it is treated, have
|
|
|
858 asserted the object of this science to be something other than
|
|
|
859 God---that is, either things and signs; or the works of salvation; or
|
|
|
860 the whole Christ, as the head and members. Of all these things, in
|
|
|
861 truth, we treat in this science, but so far as they have reference to
|
|
|
862 God.</p>
|
|
|
863 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 co."><a name="28273"><span class=
|
|
|
864 "ref">[28273] Iª q. 1 a. 7 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
865 quod Deus est subiectum huius scientiae. Sic enim se habet
|
|
|
866 subiectum ad scientiam, sicut obiectum ad potentiam vel habitum.
|
|
|
867 Proprie autem illud assignatur obiectum alicuius potentiae vel
|
|
|
868 habitus, sub cuius ratione omnia referuntur ad potentiam vel
|
|
|
869 habitum, sicut homo et lapis referuntur ad visum inquantum sunt
|
|
|
870 colorata, unde coloratum est proprium obiectum visus. Omnia autem
|
|
|
871 pertractantur in sacra doctrina sub ratione Dei, vel quia sunt ipse
|
|
|
872 Deus; vel quia habent ordinem ad Deum, ut ad principium et finem.
|
|
|
873 Unde sequitur quod Deus vere sit subiectum huius scientiae. Quod
|
|
|
874 etiam manifestum fit ex principiis huius scientiae, quae sunt
|
|
|
875 articuli fidei, quae est de Deo, idem autem est subiectum
|
|
|
876 principiorum et totius scientiae, cum tota scientia virtute
|
|
|
877 contineatur in principiis. Quidam vero, attendentes ad ea quae in
|
|
|
878 ista scientia tractantur, et non ad rationem secundum quam
|
|
|
879 considerantur, assignaverunt aliter subiectum huius scientiae, vel
|
|
|
880 res et signa; vel opera reparationis; vel totum Christum, idest
|
|
|
881 caput et membra. De omnibus enim istis tractatur in ista scientia,
|
|
|
882 sed secundum ordinem ad Deum.</p>
|
|
|
883 </div>
|
|
|
884
|
|
|
885 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
886 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p6"><b>Reply
|
|
|
887 to Objection 1:</b> Although we cannot know in what consists the
|
|
|
888 essence of God, nevertheless in this science we make use of His
|
|
|
889 effects, either of nature or of grace, in place of a definition, in
|
|
|
890 regard to whatever is treated of in this science concerning God; even
|
|
|
891 as in some philosophical sciences we demonstrate something about a
|
|
|
892 cause from its effect, by taking the effect in place of a definition
|
|
|
893 of the cause.</p>
|
|
|
894 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 ad 1"><a name="28274"><span class=
|
|
|
895 "ref">[28274] Iª q. 1 a. 7 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
896 dicendum quod, licet de Deo non possimus scire quid est, utimur
|
|
|
897 tamen eius effectu, in hac doctrina, vel naturae vel gratiae, loco
|
|
|
898 definitionis, ad ea quae de Deo in hac doctrina considerantur,
|
|
|
899 sicut et in aliquibus scientiis philosophicis demonstratur aliquid
|
|
|
900 de causa per effectum, accipiendo effectum loco definitionis
|
|
|
901 causae.</p>
|
|
|
902 </div>
|
|
|
903
|
|
|
904 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
905 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A7-p7"><b>Reply
|
|
|
906 to Objection 2:</b> Whatever other conclusions are reached in this
|
|
|
907 sacred science are comprehended under God, not as parts or species or
|
|
|
908 accidents but as in some way related to Him.</p>
|
|
|
909 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 7 ad 2"><a name="28275"><span class=
|
|
|
910 "ref">[28275] Iª q. 1 a. 7 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
911 dicendum quod omnia alia quae determinantur in sacra doctrina,
|
|
|
912 comprehenduntur sub Deo, non ut partes vel species vel accidentia,
|
|
|
913 sed ut ordinata aliqualiter ad ipsum.</p>
|
|
|
914 </div>
|
|
|
915
|
|
|
916 </div4>
|
|
|
917
|
|
|
918 <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?">
|
|
|
919 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p0.1">Whether sacred doctrine is a matter of argument?</h4>
|
|
|
920
|
|
|
921 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
922 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
923 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems this doctrine
|
|
|
924 is not a matter of argument. For Ambrose says (De Fide 1): "Put
|
|
|
925 arguments aside where faith is sought." But in this doctrine, faith
|
|
|
926 especially is sought: "But these things are written that you may
|
|
|
927 believe" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.20.31"
|
|
|
928 parsed="vul|John|20|31|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p2.1"
|
|
|
929 passage="Jn. 20:31">Jn. 20:31</scripRef>). Therefore sacred doctrine
|
|
|
930 is not a matter of argument.</p>
|
|
|
931 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 arg. 1"><a name="28276"><span class=
|
|
|
932 "ref">[28276] Iª q. 1 a. 8 arg. 1</span></a> Ad octavum sic
|
|
|
933 proceditur. Videtur quod haec doctrina non sit argumentativa. Dicit
|
|
|
934 enim Ambrosius in libro I de fide Catholica, <i>tolle argumenta,
|
|
|
935 ubi fides quaeritur</i>. Sed in hac doctrina praecipue fides
|
|
|
936 quaeritur, unde dicitur Ioan. XX, <i>haec scripta sunt ut
|
|
|
937 credatis</i>. Ergo sacra doctrina non est argumentativa.</p>
|
|
|
938 </div>
|
|
|
939
|
|
|
940 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
941 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
942 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, if it is a
|
|
|
943 matter of argument, the argument is either from authority or from
|
|
|
944 reason. If it is from authority, it seems unbefitting its dignity, for
|
|
|
945 the proof from authority is the weakest form of proof. But if it is
|
|
|
946 from reason, this is unbefitting its end, because, according to
|
|
|
947 Gregory (Hom. 26), "faith has no merit in those things of which human
|
|
|
948 reason brings its own experience." Therefore sacred doctrine is not a
|
|
|
949 matter of argument.</p>
|
|
|
950 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 arg. 2"><a name="28277"><span class=
|
|
|
951 "ref">[28277] Iª q. 1 a. 8 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, si sit
|
|
|
952 argumentativa, aut argumentatur ex auctoritate, aut ex ratione. Si
|
|
|
953 ex auctoritate, non videtur hoc congruere eius dignitati, nam locus
|
|
|
954 ab auctoritate est infirmissimus, secundum Boetium. Si etiam ex
|
|
|
955 ratione, hoc non congruit eius fini, quia secundum Gregorium in
|
|
|
956 homilia, <i>fides non habet meritum, ubi humana ratio praebet
|
|
|
957 experimentum</i>. Ergo sacra doctrina non est argumentativa.</p>
|
|
|
958 </div>
|
|
|
959
|
|
|
960 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
961 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p4"><b>On the
|
|
|
962 contrary,</b> The Scripture says that a bishop should "embrace that
|
|
|
963 faithful word which is according to doctrine, that he may be able to
|
|
|
964 exhort in sound doctrine and to convince the gainsayers" (<scripRef
|
|
|
965 osisRef="Bible.vul:Titus.1.9" parsed="vul|Titus|1|9|0|0"
|
|
|
966 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p4.1" passage="Titus 1:9">Titus
|
|
|
967 1:9</scripRef>).</p>
|
|
|
968 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 s. c."><a name="28278"><span class=
|
|
|
969 "ref">[28278] Iª q. 1 a. 8 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
970 quod dicitur ad Titum I, de episcopo, <i>amplectentem eum qui
|
|
|
971 secundum doctrinam est, fidelem sermonem, ut potens sit exhortari
|
|
|
972 in doctrina sana, et eos qui contradicunt arguere</i>.</p>
|
|
|
973 </div>
|
|
|
974
|
|
|
975 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
976 <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
|
|
|
977 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
|
|
|
978 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
|
|
|
979 never be demonstrated, it is clear that the arguments brought
|
|
|
980 against faith cannot be demonstrations, but are difficulties that can
|
|
|
981 be answered.</p>
|
|
|
982 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 co."><a name="28279"><span class=
|
|
|
983 "ref">[28279] Iª q. 1 a. 8 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
984 quod, sicut aliae scientiae non argumentantur ad sua principia
|
|
|
985 probanda, sed ex principiis argumentantur ad ostendendum alia in
|
|
|
986 ipsis scientiis; ita haec doctrina non argumentatur ad sua
|
|
|
987 principia probanda, quae sunt articuli fidei; sed ex eis procedit
|
|
|
988 ad aliquid aliud ostendendum; sicut apostolus, I ad Cor. XV, ex
|
|
|
989 resurrectione Christi argumentatur ad resurrectionem communem
|
|
|
990 probandam. Sed tamen considerandum est in scientiis philosophicis,
|
|
|
991 quod inferiores scientiae nec probant sua principia, nec contra
|
|
|
992 negantem principia disputant, sed hoc relinquunt superiori
|
|
|
993 scientiae, suprema vero inter eas, scilicet metaphysica, disputat
|
|
|
994 contra negantem sua principia, si adversarius aliquid concedit, si
|
|
|
995 autem nihil concedit, non potest cum eo disputare, potest tamen
|
|
|
996 solvere rationes ipsius. Unde sacra Scriptura, cum non habeat
|
|
|
997 superiorem, disputat cum negante sua principia, argumentando
|
|
|
998 quidem, si adversarius aliquid concedat eorum quae per divinam
|
|
|
999 revelationem habentur; sicut per auctoritates sacrae doctrinae
|
|
|
1000 disputamus contra haereticos, et per unum articulum contra negantes
|
|
|
1001 alium. Si vero adversarius nihil credat eorum quae divinitus
|
|
|
1002 revelantur, non remanet amplius via ad probandum articulos fidei
|
|
|
1003 per rationes, sed ad solvendum rationes, si quas inducit, contra
|
|
|
1004 fidem. Cum enim fides infallibili veritati innitatur, impossibile
|
|
|
1005 autem sit de vero demonstrari contrarium, manifestum est
|
|
|
1006 probationes quae contra fidem inducuntur, non esse demonstrationes,
|
|
|
1007 sed solubilia argumenta.</p>
|
|
|
1008 </div>
|
|
|
1009
|
|
|
1010 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1011 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A8-p6"><b>Reply
|
|
|
1012 to Objection 1:</b> Although arguments from human reason cannot avail
|
|
|
1013 to prove what must be received on faith, nevertheless, this doctrine
|
|
|
1014 argues from articles of faith to other truths.</p>
|
|
|
1015 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 ad 1"><a name="28280"><span class=
|
|
|
1016 "ref">[28280] Iª q. 1 a. 8 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
1017 dicendum quod, licet argumenta rationis humanae non habeant locum
|
|
|
1018 ad probandum quae fidei sunt, tamen ex articulis fidei haec
|
|
|
1019 doctrina ad alia argumentatur, ut dictum est.</p>
|
|
|
1020 </div>
|
|
|
1021
|
|
|
1022 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1023 <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
|
|
|
1024 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
|
|
|
1025 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
|
|
|
1026 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
|
|
|
1027 in their works to be true, merely on account of their having so
|
|
|
1028 thought and written, whatever may have been their holiness and
|
|
|
1029 learning."</p>
|
|
|
1030 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 8 ad 2"><a name="28281"><span class=
|
|
|
1031 "ref">[28281] Iª q. 1 a. 8 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
1032 dicendum quod argumentari ex auctoritate est maxime proprium huius
|
|
|
1033 doctrinae, eo quod principia huius doctrinae per revelationem
|
|
|
1034 habentur, et sic oportet quod credatur auctoritati eorum quibus
|
|
|
1035 revelatio facta est. Nec hoc derogat dignitati huius doctrinae, nam
|
|
|
1036 licet locus ab auctoritate quae fundatur super ratione humana, sit
|
|
|
1037 infirmissimus; locus tamen ab auctoritate quae fundatur super
|
|
|
1038 revelatione divina, est efficacissimus. Utitur tamen sacra doctrina
|
|
|
1039 etiam ratione humana, non quidem ad probandum fidem, quia per hoc
|
|
|
1040 tolleretur meritum fidei; sed ad manifestandum aliqua alia quae
|
|
|
1041 traduntur in hac doctrina. Cum enim gratia non tollat naturam, sed
|
|
|
1042 perficiat, oportet quod naturalis ratio subserviat fidei; sicut et
|
|
|
1043 naturalis inclinatio voluntatis obsequitur caritati. Unde et
|
|
|
1044 apostolus dicit, II ad Cor. X, <i>in captivitatem redigentes omnem
|
|
|
1045 intellectum in obsequium Christi</i>. Et inde est quod etiam
|
|
|
1046 auctoritatibus philosophorum sacra doctrina utitur, ubi per
|
|
|
1047 rationem naturalem veritatem cognoscere potuerunt; sicut Paulus,
|
|
|
1048 actuum XVII, inducit verbum Arati, dicens, <i>sicut et quidam
|
|
|
1049 poetarum vestrorum dixerunt, genus Dei sumus</i>. Sed tamen sacra
|
|
|
1050 doctrina huiusmodi auctoritatibus utitur quasi extraneis
|
|
|
1051 argumentis, et probabilibus. Auctoritatibus autem canonicae
|
|
|
1052 Scripturae utitur proprie, ex necessitate argumentando.
|
|
|
1053 Auctoritatibus autem aliorum doctorum Ecclesiae, quasi arguendo ex
|
|
|
1054 propriis, sed probabiliter. Innititur enim fides nostra revelationi
|
|
|
1055 apostolis et prophetis factae, qui canonicos libros scripserunt,
|
|
|
1056 non autem revelationi, si qua fuit aliis doctoribus facta. Unde
|
|
|
1057 dicit Augustinus, in epistola ad Hieronymum, <i>solis eis
|
|
|
1058 Scripturarum libris qui canonici appellantur, didici hunc honorem
|
|
|
1059 deferre, ut nullum auctorem eorum in scribendo errasse aliquid
|
|
|
1060 firmissime credam. Alios autem ita lego, ut, quantalibet sanctitate
|
|
|
1061 doctrinaque praepolleant, non ideo verum putem, quod ipsi ita
|
|
|
1062 senserunt vel scripserunt</i>.</p>
|
|
|
1063 </div>
|
|
|
1064
|
|
|
1065 </div4>
|
|
|
1066
|
|
|
1067 <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?">
|
|
|
1068 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p0.1">Whether Holy Scripture should use metaphors?</h4>
|
|
|
1069
|
|
|
1070 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1071 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
1072 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that Holy
|
|
|
1073 Scripture should not use metaphors. For that which is proper to the
|
|
|
1074 lowest science seems not to befit this science, which holds the
|
|
|
1075 highest place of all. But to proceed by the aid of various similitudes
|
|
|
1076 and figures is proper to poetry, the least of all the
|
|
|
1077 sciences. Therefore it is not fitting that this science should make
|
|
|
1078 use of such similitudes.</p>
|
|
|
1079 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 arg. 1"><a name="28282"><span class=
|
|
|
1080 "ref">[28282] Iª q. 1 a. 9 arg. 1</span></a> Ad nonum sic
|
|
|
1081 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra Scriptura non debeat uti metaphoris.
|
|
|
1082 Illud enim quod est proprium infimae doctrinae, non videtur
|
|
|
1083 competere huic scientiae, quae inter alias tenet locum supremum, ut
|
|
|
1084 iam dictum est. Procedere autem per similitudines varias et
|
|
|
1085 repraesentationes, est proprium poeticae, quae est infima inter
|
|
|
1086 omnes doctrinas. Ergo huiusmodi similitudinibus uti, non est
|
|
|
1087 conveniens huic scientiae.</p>
|
|
|
1088 </div>
|
|
|
1089
|
|
|
1090 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1091 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
1092 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, this doctrine
|
|
|
1093 seems to be intended to make truth clear. Hence a reward is held out
|
|
|
1094 to those who manifest it: "They that explain me shall have life
|
|
|
1095 everlasting" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Sir.24.31"
|
|
|
1096 parsed="vul|Sir|24|31|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p3.1"
|
|
|
1097 passage="Ecclus. 24:31">Ecclus. 24:31</scripRef>). But by such
|
|
|
1098 similitudes truth is obscured. Therefore, to put forward divine truths
|
|
|
1099 by likening them to corporeal things does not befit this science.</p>
|
|
|
1100 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 arg. 2"><a name="28283"><span class=
|
|
|
1101 "ref">[28283] Iª q. 1 a. 9 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, haec
|
|
|
1102 doctrina videtur esse ordinata ad veritatis manifestationem, unde
|
|
|
1103 et manifestatoribus eius praemium promittitur, Eccli. XXIV, <i>qui
|
|
|
1104 elucidant me, vitam aeternam habebunt</i>. Sed per huiusmodi
|
|
|
1105 similitudines veritas occultatur. Non ergo competit huic doctrinae
|
|
|
1106 divina tradere sub similitudine corporalium rerum.</p>
|
|
|
1107 </div>
|
|
|
1108
|
|
|
1109 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1110 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
1111 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the higher
|
|
|
1112 creatures are, the nearer they approach to the divine likeness. If
|
|
|
1113 therefore any creature be taken to represent God, this representation
|
|
|
1114 ought chiefly to be taken from the higher creatures, and not from the
|
|
|
1115 lower; yet this is often found in Scriptures.</p>
|
|
|
1116 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 arg. 3"><a name="28284"><span class=
|
|
|
1117 "ref">[28284] Iª q. 1 a. 9 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, quanto
|
|
|
1118 aliquae creaturae sunt sublimiores, tanto magis ad divinam
|
|
|
1119 similitudinem accedunt. Si igitur aliquae ex creaturis
|
|
|
1120 transumerentur ad Deum, tunc oporteret talem transumptionem maxime
|
|
|
1121 fieri ex sublimioribus creaturis, et non ex infimis. Quod tamen in
|
|
|
1122 Scripturis frequenter invenitur.</p>
|
|
|
1123 </div>
|
|
|
1124
|
|
|
1125 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1126 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p5"><b>On the
|
|
|
1127 contrary,</b> It is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Hos.12.10"
|
|
|
1128 parsed="vul|Hos|12|10|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p5.1" passage="Osee
|
|
|
1129 12:10">Osee 12:10</scripRef>): "I have multiplied visions, and I have
|
|
|
1130 used similitudes by the ministry of the prophets." But to put forward
|
|
|
1131 anything by means of similitudes is to use metaphors. Therefore this
|
|
|
1132 sacred science may use metaphors.</p>
|
|
|
1133 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 s. c."><a name="28285"><span class=
|
|
|
1134 "ref">[28285] Iª q. 1 a. 9 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
1135 quod dicitur Osee XII, <i>ego visionem multiplicavi eis, et in
|
|
|
1136 manibus prophetarum assimilatus sum</i>. Tradere autem aliquid sub
|
|
|
1137 similitudine, est metaphoricum. Ergo ad sacram doctrinam pertinet
|
|
|
1138 uti metaphoris.</p>
|
|
|
1139 </div>
|
|
|
1140
|
|
|
1141 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1142 <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):
|
|
|
1143 "We cannot be enlightened by the divine rays except they be hidden
|
|
|
1144 within the covering of many sacred veils." It is also befitting Holy
|
|
|
1145 Writ, which is proposed to all without distinction of persons---"To
|
|
|
1146 the wise and to the unwise I am a debtor" (<scripRef
|
|
|
1147 osisRef="Bible.vul:Rom.1.14" parsed="vul|Rom|1|14|0|0"
|
|
|
1148 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p6.1"
|
|
|
1149 passage="Rom. 1:14">Rom. 1:14</scripRef>)---that spiritual truths be
|
|
|
1150 expounded by means of figures taken from corporeal things, in order
|
|
|
1151 that thereby even the simple who are unable by themselves to grasp
|
|
|
1152 intellectual things may be able to understand it.</p>
|
|
|
1153 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 co."><a name="28286"><span class=
|
|
|
1154 "ref">[28286] Iª q. 1 a. 9 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
1155 quod conveniens est sacrae Scripturae divina et spiritualia sub
|
|
|
1156 similitudine corporalium tradere. Deus enim omnibus providet
|
|
|
1157 secundum quod competit eorum naturae. Est autem naturale homini ut
|
|
|
1158 per sensibilia ad intelligibilia veniat, quia omnis nostra cognitio
|
|
|
1159 a sensu initium habet. Unde convenienter in sacra Scriptura
|
|
|
1160 traduntur nobis spiritualia sub metaphoris corporalium. Et hoc est
|
|
|
1161 quod dicit Dionysius, I cap. caelestis hierarchiae, <i>impossibile
|
|
|
1162 est nobis aliter lucere divinum radium, nisi varietate sacrorum
|
|
|
1163 velaminum circumvelatum</i>. Convenit etiam sacrae Scripturae, quae
|
|
|
1164 communiter omnibus proponitur (secundum illud ad Rom. I,
|
|
|
1165 <i>sapientibus et insipientibus debitor sum</i>), ut spiritualia
|
|
|
1166 sub similitudinibus corporalium proponantur; ut saltem vel sic
|
|
|
1167 rudes eam capiant, qui ad intelligibilia secundum se capienda non
|
|
|
1168 sunt idonei.</p>
|
|
|
1169 </div>
|
|
|
1170
|
|
|
1171 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1172 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p7"><b>Reply
|
|
|
1173 to Objection 1:</b> Poetry makes use of metaphors to produce a
|
|
|
1174 representation, for it is natural to man to be pleased with
|
|
|
1175 representations. But sacred doctrine makes use of metaphors as both
|
|
|
1176 necessary and useful.</p>
|
|
|
1177 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 ad 1"><a name="28287"><span class=
|
|
|
1178 "ref">[28287] Iª q. 1 a. 9 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
1179 dicendum quod poeta utitur metaphoris propter repraesentationem,
|
|
|
1180 repraesentatio enim naturaliter homini delectabilis est. Sed sacra
|
|
|
1181 doctrina utitur metaphoris propter necessitatem et utilitatem, ut
|
|
|
1182 dictum est.</p>
|
|
|
1183 </div>
|
|
|
1184
|
|
|
1185 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1186 <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
|
|
|
1187 metaphorically in one part of Scripture, in other parts are taught
|
|
|
1188 more openly. The very hiding of truth in figures is useful for the
|
|
|
1189 exercise of thoughtful minds and as a defense against the ridicule of
|
|
|
1190 the impious, according to the words "Give not that which is holy to
|
|
|
1191 dogs" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Matt.7.6"
|
|
|
1192 parsed="vul|Matt|7|6|0|0" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A9-p8.1"
|
|
|
1193 passage="Mat. 7:6">Mat. 7:6</scripRef>).</p>
|
|
|
1194 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 ad 2"><a name="28288"><span class=
|
|
|
1195 "ref">[28288] Iª q. 1 a. 9 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
1196 dicendum quod radius divinae revelationis non destruitur propter
|
|
|
1197 figuras sensibiles quibus circumvelatur, ut dicit Dionysius, sed
|
|
|
1198 remanet in sua veritate; ut mentes quibus fit revelatio, non
|
|
|
1199 permittat in similitudinibus permanere, sed elevet eas ad
|
|
|
1200 cognitionem intelligibilium; et per eos quibus revelatio facta est,
|
|
|
1201 alii etiam circa haec instruantur. Unde ea quae in uno loco
|
|
|
1202 Scripturae traduntur sub metaphoris, in aliis locis expressius
|
|
|
1203 exponuntur. Et ipsa etiam occultatio figurarum utilis est, ad
|
|
|
1204 exercitium studiosorum, et contra irrisiones infidelium, de quibus
|
|
|
1205 dicitur, Matth. VII, <i>nolite sanctum dare canibus</i>.</p>
|
|
|
1206 </div>
|
|
|
1207
|
|
|
1208 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1209 <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
|
|
|
1210 could think of nothing nobler than bodies. Secondly, because this is
|
|
|
1211 more befitting the knowledge of God that we have in this life. For
|
|
|
1212 what He is not is clearer to us than what He is. Therefore similitudes
|
|
|
1213 drawn from things farthest away from God form within us a truer
|
|
|
1214 estimate that God is above whatsoever we may say or think of
|
|
|
1215 Him. Thirdly, because thereby divine truths are the better hidden from
|
|
|
1216 the unworthy.</p>
|
|
|
1217 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 9 ad 3"><a name="28289"><span class=
|
|
|
1218 "ref">[28289] Iª q. 1 a. 9 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
|
|
|
1219 quod, sicut docet Dionysius, cap. II Cael. Hier., magis est
|
|
|
1220 conveniens quod divina in Scripturis tradantur sub figuris vilium
|
|
|
1221 corporum, quam corporum nobilium. Et hoc propter tria. Primo, quia
|
|
|
1222 per hoc magis liberatur humanus animus ab errore. Manifestum enim
|
|
|
1223 apparet quod haec secundum proprietatem non dicuntur de divinis,
|
|
|
1224 quod posset esse dubium, si sub figuris nobilium corporum
|
|
|
1225 describerentur divina; maxime apud illos qui nihil aliud a
|
|
|
1226 corporibus nobilius excogitare noverunt. Secundo, quia hic modus
|
|
|
1227 convenientior est cognitioni quam de Deo habemus in hac vita. Magis
|
|
|
1228 enim manifestatur nobis de ipso quid non est, quam quid est, et
|
|
|
1229 ideo similitudines illarum rerum quae magis elongantur a Deo,
|
|
|
1230 veriorem nobis faciunt aestimationem quod sit supra illud quod de
|
|
|
1231 Deo dicimus vel cogitamus. Tertio, quia per huiusmodi, divina magis
|
|
|
1232 occultantur indignis.</p>
|
|
|
1233 </div>
|
|
|
1234 </div4>
|
|
|
1235
|
|
|
1236 <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?">
|
|
|
1237 <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>
|
|
|
1238
|
|
|
1239 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1240 <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
|
|
|
1241 word.</p>
|
|
|
1242 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 arg. 1"><a name="28290"><span class=
|
|
|
1243 "ref">[28290] Iª q. 1 a. 10 arg. 1</span></a> Ad decimum sic
|
|
|
1244 proceditur. Videtur quod sacra Scriptura sub una littera non habeat
|
|
|
1245 plures sensus, qui sunt historicus vel litteralis, allegoricus,
|
|
|
1246 tropologicus sive moralis, et anagogicus. Multiplicitas enim
|
|
|
1247 sensuum in una Scriptura parit confusionem et deceptionem, et
|
|
|
1248 tollit arguendi firmitatem, unde ex multiplicibus propositionibus
|
|
|
1249 non procedit argumentatio, sed secundum hoc aliquae fallaciae
|
|
|
1250 assignantur. Sacra autem Scriptura debet esse efficax ad
|
|
|
1251 ostendendam veritatem absque omni fallacia. Ergo non debent in ea
|
|
|
1252 sub una littera plures sensus tradi.</p>
|
|
|
1253 </div>
|
|
|
1254
|
|
|
1255 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1256 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
1257 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine
|
|
|
1258 says (De util. cred. iii) that "the Old Testament has a fourfold
|
|
|
1259 division as to history, etiology, analogy and allegory." Now these
|
|
|
1260 four seem altogether different from the four divisions mentioned in
|
|
|
1261 the first objection. Therefore it does not seem fitting to explain the
|
|
|
1262 same word of Holy Writ according to the four different senses
|
|
|
1263 mentioned above.</p>
|
|
|
1264 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 arg. 2"><a name="28291"><span class=
|
|
|
1265 "ref">[28291] Iª q. 1 a. 10 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
|
|
|
1266 Augustinus dicit in libro de utilitate credendi, quod <i>Scriptura
|
|
|
1267 quae testamentum vetus vocatur, quadrifariam traditur, scilicet,
|
|
|
1268 secundum historiam, secundum aetiologiam, secundum analogiam,
|
|
|
1269 secundum allegoriam</i>. Quae quidem quatuor a quatuor praedictis
|
|
|
1270 videntur esse aliena omnino. Non igitur conveniens videtur quod
|
|
|
1271 eadem littera sacrae Scripturae secundum quatuor sensus praedictos
|
|
|
1272 exponatur.</p>
|
|
|
1273 </div>
|
|
|
1274
|
|
|
1275 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1276 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
|
|
|
1277 id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, besides
|
|
|
1278 these senses, there is the parabolical, which is not one of these
|
|
|
1279 four.</p>
|
|
|
1280 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 arg. 3"><a name="28292"><span class=
|
|
|
1281 "ref">[28292] Iª q. 1 a. 10 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
|
|
|
1282 praeter praedictos sensus, invenitur sensus parabolicus, qui inter
|
|
|
1283 illos sensus quatuor non continetur.</p>
|
|
|
1284 </div>
|
|
|
1285
|
|
|
1286 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1287 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p5"><b>On
|
|
|
1288 the contrary,</b> Gregory says (Moral. xx, 1): "Holy Writ by the
|
|
|
1289 manner of its speech transcends every science, because in one and the
|
|
|
1290 same sentence, while it describes a fact, it reveals a mystery."</p>
|
|
|
1291 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 s. c."><a name="28293"><span class=
|
|
|
1292 "ref">[28293] Iª q. 1 a. 10 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
|
|
|
1293 quod dicit Gregorius, XX Moralium, <i>sacra Scriptura omnes
|
|
|
1294 scientias ipso locutionis suae more transcendit, quia uno eodemque
|
|
|
1295 sermone, dum narrat gestum, prodit mysterium</i>.</p>
|
|
|
1296 </div>
|
|
|
1297
|
|
|
1298 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1299 <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
|
|
|
1300 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
|
|
|
1301 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,
|
|
|
1302 as Augustine says (Confess. xii), if, even according to the literal
|
|
|
1303 sense, one word in Holy Writ should have several senses.</p>
|
|
|
1304 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 co."><a name="28294"><span class=
|
|
|
1305 "ref">[28294] Iª q. 1 a. 10 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
|
|
|
1306 quod auctor sacrae Scripturae est Deus, in cuius potestate est ut
|
|
|
1307 non solum voces ad significandum accommodet (quod etiam homo facere
|
|
|
1308 potest), sed etiam res ipsas. Et ideo, cum in omnibus scientiis
|
|
|
1309 voces significent, hoc habet proprium ista scientia, quod ipsae res
|
|
|
1310 significatae per voces, etiam significant aliquid. Illa ergo prima
|
|
|
1311 significatio, qua voces significant res, pertinet ad primum sensum,
|
|
|
1312 qui est sensus historicus vel litteralis. Illa vero significatio
|
|
|
1313 qua res significatae per voces, iterum res alias significant,
|
|
|
1314 dicitur sensus spiritualis; qui super litteralem fundatur, et eum
|
|
|
1315 supponit. Hic autem sensus spiritualis trifariam dividitur. Sicut
|
|
|
1316 enim dicit apostolus, ad Hebr. VII, lex vetus figura est novae
|
|
|
1317 legis, et ipsa nova lex, ut dicit Dionysius in ecclesiastica
|
|
|
1318 hierarchia, est figura futurae gloriae, in nova etiam lege, ea quae
|
|
|
1319 in capite sunt gesta, sunt signa eorum quae nos agere debemus.
|
|
|
1320 Secundum ergo quod ea quae sunt veteris legis, significant ea quae
|
|
|
1321 sunt novae legis, est sensus allegoricus, secundum vero quod ea
|
|
|
1322 quae in Christo sunt facta, vel in his quae Christum significant,
|
|
|
1323 sunt signa eorum quae nos agere debemus, est sensus moralis, prout
|
|
|
1324 vero significant ea quae sunt in aeterna gloria, est sensus
|
|
|
1325 anagogicus. Quia vero sensus litteralis est, quem auctor intendit,
|
|
|
1326 auctor autem sacrae Scripturae Deus est, qui omnia simul suo
|
|
|
1327 intellectu comprehendit, non est inconveniens, ut dicit Augustinus
|
|
|
1328 XII confessionum, si etiam secundum litteralem sensum in una
|
|
|
1329 littera Scripturae plures sint sensus.</p>
|
|
|
1330 </div>
|
|
|
1331
|
|
|
1332 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1333 <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
|
|
|
1334 Augustine says (Epis. 48). Nevertheless, nothing of Holy Scripture
|
|
|
1335 perishes on account of this, since nothing necessary to faith is
|
|
|
1336 contained under the spiritual sense which is not elsewhere put forward
|
|
|
1337 by the Scripture in its literal sense.</p>
|
|
|
1338 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 ad 1"><a name="28295"><span class=
|
|
|
1339 "ref">[28295] Iª q. 1 a. 10 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
|
|
|
1340 dicendum quod multiplicitas horum sensuum non facit
|
|
|
1341 aequivocationem, aut aliam speciem multiplicitatis, quia, sicut iam
|
|
|
1342 dictum est, sensus isti non multiplicantur propter hoc quod una vox
|
|
|
1343 multa significet; sed quia ipsae res significatae per voces,
|
|
|
1344 aliarum rerum possunt esse signa. Et ita etiam nulla confusio
|
|
|
1345 sequitur in sacra Scriptura, cum omnes sensus fundentur super unum,
|
|
|
1346 scilicet litteralem; ex quo solo potest trahi argumentum, non autem
|
|
|
1347 ex his quae secundum allegoriam dicuntur, ut dicit Augustinus in
|
|
|
1348 epistola contra Vincentium Donatistam. Non tamen ex hoc aliquid
|
|
|
1349 deperit sacrae Scripturae, quia nihil sub spirituali sensu
|
|
|
1350 continetur fidei necessarium, quod Scriptura per litteralem sensum
|
|
|
1351 alicubi manifeste non tradat.</p>
|
|
|
1352 </div>
|
|
|
1353
|
|
|
1354 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1355 <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
|
|
|
1356 truth of another. Of these four, allegory alone stands for the three
|
|
|
1357 spiritual senses. Thus Hugh of St. Victor (Sacram. iv, 4 Prolog.)
|
|
|
1358 includes the anagogical under the allegorical sense, laying down three
|
|
|
1359 senses only---the historical, the allegorical, and the
|
|
|
1360 tropological.</p>
|
|
|
1361 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 ad 2"><a name="28296"><span class=
|
|
|
1362 "ref">[28296] Iª q. 1 a. 10 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
|
|
|
1363 dicendum quod illa tria, historia, aetiologia, analogia, ad unum
|
|
|
1364 litteralem sensum pertinent. Nam historia est, ut ipse Augustinus
|
|
|
1365 exponit, cum simpliciter aliquid proponitur, aetiologia vero, cum
|
|
|
1366 causa dicti assignatur, sicut cum dominus assignavit causam quare
|
|
|
1367 Moyses permisit licentiam repudiandi uxores, scilicet propter
|
|
|
1368 duritiam cordis ipsorum, Matt. XIX, analogia vero est, cum veritas
|
|
|
1369 unius Scripturae ostenditur veritati alterius non repugnare. Sola
|
|
|
1370 autem allegoria, inter illa quatuor, pro tribus spiritualibus
|
|
|
1371 sensibus ponitur. Sicut et Hugo de sancto Victore sub sensu
|
|
|
1372 allegorico etiam anagogicum comprehendit, ponens in tertio suarum
|
|
|
1373 sententiarum solum tres sensus, scilicet historicum, allegoricum et
|
|
|
1374 tropologicum.</p>
|
|
|
1375 </div>
|
|
|
1376
|
|
|
1377 <div class="bilingual">
|
|
|
1378 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.i.FP_Q1.FP_Q1_A10-p9"><b>Reply
|
|
|
1379 to Objection 3:</b> The parabolical sense is contained in the literal,
|
|
|
1380 for by words things are signified properly and figuratively. Nor is
|
|
|
1381 the figure itself, but that which is figured, the literal sense. When
|
|
|
1382 Scripture speaks of God's arm, the literal sense is not that God has
|
|
|
1383 such a member, but only what is signified by this member, namely
|
|
|
1384 operative power. Hence it is plain that nothing false can ever
|
|
|
1385 underlie the literal sense of Holy Writ.</p>
|
|
|
1386 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 1 a. 10 ad 3"><a name="28297"><span class=
|
|
|
1387 "ref">[28297] Iª q. 1 a. 10 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
|
|
|
1388 dicendum quod sensus parabolicus sub litterali continetur, nam per
|
|
|
1389 voces significatur aliquid proprie, et aliquid figurative; nec est
|
|
|
1390 litteralis sensus ipsa figura, sed id quod est figuratum. Non enim
|
|
|
1391 cum Scriptura nominat Dei brachium, est litteralis sensus quod in
|
|
|
1392 Deo sit membrum huiusmodi corporale, sed id quod per hoc membrum
|
|
|
1393 significatur, scilicet virtus operativa. In quo patet quod sensui
|
|
|
1394 litterali sacrae Scripturae nunquam potest subesse falsum.</p>
|
|
|
1395 </div>
|
|
|
1396
|
|
|
1397 </div4>
|
|
|
1398 </div3>
|
|
|
1399 </div2>
|
|
3
|
1400 </div1>
|
