PROPOSITION LXXXI.

This actual or aptitudinal conformity of Being with the Intellect, on which Ontological Truth formally reposes, refers primarily to the Uncreated, secondarily to created or finite, Intelligence.

I. THE FIRST MEMBER of this Thesis states, that this conformity of Being with the intellect refers principally to the Uncreated Intelligence; and the statement is thus proved. All Being is either Infinite or finite. But the Ontological Truth in both refers principally to the Divine Intelligence. First of all, then, the Truth of Infinite Being primarily connotes the Uncreated Intelligence, because of the intrinsic and essential identity in God of Subject and Object, -- of Thought and Being; whence proceed two characteristics. The one is, that eternally and immutably there must be actual cognition, actual conformity; for Being is Thought, and Thought is Being. The other is that there is a perfect adequation; because there is perfect identity. Hence, God is infinitely comprehended by Himself; whence results a special and infinitely perfect conformity of Infinite Being with Infinite Cognition. But the Divine Nature, because of its Infinity, cannot be comprehended by any finite intelligence. There is a fathomless disproportion. Moreover, in the natural order, It is not of necessity actually conformed to the finite intellect; because It is not directly and formally present to it. Secondly, The Truth of finite Being primarily connotes the Uncreated Intelligence. For, to begin with, in the Divine Intelligence there is consummate and infallible Truth, all-embracing, infinitely complete, and the most perfect Idea or Representation of all things, as well possible as actual. Then, again, the Divine Intelligence is the one efficient Cause of all finite Truth; because God is the one supreme efficient Cause of all entity, and His Nature is fundamentally the one exemplar Cause of all things that are, or can be, created. Therefore, in a certain sense, it is most correct to say, that God is the Creator of finite Truth, save in the instance of those truths which are dependent on the free-will of the creature. Moreover, the Divine Cognition of the creature is necessarily actual and immutable, not by virtue of the object, but by virtue of the Divine Intelligence. Hence, though the existence of the creature is temporal and changing, the Divine Idea of the creature is everlasting and immutable; for really it is God Himself. But, of this more at length in the last Book, on Natural Theology. Enough has been said to show that, if Truth consists in a conformity or equation of Being with Intellect, such conformity or adequation, in the case either of Infinite or finite Being, must have primary reference to the Uncreated Intelligence.

II. IN THE SECOND MEMBER it is asserted that the conformity of Being with Intellect secondarily refers to the finite intelligence. This member virtually includes two Propositions; the one, that Being is conformable to the finite intelligence; the other that it is only conformable to that intelligence in a secondary or inferior way. These two statements it would be better to consider separately. First of all, then, it is easy to see that there is an actual or, at least, aptitudinal conformity of Being with finite intelligence, speaking of Being generally; because finite intelligence is, after a manner, a participation of the Divine Intelligence; and, therefore, conformity with the Latter would presuppose conformability with the former. But, when the question is considered in relation to that primary determination and division of Being into the finite and Infinite; there straightway arises a difficulty of no mean importance, touching the conformability of Infinite Being with finite intelligence. For it is universally held by the Doctors of the School, that it is naturally impossible for the highest finite intelligence to have a direct intuition of the Divine Nature. But, if so, how can it be maintained that the Infinite Being is in anywise conformable to the finite intelligence? This whole question will have to be treated in its proper place; and, accordingly, here a short answer will be given. It is certain that the Divine Nature is intelligible, in infinite excess of all finite Being even when collected into one whole; consequently, of Itself It has an Infinite conformability with whatsoever intellect capable of forming a true concept of It. It follows, therefore, that the finite intellect not only can, but does, form a true concept of God, though imperfect, and, as it were, arguitive. It must necessarily de potentia absoluta be imperfect; because it is metaphysically impossible that the finite should comprehend, (though it may be able in a way to apprehend), the Infinite. Its cognition of God must naturally be deductive, not immediate; because of its natural weakness and imperfection. But this does not interfere with the conformability of the object; but with Its actual conformity. And, (if it may be allowed to assume a truth, as a Lemma, from Christian Theology, for the sake of illustrating this explanation), it is in exact conformity with what has been said, that, when the finite intellect is supernaturally comforted in its final beatitude by a Divine Grace which Theologians call the light of glory, it is rendered thereby capable of the Beatific Vision, that is of a direct, immediate cognition, -- an intuition of God. Therefore, the natural impossibility, under which the finite intellect labours, of forming an intuitive idea of God, does not arise from any defect of conformability on the part of the object; but just the reverse. It originates in the in capacity and limitation of the finite intelligence itself. As to the conformability of finite Being with the created intellect, there can be no possible doubt, save in the mind of universal sceptics, who will not accept the first principles of thought, except under the safeguard of impossible proof. For, as a fact, we know existing things through our concepts of them; and all scientific knowledge is built up upon the foundation of conceptual definitions. The nature of the human intellect requires that we should accept its concepts as true symbols of objective realities; apart from primary intuitions which are direct, but are, nevertheless, the foundation of the reflex. Nature imperatively exacts of us this acceptance of ideas, as sterling coin, in the Empire of Truth, on peril of total intellectual bankruptcy; and nature is the voice of God. But what does this necessarily imply and presuppose? Surely, it implies and presupposes a conformability of finite Being with the human intellect. If there were no such conformability, there could be no bridge between the Subjective and the Objective; and, consequently, nature would be to human thought as though it were not, -- an unknown possibility. But the same position can be thoroughly maintained on a priori grounds. For, if every existing Being is intelligible, i.e. has an aptitude for generating a true cognition of itself in any intellect capable of representing it, there must be conformability of finite Being with the created intellect, even though there should be, in certain cases, an absence of actual conformity, because of a deficiency in such or such a particular intelligence.

The second statement, included under the second member of the Proposition, to the effect that the aforesaid conformity of Being refers only secondarily to finite intelligence, is evident from the nature of the case; whether that conformity be considered in connection with Infinite, or with finite, Being. In the instance of the former it hardly needs declaration; for, while Infinite Being is ever actually one, and so, in the highest sense actually conformed with the Uncreated Intelligence, It is only conformable, and can never be adequately conformed, with created intelligence. But, speaking of the two kinds of Being indifferently, i.e. of Being in general, actual conformity with the Uncreated Intellect is a necessity, merely aptitudinal conformity, an impossibility; whereas, with the finite intellect, actual conformity is an accident, aptitudinal conformity essential. Again, Ontological Truth is (so to say) caused by the Uncreated Intellect, while itself is a cause to the created intellect; at once measured and measuring, as will be explained in a subsequent Thesis. Finally, between Being and the finite intellect there may be difformity through the extravagance of the latter; with the Uncreated Intelligence it is impossible. St. Thomas adds another reason as important as any. 'The truth,' he remarks, which is predicated of entities,' (he is speaking of finite Beings, and his argument applies exclusively to them), 'by relation to the human intellect, is as it were accidental to entities, because in the hypothesis that there was not, and could not be, a human intellect, entities would still abide in their essential nature,' (and would therefore he ontologically true). 'But the truth which is predicated of them in relation to the Divine Intelligence, is inseparably communicated to them; for they cannot subsist, save by virtue of the Divine Intelligence which brings them into Being.'^{1} The Divine Idea, which is their Prototype, is really identical with the Divine Will that creates them ; just as a work of art receives its aesthetic truth from the artist, according to whose conception it is formed and by whose will it is produced. Another passage from the Angelic Doctor may be inserted by way of conclusion to the present Thesis; as, in it, be unequivocally maintains the truth which has been here evolved. 'An entity intellectually apprehended,' he says, 'can stand in relation to an intellect either necessarily or accidentally. It has absolute relation to the intellect on which it is dependent for its being, accidental relation to the intellect by which it is cognizable; just as we might say that a building is conformable to the mind of the architect of necessity, but only accidentally to an intellect on which it is not dependent. But Judgment concerning any entity is not formed on that which is accidentally, but on that which is necessarily, inherent in it. Hence, everything is pronounced to be true absolutely, according to its order of relation to the intellect on which it depends. Hence it is, that artificial things are said to be true in reference to the human intellect. For that building is said to be a true one, which acquires a likeness to the form which is in the mind of the architect; and speech is said to be true, in so far as it is a symbol of true thought. In a like manner, the things of nature are said to be true, in that they acquire a likeness to the Forms which are in the Divine Mind. For that is called a true stone, which acquires the proper nature of a stone, according to the Pattern preconceived in the Divine Intelligence.^{2}

{1} 'Veritas autem quae dicitur de rebus in comparatione ad intellectum humanum, rebus quodammodo accidentalis; quia, posito quod intellectus humanus non esset nec esse posset, adhuc res in sua essentia permanerent. Sed veritas, quae dicitur de eis in comparatione ad intellectum divinum, eis inseparabiliter communicatur; non enim subsistere possunt, nisi per intellectum divinum eas in esse producentem.' De Verit. Q. I, a. 4, c.

{2} 'Res autem intellecta ad intellectum aliquem potest habere ordinem vel per se vel per accidens. Per se quidem habet ordinem ad intellectum a quo dependet secundum suum esse; per accidens autem ad intellectum a quo cognoscibilis est. Sicut, si dicamus quod domus comparatur ad intellectum artificis per se; per accidens autem comparatur ad intellectum a quo non dependet. Judicium autem de re non sumitur secundum id quod inest ei per accidens, sed secundum id quod inest ei per se. Unde unaquaeque res dicitur vera absolute, secundum ordinem ad intellectum a quo dependet. Et inde est quod res artificiales dicuntur verae per ordinem ad intellectum nostrum. Dicitur enim domus vera quae assequitur similitudinem formas quae est in mente artificis; et dicitur oratio Vera, in quantum est signum intellectus veri. Et similiter res naturales dicuntur esse verae, secundum quod assequuntur similitudinem specierum quae sunt in mente divina. Dicitur enim verus lapis, qui assequitur propriam lapidis naturam secundum praeconceptionem intellectus divini.' De Verit. Q. xvi, a. I, c.