Mercurial > hg > Aquinas

comparison summa/bilingual/FP_ii.xml @ 9:ebcff15cd677

Find changesets by keywords (author, files, the commit message), revision number or hash, or revset expression.
Q5
author ht
date Fri, 09 May 2008 17:20:13 +0000
parents 929b4153a4aa
children c102f6bf9d04
comparison
equal deleted inserted replaced
8:1a67da87d11f 9:ebcff15cd677
1 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> 1 <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
2 <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="bi.xsl"?> 2 <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="bi.xsl"?>
3 <!DOCTYPE div2 3 <!DOCTYPE div2 SYSTEM "../../dtd/ThML10.dtd" >
4 SYSTEM "../../dtd/ThML10.dtd">
5 <div2 id="FP.ii" next="FP_Q2" prev="FP_Q1_A10" progress="0.25%" n="ii" title="Treatise on The One God (QQ[2-26])"> 4 <div2 id="FP.ii" next="FP_Q2" prev="FP_Q1_A10" progress="0.25%" n="ii" title="Treatise on The One God (QQ[2-26])">
6 <h2 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii-p0.1">TREATISE ON THE ONE GOD (QQ[2]-26)</h2> 5 <h2 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii-p0.1">TREATISE ON THE ONE GOD (QQ[2]-26)</h2>
7 6
8 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2" next="FP_Q2_A1" prev="FP.ii" progress="0.25%" n="i" title="Question. 2 - The Existence of God (Three Articles)"> 7 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2" next="FP_Q2_A1" prev="FP.ii" progress="0.25%" n="i" title="Question. 2 - The Existence of God (Three Articles)">
9 <h3 xml:lang="en" 8 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2-p0.1">Question 2. THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
10 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2-p0.1">Question 2. THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
11 9
12 10
13 11
14 <div class="bilingual"> 12 <div class="bilingual">
15 <div xml:lang="en"> 13 <div xml:lang="en">
44 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p0.1">Whether the existence of God is self-evident?</h4> 42 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p0.1">Whether the existence of God is self-evident?</h4>
45 43
46 44
47 45
48 <div class="bilingual"> 46 <div class="bilingual">
49 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 47 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the
50 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the
51 existence of God is self-evident. Now those things are said to be 48 existence of God is self-evident. Now those things are said to be
52 self-evident to us the knowledge of which is naturally implanted in 49 self-evident to us the knowledge of which is naturally implanted in
53 us, as we can see in regard to first principles. But as Damascene says 50 us, as we can see in regard to first principles. But as Damascene says
54 (De Fide Orth. i, 1,3), "the knowledge of God is naturally implanted 51 (De Fide Orth. i, 1,3), "the knowledge of God is naturally implanted
55 in all." Therefore the existence of God is self-evident.</p> 52 in all." Therefore the existence of God is self-evident.</p>
56 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 arg. 1"><a name="28299"><span class= 53 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 arg. 1"><a name="28299"><span class="ref">[28299] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 arg. 1</span></a> Ad primum sic
57 "ref">[28299] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 arg. 1</span></a> Ad primum sic
58 proceditur. Videtur quod Deum esse sit per se notum. Illa enim 54 proceditur. Videtur quod Deum esse sit per se notum. Illa enim
59 nobis dicuntur per se nota, quorum cognitio nobis naturaliter 55 nobis dicuntur per se nota, quorum cognitio nobis naturaliter
60 inest, sicut patet de primis principiis. Sed, sicut dicit 56 inest, sicut patet de primis principiis. Sed, sicut dicit
61 Damascenus in principio libri sui, <i>omnibus cognitio existendi 57 Damascenus in principio libri sui, <i>omnibus cognitio existendi
62 Deum naturaliter est inserta</i>. Ergo Deum esse est per se 58 Deum naturaliter est inserta</i>. Ergo Deum esse est per se
68 which nothing greater can be conceived. But that which exists 64 which nothing greater can be conceived. But that which exists
69 actually and mentally is greater than that which exists only 65 actually and mentally is greater than that which exists only
70 mentally. Therefore, since as soon as the word "God" is understood it 66 mentally. Therefore, since as soon as the word "God" is understood it
71 exists mentally, it also follows that it exists actually. Therefore 67 exists mentally, it also follows that it exists actually. Therefore
72 the proposition "God exists" is self-evident.</p> 68 the proposition "God exists" is self-evident.</p>
73 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 arg. 2"><a name="28300"><span class= 69 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 arg. 2"><a name="28300"><span class="ref">[28300] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, illa
74 "ref">[28300] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, illa
75 dicuntur esse per se nota, quae statim, cognitis terminis, 70 dicuntur esse per se nota, quae statim, cognitis terminis,
76 cognoscuntur, quod philosophus attribuit primis demonstrationis 71 cognoscuntur, quod philosophus attribuit primis demonstrationis
77 principiis, in I Poster., scito enim quid est totum et quid pars, 72 principiis, in I Poster., scito enim quid est totum et quid pars,
78 statim scitur quod omne totum maius est sua parte. Sed intellecto 73 statim scitur quod omne totum maius est sua parte. Sed intellecto
79 quid significet hoc nomen Deus, statim habetur quod Deus est. 74 quid significet hoc nomen Deus, statim habetur quod Deus est.
83 in intellectu, sequitur etiam quod sit in re. Ergo Deum esse est 78 in intellectu, sequitur etiam quod sit in re. Ergo Deum esse est
84 per se notum.</p> 79 per se notum.</p>
85 </div> 80 </div>
86 81
87 <div class="bilingual"> 82 <div class="bilingual">
88 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 83 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the
89 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the
90 existence of truth is self-evident. For whoever denies the existence 84 existence of truth is self-evident. For whoever denies the existence
91 of truth grants that truth does not exist: and, if truth does not 85 of truth grants that truth does not exist: and, if truth does not
92 exist, then the proposition "Truth does not exist" is true: and if 86 exist, then the proposition "Truth does not exist" is true: and if
93 there is anything true, there must be truth. But God is truth itself: 87 there is anything true, there must be truth. But God is truth itself:
94 "I am the way, the truth, and the life" (<scripRef 88 "I am the way, the truth, and the life" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.14.6" parsed="vul|John|14|6|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p4.1" passage="Jn. 14:6">Jn. 14:6</scripRef>)
95 osisRef="Bible.vul:John.14.6" parsed="vul|John|14|6|0|0"
96 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p4.1" passage="Jn. 14:6">Jn. 14:6</scripRef>)
97 Therefore "God exists" is self-evident.</p> 89 Therefore "God exists" is self-evident.</p>
98 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 arg. 3"><a name="28301"><span class= 90 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 arg. 3"><a name="28301"><span class="ref">[28301] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
99 "ref">[28301] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
100 veritatem esse est per se notum, quia qui negat veritatem esse, 91 veritatem esse est per se notum, quia qui negat veritatem esse,
101 concedit veritatem esse, si enim veritas non est, verum est 92 concedit veritatem esse, si enim veritas non est, verum est
102 veritatem non esse. Si autem est aliquid verum, oportet quod 93 veritatem non esse. Si autem est aliquid verum, oportet quod
103 veritas sit. Deus autem est ipsa veritas, Ioann. XIV, <i>ego sum 94 veritas sit. Deus autem est ipsa veritas, Ioann. XIV, <i>ego sum
104 via, veritas et vita</i>. Ergo Deum esse est per se notum.</p> 95 via, veritas et vita</i>. Ergo Deum esse est per se notum.</p>
108 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p5"><b>On 99 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p5"><b>On
109 the contrary,</b> No one can mentally admit the opposite of what is 100 the contrary,</b> No one can mentally admit the opposite of what is
110 self-evident; as the Philosopher (Metaph. iv, lect. vi) states 101 self-evident; as the Philosopher (Metaph. iv, lect. vi) states
111 concerning the first principles of demonstration. But the opposite of 102 concerning the first principles of demonstration. But the opposite of
112 the proposition "God is" can be mentally admitted: "The fool said in 103 the proposition "God is" can be mentally admitted: "The fool said in
113 his heart, There is no God" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.52.1" 104 his heart, There is no God" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.52.1" parsed="vul|Ps|52|1|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p5.1" passage="Ps. 52:1">Ps. 52:1</scripRef>). Therefore, that God exists is
114 parsed="vul|Ps|52|1|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p5.1"
115 passage="Ps. 52:1">Ps. 52:1</scripRef>). Therefore, that God exists is
116 not self-evident.</p> 105 not self-evident.</p>
117 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 s. c."><a name="28302"><span class= 106 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 s. c."><a name="28302"><span class="ref">[28302] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, nullus
118 "ref">[28302] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, nullus
119 potest cogitare oppositum eius quod est per se notum ut patet per 107 potest cogitare oppositum eius quod est per se notum ut patet per
120 philosophum, in IV Metaphys. et I Poster., circa prima 108 philosophum, in IV Metaphys. et I Poster., circa prima
121 demonstrationis principia. Cogitari autem potest oppositum eius 109 demonstrationis principia. Cogitari autem potest oppositum eius
122 quod est Deum esse, secundum illud Psalmi LII, <i>dixit insipiens 110 quod est Deum esse, secundum illud Psalmi LII, <i>dixit insipiens
123 in corde suo, non est Deus</i>. Ergo Deum esse non est per se 111 in corde suo, non est Deus</i>. Ergo Deum esse non est per se
128 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> A thing can be self-evident in either of two ways: on the one hand, self-evident in itself, though not to us; on the other, self-evident in itself, and to us. A proposition is self-evident because the predicate is included in the essence of the subject, as "Man is an animal," for animal is contained in the essence of man. If, therefore the essence of the predicate and subject be known to all, the proposition will be self-evident to all; as is clear with 116 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> A thing can be self-evident in either of two ways: on the one hand, self-evident in itself, though not to us; on the other, self-evident in itself, and to us. A proposition is self-evident because the predicate is included in the essence of the subject, as "Man is an animal," for animal is contained in the essence of man. If, therefore the essence of the predicate and subject be known to all, the proposition will be self-evident to all; as is clear with
129 regard to the first principles of demonstration, the terms of which are common things that no one is ignorant of, such as being and non-being, whole and part, and such like. If, however, there are some to whom the essence of the predicate and subject is unknown, the proposition will be self-evident in itself, but not to those who do not know the meaning of the predicate and subject of the proposition. Therefore, it happens, as Boethius says (Hebdom., the title of which is: "Whether all that is, 117 regard to the first principles of demonstration, the terms of which are common things that no one is ignorant of, such as being and non-being, whole and part, and such like. If, however, there are some to whom the essence of the predicate and subject is unknown, the proposition will be self-evident in itself, but not to those who do not know the meaning of the predicate and subject of the proposition. Therefore, it happens, as Boethius says (Hebdom., the title of which is: "Whether all that is,
130 is good"), "that there are some mental concepts self-evident only to the learned, as that incorporeal substances are not in space." Therefore I say that this proposition, "God exists," of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject, because God is His own existence as will be hereafter shown (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p6.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4">Q[3], A[4]</a>). Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more 118 is good"), "that there are some mental concepts self-evident only to the learned, as that incorporeal substances are not in space." Therefore I say that this proposition, "God exists," of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject, because God is His own existence as will be hereafter shown (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p6.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4">Q[3], A[4]</a>). Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more
131 known to us, though less known in their nature---namely, by 119 known to us, though less known in their nature---namely, by
132 effects.</p> 120 effects.</p>
133 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 co."><a name="28303"><span class= 121 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 co."><a name="28303"><span class="ref">[28303] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
134 "ref">[28303] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
135 quod contingit aliquid esse per se notum dupliciter, uno modo, 122 quod contingit aliquid esse per se notum dupliciter, uno modo,
136 secundum se et non quoad nos; alio modo, secundum se et quoad nos. 123 secundum se et non quoad nos; alio modo, secundum se et quoad nos.
137 Ex hoc enim aliqua propositio est per se nota, quod praedicatum 124 Ex hoc enim aliqua propositio est per se nota, quod praedicatum
138 includitur in ratione subiecti, ut homo est animal, nam animal est 125 includitur in ratione subiecti, ut homo est animal, nam animal est
139 de ratione hominis. Si igitur notum sit omnibus de praedicato et de 126 de ratione hominis. Si igitur notum sit omnibus de praedicato et de
156 143
157 <div class="bilingual"> 144 <div class="bilingual">
158 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> To know that God exists in a general and confused way is implanted in us by nature, inasmuch as God is man's beatitude. For man naturally desires happiness, and what is naturally desired by man must be naturally known to him. This, however, is not to know absolutely that God exists; just as to know that someone is approaching is not the same as to know that Peter is approaching, even though it is Peter who is approaching; for many there are who 145 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> To know that God exists in a general and confused way is implanted in us by nature, inasmuch as God is man's beatitude. For man naturally desires happiness, and what is naturally desired by man must be naturally known to him. This, however, is not to know absolutely that God exists; just as to know that someone is approaching is not the same as to know that Peter is approaching, even though it is Peter who is approaching; for many there are who
159 imagine that man's perfect good which is happiness, consists in 146 imagine that man's perfect good which is happiness, consists in
160 riches, and others in pleasures, and others in something else.</p> 147 riches, and others in pleasures, and others in something else.</p>
161 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 ad 1"><a name="28304"><span class= 148 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 ad 1"><a name="28304"><span class="ref">[28304] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
162 "ref">[28304] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
163 dicendum quod cognoscere Deum esse in aliquo communi, sub quadam 149 dicendum quod cognoscere Deum esse in aliquo communi, sub quadam
164 confusione, est nobis naturaliter insertum, inquantum scilicet Deus 150 confusione, est nobis naturaliter insertum, inquantum scilicet Deus
165 est hominis beatitudo, homo enim naturaliter desiderat 151 est hominis beatitudo, homo enim naturaliter desiderat
166 beatitudinem, et quod naturaliter desideratur ab homine, 152 beatitudinem, et quod naturaliter desideratur ab homine,
167 naturaliter cognoscitur ab eodem. Sed hoc non est simpliciter 153 naturaliter cognoscitur ab eodem. Sed hoc non est simpliciter
175 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Perhaps not everyone who hears this word "God" understands it to signify something than which nothing greater can be thought, seeing that some have believed God to be a body. Yet, granted that everyone understands that by this word "God" is signified something than which nothing greater can be thought, nevertheless, it does not therefore follow that he understands that what the word signifies exists actually, but only that it exists mentally. Nor can 161 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Perhaps not everyone who hears this word "God" understands it to signify something than which nothing greater can be thought, seeing that some have believed God to be a body. Yet, granted that everyone understands that by this word "God" is signified something than which nothing greater can be thought, nevertheless, it does not therefore follow that he understands that what the word signifies exists actually, but only that it exists mentally. Nor can
176 it be argued that it actually exists, unless it be admitted that 162 it be argued that it actually exists, unless it be admitted that
177 there actually exists something than which nothing greater can be 163 there actually exists something than which nothing greater can be
178 thought; and this precisely is not admitted by those who hold that God 164 thought; and this precisely is not admitted by those who hold that God
179 does not exist.</p> 165 does not exist.</p>
180 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 ad 2"><a name="28305"><span class= 166 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 ad 2"><a name="28305"><span class="ref">[28305] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
181 "ref">[28305] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
182 dicendum quod forte ille qui audit hoc nomen Deus, non intelligit 167 dicendum quod forte ille qui audit hoc nomen Deus, non intelligit
183 significari aliquid quo maius cogitari non possit, cum quidam 168 significari aliquid quo maius cogitari non possit, cum quidam
184 crediderint Deum esse corpus. Dato etiam quod quilibet intelligat 169 crediderint Deum esse corpus. Dato etiam quod quilibet intelligat
185 hoc nomine Deus significari hoc quod dicitur, scilicet illud quo 170 hoc nomine Deus significari hoc quod dicitur, scilicet illud quo
186 maius cogitari non potest; non tamen propter hoc sequitur quod 171 maius cogitari non potest; non tamen propter hoc sequitur quod
192 177
193 <div class="bilingual"> 178 <div class="bilingual">
194 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p9"><b>Reply 179 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A1-p9"><b>Reply
195 to Objection 3:</b> The existence of truth in general is self-evident 180 to Objection 3:</b> The existence of truth in general is self-evident
196 but the existence of a Primal Truth is not self-evident to us.</p> 181 but the existence of a Primal Truth is not self-evident to us.</p>
197 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 ad 3"><a name="28306"><span class= 182 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 1 ad 3"><a name="28306"><span class="ref">[28306] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
198 "ref">[28306] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 1 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
199 quod veritatem esse in communi, est per se notum, sed primam 183 quod veritatem esse in communi, est per se notum, sed primam
200 veritatem esse, hoc non est per se notum quoad nos.</p> 184 veritatem esse, hoc non est per se notum quoad nos.</p>
201 </div> 185 </div>
202 186
203 187
209 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p0.1">Whether it can be demonstrated that God exists?</h4> 193 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p0.1">Whether it can be demonstrated that God exists?</h4>
210 194
211 195
212 196
213 <div class="bilingual"> 197 <div class="bilingual">
214 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 198 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the
215 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the
216 existence of God cannot be demonstrated. For it is an article of faith 199 existence of God cannot be demonstrated. For it is an article of faith
217 that God exists. But what is of faith cannot be demonstrated, because 200 that God exists. But what is of faith cannot be demonstrated, because
218 a demonstration produces scientific knowledge; whereas faith is of the 201 a demonstration produces scientific knowledge; whereas faith is of the
219 unseen (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Heb.11.1" 202 unseen (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Heb.11.1" parsed="vul|Heb|11|1|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p2.1" passage="Heb. 11:1">Heb. 11:1</scripRef>). Therefore it cannot be
220 parsed="vul|Heb|11|1|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p2.1"
221 passage="Heb. 11:1">Heb. 11:1</scripRef>). Therefore it cannot be
222 demonstrated that God exists.</p> 203 demonstrated that God exists.</p>
223 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 arg. 1"><a name="28307"><span class= 204 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 arg. 1"><a name="28307"><span class="ref">[28307] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 arg. 1</span></a> Ad secundum sic
224 "ref">[28307] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 arg. 1</span></a> Ad secundum sic
225 proceditur. Videtur quod Deum esse non sit demonstrabile. Deum enim 205 proceditur. Videtur quod Deum esse non sit demonstrabile. Deum enim
226 esse est articulus fidei. Sed ea quae sunt fidei, non sunt 206 esse est articulus fidei. Sed ea quae sunt fidei, non sunt
227 demonstrabilia, quia demonstratio facit scire, fides autem de non 207 demonstrabilia, quia demonstratio facit scire, fides autem de non
228 apparentibus est, ut patet per apostolum, ad Hebr. XI. Ergo Deum 208 apparentibus est, ut patet per apostolum, ad Hebr. XI. Ergo Deum
229 esse non est demonstrabile.</p> 209 esse non est demonstrabile.</p>
230 </div> 210 </div>
231 211
232 <div class="bilingual"> 212 <div class="bilingual">
233 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 213 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the essence
234 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the essence
235 is the middle term of demonstration. But we cannot know in what God's 214 is the middle term of demonstration. But we cannot know in what God's
236 essence consists, but solely in what it does not consist; as Damascene 215 essence consists, but solely in what it does not consist; as Damascene
237 says (De Fide Orth. i, 4). Therefore we cannot demonstrate that God 216 says (De Fide Orth. i, 4). Therefore we cannot demonstrate that God
238 exists.</p> 217 exists.</p>
239 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 arg. 2"><a name="28308"><span class= 218 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 arg. 2"><a name="28308"><span class="ref">[28308] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, medium
240 "ref">[28308] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, medium
241 demonstrationis est quod quid est. Sed de Deo non possumus scire 219 demonstrationis est quod quid est. Sed de Deo non possumus scire
242 quid est, sed solum quid non est, ut dicit Damascenus. Ergo non 220 quid est, sed solum quid non est, ut dicit Damascenus. Ergo non
243 possumus demonstrare Deum esse.</p> 221 possumus demonstrare Deum esse.</p>
244 </div> 222 </div>
245 223
246 <div class="bilingual"> 224 <div class="bilingual">
247 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 225 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, if the
248 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, if the
249 existence of God were demonstrated, this could only be from His 226 existence of God were demonstrated, this could only be from His
250 effects. But His effects are not proportionate to Him, since He is 227 effects. But His effects are not proportionate to Him, since He is
251 infinite and His effects are finite; and between the finite and 228 infinite and His effects are finite; and between the finite and
252 infinite there is no proportion. Therefore, since a cause cannot be 229 infinite there is no proportion. Therefore, since a cause cannot be
253 demonstrated by an effect not proportionate to it, it seems that the 230 demonstrated by an effect not proportionate to it, it seems that the
254 existence of God cannot be demonstrated.</p> 231 existence of God cannot be demonstrated.</p>
255 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 arg. 3"><a name="28309"><span class= 232 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 arg. 3"><a name="28309"><span class="ref">[28309] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, si
256 "ref">[28309] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, si
257 demonstraretur Deum esse, hoc non esset nisi ex effectibus eius. 233 demonstraretur Deum esse, hoc non esset nisi ex effectibus eius.
258 Sed effectus eius non sunt proportionati ei, cum ipse sit 234 Sed effectus eius non sunt proportionati ei, cum ipse sit
259 infinitus, et effectus finiti; finiti autem ad infinitum non est 235 infinitus, et effectus finiti; finiti autem ad infinitum non est
260 proportio. Cum ergo causa non possit demonstrari per effectum sibi 236 proportio. Cum ergo causa non possit demonstrari per effectum sibi
261 non proportionatum, videtur quod Deum esse non possit 237 non proportionatum, videtur quod Deum esse non possit
263 </div> 239 </div>
264 240
265 <div class="bilingual"> 241 <div class="bilingual">
266 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p5"><b>On 242 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p5"><b>On
267 the contrary,</b> The Apostle says: "The invisible things of Him are 243 the contrary,</b> The Apostle says: "The invisible things of Him are
268 clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made" (<scripRef 244 clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Rom.1.20" parsed="vul|Rom|1|20|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p5.1" passage="Rom. 1:20">Rom. 1:20</scripRef>). But this would not be
269 osisRef="Bible.vul:Rom.1.20" parsed="vul|Rom|1|20|0|0"
270 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p5.1"
271 passage="Rom. 1:20">Rom. 1:20</scripRef>). But this would not be
272 unless the existence of God could be demonstrated through the things 245 unless the existence of God could be demonstrated through the things
273 that are made; for the first thing we must know of anything is whether 246 that are made; for the first thing we must know of anything is whether
274 it exists.</p> 247 it exists.</p>
275 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 s. c."><a name="28310"><span class= 248 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 s. c."><a name="28310"><span class="ref">[28310] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
276 "ref">[28310] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
277 quod apostolus dicit, ad Rom. I, <i>invisibilia Dei per ea quae 249 quod apostolus dicit, ad Rom. I, <i>invisibilia Dei per ea quae
278 facta sunt, intellecta, conspiciuntur</i>. Sed hoc non esset, nisi 250 facta sunt, intellecta, conspiciuntur</i>. Sed hoc non esset, nisi
279 per ea quae facta sunt, posset demonstrari Deum esse, primum enim 251 per ea quae facta sunt, posset demonstrari Deum esse, primum enim
280 quod oportet intelligi de aliquo, est an sit.</p> 252 quod oportet intelligi de aliquo, est an sit.</p>
281 </div> 253 </div>
285 demonstrated, so long as its effects are better known to us; because 257 demonstrated, so long as its effects are better known to us; because
286 since every effect depends upon its cause, if the effect exists, the 258 since every effect depends upon its cause, if the effect exists, the
287 cause must pre-exist. Hence the existence of God, in so far as it is 259 cause must pre-exist. Hence the existence of God, in so far as it is
288 not self-evident to us, can be demonstrated from those of His effects 260 not self-evident to us, can be demonstrated from those of His effects
289 which are known to us.</p> 261 which are known to us.</p>
290 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 co."><a name="28311"><span class= 262 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 co."><a name="28311"><span class="ref">[28311] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
291 "ref">[28311] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
292 quod duplex est demonstratio. Una quae est per causam, et dicitur 263 quod duplex est demonstratio. Una quae est per causam, et dicitur
293 propter quid, et haec est per priora simpliciter. Alia est per 264 propter quid, et haec est per priora simpliciter. Alia est per
294 effectum, et dicitur demonstratio quia, et haec est per ea quae 265 effectum, et dicitur demonstratio quia, et haec est per ea quae
295 sunt priora quoad nos, cum enim effectus aliquis nobis est 266 sunt priora quoad nos, cum enim effectus aliquis nobis est
296 manifestior quam sua causa, per effectum procedimus ad cognitionem 267 manifestior quam sua causa, per effectum procedimus ad cognitionem
302 </div> 273 </div>
303 274
304 <div class="bilingual"> 275 <div class="bilingual">
305 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The existence of God and other like truths about God, which can be known by natural reason, are not articles of faith, but are preambles to the articles; for faith presupposes natural knowledge, even as grace presupposes nature, and perfection supposes something that can be perfected. Nevertheless, there is nothing to prevent a man, who cannot grasp a proof, accepting, as a matter of faith, something which in itself is capable of being scientifically 276 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The existence of God and other like truths about God, which can be known by natural reason, are not articles of faith, but are preambles to the articles; for faith presupposes natural knowledge, even as grace presupposes nature, and perfection supposes something that can be perfected. Nevertheless, there is nothing to prevent a man, who cannot grasp a proof, accepting, as a matter of faith, something which in itself is capable of being scientifically
306 known and demonstrated.</p> 277 known and demonstrated.</p>
307 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 ad 1"><a name="28312"><span class= 278 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 ad 1"><a name="28312"><span class="ref">[28312] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
308 "ref">[28312] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
309 dicendum quod Deum esse, et alia huiusmodi quae per rationem 279 dicendum quod Deum esse, et alia huiusmodi quae per rationem
310 naturalem nota possunt esse de Deo, ut dicitur Rom. I non sunt 280 naturalem nota possunt esse de Deo, ut dicitur Rom. I non sunt
311 articuli fidei, sed praeambula ad articulos, sic enim fides 281 articuli fidei, sed praeambula ad articulos, sic enim fides
312 praesupponit cognitionem naturalem, sicut gratia naturam, et ut 282 praesupponit cognitionem naturalem, sicut gratia naturam, et ut
313 perfectio perfectibile. Nihil tamen prohibet illud quod secundum se 283 perfectio perfectibile. Nihil tamen prohibet illud quod secundum se
318 <div class="bilingual"> 288 <div class="bilingual">
319 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> When the existence of a cause is demonstrated from an effect, this effect takes the place of the definition of the cause in proof of the cause's existence. This is especially the case in regard to God, because, in order to prove the existence of anything, it is necessary to accept as a middle term the meaning of the word, and not its essence, for the question of its essence follows on the question of its existence. Now the names given to God are 289 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> When the existence of a cause is demonstrated from an effect, this effect takes the place of the definition of the cause in proof of the cause's existence. This is especially the case in regard to God, because, in order to prove the existence of anything, it is necessary to accept as a middle term the meaning of the word, and not its essence, for the question of its essence follows on the question of its existence. Now the names given to God are
320 derived from His effects; consequently, in demonstrating the 290 derived from His effects; consequently, in demonstrating the
321 existence of God from His effects, we may take for the middle term the 291 existence of God from His effects, we may take for the middle term the
322 meaning of the word "God".</p> 292 meaning of the word "God".</p>
323 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 ad 2"><a name="28313"><span class= 293 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 ad 2"><a name="28313"><span class="ref">[28313] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
324 "ref">[28313] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
325 dicendum quod cum demonstratur causa per effectum, necesse est uti 294 dicendum quod cum demonstratur causa per effectum, necesse est uti
326 effectu loco definitionis causae, ad probandum causam esse, et hoc 295 effectu loco definitionis causae, ad probandum causam esse, et hoc
327 maxime contingit in Deo. Quia ad probandum aliquid esse, necesse 296 maxime contingit in Deo. Quia ad probandum aliquid esse, necesse
328 est accipere pro medio quid significet nomen non autem quod quid 297 est accipere pro medio quid significet nomen non autem quod quid
329 est, quia quaestio quid est, sequitur ad quaestionem an est. Nomina 298 est, quia quaestio quid est, sequitur ad quaestionem an est. Nomina
337 to Objection 3:</b> From effects not proportionate to the cause no 306 to Objection 3:</b> From effects not proportionate to the cause no
338 perfect knowledge of that cause can be obtained. Yet from every effect 307 perfect knowledge of that cause can be obtained. Yet from every effect
339 the existence of the cause can be clearly demonstrated, and so we can 308 the existence of the cause can be clearly demonstrated, and so we can
340 demonstrate the existence of God from His effects; though from them we 309 demonstrate the existence of God from His effects; though from them we
341 cannot perfectly know God as He is in His essence.</p> 310 cannot perfectly know God as He is in His essence.</p>
342 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 ad 3"><a name="28314"><span class= 311 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 2 ad 3"><a name="28314"><span class="ref">[28314] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
343 "ref">[28314] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 2 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
344 quod per effectus non proportionatos causae, non potest perfecta 312 quod per effectus non proportionatos causae, non potest perfecta
345 cognitio de causa haberi, sed tamen ex quocumque effectu potest 313 cognitio de causa haberi, sed tamen ex quocumque effectu potest
346 manifeste nobis demonstrari causam esse, ut dictum est. Et sic ex 314 manifeste nobis demonstrari causam esse, ut dictum est. Et sic ex
347 effectibus Dei potest demonstrari Deum esse, licet per eos non 315 effectibus Dei potest demonstrari Deum esse, licet per eos non
348 perfecte possimus eum cognoscere secundum suam essentiam.</p> 316 perfecte possimus eum cognoscere secundum suam essentiam.</p>
357 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p0.1">Whether God exists?</h4> 325 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p0.1">Whether God exists?</h4>
358 326
359 327
360 328
361 <div class="bilingual"> 329 <div class="bilingual">
362 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 330 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God
363 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God
364 does not exist; because if one of two contraries be infinite, the 331 does not exist; because if one of two contraries be infinite, the
365 other would be altogether destroyed. But the word "God" means that He 332 other would be altogether destroyed. But the word "God" means that He
366 is infinite goodness. If, therefore, God existed, there would be no 333 is infinite goodness. If, therefore, God existed, there would be no
367 evil discoverable; but there is evil in the world. Therefore God does 334 evil discoverable; but there is evil in the world. Therefore God does
368 not exist.</p> 335 not exist.</p>
369 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 arg. 1"><a name="28315"><span class= 336 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 arg. 1"><a name="28315"><span class="ref">[28315] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 arg. 1</span></a> Ad tertium sic
370 "ref">[28315] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 arg. 1</span></a> Ad tertium sic
371 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus non sit. Quia si unum contrariorum 337 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus non sit. Quia si unum contrariorum
372 fuerit infinitum, totaliter destruetur aliud. Sed hoc intelligitur 338 fuerit infinitum, totaliter destruetur aliud. Sed hoc intelligitur
373 in hoc nomine Deus, scilicet quod sit quoddam bonum infinitum. Si 339 in hoc nomine Deus, scilicet quod sit quoddam bonum infinitum. Si
374 ergo Deus esset, nullum malum inveniretur. Invenitur autem malum in 340 ergo Deus esset, nullum malum inveniretur. Invenitur autem malum in
375 mundo. Ergo Deus non est.</p> 341 mundo. Ergo Deus non est.</p>
376 </div> 342 </div>
377 343
378 <div class="bilingual"> 344 <div class="bilingual">
379 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 345 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, it is
380 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, it is
381 superfluous to suppose that what can be accounted for by a few 346 superfluous to suppose that what can be accounted for by a few
382 principles has been produced by many. But it seems that everything we 347 principles has been produced by many. But it seems that everything we
383 see in the world can be accounted for by other principles, supposing 348 see in the world can be accounted for by other principles, supposing
384 God did not exist. For all natural things can be reduced to one 349 God did not exist. For all natural things can be reduced to one
385 principle which is nature; and all voluntary things can be reduced to 350 principle which is nature; and all voluntary things can be reduced to
386 one principle which is human reason, or will. Therefore there is no 351 one principle which is human reason, or will. Therefore there is no
387 need to suppose God's existence.</p> 352 need to suppose God's existence.</p>
388 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 arg. 2"><a name="28316"><span class= 353 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 arg. 2"><a name="28316"><span class="ref">[28316] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, quod
389 "ref">[28316] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, quod
390 potest compleri per pauciora principia, non fit per plura. Sed 354 potest compleri per pauciora principia, non fit per plura. Sed
391 videtur quod omnia quae apparent in mundo, possunt compleri per 355 videtur quod omnia quae apparent in mundo, possunt compleri per
392 alia principia, supposito quod Deus non sit, quia ea quae sunt 356 alia principia, supposito quod Deus non sit, quia ea quae sunt
393 naturalia, reducuntur in principium quod est natura; ea vero quae 357 naturalia, reducuntur in principium quod est natura; ea vero quae
394 sunt a proposito, reducuntur in principium quod est ratio humana 358 sunt a proposito, reducuntur in principium quod est ratio humana
396 </div> 360 </div>
397 361
398 <div class="bilingual"> 362 <div class="bilingual">
399 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p4"><b>On 363 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p4"><b>On
400 the contrary,</b> It is said in the person of God: "I am Who am." 364 the contrary,</b> It is said in the person of God: "I am Who am."
401 (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Exod.3.14" parsed="vul|Exod|3|14|0|0" 365 (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Exod.3.14" parsed="vul|Exod|3|14|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p4.1" passage="Ex. 3:14">Ex. 3:14</scripRef>)</p>
402 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p4.1" 366 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28317"><span class="ref">[28317] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
403 passage="Ex. 3:14">Ex. 3:14</scripRef>)</p>
404 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28317"><span class=
405 "ref">[28317] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
406 quod dicitur Exodi III, ex persona Dei, <i>ego sum qui sum</i>.</p> 367 quod dicitur Exodi III, ex persona Dei, <i>ego sum qui sum</i>.</p>
407 </div> 368 </div>
408 369
409 <div class="bilingual"> 370 <div class="bilingual">
410 <div xml:lang="en"> 371 <div xml:lang="en">
422 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p9"> The fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like. But "more" and "less" are predicated of different things, according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum, as a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest; so that there is something which is truest, something best, something noblest and, consequently, 383 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p9"> The fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like. But "more" and "less" are predicated of different things, according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum, as a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest; so that there is something which is truest, something best, something noblest and, consequently,
423 something which is uttermost being; for those things that are greatest in truth are greatest in being, as it is written in Metaph. ii. Now the maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.</p> 384 something which is uttermost being; for those things that are greatest in truth are greatest in being, as it is written in Metaph. ii. Now the maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.</p>
424 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p10"> The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the 385 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p10"> The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the
425 arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.</p> 386 arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.</p>
426 </div> 387 </div>
427 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 co."><a name="28318"><span class= 388 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 co."><a name="28318"><span class="ref">[28318] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
428 "ref">[28318] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
429 quod Deum esse quinque viis probari potest. Prima autem et 389 quod Deum esse quinque viis probari potest. Prima autem et
430 manifestior via est, quae sumitur ex parte motus. Certum est enim, 390 manifestior via est, quae sumitur ex parte motus. Certum est enim,
431 et sensu constat, aliqua moveri in hoc mundo. Omne autem quod 391 et sensu constat, aliqua moveri in hoc mundo. Omne autem quod
432 movetur, ab alio movetur. Nihil enim movetur, nisi secundum quod 392 movetur, ab alio movetur. Nihil enim movetur, nisi secundum quod
433 est in potentia ad illud ad quod movetur, movet autem aliquid 393 est in potentia ad illud ad quod movetur, movet autem aliquid
501 sagitta a sagittante. Ergo est aliquid intelligens, a quo omnes res 461 sagitta a sagittante. Ergo est aliquid intelligens, a quo omnes res
502 naturales ordinantur ad finem, et hoc dicimus Deum.</p> 462 naturales ordinantur ad finem, et hoc dicimus Deum.</p>
503 </div> 463 </div>
504 464
505 <div class="bilingual"> 465 <div class="bilingual">
506 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 466 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> As
507 id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> As
508 Augustine says (Enchiridion xi): "Since God is the highest good, He 467 Augustine says (Enchiridion xi): "Since God is the highest good, He
509 would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence 468 would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence
510 and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil." This is 469 and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil." This is
511 part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to 470 part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to
512 exist, and out of it produce good.</p> 471 exist, and out of it produce good.</p>
513 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 ad 1"><a name="28319"><span class= 472 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 ad 1"><a name="28319"><span class="ref">[28319] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
514 "ref">[28319] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
515 dicendum quod, sicut dicit Augustinus in Enchiridio, <i>Deus, cum 473 dicendum quod, sicut dicit Augustinus in Enchiridio, <i>Deus, cum
516 sit summe bonus, nullo modo sineret aliquid mali esse in operibus 474 sit summe bonus, nullo modo sineret aliquid mali esse in operibus
517 suis, nisi esset adeo omnipotens et bonus, ut bene faceret etiam de 475 suis, nisi esset adeo omnipotens et bonus, ut bene faceret etiam de
518 malo</i>. Hoc ergo ad infinitam Dei bonitatem pertinet, ut esse 476 malo</i>. Hoc ergo ad infinitam Dei bonitatem pertinet, ut esse
519 permittat mala, et ex eis eliciat bona.</p> 477 permittat mala, et ex eis eliciat bona.</p>
520 </div> 478 </div>
521 479
522 <div class="bilingual"> 480 <div class="bilingual">
523 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p12"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Since nature works for a determinate end under the direction of a higher agent, whatever is done by nature must needs be traced back to God, as to its first cause. So also whatever is done voluntarily must also be traced back to some higher cause other than human reason or will, since these can change or fail; for all things that are changeable and capable of defect must be traced back to an immovable and self-necessary first principle, as was shown 481 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3-p12"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Since nature works for a determinate end under the direction of a higher agent, whatever is done by nature must needs be traced back to God, as to its first cause. So also whatever is done voluntarily must also be traced back to some higher cause other than human reason or will, since these can change or fail; for all things that are changeable and capable of defect must be traced back to an immovable and self-necessary first principle, as was shown
524 in the body of the Article.</p> 482 in the body of the Article.</p>
525 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 ad 2"><a name="28320"><span class= 483 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 2 a. 3 ad 2"><a name="28320"><span class="ref">[28320] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
526 "ref">[28320] I&ordf; q. 2 a. 3 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
527 dicendum quod, cum natura propter determinatum finem operetur ex 484 dicendum quod, cum natura propter determinatum finem operetur ex
528 directione alicuius superioris agentis, necesse est ea quae a 485 directione alicuius superioris agentis, necesse est ea quae a
529 natura fiunt, etiam in Deum reducere, sicut in primam causam. 486 natura fiunt, etiam in Deum reducere, sicut in primam causam.
530 Similiter etiam quae ex proposito fiunt, oportet reducere in 487 Similiter etiam quae ex proposito fiunt, oportet reducere in
531 aliquam altiorem causam, quae non sit ratio et voluntas humana, 488 aliquam altiorem causam, quae non sit ratio et voluntas humana,
539 496
540 </div4> 497 </div4>
541 </div3> 498 </div3>
542 499
543 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3" next="FP_Q3_A1" prev="FP_Q2_A3" progress="0.36%" n="ii" title="Question. 3 - OF THE SIMPLICITY OF GOD (EIGHT ARTICLES)"> 500 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3" next="FP_Q3_A1" prev="FP_Q2_A3" progress="0.36%" n="ii" title="Question. 3 - OF THE SIMPLICITY OF GOD (EIGHT ARTICLES)">
544 <h3 xml:lang="en" 501 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3-p0.1">Question 3. OF THE SIMPLICITY OF GOD (EIGHT ARTICLES)</h3>
545 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3-p0.1">Question 3. OF THE SIMPLICITY OF GOD (EIGHT ARTICLES)</h3>
546 502
547 503
548 504
549 <div class="bilingual"> 505 <div class="bilingual">
550 <div xml:lang="en"> 506 <div xml:lang="en">
587 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p0.1">Whether God is a body?</h4> 543 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p0.1">Whether God is a body?</h4>
588 544
589 545
590 546
591 <div class="bilingual"> 547 <div class="bilingual">
592 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 548 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
593 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
594 a body. For a body is that which has the three dimensions. But Holy 549 a body. For a body is that which has the three dimensions. But Holy
595 Scripture attributes the three dimensions to God, for it is written: 550 Scripture attributes the three dimensions to God, for it is written:
596 "He is higher than Heaven, and what wilt thou do? He is deeper than 551 "He is higher than Heaven, and what wilt thou do? He is deeper than
597 Hell, and how wilt thou know? The measure of Him is longer than the 552 Hell, and how wilt thou know? The measure of Him is longer than the
598 earth and broader than the sea" (<scripRef 553 earth and broader than the sea" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Job.11.8-Job.11.9" parsed="vul|Job|11|8|11|9" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p2.1" passage="Job 11:8,9">Job
599 osisRef="Bible.vul:Job.11.8-Job.11.9" parsed="vul|Job|11|8|11|9"
600 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p2.1" passage="Job 11:8,9">Job
601 11:8,9</scripRef>). Therefore God is a body.</p> 554 11:8,9</scripRef>). Therefore God is a body.</p>
602 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 arg. 1"><a name="28322"><span class= 555 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 arg. 1"><a name="28322"><span class="ref">[28322] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 arg. 1</span></a> Ad primum sic
603 "ref">[28322] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 arg. 1</span></a> Ad primum sic
604 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus sit corpus. Corpus enim est quod 556 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus sit corpus. Corpus enim est quod
605 habet trinam dimensionem. Sed sacra Scriptura attribuit Deo trinam 557 habet trinam dimensionem. Sed sacra Scriptura attribuit Deo trinam
606 dimensionem, dicitur enim Iob XI, <i>excelsior caelo est, et quid 558 dimensionem, dicitur enim Iob XI, <i>excelsior caelo est, et quid
607 facies? Profundior Inferno, et unde cognosces? Longior terra 559 facies? Profundior Inferno, et unde cognosces? Longior terra
608 mensura eius, et latior mari</i>. Ergo Deus est corpus.</p> 560 mensura eius, et latior mari</i>. Ergo Deus est corpus.</p>
609 </div> 561 </div>
610 562
611 <div class="bilingual"> 563 <div class="bilingual">
612 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 564 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, everything
613 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, everything
614 that has figure is a body, since figure is a quality of quantity. But 565 that has figure is a body, since figure is a quality of quantity. But
615 God seems to have figure, for it is written: "Let us make man to our 566 God seems to have figure, for it is written: "Let us make man to our
616 image and likeness" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Gen.1.26" 567 image and likeness" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Gen.1.26" parsed="vul|Gen|1|26|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p3.1" passage="Gn. 1:26">Gn. 1:26</scripRef>). Now a figure is called an
617 parsed="vul|Gen|1|26|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p3.1"
618 passage="Gn. 1:26">Gn. 1:26</scripRef>). Now a figure is called an
619 image, according to the text: "Who being the brightness of His glory 568 image, according to the text: "Who being the brightness of His glory
620 and the figure," i.e. the image, "of His substance" (<scripRef 569 and the figure," i.e. the image, "of His substance" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Heb.1.3" parsed="vul|Heb|1|3|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p3.2" passage="Heb. 1:3">Heb. 1:3</scripRef>). Therefore God is a body.</p>
621 osisRef="Bible.vul:Heb.1.3" parsed="vul|Heb|1|3|0|0" 570 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 arg. 2"><a name="28323"><span class="ref">[28323] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, omne
622 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p3.2"
623 passage="Heb. 1:3">Heb. 1:3</scripRef>). Therefore God is a body.</p>
624 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 arg. 2"><a name="28323"><span class=
625 "ref">[28323] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, omne
626 figuratum est corpus, cum figura sit qualitas circa quantitatem. 571 figuratum est corpus, cum figura sit qualitas circa quantitatem.
627 Sed Deus videtur esse figuratus, cum scriptum sit Gen. I, 572 Sed Deus videtur esse figuratus, cum scriptum sit Gen. I,
628 <i>faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram</i>, 573 <i>faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram</i>,
629 figura enim imago dicitur, secundum illud Hebr. I, <i>cum sit 574 figura enim imago dicitur, secundum illud Hebr. I, <i>cum sit
630 splendor gloriae, et figura substantiae eius</i>, idest imago. Ergo 575 splendor gloriae, et figura substantiae eius</i>, idest imago. Ergo
631 Deus est corpus.</p> 576 Deus est corpus.</p>
632 </div> 577 </div>
633 578
634 <div class="bilingual"> 579 <div class="bilingual">
635 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 580 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, whatever has
636 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, whatever has
637 corporeal parts is a body. Now Scripture attributes corporeal parts to 581 corporeal parts is a body. Now Scripture attributes corporeal parts to
638 God. "Hast thou an arm like God?" (<scripRef 582 God. "Hast thou an arm like God?" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Job.40.4" parsed="vul|Job|40|4|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p4.1" passage="Job 40:4">Job
639 osisRef="Bible.vul:Job.40.4" parsed="vul|Job|40|4|0|0"
640 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p4.1" passage="Job 40:4">Job
641 40:4</scripRef>); and "The eyes of the Lord are upon the just" 583 40:4</scripRef>); and "The eyes of the Lord are upon the just"
642 (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.33.16" parsed="vul|Ps|33|16|0|0" 584 (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.33.16" parsed="vul|Ps|33|16|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p4.2" passage="Ps. 33:16">Ps. 33:16</scripRef>); and "The right hand of the
643 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p4.2" 585 Lord hath wrought strength" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.117.16" parsed="vul|Ps|117|16|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p4.3" passage="Ps. 117:16">Ps. 117:16</scripRef>). Therefore God is a
644 passage="Ps. 33:16">Ps. 33:16</scripRef>); and "The right hand of the
645 Lord hath wrought strength" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.117.16"
646 parsed="vul|Ps|117|16|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p4.3"
647 passage="Ps. 117:16">Ps. 117:16</scripRef>). Therefore God is a
648 body.</p> 586 body.</p>
649 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 arg. 3"><a name="28324"><span class= 587 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 arg. 3"><a name="28324"><span class="ref">[28324] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, omne
650 "ref">[28324] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, omne
651 quod habet partes corporeas, est corpus. Sed Scriptura attribuit 588 quod habet partes corporeas, est corpus. Sed Scriptura attribuit
652 Deo partes corporeas, dicitur enim Iob XL, <i>si habes brachium ut 589 Deo partes corporeas, dicitur enim Iob XL, <i>si habes brachium ut
653 Deus</i>; et in Psalmo, <i>oculi domini super iustos; et, dextera 590 Deus</i>; et in Psalmo, <i>oculi domini super iustos; et, dextera
654 domini fecit virtutem</i>. Ergo Deus est corpus.</p> 591 domini fecit virtutem</i>. Ergo Deus est corpus.</p>
655 </div> 592 </div>
656 593
657 <div class="bilingual"> 594 <div class="bilingual">
658 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 595 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, posture
659 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, posture
660 belongs only to bodies. But something which supposes posture is said 596 belongs only to bodies. But something which supposes posture is said
661 of God in the Scriptures: "I saw the Lord sitting" (<scripRef 597 of God in the Scriptures: "I saw the Lord sitting" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.6.1" parsed="vul|Isa|6|1|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p5.1" passage="Is. 6:1">Is. 6:1</scripRef>),
662 osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.6.1" parsed="vul|Isa|6|1|0|0" 598 and "He standeth up to judge" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.3.13" parsed="vul|Isa|3|13|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p5.2" passage="Is. 3:13">Is. 3:13</scripRef>). Therefore God is a body.</p>
663 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p5.1" passage="Is. 6:1">Is. 6:1</scripRef>), 599 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 arg. 4"><a name="28325"><span class="ref">[28325] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 arg. 4</span></a> Praeterea, situs
664 and "He standeth up to judge" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.3.13"
665 parsed="vul|Isa|3|13|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p5.2"
666 passage="Is. 3:13">Is. 3:13</scripRef>). Therefore God is a body.</p>
667 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 arg. 4"><a name="28325"><span class=
668 "ref">[28325] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 arg. 4</span></a> Praeterea, situs
669 non convenit nisi corpori. Sed ea quae ad situm pertinent, in 600 non convenit nisi corpori. Sed ea quae ad situm pertinent, in
670 Scripturis dicuntur de Deo, dicitur enim Isaiae VI, <i>vidi dominum 601 Scripturis dicuntur de Deo, dicitur enim Isaiae VI, <i>vidi dominum
671 sedentem</i>; et Isaiae III, <i>stat ad iudicandum dominus</i>. 602 sedentem</i>; et Isaiae III, <i>stat ad iudicandum dominus</i>.
672 Ergo Deus est corpus.</p> 603 Ergo Deus est corpus.</p>
673 </div> 604 </div>
674 605
675 <div class="bilingual"> 606 <div class="bilingual">
676 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 607 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p6"><b>Objection 5:</b> Further, only bodies
677 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p6"><b>Objection 5:</b> Further, only bodies
678 or things corporeal can be a local term "wherefrom" or "whereto." But 608 or things corporeal can be a local term "wherefrom" or "whereto." But
679 in the Scriptures God is spoken of as a local term "whereto," 609 in the Scriptures God is spoken of as a local term "whereto,"
680 according to the words, "Come ye to Him and be enlightened" (<scripRef 610 according to the words, "Come ye to Him and be enlightened" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.33.6" parsed="vul|Ps|33|6|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p6.1" passage="Ps. 33:6">Ps. 33:6</scripRef>), and as a term "wherefrom":
681 osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.33.6" parsed="vul|Ps|33|6|0|0"
682 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p6.1"
683 passage="Ps. 33:6">Ps. 33:6</scripRef>), and as a term "wherefrom":
684 "All they that depart from Thee shall be written in the earth" 611 "All they that depart from Thee shall be written in the earth"
685 (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Jer.17.13" parsed="vul|Jer|17|13|0|0" 612 (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Jer.17.13" parsed="vul|Jer|17|13|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p6.2" passage="Jer. 17:13">Jer. 17:13</scripRef>). Therefore God is a
686 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p6.2"
687 passage="Jer. 17:13">Jer. 17:13</scripRef>). Therefore God is a
688 body.</p> 613 body.</p>
689 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 arg. 5"><a name="28326"><span class= 614 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 arg. 5"><a name="28326"><span class="ref">[28326] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 arg. 5</span></a> Praeterea, nihil
690 "ref">[28326] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 arg. 5</span></a> Praeterea, nihil
691 potest esse terminus localis a quo vel ad quem, nisi sit corpus vel 615 potest esse terminus localis a quo vel ad quem, nisi sit corpus vel
692 aliquod corporeum. Sed Deus in Scriptura dicitur esse terminus 616 aliquod corporeum. Sed Deus in Scriptura dicitur esse terminus
693 localis ut ad quem, secundum illud Psalmi, <i>accedite ad eum, et 617 localis ut ad quem, secundum illud Psalmi, <i>accedite ad eum, et
694 illuminamini</i>; et ut a quo, secundum illud Hierem. XVII, 618 illuminamini</i>; et ut a quo, secundum illud Hierem. XVII,
695 recedentes a te in terra scribentur. Ergo Deus est corpus.</p> 619 recedentes a te in terra scribentur. Ergo Deus est corpus.</p>
696 </div> 620 </div>
697 621
698 <div class="bilingual"> 622 <div class="bilingual">
699 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p7"><b>On 623 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p7"><b>On
700 the contrary,</b> It is written in the Gospel of St. John (<scripRef 624 the contrary,</b> It is written in the Gospel of St. John (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.4.24" parsed="vul|John|4|24|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p7.1" passage="Jn. 4:24">Jn. 4:24</scripRef>): "God is a spirit."</p>
701 osisRef="Bible.vul:John.4.24" parsed="vul|John|4|24|0|0" 625 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 s. c."><a name="28327"><span class="ref">[28327] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
702 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p7.1"
703 passage="Jn. 4:24">Jn. 4:24</scripRef>): "God is a spirit."</p>
704 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 s. c."><a name="28327"><span class=
705 "ref">[28327] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
706 quod dicitur Ioan. IV, <i>spiritus est Deus</i>.</p> 626 quod dicitur Ioan. IV, <i>spiritus est Deus</i>.</p>
707 </div> 627 </div>
708 628
709 <div class="bilingual"> 629 <div class="bilingual">
710 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p8"><b>I answer that,</b> It is absolutely true that God is not a body; and this can be shown in three ways. First, because no body is in motion unless it be put in motion, as is evident from induction. Now it has been already proved (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p8.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3">Q[2], A[3]</a>), that God is the First Mover, and is Himself unmoved. Therefore it is clear that God is not a body. Secondly, because the first being must of necessity be in act, and in no way in potentiality. For although in any 630 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p8"><b>I answer that,</b> It is absolutely true that God is not a body; and this can be shown in three ways. First, because no body is in motion unless it be put in motion, as is evident from induction. Now it has been already proved (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p8.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3">Q[2], A[3]</a>), that God is the First Mover, and is Himself unmoved. Therefore it is clear that God is not a body. Secondly, because the first being must of necessity be in act, and in no way in potentiality. For although in any
711 single thing that passes from potentiality to actuality, the potentiality is prior in time to the actuality; nevertheless, absolutely speaking, actuality is prior to potentiality; for whatever is in potentiality can be reduced into actuality only by some being in actuality. Now it has been already proved that God is the First Being. It is therefore impossible that in God there should be any potentiality. But every body is in potentiality because the continuous, as such, is divisible to 631 single thing that passes from potentiality to actuality, the potentiality is prior in time to the actuality; nevertheless, absolutely speaking, actuality is prior to potentiality; for whatever is in potentiality can be reduced into actuality only by some being in actuality. Now it has been already proved that God is the First Being. It is therefore impossible that in God there should be any potentiality. But every body is in potentiality because the continuous, as such, is divisible to
712 infinity; it is therefore impossible that God should be a body. Thirdly, because God is the most noble of beings. Now it is impossible for a body to be the most noble of beings; for a body must be either animate or inanimate; and an animate body is manifestly nobler than any inanimate body. But an animate body is not animate precisely as body; otherwise all bodies would be animate. Therefore its animation depends upon some other thing, as our body depends for its animation on the soul. Hence 632 infinity; it is therefore impossible that God should be a body. Thirdly, because God is the most noble of beings. Now it is impossible for a body to be the most noble of beings; for a body must be either animate or inanimate; and an animate body is manifestly nobler than any inanimate body. But an animate body is not animate precisely as body; otherwise all bodies would be animate. Therefore its animation depends upon some other thing, as our body depends for its animation on the soul. Hence
713 that by which a body becomes animated must be nobler than the 633 that by which a body becomes animated must be nobler than the
714 body. Therefore it is impossible that God should be a body.</p> 634 body. Therefore it is impossible that God should be a body.</p>
715 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 co."><a name="28328"><span class= 635 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 co."><a name="28328"><span class="ref">[28328] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
716 "ref">[28328] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
717 absolute Deum non esse corpus. Quod tripliciter ostendi potest. 636 absolute Deum non esse corpus. Quod tripliciter ostendi potest.
718 Primo quidem, quia nullum corpus movet non motum, ut patet 637 Primo quidem, quia nullum corpus movet non motum, ut patet
719 inducendo per singula. Ostensum est autem supra quod Deus est 638 inducendo per singula. Ostensum est autem supra quod Deus est
720 primum movens immobile. Unde manifestum est quod Deus non est 639 primum movens immobile. Unde manifestum est quod Deus non est
721 corpus. Secundo, quia necesse est id quod est primum ens, esse in 640 corpus. Secundo, quia necesse est id quod est primum ens, esse in
742 breadth, His act of love for all. Or, as says Dionysius 661 breadth, His act of love for all. Or, as says Dionysius
743 (Div. Nom. ix), by the depth of God is meant the incomprehensibility 662 (Div. Nom. ix), by the depth of God is meant the incomprehensibility
744 of His essence; by length, the procession of His all-pervading power; 663 of His essence; by length, the procession of His all-pervading power;
745 by breadth, His overspreading all things, inasmuch as all things lie 664 by breadth, His overspreading all things, inasmuch as all things lie
746 under His protection.</p> 665 under His protection.</p>
747 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 ad 1"><a name="28329"><span class= 666 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 ad 1"><a name="28329"><span class="ref">[28329] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
748 "ref">[28329] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
749 dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, sacra Scriptura tradit nobis 667 dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, sacra Scriptura tradit nobis
750 spiritualia et divina sub similitudinibus corporalium. Unde, cum 668 spiritualia et divina sub similitudinibus corporalium. Unde, cum
751 trinam dimensionem Deo attribuit, sub similitudine quantitatis 669 trinam dimensionem Deo attribuit, sub similitudine quantitatis
752 corporeae, quantitatem virtualem ipsius designat, utpote per 670 corporeae, quantitatem virtualem ipsius designat, utpote per
753 profunditatem, virtutem ad cognoscendum occulta; per altitudinem, 671 profunditatem, virtutem ad cognoscendum occulta; per altitudinem,
761 </div> 679 </div>
762 680
763 <div class="bilingual"> 681 <div class="bilingual">
764 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Man is said to be after the image of God, not as regards his body, but as regards that whereby he excels other animals. Hence, when it is said, "Let us make man to our image and likeness", it is added, "And let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Gen.1.26" parsed="vul|Gen|1|26|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p10.1" passage="Gn. 1:26">Gn. 1:26</scripRef>). Now man excels all animals by his reason and intelligence; hence it is according to his intelligence and reason, which are incorporeal, that man is said to be according to the image of 682 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Man is said to be after the image of God, not as regards his body, but as regards that whereby he excels other animals. Hence, when it is said, "Let us make man to our image and likeness", it is added, "And let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Gen.1.26" parsed="vul|Gen|1|26|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p10.1" passage="Gn. 1:26">Gn. 1:26</scripRef>). Now man excels all animals by his reason and intelligence; hence it is according to his intelligence and reason, which are incorporeal, that man is said to be according to the image of
765 God.</p> 683 God.</p>
766 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 ad 2"><a name="28330"><span class= 684 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 ad 2"><a name="28330"><span class="ref">[28330] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
767 "ref">[28330] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
768 dicendum quod homo dicitur esse ad imaginem Dei, non secundum 685 dicendum quod homo dicitur esse ad imaginem Dei, non secundum
769 corpus, sed secundum id quo homo excellit alia animalia, unde, Gen. 686 corpus, sed secundum id quo homo excellit alia animalia, unde, Gen.
770 I, postquam dictum est, <i>faciamus hominem ad imaginem et 687 I, postquam dictum est, <i>faciamus hominem ad imaginem et
771 similitudinem nostram</i>, subditur, <i>ut praesit piscibus 688 similitudinem nostram</i>, subditur, <i>ut praesit piscibus
772 maris,</i> et cetera. Excellit autem homo omnia animalia quantum ad 689 maris,</i> et cetera. Excellit autem homo omnia animalia quantum ad
773 rationem et intellectum. Unde secundum intellectum et rationem, 690 rationem et intellectum. Unde secundum intellectum et rationem,
774 quae sunt incorporea, homo est ad imaginem Dei.</p> 691 quae sunt incorporea, homo est ad imaginem Dei.</p>
775 </div> 692 </div>
776 693
777 <div class="bilingual"> 694 <div class="bilingual">
778 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 695 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Corporeal
779 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Corporeal
780 parts are attributed to God in Scripture on account of His actions, 696 parts are attributed to God in Scripture on account of His actions,
781 and this is owing to a certain parallel. For instance the act of the 697 and this is owing to a certain parallel. For instance the act of the
782 eye is to see; hence the eye attributed to God signifies His power of 698 eye is to see; hence the eye attributed to God signifies His power of
783 seeing intellectually, not sensibly; and so on with the other 699 seeing intellectually, not sensibly; and so on with the other
784 parts.</p> 700 parts.</p>
785 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 ad 3"><a name="28331"><span class= 701 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 ad 3"><a name="28331"><span class="ref">[28331] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
786 "ref">[28331] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
787 quod partes corporeae attribuuntur Deo in Scripturis ratione suorum 702 quod partes corporeae attribuuntur Deo in Scripturis ratione suorum
788 actuum, secundum quandam similitudinem. Sicut actus oculi est 703 actuum, secundum quandam similitudinem. Sicut actus oculi est
789 videre, unde oculus de Deo dictus, significat virtutem eius ad 704 videre, unde oculus de Deo dictus, significat virtutem eius ad
790 videndum modo intelligibili, non sensibili. Et simile est de aliis 705 videndum modo intelligibili, non sensibili. Et simile est de aliis
791 partibus.</p> 706 partibus.</p>
792 </div> 707 </div>
793 708
794 <div class="bilingual"> 709 <div class="bilingual">
795 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 710 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p12"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Whatever
796 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p12"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Whatever
797 pertains to posture, also, is only attributed to God by some sort of 711 pertains to posture, also, is only attributed to God by some sort of
798 parallel. He is spoken of as sitting, on account of His 712 parallel. He is spoken of as sitting, on account of His
799 unchangeableness and dominion; and as standing, on account of His 713 unchangeableness and dominion; and as standing, on account of His
800 power of overcoming whatever withstands Him.</p> 714 power of overcoming whatever withstands Him.</p>
801 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 ad 4"><a name="28332"><span class= 715 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 ad 4"><a name="28332"><span class="ref">[28332] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 ad 4</span></a> Ad quartum dicendum
802 "ref">[28332] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 ad 4</span></a> Ad quartum dicendum
803 quod etiam ea quae ad situm pertinent, non attribuuntur Deo nisi 716 quod etiam ea quae ad situm pertinent, non attribuuntur Deo nisi
804 secundum quandam similitudinem, sicut dicitur sedens, propter suam 717 secundum quandam similitudinem, sicut dicitur sedens, propter suam
805 immobilitatem et auctoritatem; et stans, propter suam fortitudinem 718 immobilitatem et auctoritatem; et stans, propter suam fortitudinem
806 ad debellandum omne quod adversatur.</p> 719 ad debellandum omne quod adversatur.</p>
807 </div> 720 </div>
808 721
809 <div class="bilingual"> 722 <div class="bilingual">
810 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 723 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p13"><b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> We draw
811 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1-p13"><b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> We draw
812 near to God by no corporeal steps, since He is everywhere, but by the 724 near to God by no corporeal steps, since He is everywhere, but by the
813 affections of our soul, and by the actions of that same soul do we 725 affections of our soul, and by the actions of that same soul do we
814 withdraw from Him; thus, to draw near to or to withdraw signifies 726 withdraw from Him; thus, to draw near to or to withdraw signifies
815 merely spiritual actions based on the metaphor of local motion.</p> 727 merely spiritual actions based on the metaphor of local motion.</p>
816 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 ad 5"><a name="28333"><span class= 728 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 1 ad 5"><a name="28333"><span class="ref">[28333] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 ad 5</span></a> Ad quintum dicendum
817 "ref">[28333] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 1 ad 5</span></a> Ad quintum dicendum
818 quod ad Deum non acceditur passibus corporalibus, cum ubique sit, 729 quod ad Deum non acceditur passibus corporalibus, cum ubique sit,
819 sed affectibus mentis, et eodem modo ab eo receditur. Et sic 730 sed affectibus mentis, et eodem modo ab eo receditur. Et sic
820 accessus et recessus, sub similitudine localis motus, designant 731 accessus et recessus, sub similitudine localis motus, designant
821 spiritualem affectum.</p> 732 spiritualem affectum.</p>
822 </div> 733 </div>
830 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p0.1">Whether God is composed of matter and form?</h4> 741 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p0.1">Whether God is composed of matter and form?</h4>
831 742
832 743
833 744
834 <div class="bilingual"> 745 <div class="bilingual">
835 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 746 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
836 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
837 composed of matter and form. For whatever has a soul is composed of 747 composed of matter and form. For whatever has a soul is composed of
838 matter and form; since the soul is the form of the body. But Scripture 748 matter and form; since the soul is the form of the body. But Scripture
839 attributes a soul to God; for it is mentioned in Hebrews (<scripRef 749 attributes a soul to God; for it is mentioned in Hebrews (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Heb.10.38" parsed="vul|Heb|10|38|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p2.1" passage="Heb. 10:38">Heb. 10:38</scripRef>), where God says: "But My
840 osisRef="Bible.vul:Heb.10.38" parsed="vul|Heb|10|38|0|0"
841 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p2.1"
842 passage="Heb. 10:38">Heb. 10:38</scripRef>), where God says: "But My
843 just man liveth by faith; but if he withdraw himself, he shall not 750 just man liveth by faith; but if he withdraw himself, he shall not
844 please My soul." Therefore God is composed of matter and form.</p> 751 please My soul." Therefore God is composed of matter and form.</p>
845 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 arg. 1"><a name="28334"><span class= 752 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 arg. 1"><a name="28334"><span class="ref">[28334] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 arg. 1</span></a> Ad secundum sic
846 "ref">[28334] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 arg. 1</span></a> Ad secundum sic
847 proceditur. Videtur quod in Deo sit compositio formae et materiae. 753 proceditur. Videtur quod in Deo sit compositio formae et materiae.
848 Omne enim quod habet animam, est compositum ex materia et forma, 754 Omne enim quod habet animam, est compositum ex materia et forma,
849 quia anima est forma corporis. Sed Scriptura attribuit animam Deo, 755 quia anima est forma corporis. Sed Scriptura attribuit animam Deo,
850 introducitur enim ad Hebr. X, ex persona Dei, <i>iustus autem meus 756 introducitur enim ad Hebr. X, ex persona Dei, <i>iustus autem meus
851 ex fide vivit; quod si subtraxerit se, non placebit animae 757 ex fide vivit; quod si subtraxerit se, non placebit animae
852 meae</i>. Ergo Deus est compositus ex materia et forma.</p> 758 meae</i>. Ergo Deus est compositus ex materia et forma.</p>
853 </div> 759 </div>
854 760
855 <div class="bilingual"> 761 <div class="bilingual">
856 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 762 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, anger, joy
857 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, anger, joy
858 and the like are passions of the composite. But these are attributed 763 and the like are passions of the composite. But these are attributed
859 to God in Scripture: "The Lord was exceeding angry with His people" 764 to God in Scripture: "The Lord was exceeding angry with His people"
860 (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.105.40" parsed="vul|Ps|105|40|0|0" 765 (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.105.40" parsed="vul|Ps|105|40|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p3.1" passage="Ps. 105:40">Ps. 105:40</scripRef>). Therefore God is composed
861 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p3.1"
862 passage="Ps. 105:40">Ps. 105:40</scripRef>). Therefore God is composed
863 of matter and form.</p> 766 of matter and form.</p>
864 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 arg. 2"><a name="28335"><span class= 767 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 arg. 2"><a name="28335"><span class="ref">[28335] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, ira,
865 "ref">[28335] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, ira,
866 gaudium, et huiusmodi, sunt passiones coniuncti, ut dicitur I de 768 gaudium, et huiusmodi, sunt passiones coniuncti, ut dicitur I de
867 anima. Sed huiusmodi attribuuntur Deo in Scriptura dicitur enim in 769 anima. Sed huiusmodi attribuuntur Deo in Scriptura dicitur enim in
868 Psalmo, <i>iratus est furore dominus in populum suum</i>. Ergo Deus 770 Psalmo, <i>iratus est furore dominus in populum suum</i>. Ergo Deus
869 ex materia et forma est compositus.</p> 771 ex materia et forma est compositus.</p>
870 </div> 772 </div>
871 773
872 <div class="bilingual"> 774 <div class="bilingual">
873 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 775 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, matter is
874 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, matter is
875 the principle of individualization. But God seems to be individual, 776 the principle of individualization. But God seems to be individual,
876 for He cannot be predicated of many. Therefore He is composed of 777 for He cannot be predicated of many. Therefore He is composed of
877 matter and form.</p> 778 matter and form.</p>
878 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 arg. 3"><a name="28336"><span class= 779 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 arg. 3"><a name="28336"><span class="ref">[28336] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
879 "ref">[28336] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
880 materia est principium individuationis. Sed Deus videtur esse 780 materia est principium individuationis. Sed Deus videtur esse
881 individuum, non enim de multis praedicatur. Ergo est compositus ex 781 individuum, non enim de multis praedicatur. Ergo est compositus ex
882 materia et forma.</p> 782 materia et forma.</p>
883 </div> 783 </div>
884 784
886 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p5"><b>On 786 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p5"><b>On
887 the contrary,</b> Whatever is composed of matter and form is a body; 787 the contrary,</b> Whatever is composed of matter and form is a body;
888 for dimensive quantity is the first property of matter. But God is not 788 for dimensive quantity is the first property of matter. But God is not
889 a body as proved in the preceding Article; therefore He is not 789 a body as proved in the preceding Article; therefore He is not
890 composed of matter and form.</p> 790 composed of matter and form.</p>
891 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 s. c."><a name="28337"><span class= 791 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 s. c."><a name="28337"><span class="ref">[28337] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, omne
892 "ref">[28337] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, omne
893 compositum ex materia et forma est corpus, quantitas enim dimensiva 792 compositum ex materia et forma est corpus, quantitas enim dimensiva
894 est quae primo inhaeret materiae. Sed Deus non est corpus, ut 793 est quae primo inhaeret materiae. Sed Deus non est corpus, ut
895 ostensum est. Ergo Deus non est compositus ex materia et forma.</p> 794 ostensum est. Ergo Deus non est compositus ex materia et forma.</p>
896 </div> 795 </div>
897 796
898 <div class="bilingual"> 797 <div class="bilingual">
899 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> It is impossible that matter should exist in God. First, because matter is in potentiality. But we have shown (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p6.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3">Q[2], A[3]</a>) that God is pure act, without any potentiality. Hence it is impossible that God should be composed of matter and form. Secondly, because everything composed of matter and form owes its perfection and goodness to its form; therefore its goodness is participated, inasmuch as matter participates the form. Now the 798 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> It is impossible that matter should exist in God. First, because matter is in potentiality. But we have shown (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p6.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3">Q[2], A[3]</a>) that God is pure act, without any potentiality. Hence it is impossible that God should be composed of matter and form. Secondly, because everything composed of matter and form owes its perfection and goodness to its form; therefore its goodness is participated, inasmuch as matter participates the form. Now the
900 first good and the best---viz. God---is not a participated good, because the essential good is prior to the participated good. Hence it is impossible that God should be composed of matter and form. Thirdly, because every agent acts by its form; hence the manner in which it has its form is the manner in which it is an agent. Therefore whatever is primarily and essentially an agent must be primarily and essentially form. Now God is the first agent, since He is the first efficient cause. He is 799 first good and the best---viz. God---is not a participated good, because the essential good is prior to the participated good. Hence it is impossible that God should be composed of matter and form. Thirdly, because every agent acts by its form; hence the manner in which it has its form is the manner in which it is an agent. Therefore whatever is primarily and essentially an agent must be primarily and essentially form. Now God is the first agent, since He is the first efficient cause. He is
901 therefore of His essence a form; and not composed of matter and 800 therefore of His essence a form; and not composed of matter and
902 form.</p> 801 form.</p>
903 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 co."><a name="28338"><span class= 802 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 co."><a name="28338"><span class="ref">[28338] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
904 "ref">[28338] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
905 quod impossibile est in Deo esse materiam. Primo quidem, quia 803 quod impossibile est in Deo esse materiam. Primo quidem, quia
906 materia est id quod est in potentia. Ostensum est autem quod Deus 804 materia est id quod est in potentia. Ostensum est autem quod Deus
907 est purus actus, non habens aliquid de potentialitate. Unde 805 est purus actus, non habens aliquid de potentialitate. Unde
908 impossibile est quod Deus sit compositus ex materia et forma. 806 impossibile est quod Deus sit compositus ex materia et forma.
909 Secundo, quia omne compositum ex materia et forma est perfectum et 807 Secundo, quia omne compositum ex materia et forma est perfectum et
925 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p7"><b>Reply 823 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p7"><b>Reply
926 to Objection 1:</b> A soul is attributed to God because His acts 824 to Objection 1:</b> A soul is attributed to God because His acts
927 resemble the acts of a soul; for, that we will anything, is due to our 825 resemble the acts of a soul; for, that we will anything, is due to our
928 soul. Hence what is pleasing to His will is said to be pleasing to His 826 soul. Hence what is pleasing to His will is said to be pleasing to His
929 soul.</p> 827 soul.</p>
930 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 ad 1"><a name="28339"><span class= 828 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 ad 1"><a name="28339"><span class="ref">[28339] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
931 "ref">[28339] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
932 dicendum quod anima attribuitur Deo per similitudinem actus. Quod 829 dicendum quod anima attribuitur Deo per similitudinem actus. Quod
933 enim volumus aliquid nobis, ex anima nostra est, unde illud dicitur 830 enim volumus aliquid nobis, ex anima nostra est, unde illud dicitur
934 esse placitum animae Dei, quod est placitum voluntati ipsius.</p> 831 esse placitum animae Dei, quod est placitum voluntati ipsius.</p>
935 </div> 832 </div>
936 833
938 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p8"><b>Reply 835 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p8"><b>Reply
939 to Objection 2:</b> Anger and the like are attributed to God on 836 to Objection 2:</b> Anger and the like are attributed to God on
940 account of a similitude of effect. Thus, because to punish is properly 837 account of a similitude of effect. Thus, because to punish is properly
941 the act of an angry man, God's punishment is metaphorically spoken of 838 the act of an angry man, God's punishment is metaphorically spoken of
942 as His anger.</p> 839 as His anger.</p>
943 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 ad 2"><a name="28340"><span class= 840 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 ad 2"><a name="28340"><span class="ref">[28340] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
944 "ref">[28340] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
945 dicendum quod ira et huiusmodi attribuuntur Deo secundum 841 dicendum quod ira et huiusmodi attribuuntur Deo secundum
946 similitudinem effectus, quia enim proprium est irati punire, ira 842 similitudinem effectus, quia enim proprium est irati punire, ira
947 eius punitio metaphorice vocatur.</p> 843 eius punitio metaphorice vocatur.</p>
948 </div> 844 </div>
949 845
950 <div class="bilingual"> 846 <div class="bilingual">
951 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Forms which can be received in matter are individualized by matter, which cannot be in another as in a subject since it is the first underlying subject; although form of itself, unless something else prevents it, can be received by many. But that form which cannot be received in matter, but is self-subsisting, is individualized precisely because it cannot be received in a subject; and such a form is God. Hence it does not follow that matter exists in 847 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A2-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Forms which can be received in matter are individualized by matter, which cannot be in another as in a subject since it is the first underlying subject; although form of itself, unless something else prevents it, can be received by many. But that form which cannot be received in matter, but is self-subsisting, is individualized precisely because it cannot be received in a subject; and such a form is God. Hence it does not follow that matter exists in
952 God.</p> 848 God.</p>
953 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 ad 3"><a name="28341"><span class= 849 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 2 ad 3"><a name="28341"><span class="ref">[28341] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
954 "ref">[28341] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 2 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
955 quod formae quae sunt receptibiles in materia individuantur per 850 quod formae quae sunt receptibiles in materia individuantur per
956 materiam, quae non potest esse in alio, cum sit primum subiectum 851 materiam, quae non potest esse in alio, cum sit primum subiectum
957 substans, forma vero, quantum est de se, nisi aliquid aliud 852 substans, forma vero, quantum est de se, nisi aliquid aliud
958 impediat, recipi potest a pluribus. Sed illa forma quae non est 853 impediat, recipi potest a pluribus. Sed illa forma quae non est
959 receptibilis in materia, sed est per se subsistens, ex hoc ipso 854 receptibilis in materia, sed est per se subsistens, ex hoc ipso
970 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p0.1">Whether God is the same as His essence or nature?</h4> 865 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p0.1">Whether God is the same as His essence or nature?</h4>
971 866
972 867
973 868
974 <div class="bilingual"> 869 <div class="bilingual">
975 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 870 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
976 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
977 not the same as His essence or nature. For nothing can be in 871 not the same as His essence or nature. For nothing can be in
978 itself. But the substance or nature of God---i.e. the Godhead---is 872 itself. But the substance or nature of God---i.e. the Godhead---is
979 said to be in God. Therefore it seems that God is not the same as His 873 said to be in God. Therefore it seems that God is not the same as His
980 essence or nature.</p> 874 essence or nature.</p>
981 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 arg. 1"><a name="28342"><span class= 875 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 arg. 1"><a name="28342"><span class="ref">[28342] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 arg. 1</span></a> Ad tertium sic
982 "ref">[28342] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 arg. 1</span></a> Ad tertium sic
983 proceditur. Videtur quod non sit idem Deus quod sua essentia vel 876 proceditur. Videtur quod non sit idem Deus quod sua essentia vel
984 natura. Nihil enim est in seipso. Sed essentia vel natura Dei, quae 877 natura. Nihil enim est in seipso. Sed essentia vel natura Dei, quae
985 est deitas, dicitur esse in Deo. Ergo videtur quod Deus non sit 878 est deitas, dicitur esse in Deo. Ergo videtur quod Deus non sit
986 idem quod sua essentia vel natura.</p> 879 idem quod sua essentia vel natura.</p>
987 </div> 880 </div>
988 881
989 <div class="bilingual"> 882 <div class="bilingual">
990 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 883 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the effect
991 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the effect
992 is assimilated to its cause; for every agent produces its like. But in 884 is assimilated to its cause; for every agent produces its like. But in
993 created things the "suppositum" is not identical with its nature; for 885 created things the "suppositum" is not identical with its nature; for
994 a man is not the same as his humanity. Therefore God is not the same 886 a man is not the same as his humanity. Therefore God is not the same
995 as His Godhead.</p> 887 as His Godhead.</p>
996 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 arg. 2"><a name="28343"><span class= 888 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 arg. 2"><a name="28343"><span class="ref">[28343] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
997 "ref">[28343] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
998 effectus assimilatur suae causae, quia omne agens agit sibi simile. 889 effectus assimilatur suae causae, quia omne agens agit sibi simile.
999 Sed in rebus creatis non est idem suppositum quod sua natura, non 890 Sed in rebus creatis non est idem suppositum quod sua natura, non
1000 enim idem est homo quod sua humanitas. Ergo nec Deus est idem quod 891 enim idem est homo quod sua humanitas. Ergo nec Deus est idem quod
1001 sua deitas.</p> 892 sua deitas.</p>
1002 </div> 893 </div>
1003 894
1004 <div class="bilingual"> 895 <div class="bilingual">
1005 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p4"><b>On 896 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p4"><b>On
1006 the contrary,</b> It is said of God that He is life itself, and not 897 the contrary,</b> It is said of God that He is life itself, and not
1007 only that He is a living thing: "I am the way, the truth, and the 898 only that He is a living thing: "I am the way, the truth, and the
1008 life" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.14.6" 899 life" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.14.6" parsed="vul|John|14|6|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p4.1" passage="Jn. 14:6">Jn. 14:6</scripRef>). Now the relation between
1009 parsed="vul|John|14|6|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p4.1"
1010 passage="Jn. 14:6">Jn. 14:6</scripRef>). Now the relation between
1011 Godhead and God is the same as the relation between life and a living 900 Godhead and God is the same as the relation between life and a living
1012 thing. Therefore God is His very Godhead.</p> 901 thing. Therefore God is His very Godhead.</p>
1013 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28344"><span class= 902 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28344"><span class="ref">[28344] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Contra, de Deo
1014 "ref">[28344] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Contra, de Deo
1015 dicitur quod est vita, et non solum quod est vivens, ut patet Ioan. 903 dicitur quod est vita, et non solum quod est vivens, ut patet Ioan.
1016 XIV, <i>ego sum via, veritas et vita</i>. Sicut autem se habet vita 904 XIV, <i>ego sum via, veritas et vita</i>. Sicut autem se habet vita
1017 ad viventem, ita deitas ad Deum. Ergo Deus est ipsa deitas.</p> 905 ad viventem, ita deitas ad Deum. Ergo Deus est ipsa deitas.</p>
1018 </div> 906 </div>
1019 907
1023 Consequently humanity and a man are not wholly identical; but humanity is taken to mean the formal part of a man, because the principles whereby a thing is defined are regarded as the formal constituent in regard to the individualizing matter. On the other hand, in things not composed of matter and form, in which individualization is not due to individual matter---that is to say, to "this" matter---the very forms being individualized of themselves---it is necessary the forms themselves should 911 Consequently humanity and a man are not wholly identical; but humanity is taken to mean the formal part of a man, because the principles whereby a thing is defined are regarded as the formal constituent in regard to the individualizing matter. On the other hand, in things not composed of matter and form, in which individualization is not due to individual matter---that is to say, to "this" matter---the very forms being individualized of themselves---it is necessary the forms themselves should
1024 be subsisting "supposita." Therefore "suppositum" and nature in them 912 be subsisting "supposita." Therefore "suppositum" and nature in them
1025 are identified. Since God then is not composed of matter and form, He 913 are identified. Since God then is not composed of matter and form, He
1026 must be His own Godhead, His own Life, and whatever else is thus 914 must be His own Godhead, His own Life, and whatever else is thus
1027 predicated of Him.</p> 915 predicated of Him.</p>
1028 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 co."><a name="28345"><span class= 916 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 co."><a name="28345"><span class="ref">[28345] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1029 "ref">[28345] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1030 quod Deus est idem quod sua essentia vel natura. Ad cuius 917 quod Deus est idem quod sua essentia vel natura. Ad cuius
1031 intellectum sciendum est, quod in rebus compositis ex materia et 918 intellectum sciendum est, quod in rebus compositis ex materia et
1032 forma, necesse est quod differant natura vel essentia et 919 forma, necesse est quod differant natura vel essentia et
1033 suppositum. Quia essentia vel natura comprehendit in se illa tantum 920 suppositum. Quia essentia vel natura comprehendit in se illa tantum
1034 quae cadunt in definitione speciei, sicut humanitas comprehendit in 921 quae cadunt in definitione speciei, sicut humanitas comprehendit in
1054 </div> 941 </div>
1055 942
1056 <div class="bilingual"> 943 <div class="bilingual">
1057 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p6"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> We can speak of simple things only as though they were like the composite things from which we derive our knowledge. Therefore in speaking of God, we use concrete nouns to signify His subsistence, because with us only those things subsist which are composite; and we use abstract nouns to signify His simplicity. In saying therefore that Godhead, or life, or the like are in God, we indicate the composite way in which our intellect understands, but not 944 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3-p6"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> We can speak of simple things only as though they were like the composite things from which we derive our knowledge. Therefore in speaking of God, we use concrete nouns to signify His subsistence, because with us only those things subsist which are composite; and we use abstract nouns to signify His simplicity. In saying therefore that Godhead, or life, or the like are in God, we indicate the composite way in which our intellect understands, but not
1058 that there is any composition in God.</p> 945 that there is any composition in God.</p>
1059 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 ad 1"><a name="28346"><span class= 946 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 ad 1"><a name="28346"><span class="ref">[28346] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1060 "ref">[28346] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1061 dicendum quod de rebus simplicibus loqui non possumus, nisi per 947 dicendum quod de rebus simplicibus loqui non possumus, nisi per
1062 modum compositorum, a quibus cognitionem accipimus. Et ideo, de Deo 948 modum compositorum, a quibus cognitionem accipimus. Et ideo, de Deo
1063 loquentes, utimur nominibus concretis, ut significemus eius 949 loquentes, utimur nominibus concretis, ut significemus eius
1064 subsistentiam, quia apud nos non subsistunt nisi composita, et 950 subsistentiam, quia apud nos non subsistunt nisi composita, et
1065 utimur nominibus abstractis, ut significemus eius simplicitatem. 951 utimur nominibus abstractis, ut significemus eius simplicitatem.
1073 to Objection 2:</b> The effects of God do not imitate Him perfectly, 959 to Objection 2:</b> The effects of God do not imitate Him perfectly,
1074 but only as far as they are able; and the imitation is here defective, 960 but only as far as they are able; and the imitation is here defective,
1075 precisely because what is simple and one, can only be represented by 961 precisely because what is simple and one, can only be represented by
1076 divers things; consequently, composition is accidental to them, and 962 divers things; consequently, composition is accidental to them, and
1077 therefore, in them "suppositum" is not the same as nature.</p> 963 therefore, in them "suppositum" is not the same as nature.</p>
1078 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 ad 2"><a name="28347"><span class= 964 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 3 ad 2"><a name="28347"><span class="ref">[28347] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1079 "ref">[28347] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 3 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1080 dicendum quod effectus Dei imitantur ipsum, non perfecte, sed 965 dicendum quod effectus Dei imitantur ipsum, non perfecte, sed
1081 secundum quod possunt. Et hoc ad defectum imitationis pertinet, 966 secundum quod possunt. Et hoc ad defectum imitationis pertinet,
1082 quod id quod est simplex et unum, non potest repraesentari nisi per 967 quod id quod est simplex et unum, non potest repraesentari nisi per
1083 multa, et sic accidit in eis compositio, ex qua provenit quod in 968 multa, et sic accidit in eis compositio, ex qua provenit quod in
1084 eis non est idem suppositum quod natura.</p> 969 eis non est idem suppositum quod natura.</p>
1095 980
1096 981
1097 <div class="bilingual"> 982 <div class="bilingual">
1098 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that essence and existence are not the same in God. For if it be so, then the divine being has nothing added to it. Now being to which no addition is made is universal being which is predicated of all things. Therefore it follows that God is being in general which can be predicated of everything. But this is false: "For men gave the incommunicable name to stones and wood" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Wis.14.21" parsed="vul|Wis|14|21|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p2.1" passage="Wis. 14:21">Wis. 14:21</scripRef>). Therefore God's existence is not His 983 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that essence and existence are not the same in God. For if it be so, then the divine being has nothing added to it. Now being to which no addition is made is universal being which is predicated of all things. Therefore it follows that God is being in general which can be predicated of everything. But this is false: "For men gave the incommunicable name to stones and wood" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Wis.14.21" parsed="vul|Wis|14|21|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p2.1" passage="Wis. 14:21">Wis. 14:21</scripRef>). Therefore God's existence is not His
1099 essence.</p> 984 essence.</p>
1100 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 arg. 1"><a name="28348"><span class= 985 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 arg. 1"><a name="28348"><span class="ref">[28348] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quartum sic
1101 "ref">[28348] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quartum sic
1102 proceditur. Videtur quod in Deo non sit idem essentia et esse. Si 986 proceditur. Videtur quod in Deo non sit idem essentia et esse. Si
1103 enim hoc sit, tunc ad esse divinum nihil additur. Sed esse cui 987 enim hoc sit, tunc ad esse divinum nihil additur. Sed esse cui
1104 nulla fit additio, est esse commune quod de omnibus praedicatur, 988 nulla fit additio, est esse commune quod de omnibus praedicatur,
1105 sequitur ergo quod Deus sit ens commune praedicabile de omnibus. 989 sequitur ergo quod Deus sit ens commune praedicabile de omnibus.
1106 Hoc autem est falsum, secundum illud Sap. XIV, <i>incommunicabile 990 Hoc autem est falsum, secundum illud Sap. XIV, <i>incommunicabile
1107 nomen lignis et lapidibus imposuerunt</i>. Ergo esse Dei non est 991 nomen lignis et lapidibus imposuerunt</i>. Ergo esse Dei non est
1108 eius essentia.</p> 992 eius essentia.</p>
1109 </div> 993 </div>
1110 994
1111 <div class="bilingual"> 995 <div class="bilingual">
1112 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 996 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, we can know
1113 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, we can know 997 "whether" God exists as said above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p3.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2">Q[2],
1114 "whether" God exists as said above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect"
1115 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p3.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2">Q[2],
1116 A[2]</a>); but we cannot know "what" He is. Therefore God's existence 998 A[2]</a>); but we cannot know "what" He is. Therefore God's existence
1117 is not the same as His essence---that is, as His quiddity or 999 is not the same as His essence---that is, as His quiddity or
1118 nature.</p> 1000 nature.</p>
1119 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 arg. 2"><a name="28349"><span class= 1001 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 arg. 2"><a name="28349"><span class="ref">[28349] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, de Deo
1120 "ref">[28349] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, de Deo
1121 scire possumus an sit, ut supra dictum est. Non autem possumus 1002 scire possumus an sit, ut supra dictum est. Non autem possumus
1122 scire quid sit. Ergo non est idem esse Dei, et quod quid est eius, 1003 scire quid sit. Ergo non est idem esse Dei, et quod quid est eius,
1123 sive quidditas vel natura.</p> 1004 sive quidditas vel natura.</p>
1124 </div> 1005 </div>
1125 1006
1126 <div class="bilingual"> 1007 <div class="bilingual">
1127 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p4"><b>On 1008 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p4"><b>On
1128 the contrary,</b> Hilary says (Trin. vii): "In God existence is not an 1009 the contrary,</b> Hilary says (Trin. vii): "In God existence is not an
1129 accidental quality, but subsisting truth." Therefore what subsists in 1010 accidental quality, but subsisting truth." Therefore what subsists in
1130 God is His existence.</p> 1011 God is His existence.</p>
1131 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 s. c."><a name="28350"><span class= 1012 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 s. c."><a name="28350"><span class="ref">[28350] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
1132 "ref">[28350] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
1133 quod Hilarius dicit in VII de Trin., <i>esse non est accidens in 1013 quod Hilarius dicit in VII de Trin., <i>esse non est accidens in
1134 Deo, sed subsistens veritas</i>. Id ergo quod subsistit in Deo, est 1014 Deo, sed subsistens veritas</i>. Id ergo quod subsistit in Deo, est
1135 suum esse.</p> 1015 suum esse.</p>
1136 </div> 1016 </div>
1137 1017
1140 in water by fire. Therefore, if the existence of a thing differs from its essence, this existence must be caused either by some exterior agent or by its essential principles. Now it is impossible for a thing's existence to be caused by its essential constituent principles, for nothing can be the sufficient cause of its own existence, if its existence is caused. Therefore that thing, whose existence differs from its essence, must have its existence caused by another. But this cannot be true of 1020 in water by fire. Therefore, if the existence of a thing differs from its essence, this existence must be caused either by some exterior agent or by its essential principles. Now it is impossible for a thing's existence to be caused by its essential constituent principles, for nothing can be the sufficient cause of its own existence, if its existence is caused. Therefore that thing, whose existence differs from its essence, must have its existence caused by another. But this cannot be true of
1141 God; because we call God the first efficient cause. Therefore it is impossible that in God His existence should differ from His essence. Secondly, existence is that which makes every form or nature actual; for goodness and humanity are spoken of as actual, only because they are spoken of as existing. Therefore existence must be compared to essence, if the latter is a distinct reality, as actuality to potentiality. Therefore, since in God there is no potentiality, as shown above 1021 God; because we call God the first efficient cause. Therefore it is impossible that in God His existence should differ from His essence. Secondly, existence is that which makes every form or nature actual; for goodness and humanity are spoken of as actual, only because they are spoken of as existing. Therefore existence must be compared to essence, if the latter is a distinct reality, as actuality to potentiality. Therefore, since in God there is no potentiality, as shown above
1142 <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p5.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1">(A[1])</a>, it follows that in Him essence does not differ from existence. Therefore His essence is His existence. Thirdly, because, just as that which has fire, but is not itself fire, is on fire by participation; so that which has existence but is not existence, is a being by participation. But God is His own essence, as shown above <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p5.2" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3">(A[3])</a> if, therefore, He is not His own existence He will be not essential, but participated being. He will not 1022 <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p5.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1">(A[1])</a>, it follows that in Him essence does not differ from existence. Therefore His essence is His existence. Thirdly, because, just as that which has fire, but is not itself fire, is on fire by participation; so that which has existence but is not existence, is a being by participation. But God is His own essence, as shown above <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p5.2" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A3">(A[3])</a> if, therefore, He is not His own existence He will be not essential, but participated being. He will not
1143 therefore be the first being---which is absurd. Therefore God is His 1023 therefore be the first being---which is absurd. Therefore God is His
1144 own existence, and not merely His own essence.</p> 1024 own existence, and not merely His own essence.</p>
1145 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 co."><a name="28351"><span class= 1025 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 co."><a name="28351"><span class="ref">[28351] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1146 "ref">[28351] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1147 quod Deus non solum est sua essentia, ut ostensum est, sed etiam 1026 quod Deus non solum est sua essentia, ut ostensum est, sed etiam
1148 suum esse. Quod quidem multipliciter ostendi potest. Primo quidem, 1027 suum esse. Quod quidem multipliciter ostendi potest. Primo quidem,
1149 quia quidquid est in aliquo quod est praeter essentiam eius, 1028 quia quidquid est in aliquo quod est praeter essentiam eius,
1150 oportet esse causatum vel a principiis essentiae, sicut accidentia 1029 oportet esse causatum vel a principiis essentiae, sicut accidentia
1151 propria consequentia speciem, ut risibile consequitur hominem et 1030 propria consequentia speciem, ut risibile consequitur hominem et
1178 <div class="bilingual"> 1057 <div class="bilingual">
1179 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p6"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> A thing that has nothing added to it can be of two kinds. Either its essence precludes any addition; thus, for example, it is of the essence of an irrational animal to be without reason. Or we may understand a thing to have nothing added to it, inasmuch as its essence does not require that anything should be added to it; thus the genus animal is without reason, because it is not of the essence of animal in general to have reason; but neither is it to 1058 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p6"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> A thing that has nothing added to it can be of two kinds. Either its essence precludes any addition; thus, for example, it is of the essence of an irrational animal to be without reason. Or we may understand a thing to have nothing added to it, inasmuch as its essence does not require that anything should be added to it; thus the genus animal is without reason, because it is not of the essence of animal in general to have reason; but neither is it to
1180 lack reason. And so the divine being has nothing added to it in the 1059 lack reason. And so the divine being has nothing added to it in the
1181 first sense; whereas universal being has nothing added to it in the 1060 first sense; whereas universal being has nothing added to it in the
1182 second sense.</p> 1061 second sense.</p>
1183 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 ad 1"><a name="28352"><span class= 1062 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 ad 1"><a name="28352"><span class="ref">[28352] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1184 "ref">[28352] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1185 dicendum quod aliquid cui non fit additio potest intelligi 1063 dicendum quod aliquid cui non fit additio potest intelligi
1186 dupliciter. Uno modo, ut de ratione eius sit quod non fiat ei 1064 dupliciter. Uno modo, ut de ratione eius sit quod non fiat ei
1187 additio; sicut de ratione animalis irrationalis est, ut sit sine 1065 additio; sicut de ratione animalis irrationalis est, ut sit sine
1188 ratione. Alio modo intelligitur aliquid cui non fit additio, quia 1066 ratione. Alio modo intelligitur aliquid cui non fit additio, quia
1189 non est de ratione eius quod sibi fiat additio, sicut animal 1067 non est de ratione eius quod sibi fiat additio, sicut animal
1194 </div> 1072 </div>
1195 1073
1196 <div class="bilingual"> 1074 <div class="bilingual">
1197 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> "To be" can mean either of two things. It may mean the act of essence, or it may mean the composition of a proposition effected by the mind in joining a predicate to a subject. Taking "to be" in the first sense, we cannot understand God's existence nor His essence; but only in the second sense. We know that this proposition which we form about God when we say "God is," is true; and this we know from His effects (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p7.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2">Q[2], 1075 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> "To be" can mean either of two things. It may mean the act of essence, or it may mean the composition of a proposition effected by the mind in joining a predicate to a subject. Taking "to be" in the first sense, we cannot understand God's existence nor His essence; but only in the second sense. We know that this proposition which we form about God when we say "God is," is true; and this we know from His effects (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4-p7.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A2">Q[2],
1198 A[2]</a>).</p> 1076 A[2]</a>).</p>
1199 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 ad 2"><a name="28353"><span class= 1077 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 4 ad 2"><a name="28353"><span class="ref">[28353] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1200 "ref">[28353] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 4 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1201 dicendum quod esse dupliciter dicitur, uno modo, significat actum 1078 dicendum quod esse dupliciter dicitur, uno modo, significat actum
1202 essendi; alio modo, significat compositionem propositionis, quam 1079 essendi; alio modo, significat compositionem propositionis, quam
1203 anima adinvenit coniungens praedicatum subiecto. Primo igitur modo 1080 anima adinvenit coniungens praedicatum subiecto. Primo igitur modo
1204 accipiendo esse, non possumus scire esse Dei, sicut nec eius 1081 accipiendo esse, non possumus scire esse Dei, sicut nec eius
1205 essentiam, sed solum secundo modo. Scimus enim quod haec propositio 1082 essentiam, sed solum secundo modo. Scimus enim quod haec propositio
1218 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A5-p0.1">Whether God is contained in a genus?</h4> 1095 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A5-p0.1">Whether God is contained in a genus?</h4>
1219 1096
1220 1097
1221 1098
1222 <div class="bilingual"> 1099 <div class="bilingual">
1223 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1100 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A5-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
1224 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A5-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
1225 contained in a genus. For a substance is a being that subsists of 1101 contained in a genus. For a substance is a being that subsists of
1226 itself. But this is especially true of God. Therefore God is in a 1102 itself. But this is especially true of God. Therefore God is in a
1227 genus of substance.</p> 1103 genus of substance.</p>
1228 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 arg. 1"><a name="28354"><span class= 1104 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 arg. 1"><a name="28354"><span class="ref">[28354] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quintum sic
1229 "ref">[28354] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quintum sic
1230 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus sit in genere aliquo. Substantia enim 1105 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus sit in genere aliquo. Substantia enim
1231 est ens per se subsistens. Hoc autem maxime convenit Deo. Ergo Deus 1106 est ens per se subsistens. Hoc autem maxime convenit Deo. Ergo Deus
1232 est in genere substantiae.</p> 1107 est in genere substantiae.</p>
1233 </div> 1108 </div>
1234 1109
1235 <div class="bilingual"> 1110 <div class="bilingual">
1236 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1111 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A5-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, nothing can
1237 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A5-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, nothing can
1238 be measured save by something of its own genus; as length is measured 1112 be measured save by something of its own genus; as length is measured
1239 by length and numbers by number. But God is the measure of all 1113 by length and numbers by number. But God is the measure of all
1240 substances, as the Commentator shows (Metaph. x). Therefore God is in 1114 substances, as the Commentator shows (Metaph. x). Therefore God is in
1241 the genus of substance.</p> 1115 the genus of substance.</p>
1242 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 arg. 2"><a name="28355"><span class= 1116 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 arg. 2"><a name="28355"><span class="ref">[28355] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
1243 "ref">[28355] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
1244 unumquodque mensuratur per aliquid sui generis; sicut longitudines 1117 unumquodque mensuratur per aliquid sui generis; sicut longitudines
1245 per longitudinem, et numeri per numerum. Sed Deus est mensura 1118 per longitudinem, et numeri per numerum. Sed Deus est mensura
1246 omnium substantiarum, ut patet per Commentatorem, X Metaphys. Ergo 1119 omnium substantiarum, ut patet per Commentatorem, X Metaphys. Ergo
1247 Deus est in genere substantiae.</p> 1120 Deus est in genere substantiae.</p>
1248 </div> 1121 </div>
1250 <div class="bilingual"> 1123 <div class="bilingual">
1251 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A5-p4"><b>On 1124 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A5-p4"><b>On
1252 the contrary,</b> In the mind, genus is prior to what it contains. But 1125 the contrary,</b> In the mind, genus is prior to what it contains. But
1253 nothing is prior to God either really or mentally. Therefore God is 1126 nothing is prior to God either really or mentally. Therefore God is
1254 not in any genus.</p> 1127 not in any genus.</p>
1255 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 s. c."><a name="28356"><span class= 1128 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 s. c."><a name="28356"><span class="ref">[28356] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, genus
1256 "ref">[28356] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, genus
1257 est prius, secundum intellectum, eo quod in genere continetur. Sed 1129 est prius, secundum intellectum, eo quod in genere continetur. Sed
1258 nihil est prius Deo, nec secundum rem, nec secundum intellectum. 1130 nihil est prius Deo, nec secundum rem, nec secundum intellectum.
1259 Ergo Deus non est in aliquo genere.</p> 1131 Ergo Deus non est in aliquo genere.</p>
1260 </div> 1132 </div>
1261 1133
1268 is clear from this, that a principle reducible to any genus does not 1140 is clear from this, that a principle reducible to any genus does not
1269 extend beyond that genus; as, a point is the principle of continuous 1141 extend beyond that genus; as, a point is the principle of continuous
1270 quantity alone; and unity, of discontinuous quantity. But God is the 1142 quantity alone; and unity, of discontinuous quantity. But God is the
1271 principle of all being. Therefore He is not contained in any genus as 1143 principle of all being. Therefore He is not contained in any genus as
1272 its principle.</p> 1144 its principle.</p>
1273 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 co."><a name="28357"><span class= 1145 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 co."><a name="28357"><span class="ref">[28357] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1274 "ref">[28357] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1275 quod aliquid est in genere dupliciter. Uno modo simpliciter et 1146 quod aliquid est in genere dupliciter. Uno modo simpliciter et
1276 proprie; sicut species, quae sub genere continentur. Alio modo, per 1147 proprie; sicut species, quae sub genere continentur. Alio modo, per
1277 reductionem, sicut principia et privationes, sicut punctus et 1148 reductionem, sicut principia et privationes, sicut punctus et
1278 unitas reducuntur ad genus quantitatis, sicut principia; caecitas 1149 unitas reducuntur ad genus quantitatis, sicut principia; caecitas
1279 autem, et omnis privatio, reducitur ad genus sui habitus. Neutro 1150 autem, et omnis privatio, reducitur ad genus sui habitus. Neutro
1321 of itself---for existence cannot of itself be a genus, as shown in the 1192 of itself---for existence cannot of itself be a genus, as shown in the
1322 body of the article; but, it also signifies an essence that has the 1193 body of the article; but, it also signifies an essence that has the
1323 property of existing in this way---namely, of existing of itself; this 1194 property of existing in this way---namely, of existing of itself; this
1324 existence, however, is not its essence. Thus it is clear that God is 1195 existence, however, is not its essence. Thus it is clear that God is
1325 not in the genus of substance.</p> 1196 not in the genus of substance.</p>
1326 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 ad 1"><a name="28358"><span class= 1197 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 ad 1"><a name="28358"><span class="ref">[28358] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1327 "ref">[28358] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1328 dicendum quod substantiae nomen non significat hoc solum quod est 1198 dicendum quod substantiae nomen non significat hoc solum quod est
1329 per se esse, quia hoc quod est esse, non potest per se esse genus, 1199 per se esse, quia hoc quod est esse, non potest per se esse genus,
1330 ut ostensum est. Sed significat essentiam cui competit sic esse, 1200 ut ostensum est. Sed significat essentiam cui competit sic esse,
1331 idest per se esse, quod tamen esse non est ipsa eius essentia. Et 1201 idest per se esse, quod tamen esse non est ipsa eius essentia. Et
1332 sic patet quod Deus non est in genere substantiae.</p> 1202 sic patet quod Deus non est in genere substantiae.</p>
1337 to Objection 2:</b> This objection turns upon proportionate measure 1207 to Objection 2:</b> This objection turns upon proportionate measure
1338 which must be homogeneous with what is measured. Now, God is not a 1208 which must be homogeneous with what is measured. Now, God is not a
1339 measure proportionate to anything. Still, He is called the measure of 1209 measure proportionate to anything. Still, He is called the measure of
1340 all things, in the sense that everything has being only according as 1210 all things, in the sense that everything has being only according as
1341 it resembles Him.</p> 1211 it resembles Him.</p>
1342 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 ad 2"><a name="28359"><span class= 1212 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 5 ad 2"><a name="28359"><span class="ref">[28359] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1343 "ref">[28359] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 5 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1344 dicendum quod obiectio illa procedit de mensura proportionata, hanc 1213 dicendum quod obiectio illa procedit de mensura proportionata, hanc
1345 enim oportet esse homogeneam mensurato. Deus autem non est mensura 1214 enim oportet esse homogeneam mensurato. Deus autem non est mensura
1346 proportionata alicui. Dicitur tamen mensura omnium, ex eo quod 1215 proportionata alicui. Dicitur tamen mensura omnium, ex eo quod
1347 unumquodque tantum habet de esse, quantum ei appropinquat.</p> 1216 unumquodque tantum habet de esse, quantum ei appropinquat.</p>
1348 </div> 1217 </div>
1356 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p0.1">Whether in God there are any accidents?</h4> 1225 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p0.1">Whether in God there are any accidents?</h4>
1357 1226
1358 1227
1359 1228
1360 <div class="bilingual"> 1229 <div class="bilingual">
1361 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1230 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that there
1362 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that there
1363 are accidents in God. For substance cannot be an accident, as 1231 are accidents in God. For substance cannot be an accident, as
1364 Aristotle says (Phys. i). Therefore that which is an accident in one, 1232 Aristotle says (Phys. i). Therefore that which is an accident in one,
1365 cannot, in another, be a substance. Thus it is proved that heat cannot 1233 cannot, in another, be a substance. Thus it is proved that heat cannot
1366 be the substantial form of fire, because it is an accident in other 1234 be the substantial form of fire, because it is an accident in other
1367 things. But wisdom, virtue, and the like, which are accidents in us, 1235 things. But wisdom, virtue, and the like, which are accidents in us,
1368 are attributes of God. Therefore in God there are accidents.</p> 1236 are attributes of God. Therefore in God there are accidents.</p>
1369 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 arg. 1"><a name="28360"><span class= 1237 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 arg. 1"><a name="28360"><span class="ref">[28360] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 arg. 1</span></a> Ad sextum sic
1370 "ref">[28360] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 arg. 1</span></a> Ad sextum sic
1371 proceditur. Videtur quod in Deo sint aliqua accidentia. Substantia 1238 proceditur. Videtur quod in Deo sint aliqua accidentia. Substantia
1372 enim nulli est accidens, ut dicitur in I Physic. Quod ergo in uno 1239 enim nulli est accidens, ut dicitur in I Physic. Quod ergo in uno
1373 est accidens, non potest in alio esse substantia, sicut probatur 1240 est accidens, non potest in alio esse substantia, sicut probatur
1374 quod calor non sit forma substantialis ignis, quia in aliis est 1241 quod calor non sit forma substantialis ignis, quia in aliis est
1375 accidens. Sed sapientia, virtus, et huiusmodi, quae in nobis sunt 1242 accidens. Sed sapientia, virtus, et huiusmodi, quae in nobis sunt
1376 accidentia, Deo attribuuntur. Ergo et in Deo sunt accidentia.</p> 1243 accidentia, Deo attribuuntur. Ergo et in Deo sunt accidentia.</p>
1377 </div> 1244 </div>
1378 1245
1379 <div class="bilingual"> 1246 <div class="bilingual">
1380 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1247 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, in every
1381 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, in every
1382 genus there is a first principle. But there are many "genera" of 1248 genus there is a first principle. But there are many "genera" of
1383 accidents. If, therefore, the primal members of these genera are not 1249 accidents. If, therefore, the primal members of these genera are not
1384 in God, there will be many primal beings other than God---which is 1250 in God, there will be many primal beings other than God---which is
1385 absurd.</p> 1251 absurd.</p>
1386 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 arg. 2"><a name="28361"><span class= 1252 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 arg. 2"><a name="28361"><span class="ref">[28361] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, in
1387 "ref">[28361] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, in
1388 quolibet genere est unum primum. Multa autem sunt genera 1253 quolibet genere est unum primum. Multa autem sunt genera
1389 accidentium. Si igitur prima illorum generum non sunt in Deo, erunt 1254 accidentium. Si igitur prima illorum generum non sunt in Deo, erunt
1390 multa prima extra Deum, quod est inconveniens.</p> 1255 multa prima extra Deum, quod est inconveniens.</p>
1391 </div> 1256 </div>
1392 1257
1393 <div class="bilingual"> 1258 <div class="bilingual">
1394 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p4"><b>On 1259 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p4"><b>On
1395 the contrary,</b> Every accident is in a subject. But God cannot be a 1260 the contrary,</b> Every accident is in a subject. But God cannot be a
1396 subject, for "no simple form can be a subject", as Boethius says (De 1261 subject, for "no simple form can be a subject", as Boethius says (De
1397 Trin.). Therefore in God there cannot be any accident.</p> 1262 Trin.). Therefore in God there cannot be any accident.</p>
1398 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 s. c."><a name="28362"><span class= 1263 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 s. c."><a name="28362"><span class="ref">[28362] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, omne
1399 "ref">[28362] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, omne
1400 accidens in subiecto est. Deus autem non potest esse subiectum, 1264 accidens in subiecto est. Deus autem non potest esse subiectum,
1401 quia <i>forma simplex non potest esse subiectum</i>, ut dicit 1265 quia <i>forma simplex non potest esse subiectum</i>, ut dicit
1402 Boetius in Lib. de Trin. Ergo in Deo non potest esse accidens.</p> 1266 Boetius in Lib. de Trin. Ergo in Deo non potest esse accidens.</p>
1403 </div> 1267 </div>
1404 1268
1405 <div class="bilingual"> 1269 <div class="bilingual">
1406 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> From all we have said, it is clear there can be no accident in God. First, because a subject is compared to its accidents as potentiality to actuality; for a subject is in some sense made actual by its accidents. But there can be no potentiality in God, as was shown (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p5.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3">Q[2], A[3]</a>). Secondly, because God is His own existence; and as Boethius says (Hebdom.), although every essence may have something superadded to it, this cannot apply to 1270 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> From all we have said, it is clear there can be no accident in God. First, because a subject is compared to its accidents as potentiality to actuality; for a subject is in some sense made actual by its accidents. But there can be no potentiality in God, as was shown (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p5.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3">Q[2], A[3]</a>). Secondly, because God is His own existence; and as Boethius says (Hebdom.), although every essence may have something superadded to it, this cannot apply to
1407 absolute being: thus a heated substance can have something extraneous to heat added to it, as whiteness, nevertheless absolute heat can have nothing else than heat. Thirdly, because what is essential is prior to what is accidental. Whence as God is absolute primal being, there can be in Him nothing accidental. Neither can He have any essential accidents (as the capability of laughing is an essential accident of man), because such accidents are caused by the constituent principles of the 1271 absolute being: thus a heated substance can have something extraneous to heat added to it, as whiteness, nevertheless absolute heat can have nothing else than heat. Thirdly, because what is essential is prior to what is accidental. Whence as God is absolute primal being, there can be in Him nothing accidental. Neither can He have any essential accidents (as the capability of laughing is an essential accident of man), because such accidents are caused by the constituent principles of the
1408 subject. Now there can be nothing caused in God, since He is the 1272 subject. Now there can be nothing caused in God, since He is the
1409 first cause. Hence it follows that there is no accident in God.</p> 1273 first cause. Hence it follows that there is no accident in God.</p>
1410 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 co."><a name="28363"><span class= 1274 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 co."><a name="28363"><span class="ref">[28363] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1411 "ref">[28363] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1412 quod, secundum praemissa, manifeste apparet quod in Deo accidens 1275 quod, secundum praemissa, manifeste apparet quod in Deo accidens
1413 esse non potest. Primo quidem, quia subiectum comparatur ad 1276 esse non potest. Primo quidem, quia subiectum comparatur ad
1414 accidens, sicut potentia ad actum, subiectum enim secundum accidens 1277 accidens, sicut potentia ad actum, subiectum enim secundum accidens
1415 est aliquo modo in actu. Esse autem in potentia, omnino removetur a 1278 est aliquo modo in actu. Esse autem in potentia, omnino removetur a
1416 Deo, ut ex praedictis patet. Secundo, quia Deus est suum esse, et, 1279 Deo, ut ex praedictis patet. Secundo, quia Deus est suum esse, et,
1430 <div class="bilingual"> 1293 <div class="bilingual">
1431 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p6"><b>Reply 1294 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A6-p6"><b>Reply
1432 to Objection 1:</b> Virtue and wisdom are not predicated of God and of 1295 to Objection 1:</b> Virtue and wisdom are not predicated of God and of
1433 us univocally. Hence it does not follow that there are accidents in 1296 us univocally. Hence it does not follow that there are accidents in
1434 God as there are in us.</p> 1297 God as there are in us.</p>
1435 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 ad 1"><a name="28364"><span class= 1298 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 ad 1"><a name="28364"><span class="ref">[28364] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1436 "ref">[28364] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1437 dicendum quod virtus et sapientia non univoce dicuntur de Deo et de 1299 dicendum quod virtus et sapientia non univoce dicuntur de Deo et de
1438 nobis, ut infra patebit. Unde non sequitur quod accidentia sint in 1300 nobis, ut infra patebit. Unde non sequitur quod accidentia sint in
1439 Deo, sicut in nobis.</p> 1301 Deo, sicut in nobis.</p>
1440 </div> 1302 </div>
1441 1303
1444 to Objection 2:</b> Since substance is prior to its accidents, the 1306 to Objection 2:</b> Since substance is prior to its accidents, the
1445 principles of accidents are reducible to the principles of the 1307 principles of accidents are reducible to the principles of the
1446 substance as to that which is prior; although God is not first as if 1308 substance as to that which is prior; although God is not first as if
1447 contained in the genus of substance; yet He is first in respect to all 1309 contained in the genus of substance; yet He is first in respect to all
1448 being, outside of every genus.</p> 1310 being, outside of every genus.</p>
1449 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 ad 2"><a name="28365"><span class= 1311 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 6 ad 2"><a name="28365"><span class="ref">[28365] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1450 "ref">[28365] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 6 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1451 dicendum quod, cum substantia sit prior accidentibus, principia 1312 dicendum quod, cum substantia sit prior accidentibus, principia
1452 accidentium reducuntur in principia substantiae sicut in priora. 1313 accidentium reducuntur in principia substantiae sicut in priora.
1453 Quamvis Deus non sit primum contentum in genere substantiae, sed 1314 Quamvis Deus non sit primum contentum in genere substantiae, sed
1454 primum extra omne genus, respectu totius esse.</p> 1315 primum extra omne genus, respectu totius esse.</p>
1455 </div> 1316 </div>
1463 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p0.1">Whether God is altogether simple?</h4> 1324 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p0.1">Whether God is altogether simple?</h4>
1464 1325
1465 1326
1466 1327
1467 <div class="bilingual"> 1328 <div class="bilingual">
1468 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1329 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
1469 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God is
1470 not altogether simple. For whatever is from God must imitate Him. Thus 1330 not altogether simple. For whatever is from God must imitate Him. Thus
1471 from the first being are all beings; and from the first good is all 1331 from the first being are all beings; and from the first good is all
1472 good. But in the things which God has made, nothing is altogether 1332 good. But in the things which God has made, nothing is altogether
1473 simple. Therefore neither is God altogether simple.</p> 1333 simple. Therefore neither is God altogether simple.</p>
1474 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 arg. 1"><a name="28366"><span class= 1334 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 arg. 1"><a name="28366"><span class="ref">[28366] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 arg. 1</span></a> Ad septimum sic
1475 "ref">[28366] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 arg. 1</span></a> Ad septimum sic
1476 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus non sit omnino simplex. Ea enim quae 1335 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus non sit omnino simplex. Ea enim quae
1477 sunt a Deo, imitantur ipsum, unde a primo ente sunt omnia entia, et 1336 sunt a Deo, imitantur ipsum, unde a primo ente sunt omnia entia, et
1478 a primo bono sunt omnia bona. Sed in rebus quae sunt a Deo, nihil 1337 a primo bono sunt omnia bona. Sed in rebus quae sunt a Deo, nihil
1479 est omnino simplex. Ergo Deus non est omnino simplex.</p> 1338 est omnino simplex. Ergo Deus non est omnino simplex.</p>
1480 </div> 1339 </div>
1481 1340
1482 <div class="bilingual"> 1341 <div class="bilingual">
1483 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1342 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, whatever is
1484 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, whatever is
1485 best must be attributed to God. But with us that which is composite is 1343 best must be attributed to God. But with us that which is composite is
1486 better than that which is simple; thus, chemical compounds are better 1344 better than that which is simple; thus, chemical compounds are better
1487 than simple elements, and animals than the parts that compose 1345 than simple elements, and animals than the parts that compose
1488 them. Therefore it cannot be said that God is altogether simple.</p> 1346 them. Therefore it cannot be said that God is altogether simple.</p>
1489 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 arg. 2"><a name="28367"><span class= 1347 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 arg. 2"><a name="28367"><span class="ref">[28367] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, omne
1490 "ref">[28367] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, omne
1491 quod est melius, Deo attribuendum est. Sed, apud nos, composita 1348 quod est melius, Deo attribuendum est. Sed, apud nos, composita
1492 sunt meliora simplicibus, sicut corpora mixta elementis, et 1349 sunt meliora simplicibus, sicut corpora mixta elementis, et
1493 elementa suis partibus. Ergo non est dicendum quod Deus sit omnino 1350 elementa suis partibus. Ergo non est dicendum quod Deus sit omnino
1494 simplex.</p> 1351 simplex.</p>
1495 </div> 1352 </div>
1496 1353
1497 <div class="bilingual"> 1354 <div class="bilingual">
1498 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p4"><b>On 1355 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p4"><b>On
1499 the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Trin. iv, 6,7): "God is truly and 1356 the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Trin. iv, 6,7): "God is truly and
1500 absolutely simple."</p> 1357 absolutely simple."</p>
1501 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 s. c."><a name="28368"><span class= 1358 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 s. c."><a name="28368"><span class="ref">[28368] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
1502 "ref">[28368] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
1503 quod Augustinus dicit, VI de Trin., quod Deus vere et summe simplex 1359 quod Augustinus dicit, VI de Trin., quod Deus vere et summe simplex
1504 est.</p> 1360 est.</p>
1505 </div> 1361 </div>
1506 1362
1507 <div class="bilingual"> 1363 <div class="bilingual">
1513 nothing besides itself. And so, since God is absolute form, or rather 1369 nothing besides itself. And so, since God is absolute form, or rather
1514 absolute being, He can be in no way composite. Hilary implies this 1370 absolute being, He can be in no way composite. Hilary implies this
1515 argument, when he says (De Trin. vii): "God, Who is strength, is not 1371 argument, when he says (De Trin. vii): "God, Who is strength, is not
1516 made up of things that are weak; nor is He Who is light, composed of 1372 made up of things that are weak; nor is He Who is light, composed of
1517 things that are dim."</p> 1373 things that are dim."</p>
1518 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 co."><a name="28369"><span class= 1374 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 co."><a name="28369"><span class="ref">[28369] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1519 "ref">[28369] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1520 quod Deum omnino esse simplicem, multipliciter potest esse 1375 quod Deum omnino esse simplicem, multipliciter potest esse
1521 manifestum. Primo quidem per supradicta. Cum enim in Deo non sit 1376 manifestum. Primo quidem per supradicta. Cum enim in Deo non sit
1522 compositio, neque quantitativarum partium, quia corpus non est; 1377 compositio, neque quantitativarum partium, quia corpus non est;
1523 neque compositio formae et materiae, neque in eo sit aliud natura 1378 neque compositio formae et materiae, neque in eo sit aliud natura
1524 et suppositum; neque aliud essentia et esse, neque in eo sit 1379 et suppositum; neque aliud essentia et esse, neque in eo sit
1553 <div class="bilingual"> 1408 <div class="bilingual">
1554 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p6"><b>Reply 1409 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p6"><b>Reply
1555 to Objection 1:</b> Whatever is from God imitates Him, as caused 1410 to Objection 1:</b> Whatever is from God imitates Him, as caused
1556 things imitate the first cause. But it is of the essence of a thing to 1411 things imitate the first cause. But it is of the essence of a thing to
1557 be in some sort composite; because at least its existence differs from 1412 be in some sort composite; because at least its existence differs from
1558 its essence, as will be shown hereafter, (<a xml:link="simple" 1413 its essence, as will be shown hereafter, (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p6.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3">Q[4], A[3]</a>).</p>
1559 shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p6.1" 1414 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 ad 1"><a name="28370"><span class="ref">[28370] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1560 href="#FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3">Q[4], A[3]</a>).</p>
1561 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 ad 1"><a name="28370"><span class=
1562 "ref">[28370] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1563 dicendum quod ea quae sunt a Deo, imitantur Deum sicut causata 1415 dicendum quod ea quae sunt a Deo, imitantur Deum sicut causata
1564 primam causam. Est autem hoc de ratione causati, quod sit aliquo 1416 primam causam. Est autem hoc de ratione causati, quod sit aliquo
1565 modo compositum, quia ad minus esse eius est aliud quam quod quid 1417 modo compositum, quia ad minus esse eius est aliud quam quod quid
1566 est, ut infra patebit.</p> 1418 est, ut infra patebit.</p>
1567 </div> 1419 </div>
1569 <div class="bilingual"> 1421 <div class="bilingual">
1570 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p7"><b>Reply 1422 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p7"><b>Reply
1571 to Objection 2:</b> With us composite things are better than simple 1423 to Objection 2:</b> With us composite things are better than simple
1572 things, because the perfections of created goodness cannot be found in 1424 things, because the perfections of created goodness cannot be found in
1573 one simple thing, but in many things. But the perfection of divine 1425 one simple thing, but in many things. But the perfection of divine
1574 goodness is found in one simple thing (<a xml:link="simple" 1426 goodness is found in one simple thing (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p7.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1">Q[4], A[1]</a> and <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p7.2" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q6.FP_Q6_A2">Q[6], A[2]</a>).</p>
1575 shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p7.1" 1427 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 ad 2"><a name="28371"><span class="ref">[28371] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1576 href="#FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1">Q[4], A[1]</a> and <a xml:link="simple"
1577 shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7-p7.2"
1578 href="#FP.ii.FP_Q6.FP_Q6_A2">Q[6], A[2]</a>).</p>
1579 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 7 ad 2"><a name="28371"><span class=
1580 "ref">[28371] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 7 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1581 dicendum quod apud nos composita sunt meliora simplicibus, quia 1428 dicendum quod apud nos composita sunt meliora simplicibus, quia
1582 perfectio bonitatis creaturae non invenitur in uno simplici, sed in 1429 perfectio bonitatis creaturae non invenitur in uno simplici, sed in
1583 multis. Sed perfectio divinae bonitatis invenitur in uno simplici, 1430 multis. Sed perfectio divinae bonitatis invenitur in uno simplici,
1584 ut infra ostendetur.</p> 1431 ut infra ostendetur.</p>
1585 </div> 1432 </div>
1593 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p0.1">Whether God enters into the composition of other things?</h4> 1440 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p0.1">Whether God enters into the composition of other things?</h4>
1594 1441
1595 1442
1596 1443
1597 <div class="bilingual"> 1444 <div class="bilingual">
1598 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1445 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God
1599 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that God
1600 enters into the composition of other things, for Dionysius says 1446 enters into the composition of other things, for Dionysius says
1601 (Coel. Hier. iv): "The being of all things is that which is above 1447 (Coel. Hier. iv): "The being of all things is that which is above
1602 being---the Godhead." But the being of all things enters into the 1448 being---the Godhead." But the being of all things enters into the
1603 composition of everything. Therefore God enters into the composition 1449 composition of everything. Therefore God enters into the composition
1604 of other things.</p> 1450 of other things.</p>
1605 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 arg. 1"><a name="28372"><span class= 1451 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 arg. 1"><a name="28372"><span class="ref">[28372] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 arg. 1</span></a> Ad octavum sic
1606 "ref">[28372] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 arg. 1</span></a> Ad octavum sic
1607 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus in compositionem aliorum veniat. 1452 proceditur. Videtur quod Deus in compositionem aliorum veniat.
1608 Dicit enim Dionysius, IV cap. Cael. Hier., <i>esse omnium est, quae 1453 Dicit enim Dionysius, IV cap. Cael. Hier., <i>esse omnium est, quae
1609 super esse est deitas</i>. Sed esse omnium intrat compositionem 1454 super esse est deitas</i>. Sed esse omnium intrat compositionem
1610 uniuscuiusque. Ergo Deus in compositionem aliorum venit.</p> 1455 uniuscuiusque. Ergo Deus in compositionem aliorum venit.</p>
1611 </div> 1456 </div>
1612 1457
1613 <div class="bilingual"> 1458 <div class="bilingual">
1614 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1459 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, God is a
1615 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, God is a
1616 form; for Augustine says (De Verb. Dom., [*Serm. xxxviii]) that, "the 1460 form; for Augustine says (De Verb. Dom., [*Serm. xxxviii]) that, "the
1617 word of God, which is God, is an uncreated form." But a form is part 1461 word of God, which is God, is an uncreated form." But a form is part
1618 of a compound. Therefore God is part of some compound.</p> 1462 of a compound. Therefore God is part of some compound.</p>
1619 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 arg. 2"><a name="28373"><span class= 1463 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 arg. 2"><a name="28373"><span class="ref">[28373] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, Deus
1620 "ref">[28373] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, Deus
1621 est forma, dicit enim Augustinus, in libro de verbis domini, quod 1464 est forma, dicit enim Augustinus, in libro de verbis domini, quod
1622 verbum Dei (quod est Deus) est forma quaedam non formata. Sed forma 1465 verbum Dei (quod est Deus) est forma quaedam non formata. Sed forma
1623 est pars compositi. Ergo Deus est pars alicuius compositi.</p> 1466 est pars compositi. Ergo Deus est pars alicuius compositi.</p>
1624 </div> 1467 </div>
1625 1468
1626 <div class="bilingual"> 1469 <div class="bilingual">
1627 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, whatever things exist, in no way differing from each other, are the same. But God and primary matter exist, and in no way differ from each other. Therefore they are absolutely the same. But primary matter enters into the composition things. Therefore also does God. Proof of the minor---whatever things differ, they differ by some differences, and therefore must be composite. But God and primary matter are altogether simple. Therefore they nowise differ 1470 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, whatever things exist, in no way differing from each other, are the same. But God and primary matter exist, and in no way differ from each other. Therefore they are absolutely the same. But primary matter enters into the composition things. Therefore also does God. Proof of the minor---whatever things differ, they differ by some differences, and therefore must be composite. But God and primary matter are altogether simple. Therefore they nowise differ
1628 from each other.</p> 1471 from each other.</p>
1629 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 arg. 3"><a name="28374"><span class= 1472 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 arg. 3"><a name="28374"><span class="ref">[28374] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
1630 "ref">[28374] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
1631 quaecumque sunt et nullo modo differunt, sunt idem. Sed Deus et 1473 quaecumque sunt et nullo modo differunt, sunt idem. Sed Deus et
1632 materia prima sunt, et nullo modo differunt. Ergo penitus sunt 1474 materia prima sunt, et nullo modo differunt. Ergo penitus sunt
1633 idem. Sed materia prima intrat compositionem rerum. Ergo et Deus. 1475 idem. Sed materia prima intrat compositionem rerum. Ergo et Deus.
1634 Probatio mediae, quaecumque differunt, aliquibus differentiis 1476 Probatio mediae, quaecumque differunt, aliquibus differentiis
1635 differunt, et ita oportet ea esse composita; sed Deus et materia 1477 differunt, et ita oportet ea esse composita; sed Deus et materia
1639 <div class="bilingual"> 1481 <div class="bilingual">
1640 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p5"><b>On 1482 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p5"><b>On
1641 the contrary,</b> Dionysius says (Div. Nom. ii): "There can be no 1483 the contrary,</b> Dionysius says (Div. Nom. ii): "There can be no
1642 touching Him," i.e. God, "nor any other union with Him by mingling 1484 touching Him," i.e. God, "nor any other union with Him by mingling
1643 part with part."</p> 1485 part with part."</p>
1644 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 s. c. 1"><a name="28375"><span class= 1486 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 s. c. 1"><a name="28375"><span class="ref">[28375] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 s. c. 1</span></a> Sed contra est
1645 "ref">[28375] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 s. c. 1</span></a> Sed contra est
1646 quod dicit Dionysius, II cap. de Div. Nom., quod neque tactus est 1487 quod dicit Dionysius, II cap. de Div. Nom., quod neque tactus est
1647 eius (scilicet Dei), <i>neque alia quaedam ad partes commiscendi 1488 eius (scilicet Dei), <i>neque alia quaedam ad partes commiscendi
1648 communio</i>.</p> 1489 communio</i>.</p>
1649 </div> 1490 </div>
1650 1491
1651 <div class="bilingual"> 1492 <div class="bilingual">
1652 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p6"> 1493 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p6">
1653 Further, the first cause rules all things without commingling with 1494 Further, the first cause rules all things without commingling with
1654 them, as the Philosopher says (De Causis).</p> 1495 them, as the Philosopher says (De Causis).</p>
1655 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 s. c. 2"><a name="28376"><span class= 1496 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 s. c. 2"><a name="28376"><span class="ref">[28376] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 s. c. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
1656 "ref">[28376] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 s. c. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
1657 dicitur in libro de causis, quod <i>causa prima regit omnes res, 1497 dicitur in libro de causis, quod <i>causa prima regit omnes res,
1658 praeterquam commisceatur eis</i>.</p> 1498 praeterquam commisceatur eis</i>.</p>
1659 </div> 1499 </div>
1660 1500
1661 <div class="bilingual"> 1501 <div class="bilingual">
1662 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p7"><b>I answer that,</b> On this point there have been three errors. Some have affirmed that God is the world-soul, as is clear from Augustine (De Civ. Dei vii, 6). This is practically the same as the opinion of those who assert that God is the soul of the highest heaven. Again, others have said that God is the formal principle of all things; and this was the theory of the Almaricians. The third error is that of David of Dinant, who most absurdly taught that God was primary matter. 1502 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p7"><b>I answer that,</b> On this point there have been three errors. Some have affirmed that God is the world-soul, as is clear from Augustine (De Civ. Dei vii, 6). This is practically the same as the opinion of those who assert that God is the soul of the highest heaven. Again, others have said that God is the formal principle of all things; and this was the theory of the Almaricians. The third error is that of David of Dinant, who most absurdly taught that God was primary matter.
1663 Now all these contain manifest untruth; since it is not possible for God to enter into the composition of anything, either as a formal or a material principle. First, because God is the first efficient cause. Now the efficient cause is not identical numerically with the form of the thing caused, but only specifically: for man begets man. But primary matter can be neither numerically nor specifically identical with an efficient cause; for the former is merely potential, while the latter is 1503 Now all these contain manifest untruth; since it is not possible for God to enter into the composition of anything, either as a formal or a material principle. First, because God is the first efficient cause. Now the efficient cause is not identical numerically with the form of the thing caused, but only specifically: for man begets man. But primary matter can be neither numerically nor specifically identical with an efficient cause; for the former is merely potential, while the latter is
1664 actual. Secondly, because, since God is the first efficient cause, to act belongs to Him primarily and essentially. But that which enters into composition with anything does not act primarily and essentially, but rather the composite so acts; for the hand does not act, but the man by his hand; and, fire warms by its heat. Hence God cannot be part of a compound. Thirdly, because no part of a compound can be absolutely primal among beings---not even matter, nor form, though they are the primal 1504 actual. Secondly, because, since God is the first efficient cause, to act belongs to Him primarily and essentially. But that which enters into composition with anything does not act primarily and essentially, but rather the composite so acts; for the hand does not act, but the man by his hand; and, fire warms by its heat. Hence God cannot be part of a compound. Thirdly, because no part of a compound can be absolutely primal among beings---not even matter, nor form, though they are the primal
1665 parts of every compound. For matter is merely potential; and 1505 parts of every compound. For matter is merely potential; and
1666 potentiality is absolutely posterior to actuality, as is clear from 1506 potentiality is absolutely posterior to actuality, as is clear from
1667 the foregoing (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" 1507 the foregoing (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p7.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1">Q[3],
1668 id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p7.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1">Q[3],
1669 A[1]</a>): while a form which is part of a compound is a participated 1508 A[1]</a>): while a form which is part of a compound is a participated
1670 form; and as that which participates is posterior to that which is 1509 form; and as that which participates is posterior to that which is
1671 essential, so likewise is that which is participated; as fire in 1510 essential, so likewise is that which is participated; as fire in
1672 ignited objects is posterior to fire that is essentially such. Now it 1511 ignited objects is posterior to fire that is essentially such. Now it
1673 has been proved that God is absolutely primal being (<a 1512 has been proved that God is absolutely primal being (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p7.2" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3">Q[2], A[3]</a>).</p>
1674 xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p7.2" 1513 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 co."><a name="28377"><span class="ref">[28377] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1675 href="#FP.ii.FP_Q2.FP_Q2_A3">Q[2], A[3]</a>).</p>
1676 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 co."><a name="28377"><span class=
1677 "ref">[28377] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1678 quod circa hoc fuerunt tres errores. Quidam enim posuerunt quod 1514 quod circa hoc fuerunt tres errores. Quidam enim posuerunt quod
1679 Deus esset anima mundi, ut patet per Augustinum in Lib. VII de 1515 Deus esset anima mundi, ut patet per Augustinum in Lib. VII de
1680 civitate Dei, et ad hoc etiam reducitur, quod quidam dixerunt Deum 1516 civitate Dei, et ad hoc etiam reducitur, quod quidam dixerunt Deum
1681 esse animam primi caeli. Alii autem dixerunt Deum esse principium 1517 esse animam primi caeli. Alii autem dixerunt Deum esse principium
1682 formale omnium rerum. Et haec dicitur fuisse opinio Almarianorum. 1518 formale omnium rerum. Et haec dicitur fuisse opinio Almarianorum.
1707 <div class="bilingual"> 1543 <div class="bilingual">
1708 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p8"><b>Reply 1544 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p8"><b>Reply
1709 to Objection 1:</b> The Godhead is called the being of all things, as 1545 to Objection 1:</b> The Godhead is called the being of all things, as
1710 their efficient and exemplar cause, but not as being their 1546 their efficient and exemplar cause, but not as being their
1711 essence.</p> 1547 essence.</p>
1712 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 ad 1"><a name="28378"><span class= 1548 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 ad 1"><a name="28378"><span class="ref">[28378] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1713 "ref">[28378] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1714 dicendum quod deitas dicitur esse omnium effective et exemplariter, 1549 dicendum quod deitas dicitur esse omnium effective et exemplariter,
1715 non autem per essentiam.</p> 1550 non autem per essentiam.</p>
1716 </div> 1551 </div>
1717 1552
1718 <div class="bilingual"> 1553 <div class="bilingual">
1719 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p9"><b>Reply 1554 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p9"><b>Reply
1720 to Objection 2:</b> The Word is an exemplar form; but not a form that 1555 to Objection 2:</b> The Word is an exemplar form; but not a form that
1721 is part of a compound.</p> 1556 is part of a compound.</p>
1722 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 ad 2"><a name="28379"><span class= 1557 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 ad 2"><a name="28379"><span class="ref">[28379] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1723 "ref">[28379] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1724 dicendum quod verbum est forma exemplaris, non autem forma quae est 1558 dicendum quod verbum est forma exemplaris, non autem forma quae est
1725 pars compositi.</p> 1559 pars compositi.</p>
1726 </div> 1560 </div>
1727 1561
1728 <div class="bilingual"> 1562 <div class="bilingual">
1729 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Simple things do not differ by added differences---for this is the property of compounds. Thus man and horse differ by their differences, rational and irrational; which differences, however, do not differ from each other by other differences. Hence, to be quite accurate, it is better to say that they are, not different, but diverse. Hence, according to the Philosopher (Metaph. x), "things which are diverse are absolutely distinct, but things which are 1563 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A8-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Simple things do not differ by added differences---for this is the property of compounds. Thus man and horse differ by their differences, rational and irrational; which differences, however, do not differ from each other by other differences. Hence, to be quite accurate, it is better to say that they are, not different, but diverse. Hence, according to the Philosopher (Metaph. x), "things which are diverse are absolutely distinct, but things which are
1730 different differ by something." Therefore, strictly speaking, 1564 different differ by something." Therefore, strictly speaking,
1731 primary matter and God do not differ, but are by their very being, 1565 primary matter and God do not differ, but are by their very being,
1732 diverse. Hence it does not follow they are the same.</p> 1566 diverse. Hence it does not follow they are the same.</p>
1733 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 ad 3"><a name="28380"><span class= 1567 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 3 a. 8 ad 3"><a name="28380"><span class="ref">[28380] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
1734 "ref">[28380] I&ordf; q. 3 a. 8 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
1735 quod simplicia non differunt aliquibus aliis differentiis, hoc enim 1568 quod simplicia non differunt aliquibus aliis differentiis, hoc enim
1736 compositorum est. Homo enim et equus differunt rationali et 1569 compositorum est. Homo enim et equus differunt rationali et
1737 irrationali differentiis, quae quidem differentiae non differunt 1570 irrationali differentiis, quae quidem differentiae non differunt
1738 amplius ab invicem aliis differentiis. Unde, si fiat vis in verbo, 1571 amplius ab invicem aliis differentiis. Unde, si fiat vis in verbo,
1739 non proprie dicuntur differre, sed diversa esse, nam, secundum 1572 non proprie dicuntur differre, sed diversa esse, nam, secundum
1748 1581
1749 </div4> 1582 </div4>
1750 </div3> 1583 </div3>
1751 1584
1752 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4" next="FP_Q4_A1" prev="FP_Q3_A8" progress="0.58%" n="iii" title="Question. 4 - THE PERFECTION OF GOD (THREE ARTICLES)"> 1585 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4" next="FP_Q4_A1" prev="FP_Q3_A8" progress="0.58%" n="iii" title="Question. 4 - THE PERFECTION OF GOD (THREE ARTICLES)">
1753 <h3 xml:lang="en" 1586 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p0.1">Question 4. THE PERFECTION OF GOD (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
1754 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p0.1">Question 4. THE PERFECTION OF GOD (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
1755 1587
1756 1588
1757 1589
1758 <div class="bilingual"> 1590 <div class="bilingual">
1759 <div xml:lang="en"> 1591 <div xml:lang="en">
1760 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p2"> Having considered the divine simplicity, we treat next of God's perfection. Now because everything in so far as it is perfect is called good, we shall speak first of the divine perfection; secondly of the divine goodness.</p> 1592 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p2"> Having considered the divine simplicity, we treat next of God's perfection. Now because everything in so far as it is perfect is called good, we shall speak first of the divine perfection; secondly of the divine goodness.</p>
1761 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p3"> Concerning the first there are three points of inquiry:</p> 1593 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p3"> Concerning the first there are three points of inquiry:</p>
1762 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p4"> (1) Whether God is perfect?</p> 1594 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p4"> (1) Whether God is perfect?</p>
1763 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p5"> (2) Whether God is perfect universally, as having in Himself the perfections of all things?</p> 1595 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p5"> (2) Whether God is perfect universally, as having in Himself the perfections of all things?</p>
1764 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p6"> (3) Whether creatures can be said to be like God?</p> 1596 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4-p6"> (3) Whether creatures can be said to be like God?</p>
1765 1597 </div>
1766 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 pr."><a name="28381"><span class="ref">[28381] 1598 <div xml:lang="la"><p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 pr."><a name="28381"><span class="ref">[28381]
1767 I&ordf; q. 4 pr.</span></a> Post considerationem divinae 1599 I&ordf; q. 4 pr.</span></a> Post considerationem divinae
1768 simplicitatis, de perfectione ipsius Dei dicendum est. Et quia 1600 simplicitatis, de perfectione ipsius Dei dicendum est. Et quia
1769 unumquodque, secundum quod perfectum est, sic dicitur bonum, primo 1601 unumquodque, secundum quod perfectum est, sic dicitur bonum, primo
1770 agendum est de perfectione divina; secundo de eius bonitate. Circa 1602 agendum est de perfectione divina; secundo de eius bonitate. Circa
1771 primum quaeruntur tria. Primo, utrum Deus sit perfectus. Secundo, 1603 primum quaeruntur tria. Primo, utrum Deus sit perfectus. Secundo,
1776 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p0.1">Whether God is perfect?</h4> 1608 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p0.1">Whether God is perfect?</h4>
1777 1609
1778 1610
1779 1611
1780 <div class="bilingual"> 1612 <div class="bilingual">
1781 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1613 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that
1782 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that
1783 perfection does not belong to God. For we say a thing is perfect if it 1614 perfection does not belong to God. For we say a thing is perfect if it
1784 is completely made. But it does not befit God to be made. Therefore He 1615 is completely made. But it does not befit God to be made. Therefore He
1785 is not perfect.</p> 1616 is not perfect.</p>
1786 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 arg. 1"><a name="28382"><span class= 1617 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 arg. 1"><a name="28382"><span class="ref">[28382] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 arg. 1</span></a> Ad primum sic
1787 "ref">[28382] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 arg. 1</span></a> Ad primum sic
1788 proceditur. Videtur quod esse perfectum non conveniat Deo. 1618 proceditur. Videtur quod esse perfectum non conveniat Deo.
1789 Perfectum enim dicitur quasi totaliter factum. Sed Deo non convenit 1619 Perfectum enim dicitur quasi totaliter factum. Sed Deo non convenit
1790 esse factum. Ergo nec esse perfectum.</p> 1620 esse factum. Ergo nec esse perfectum.</p>
1791 </div> 1621 </div>
1792 1622
1793 <div class="bilingual"> 1623 <div class="bilingual">
1794 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1624 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, God is the
1795 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, God is the
1796 first beginning of things. But the beginnings of things seem to be 1625 first beginning of things. But the beginnings of things seem to be
1797 imperfect, as seed is the beginning of animal and vegetable 1626 imperfect, as seed is the beginning of animal and vegetable
1798 life. Therefore God is imperfect.</p> 1627 life. Therefore God is imperfect.</p>
1799 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 arg. 2"><a name="28383"><span class= 1628 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 arg. 2"><a name="28383"><span class="ref">[28383] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, Deus
1800 "ref">[28383] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, Deus
1801 est primum rerum principium. Sed principia rerum videntur esse 1629 est primum rerum principium. Sed principia rerum videntur esse
1802 imperfecta, semen enim est principium animalium et plantarum. Ergo 1630 imperfecta, semen enim est principium animalium et plantarum. Ergo
1803 Deus est imperfectus.</p> 1631 Deus est imperfectus.</p>
1804 </div> 1632 </div>
1805 1633
1806 <div class="bilingual"> 1634 <div class="bilingual">
1807 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1635 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, as shown
1808 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, as shown 1636 above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p4.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4">Q[3],
1809 above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect"
1810 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p4.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4">Q[3],
1811 A[4]</a>), God's essence is existence. But existence seems most 1637 A[4]</a>), God's essence is existence. But existence seems most
1812 imperfect, since it is most universal and receptive of all 1638 imperfect, since it is most universal and receptive of all
1813 modification. Therefore God is imperfect.</p> 1639 modification. Therefore God is imperfect.</p>
1814 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 arg. 3"><a name="28384"><span class= 1640 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 arg. 3"><a name="28384"><span class="ref">[28384] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
1815 "ref">[28384] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
1816 ostensum est supra quod essentia Dei est ipsum esse. Sed ipsum esse 1641 ostensum est supra quod essentia Dei est ipsum esse. Sed ipsum esse
1817 videtur esse imperfectissimum, cum sit communissimum, et recipiens 1642 videtur esse imperfectissimum, cum sit communissimum, et recipiens
1818 omnium additiones. Ergo Deus est imperfectus.</p> 1643 omnium additiones. Ergo Deus est imperfectus.</p>
1819 </div> 1644 </div>
1820 1645
1821 <div class="bilingual"> 1646 <div class="bilingual">
1822 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p5"><b>On 1647 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p5"><b>On
1823 the contrary,</b> It is written: "Be you perfect as also your heavenly 1648 the contrary,</b> It is written: "Be you perfect as also your heavenly
1824 Father is perfect" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Matt.5.48" 1649 Father is perfect" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Matt.5.48" parsed="vul|Matt|5|48|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p5.1" passage="Mat. 5:48">Mat. 5:48</scripRef>).</p>
1825 parsed="vul|Matt|5|48|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p5.1" 1650 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 s. c."><a name="28385"><span class="ref">[28385] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
1826 passage="Mat. 5:48">Mat. 5:48</scripRef>).</p>
1827 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 s. c."><a name="28385"><span class=
1828 "ref">[28385] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
1829 quod dicitur Matt. V, <i>estote perfecti, sicut et pater vester 1651 quod dicitur Matt. V, <i>estote perfecti, sicut et pater vester
1830 caelestis perfectus est</i>.</p> 1652 caelestis perfectus est</i>.</p>
1831 </div> 1653 </div>
1832 1654
1833 <div class="bilingual"> 1655 <div class="bilingual">
1837 agent, as such, is in the state of actuality. Hence, the first active 1659 agent, as such, is in the state of actuality. Hence, the first active
1838 principle must needs be most actual, and therefore most perfect; for a 1660 principle must needs be most actual, and therefore most perfect; for a
1839 thing is perfect in proportion to its state of actuality, because we 1661 thing is perfect in proportion to its state of actuality, because we
1840 call that perfect which lacks nothing of the mode of its 1662 call that perfect which lacks nothing of the mode of its
1841 perfection.</p> 1663 perfection.</p>
1842 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 co."><a name="28386"><span class= 1664 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 co."><a name="28386"><span class="ref">[28386] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1843 "ref">[28386] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1844 quod, sicut philosophus narrat in XII Metaphys., quidam antiqui 1665 quod, sicut philosophus narrat in XII Metaphys., quidam antiqui
1845 philosophi, scilicet Pythagorici et Speusippus, non attribuerunt 1666 philosophi, scilicet Pythagorici et Speusippus, non attribuerunt
1846 optimum et perfectissimum primo principio. Cuius ratio est, quia 1667 optimum et perfectissimum primo principio. Cuius ratio est, quia
1847 philosophi antiqui consideraverunt principium materiale tantum, 1668 philosophi antiqui consideraverunt principium materiale tantum,
1848 primum autem principium materiale imperfectissimum est. Cum enim 1669 primum autem principium materiale imperfectissimum est. Cum enim
1865 which is not made is improperly called perfect. Nevertheless because 1686 which is not made is improperly called perfect. Nevertheless because
1866 created things are then called perfect, when from potentiality they 1687 created things are then called perfect, when from potentiality they
1867 are brought into actuality, this word "perfect" signifies whatever is 1688 are brought into actuality, this word "perfect" signifies whatever is
1868 not wanting in actuality, whether this be by way of perfection or 1689 not wanting in actuality, whether this be by way of perfection or
1869 not.</p> 1690 not.</p>
1870 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 ad 1"><a name="28387"><span class= 1691 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 ad 1"><a name="28387"><span class="ref">[28387] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1871 "ref">[28387] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
1872 dicendum quod, sicut dicit Gregorius, <i>balbutiendo ut possumus, 1692 dicendum quod, sicut dicit Gregorius, <i>balbutiendo ut possumus,
1873 excelsa Dei resonamus, quod enim factum non est, perfectum proprie 1693 excelsa Dei resonamus, quod enim factum non est, perfectum proprie
1874 dici non potest</i>. Sed quia in his quae fiunt, tunc dicitur esse 1694 dici non potest</i>. Sed quia in his quae fiunt, tunc dicitur esse
1875 aliquid perfectum, cum de potentia educitur in actum; transumitur 1695 aliquid perfectum, cum de potentia educitur in actum; transumitur
1876 hoc nomen perfectum ad significandum omne illud cui non deest esse 1696 hoc nomen perfectum ad significandum omne illud cui non deest esse
1884 something perfect. For seed, though it be the principle of animal life 1704 something perfect. For seed, though it be the principle of animal life
1885 reproduced through seed, has previous to it, the animal or plant from 1705 reproduced through seed, has previous to it, the animal or plant from
1886 which is came. Because, previous to that which is potential, must be 1706 which is came. Because, previous to that which is potential, must be
1887 that which is actual; since a potential being can only be reduced into 1707 that which is actual; since a potential being can only be reduced into
1888 act by some being already actual.</p> 1708 act by some being already actual.</p>
1889 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 ad 2"><a name="28388"><span class= 1709 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 ad 2"><a name="28388"><span class="ref">[28388] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1890 "ref">[28388] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
1891 dicendum quod principium materiale, quod apud nos imperfectum 1710 dicendum quod principium materiale, quod apud nos imperfectum
1892 invenitur, non potest esse simpliciter primum, sed praeceditur ab 1711 invenitur, non potest esse simpliciter primum, sed praeceditur ab
1893 alio perfecto. Nam semen, licet sit principium animalis generati ex 1712 alio perfecto. Nam semen, licet sit principium animalis generati ex
1894 semine, tamen habet ante se animal vel plantam unde deciditur. 1713 semine, tamen habet ante se animal vel plantam unde deciditur.
1895 Oportet enim ante id quod est in potentia, esse aliquid actu, cum 1714 Oportet enim ante id quod est in potentia, esse aliquid actu, cum
1899 1718
1900 <div class="bilingual"> 1719 <div class="bilingual">
1901 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Existence is the most perfect of all things, for it is compared to all things as that by which they are made actual; for nothing has actuality except so far as it exists. Hence existence is that which actuates all things, even their forms. Therefore it is not compared to other things as the receiver is to the received; but rather as the received to the receiver. When therefore I speak of the existence of man, or horse, or anything else, existence is 1720 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Existence is the most perfect of all things, for it is compared to all things as that by which they are made actual; for nothing has actuality except so far as it exists. Hence existence is that which actuates all things, even their forms. Therefore it is not compared to other things as the receiver is to the received; but rather as the received to the receiver. When therefore I speak of the existence of man, or horse, or anything else, existence is
1902 considered a formal principle, and as something received; and not as 1721 considered a formal principle, and as something received; and not as
1903 that which exists.</p> 1722 that which exists.</p>
1904 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 ad 3"><a name="28389"><span class= 1723 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 1 ad 3"><a name="28389"><span class="ref">[28389] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
1905 "ref">[28389] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 1 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
1906 quod ipsum esse est perfectissimum omnium, comparatur enim ad omnia 1724 quod ipsum esse est perfectissimum omnium, comparatur enim ad omnia
1907 ut actus. Nihil enim habet actualitatem, nisi inquantum est, unde 1725 ut actus. Nihil enim habet actualitatem, nisi inquantum est, unde
1908 ipsum esse est actualitas omnium rerum, et etiam ipsarum formarum. 1726 ipsum esse est actualitas omnium rerum, et etiam ipsarum formarum.
1909 Unde non comparatur ad alia sicut recipiens ad receptum, sed magis 1727 Unde non comparatur ad alia sicut recipiens ad receptum, sed magis
1910 sicut receptum ad recipiens. Cum enim dico esse hominis, vel equi, 1728 sicut receptum ad recipiens. Cum enim dico esse hominis, vel equi,
1921 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p0.1">Whether the perfections of all things are in God?</h4> 1739 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p0.1">Whether the perfections of all things are in God?</h4>
1922 1740
1923 1741
1924 1742
1925 <div class="bilingual"> 1743 <div class="bilingual">
1926 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1744 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the
1927 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the
1928 perfections of all things are not in God. For God is simple, as shown 1745 perfections of all things are not in God. For God is simple, as shown
1929 above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" 1746 above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p2.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7">Q[3],
1930 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p2.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7">Q[3],
1931 A[7]</a>); whereas the perfections of things are many and 1747 A[7]</a>); whereas the perfections of things are many and
1932 diverse. Therefore the perfections of all things are not in God.</p> 1748 diverse. Therefore the perfections of all things are not in God.</p>
1933 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 arg. 1"><a name="28390"><span class= 1749 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 arg. 1"><a name="28390"><span class="ref">[28390] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 arg. 1</span></a> Ad secundum sic
1934 "ref">[28390] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 arg. 1</span></a> Ad secundum sic
1935 proceditur. Videtur quod in Deo non sint perfectiones omnium rerum. 1750 proceditur. Videtur quod in Deo non sint perfectiones omnium rerum.
1936 Deus enim simplex est, ut ostensum est. Sed perfectiones rerum sunt 1751 Deus enim simplex est, ut ostensum est. Sed perfectiones rerum sunt
1937 multae et diversae. Ergo in Deo non sunt omnes perfectiones 1752 multae et diversae. Ergo in Deo non sunt omnes perfectiones
1938 rerum.</p> 1753 rerum.</p>
1939 </div> 1754 </div>
1940 1755
1941 <div class="bilingual"> 1756 <div class="bilingual">
1942 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1757 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, opposites
1943 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, opposites
1944 cannot coexist. Now the perfections of things are opposed to each 1758 cannot coexist. Now the perfections of things are opposed to each
1945 other, for each thing is perfected by its specific difference. But the 1759 other, for each thing is perfected by its specific difference. But the
1946 differences by which "genera" are divided, and "species" constituted, 1760 differences by which "genera" are divided, and "species" constituted,
1947 are opposed to each other. Therefore because opposites cannot coexist 1761 are opposed to each other. Therefore because opposites cannot coexist
1948 in the same subject, it seems that the perfections of all things are 1762 in the same subject, it seems that the perfections of all things are
1949 not in God.</p> 1763 not in God.</p>
1950 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 arg. 2"><a name="28391"><span class= 1764 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 arg. 2"><a name="28391"><span class="ref">[28391] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
1951 "ref">[28391] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
1952 opposita non possunt esse in eodem. Sed perfectiones rerum sunt 1765 opposita non possunt esse in eodem. Sed perfectiones rerum sunt
1953 oppositae, unaquaeque enim species perficitur per suam differentiam 1766 oppositae, unaquaeque enim species perficitur per suam differentiam
1954 specificam; differentiae autem quibus dividitur genus et 1767 specificam; differentiae autem quibus dividitur genus et
1955 constituuntur species, sunt oppositae. Cum ergo opposita non 1768 constituuntur species, sunt oppositae. Cum ergo opposita non
1956 possint simul esse in eodem, videtur quod non omnes rerum 1769 possint simul esse in eodem, videtur quod non omnes rerum
1957 perfectiones sint in Deo.</p> 1770 perfectiones sint in Deo.</p>
1958 </div> 1771 </div>
1959 1772
1960 <div class="bilingual"> 1773 <div class="bilingual">
1961 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1774 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, a living
1962 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, a living
1963 thing is more perfect than what merely exists; and an intelligent 1775 thing is more perfect than what merely exists; and an intelligent
1964 thing than what merely lives. Therefore life is more perfect than 1776 thing than what merely lives. Therefore life is more perfect than
1965 existence; and knowledge than life. But the essence of God is 1777 existence; and knowledge than life. But the essence of God is
1966 existence itself. Therefore He has not the perfections of life, and 1778 existence itself. Therefore He has not the perfections of life, and
1967 knowledge, and other similar perfections.</p> 1779 knowledge, and other similar perfections.</p>
1968 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 arg. 3"><a name="28392"><span class= 1780 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 arg. 3"><a name="28392"><span class="ref">[28392] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, vivens
1969 "ref">[28392] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, vivens
1970 est perfectius quam ens, et sapiens quam vivens, ergo et vivere est 1781 est perfectius quam ens, et sapiens quam vivens, ergo et vivere est
1971 perfectius quam esse, et sapere quam vivere. Sed essentia Dei est 1782 perfectius quam esse, et sapere quam vivere. Sed essentia Dei est
1972 ipsum esse. Ergo non habet in se perfectionem vitae et sapientiae, 1783 ipsum esse. Ergo non habet in se perfectionem vitae et sapientiae,
1973 et alias huiusmodi perfectiones.</p> 1784 et alias huiusmodi perfectiones.</p>
1974 </div> 1785 </div>
1975 1786
1976 <div class="bilingual"> 1787 <div class="bilingual">
1977 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p5"><b>On 1788 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p5"><b>On
1978 the contrary,</b> Dionysius says (Div. Nom. v) that "God in His one 1789 the contrary,</b> Dionysius says (Div. Nom. v) that "God in His one
1979 existence prepossesses all things."</p> 1790 existence prepossesses all things."</p>
1980 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 s. c."><a name="28393"><span class= 1791 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 s. c."><a name="28393"><span class="ref">[28393] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
1981 "ref">[28393] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
1982 quod dicit Dionysius, cap. V de Div. Nom., quod Deus in uno 1792 quod dicit Dionysius, cap. V de Div. Nom., quod Deus in uno
1983 existentia omnia praehabet.</p> 1793 existentia omnia praehabet.</p>
1984 </div> 1794 </div>
1985 1795
1986 <div class="bilingual"> 1796 <div class="bilingual">
1991 thing is wanting to God. This line of argument, too, is implied by 1801 thing is wanting to God. This line of argument, too, is implied by
1992 Dionysius (Div. Nom. v), when he says that, "God exists not in any 1802 Dionysius (Div. Nom. v), when he says that, "God exists not in any
1993 single mode, but embraces all being within Himself, absolutely, 1803 single mode, but embraces all being within Himself, absolutely,
1994 without limitation, uniformly;" and afterwards he adds that, "He is 1804 without limitation, uniformly;" and afterwards he adds that, "He is
1995 the very existence to subsisting things."</p> 1805 the very existence to subsisting things."</p>
1996 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 co."><a name="28394"><span class= 1806 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 co."><a name="28394"><span class="ref">[28394] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1997 "ref">[28394] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
1998 quod in Deo sunt perfectiones omnium rerum. Unde et dicitur 1807 quod in Deo sunt perfectiones omnium rerum. Unde et dicitur
1999 universaliter perfectus, quia non deest ei aliqua nobilitas quae 1808 universaliter perfectus, quia non deest ei aliqua nobilitas quae
2000 inveniatur in aliquo genere, ut dicit Commentator in V Metaphys. Et 1809 inveniatur in aliquo genere, ut dicit Commentator in V Metaphys. Et
2001 hoc quidem ex duobus considerari potest. Primo quidem, per hoc quod 1810 hoc quidem ex duobus considerari potest. Primo quidem, per hoc quod
2002 quidquid perfectionis est in effectu, oportet inveniri in causa 1811 quidquid perfectionis est in effectu, oportet inveniri in causa
2032 1841
2033 <div class="bilingual"> 1842 <div class="bilingual">
2034 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Even as the sun (as Dionysius remarks, (Div. Nom. v)), while remaining one and shining uniformly, contains within itself first and uniformly the substances of sensible things, and many and diverse qualities; "a fortiori" should all things in a kind of natural unity pre-exist in the cause of all things; and thus things diverse and in themselves opposed to each other, pre-exist in God as one, without injury to His simplicity. This suffices for the Reply 1843 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Even as the sun (as Dionysius remarks, (Div. Nom. v)), while remaining one and shining uniformly, contains within itself first and uniformly the substances of sensible things, and many and diverse qualities; "a fortiori" should all things in a kind of natural unity pre-exist in the cause of all things; and thus things diverse and in themselves opposed to each other, pre-exist in God as one, without injury to His simplicity. This suffices for the Reply
2035 to the Second Objection.</p> 1844 to the Second Objection.</p>
2036 <div xml:lang="la"> 1845 <div xml:lang="la">
2037 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 ad 1"><a name="28395"><span class= 1846 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 ad 1"><a name="28395"><span class="ref">[28395] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
2038 "ref">[28395] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
2039 dicendum quod, <i>sicut sol</i>, ut dicit Dionysius, cap. V de Div. 1847 dicendum quod, <i>sicut sol</i>, ut dicit Dionysius, cap. V de Div.
2040 Nom., <i>sensibilium substantias et qualitates multas et 1848 Nom., <i>sensibilium substantias et qualitates multas et
2041 differentes, ipse unus existens et uniformiter lucendo, in seipso 1849 differentes, ipse unus existens et uniformiter lucendo, in seipso
2042 uniformiter praeaccipit; ita multo magis in causa omnium necesse 1850 uniformiter praeaccipit; ita multo magis in causa omnium necesse
2043 est praeexistere omnia secundum naturalem unionem</i>. Et sic, quae 1851 est praeexistere omnia secundum naturalem unionem</i>. Et sic, quae
2044 sunt diversa et opposita in seipsis, in Deo praeexistunt ut unum, 1852 sunt diversa et opposita in seipsis, in Deo praeexistunt ut unum,
2045 absque detrimento simplicitatis ipsius.</p> 1853 absque detrimento simplicitatis ipsius.</p>
2046 <p title="I q. 4 a. 2 ad 2"><a name="28396"><span class= 1854 <p title="I q. 4 a. 2 ad 2"><a name="28396"><span class="ref">[28396] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 ad 2</span></a> Et per hoc patet
2047 "ref">[28396] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 ad 2</span></a> Et per hoc patet
2048 solutio ad secundum.</p> 1855 solutio ad secundum.</p>
2049 </div> 1856 </div>
2050 </div> 1857 </div>
2051 1858
2052 <div class="bilingual"> 1859 <div class="bilingual">
2053 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The same Dionysius says (Div. Nom. v) that, although existence is more perfect than life, and life than wisdom, if they are considered as distinguished in idea; nevertheless, a living thing is more perfect than what merely exists, because living things also exist and intelligent things both exist and live. Although therefore existence does not include life and wisdom, because that which participates in existence need not participate in every mode of 1860 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A2-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The same Dionysius says (Div. Nom. v) that, although existence is more perfect than life, and life than wisdom, if they are considered as distinguished in idea; nevertheless, a living thing is more perfect than what merely exists, because living things also exist and intelligent things both exist and live. Although therefore existence does not include life and wisdom, because that which participates in existence need not participate in every mode of
2054 existence; nevertheless God's existence includes in itself life and 1861 existence; nevertheless God's existence includes in itself life and
2055 wisdom, because nothing of the perfection of being can be wanting to 1862 wisdom, because nothing of the perfection of being can be wanting to
2056 Him who is subsisting being itself.</p> 1863 Him who is subsisting being itself.</p>
2057 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 ad 3"><a name="28397"><span class= 1864 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 2 ad 3"><a name="28397"><span class="ref">[28397] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
2058 "ref">[28397] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 2 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
2059 quod, sicut in eodem capite idem Dionysius dicit, licet ipsum esse 1865 quod, sicut in eodem capite idem Dionysius dicit, licet ipsum esse
2060 sit perfectius quam vita, et ipsa vita quam ipsa sapientia, si 1866 sit perfectius quam vita, et ipsa vita quam ipsa sapientia, si
2061 considerentur secundum quod distinguuntur ratione, tamen vivens est 1867 considerentur secundum quod distinguuntur ratione, tamen vivens est
2062 perfectius quam ens tantum, quia vivens etiam est ens; et sapiens 1868 perfectius quam ens tantum, quia vivens etiam est ens; et sapiens
2063 est ens et vivens. Licet igitur ens non includat in se vivens et 1869 est ens et vivens. Licet igitur ens non includat in se vivens et
2076 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p0.1">Whether any creature can be like God?</h4> 1882 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p0.1">Whether any creature can be like God?</h4>
2077 1883
2078 1884
2079 1885
2080 <div class="bilingual"> 1886 <div class="bilingual">
2081 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1887 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that no
2082 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that no 1888 creature can be like God. For it is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.85.8" parsed="vul|Ps|85|8|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p2.1" passage="Ps. 85:8">Ps. 85:8</scripRef>): "There is none among the gods
2083 creature can be like God. For it is written (<scripRef
2084 osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.85.8" parsed="vul|Ps|85|8|0|0"
2085 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p2.1"
2086 passage="Ps. 85:8">Ps. 85:8</scripRef>): "There is none among the gods
2087 like unto Thee, O Lord." But of all creatures the most excellent are 1889 like unto Thee, O Lord." But of all creatures the most excellent are
2088 those which are called participation gods. Therefore still less can 1890 those which are called participation gods. Therefore still less can
2089 other creatures be said to be like God.</p> 1891 other creatures be said to be like God.</p>
2090 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 arg. 1"><a name="28398"><span class= 1892 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 arg. 1"><a name="28398"><span class="ref">[28398] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 arg. 1</span></a> Ad tertium sic
2091 "ref">[28398] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 arg. 1</span></a> Ad tertium sic
2092 proceditur. Videtur quod nulla creatura possit esse similis Deo. 1893 proceditur. Videtur quod nulla creatura possit esse similis Deo.
2093 Dicitur enim in Psalmo, <i>non est similis tui in diis, domine</i>. 1894 Dicitur enim in Psalmo, <i>non est similis tui in diis, domine</i>.
2094 Sed inter omnes creaturas, excellentiores sunt quae dicuntur dii 1895 Sed inter omnes creaturas, excellentiores sunt quae dicuntur dii
2095 participative. Multo ergo minus aliae creaturae possunt dici Deo 1896 participative. Multo ergo minus aliae creaturae possunt dici Deo
2096 similes.</p> 1897 similes.</p>
2097 </div> 1898 </div>
2098 1899
2099 <div class="bilingual"> 1900 <div class="bilingual">
2100 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1901 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, likeness
2101 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, likeness
2102 implies comparison. But there can be no comparison between things in a 1902 implies comparison. But there can be no comparison between things in a
2103 different "genus." Therefore neither can there be any likeness. Thus 1903 different "genus." Therefore neither can there be any likeness. Thus
2104 we do not say that sweetness is like whiteness. But no creature is in 1904 we do not say that sweetness is like whiteness. But no creature is in
2105 the same "genus" as God: since God is no "genus," as shown above (<a 1905 the same "genus" as God: since God is no "genus," as shown above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p3.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A5">Q[3], A[5]</a>). Therefore no creature is
2106 xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p3.1"
2107 href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A5">Q[3], A[5]</a>). Therefore no creature is
2108 like God.</p> 1906 like God.</p>
2109 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 arg. 2"><a name="28399"><span class= 1907 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 arg. 2"><a name="28399"><span class="ref">[28399] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
2110 "ref">[28399] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
2111 similitudo est comparatio quaedam. Non est autem comparatio eorum 1908 similitudo est comparatio quaedam. Non est autem comparatio eorum
2112 quae sunt diversorum generum; ergo nec similitudo, non enim dicimus 1909 quae sunt diversorum generum; ergo nec similitudo, non enim dicimus
2113 quod dulcedo sit similis albedini. Sed nulla creatura est eiusdem 1910 quod dulcedo sit similis albedini. Sed nulla creatura est eiusdem
2114 generis cum Deo, cum Deus non sit in genere, ut supra ostensum est. 1911 generis cum Deo, cum Deus non sit in genere, ut supra ostensum est.
2115 Ergo nulla creatura est similis Deo.</p> 1912 Ergo nulla creatura est similis Deo.</p>
2116 </div> 1913 </div>
2117 1914
2118 <div class="bilingual"> 1915 <div class="bilingual">
2119 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1916 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, we speak of
2120 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, we speak of
2121 those things as like which agree in form. But nothing can agree with 1917 those things as like which agree in form. But nothing can agree with
2122 God in form; for, save in God alone, essence and existence 1918 God in form; for, save in God alone, essence and existence
2123 differ. Therefore no creature can be like to God.</p> 1919 differ. Therefore no creature can be like to God.</p>
2124 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 arg. 3"><a name="28400"><span class= 1920 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 arg. 3"><a name="28400"><span class="ref">[28400] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
2125 "ref">[28400] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
2126 similia dicuntur quae conveniunt in forma. Sed nihil convenit cum 1921 similia dicuntur quae conveniunt in forma. Sed nihil convenit cum
2127 Deo in forma, nullius enim rei essentia est ipsum esse, nisi solius 1922 Deo in forma, nullius enim rei essentia est ipsum esse, nisi solius
2128 Dei. Ergo nulla creatura potest esse similis Deo.</p> 1923 Dei. Ergo nulla creatura potest esse similis Deo.</p>
2129 </div> 1924 </div>
2130 1925
2131 <div class="bilingual"> 1926 <div class="bilingual">
2132 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 1927 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, among like
2133 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, among like
2134 things there is mutual likeness; for like is like to like. If 1928 things there is mutual likeness; for like is like to like. If
2135 therefore any creature is like God, God will be like some creature, 1929 therefore any creature is like God, God will be like some creature,
2136 which is against what is said by Isaias: "To whom have you likened 1930 which is against what is said by Isaias: "To whom have you likened
2137 God?" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.40.18" 1931 God?" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.40.18" parsed="vul|Isa|40|18|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p5.1" passage="Is. 40:18">Is. 40:18</scripRef>).</p>
2138 parsed="vul|Isa|40|18|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p5.1" 1932 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 arg. 4"><a name="28401"><span class="ref">[28401] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 arg. 4</span></a> Praeterea, in
2139 passage="Is. 40:18">Is. 40:18</scripRef>).</p>
2140 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 arg. 4"><a name="28401"><span class=
2141 "ref">[28401] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 arg. 4</span></a> Praeterea, in
2142 similibus est mutua similitudo, nam simile est simili simile. Si 1933 similibus est mutua similitudo, nam simile est simili simile. Si
2143 igitur aliqua creatura est similis Deo, et Deus erit similis alicui 1934 igitur aliqua creatura est similis Deo, et Deus erit similis alicui
2144 creaturae. Quod est contra id quod dicitur Isaiae XL, <i>cui 1935 creaturae. Quod est contra id quod dicitur Isaiae XL, <i>cui
2145 similem fecistis Deum?</i></p> 1936 similem fecistis Deum?</i></p>
2146 </div> 1937 </div>
2147 1938
2148 <div class="bilingual"> 1939 <div class="bilingual">
2149 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p6"><b>On 1940 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p6"><b>On
2150 the contrary,</b> It is written: "Let us make man to our image and 1941 the contrary,</b> It is written: "Let us make man to our image and
2151 likeness" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Gen.1.26" 1942 likeness" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Gen.1.26" parsed="vul|Gen|1|26|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p6.1" passage="Gn. 1:26">Gn. 1:26</scripRef>), and: "When He shall appear we
2152 parsed="vul|Gen|1|26|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p6.1" 1943 shall be like to Him" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1John.3.2" parsed="vul|1John|3|2|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p6.2" passage="1
2153 passage="Gn. 1:26">Gn. 1:26</scripRef>), and: "When He shall appear we
2154 shall be like to Him" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1John.3.2"
2155 parsed="vul|1John|3|2|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p6.2" passage="1
2156 Jn. 3:2">1 Jn. 3:2</scripRef>).</p> 1944 Jn. 3:2">1 Jn. 3:2</scripRef>).</p>
2157 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28402"><span class= 1945 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28402"><span class="ref">[28402] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
2158 "ref">[28402] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
2159 quod dicitur Gen. I, <i>faciamus hominem ad imaginem et 1946 quod dicitur Gen. I, <i>faciamus hominem ad imaginem et
2160 similitudinem nostram</i>; et I Ioann. III, <i>cum apparuerit, 1947 similitudinem nostram</i>; et I Ioann. III, <i>cum apparuerit,
2161 similes ei erimus</i>.</p> 1948 similes ei erimus</i>.</p>
2162 </div> 1949 </div>
2163 1950
2167 according to the manner of its form, the effect must in some way resemble the form of the agent. If therefore the agent is contained in the same species as its effect, there will be a likeness in form between that which makes and that which is made, according to the same formality of the species; as man reproduces man. If, however, the agent and its effect are not contained in the same species, there will be a likeness, but not according to the formality of the same species; as things generated 1954 according to the manner of its form, the effect must in some way resemble the form of the agent. If therefore the agent is contained in the same species as its effect, there will be a likeness in form between that which makes and that which is made, according to the same formality of the species; as man reproduces man. If, however, the agent and its effect are not contained in the same species, there will be a likeness, but not according to the formality of the same species; as things generated
2168 by the sun's heat may be in some sort spoken of as like the sun, not as though they received the form of the sun in its specific likeness, but in its generic likeness. Therefore if there is an agent not contained in any "genus," its effect will still more distantly reproduce the form of the agent, not, that is, so as to participate in the likeness of the agent's form according to the same specific or generic formality, but only according to some sort of analogy; as existence is common to all. 1955 by the sun's heat may be in some sort spoken of as like the sun, not as though they received the form of the sun in its specific likeness, but in its generic likeness. Therefore if there is an agent not contained in any "genus," its effect will still more distantly reproduce the form of the agent, not, that is, so as to participate in the likeness of the agent's form according to the same specific or generic formality, but only according to some sort of analogy; as existence is common to all.
2169 In this way all created things, so far as they are beings, are like 1956 In this way all created things, so far as they are beings, are like
2170 God as the first and universal principle of all being.</p> 1957 God as the first and universal principle of all being.</p>
2171 <div xml:lang="la"> 1958 <div xml:lang="la">
2172 <p title="I q. 4 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28402"><span class= 1959 <p title="I q. 4 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28402"><span class="ref">[28402] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
2173 "ref">[28402] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
2174 quod dicitur Gen. I, <i>faciamus hominem ad imaginem et 1960 quod dicitur Gen. I, <i>faciamus hominem ad imaginem et
2175 similitudinem nostram</i>; et I Ioann. III, <i>cum apparuerit, 1961 similitudinem nostram</i>; et I Ioann. III, <i>cum apparuerit,
2176 similes ei erimus</i>.</p> 1962 similes ei erimus</i>.</p>
2177 <p title="I q. 4 a. 3 co."><a name="28403"><span class= 1963 <p title="I q. 4 a. 3 co."><a name="28403"><span class="ref">[28403] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
2178 "ref">[28403] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
2179 quod, cum similitudo attendatur secundum convenientiam vel 1964 quod, cum similitudo attendatur secundum convenientiam vel
2180 communicationem in forma, multiplex est similitudo, secundum multos 1965 communicationem in forma, multiplex est similitudo, secundum multos
2181 modos communicandi in forma. Quaedam enim dicuntur similia, quae 1966 modos communicandi in forma. Quaedam enim dicuntur similia, quae
2182 communicant in eadem forma secundum eandem rationem, et secundum 1967 communicant in eadem forma secundum eandem rationem, et secundum
2183 eundem modum, et haec non solum dicuntur similia, sed aequalia in 1968 eundem modum, et haec non solum dicuntur similia, sed aequalia in
2209 </div> 1994 </div>
2210 1995
2211 <div class="bilingual"> 1996 <div class="bilingual">
2212 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> As Dionysius says (Div. Nom. ix), when Holy Writ declares that nothing is like God, it does not mean to deny all likeness to Him. For, "the same things can be like and unlike to God: like, according as they imitate Him, as far as He, Who is not perfectly imitable, can be imitated; unlike according as they fall short of their cause," not merely in intensity and remission, as that which is less white falls short of that which is more white; but because 1997 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> As Dionysius says (Div. Nom. ix), when Holy Writ declares that nothing is like God, it does not mean to deny all likeness to Him. For, "the same things can be like and unlike to God: like, according as they imitate Him, as far as He, Who is not perfectly imitable, can be imitated; unlike according as they fall short of their cause," not merely in intensity and remission, as that which is less white falls short of that which is more white; but because
2213 they are not in agreement, specifically or generically.</p> 1998 they are not in agreement, specifically or generically.</p>
2214 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 ad 1"><a name="28404"><span class= 1999 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 ad 1"><a name="28404"><span class="ref">[28404] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
2215 "ref">[28404] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
2216 dicendum quod, sicut dicit Dionysius cap. IX de Div. Nom., cum 2000 dicendum quod, sicut dicit Dionysius cap. IX de Div. Nom., cum
2217 sacra Scriptura dicit aliquid non esse simile Deo, <i>non est 2001 sacra Scriptura dicit aliquid non esse simile Deo, <i>non est
2218 contrarium assimilationi ad ipsum. Eadem enim sunt similia Deo, et 2002 contrarium assimilationi ad ipsum. Eadem enim sunt similia Deo, et
2219 dissimilia, similia quidem secundum quod imitantur ipsum, prout 2003 dissimilia, similia quidem secundum quod imitantur ipsum, prout
2220 contingit eum imitari qui non perfecte imitabilis est dissimilia 2004 contingit eum imitari qui non perfecte imitabilis est dissimilia
2227 <div class="bilingual"> 2011 <div class="bilingual">
2228 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p9"><b>Reply 2012 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p9"><b>Reply
2229 to Objection 2:</b> God is not related to creatures as though 2013 to Objection 2:</b> God is not related to creatures as though
2230 belonging to a different "genus," but as transcending every "genus," 2014 belonging to a different "genus," but as transcending every "genus,"
2231 and as the principle of all "genera."</p> 2015 and as the principle of all "genera."</p>
2232 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 ad 2"><a name="28405"><span class= 2016 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 ad 2"><a name="28405"><span class="ref">[28405] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
2233 "ref">[28405] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
2234 dicendum quod Deus non se habet ad creaturas sicut res diversorum 2017 dicendum quod Deus non se habet ad creaturas sicut res diversorum
2235 generum, sed sicut id quod est extra omne genus, et principium 2018 generum, sed sicut id quod est extra omne genus, et principium
2236 omnium generum.</p> 2019 omnium generum.</p>
2237 </div> 2020 </div>
2238 2021
2239 <div class="bilingual"> 2022 <div class="bilingual">
2240 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 2023 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Likeness of
2241 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Likeness of
2242 creatures to God is not affirmed on account of agreement in form 2024 creatures to God is not affirmed on account of agreement in form
2243 according to the formality of the same genus or species, but solely 2025 according to the formality of the same genus or species, but solely
2244 according to analogy, inasmuch as God is essential being, whereas 2026 according to analogy, inasmuch as God is essential being, whereas
2245 other things are beings by participation.</p> 2027 other things are beings by participation.</p>
2246 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 ad 3"><a name="28406"><span class= 2028 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 ad 3"><a name="28406"><span class="ref">[28406] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
2247 "ref">[28406] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
2248 quod non dicitur esse similitudo creaturae ad Deum propter 2029 quod non dicitur esse similitudo creaturae ad Deum propter
2249 communicantiam in forma secundum eandem rationem generis et 2030 communicantiam in forma secundum eandem rationem generis et
2250 speciei, sed secundum analogiam tantum; prout scilicet Deus est ens 2031 speciei, sed secundum analogiam tantum; prout scilicet Deus est ens
2251 per essentiam, et alia per participationem.</p> 2032 per essentiam, et alia per participationem.</p>
2252 </div> 2033 </div>
2253 2034
2254 <div class="bilingual"> 2035 <div class="bilingual">
2255 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" 2036 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Although it
2256 id="FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A3-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Although it
2257 may be admitted that creatures are in some sort like God, it must 2037 may be admitted that creatures are in some sort like God, it must
2258 nowise be admitted that God is like creatures; because, as Dionysius 2038 nowise be admitted that God is like creatures; because, as Dionysius
2259 says (Div. Nom. ix): "A mutual likeness may be found between things of 2039 says (Div. Nom. ix): "A mutual likeness may be found between things of
2260 the same order, but not between a cause and that which is caused." 2040 the same order, but not between a cause and that which is caused."
2261 For, we say that a statue is like a man, but not conversely; so also a 2041 For, we say that a statue is like a man, but not conversely; so also a
2262 creature can be spoken of as in some sort like God; but not that God 2042 creature can be spoken of as in some sort like God; but not that God
2263 is like a creature.</p> 2043 is like a creature.</p>
2264 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 ad 4"><a name="28407"><span class= 2044 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 4 a. 3 ad 4"><a name="28407"><span class="ref">[28407] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 ad 4</span></a> Ad quartum dicendum
2265 "ref">[28407] I&ordf; q. 4 a. 3 ad 4</span></a> Ad quartum dicendum
2266 quod, licet aliquo modo concedatur quod creatura sit similis Deo, 2045 quod, licet aliquo modo concedatur quod creatura sit similis Deo,
2267 nullo tamen modo concedendum est quod Deus sit similis creaturae, 2046 nullo tamen modo concedendum est quod Deus sit similis creaturae,
2268 quia, ut dicit Dionysius cap. IX de Div. Nom., <i>in his quae unius 2047 quia, ut dicit Dionysius cap. IX de Div. Nom., <i>in his quae unius
2269 ordinis sunt, recipitur mutua similitudo, non autem in causa et 2048 ordinis sunt, recipitur mutua similitudo, non autem in causa et
2270 causato</i>, dicimus enim quod imago sit similis homini, et non e 2049 causato</i>, dicimus enim quod imago sit similis homini, et non e
2275 2054
2276 2055
2277 2056
2278 </div4> 2057 </div4>
2279 </div3> 2058 </div3>
2280 <!-- merged down to here -->
2281 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5" next="FP_Q5_A1" prev="FP_Q4_A3" progress="0.67%" n="iv" title="Question. 5 - OF GOODNESS IN GENERAL (SIX ARTICLES)"> 2059 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5" next="FP_Q5_A1" prev="FP_Q4_A3" progress="0.67%" n="iv" title="Question. 5 - OF GOODNESS IN GENERAL (SIX ARTICLES)">
2282 <h3 xml:lang="en" 2060 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p0.1">Question 5. OF GOODNESS IN GENERAL (SIX ARTICLES)</h3>
2283 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p0.1">Question 5. OF GOODNESS IN GENERAL (SIX ARTICLES)</h3>
2284 2061
2285 2062
2286 2063
2287 <div class="bilingual"> 2064 <div class="bilingual">
2065 <div xml:lang="en">
2288 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p2"> We next consider goodness: First, goodness in general. Secondly, the goodness of God.</p> 2066 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p2"> We next consider goodness: First, goodness in general. Secondly, the goodness of God.</p>
2289 </div>
2290
2291 <div class="bilingual">
2292 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p3"> Under the first head there are six points of inquiry:</p> 2067 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p3"> Under the first head there are six points of inquiry:</p>
2293 </div>
2294
2295 <div class="bilingual">
2296 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p4"> (1) Whether goodness and being are the same really?</p> 2068 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p4"> (1) Whether goodness and being are the same really?</p>
2297 </div>
2298
2299 <div class="bilingual">
2300 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p5"> (2) Granted that they differ only in idea, which is prior in thought?</p> 2069 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p5"> (2) Granted that they differ only in idea, which is prior in thought?</p>
2301 </div>
2302
2303 <div class="bilingual">
2304 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p6"> (3) Granted that being is prior, whether every being is good?</p> 2070 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p6"> (3) Granted that being is prior, whether every being is good?</p>
2305 </div>
2306
2307 <div class="bilingual">
2308 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p7"> (4) To what cause should goodness be reduced?</p> 2071 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p7"> (4) To what cause should goodness be reduced?</p>
2309 </div>
2310
2311 <div class="bilingual">
2312 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p8"> (5) Whether goodness consists in mode, species, and order?</p> 2072 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p8"> (5) Whether goodness consists in mode, species, and order?</p>
2313 </div>
2314
2315 <div class="bilingual">
2316 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p9"> (6) Whether goodness is divided into the virtuous, the useful, and the pleasant?</p> 2073 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5-p9"> (6) Whether goodness is divided into the virtuous, the useful, and the pleasant?</p>
2317 </div> 2074 </div>
2318 2075 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 pr."><a name="28408"><span class="ref">[28408]
2076 I&ordf; q. 5 pr.</span></a> Deinde quaeritur de bono, et primo de
2077 bono in communi; secundo de bonitate Dei. Circa primum quaeruntur
2078 sex. Primo, utrum bonum et ens sint idem secundum rem. Secundo,
2079 supposito quod differant ratione tantum, quid sit prius secundum
2080 rationem, utrum bonum vel ens. Tertio, supposito quod ens sit
2081 prius, utrum omne ens sit bonum. Quarto, ad quam causam ratio boni
2082 reducatur. Quinto, utrum ratio boni consistat in modo, specie et
2083 ordine. Sexto, quomodo dividatur bonum in honestum, utile et
2084 delectabile.</p>
2085 </div>
2319 <div4 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1" next="FP_Q5_A2" prev="FP_Q5" progress="0.67%" n="i" title="Article. 1 - Whether goodness differs really from being?"> 2086 <div4 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1" next="FP_Q5_A2" prev="FP_Q5" progress="0.67%" n="i" title="Article. 1 - Whether goodness differs really from being?">
2320 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p0.1">Whether goodness differs really from being?</h4> 2087 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p0.1">Whether goodness differs really from being?</h4>
2321 2088
2322 2089
2323 2090
2324 <div class="bilingual"> 2091 <div class="bilingual">
2325 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that goodness differs really from being. For Boethius says (De Hebdom.): "I perceive that in nature the fact that things are good is one thing: that they are is another." Therefore goodness and being really differ.</p> 2092 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2326 </div> 2093 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that
2327 2094 goodness differs really from being. For Boethius says (De Hebdom.): "I
2328 <div class="bilingual"> 2095 perceive that in nature the fact that things are good is one thing:
2329 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, nothing can be its own form. "But that is called good which has the form of being", according to the commentary on De Causis. Therefore goodness differs really from being.</p> 2096 that they are is another." Therefore goodness and being really
2330 </div> 2097 differ.</p>
2331 2098 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 1 arg. 1"><a name="28409"><span class=
2332 <div class="bilingual"> 2099 "ref">[28409] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 1 arg. 1</span></a> Ad primum sic
2333 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, goodness can be more or less. But being cannot be more or less. Therefore goodness differs really from being.</p> 2100 proceditur. Videtur quod bonum differat secundum rem ab ente. Dicit
2334 </div> 2101 enim Boetius, in libro de Hebdom., <i>intueor in rebus aliud esse
2335 2102 quod sunt bona, et aliud esse quod sunt</i>. Ergo bonum et ens
2336 <div class="bilingual"> 2103 differunt secundum rem.</p>
2337 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 42) that, "inasmuch as we exist we are good."</p> 2104 </div>
2105
2106 <div class="bilingual">
2107 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2108 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, nothing can
2109 be its own form. "But that is called good which has the form of
2110 being", according to the commentary on De Causis. Therefore goodness
2111 differs really from being.</p>
2112 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 1 arg. 2"><a name="28410"><span class=
2113 "ref">[28410] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 1 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, nihil
2114 informatur seipso. Sed bonum dicitur per informationem entis, ut
2115 habetur in commento libri de causis. Ergo bonum differt secundum
2116 rem ab ente.</p>
2117 </div>
2118
2119 <div class="bilingual">
2120 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2121 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, goodness can
2122 be more or less. But being cannot be more or less. Therefore goodness
2123 differs really from being.</p>
2124 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 1 arg. 3"><a name="28411"><span class=
2125 "ref">[28411] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 1 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, bonum
2126 suscipit magis et minus. Esse autem non suscipit magis et minus.
2127 Ergo bonum differt secundum rem ab ente.</p>
2128 </div>
2129
2130 <div class="bilingual">
2131 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p5"><b>On
2132 the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 42) that,
2133 "inasmuch as we exist we are good."</p>
2134 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 1 s. c."><a name="28412"><span class=
2135 "ref">[28412] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 1 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
2136 quod Augustinus dicit, in libro de doctrina Christiana, quod
2137 <i>inquantum sumus, boni sumus</i>.</p>
2338 </div> 2138 </div>
2339 2139
2340 <div class="bilingual"> 2140 <div class="bilingual">
2341 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> Goodness and being are really the same, and differ only in idea; which is clear from the following argument. The essence of goodness consists in this, that it is in some way desirable. Hence the Philosopher says (Ethic. i): "Goodness is what all desire." Now it is clear that a thing is desirable only in so far as it is perfect; for all desire their own perfection. But everything is perfect so far as it is actual. Therefore it is clear that a thing is perfect 2141 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> Goodness and being are really the same, and differ only in idea; which is clear from the following argument. The essence of goodness consists in this, that it is in some way desirable. Hence the Philosopher says (Ethic. i): "Goodness is what all desire." Now it is clear that a thing is desirable only in so far as it is perfect; for all desire their own perfection. But everything is perfect so far as it is actual. Therefore it is clear that a thing is perfect
2342 so far as it exists; for it is existence that makes all things actual, as is clear from the foregoing (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p6.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4">Q[3], A[4]</a>; <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p6.2" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1">Q[4], A[1]</a>). Hence it is clear that goodness and being are the same really. But goodness presents the aspect of desirableness, which being does not present.</p> 2142 so far as it exists; for it is existence that makes all things
2143 actual, as is clear from the foregoing (<a xml:link="simple"
2144 shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p6.1"
2145 href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4">Q[3], A[4]</a>; <a xml:link="simple"
2146 shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p6.2"
2147 href="#FP.ii.FP_Q4.FP_Q4_A1">Q[4], A[1]</a>). Hence it is clear that
2148 goodness and being are the same really. But goodness presents the
2149 aspect of desirableness, which being does not present.</p>
2150 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 1 co."><a name="28413"><span class=
2151 "ref">[28413] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 1 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
2152 quod bonum et ens sunt idem secundum rem, sed differunt secundum
2153 rationem tantum. Quod sic patet. Ratio enim boni in hoc consistit,
2154 quod aliquid sit appetibile, unde philosophus, in I Ethic., dicit
2155 quod <i>bonum est quod omnia appetunt</i>. Manifestum est autem
2156 quod unumquodque est appetibile secundum quod est perfectum, nam
2157 omnia appetunt suam perfectionem. Intantum est autem perfectum
2158 unumquodque, inquantum est actu, unde manifestum est quod intantum
2159 est aliquid bonum, inquantum est ens, esse enim est actualitas
2160 omnis rei, ut ex superioribus patet. Unde manifestum est quod bonum
2161 et ens sunt idem secundum rem, sed bonum dicit rationem
2162 appetibilis, quam non dicit ens.</p>
2343 </div> 2163 </div>
2344 2164
2345 <div class="bilingual"> 2165 <div class="bilingual">
2346 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Although goodness and being are the same really, nevertheless since they differ in thought, they are not predicated of a thing absolutely in the same way. Since being properly signifies that something actually is, and actuality properly correlates to potentiality; a thing is, in consequence, said simply to have being, accordingly as it is primarily distinguished from that which is only in potentiality; and this is precisely each thing's substantial 2166 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Although goodness and being are the same really, nevertheless since they differ in thought, they are not predicated of a thing absolutely in the same way. Since being properly signifies that something actually is, and actuality properly correlates to potentiality; a thing is, in consequence, said simply to have being, accordingly as it is primarily distinguished from that which is only in potentiality; and this is precisely each thing's substantial
2347 being. Hence by its substantial being, everything is said to have being simply; but by any further actuality it is said to have being relatively. Thus to be white implies relative being, for to be white does not take a thing out of simply potential being; because only a thing that actually has being can receive this mode of being. But goodness signifies perfection which is desirable; and consequently of ultimate perfection. Hence that which has ultimate perfection is said to be simply good; but 2167 being. Hence by its substantial being, everything is said to have being simply; but by any further actuality it is said to have being relatively. Thus to be white implies relative being, for to be white does not take a thing out of simply potential being; because only a thing that actually has being can receive this mode of being. But goodness signifies perfection which is desirable; and consequently of ultimate perfection. Hence that which has ultimate perfection is said to be simply good; but
2348 that which has not the ultimate perfection it ought to have (although, in so far as it is at all actual, it has some perfection), is not said to be perfect simply nor good simply, but only relatively. In this way, therefore, viewed in its primal (i.e. substantial) being a thing is said to be simply, and to be good relatively (i.e. in so far as it has being) but viewed in its complete actuality, a thing is said to be relatively, and to be good simply. Hence the saying of Boethius (De Hebrom.), 2168 that which has not the ultimate perfection it ought to have (although, in so far as it is at all actual, it has some perfection), is not said to be perfect simply nor good simply, but only relatively. In this way, therefore, viewed in its primal (i.e. substantial) being a thing is said to be simply, and to be good relatively (i.e. in so far as it has being) but viewed in its complete actuality, a thing is said to be relatively, and to be good simply. Hence the saying of Boethius (De Hebrom.),
2349 "I perceive that in nature the fact that things are good is one thing; that they are is another," is to be referred to a thing's goodness simply, and having being simply. Because, regarded in its primal actuality, a thing simply exists; and regarded in its complete actuality, it is good simply---in such sort that even in its primal actuality, it is in some sort good, and even in its complete actuality, it in some sort has being.</p> 2169 "I perceive that in nature the fact that things are good is one
2350 </div> 2170 thing; that they are is another," is to be referred to a thing's
2351 2171 goodness simply, and having being simply. Because, regarded in its
2352 <div class="bilingual"> 2172 primal actuality, a thing simply exists; and regarded in its complete
2353 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Goodness is a form so far as absolute goodness signifies complete actuality.</p> 2173 actuality, it is good simply---in such sort that even in its primal
2354 </div> 2174 actuality, it is in some sort good, and even in its complete
2355 2175 actuality, it in some sort has being.</p>
2356 <div class="bilingual"> 2176 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 1 ad 1"><a name="28414"><span class=
2357 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Again, goodness is spoken of as more or less according to a thing's superadded actuality, for example, as to knowledge or virtue.</p> 2177 "ref">[28414] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 1 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
2178 dicendum quod, licet bonum et ens sint idem secundum rem, quia
2179 tamen differunt secundum rationem, non eodem modo dicitur aliquid
2180 ens simpliciter, et bonum simpliciter. Nam cum ens dicat aliquid
2181 proprie esse in actu; actus autem proprie ordinem habeat ad
2182 potentiam; secundum hoc simpliciter aliquid dicitur ens, secundum
2183 quod primo discernitur ab eo quod est in potentia tantum. Hoc autem
2184 est esse substantiale rei uniuscuiusque; unde per suum esse
2185 substantiale dicitur unumquodque ens simpliciter. Per actus autem
2186 superadditos, dicitur aliquid esse secundum quid, sicut esse album
2187 significat esse secundum quid, non enim esse album aufert esse in
2188 potentia simpliciter, cum adveniat rei iam praeexistenti in actu.
2189 Sed bonum dicit rationem perfecti, quod est appetibile, et per
2190 consequens dicit rationem ultimi. Unde id quod est ultimo
2191 perfectum, dicitur bonum simpliciter. Quod autem non habet ultimam
2192 perfectionem quam debet habere, quamvis habeat aliquam perfectionem
2193 inquantum est actu, non tamen dicitur perfectum simpliciter, nec
2194 bonum simpliciter, sed secundum quid. Sic ergo secundum primum
2195 esse, quod est substantiale, dicitur aliquid ens simpliciter et
2196 bonum secundum quid, idest inquantum est ens, secundum vero ultimum
2197 actum dicitur aliquid ens secundum quid, et bonum simpliciter. Sic
2198 ergo quod dicit Boetius, quod <i>in rebus aliud est quod sunt bona,
2199 et aliud quod sunt</i>, referendum est ad esse bonum et ad esse
2200 simpliciter, quia secundum primum actum est aliquid ens
2201 simpliciter; et secundum ultimum, bonum simpliciter. Et tamen
2202 secundum primum actum est quodammodo bonum, et secundum ultimum
2203 actum est quodammodo ens.</p>
2204 </div>
2205
2206 <div class="bilingual">
2207 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p8"><b>Reply
2208 to Objection 2:</b> Goodness is a form so far as absolute goodness
2209 signifies complete actuality.</p>
2210 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 1 ad 2"><a name="28415"><span class=
2211 "ref">[28415] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 1 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
2212 dicendum quod bonum dicitur per informationem, prout accipitur
2213 bonum simpliciter, secundum ultimum actum.</p>
2214 </div>
2215
2216 <div class="bilingual">
2217 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1-p9"><b>Reply
2218 to Objection 3:</b> Again, goodness is spoken of as more or less
2219 according to a thing's superadded actuality, for example, as to
2220 knowledge or virtue.</p>
2221 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 1 ad 3"><a name="28416"><span class=
2222 "ref">[28416] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 1 ad 3</span></a> Et similiter
2223 dicendum ad tertium, quod bonum dicitur secundum magis et minus,
2224 secundum actum supervenientem; puta secundum scientiam vel
2225 virtutem.</p>
2358 </div> 2226 </div>
2359 2227
2360 2228
2361 2229
2362 2230
2366 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p0.1">Whether goodness is prior in idea to being?</h4> 2234 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p0.1">Whether goodness is prior in idea to being?</h4>
2367 2235
2368 2236
2369 2237
2370 <div class="bilingual"> 2238 <div class="bilingual">
2371 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that goodness is prior in idea to being. For names are arranged according to the arrangement of the things signified by the names. But Dionysius (Div. Nom. iii) assigned the first place, amongst the other names of God, to His goodness rather than to His being. Therefore in idea goodness is prior to being.</p> 2239 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2372 </div> 2240 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that
2373 2241 goodness is prior in idea to being. For names are arranged according
2374 <div class="bilingual"> 2242 to the arrangement of the things signified by the names. But Dionysius
2375 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, that which is the more extensive is prior in idea. But goodness is more extensive than being, because, as Dionysius notes (Div. Nom. v), "goodness extends to things both existing and non-existing; whereas existence extends to existing things alone." Therefore goodness is in idea prior to being.</p> 2243 (Div. Nom. iii) assigned the first place, amongst the other names of
2376 </div> 2244 God, to His goodness rather than to His being. Therefore in idea
2377 2245 goodness is prior to being.</p>
2378 <div class="bilingual"> 2246 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 2 arg. 1"><a name="28417"><span class=
2379 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, what is the more universal is prior in idea. But goodness seems to be more universal than being, since goodness has the aspect of desirable; whereas to some non-existence is desirable; for it is said of Judas: "It were better for him, if that man had not been born" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Matt.26.24" parsed="vul|Matt|26|24|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p4.1" passage="Mat. 26:24">Mat. 26:24</scripRef>). Therefore in idea goodness is prior to being.</p> 2247 "ref">[28417] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 2 arg. 1</span></a> Ad secundum sic
2380 </div> 2248 proceditur. Videtur quod bonum secundum rationem sit prius quam
2381 2249 ens. Ordo enim nominum est secundum ordinem rerum significatarum
2382 <div class="bilingual"> 2250 per nomina. Sed Dionysius, inter alia nomina Dei, prius ponit bonum
2383 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, not only is existence desirable, but life, knowledge, and many other things besides. Thus it seems that existence is a particular appetible, and goodness a universal appetible. Therefore, absolutely, goodness is prior in idea to being.</p> 2251 quam ens, ut patet, in III cap. de Div. Nom. Ergo bonum secundum
2384 </div> 2252 rationem est prius quam ens.</p>
2385 2253 </div>
2386 <div class="bilingual"> 2254
2387 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p6"><b>On the contrary,</b> It is said by Aristotle (De Causis) that "the first of created things is being."</p> 2255 <div class="bilingual">
2256 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2257 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, that which
2258 is the more extensive is prior in idea. But goodness is more extensive
2259 than being, because, as Dionysius notes (Div. Nom. v), "goodness
2260 extends to things both existing and non-existing; whereas existence
2261 extends to existing things alone." Therefore goodness is in idea prior
2262 to being.</p>
2263 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 2 arg. 2"><a name="28418"><span class=
2264 "ref">[28418] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 2 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, illud
2265 est prius secundum rationem, quod ad plura se extendit. Sed bonum
2266 ad plura se extendit quam ens, quia, ut dicit Dionysius, V cap. de
2267 Div. Nom., <i>bonum se extendit ad existentia et non existentia,
2268 ens vero ad existentia tantum</i>. Ergo bonum est prius secundum
2269 rationem quam ens.</p>
2270 </div>
2271
2272 <div class="bilingual">
2273 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2274 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, what is the
2275 more universal is prior in idea. But goodness seems to be more
2276 universal than being, since goodness has the aspect of desirable;
2277 whereas to some non-existence is desirable; for it is said of Judas:
2278 "It were better for him, if that man had not been born" (<scripRef
2279 osisRef="Bible.vul:Matt.26.24" parsed="vul|Matt|26|24|0|0"
2280 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p4.1"
2281 passage="Mat. 26:24">Mat. 26:24</scripRef>). Therefore in idea
2282 goodness is prior to being.</p>
2283 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 2 arg. 3"><a name="28419"><span class=
2284 "ref">[28419] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 2 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, quod
2285 est universalius, est prius secundum rationem. Sed bonum videtur
2286 universalius esse quam ens, quia bonum habet rationem appetibilis;
2287 quibusdam autem appetibile est ipsum non esse; dicitur enim, Matth.
2288 XXVI, de Iuda, <i>bonum erat ei, si natus non fuisset</i> et
2289 cetera. Ergo bonum est prius quam ens, secundum rationem.</p>
2290 </div>
2291
2292 <div class="bilingual">
2293 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2294 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, not only is
2295 existence desirable, but life, knowledge, and many other things
2296 besides. Thus it seems that existence is a particular appetible, and
2297 goodness a universal appetible. Therefore, absolutely, goodness is
2298 prior in idea to being.</p>
2299 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 2 arg. 4"><a name="28420"><span class=
2300 "ref">[28420] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 2 arg. 4</span></a> Praeterea, non
2301 solum esse est appetibile, sed et vita et sapientia, et multa
2302 huiusmodi, et sic videtur quod esse sit quoddam particulare
2303 appetibile, et bonum, universale. Bonum ergo simpliciter est prius
2304 secundum rationem quam ens.</p>
2305 </div>
2306
2307 <div class="bilingual">
2308 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p6"><b>On
2309 the contrary,</b> It is said by Aristotle (De Causis) that "the first
2310 of created things is being."</p>
2311 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 2 s. c."><a name="28421"><span class=
2312 "ref">[28421] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 2 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
2313 quod dicitur in libro de causis, quod <i>prima rerum creatarum est
2314 esse</i>.</p>
2388 </div> 2315 </div>
2389 2316
2390 <div class="bilingual"> 2317 <div class="bilingual">
2391 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p7"><b>I answer that,</b> In idea being is prior to goodness. For the meaning signified by the name of a thing is that which the mind conceives of the thing and intends by the word that stands for it. Therefore, that is prior in idea, which is first conceived by the intellect. Now the first thing conceived by the intellect is being; because everything is knowable only inasmuch as it is in actuality. Hence, being is the proper object of the intellect, and is primarily intelligible; as 2318 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p7"><b>I answer that,</b> In idea being is prior to goodness. For the meaning signified by the name of a thing is that which the mind conceives of the thing and intends by the word that stands for it. Therefore, that is prior in idea, which is first conceived by the intellect. Now the first thing conceived by the intellect is being; because everything is knowable only inasmuch as it is in actuality. Hence, being is the proper object of the intellect, and is primarily intelligible; as
2392 sound is that which is primarily audible. Therefore in idea being is prior to goodness.</p> 2319 sound is that which is primarily audible. Therefore in idea being is
2320 prior to goodness.</p>
2321 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 2 co."><a name="28422"><span class=
2322 "ref">[28422] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 2 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
2323 quod ens secundum rationem est prius quam bonum. Ratio enim
2324 significata per nomen, est id quod concipit intellectus de re, et
2325 significat illud per vocem, illud ergo est prius secundum rationem,
2326 quod prius cadit in conceptione intellectus. Primo autem in
2327 conceptione intellectus cadit ens, quia secundum hoc unumquodque
2328 cognoscibile est, inquantum est actu, ut dicitur in IX Metaphys.
2329 Unde ens est proprium obiectum intellectus, et sic est primum
2330 intelligibile, sicut sonus est primum audibile. Ita ergo secundum
2331 rationem prius est ens quam bonum.</p>
2393 </div> 2332 </div>
2394 2333
2395 <div class="bilingual"> 2334 <div class="bilingual">
2396 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Dionysius discusses the Divine Names (Div. Nom. i, iii) as implying some causal relation in God; for we name God, as he says, from creatures, as a cause from its effects. But goodness, since it has the aspect of desirable, implies the idea of a final cause, the causality of which is first among causes, since an agent does not act except for some end; and by an agent matter is moved to its form. Hence the end is called the cause of causes. Thus 2335 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Dionysius discusses the Divine Names (Div. Nom. i, iii) as implying some causal relation in God; for we name God, as he says, from creatures, as a cause from its effects. But goodness, since it has the aspect of desirable, implies the idea of a final cause, the causality of which is first among causes, since an agent does not act except for some end; and by an agent matter is moved to its form. Hence the end is called the cause of causes. Thus
2397 goodness, as a cause, is prior to being, as is the end to the form. Therefore among the names signifying the divine causality, goodness precedes being. Again, according to the Platonists, who, through not distinguishing primary matter from privation, said that matter was non-being, goodness is more extensively participated than being; for primary matter participates in goodness as tending to it, for all seek their like; but it does not participate in being, since it is presumed to be non-being. 2336 goodness, as a cause, is prior to being, as is the end to the form. Therefore among the names signifying the divine causality, goodness precedes being. Again, according to the Platonists, who, through not distinguishing primary matter from privation, said that matter was non-being, goodness is more extensively participated than being; for primary matter participates in goodness as tending to it, for all seek their like; but it does not participate in being, since it is presumed to be non-being.
2398 Therefore Dionysius says that "goodness extends to non-existence" (Div. Nom. v).</p> 2337 Therefore Dionysius says that "goodness extends to non-existence"
2338 (Div. Nom. v).</p>
2339 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 2 ad 1"><a name="28423"><span class=
2340 "ref">[28423] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 2 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
2341 dicendum quod Dionysius determinat de divinis nominibus secundum
2342 quod important circa Deum habitudinem causae, nominamus enim Deum,
2343 ut ipse dicit, ex creaturis, sicut causam ex effectibus. Bonum
2344 autem, cum habeat rationem appetibilis, importat habitudinem causae
2345 finalis, cuius causalitas prima est, quia agens non agit nisi
2346 propter finem, et ab agente materia movetur ad formam, unde dicitur
2347 quod finis est causa causarum. Et sic, in causando, bonum est prius
2348 quam ens, sicut finis quam forma, et hac ratione, inter nomina
2349 significantia causalitatem divinam, prius ponitur bonum quam ens.
2350 Et iterum quia, secundum Platonicos, qui, materiam a privatione non
2351 distinguentes, dicebant materiam esse non ens, ad plura se extendit
2352 participatio boni quam participatio entis. Nam materia prima
2353 participat bonum, cum appetat ipsum (nihil autem appetit nisi
2354 simile sibi), non autem participat ens, cum ponatur non ens. Et
2355 ideo dicit Dionysius quod <i>bonum extenditur ad non
2356 existentia</i>.</p>
2399 </div> 2357 </div>
2400 2358
2401 <div class="bilingual"> 2359 <div class="bilingual">
2402 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The same solution is applied to this objection. Or it may be said that goodness extends to existing and non-existing things, not so far as it can be predicated of them, but so far as it can cause them---if, indeed, by non-existence we understand not simply those things which do not exist, but those which are potential, and not actual. For goodness has the aspect of the end, in which not only actual things find their completion, but also towards which 2360 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The same solution is applied to this objection. Or it may be said that goodness extends to existing and non-existing things, not so far as it can be predicated of them, but so far as it can cause them---if, indeed, by non-existence we understand not simply those things which do not exist, but those which are potential, and not actual. For goodness has the aspect of the end, in which not only actual things find their completion, but also towards which
2403 tend even those things which are not actual, but merely potential. Now being implies the habitude of a formal cause only, either inherent or exemplar; and its causality does not extend save to those things which are actual.</p> 2361 tend even those things which are not actual, but merely
2362 potential. Now being implies the habitude of a formal cause only,
2363 either inherent or exemplar; and its causality does not extend save to
2364 those things which are actual.</p>
2365 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 2 ad 2"><a name="28424"><span class=
2366 "ref">[28424] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 2 ad 2</span></a> Unde patet solutio
2367 ad secundum. Vel dicendum quod bonum extenditur ad existentia et
2368 non existentia, non secundum praedicationem, sed secundum
2369 causalitatem, ut per non existentia intelligamus, non ea
2370 simpliciter quae penitus non sunt, sed ea quae sunt in potentia et
2371 non in actu, quia bonum habet rationem finis, in quo non solum
2372 quiescunt quae sunt in actu, sed ad ipsum etiam ea moventur quae in
2373 actu non sunt sed in potentia tantum. Ens autem non importat
2374 habitudinem causae nisi formalis tantum, vel inhaerentis vel
2375 exemplaris, cuius causalitas non se extendit nisi ad ea quae sunt
2376 in actu.</p>
2404 </div> 2377 </div>
2405 2378
2406 <div class="bilingual"> 2379 <div class="bilingual">
2407 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Non-being is desirable, not of itself, but only relatively---i.e. inasmuch as the removal of an evil, which can only be removed by non-being, is desirable. Now the removal of an evil cannot be desirable, except so far as this evil deprives a thing of some being. Therefore being is desirable of itself; and non-being only relatively, inasmuch as one seeks some mode of being of which one cannot bear to be deprived; thus even non-being can be spoken of as 2380 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Non-being is desirable, not of itself, but only relatively---i.e. inasmuch as the removal of an evil, which can only be removed by non-being, is desirable. Now the removal of an evil cannot be desirable, except so far as this evil deprives a thing of some being. Therefore being is desirable of itself; and non-being only relatively, inasmuch as one seeks some mode of being of which one cannot bear to be deprived; thus even non-being can be spoken of as
2408 relatively good.</p> 2381 relatively good.</p>
2409 </div> 2382 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 2 ad 3"><a name="28425"><span class=
2410 2383 "ref">[28425] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 2 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
2411 <div class="bilingual"> 2384 quod non esse secundum se non est appetibile, sed per accidens,
2412 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Life, wisdom, and the like, are desirable only so far as they are actual. Hence, in each one of them some sort of being is desired. And thus nothing can be desired except being; and consequently nothing is good except being.</p> 2385 inquantum scilicet ablatio alicuius mali est appetibilis, quod
2386 malum quidem aufertur per non esse. Ablatio vero mali non est
2387 appetibilis, nisi inquantum per malum privatur quodam esse. Illud
2388 igitur quod per se est appetibile, est esse, non esse vero per
2389 accidens tantum, inquantum scilicet quoddam esse appetitur, quo
2390 homo non sustinet privari. Et sic etiam per accidens non esse
2391 dicitur bonum.</p>
2392 </div>
2393
2394 <div class="bilingual">
2395 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2396 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A2-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Life,
2397 wisdom, and the like, are desirable only so far as they are
2398 actual. Hence, in each one of them some sort of being is desired. And
2399 thus nothing can be desired except being; and consequently nothing is
2400 good except being.</p>
2401 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 2 ad 4"><a name="28426"><span class=
2402 "ref">[28426] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 2 ad 4</span></a> Ad quartum dicendum
2403 quod vita et scientia, et alia huiusmodi, sic appetuntur ut sunt in
2404 actu, unde in omnibus appetitur quoddam esse. Et sic nihil est
2405 appetibile nisi ens, et per consequens nihil est bonum nisi
2406 ens.</p>
2413 </div> 2407 </div>
2414 2408
2415 2409
2416 2410
2417 2411
2421 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p0.1">Whether every being is good?</h4> 2415 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p0.1">Whether every being is good?</h4>
2422 2416
2423 2417
2424 2418
2425 <div class="bilingual"> 2419 <div class="bilingual">
2426 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that not every being is good. For goodness is something superadded to being, as is clear from A[1]. But whatever is added to being limits it; as substance, quantity, quality, etc. Therefore goodness limits being. Therefore not every being is good.</p> 2420 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2427 </div> 2421 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that not
2428 2422 every being is good. For goodness is something superadded to being, as
2429 <div class="bilingual"> 2423 is clear from A[1]. But whatever is added to being limits it; as
2430 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, no evil is good: "Woe to you that call evil good and good evil" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.5.20" parsed="vul|Isa|5|20|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p3.1" passage="Is. 5:20">Is. 5:20</scripRef>). But some things are called evil. Therefore not every being is good.</p> 2424 substance, quantity, quality, etc. Therefore goodness limits
2431 </div> 2425 being. Therefore not every being is good.</p>
2432 2426 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 3 arg. 1"><a name="28427"><span class=
2433 <div class="bilingual"> 2427 "ref">[28427] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 3 arg. 1</span></a> Ad tertium sic
2434 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, goodness implies desirability. Now primary matter does not imply desirability, but rather that which desires. Therefore primary matter does not contain the formality of goodness. Therefore not every being is good.</p> 2428 proceditur. Videtur quod non omne ens sit bonum. Bonum enim addit
2435 </div> 2429 supra ens, ut ex dictis patet. Ea vero quae addunt aliquid supra
2436 2430 ens, contrahunt ipsum, sicut substantia, quantitas, qualitas, et
2437 <div class="bilingual"> 2431 alia huiusmodi. Ergo bonum contrahit ens. Non igitur omne ens est
2438 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, the Philosopher notes (Metaph. iii) that "in mathematics goodness does not exist." But mathematics are entities; otherwise there would be no science of mathematics. Therefore not every being is good.</p> 2432 bonum.</p>
2439 </div> 2433 </div>
2440 2434
2441 <div class="bilingual"> 2435 <div class="bilingual">
2442 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p6"><b>On the contrary,</b> Every being that is not God is God's creature. Now every creature of God is good (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1Tim.4.4" parsed="vul|1Tim|4|4|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p6.1" passage="1 Tim. 4:4">1 Tim. 4:4</scripRef>): and God is the greatest good. Therefore every being is good.</p> 2436 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2443 </div> 2437 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, no evil is
2444 2438 good: "Woe to you that call evil good and good evil" (<scripRef
2445 <div class="bilingual"> 2439 osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.5.20" parsed="vul|Isa|5|20|0|0"
2446 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p7"><b>I answer that,</b> Every being, as being, is good. For all being, as being, has actuality and is in some way perfect; since every act implies some sort of perfection; and perfection implies desirability and goodness, as is clear from A[1]. Hence it follows that every being as such is good.</p> 2440 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p3.1"
2447 </div> 2441 passage="Is. 5:20">Is. 5:20</scripRef>). But some things are called
2448 2442 evil. Therefore not every being is good.</p>
2449 <div class="bilingual"> 2443 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 3 arg. 2"><a name="28428"><span class=
2450 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Substance, quantity, quality, and everything included in them, limit being by applying it to some essence or nature. Now in this sense, goodness does not add anything to being beyond the aspect of desirability and perfection, which is also proper to being, whatever kind of nature it may be. Hence goodness does not limit being.</p> 2444 "ref">[28428] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 3 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, nullum
2451 </div> 2445 malum est bonum, Isaiae V, <i>vae qui dicitis malum bonum, et bonum
2452 2446 malum</i>. Sed aliquod ens dicitur malum. Ergo non omne ens est
2453 <div class="bilingual"> 2447 bonum.</p>
2454 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> No being can be spoken of as evil, formally as being, but only so far as it lacks being. Thus a man is said to be evil, because he lacks some virtue; and an eye is said to be evil, because it lacks the power to see well.</p> 2448 </div>
2455 </div> 2449
2456 2450 <div class="bilingual">
2457 <div class="bilingual"> 2451 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2458 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> As primary matter has only potential being, so it is only potentially good. Although, according to the Platonists, primary matter may be said to be a non-being on account of the privation attaching to it, nevertheless, it does participate to a certain extent in goodness, viz. by its relation to, or aptitude for, goodness. Consequently, to be desirable is not its property, but to desire.</p> 2452 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, goodness
2453 implies desirability. Now primary matter does not imply desirability,
2454 but rather that which desires. Therefore primary matter does not
2455 contain the formality of goodness. Therefore not every being is
2456 good.</p>
2457 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 3 arg. 3"><a name="28429"><span class=
2458 "ref">[28429] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 3 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, bonum
2459 habet rationem appetibilis. Sed materia prima non habet rationem
2460 appetibilis, sed appetentis tantum. Ergo materia prima non habet
2461 rationem boni. Non igitur omne ens est bonum.</p>
2462 </div>
2463
2464 <div class="bilingual">
2465 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2466 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, the
2467 Philosopher notes (Metaph. iii) that "in mathematics goodness does not
2468 exist." But mathematics are entities; otherwise there would be no
2469 science of mathematics. Therefore not every being is good.</p>
2470 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 3 arg. 4"><a name="28430"><span class=
2471 "ref">[28430] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 3 arg. 4</span></a> Praeterea,
2472 philosophus dicit, in III Metaphys., quod in mathematicis non est
2473 bonum. Sed mathematica sunt quaedam entia, alioquin de eis non
2474 esset scientia. Ergo non omne ens est bonum.</p>
2475 </div>
2476
2477 <div class="bilingual">
2478 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p6"><b>On
2479 the contrary,</b> Every being that is not God is God's creature. Now
2480 every creature of God is good (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1Tim.4.4"
2481 parsed="vul|1Tim|4|4|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p6.1" passage="1
2482 Tim. 4:4">1 Tim. 4:4</scripRef>): and God is the greatest
2483 good. Therefore every being is good.</p>
2484 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28431"><span class=
2485 "ref">[28431] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra, omne
2486 ens quod non est Deus, est Dei creatura. Sed omnis creatura Dei est
2487 bona, ut dicitur I ad Tim., IV cap., Deus vero est maxime bonus.
2488 Ergo omne ens est bonum.</p>
2489 </div>
2490
2491 <div class="bilingual">
2492 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p7"><b>I
2493 answer that,</b> Every being, as being, is good. For all being, as
2494 being, has actuality and is in some way perfect; since every act
2495 implies some sort of perfection; and perfection implies desirability
2496 and goodness, as is clear from A[1]. Hence it follows that every being
2497 as such is good.</p>
2498 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 3 co."><a name="28432"><span class=
2499 "ref">[28432] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 3 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
2500 quod omne ens, inquantum est ens, est bonum. Omne enim ens,
2501 inquantum est ens, est in actu, et quodammodo perfectum, quia omnis
2502 actus perfectio quaedam est. Perfectum vero habet rationem
2503 appetibilis et boni, ut ex dictis patet. Unde sequitur omne ens,
2504 inquantum huiusmodi, bonum esse.</p>
2505 </div>
2506
2507 <div class="bilingual">
2508 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p8"><b>Reply
2509 to Objection 1:</b> Substance, quantity, quality, and everything
2510 included in them, limit being by applying it to some essence or
2511 nature. Now in this sense, goodness does not add anything to being
2512 beyond the aspect of desirability and perfection, which is also proper
2513 to being, whatever kind of nature it may be. Hence goodness does not
2514 limit being.</p>
2515 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 3 ad 1"><a name="28433"><span class=
2516 "ref">[28433] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 3 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
2517 dicendum quod substantia, quantitas et qualitas, et ea quae sub eis
2518 continentur, contrahunt ens applicando ens ad aliquam quidditatem
2519 seu naturam. Sic autem non addit aliquid bonum super ens, sed
2520 rationem tantum appetibilis et perfectionis, quod convenit ipsi
2521 esse in quacumque natura sit. Unde bonum non contrahit ens.</p>
2522 </div>
2523
2524 <div class="bilingual">
2525 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p9"><b>Reply
2526 to Objection 2:</b> No being can be spoken of as evil, formally as
2527 being, but only so far as it lacks being. Thus a man is said to be
2528 evil, because he lacks some virtue; and an eye is said to be evil,
2529 because it lacks the power to see well.</p>
2530 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 3 ad 2"><a name="28434"><span class=
2531 "ref">[28434] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 3 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
2532 dicendum quod nullum ens dicitur malum inquantum est ens, sed
2533 inquantum caret quodam esse, sicut homo dicitur malus inquantum
2534 caret esse virtutis, et oculus dicitur malus inquantum caret
2535 acumine visus.</p>
2536 </div>
2537
2538 <div class="bilingual">
2539 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2540 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> As primary
2541 matter has only potential being, so it is only potentially
2542 good. Although, according to the Platonists, primary matter may be
2543 said to be a non-being on account of the privation attaching to it,
2544 nevertheless, it does participate to a certain extent in goodness,
2545 viz. by its relation to, or aptitude for, goodness. Consequently, to
2546 be desirable is not its property, but to desire.</p>
2547 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 3 ad 3"><a name="28435"><span class=
2548 "ref">[28435] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 3 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
2549 quod materia prima, sicut non est ens nisi in potentia, ita nec
2550 bonum nisi in potentia. Licet, secundum Platonicos, dici possit
2551 quod materia prima est non ens, propter privationem adiunctam. Sed
2552 tamen participat aliquid de bono, scilicet ipsum ordinem vel
2553 aptitudinem ad bonum. Et ideo non convenit sibi quod sit
2554 appetibile, sed quod appetat.</p>
2459 </div> 2555 </div>
2460 2556
2461 <div class="bilingual"> 2557 <div class="bilingual">
2462 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Mathematical entities do not subsist as realities; because they would be in some sort good if they subsisted; but they have only logical existence, inasmuch as they are abstracted from motion and matter; thus they cannot have the aspect of an end, which itself has the aspect of moving another. Nor is it repugnant that there should be in some logical entity neither goodness nor form of goodness; since the idea of being is prior to the idea of goodness, 2558 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A3-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Mathematical entities do not subsist as realities; because they would be in some sort good if they subsisted; but they have only logical existence, inasmuch as they are abstracted from motion and matter; thus they cannot have the aspect of an end, which itself has the aspect of moving another. Nor is it repugnant that there should be in some logical entity neither goodness nor form of goodness; since the idea of being is prior to the idea of goodness,
2463 as was said in the preceding article.</p> 2559 as was said in the preceding article.</p>
2560 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 3 ad 4"><a name="28436"><span class=
2561 "ref">[28436] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 3 ad 4</span></a> Ad quartum dicendum
2562 quod mathematica non subsistunt separata secundum esse, quia si
2563 subsisterent, esset in eis bonum, scilicet ipsum esse ipsorum. Sunt
2564 autem mathematica separata secundum rationem tantum, prout
2565 abstrahuntur a motu et a materia, et sic abstrahuntur a ratione
2566 finis, qui habet rationem moventis. Non est autem inconveniens quod
2567 in aliquo ente secundum rationem non sit bonum vel ratio boni, cum
2568 ratio entis sit prior quam ratio boni, sicut supra dictum est.</p>
2464 </div> 2569 </div>
2465 2570
2466 2571
2467 2572
2468 2573
2472 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p0.1">Whether goodness has the aspect of a final cause?</h4> 2577 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p0.1">Whether goodness has the aspect of a final cause?</h4>
2473 2578
2474 2579
2475 2580
2476 <div class="bilingual"> 2581 <div class="bilingual">
2477 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that goodness has not the aspect of a final cause, but rather of the other causes. For, as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv), "Goodness is praised as beauty." But beauty has the aspect of a formal cause. Therefore goodness has the aspect of a formal cause.</p> 2582 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2478 </div> 2583 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that
2479 2584 goodness has not the aspect of a final cause, but rather of the other
2480 <div class="bilingual"> 2585 causes. For, as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv), "Goodness is praised as
2481 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, goodness is self-diffusive; for Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv) that goodness is that whereby all things subsist, and are. But to be self-giving implies the aspect of an efficient cause. Therefore goodness has the aspect of an efficient cause.</p> 2586 beauty." But beauty has the aspect of a formal cause. Therefore
2482 </div> 2587 goodness has the aspect of a formal cause.</p>
2483 2588 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 4 arg. 1"><a name="28437"><span class=
2484 <div class="bilingual"> 2589 "ref">[28437] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 4 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quartum sic
2485 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 31) that "we exist because God is good." But we owe our existence to God as the efficient cause. Therefore goodness implies the aspect of an efficient cause.</p> 2590 proceditur. Videtur quod bonum non habeat rationem causae finalis,
2486 </div> 2591 sed magis aliarum. Ut enim dicit Dionysius, IV cap. de Div. Nom.,
2487 2592 <i>bonum laudatur ut pulchrum</i>. Sed pulchrum importat rationem
2488 <div class="bilingual"> 2593 causae formalis. Ergo bonum habet rationem causae formalis.</p>
2489 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> The Philosopher says (Phys. ii) that "that is to be considered as the end and the good of other things, for the sake of which something is." Therefore goodness has the aspect of a final cause.</p> 2594 </div>
2595
2596 <div class="bilingual">
2597 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2598 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, goodness is
2599 self-diffusive; for Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv) that goodness is
2600 that whereby all things subsist, and are. But to be self-giving
2601 implies the aspect of an efficient cause. Therefore goodness has the
2602 aspect of an efficient cause.</p>
2603 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 4 arg. 2"><a name="28438"><span class=
2604 "ref">[28438] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 4 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, bonum
2605 est diffusivum sui esse, ut ex verbis Dionysii accipitur, quibus
2606 dicit quod <i>bonum est ex quo omnia subsistunt et sunt</i>. Sed
2607 esse diffusivum importat rationem causae efficientis. Ergo bonum
2608 habet rationem causae efficientis.</p>
2609 </div>
2610
2611 <div class="bilingual">
2612 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2613 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, Augustine
2614 says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 31) that "we exist because God is good."
2615 But we owe our existence to God as the efficient cause. Therefore
2616 goodness implies the aspect of an efficient cause.</p>
2617 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 4 arg. 3"><a name="28439"><span class=
2618 "ref">[28439] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 4 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, dicit
2619 Augustinus in I de Doctr. Christ., quod <i>quia Deus bonus est, nos
2620 sumus</i>. Sed ex Deo sumus sicut ex causa efficiente. Ergo bonum
2621 importat rationem causae efficientis.</p>
2622 </div>
2623
2624 <div class="bilingual">
2625 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p5"><b>On
2626 the contrary,</b> The Philosopher says (Phys. ii) that "that is to be
2627 considered as the end and the good of other things, for the sake of
2628 which something is." Therefore goodness has the aspect of a final
2629 cause.</p>
2630 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 4 s. c."><a name="28440"><span class=
2631 "ref">[28440] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 4 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
2632 quod philosophus dicit, in II Physic., quod <i>illud cuius causa
2633 est, est sicut finis et bonum aliorum</i>. Bonum ergo habet
2634 rationem causae finalis.</p>
2490 </div> 2635 </div>
2491 2636
2492 <div class="bilingual"> 2637 <div class="bilingual">
2493 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> Since goodness is that which all things desire, and since this has the aspect of an end, it is clear that goodness implies the aspect of an end. Nevertheless, the idea of goodness presupposes the idea of an efficient cause, and also of a formal cause. For we see that what is first in causing, is last in the thing caused. Fire, e.g. heats first of all before it reproduces the form of fire; though the heat in the fire follows from its substantial form. Now in 2638 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> Since goodness is that which all things desire, and since this has the aspect of an end, it is clear that goodness implies the aspect of an end. Nevertheless, the idea of goodness presupposes the idea of an efficient cause, and also of a formal cause. For we see that what is first in causing, is last in the thing caused. Fire, e.g. heats first of all before it reproduces the form of fire; though the heat in the fire follows from its substantial form. Now in
2494 causing, goodness and the end come first, both of which move the agent to act; secondly, the action of the agent moving to the form; thirdly, comes the form. Hence in that which is caused the converse ought to take place, so that there should be first, the form whereby it is a being; secondly, we consider in it its effective power, whereby it is perfect in being, for a thing is perfect when it can reproduce its like, as the Philosopher says (Meteor. iv); thirdly, there follows the formality of 2639 causing, goodness and the end come first, both of which move the agent to act; secondly, the action of the agent moving to the form; thirdly, comes the form. Hence in that which is caused the converse ought to take place, so that there should be first, the form whereby it is a being; secondly, we consider in it its effective power, whereby it is perfect in being, for a thing is perfect when it can reproduce its like, as the Philosopher says (Meteor. iv); thirdly, there follows the formality of
2495 goodness which is the basic principle of its perfection.</p> 2640 goodness which is the basic principle of its perfection.</p>
2641 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 4 co."><a name="28441"><span class=
2642 "ref">[28441] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 4 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
2643 quod, cum bonum sit quod omnia appetunt, hoc autem habet rationem
2644 finis; manifestum est quod bonum rationem finis importat. Sed tamen
2645 ratio boni praesupponit rationem causae efficientis, et rationem
2646 causae formalis. Videmus enim quod id quod est primum in causando,
2647 ultimum est in causato, ignis enim primo calefacit quam formam
2648 ignis inducat, cum tamen calor in igne consequatur formam
2649 substantialem. In causando autem, primum invenitur bonum et finis,
2650 qui movet efficientem; secundo, actio efficientis, movens ad
2651 formam; tertio advenit forma. Unde e converso esse oportet in
2652 causato, quod primum sit ipsa forma, per quam est ens; secundo
2653 consideratur in ea virtus effectiva, secundum quod est perfectum in
2654 esse (quia unumquodque tunc perfectum est, quando potest sibi
2655 simile facere, ut dicit philosophus in IV Meteor.); tertio
2656 consequitur ratio boni, per quam in ente perfectio fundatur.</p>
2496 </div> 2657 </div>
2497 2658
2498 <div class="bilingual"> 2659 <div class="bilingual">
2499 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Beauty and goodness in a thing are identical fundamentally; for they are based upon the same thing, namely, the form; and consequently goodness is praised as beauty. But they differ logically, for goodness properly relates to the appetite (goodness being what all things desire); and therefore it has the aspect of an end (the appetite being a kind of movement towards a thing). On the other hand, beauty relates to the cognitive faculty; for beautiful 2660 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Beauty and goodness in a thing are identical fundamentally; for they are based upon the same thing, namely, the form; and consequently goodness is praised as beauty. But they differ logically, for goodness properly relates to the appetite (goodness being what all things desire); and therefore it has the aspect of an end (the appetite being a kind of movement towards a thing). On the other hand, beauty relates to the cognitive faculty; for beautiful
2500 things are those which please when seen. Hence beauty consists in due proportion; for the senses delight in things duly proportioned, as in what is after their own kind---because even sense is a sort of reason, just as is every cognitive faculty. Now since knowledge is by assimilation, and similarity relates to form, beauty properly belongs to the nature of a formal cause.</p> 2661 things are those which please when seen. Hence beauty consists in
2501 </div> 2662 due proportion; for the senses delight in things duly proportioned, as
2502 2663 in what is after their own kind---because even sense is a sort of
2503 <div class="bilingual"> 2664 reason, just as is every cognitive faculty. Now since knowledge is by
2504 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Goodness is described as self-diffusive in the sense that an end is said to move.</p> 2665 assimilation, and similarity relates to form, beauty properly belongs
2505 </div> 2666 to the nature of a formal cause.</p>
2506 2667 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 4 ad 1"><a name="28442"><span class=
2507 <div class="bilingual"> 2668 "ref">[28442] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 4 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
2508 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> He who has a will is said to be good, so far as he has a good will; because it is by our will that we employ whatever powers we may have. Hence a man is said to be good, not by his good understanding; but by his good will. Now the will relates to the end as to its proper object. Thus the saying, "we exist because God is good" has reference to the final cause.</p> 2669 dicendum quod pulchrum et bonum in subiecto quidem sunt idem, quia
2670 super eandem rem fundantur, scilicet super formam, et propter hoc,
2671 bonum laudatur ut pulchrum. Sed ratione differunt. Nam bonum
2672 proprie respicit appetitum, est enim bonum quod omnia appetunt. Et
2673 ideo habet rationem finis, nam appetitus est quasi quidam motus ad
2674 rem. Pulchrum autem respicit vim cognoscitivam, pulchra enim
2675 dicuntur quae visa placent. Unde pulchrum in debita proportione
2676 consistit, quia sensus delectatur in rebus debite proportionatis,
2677 sicut in sibi similibus; nam et sensus ratio quaedam est, et omnis
2678 virtus cognoscitiva. Et quia cognitio fit per assimilationem,
2679 similitudo autem respicit formam, pulchrum proprie pertinet ad
2680 rationem causae formalis.</p>
2681 </div>
2682
2683 <div class="bilingual">
2684 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p8"><b>Reply
2685 to Objection 2:</b> Goodness is described as self-diffusive in the
2686 sense that an end is said to move.</p>
2687 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 4 ad 2"><a name="28443"><span class=
2688 "ref">[28443] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 4 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
2689 dicendum quod bonum dicitur diffusivum sui esse, eo modo quo finis
2690 dicitur movere.</p>
2691 </div>
2692
2693 <div class="bilingual">
2694 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A4-p9"><b>Reply
2695 to Objection 3:</b> He who has a will is said to be good, so far as he
2696 has a good will; because it is by our will that we employ whatever
2697 powers we may have. Hence a man is said to be good, not by his good
2698 understanding; but by his good will. Now the will relates to the end
2699 as to its proper object. Thus the saying, "we exist because God is
2700 good" has reference to the final cause.</p>
2701 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 4 ad 3"><a name="28444"><span class=
2702 "ref">[28444] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 4 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
2703 quod quilibet habens voluntatem, dicitur bonus inquantum habet
2704 bonam voluntatem, quia per voluntatem utimur omnibus quae in nobis
2705 sunt. Unde non dicitur bonus homo, qui habet bonum intellectum, sed
2706 qui habet bonam voluntatem. Voluntas autem respicit finem ut
2707 obiectum proprium, et sic, quod dicitur, quia Deus est bonus,
2708 sumus, refertur ad causam finalem.</p>
2509 </div> 2709 </div>
2510 2710
2511 2711
2512 2712
2513 2713
2518 2718
2519 2719
2520 2720
2521 <div class="bilingual"> 2721 <div class="bilingual">
2522 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the essence of goodness does not consist in mode, species and order. For goodness and being differ logically. But mode, species and order seem to belong to the nature of being, for it is written: "Thou hast ordered all things in measure, and number, and weight" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Wis.11.21" parsed="vul|Wis|11|21|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p2.1" passage="Wis. 11:21">Wis. 11:21</scripRef>). And to these three can be reduced species, mode and order, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. iv, 3): "Measure fixes the mode of everything, number gives it 2722 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the essence of goodness does not consist in mode, species and order. For goodness and being differ logically. But mode, species and order seem to belong to the nature of being, for it is written: "Thou hast ordered all things in measure, and number, and weight" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Wis.11.21" parsed="vul|Wis|11|21|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p2.1" passage="Wis. 11:21">Wis. 11:21</scripRef>). And to these three can be reduced species, mode and order, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. iv, 3): "Measure fixes the mode of everything, number gives it
2523 its species, and weight gives it rest and stability." Therefore the essence of goodness does not consist in mode, species and order.</p> 2723 its species, and weight gives it rest and stability." Therefore the
2524 </div> 2724 essence of goodness does not consist in mode, species and order.</p>
2525 2725 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 arg. 1"><a name="28445"><span class=
2526 <div class="bilingual"> 2726 "ref">[28445] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quintum sic
2527 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, mode, species and order are themselves good. Therefore if the essence of goodness consists in mode, species and order, then every mode must have its own mode, species and order. The same would be the case with species and order in endless succession.</p> 2727 proceditur. Videtur quod ratio boni non consistat in modo, specie
2528 </div> 2728 et ordine. Bonum enim et ens ratione differunt, ut supra dictum
2529 2729 est. Sed modus, species et ordo pertinere ad rationem entis
2530 <div class="bilingual"> 2730 videntur, quia, sicut dicitur Sap. XI, <i>omnia in numero, pondere
2531 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, evil is the privation of mode, species and order. But evil is not the total absence of goodness. Therefore the essence of goodness does not consist in mode, species and order.</p> 2731 et mensura disposuisti</i>, ad quae tria reducuntur species, modus
2532 </div> 2732 et ordo, quia, ut dicit Augustinus, IV super Gen. ad litteram,
2533 2733 <i>mensura omni rei modum praefigit, et numerus omni rei speciem
2534 <div class="bilingual"> 2734 praebet, et pondus omnem rem ad quietem et stabilitatem trahit</i>.
2535 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, that wherein consists the essence of goodness cannot be spoken of as evil. Yet we can speak of an evil mode, species and order. Therefore the essence of goodness does not consist in mode, species and order.</p> 2735 Ergo ratio boni non consistit in modo, specie et ordine.</p>
2536 </div> 2736 </div>
2537 2737
2538 <div class="bilingual"> 2738 <div class="bilingual">
2539 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p6"><b>Objection 5:</b> Further, mode, species and order are caused by weight, number and measure, as appears from the quotation from Augustine. But not every good thing has weight, number and measure; for Ambrose says (Hexam. i, 9): "It is of the nature of light not to have been created in number, weight and measure." Therefore the essence of goodness does not consist in mode, species and order.</p> 2739 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2540 </div> 2740 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, mode,
2541 2741 species and order are themselves good. Therefore if the essence of
2542 <div class="bilingual"> 2742 goodness consists in mode, species and order, then every mode must
2543 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p7"><b>On the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Nat. Boni. iii): "These three---mode, species and order---as common good things, are in everything God has made; thus, where these three abound the things are very good; where they are less, the things are less good; where they do not exist at all, there can be nothing good." But this would not be unless the essence of goodness consisted in them. Therefore the essence of goodness consists in mode, species and order.</p> 2743 have its own mode, species and order. The same would be the case with
2744 species and order in endless succession.</p>
2745 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 arg. 2"><a name="28446"><span class=
2746 "ref">[28446] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, ipse
2747 modus, species et ordo bona quaedam sunt. Si ergo ratio boni
2748 consistit in modo, specie et ordine, oportet etiam quod modus
2749 habeat modum, speciem et ordinem, et similiter species et ordo.
2750 Ergo procederetur in infinitum.</p>
2751 </div>
2752
2753 <div class="bilingual">
2754 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2755 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, evil is the
2756 privation of mode, species and order. But evil is not the total
2757 absence of goodness. Therefore the essence of goodness does not
2758 consist in mode, species and order.</p>
2759 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 arg. 3"><a name="28447"><span class=
2760 "ref">[28447] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, malum
2761 est privatio modi et speciei et ordinis. Sed malum non tollit
2762 totaliter bonum. Ergo ratio boni non consistit in modo, specie et
2763 ordine.</p>
2764 </div>
2765
2766 <div class="bilingual">
2767 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2768 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, that wherein
2769 consists the essence of goodness cannot be spoken of as evil. Yet we
2770 can speak of an evil mode, species and order. Therefore the essence of
2771 goodness does not consist in mode, species and order.</p>
2772 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 arg. 4"><a name="28448"><span class=
2773 "ref">[28448] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 arg. 4</span></a> Praeterea, illud
2774 in quo consistit ratio boni, non potest dici malum. Sed dicitur
2775 malus modus, mala species, malus ordo. Ergo ratio boni non
2776 consistit in modo, specie et ordine.</p>
2777 </div>
2778
2779 <div class="bilingual">
2780 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2781 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p6"><b>Objection 5:</b> Further, mode,
2782 species and order are caused by weight, number and measure, as appears
2783 from the quotation from Augustine. But not every good thing has
2784 weight, number and measure; for Ambrose says (Hexam. i, 9): "It is of
2785 the nature of light not to have been created in number, weight and
2786 measure." Therefore the essence of goodness does not consist in mode,
2787 species and order.</p>
2788 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 arg. 5"><a name="28449"><span class=
2789 "ref">[28449] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 arg. 5</span></a> Praeterea, modus,
2790 species et ordo ex pondere, numero et mensura causantur, ut ex
2791 auctoritate Augustini inducta patet. Non autem omnia bona habent
2792 pondus, numerum et mensuram, dicit enim Ambrosius, in Hexaemeron,
2793 quod <i>lucis natura est, ut non in numero, non in pondere, non in
2794 mensura creata sit</i>. Non ergo ratio boni consistit in modo,
2795 specie et ordine.</p>
2796 </div>
2797
2798 <div class="bilingual">
2799 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p7"><b>On
2800 the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Nat. Boni. iii): "These
2801 three---mode, species and order---as common good things, are in
2802 everything God has made; thus, where these three abound the things are
2803 very good; where they are less, the things are less good; where they
2804 do not exist at all, there can be nothing good." But this would not be
2805 unless the essence of goodness consisted in them. Therefore the
2806 essence of goodness consists in mode, species and order.</p>
2807 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 s. c."><a name="28450"><span class=
2808 "ref">[28450] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
2809 quod dicit Augustinus, in libro de natura boni, <i>haec tria,
2810 modus, species et ordo, tanquam generalia bona sunt in rebus a Deo
2811 factis, et ita, haec tria ubi magna sunt, magna bona sunt; ubi
2812 parva, parva bona sunt; ubi nulla, nullum bonum est</i>. Quod non
2813 esset, nisi ratio boni in eis consisteret. Ergo ratio boni
2814 consistit in modo, specie et ordine.</p>
2544 </div> 2815 </div>
2545 2816
2546 <div class="bilingual"> 2817 <div class="bilingual">
2547 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p8"><b>I answer that,</b> Everything is said to be good so far as it is perfect; for in that way only is it desirable (as shown above <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p8.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1">AA[1]</a>,3). Now a thing is said to be perfect if it lacks nothing according to the mode of its perfection. But since everything is what it is by its form (and since the form presupposes certain things, and from the form certain things necessarily follow), in order for a thing to be perfect and good it must have a form, together 2818 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p8"><b>I answer that,</b> Everything is said to be good so far as it is perfect; for in that way only is it desirable (as shown above <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p8.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A1">AA[1]</a>,3). Now a thing is said to be perfect if it lacks nothing according to the mode of its perfection. But since everything is what it is by its form (and since the form presupposes certain things, and from the form certain things necessarily follow), in order for a thing to be perfect and good it must have a form, together
2548 with all that precedes and follows upon that form. Now the form presupposes determination or commensuration of its principles, whether material or efficient, and this is signified by the mode: hence it is said that the measure marks the mode. But the form itself is signified by the species; for everything is placed in its species by its form. Hence the number is said to give the species, for definitions signifying species are like numbers, according to the Philosopher (Metaph. x); for as a unit 2819 with all that precedes and follows upon that form. Now the form presupposes determination or commensuration of its principles, whether material or efficient, and this is signified by the mode: hence it is said that the measure marks the mode. But the form itself is signified by the species; for everything is placed in its species by its form. Hence the number is said to give the species, for definitions signifying species are like numbers, according to the Philosopher (Metaph. x); for as a unit
2549 added to, or taken from a number, changes its species, so a difference added to, or taken from a definition, changes its species. Further, upon the form follows an inclination to the end, or to an action, or something of the sort; for everything, in so far as it is in act, acts and tends towards that which is in accordance with its form; and this belongs to weight and order. Hence the essence of goodness, so far as it consists in perfection, consists also in mode, species and order.</p> 2820 added to, or taken from a number, changes its species, so a
2550 </div> 2821 difference added to, or taken from a definition, changes its
2551 2822 species. Further, upon the form follows an inclination to the end, or
2552 <div class="bilingual"> 2823 to an action, or something of the sort; for everything, in so far as
2553 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> These three only follow upon being, so far as it is perfect, and according to this perfection is it good.</p> 2824 it is in act, acts and tends towards that which is in accordance with
2825 its form; and this belongs to weight and order. Hence the essence of
2826 goodness, so far as it consists in perfection, consists also in mode,
2827 species and order.</p>
2828 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 co."><a name="28451"><span class=
2829 "ref">[28451] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
2830 quod unumquodque dicitur bonum, inquantum est perfectum, sic enim
2831 est appetibile, ut supra dictum est. Perfectum autem dicitur, cui
2832 nihil deest secundum modum suae perfectionis. Cum autem unumquodque
2833 sit id quod est, per suam formam; forma autem praesupponit quaedam,
2834 et quaedam ad ipsam ex necessitate consequuntur; ad hoc quod
2835 aliquid sit perfectum et bonum, necesse est quod formam habeat, et
2836 ea quae praeexiguntur ad eam, et ea quae consequuntur ad ipsam.
2837 Praeexigitur autem ad formam determinatio sive commensuratio
2838 principiorum, seu materialium, seu efficientium ipsam, et hoc
2839 significatur per modum, unde dicitur quod mensura modum praefigit.
2840 Ipsa autem forma significatur per speciem, quia per formam
2841 unumquodque in specie constituitur. Et propter hoc dicitur quod
2842 numerus speciem praebet, quia definitiones significantes speciem
2843 sunt sicut numeri, secundum philosophum in VIII Metaphys.; sicut
2844 enim unitas addita vel subtracta variat speciem numeri, ita in
2845 definitionibus differentia apposita vel subtracta. Ad formam autem
2846 consequitur inclinatio ad finem, aut ad actionem, aut ad aliquid
2847 huiusmodi, quia unumquodque, inquantum est actu, agit, et tendit in
2848 id quod sibi convenit secundum suam formam. Et hoc pertinet ad
2849 pondus et ordinem. Unde ratio boni, secundum quod consistit in
2850 perfectione, consistit etiam in modo, specie et ordine.</p>
2851 </div>
2852
2853 <div class="bilingual">
2854 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p9"><b>Reply
2855 to Objection 1:</b> These three only follow upon being, so far as it
2856 is perfect, and according to this perfection is it good.</p>
2857 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 ad 1"><a name="28452"><span class=
2858 "ref">[28452] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
2859 dicendum quod ista tria non consequuntur ens, nisi inquantum est
2860 perfectum, et secundum hoc est bonum.</p>
2554 </div> 2861 </div>
2555 2862
2556 <div class="bilingual"> 2863 <div class="bilingual">
2557 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Mode, species and order are said to be good, and to be beings, not as though they themselves were subsistences, but because it is through them that other things are both beings and good. Hence they have no need of other things whereby they are good: for they are spoken of as good, not as though formally constituted so by something else, but as formally constituting others good: thus whiteness is not said to be a being as though it were by anything 2864 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Mode, species and order are said to be good, and to be beings, not as though they themselves were subsistences, but because it is through them that other things are both beings and good. Hence they have no need of other things whereby they are good: for they are spoken of as good, not as though formally constituted so by something else, but as formally constituting others good: thus whiteness is not said to be a being as though it were by anything
2558 else; but because, by it, something else has accidental being, as an object that is white.</p> 2865 else; but because, by it, something else has accidental being, as an
2559 </div> 2866 object that is white.</p>
2560 2867 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 ad 2"><a name="28453"><span class=
2561 <div class="bilingual"> 2868 "ref">[28453] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
2562 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Every being is due to some form. Hence, according to every being of a thing is its mode, species, order. Thus, a man has a mode, species and order as he is white, virtuous, learned and so on; according to everything predicated of him. But evil deprives a thing of some sort of being, as blindness deprives us of that being which is sight; yet it does not destroy every mode, species and order, but only such as follow upon the being of sight.</p> 2869 dicendum quod modus, species et ordo eo modo dicuntur bona, sicut
2563 </div> 2870 et entia, non quia ipsa sint quasi subsistentia, sed quia eis alia
2564 2871 sunt et entia et bona. Unde non oportet quod ipsa habeant aliqua
2565 <div class="bilingual"> 2872 alia, quibus sint bona. Non enim sic dicuntur bona, quasi
2566 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p12"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Augustine says (De Nat. Boni. xxiii), "Every mode, as mode, is good" (and the same can be said of species and order). "But an evil mode, species and order are so called as being less than they ought to be, or as not belonging to that which they ought to belong. Therefore they are called evil, because they are out of place and incongruous."</p> 2873 formaliter aliis sint bona; sed quia ipsis formaliter aliqua sunt
2567 </div> 2874 bona; sicut albedo non dicitur ens quia ipsa aliquo sit, sed quia
2568 2875 ipsa aliquid est secundum quid, scilicet album.</p>
2569 <div class="bilingual"> 2876 </div>
2570 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p13"><b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> The nature of light is spoken of as being without number, weight and measure, not absolutely, but in comparison with corporeal things, because the power of light extends to all corporeal things; inasmuch as it is an active quality of the first body that causes change, i.e. the heavens.</p> 2877
2878 <div class="bilingual">
2879 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2880 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Every being
2881 is due to some form. Hence, according to every being of a thing is its
2882 mode, species, order. Thus, a man has a mode, species and order as he
2883 is white, virtuous, learned and so on; according to everything
2884 predicated of him. But evil deprives a thing of some sort of being, as
2885 blindness deprives us of that being which is sight; yet it does not
2886 destroy every mode, species and order, but only such as follow upon
2887 the being of sight.</p>
2888 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 ad 3"><a name="28454"><span class=
2889 "ref">[28454] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
2890 quod quodlibet esse est secundum formam aliquam, unde secundum
2891 quodlibet esse rei, consequuntur ipsam modus, species et ordo,
2892 sicut homo habet speciem, modum et ordinem, inquantum est homo; et
2893 similiter inquantum est albus, habet similiter modum, speciem et
2894 ordinem; et inquantum est virtuosus, et inquantum est sciens, et
2895 secundum omnia quae de ipso dicuntur. Malum autem privat quodam
2896 esse, sicut caecitas privat esse visus, unde non tollit omnem
2897 modum, speciem et ordinem; sed solum modum, speciem et ordinem quae
2898 consequuntur esse visus.</p>
2899 </div>
2900
2901 <div class="bilingual">
2902 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2903 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p12"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Augustine
2904 says (De Nat. Boni. xxiii), "Every mode, as mode, is good" (and the
2905 same can be said of species and order). "But an evil mode, species and
2906 order are so called as being less than they ought to be, or as not
2907 belonging to that which they ought to belong. Therefore they are
2908 called evil, because they are out of place and incongruous."</p>
2909 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 ad 4"><a name="28455"><span class=
2910 "ref">[28455] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 ad 4</span></a> Ad quartum dicendum
2911 quod, sicut dicit Augustinus in libro de natura boni, <i>omnis
2912 modus, inquantum modus, bonus est</i> (et sic potest dici de specie
2913 et ordine), <i>sed malus modus, vel mala species, vel malus ordo,
2914 aut ideo dicuntur quia minora sunt quam esse debuerunt; aut quia
2915 non his rebus accommodantur, quibus accommodanda sunt; ut ideo
2916 dicantur mala, quia sunt aliena et incongrua</i>.</p>
2917 </div>
2918
2919 <div class="bilingual">
2920 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2921 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A5-p13"><b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> The nature
2922 of light is spoken of as being without number, weight and measure, not
2923 absolutely, but in comparison with corporeal things, because the power
2924 of light extends to all corporeal things; inasmuch as it is an active
2925 quality of the first body that causes change, i.e. the heavens.</p>
2926 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 5 ad 5"><a name="28456"><span class=
2927 "ref">[28456] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 5 ad 5</span></a> Ad quintum dicendum
2928 quod natura lucis dicitur esse sine numero et pondere et mensura,
2929 non simpliciter, sed per comparationem ad corporalia, quia virtus
2930 lucis ad omnia corporalia se extendit, inquantum est qualitas
2931 activa primi corporis alterantis, scilicet caeli.</p>
2571 </div> 2932 </div>
2572 2933
2573 2934
2574 2935
2575 2936
2579 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p0.1">Whether goodness is rightly divided into the virtuous*, the useful and the pleasant? [*"Bonum honestum" is the virtuous good considered as fitting. (cf. SS, Q[141], A[3]; SS, Q[145])]</h4> 2940 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p0.1">Whether goodness is rightly divided into the virtuous*, the useful and the pleasant? [*"Bonum honestum" is the virtuous good considered as fitting. (cf. SS, Q[141], A[3]; SS, Q[145])]</h4>
2580 2941
2581 2942
2582 2943
2583 <div class="bilingual"> 2944 <div class="bilingual">
2584 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that goodness is not rightly divided into the virtuous, the useful and the pleasant. For goodness is divided by the ten predicaments, as the Philosopher says (Ethic. i). But the virtuous, the useful and the pleasant can be found under one predicament. Therefore goodness is not rightly divided by them.</p> 2945 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2585 </div> 2946 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that
2586 2947 goodness is not rightly divided into the virtuous, the useful and the
2587 <div class="bilingual"> 2948 pleasant. For goodness is divided by the ten predicaments, as the
2588 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, every division is made by opposites. But these three do not seem to be opposites; for the virtuous is pleasing, and no wickedness is useful; whereas this ought to be the case if the division were made by opposites, for then the virtuous and the useful would be opposed; and Tully speaks of this (De Offic. ii). Therefore this division is incorrect.</p> 2949 Philosopher says (Ethic. i). But the virtuous, the useful and the
2589 </div> 2950 pleasant can be found under one predicament. Therefore goodness is not
2590 2951 rightly divided by them.</p>
2591 <div class="bilingual"> 2952 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 6 arg. 1"><a name="28457"><span class=
2592 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, where one thing is on account of another, there is only one thing. But the useful is not goodness, except so far as it is pleasing and virtuous. Therefore the useful ought not to divided against the pleasant and the virtuous.</p> 2953 "ref">[28457] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 6 arg. 1</span></a> Ad sextum sic
2593 </div> 2954 proceditur. Videtur quod non convenienter dividatur bonum per
2594 2955 honestum, utile et delectabile. Bonum enim, sicut dicit philosophus
2595 <div class="bilingual"> 2956 in I Ethic., dividitur per decem praedicamenta. Honestum autem,
2596 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> Ambrose makes use of this division of goodness (De Offic. i, 9)</p> 2957 utile et delectabile inveniri possunt in uno praedicamento. Ergo
2958 non convenienter per haec dividitur bonum.</p>
2959 </div>
2960
2961 <div class="bilingual">
2962 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2963 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, every
2964 division is made by opposites. But these three do not seem to be
2965 opposites; for the virtuous is pleasing, and no wickedness is useful;
2966 whereas this ought to be the case if the division were made by
2967 opposites, for then the virtuous and the useful would be opposed; and
2968 Tully speaks of this (De Offic. ii). Therefore this division is
2969 incorrect.</p>
2970 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 6 arg. 2"><a name="28458"><span class=
2971 "ref">[28458] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 6 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, omnis
2972 divisio fit per opposita. Sed haec tria non videntur esse opposita,
2973 nam honesta sunt delectabilia, nullumque inhonestum est utile (quod
2974 tamen oportet, si divisio fieret per opposita, ut opponerentur
2975 honestum et utile), ut etiam dicit Tullius, in libro de officiis.
2976 Ergo praedicta divisio non est conveniens.</p>
2977 </div>
2978
2979 <div class="bilingual">
2980 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
2981 id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, where one
2982 thing is on account of another, there is only one thing. But the
2983 useful is not goodness, except so far as it is pleasing and
2984 virtuous. Therefore the useful ought not to divided against the
2985 pleasant and the virtuous.</p>
2986 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 6 arg. 3"><a name="28459"><span class=
2987 "ref">[28459] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 6 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, ubi
2988 unum propter alterum, ibi unum tantum est. Sed utile non est bonum
2989 nisi propter delectabile vel honestum. Ergo non debet utile dividi
2990 contra delectabile et honestum.</p>
2991 </div>
2992
2993 <div class="bilingual">
2994 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p5"><b>On
2995 the contrary,</b> Ambrose makes use of this division of goodness (De
2996 Offic. i, 9)</p>
2997 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 6 s. c."><a name="28460"><span class=
2998 "ref">[28460] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 6 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
2999 quod Ambrosius, in libro de officiis, utitur ista divisione
3000 boni.</p>
2597 </div> 3001 </div>
2598 3002
2599 <div class="bilingual"> 3003 <div class="bilingual">
2600 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> This division properly concerns human goodness. But if we consider the nature of goodness from a higher and more universal point of view, we shall find that this division properly concerns goodness as such. For everything is good so far as it is desirable, and is a term of the movement of the appetite; the term of whose movement can be seen from a consideration of the movement of a natural body. Now the movement of a natural body is terminated by the end 3004 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> This division properly concerns human goodness. But if we consider the nature of goodness from a higher and more universal point of view, we shall find that this division properly concerns goodness as such. For everything is good so far as it is desirable, and is a term of the movement of the appetite; the term of whose movement can be seen from a consideration of the movement of a natural body. Now the movement of a natural body is terminated by the end
2601 absolutely; and relatively by the means through which it comes to the end, where the movement ceases; so a thing is called a term of movement, so far as it terminates any part of that movement. Now the ultimate term of movement can be taken in two ways, either as the thing itself towards which it tends, e.g. a place or form; or a state of rest in that thing. Thus, in the movement of the appetite, the thing desired that terminates the movement of the appetite relatively, as a means by which 3005 absolutely; and relatively by the means through which it comes to the end, where the movement ceases; so a thing is called a term of movement, so far as it terminates any part of that movement. Now the ultimate term of movement can be taken in two ways, either as the thing itself towards which it tends, e.g. a place or form; or a state of rest in that thing. Thus, in the movement of the appetite, the thing desired that terminates the movement of the appetite relatively, as a means by which
2602 something tends towards another, is called the useful; but that sought after as the last thing absolutely terminating the movement of the appetite, as a thing towards which for its own sake the appetite tends, is called the virtuous; for the virtuous is that which is desired for its own sake; but that which terminates the movement of the appetite in the form of rest in the thing desired, is called the pleasant.</p> 3006 something tends towards another, is called the useful; but that
2603 </div> 3007 sought after as the last thing absolutely terminating the movement of
2604 3008 the appetite, as a thing towards which for its own sake the appetite
2605 <div class="bilingual"> 3009 tends, is called the virtuous; for the virtuous is that which is
2606 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Goodness, so far as it is identical with being, is divided by the ten predicaments. But this division belongs to it according to its proper formality.</p> 3010 desired for its own sake; but that which terminates the movement of
3011 the appetite in the form of rest in the thing desired, is called the
3012 pleasant.</p>
3013 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 6 co."><a name="28461"><span class=
3014 "ref">[28461] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 6 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
3015 quod haec divisio proprie videtur esse boni humani. Si tamen altius
3016 et communius rationem boni consideremus, invenitur haec divisio
3017 proprie competere bono, secundum quod bonum est. Nam bonum est
3018 aliquid, inquantum est appetibile, et terminus motus appetitus.
3019 Cuius quidem motus terminatio considerari potest ex consideratione
3020 motus corporis naturalis. Terminatur autem motus corporis
3021 naturalis, simpliciter quidem ad ultimum; secundum quid autem etiam
3022 ad medium, per quod itur ad ultimum quod terminat motum, et dicitur
3023 aliquis terminus motus, inquantum aliquam partem motus terminat. Id
3024 autem quod est ultimus terminus motus, potest accipi dupliciter,
3025 vel ipsa res in quam tenditur, utpote locus vel forma; vel quies in
3026 re illa. Sic ergo in motu appetitus, id quod est appetibile
3027 terminans motum appetitus secundum quid, ut medium per quod
3028 tenditur in aliud, vocatur utile. Id autem quod appetitur ut
3029 ultimum, terminans totaliter motum appetitus, sicut quaedam res in
3030 quam per se appetitus tendit, vocatur honestum, quia honestum
3031 dicitur quod per se desideratur. Id autem quod terminat motum
3032 appetitus ut quies in re desiderata, est delectatio.</p>
3033 </div>
3034
3035 <div class="bilingual">
3036 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p7"><b>Reply
3037 to Objection 1:</b> Goodness, so far as it is identical with being, is
3038 divided by the ten predicaments. But this division belongs to it
3039 according to its proper formality.</p>
3040 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 6 ad 1"><a name="28462"><span class=
3041 "ref">[28462] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 6 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
3042 dicendum quod bonum, inquantum est idem subiecto cum ente,
3043 dividitur per decem praedicamenta, sed secundum propriam rationem,
3044 competit sibi ista divisio.</p>
2607 </div> 3045 </div>
2608 3046
2609 <div class="bilingual"> 3047 <div class="bilingual">
2610 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> This division is not by opposite things; but by opposite aspects. Now those things are called pleasing which have no other formality under which they are desirable except the pleasant, being sometimes hurtful and contrary to virtue. Whereas the useful applies to such as have nothing desirable in themselves, but are desired only as helpful to something further, as the taking of bitter medicine; while the virtuous is predicated of such as are desirable 3048 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> This division is not by opposite things; but by opposite aspects. Now those things are called pleasing which have no other formality under which they are desirable except the pleasant, being sometimes hurtful and contrary to virtue. Whereas the useful applies to such as have nothing desirable in themselves, but are desired only as helpful to something further, as the taking of bitter medicine; while the virtuous is predicated of such as are desirable
2611 in themselves.</p> 3049 in themselves.</p>
2612 </div> 3050 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 6 ad 2"><a name="28463"><span class=
2613 3051 "ref">[28463] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 6 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
2614 <div class="bilingual"> 3052 dicendum quod haec divisio non est per oppositas res, sed per
2615 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Goodness is not divided into these three as something univocal to be predicated equally of them all; but as something analogical to be predicated of them according to priority and posteriority. Hence it is predicated chiefly of the virtuous; then of the pleasant; and lastly of the useful.</p> 3053 oppositas rationes. Dicuntur tamen illa proprie delectabilia, quae
3054 nullam habent aliam rationem appetibilitatis nisi delectationem,
3055 cum aliquando sint et noxia et inhonesta. Utilia vero dicuntur,
3056 quae non habent in se unde desiderentur; sed desiderantur solum ut
3057 sunt ducentia in alterum, sicut sumptio medicinae amarae. Honesta
3058 vero dicuntur, quae in seipsis habent unde desiderentur.</p>
3059 </div>
3060
3061 <div class="bilingual">
3062 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q5.FP_Q5_A6-p9"><b>Reply
3063 to Objection 3:</b> Goodness is not divided into these three as
3064 something univocal to be predicated equally of them all; but as
3065 something analogical to be predicated of them according to priority
3066 and posteriority. Hence it is predicated chiefly of the virtuous; then
3067 of the pleasant; and lastly of the useful.</p>
3068 <p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 5 a. 6 ad 3"><a name="28464"><span class=
3069 "ref">[28464] I&ordf; q. 5 a. 6 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium dicendum
3070 quod bonum non dividitur in ista tria sicut univocum aequaliter de
3071 his praedicatum, sed sicut analogum, quod praedicatur secundum
3072 prius et posterius. Per prius enim praedicatur de honesto; et
3073 secundario de delectabili; tertio de utili.</p>
2616 </div> 3074 </div>
2617 3075
2618 3076
2619 3077
2620 3078
2621 </div4> 3079 </div4>
2622 </div3> 3080 </div3>
2623 3081 <!-- merged down to here -->
2624 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q6" next="FP_Q6_A1" prev="FP_Q5_A6" progress="0.84%" n="v" title="Question. 6 - THE GOODNESS OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)"> 3082 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q6" next="FP_Q6_A1" prev="FP_Q5_A6" progress="0.84%" n="v" title="Question. 6 - THE GOODNESS OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)">
2625 <h3 xml:lang="en" 3083 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q6-p0.1">Question 6. THE GOODNESS OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
2626 id="FP.ii.FP_Q6-p0.1">Question 6. THE GOODNESS OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
2627 3084
2628 3085
2629 3086
2630 <div class="bilingual"> 3087 <div class="bilingual">
2631 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q6-p2"> We next consider the goodness of God; under which head there are four points of inquiry:</p> 3088 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q6-p2"> We next consider the goodness of God; under which head there are four points of inquiry:</p>
2814 3271
2815 </div4> 3272 </div4>
2816 </div3> 3273 </div3>
2817 3274
2818 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q7" next="FP_Q7_A1" prev="FP_Q6_A4" progress="0.92%" n="vi" title="Question. 7 - THE INFINITY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)"> 3275 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q7" next="FP_Q7_A1" prev="FP_Q6_A4" progress="0.92%" n="vi" title="Question. 7 - THE INFINITY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)">
2819 <h3 xml:lang="en" 3276 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q7-p0.1">Question 7. THE INFINITY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
2820 id="FP.ii.FP_Q7-p0.1">Question 7. THE INFINITY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
2821 3277
2822 3278
2823 3279
2824 <div class="bilingual"> 3280 <div class="bilingual">
2825 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q7-p2"> After considering the divine perfection we must consider the divine infinity, and God's existence in things: for God is everywhere, and in all things, inasmuch as He is boundless and infinite.</p> 3281 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q7-p2"> After considering the divine perfection we must consider the divine infinity, and God's existence in things: for God is everywhere, and in all things, inasmuch as He is boundless and infinite.</p>
3057 3513
3058 </div4> 3514 </div4>
3059 </div3> 3515 </div3>
3060 3516
3061 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q8" next="FP_Q8_A1" prev="FP_Q7_A4" progress="1.04%" n="vii" title="Question. 8 - THE EXISTENCE OF GOD IN THINGS (FOUR ARTICLES)"> 3517 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q8" next="FP_Q8_A1" prev="FP_Q7_A4" progress="1.04%" n="vii" title="Question. 8 - THE EXISTENCE OF GOD IN THINGS (FOUR ARTICLES)">
3062 <h3 xml:lang="en" 3518 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q8-p0.1">Question 8. THE EXISTENCE OF GOD IN THINGS (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
3063 id="FP.ii.FP_Q8-p0.1">Question 8. THE EXISTENCE OF GOD IN THINGS (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
3064 3519
3065 3520
3066 3521
3067 <div class="bilingual"> 3522 <div class="bilingual">
3068 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q8-p2"> Since it evidently belongs to the infinite to be present everywhere, and in all things, we now consider whether this belongs to God; and concerning this there arise four points of inquiry:</p> 3523 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q8-p2"> Since it evidently belongs to the infinite to be present everywhere, and in all things, we now consider whether this belongs to God; and concerning this there arise four points of inquiry:</p>
3319 3774
3320 </div4> 3775 </div4>
3321 </div3> 3776 </div3>
3322 3777
3323 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q9" next="FP_Q9_A1" prev="FP_Q8_A4" progress="1.16%" n="viii" title="Question. 9 - THE IMMUTABILITY OF GOD (TWO ARTICLES)"> 3778 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q9" next="FP_Q9_A1" prev="FP_Q8_A4" progress="1.16%" n="viii" title="Question. 9 - THE IMMUTABILITY OF GOD (TWO ARTICLES)">
3324 <h3 xml:lang="en" 3779 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q9-p0.1">Question 9. THE IMMUTABILITY OF GOD (TWO ARTICLES)</h3>
3325 id="FP.ii.FP_Q9-p0.1">Question 9. THE IMMUTABILITY OF GOD (TWO ARTICLES)</h3>
3326 3780
3327 3781
3328 3782
3329 <div class="bilingual"> 3783 <div class="bilingual">
3330 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q9-p2"> We next consider God's immutability, and His eternity following on His immutability. On the immutability of God there are two points of inquiry:</p> 3784 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q9-p2"> We next consider God's immutability, and His eternity following on His immutability. On the immutability of God there are two points of inquiry:</p>
3443 3897
3444 </div4> 3898 </div4>
3445 </div3> 3899 </div3>
3446 3900
3447 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q10" next="FP_Q10_A1" prev="FP_Q9_A2" progress="1.23%" n="ix" title="Question. 10 - THE ETERNITY OF GOD (SIX ARTICLES)"> 3901 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q10" next="FP_Q10_A1" prev="FP_Q9_A2" progress="1.23%" n="ix" title="Question. 10 - THE ETERNITY OF GOD (SIX ARTICLES)">
3448 <h3 xml:lang="en" 3902 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q10-p0.1">Question 10. THE ETERNITY OF GOD (SIX ARTICLES)</h3>
3449 id="FP.ii.FP_Q10-p0.1">Question 10. THE ETERNITY OF GOD (SIX ARTICLES)</h3>
3450 3903
3451 3904
3452 3905
3453 <div class="bilingual"> 3906 <div class="bilingual">
3454 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q10-p2"> We must now consider the eternity of God, concerning which arise six points of inquiry:</p> 3907 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q10-p2"> We must now consider the eternity of God, concerning which arise six points of inquiry:</p>
3817 4270
3818 </div4> 4271 </div4>
3819 </div3> 4272 </div3>
3820 4273
3821 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q11" next="FP_Q11_A1" prev="FP_Q10_A6" progress="1.42%" n="x" title="Question. 11 - THE UNITY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)"> 4274 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q11" next="FP_Q11_A1" prev="FP_Q10_A6" progress="1.42%" n="x" title="Question. 11 - THE UNITY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)">
3822 <h3 xml:lang="en" 4275 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q11-p0.1">Question 11. THE UNITY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
3823 id="FP.ii.FP_Q11-p0.1">Question 11. THE UNITY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
3824 4276
3825 4277
3826 4278
3827 <div class="bilingual"> 4279 <div class="bilingual">
3828 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q11-p2"> After the foregoing, we consider the divine unity; concerning which there are four points of inquiry:</p> 4280 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q11-p2"> After the foregoing, we consider the divine unity; concerning which there are four points of inquiry:</p>
4036 4488
4037 </div4> 4489 </div4>
4038 </div3> 4490 </div3>
4039 4491
4040 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q12" next="FP_Q12_A1" prev="FP_Q11_A4" progress="1.53%" n="xi" title="Question. 12 - HOW GOD IS KNOWN BY US (THIRTEEN ARTICLES)"> 4492 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q12" next="FP_Q12_A1" prev="FP_Q11_A4" progress="1.53%" n="xi" title="Question. 12 - HOW GOD IS KNOWN BY US (THIRTEEN ARTICLES)">
4041 <h3 xml:lang="en" 4493 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p0.1">Question 12. HOW GOD IS KNOWN BY US (THIRTEEN ARTICLES)</h3>
4042 id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p0.1">Question 12. HOW GOD IS KNOWN BY US (THIRTEEN ARTICLES)</h3>
4043 4494
4044 4495
4045 4496
4046 <div class="bilingual"> 4497 <div class="bilingual">
4047 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p2"> As hitherto we have considered God as He is in Himself, we now go on to consider in what manner He is in the knowledge of creatures; concerning which there are thirteen points of inquiry:</p> 4498 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p2"> As hitherto we have considered God as He is in Himself, we now go on to consider in what manner He is in the knowledge of creatures; concerning which there are thirteen points of inquiry:</p>
4735 5186
4736 </div4> 5187 </div4>
4737 </div3> 5188 </div3>
4738 5189
4739 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q13" next="FP_Q13_A1" prev="FP_Q12_A13" progress="1.92%" n="xii" title="Question. 13 - THE NAMES OF GOD (TWELVE ARTICLES)"> 5190 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q13" next="FP_Q13_A1" prev="FP_Q12_A13" progress="1.92%" n="xii" title="Question. 13 - THE NAMES OF GOD (TWELVE ARTICLES)">
4740 <h3 xml:lang="en" 5191 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q13-p0.1">Question 13. THE NAMES OF GOD (TWELVE ARTICLES)</h3>
4741 id="FP.ii.FP_Q13-p0.1">Question 13. THE NAMES OF GOD (TWELVE ARTICLES)</h3>
4742 5192
4743 5193
4744 5194
4745 <div class="bilingual"> 5195 <div class="bilingual">
4746 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q13-p2"> After the consideration of those things which belong to the divine knowledge, we now proceed to the consideration of the divine names. For everything is named by us according to our knowledge of it.</p> 5196 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q13-p2"> After the consideration of those things which belong to the divine knowledge, we now proceed to the consideration of the divine names. For everything is named by us according to our knowledge of it.</p>
5469 5919
5470 </div4> 5920 </div4>
5471 </div3> 5921 </div3>
5472 5922
5473 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q14" next="FP_Q14_A1" prev="FP_Q13_A12" progress="2.35%" n="xiii" title="Question. 14 - OF GOD’S KNOWLEDGE (SIXTEEN ARTICLES)"> 5923 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q14" next="FP_Q14_A1" prev="FP_Q13_A12" progress="2.35%" n="xiii" title="Question. 14 - OF GOD’S KNOWLEDGE (SIXTEEN ARTICLES)">
5474 <h3 xml:lang="en" 5924 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q14-p0.1">Question 14. OF GOD'S KNOWLEDGE (SIXTEEN ARTICLES)</h3>
5475 id="FP.ii.FP_Q14-p0.1">Question 14. OF GOD'S KNOWLEDGE (SIXTEEN ARTICLES)</h3>
5476 5925
5477 5926
5478 5927
5479 <div class="bilingual"> 5928 <div class="bilingual">
5480 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q14-p2"> Having considered what belongs to the divine substance, we have now to treat of God's operation. And since one kind of operation is immanent, and another kind of operation proceeds to the exterior effect, we treat first of knowledge and of will (for understanding abides in the intelligent agent, and will is in the one who wills); and afterwards of the power of God, the principle of the divine operation as proceeding to the exterior effect. Now because to understand is a kind of 5929 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q14-p2"> Having considered what belongs to the divine substance, we have now to treat of God's operation. And since one kind of operation is immanent, and another kind of operation proceeds to the exterior effect, we treat first of knowledge and of will (for understanding abides in the intelligent agent, and will is in the one who wills); and afterwards of the power of God, the principle of the divine operation as proceeding to the exterior effect. Now because to understand is a kind of
6371 6820
6372 </div4> 6821 </div4>
6373 </div3> 6822 </div3>
6374 6823
6375 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q15" next="FP_Q15_A1" prev="FP_Q14_A16" progress="2.85%" n="xiv" title="Question. 15 - OF IDEAS (THREE ARTICLES)"> 6824 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q15" next="FP_Q15_A1" prev="FP_Q14_A16" progress="2.85%" n="xiv" title="Question. 15 - OF IDEAS (THREE ARTICLES)">
6376 <h3 xml:lang="en" 6825 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q15-p0.1">Question 15. OF IDEAS (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
6377 id="FP.ii.FP_Q15-p0.1">Question 15. OF IDEAS (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
6378 6826
6379 6827
6380 6828
6381 <div class="bilingual"> 6829 <div class="bilingual">
6382 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q15-p2"> After considering the knowledge of God, it remains to consider ideas. And about this there are three points of inquiry:</p> 6830 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q15-p2"> After considering the knowledge of God, it remains to consider ideas. And about this there are three points of inquiry:</p>
6553 7001
6554 </div4> 7002 </div4>
6555 </div3> 7003 </div3>
6556 7004
6557 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q16" next="FP_Q16_A1" prev="FP_Q15_A3" progress="2.95%" n="xv" title="Question. 16 - OF TRUTH (EIGHT ARTICLES)"> 7005 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q16" next="FP_Q16_A1" prev="FP_Q15_A3" progress="2.95%" n="xv" title="Question. 16 - OF TRUTH (EIGHT ARTICLES)">
6558 <h3 xml:lang="en" 7006 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q16-p0.1">Question 16. OF TRUTH (EIGHT ARTICLES)</h3>
6559 id="FP.ii.FP_Q16-p0.1">Question 16. OF TRUTH (EIGHT ARTICLES)</h3>
6560 7007
6561 7008
6562 7009
6563 <div class="bilingual"> 7010 <div class="bilingual">
6564 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q16-p2"> Since knowledge is of things that are true, after the consideration of the knowledge of God, we must inquire concerning truth. About this there are eight points of inquiry:</p> 7011 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q16-p2"> Since knowledge is of things that are true, after the consideration of the knowledge of God, we must inquire concerning truth. About this there are eight points of inquiry:</p>
6964 7411
6965 </div4> 7412 </div4>
6966 </div3> 7413 </div3>
6967 7414
6968 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q17" next="FP_Q17_A1" prev="FP_Q16_A8" progress="3.16%" n="xvi" title="Question. 17 - CONCERNING FALSITY (FOUR ARTICLES)"> 7415 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q17" next="FP_Q17_A1" prev="FP_Q16_A8" progress="3.16%" n="xvi" title="Question. 17 - CONCERNING FALSITY (FOUR ARTICLES)">
6969 <h3 xml:lang="en" 7416 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q17-p0.1">Question 17. CONCERNING FALSITY (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
6970 id="FP.ii.FP_Q17-p0.1">Question 17. CONCERNING FALSITY (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
6971 7417
6972 7418
6973 7419
6974 <div class="bilingual"> 7420 <div class="bilingual">
6975 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q17-p2"> We next consider falsity. About this four points of inquiry arise:</p> 7421 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q17-p2"> We next consider falsity. About this four points of inquiry arise:</p>
7192 7638
7193 </div4> 7639 </div4>
7194 </div3> 7640 </div3>
7195 7641
7196 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q18" next="FP_Q18_A1" prev="FP_Q17_A4" progress="3.28%" n="xvii" title="Question. 18 - THE LIFE OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)"> 7642 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q18" next="FP_Q18_A1" prev="FP_Q17_A4" progress="3.28%" n="xvii" title="Question. 18 - THE LIFE OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)">
7197 <h3 xml:lang="en" 7643 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q18-p0.1">Question 18. THE LIFE OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
7198 id="FP.ii.FP_Q18-p0.1">Question 18. THE LIFE OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
7199 7644
7200 7645
7201 7646
7202 <div class="bilingual"> 7647 <div class="bilingual">
7203 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q18-p2"> Since to understand belongs to living beings, after considering the divine knowledge and intellect, we must consider the divine life. About this, four points of inquiry arise:</p> 7648 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q18-p2"> Since to understand belongs to living beings, after considering the divine knowledge and intellect, we must consider the divine life. About this, four points of inquiry arise:</p>
7429 7874
7430 </div4> 7875 </div4>
7431 </div3> 7876 </div3>
7432 7877
7433 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q19" next="FP_Q19_A1" prev="FP_Q18_A4" progress="3.41%" n="xviii" title="Question. 19 - THE WILL OF GOD (TWELVE ARTICLES)"> 7878 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q19" next="FP_Q19_A1" prev="FP_Q18_A4" progress="3.41%" n="xviii" title="Question. 19 - THE WILL OF GOD (TWELVE ARTICLES)">
7434 <h3 xml:lang="en" 7879 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q19-p0.1">Question 19. THE WILL OF GOD (TWELVE ARTICLES)</h3>
7435 id="FP.ii.FP_Q19-p0.1">Question 19. THE WILL OF GOD (TWELVE ARTICLES)</h3>
7436 7880
7437 7881
7438 7882
7439 <div class="bilingual"> 7883 <div class="bilingual">
7440 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q19-p2"> After considering the things belonging to the divine knowledge, we consider what belongs to the divine will. The first consideration is about the divine will itself; the second about what belongs strictly to His will; the third about what belongs to the intellect in relation to His will. About His will itself there are twelve points of inquiry:</p> 7884 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q19-p2"> After considering the things belonging to the divine knowledge, we consider what belongs to the divine will. The first consideration is about the divine will itself; the second about what belongs strictly to His will; the third about what belongs to the intellect in relation to His will. About His will itself there are twelve points of inquiry:</p>
8109 8553
8110 </div4> 8554 </div4>
8111 </div3> 8555 </div3>
8112 8556
8113 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q20" next="FP_Q20_A1" prev="FP_Q19_A12" progress="3.78%" n="xix" title="Question. 20 - GOD'S LOVE (FOUR ARTICLES)"> 8557 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q20" next="FP_Q20_A1" prev="FP_Q19_A12" progress="3.78%" n="xix" title="Question. 20 - GOD'S LOVE (FOUR ARTICLES)">
8114 <h3 xml:lang="en" 8558 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q20-p0.1">Question 20. GOD'S LOVE (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
8115 id="FP.ii.FP_Q20-p0.1">Question 20. GOD'S LOVE (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
8116 8559
8117 8560
8118 8561
8119 <div class="bilingual"> 8562 <div class="bilingual">
8120 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q20-p2"> We next consider those things that pertain absolutely to the will of God. In the appetitive part of the soul there are found in ourselves both the passions of the soul, as joy, love, and the like; and the habits of the moral virtues, as justice, fortitude and the like. Hence we shall first consider the love of God, and secondly His justice and mercy. About the first there are four points of inquiry:</p> 8563 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q20-p2"> We next consider those things that pertain absolutely to the will of God. In the appetitive part of the soul there are found in ourselves both the passions of the soul, as joy, love, and the like; and the habits of the moral virtues, as justice, fortitude and the like. Hence we shall first consider the love of God, and secondly His justice and mercy. About the first there are four points of inquiry:</p>
8356 8799
8357 </div4> 8800 </div4>
8358 </div3> 8801 </div3>
8359 8802
8360 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q21" next="FP_Q21_A1" prev="FP_Q20_A4" progress="3.92%" n="xx" title="Question. 21 - THE JUSTICE AND MERCY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)"> 8803 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q21" next="FP_Q21_A1" prev="FP_Q20_A4" progress="3.92%" n="xx" title="Question. 21 - THE JUSTICE AND MERCY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)">
8361 <h3 xml:lang="en" 8804 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q21-p0.1">Question 21. THE JUSTICE AND MERCY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
8362 id="FP.ii.FP_Q21-p0.1">Question 21. THE JUSTICE AND MERCY OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
8363 8805
8364 8806
8365 8807
8366 <div class="bilingual"> 8808 <div class="bilingual">
8367 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q21-p2"> After considering the divine love, we must treat of God's justice and mercy. Under this head there are four points of inquiry:</p> 8809 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q21-p2"> After considering the divine love, we must treat of God's justice and mercy. Under this head there are four points of inquiry:</p>
8574 9016
8575 </div4> 9017 </div4>
8576 </div3> 9018 </div3>
8577 9019
8578 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q22" next="FP_Q22_A1" prev="FP_Q21_A4" progress="4.03%" n="xxi" title="Question. 22 - THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)"> 9020 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q22" next="FP_Q22_A1" prev="FP_Q21_A4" progress="4.03%" n="xxi" title="Question. 22 - THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)">
8579 <h3 xml:lang="en" 9021 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q22-p0.1">Question 22. THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
8580 id="FP.ii.FP_Q22-p0.1">Question 22. THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
8581 9022
8582 9023
8583 9024
8584 <div class="bilingual"> 9025 <div class="bilingual">
8585 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q22-p2"> Having considered all that relates to the will absolutely, we must now proceed to those things which have relation to both the intellect and the will, namely providence, in respect to all created things; predestination and reprobation and all that is connected with these acts in respect especially of man as regards his eternal salvation. For in the science of morals, after the moral virtues themselves, comes the consideration of prudence, to which providence would seem to belong. 9026 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q22-p2"> Having considered all that relates to the will absolutely, we must now proceed to those things which have relation to both the intellect and the will, namely providence, in respect to all created things; predestination and reprobation and all that is connected with these acts in respect especially of man as regards his eternal salvation. For in the science of morals, after the moral virtues themselves, comes the consideration of prudence, to which providence would seem to belong.
8817 9258
8818 </div4> 9259 </div4>
8819 </div3> 9260 </div3>
8820 9261
8821 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q23" next="FP_Q23_A1" prev="FP_Q22_A4" progress="4.18%" n="xxii" title="Question. 23 - OF PREDESTINATION (EIGHT ARTICLES)"> 9262 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q23" next="FP_Q23_A1" prev="FP_Q22_A4" progress="4.18%" n="xxii" title="Question. 23 - OF PREDESTINATION (EIGHT ARTICLES)">
8822 <h3 xml:lang="en" 9263 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q23-p0.1">Question 23. OF PREDESTINATION (EIGHT ARTICLES)</h3>
8823 id="FP.ii.FP_Q23-p0.1">Question 23. OF PREDESTINATION (EIGHT ARTICLES)</h3>
8824 9264
8825 9265
8826 9266
8827 <div class="bilingual"> 9267 <div class="bilingual">
8828 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q23-p2"> After consideration of divine providence, we must treat of predestination and the book of life. Concerning predestination there are eight points of inquiry:</p> 9268 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q23-p2"> After consideration of divine providence, we must treat of predestination and the book of life. Concerning predestination there are eight points of inquiry:</p>
9286 9726
9287 </div4> 9727 </div4>
9288 </div3> 9728 </div3>
9289 9729
9290 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q24" next="FP_Q24_A1" prev="FP_Q23_A8" progress="4.47%" n="xxiii" title="Question. 24 - THE BOOK OF LIFE (THREE ARTICLES)"> 9730 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q24" next="FP_Q24_A1" prev="FP_Q23_A8" progress="4.47%" n="xxiii" title="Question. 24 - THE BOOK OF LIFE (THREE ARTICLES)">
9291 <h3 xml:lang="en" 9731 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q24-p0.1">Question 24. THE BOOK OF LIFE (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
9292 id="FP.ii.FP_Q24-p0.1">Question 24. THE BOOK OF LIFE (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
9293 9732
9294 9733
9295 9734
9296 <div class="bilingual"> 9735 <div class="bilingual">
9297 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q24-p2"> We now consider the book of life; concerning which there are three points of inquiry:</p> 9736 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q24-p2"> We now consider the book of life; concerning which there are three points of inquiry:</p>
9448 9887
9449 </div4> 9888 </div4>
9450 </div3> 9889 </div3>
9451 9890
9452 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q25" next="FP_Q25_A1" prev="FP_Q24_A3" progress="4.54%" n="xxiv" title="Question. 25 - THE POWER OF GOD (SIX ARTICLES)"> 9891 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q25" next="FP_Q25_A1" prev="FP_Q24_A3" progress="4.54%" n="xxiv" title="Question. 25 - THE POWER OF GOD (SIX ARTICLES)">
9453 <h3 xml:lang="en" 9892 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q25-p0.1">Question 25. THE POWER OF GOD (SIX ARTICLES)</h3>
9454 id="FP.ii.FP_Q25-p0.1">Question 25. THE POWER OF GOD (SIX ARTICLES)</h3>
9455 9893
9456 9894
9457 9895
9458 <div class="bilingual"> 9896 <div class="bilingual">
9459 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q25-p2"> After considering the divine foreknowledge and will, and other things pertaining thereto, it remains for us to consider the power of God. About this are six points of inquiry:</p> 9897 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q25-p2"> After considering the divine foreknowledge and will, and other things pertaining thereto, it remains for us to consider the power of God. About this are six points of inquiry:</p>
9802 10240
9803 </div4> 10241 </div4>
9804 </div3> 10242 </div3>
9805 10243
9806 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q26" next="FP_Q26_A1" prev="FP_Q25_A6" progress="4.76%" n="xxv" title="Question. 26 - OF THE DIVINE BEATITUDE (FOUR ARTICLES) "> 10244 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q26" next="FP_Q26_A1" prev="FP_Q25_A6" progress="4.76%" n="xxv" title="Question. 26 - OF THE DIVINE BEATITUDE (FOUR ARTICLES) ">
9807 <h3 xml:lang="en" 10245 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q26-p0.1">Question 26. OF THE DIVINE BEATITUDE (FOUR ARTICLES) </h3>
9808 id="FP.ii.FP_Q26-p0.1">Question 26. OF THE DIVINE BEATITUDE (FOUR ARTICLES) </h3>
9809 10246
9810 10247
9811 10248
9812 <div class="bilingual"> 10249 <div class="bilingual">
9813 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q26-p2"> After considering all that pertains to the unity of the divine essence, we come to treat of the divine beatitude. Concerning this, there are four points of inquiry:</p> 10250 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q26-p2"> After considering all that pertains to the unity of the divine essence, we come to treat of the divine beatitude. Concerning this, there are four points of inquiry:</p>