Summa Theologica: Difference between revisions

[[Thomas Aquinas#Late career and cessation of writing (1272–1274)|Although unfinished]], it is "one of the classics of the history of philosophy and one of the most influential works of Western literature."<ref>Ross, James F. 2003. "Thomas Aquinas, 'Summa theologiae' (ca. 1273), Christian Wisdom Explained Philosophically." P. 165 in ''[https://books.google.ca/books?id=6jAcwGItzssC&pg=PA165&redir_esc=y The Classics of Western Philosophy: A Reader's Guide],'' edited by [[Jorge J. E. Gracia|J. J. E. Gracia]], G. M. Reichberg, B. N. Schumacher. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. {{ISBN|9780631236115}}.</ref> Moreover, the ''Summa''It remains Aquinas' "most perfect work, the fruit of his mature years, in which the thought of his whole life is condensed.".<ref>Perrier, Joseph Louis. 1909. "The Revival of Scholastic Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century." New York: [[Columbia University Press]]. pg. 149.</ref> Among non-scholars, the ''Summa'' is perhaps most famous for its five arguments for the existence of God, which are known as the "[[Five Ways (Aquinas)|five ways]]" ({{lang-la|quinque viae}}). The five ways, however, occupy only one of the ''Summa''{{'s}} 3,125 articles.

* '''Dionysius''' – [[Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite]]: Aquinas refers to the works of Dionysius, whom scholars of the time thought to be the person mentioned in Acts 17:34 (a disciple of [[Paul of Tarsus|St. Paul]]). However, theyThese were most likely written in Syria during the 6th century by a writer who attributed his book to Dionysius (hence the addition of the prefix "pseudo-" to the name "Dionysius" in most modern references to these works).

* Human reasoning alone can prove: the [[existence of God]]; [[divine simplicity|His total simplicity]] or lack of composition; his [[God and eternity|eternal nature]] (i.e., He exists outside of time, as time is held to be a part of God's created universe); His knowledge; the way His [[Will of God|will]] operates; and His power. However, althoughAlthough St. Thomas felt that human reason alone could prove that God created the universe, reason alone could not determine whether the universe was eternal or actually began at some point in time. Rather, only [[Revelation|divine revelation]] from the [[Book of Genesis]] proves that.<ref group="lower-roman">{{Bibleverse|Romans|1:19-20}}</ref><ref group="lower-roman">[http://www.ccel.org/a/aquinas/summa/FP/FP002.html#FPQ2A2THEP1 ''Summa Theologica'', Pt. I, Q. 2, Art. 2]. See also: Pt. I, Q. 1, Art. 8.</ref>

However, atAt other points, Aquinas, with different meanings of "great" makes the claimclaims for pride, despair, and hatred of God.</ref>

As God rules in the world, the "plan of the order of things" preexists in him; in other words, his [[Divine providence|providence]] and the exercise of it in his government are what condition as cause everything which comes to pass in the world. Hence follows [[predestination]]: from eternity some are destined to eternal life, while as concerns others "he permits some to fall short of that end". [[Reprobation]], however, is more than mere foreknowledge; it is the "will of permitting anyone to fall into sin and incur the penalty of condemnation for sin".

In his doctrine of the [[Trinity]], Aquinas starts from the Augustinian system. Since God has only the functions of thinking and willing, only two ''processiones'' can be asserted from the Father; but these establish definite relations of the persons of the Trinity, one to another. The relations must be conceived as real and not as merely ideal; for, as with creatures relations arise through certain accidents, since in God there is no accident but all is substance, it follows that "the relation really existing in God is the same as the essence according to the thing". From another side, however, the relations as real must be really distinguished one from another. Therefore, three persons are to be affirmed in God.

In a chain of acts of will, man strives for the highest end. They are free acts, insofar as man has in himself the knowledge of their end (and therein the principle of action). In that the will wills the end, it wills also the appropriate means, chooses freely and completes the ''consensus''. Whether the act is good or evil depends on the end. The "human reason" pronounces judgment concerning the character of the end; it is, therefore, the law for action. Human acts, however, are meritorious insofar as they promote the purpose of God and his honor.

By repeating a good action, man acquires a moral habit or a quality that enables him to do the good gladly and easily. This is true, however, only of the intellectual and moral virtues (which St. Thomas treats after the manner of [[Aristotle]]); the theological virtues are imparted by God to man as a "disposition", from which the acts here proceed; while they strengthen, they do not form it. The "disposition" of evil is the opposite alternative.

[[Sin]] has its origin in the will, which decides (against reason) for a "changeable good". Since, however, the will also moves the other powers of man, sin has its seat in these too. By choosing such a lower good as its end, the will is misled by self-love, so that this works as cause in every sin. God is not the cause of sin since, on the contrary, he draws all things to himself; but from another side, God is the cause of all things, so he is efficacious also in sin as ''actio'' but not as ''ens.'' The devil is not directly the cause of sin, but he incites the imagination and the sensuous impulse of man (as men or things may also do).

The divine law consists of an old and a new. Insofar as the old divine law contains the moral law of nature, it is universally valid; what there is in it, however, beyond this is only valid only for the Jews. The new law is "primarily grace itself" and so a "law given within"; "a gift superadded to nature by grace", but not a "written law". In this sense, as sacramental grace, the new law justifies. It contains, however, an "ordering" of external and internal conduct and so regarded is, as a matter of course, identical with both the old law and the law of nature. The ''consilia ''show how one may attain the end "better and more expediently" by full renunciation of worldly goods.

Accordingly, the object of both faith and love is God, involving also the entire complex of truths and commandments that God reveals, insofar as they in fact relate to God and lead to him. Thus, faith becomes recognition of the teachings and precepts of the Scriptures and the Church ("the first subjection of man to God is by faith"). The object of faith, however, is, by its nature, object of love; therefore, faith comes to completion only in love ("by love is the act of faith accomplished and formed").

The person of the Logos, accordingly, has assumed the impersonal human nature, and in such way that the assumption of the soul became the means for the assumption of the body. This union with the human soul is the ''gratia unionis'', which leads to the impartation of the ''gratia habitualis'' from the Logos to the human nature. Thereby, all human potentialities are made perfect in Jesus. Besides the perfections given by the vision of God, which Jesus enjoyed from the beginning, he receives all others by the ''gratia habitualis''. Insofar, however, as it is the limited human nature which receives these perfections, they are finite. This holds both of the knowledge and the will of Christ.

This is the first course of thought. Then follows a second complex of thoughts, which has the idea of satisfaction as its center. To be sure, God as the highest being could forgive sins without satisfaction; but because his justice and mercy could be best revealed through satisfaction, he chose this way. As little, however, as satisfaction is necessary in itself, so little does it offer an equivalent, in a correct sense, for guilt; it is rather a "superabundant satisfaction", since on account of the divine subject in Christ in a certain sense his suffering and activity are infinite.

The translation is entirely the work of Laurence Shapcote (1864-1947), an English Dominican friar. Wanting to remain anonymous, however, he attributed the translation to the Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Father Shapcote also translated various of Aquinas's other works.<ref>"Thomas Aquinas's 'Summa Theologiae': A Guide and Commentary" by Brian Davies [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014, p. xiv].