Jacques Maritain Center
: Readings
Landulph, his father, was Count of Aquino, Theodora, his mother, Countess of Teano. His family was related to the Emperors Henry VI and Frederick II, and to the Kings of Aragon, Castile, and France. Calo relates that a holy hermit foretold his career, saying to Theodora before his birth: "He will enter the Order of Friars Preachers, and so great will be his learning and sanctity that in his day no one will be found to equal him" (Prümmer, op. cit., 18). At the age of five, according to the custom of the times, he was sent to receive his first training from the Benedictine monks of Monte Cassino. Diligent in study, he was thus early noted as being meditative and devoted to prayer, and his preceptor was surprised at hearing the child ask frequently: "What is God?" About the year 1236 he was sent to the University of Naples. Calo says that the change was made at the instance of the Abbot of Monte Cassino, who wrote to Thomas's father that a boy of such talents should not be left in obscurity (Prümmcr, op. cit., 20). At Naples his preceptors were Pietro Martini and Petrus Hibernus. The chronicler says that he soon surpassed Martini a grammar, and he was then given over to Peter of Ireland, who trained him in logic and the natural sciences. The customs of the times divided the liberal arts into two courses: the Trivium, embracing grammar, logic, and rhetoric; the Quadrivium, comprising music, mathematics, geometry, and astronomy . . . . Thomas could repeat the lessons with more depth and lucidity than his masters displayed. The youth's heart had remained pure amidst the corruption with which he was surrounded, and he resolved to embrace the religious life.
Some time between 1240 and August, 1243, he received the habit of the Order of St. Dominic, being attracted and directed by John of St. Julian, a noted preacher of the convent of Naples. The city wondered that such a noble young man should don the garb of poor friar. His mother, with mingled feelings of joy and sorrow, hastened to Naples to see her son. The Dominicans, fearing she would take him away, sent him to Rome, his ultimate destination being Paris or Cologne. At the instance of Theodora, Thomas's brothers, who were soldiers under the Emperor Frederick, captured the novice near the town of Aquapendente and confined him in the fortress of San Giovanni at Rocca Secca. Here he was detained nearly two years, his parents, brothers, and Sisters endeavouring by various means to destroy his vocation. The brothers even laid snares for his virtue, but the pure-minded novice drove the temptress from his room with a brand which he snatched from the fire. Towards the end of his life, St. Thomas confided to his faithful friend and companion, Reginald of Piperno, the secret of a remarkable favour received at this time. When the temptress had been driven from his chamber, he knelt and most earnestly implored God to grant him integrity of mind and body. He fell into a gentle sleep, and, as he slept, two angels appeared to assure him that his prayer had been heard. They then girded him about with a white girdle, saying: "We gird thee with the girdle of perpetual virginity." And from that day forward he never experienced the slightest motions of concupiscence.
The time spent in captivity was not lost. His mother relented somewhat, after the first burst of anger and grief; the Dominicans were allowed to provide him with new habits, and through the kind offices of his sister he procured some books -- the Holy Scriptures, Aristotle's Metaphysics, and the "Sentences" of Peter Lombard. After eighteen months or two years spent in prison, either because his mother saw that the hermit's prophecy would eventually be fulfilled or because his brothers feared the threats of Innocent IV and Frederick II, he was set at liberty, being lowered in a basket into the arms of the Dominicans, who were delighted to find that during his captivity "he had made as much progress as if he had been in a studium generale" (Calo, op. cit., 24). Thomas immediately pronounced his vows, and his superiors sent him to Rome. Innocent IV examined closely into his motives in joining the Friars Preachers, dismissed him with a blessing, and forbade any further interference with his vocation. John the Teutonic, fourth master general of the order, took the young student to Paris and, according to the majority of the saint's biographers, to Cologne, where he arrived in 1244 or 1245, and was placed under Albertus Magnus, the most renowned professor of the order (on chronology of this period see Prümmer, op. cit., p.25). In the schools Thomas's humility and taciturnity were misinterpreted as signs of dullness, but when Albert had heard his brilliant defence of a difficult thesis, he exclaimed: "We call this young man a dumb ox, hut his bellowing in doctrine will one day resound throughout the world."
In 1245 Albert was sent to Paris, and Thomas accompanied him as a
student. In 1248 both returned to Cologne. Albert had been appointed
regent of the new studium generale, erected that year by the
general chapter of the order, and Thomas was to teach under him as
Bachelor. (On the system of graduation in the thirteenth century see
In due time he was ordered to prepare himself to obtain the degree of
Doctor in Theology from the University of Paris, but the conferring of
the degree was postponed, owing to a dispute between the university and
the friars. The conflict, originally a dispute between the university
and the civic authorities, arose from the slaying of one of the
students and the wounding of three others by the city guard. The
universfty, jealous of its autonomy, demanded satisfaction, which was
refused. The doctors closed their schools, solemnly swore that they
would not reopen them until their demands were granted, and decreed
that in future no one should be admitted to the degree of Doctor unless
he would take an oath to follow the same line of conduct under similar
circumstances. The Dominicans and Franciscans, who had continued to
teach in their schools, refused to take the prescribed oath, and from
this there arose a bitter conflict which was at its height when St.
Thomas and St. Bonaventure were ready to be presented for their degrees
(see Vaughan, "Life and Labours of St. Thomas of Aquin", 2 vols.,
London, 1871-72, 1, xxi). William of St.-Amour extended the dispute
beyond the original question, violently attacked the Friars, of whom he
was evidently jealous, and denied their right to occupy chairs in the
university. Against his book, "De periculis novissimorum temporum" (The
Perils of the Last Times), St. Thomas wrote a treatise "Contra
impugnantes religionem", an apology for the religious orders (Touron,
op. cit., II, cc. vii sqq.). The book of William of St-Amour was
condemned by Alexander IV at Anagni, 5 October, 1256, and the pope gave
orders that the mendicant friars should be admitted to the doctorate.
About this time St. Thomas also combated a dangerous book, "The Eternal
Gospel" (Touron, op. cit., II, cxii). The university authorities did
not obey immediately; the influence of St. Louis IX and eleven papal
Briefs were required before peace was firmly established, and St.
Thomas was admitted to the degree of Doctor in Theology. The date of
his promotion, as given by many biographers, was 23 October, 1257. His
theme was "The Majesty of Chnst". His text, "Thou waterest the hills
from thy upper rooms: the earth shall be filled with the fruit of thy
works" (Ps. ciii, 13), said to have been suggested by a heavenly
visitor, seems to have been prophetic of his career. A tradition says
that St. Bonaventure and St. Thomas received the doctorate on the same
day, and that there was a contest of humility between the two friends
as to which should be promoted first. From this time St. Thomas's life
may be summed up in a few words: praying, preaching, teaching, writing,
journeying. Men were more anxious to hear him than they had been to
bear Albert, whom St. Thomas surpassed in accuracy, lucidity, brevity,
and power of exposition, if not in universality of knowledge. Paris
claimed him as her own; the popes wished to have him near them; the
studia of the order were eager to enjoy the benefit of his
teaching; hence we find him successively at Anagni, Rome, Bologna,
Orvieto, Viterbo, Perugia, in Paris again, and finally in Naples,
always teaching and writing, living on earth with one passion, an
ardent zeal for the explanation and defence of Christian truth. So
devoted was he to his sacred task that with tears he begged to be
excused from accepting the Archbishopric of Naples, to which he was
appointed by Clement IV in 1265. Had this appointment been accepted,
most probably the "Summa theologica" would not have been written.
Yielding to the requests of his brethren, he on several occasions took
part in the deliberations of the general chapters of the order. One of
these chapters was held in London in 1263. In another held at
Valenciennes (1259) he collaborated with Albertus Magnus and Peter of
Tarentasia (afterwards Pope Innocent V) in formulating a system of
studies which is substantially preserved to this day in the studia
generalia of the Dominican Order (cf. Douais, op. cit.). It is not
surprising to read in the biographies of St. Thomas that he was
frequently abstracted and in ecstasy. Towards the end of his life the
ecstasies became more frequent. On one occasion, at Naples in 1273,
after he had completed his treatise on the Eucharist, three of the
brethren saw him lifted in ecstasy, and they heard a voice proceeding
from the crucifix on the altar, saying "Thou hast written well of me,
Thomas; what reward wilt thou have?". Thomas replied, "None other than
Thyself, Lord" (Prümmer, op. cit., p. 38). Similar declarations
are said to have been made at Orvieto and at Paris. On 6 December,
1273, he laid aside his pen and would write no more. That day he
experienced an unusually long ecstasy during Mass; what was revealed to
him we can only surmise from his reply to Father Reginald, who urged
him to continue his writings: "I can do no more. Such secrets have been
revealed to me that all I have written now appears to be of little
value" (modica, Prümmer, op. cit., p. 43).
The "Summa theologica" had been completed only as far as the ninetieth
question of the third part (De partibus poenitentiae). Thomas began his
immediate preparation for death. Gregory X, having convoked a general
council, to open at Lyons on 1 May, 1274, invited St. Thomas and St.
Bonaventure to take part in the deliberations, commanding the former to
bring to the council his treatise "Contra errores Graecorum" (Against
the Errors of the Greeks). He tried to obey, setting out on foot in
January, 1274, but strength failed him; he fell to the ground near
Terracina, whence he was conducted to the Castle of Maienza the home of
his niece the Countess Francesca Ceccano. The Cistercian monks of Fossa
Nuova pressed him to accept their hospitality, and he was conveyed to
their monastery, on entering which he whispered to his companion: "This
is my rest for ever and ever: here will I dwell, for I have chosen it"
(Ps. cxxxi, 14). When Father Reginald urged him to remain at the
castle, the saint replied: "If the Lord wishes to take me away, it is
better that I be found in a religious house than in the dwelling of a
lay person." The Cistercians were so kind and attentive that Thomas's
humility was alarmed. "Whence comes this honour", he exclaimed, "that
servants of God should carry wood for my fire!" At the urgent request
of the monks he dictated a brief commentary on the Canticle of
Canticles.
The end was near; extreme unction was administered. When the Sacred
Viaticum was brought into the room he pronounced the following act of
faith: "If in this world there be any knowledge of this sacrament
stronger than that of faith, I wish now to use it in affirming that I
firmly believe and know as certain that Jesus Christ, True God and True
Man, Son of God and Son of the Virgin Mary, is in this Sacrament." Then
he added: "I receive Thee, the price of my redemption, for Whose love I
have watched, studied, and laboured. Thee have I preached; Thee have I
taught. Never have I said anything against Thee: if anything was not
well said, that is to be attributed to my ignorance. Neither do I wish
to be obstinate in my opinions, but if I have written anything
erroneous concerning this sacrament or other matters, I submit all to
the judgment and correction of the Holy Roman Church, in whose
obedience I now pass from this life" (Prümmer, op. cit., p. 45).
He died on 7 March, 1274. Numerous miracles attested his sanctity, and
he was canonized by John XXII, 18 July, 1323. The monks of Fossa Nuova
were anxious to keep his sacred remains, but by order of Urban V the
body was given to his Dominican brethren, and was solemnly translated
to the Dominican church at Toulouse, 28 January, 1369. A magnificent
shrine erected in 1628 was destroyed during the French Revolution, and
the body was removed to the Church of St. Sernin, where it now reposes
in a sarcophagus of gold and silver, which was solemnly blessed by
Cardinal Desprez on 24 July, 1878. The chief bone of his left arm is
preserved in the cathedral of Naples. The right arm, bestowed on the
University of Paris, and originally kept in the St. Thomas's Chapel of
the Dominican church, is now preserved in the Dominican Church of S.
Maria Sopra Minerva in Rome, whither it was transferred during the
French Revolution.
A description of the saint as he appeared in life is given by Calo
(Prümmer, op. cit., p. 401), who says that his features
corresponded with the greatness of his soul. He was of lofty stature
and of heavy build, but straight and well proportioned. His complexion
was "like the colour of new wheat": his head was large and well shaped,
and he was slightly bald. All portraits represent him as noble,
meditative, gentle yet strong. St. Pius V proclaimed St. Thomas a
Doctor of the Universal Church in the year 1567. In the Encyclical
"AEterni Patris", of 4 August, 1879, on the restoration of Christian
philosophy, Leo XIII declared him "the prince and master of all
Scholastic doctors". The same illustrious pontiff, by a Brief dated 4
August, 1880, designated him patron of all Catholic universities,
academies, colleges, and schools throughout the world.
In the "Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum" (Paris 1719) Fr. Echard
devotes eighty-six folio pages to St Thomas's works, the different
editions and translations (I, pp. 282-348). Touron (op. cit., pp. 69
sqq.) says that manuscript copies were found in nearly all the
libraries of Europe, and that, after the invention of printing, copies
were multiplied rapidly in Germany, Italy, and France, portions of the
"Summ theologica" being one of the first important works printed. Peter
Schoeffer, a printer of Mainz, published the "Secunda Secundae" in
1467. This is the first known printed copy of any work of St. Thomas.
The first complete edition of the "Summa" was printed at Basle, in
1485. Many other editions of this and of other works were published in
the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, especially at Venice and at
Lyons. The principal editions of all the work (Opera Omnia) were
published as follows: Rome, 1570; Venice, 1594,1612, 1745; Antwerp,
1612; Paris, 1660, 1871-80 (Vives); Parma, 1852-73; Rome, 1882 (the
Leonine). The Roman edition of 1570, called "the Piana", because edited
by order of St. Pius V, was the standard for many years. Besides a
carefully revised text it contained the commentaries of Cardinal
Cajetan and the valuable "Tabula Aurea" of Peter of Bergamo. The
Venetian edition of 1612 was highly prized because the text was
accompanied by the Cajetan-Porrecta commentaries . . . . The Leonine
edition, begun under the patronage of Leo XIII, now continued under the
master general of the Dominicans, undoubtedly will be the most perfect
of all. Critical dissertations on each work will be given, the text
will be carefully revised, and all references will be verified. By
direction of Leo XIII (Motu Proprio, 18 Jan., 1880) the "Summa contra
gentiles" will be published with the commentaries of Sylvester
Ferrariensis, whilst the commentaries of Cajetan go with the "Summa
theologica".
The latter has been published, being vols. IV-XII of the edition (last
in 1906). St. Thomas's works may be classified as philosophical,
theological, scriptural, and apologetic, or controversial. The
division, however, cannot always be rigidly maintained. The "Summa
theologica", e.g., contains much that is philosophical, whilst the
"Summa contra gentiles" is principally, but not exclusively,
philosophical and apologetic. His philosophical works are chiefly
commentaries on Aristotle, and his first important theological writings
were commentaries on Peter Lombard's four books of "Sentences"; but he
does not slavishly follow either the Philosopher or the Master of the
Sentences (on opinions of the Lombard rejected by theologians, see
Migne, 1841, edition of the "Summa" I, p. 451).
(1) "Quaestiones disputatae" (Disputed Questions). -- These were more
complete treatises on subjects that had not been fully elucidated in
the lecture halls, or concerning which the professor's opinion had been
sought. They are very valuable, because in them the author, free from
limitations as to time or space, freely expresses his mind and gives
all arguments for or against the opinions adopted. These treatises,
containing the questions "De potentia", "De malo", "De spirit.
creaturis", "De anima", "De unione Verbi Incarnati", "De virt. in
communi", "De caritate", "De corr. fraterna", "De spe", "De virt.
cardinal.", "De veritate", were often reprinted, e.g. recently by the
Association of St. Paul (2 vols., Paris and Fribourg, Switzerland,
1883).
(2) "Quodlibeta" (may be rendered "Various Subjects", or "Free
Discussions"). -- They present questions or arguments proposed and
answers given in or outside the lecture halls, chiefly in the more
formal scholastic exercises, termed circuli, conclusiones, or
determinationes, which were held once or twice a year. (See
Mandonnet "Siger de Brabant", 2nd ed., Louvain, 1911, IV, p. 85;
Turner, "Hist. of Philosophy", Boston, 1993, p. 346.)
(3) "De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas ". -- This opusculum
refuted a very dangerous and widespread error, viz., that there was but
one soul for all men, a theory which did away wth individual liberty
and responsibility. (See
(4) "Commentaria in Libros Sententiarum" (mentioned above). -- This
with the following work are the immediate forerunners of the "Summa
theologica".
(5) "Summa de veritate catholicae fidei contra gentiles"
(Treatise on the Truth of the Catholic Faith, against Unbelievers). --
This work, written at Rome, 1261-64, was composed at the request of St.
Raymond of Pennafort, who desired to have a philosophical exposition
and defence of the Christian Faith, to be used against the Jews and
Moors in Spain. It is a perfect model of patient and sound apologetics,
showing that no demonstrated truth (science) is opposed to revealed
truth (faith). The best recent editions are those of Rome, 1878 (by
Uccelli), of Paris and Fribourg, Switzerland, 1882, and of Rome, 1894.
It has been translated into Greek, Hebrew, and Syriac, and quite
recently Father Rickaby, S.J., gave to the world an annotated
translation into English (with some abridgment) under the title "Of God
and His Creatures" (London and St. Louis, 1905). It is divided into
four books: I. Of God as He is in Himself; II. Of God the Origin of
Creatures; III. Of God the End of Creatures; IV. Of God in His
Revelation. It is worthy of remark that the Fathers of the Vatican
Council, treating the necessity of revelation (Coast. "Dei Filius", c.
2), employed almost the very words used by St. Thomas in treating that
subject in this work (I, cc. iv, V), and in the "Summa theologica" (I,
Q. i, a. 1).
(6) Three works written by order of Urban IV (see Mandonnet, "Ecrits
authentiques", p. 128). -- (a) The "Opusculum contra errores Graecorum"
refuted the errors of the Greeks on doctrines in dispute between them
and the Roman Church, viz., the procession of the Holy Ghost from the
Father and the Son, the primacy of the Roman pontiff, the Holy
Eucharist, and purgatory. It was used against the Greeks with telling
effect in the Council of Lyons (1274) and in the Councll of Florence
(1493). In the range of human reasonings on deep subjects there can be
found nothing to surpass the sublimity and depth of the argument
adduced by St. Thomas to prove that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the
Father and the Son (cf. Summa theol., I, Q. xxxvi, a. 2); but it must
be borne in mind that our Faith is not based on that argument alone.
(b) "Officium de festo Cor poris Christi". -- Mandonnet (Ecrits, p.
127) declare that it is now established beyond doubt that St Thomas is
the author of the beautiful Office of Corpus Christi, in which solid
doctrine, tender piety, and enlightening Scriptural citations are
combined, and expressed in language remarkably accurate, beautifu]
chaste, and poetic. Here we find the well-known hymns, "Sacris
Solemniis", "Pange Lingua" (concluding in the "Tantum Ergo"), "Verbum
Super num" (concluding with the O Salutaris Hostia") and, in the Mass,
the beautiful sequence "Lauda Sion". In the responses of the office,
St. Thomas places side by side words of the New Testament affirming the
real presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament and texts from the Old
Testament referring to the types and figures of the Eucharist (se
Vaughan, op. cit., pp. 810 sqq.; Caswall, "Lyra Catholica", London,
1840; Guéranger, "The Liturgical Year; Feast of Corpus
Christi"). Santeuil, a poet of the seventeenth century, said he would
give all the verses he had written for the one stanza of the "Verbum
Supernum": "Se nascens dedit socium, convescens in edulium: Se moriens
in pretium, Se regnans dat in praemium" "In birth, man's fellow-man was
He, His meat, while sitting at the Board: He died his Ransomer to be,
He reigns to be his Great Reward (tr. by Marquis of Bute). Perhaps the
gem of the whole office is the antiphon "O Sacrum Convivium (cf.
Conway, "St. Thomas Aquinas", London and New York, 1911, p. 61). (c)
The "Catena Aurea' though not as original as his other writings,
furnishes a striking proof of St. Thomas's prodigious memory and
manifests an intimate acquaintance with the Fathers of the Church. The
work contains a series of passages selected from the writings of the
various Fathers, arranged in such order that the texts cited form a
running commentary on the Gospels. The commentary on St. Matthew was
dedicated to Urban IV. An English translation of the "Catena Aurea was
edited by John Henry Newman (4 vols., Oxford 1841-1845; see Vaughan,
op. cit., vol.II,) pp. 529 sqq..
(7) The "Summa theologica". -- This work immortalized St. Thomas. The
author himself modestly considered it simply a manual of Christian
doctrine for the use of students. In reality it is a complete
scientifically arranged exposition of theology and at the same time a
summary of Christian philosophy . . . . In the brief prologue St.
Thomas first calls attention to the difficulties experienced by
students of sacred doctrine in his day, the causes assigned being: the
multiplication of useless questions, articles, and arguments; the lack
of scientific order; frequent repetitions, "which beget disgust and
confusion in the minds of learners". Then he adds: "Wishing to avoid
these and similar drawbacks, we shall endeavour, confiding in the
Divine assistance, to treat of these things that pertain to sacred
doctrine with brevity and clearness, in so far as the subject to he
treated will permit." In the introductory question, "On Sacred
Doctrine", he proves that, besides the knowledge which reason affords,
Revelation also is necessary for salvation first, because without it
men could not know the supenatural end to which they must tend by their
voluntary acts; secondly, because, without Revelation, even the truths
concerning God which could be proved by reason would be known "only by
a few, after a lot time, and with the admixture of many errors". When
revealed truths have been accepted, the mind of man proceeds to explain
them and to draw conclusions from them. Hence results theology, which
is a science, because it proceeds from principles that are certain (a.
2). The object, or subject, of this science is God; other things are
treated in it only in so far as they relate to God (a. 7). Reason is
used in theology not to prove the truths of faith, which are accepted
on the authority of God, but to defend, explain, and develop the
doctrines revealed (a. 8). He thus announces the division of the
"Summa": "Since the chief aim of this sacred science is to give the
knowledge of God, not only as He is in Himself, but also as He is the
Beginning of all things, and the End of all, especially of rational
creatures, we shall treat first of God; secondly, of the rational
creature's advance towards God (de motu creaturae rationalis in
Deum); thirdly, of Christ, Who, as Man, is the way by which we tend
to God." God in Himself, and as He is the Creator; God as the End of
all things, especially of man; God as the Redeemer -- these are the
leading ideas, the great headings, under which all that pertains to
theology is contained.
(a) Sub-divisions. (i) The First Part is divided into three tracts:
[alpha] On those things which pertain to the Essence of God; [beta] On
the distinction of Persons in God (the mystery of the Trinity); [gamma]
On the production of creatures by God and on the creatures produced.
(ii) The Second Part, On God as He is in the End of man, is sometimes
called the Moral Theology of St. Thomas, i.e., his treatise on the end
of man and on human acts. It is subdivided into two parts, known as the
First Section of the Second (I-II, or la 2ae) and the Second of the
Second (II-II, or 2a 2ae). [alpha] The First of the Second. The first
five questions are devoted to proving that man's last end, his
beatitude, consists in the possession of God. Man attains to that end
or deviates from it by human acts, i.e. by free, deliherate acts. Of
human acts he treats, first, in general (in all but the first five
questions of the I-II), secondly, in particular (in the whole of the
II-II). The treatise on human acts in general is divided into two
parts: the first, on human acts in themselves; the other, on the
principles or causes, extrinsic or intrinsic, of those acts. In these
tracts and in the Second of the Second, St. Thomas, following
Aristotle, gives a perfect description and a wonderfully keen analysis
of the movements of man's mind and heart. [beta] The Second of the
Second considers human acts, i.e., the virtues and vices, in
particular. In it St. Thomas treats, first, of those things that
pertain to all men, no matter what may be their station in life, and,
secondly, of those things that pertain to some men only. Things that
pertain to all men are reduced to seven headings: Faith, Hope, and
Charity; Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, and Temperance. Under each
title, in order to avoid repetitions, St. Thomas treats not only of the
virtue itself, but also of the vices opposed to it, of the commandment
to practise it, and of the gift of the Holy Ghost which corresponds to
it. Things pertaining to some men only are reduced to three headings:
the graces freely given (gratia gratis datae) to certain
individuals for the good of the Church, such as the gifts of tongues,
of prophecy, of miracles; the active and the contemplative life; the
particular states of life, and duties of those who are in different
states, especially bishops and religious. (iii) The Third Part treats
of Christ and of the benefits which He has conferred upon man, hence
three tracts: On the Incarnation, and on what the Saviour did and
suffered; On the Sacraments, which were instituted by Christ, and have
their efficacy from His merits and sufferings; On Eternal Life, i.e.,
on the end of the world, the resurrection of bodies, judgment, the
punishment of the wicked, the happiness of the just who, through
Christ, attain to eternal life in heaven. Eight years were given to
the composition of this work, which was begun at Rome, where the First
Part and the First of the Second were written (1265-69). The Second of
the Second, begun in Rome, was completed in Paris (1271). In 1272 St.
Thomas went to Naples, where the Third Part was written, down to the
ninetieth question of the tract On Penance (see Leonine edition, I, p.
xlii). The work has been completed by the addition of a supplement,
drawn from other writings of St. Thomas, attributed by some to Peter of
Auvergne, by others to Henry of Gorkum. These attributions are rejected
by the editors of the Leonine edition (XI, pp. viii, xiv, xviii).
Mandonnet (op. cit., 153) inclines to the very probable opinion that it
was compiled by Father Reginald de Piperno, the saint's faithful
companion and secretary. The entire "Summa" contains 38 Treatises, 612
Questions, subdivided into 3120 articles, in which about 10,000
objections are proposed and answered. So admirably is the promised
order preserved that, by reference to the beginning of the Tracts and
Questions, one can see at a glance what place it occupies in the
general plan, which embraces all that can be known through theology of
God, of man, and of their mutual relations . . . "The whole Summa is
arranged on a uniform plan. Every subject is introduced as a question,
and divided into articles. . . . Each article has also a uniform
disposition of parts. The topic is introduced as an inquiry for
discussion, under the term Utrum, whether -- e.g. Utrum Deus
sit? The objections against the proposed thesis are then stated.
These are generally three or four in number, but sometimes extend to
seven or more. The conclusion adopted is then introduced by the words,
Respondeo dicendum. At the end of the thesis expounded the
objections are answered, under the forms, ad primum, ad
secundum, etc." . . . . The "Summa" is Christian doctrine in
scientific form; it is human reason rendering its highest service in
defence and explanation of the truths of the Christian religion. It is
the answer of the matured and saintly doctor to the question of his
youth: What is God? Revelation, made known in the Scriptures and by
tradition; reason and its best results; soundness and fulness of
doctrine, order, conciseness and clearness of expression, effacement of
self, the love of truth alone, hence a remarkable fairness towards
adversaries and calmness in combating their errors; soberness and
soundness of judgment, together with a charmingly tender and
enlightened piety -- these are all found in this "Summa" more than in
his other writings, more than in the writings of his contemporaries,
for "among the scholastic doctors, the chief and master of all, towers
Thomas Aquinas, who, as Cajetan observes (In 2am 2ae, Q. 148, a. 4)
'because he most venerated the ancient doctors of the Church in a
certain way seems to have inherited the intellect of all'" (Encyclical,
"AEterni Patris", of Leo XIII).
(b) Editions and Translations. -- It is impossible to mention the
various editions of the "Summa", which has been in constant use for
more than six hundred years. Very few books have been so often
republished. The first complete edition, printed at Basle in 1485, was
soon followed by others, e.g., at Venice in 1505, 1509, 1588, 1594; at
Lyons in 1520, 1541, 1547, 1548, 1581, 1588, 1624,1655; at Antwerp in
1575. These are enumerated by Touron (op. cit., p. 692), who says that
about the same time other editions were published at Rome, Antwerp,
Rouen, Paris, Douai, Cologne, Amsterdam, Bologna, etc. The editors of
the Leonine edition deem worthy of mention those published at Paris in
1617, 1638, and 1648, at Lyons in 1663, 1677, and 1686, and a Roman
edition of 1773 (IV, pp. xi, xii). Of all old editions they consider
the most accurate two published at Padua, one in 1698, the other in
1712, and the Venice edition of 1755. Of recent editions the best are
the -- following: the Leonine; the Migne editions (Paris 1841, 1877);
the first volume of the 1841 edition containing the "Libri quatuor
sententiarum" of Peter Lombard; the very practical Faucher edition (5
vols. small quarto, Paris, 1887), dedicated to Cardinal Pecci, enriched
with valuable notes; a Roman edition of 1894. The "Summa" has been
translated into Greek and Armenian, and some parts have been translated
into Chinese (see De Rubeis in Leonine ed., I esp. cxcvii; Echard,
"Script. Ord. Praed.", I, p. 345 Touron, op. cit., VI, ix; Vaughan,
op. cit. II, p. 167) In 1896 Father Joseph Rickaby, S.J., pub]ished
"Aquinas Ethicus", a translation of the principal portion of the Second
Part of the "Summa theologica". At the present time Father Thomas
Pègues, O.P., is publishing a French translation of the whole
"Summa" with commentaries, under the title "Commentaire fran&cced;ais
littéral de la Somme Théologique de S. Thomas d'Aquin".
The five volumes which have appeared (Paris, 1907-10) bring the work
down to the end of the First Part. (For reviews, see "Cath. University
Bulletin", Jan., 1908; Jan., 1909; March, 1910; April, 1911.) For the
English-speaking world "The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas,
literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province," is
being prepared. The first number (London and New York, 1911) contains
the treatise on the Divine Essence (De Deo Uno, QQ. i-xxvi).
Interesting introductory chapters treat of "The Scholastic Philosophy",
"The Summa theologica", "The Method of St. Thomas", and "The Leonine
Edition".
The style of St. Thomas is a medium between the rough expressiveness
of some Scholastics and the fastidious elegance of John of Salisbury;
it is remarkable for accuracy, brevity, and completeness. Pope
Innocent VI (quoted in the Encyclical, "AEterni Patris", of Leo XIII)
declared that, with the exception of the canonical writings, the works
of St. Thomas surpass all others in "accuracy of expression and truth
of statement" (habet proprietatem verborum, modum dicendorum,
veritatem sententiarum). Great orators, such as Bossuet,
Lacordaire, Monsabre, have studied his style, and have been influenced
by it, but they could not reproduce it. The same is true of theological
writers. Cajetan knew St. Thomas's style better than any of his
disciples, but Cajetan is beneath his great master in clearness and
accuracy of expression, in soberness and solidity of judgment. St.
Thomas did not attain to this perfection without an effort. He was a
singularly blessed genius, but he was also an indefatigable worker, and
by continued application he reached that stage of perfection in the art
of writing where the art disappears. "The author's manuscript of the
Summa Contra Gentiles is still in great part extant. It is now in the
Vatican Library. The manuscript consists of strips of parchment, of
various shades of colour, contained in an old parchment cover to which
they were originally stitched. The writing is in double column, and
difficult to decipher, abounding in abbreviations, often passing into a
kind of shorthand. Throughout many passages a line is drawn in sign of
erasure" (Rickaby, Op. cit., preface: see Ucelli ed., "Sum. coat.
gent.", Rome, 1878).
(2) His education was such that great things might have been expected
of him. His training at Monte Cassino, at Naples, Paris, and Cologne
was the best that the thirteenth century could give, and that century
was the golden age of education. That it afforded excellent
opportunities for forming great philosophers and theologians is evident
from the character of St. Thomas's contemporaries. Alexander of Hales,
Albertus Magnus, St. Bonaventure, St. Raymond of Pennafort, Roger
Bacon, Hugo a S. Charo, Vincent of Beauvais, not to mention scores of
others, prove beyond all doubt that those were days of really great
scholars. (See Walsh, "The Thirteenth Greatest of Centuries", New York,
1907.) The men who trained St. Thomas were his teachers at Monte
Cassino and Naples, but above all Albertus Magnus, under whom he
studied at Paris and Cologne.
(3) The books that exercised the greatest influence on his mind were
the Bible, the Decrees of the councils and of the popes, the works of
the Fathers, Greek and Latin, especially of St. Augustine, the
"Sentences" of Peter Lombard, the writings of the philosophers,
especially of Plato, Aristotle, and Boethius. If from these authors any
were to be selected for special mention, undoubtedly they would be
Aristotle, St. Augustine, and Peter Lombard. In another sense the
writings of St. Thomas were influenced by Averroes, the chief opponent
whom he had to combat in order to defend and make known the true
Aristotle.
(4) It must be borne in mind that St. Thomas was blessed with a
retentive mernory and great powers of penetration. Father Daniel
d'Agusta once pressed him to say what he considered the greatest grace
he had ever received, sanctifying grace of course excepted. "I think
that of having understood whatever I have read", was the reply. St.
Antoninus declared that "he remembered everything be had read, so that
his mind was like a huge library" (cf. Drane, op. cit., p. 427;
Vaughan, op. cit., II, p. 567). The bare enumeration of the texts of
Scripture cited in the "Summa theologica" fills eighty small-print
columns in the Migne edition, and by many it is not unreasonably
supposed that he learned the Sacred Books by heart while he was
imprisoned in the Castle of San Giovanni. Like St. Dominic he had a
special love for the Epistles of St. Paul, on which he wrote
commentaries (recent edition in 2 vols., Turin, 1891).
(5) Deep reverence for the Faith, as made known by tradition,
characterizes all his writings. The consuetudo ecclesiae -- the
practice of the Church -- should prevail over the authority of any
doctor (II-II, Q. x. a. 12). In the "Summa" he quotes from 19 councils,
41 popes, and 52 Fathers of the Church. A slight acquaintance with his
writings will show that among the Fathers his favourite was St.
Augustine (on the Greek Fathers see Vaughan, op. cit., II, cc. iii
sqq.).
(6) With St. Augustine (II De doctr. Christ., c. xl), St. Thomas held
that whatever there was of truth in the writings of pagan philosophers
should be taken from them, as from "unjust possessors", and adapted to
the teaching of the true religion (Sum. theol., I, Q. lxxxiv, a. 5). In
the "Summa" alone he quotes from the writings of 46 philosophers and
poets, his favourite authors being Aristotle, Plato, and, among
Christian writers, Boethius. From Aristotle he learned that love of
order and accuracy of expression which are characteristic of his own
works. From Boethius he learned that Aristotle's works could be used
without detriment to Christianity. He did not follow Boethius in his
vain attempt to reconcile Plato and Aristotle. In general the Stagirite
was his master, but the elevation and grandeur of St. Thomas's
conceptions and the majestic dignity of his methods of treatment speak
strongly of the sublime Plato (see Vaughan, op. cit., II, pp. 49, 627
sqq.; Huit, "Le Platonisme au treizième siècle" in
"Annales de Philos. Chrétienne", Feb., 1890; "Les
éléments Platoniciens de la doctrine de St Thomas" in
"Revue Thomiste", Nov.-Dec., 1911).
(1) Purity of mind and body contributes in no small degree to clearness
of vision (see St. Thomas, "Commentaries on I Cor., c.vii", Lesson v).
By the gift of purity, miraculously granted at the time of the mystic
girdling, God made Thomas's life angelic; the perspicacity and depth of
his intellect, Divine grace aiding, made him the "Angelic Doctor".
(2) The spirit of prayer, his great piety and devotion, drew down
blessings on his studies. Explaining why he read, every day, portions
of the "Conferences" of Cassian, he said: "In such reading I find
devotion, whence I readily ascend to contemplation" (Prümmer, op.
cit., p. 32). In the lessons of the Breviary read on his feast day it
is explicitly stated that he never began to study without first
invoking the assistance of God in prayer; and when he wrestled with
obscure passages of the Scriptures, to prayer he added fasting.
(3) Facts narrated by persons who either knew St. Thomas in life or
wrote at about the time of his canonization prove that he received
assistance from heaven. To Father Reginald he declared that he had
learned more in prayer and contemplation than he had acquired from men
or books (Prümmer, op. cit., p. 36). These same authors tell of
mysterious visitors who came to encourage and enlighten him. The
Blessed Virgin appeared, to assure him that his life and his writings
were acceptable to God, and that he would persevere in his holy
vocation. Sts. Peter and Paul came to aid him in interpreting an
obscure passage in Isaias. When humility caused him to consider himself
unworthy of the doctorate, a venerable religious of his order (supposed
to be St. Dominic) appeared to encourage him and suggested the text for
his opening discourse (Prümmer, op. cit., 29, 37; Tocco in "Acta
SS.", VII Mar.; Vaughan, op. cit., II, 91). His ecstasies have been
mentioned. His abstractions in presence of King Louis IX (St. Louis)
and of distinguished visitors are related by all biographers. Hence,
even if allowance be made for great enthusiasm on the part of his
admirers, we must conclude that his extraordinary learning cannot be
attributed to merely natural causes. Of him it may truly be said that
he laboured as if all depended on his own efforts and prayed as if all
depended on God.
(1) Faith and Reason. -- The principles of St. Thomas on the relations
between faith and reason were solemnly proclaimed in the Vatican
Council The second, third, and fourth chapters of the Constitution
"Dei Filius" read like pages taken from the works of the Angelic
Doctor. First, reason alone is no sufficient to guide men: they need
Revelation; we must carefully distinguish the truths known by reason
from higher truths (mysteries) known by Revelation. Secondly, reason
and Revelation, though distinct, are not opposed to each other.
Thirdly, faith preserves reason from error; reason should do service in
the cause of faith. Fourthly, this service is rendered in three ways:
(a) reason should prepare the minds of men to receive the Faith by
proving the truths which faith presupposes (praeambula fidei);
(b) reason should explain and develop the truths of Faith and should
propose them in scientific form; (c) reason should defend the truths
revealed by Almighty God. This is a development of St. Augustine's
famous saying (De Trin., XIV, c. i), that the right use of reason is
"that by which the most wholesome faith is begotten . . . is nourished,
defended, and made strong" These principles are proposed by St. Thomas
in many places, especially in the following: "In Boethium, d a Trin.
Proem.", Q. ii, a. 1; "Sum. cont. gent.", I, cc I iii-ix; "Summa", I,
Q. i, aa. 1, 5, 8; Q. xxxii, a. 1; Q i lxxxiv, a. 5 (cf. Vaughan, op.
cit., cc. viii, ix, x; Manning, "The Vatican Council and Its
Definitions" New York, 1905,pp.206 sqq.). St. Thomas's service a to
the Faith are thus summed up by Leo XIII in th Encyclical "AEterni
Patris": "He won this title of distinction for himself: that single-
handed he victoriously combated the errors of former times, and
supplied invincible arms to put to rout those which might in after
times spring up. Again, clearly distinguishing, as is fitting, reason
and faith, he both preserved and had regard for the rights of each; so
much so, indeed, that reason, borne on the wings of Thomas, can
scarcely rise higher, while faith could scarcely expect more or
stronger aids from reason than those which she has already obtained
through Thomas." St. Thomas did not combat imaginary foes; he attacked
living adversaries. The works of Aristotle had been introduced into
France in faulty translations and with the misleading commentaries of
Jewish and Moorish philosophers. This gave rise to a flood of errors
which so alarmed the authorities that the reading of Aristotle's
Physics and Metaphysics was forbidden by Robert de
Cour&cced;on in 1210, the decree being moderated by Gregory IX in 1231.
There crept into the University of Paris an insidious spirit of
irreverence and Rationalism, represented especially by Abelard and
Raymond Lullus, which claimed that reason could know and prove all
things, even the mysteries of Faith. Under the authority of Averroes
dangerous doctrines were propagated, especially two very pernicious
errors: first, that philosophy and religion being in different regions,
what is true in religion might be false in philosophy; secondly, that
all men have but one soul. Averroes was commonly styled "The
Commentator", but St. Thomas says he was "not so much a Peripatetic as
a corruptor of Peripatetic philosophy" (Opuse. de unit. intell.).
Applying a principle of St. Augustine (see I, Q. lxxxiv, a. 5),
following in the footsteps of Alexander of Hales and Albertus Magnus,
St. Thomas resolved to take what was true from the "unjust possessors",
in order to press it into the service of revealed religion. Objections
to Aristotle would cease if the true Aristotle were made known; hence
his first care was to obtain a new translation of the works of the
great philosopher (see A. Jourdain, "Recherches critiques sur
l'âge et l'origine des traductions latines d'Aristote", Paris,
1819, 1843: Ueberweg, op. cit., I, p. 439; Barthélemy Saint-
Hilaire). Aristotle was to be purified; false commentators were to be
refuted; the most influential of these was Averroes, hence St. Thomas
is continually rejecting his false interpretations.
(2) Theology Systematized. -- The next step was to press reason into
the service of the Faith, by putting Christian doctrine into scientific
form. Scholasticism does not consist, as some persons imagine, in
useless discussions and subtleties, but in this, that it expresses
sound doctrine in language which is accurate, clear, and concise. In
the Encyclical "AEterni Patris" Leo XIII, citing the words of Sixtus V
(Bull "Triumphantis", 1588), declares that to the right use of
philosophy we are indebted for "those noble endowments which make
Scholastic theology so formidable to the enemies of truth", because
"that ready coherence of cause and effect, that order and array of a
disciplined army in battle, those clear definitions and distinctions,
that strength of argument and those keen discussions by which light is
distinguished from darkness, the true from the false, expose and lay
bare, as it were, the falsehoods of heretics wrapped around by a cloud
of subterfuges and fallacies". When the great Scholastics had written,
there was light where there had been darkness, there was order where
confusion had prevailed. The work of St. Anselm and of Peter Lombard
was perfected by the Scholastic theologians. Since their days no
substantial improvements have been made in the plan and system of
theology, although the field of apologetics has been widened, and
positive theology has become more important.
"The oecumenical councils, where blossoms the flower of all earthly
wisdom, have always been careful to hold Thomas Aquinas in singular
honour" (Leo XIII in "AEt. Patris"). This subject has been sufficiently
treated above. The "Bullarium Ordinis Praedicatorum", published in
1729-39, gives thirty-eight Bulls in which eighteen sovereign pontiffs
praised and recommended the doctrine of St. Thomas (see also Vaughan,
op. cit., II, c. ii; Berthier, op. cit., pp. 7 sqq.). These
approbations are recalled and renewed by Leo XIII, who lays special
stress on "the crowning testimony of Innocent VI: `His teaching above
that of others, the canons alone excepted, enjoys such an elegance of
phraseology, a method of statement, a truth of proposition, that those
who hold it are never found swerving from the path of truth, and he who
dare assail it will always be suspected of error (ibid.). Leo XIII
surpassed his predecessors in admiration of St. Thomas, in whose works
he declared a remedy can be found for many evils that afflict society
(see Berthier, op. cit., introd.). The notable Encyclical Letters with
which the name of that illustrious pontiff will always be associated
show how he had studied the works of the Angelic Doctor. This is very
noticeable in the letters on Christian marriage, the Christian
constitution of states, the condition of the working classes, and the
study of Holy Scripture. Pope Pius X, in several Letters, e.g. in the
"Pascendi Dominici Gregis" (Sept., 1907), has insisted on the
observance of the recommendations of Leo XIII concerning the study of
St. Thomas. An attempt to give names of Catholic writers who have
expressed their appreciation of St. Thomas and of his influence would
be an impossible undertaking; for the list would include nearly all who
have written on philosophy or theology since the thirteenth century, as
well as hundreds of writers on other subjects. Commendations and
eulogies are found in the introductory chapters of all good
commentaries. An incomplete list of authors who have collected these
testimonies is given by Father Berthier (op. cit., p. 22). . . .
(2) Outside the Church. -- (a) Anti-Scholastics. -- Some persons have
been and are still opposed to everything that comes under the name of
Scholasticism, which they bold to be synonymous with subtleties and
useless discussions. From the prologue to the "Summa" it is clear that
St. Thomas was opposed to all that was superfluous and confusing in
Scholastic studies. When people understand what true Scholasticism
means, their objections will cease (see De Wulf, "Scholasticism Old and
New", New York, 1907; Perrier, "The Revival of Scholastic Philosophy",
New York, 1909; and especially the Encyclical "AEterni Patris"). (b)
Heretics and Schismatics. -- "A last triumph was reserved for this
incomparable man -- namely, to compel the homage, praise, and
admiration of even the very enemies of the Catholic name" (Leo XIII,
ibid.). St. Thomas's orthodoxy drew upon him the hatred of all Greeks
who were opposed to union with Rome. The united Greeks, however, admire
St. Thomas and study his works (see above Translations of the "Summa").
The leaders of the sixteenth-century revolt honoured St. Thomas by
attacking him, Luther being particularly violent in his coarse
invectives against the great doctor. Citing Bucer's wild boast, "Take
away Thomas and I will destroy the Church", Leo XIII (ibid.) remarks,
"The hope was vain, but the testimony has its value". Calo, Tocco, and
other biographers relate that St. Thomas, travelling from Rome to
Naples, converted two celebrated Jewish rabbis, whom he met at the
country house of Cardinal Richard (Prümmer, op. cit., p. 33;
Vaughan, op. cit., I, p. 795). Rabbi Paul of Burgos, in the fifteenth
century, was converted by reading the works of St. Thomas. Theobald
Thamer, a disciple of Melancthon, abjured his heresy after he had read
the "Summa", which he intended to refute. The Calvinist Duperron was
converted in the same way, subsequently becoming Archbishop of Sens and
a cardinal (see Conway, O.P., op. cit., p. 96). After the bitterness of
the first period of Protestantism had passed away, Protestants saw the
necessity of retaining many parts of Catholic philosophy and theology,
and those who came to know St. Thomas were compelled to admire him.
Ueberweg says "He brought the Scholastic philosophy to its highest
stage of development, by effecting the most perfect accommodation that
was possible of the Aristotelian philosophy to ecclesiastical
orthodoxy" (op. cit., p. 440). R. Seeberg in the "New Schaff-Herzog
Religious Encyclopedia" (New York, 1911) devotes ten columns to St.
Thomas, and says that "at all points he succeeded in upholding the
church doctrine as credible and reasonable" (XI, p. 427). For many
years, especially since the days of Pusey and Newman, St. Thomas has
been in high repute at Oxford. Recently the "Summa contra gentiles" was
placed on the list of subjects which a candidate may offer in the final
honour schools of Litterae Humaniores at that university (cf.
Walsh, op. cit., c. xvii). For several years Father De Groot, O.P., has
been the professor of Scholastic philosophy in the University of
Amsterdam, and courses in Scholastic philosophy have been established
in some of the leading non-Catholic universities of the United States.
Anglicans have a deep admiration for St. Thomas. Alfred Mortimer, in
the chapter "The Study of Theology" of his work entitled "Catholic
Faith and Practice" (2 vols., New York, 1909), regretting that "the
English priest has ordinarily no scientific acquaintance with the Queen
of Sciences", and proposing a remedy, says, "The simplest and most
perfect sketch of universal theology is to be found in the Summa of St.
Thomas" (vol. II, pp. 454, 465).
It is in relation to the sciences that some persons doubt the
availability of St. Thomas's writings; and the doubters are thinking of
the physical and experimental sciences, for in metaphysics the
scholastics are admitted to be masters. Leo XIII calls attention to the
following truths: (a) The Scholastics were not opposed to
investigation. Holding as a principle in anthropology "that the human
intelligence is only led to the knowledge of things without body and
matter by things sensible, they well understood that nothing was of
greater use to the philosopher than diligently to search into the
mysteries of nature, and to be earnest and constant in the study of
physical things" (ibid., p. 55). This principle was reduced to
practice: St. Thomas, Blessed Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon, and others
"gave large attention to the knowledge of natural things" (ibid., p.
56). (b) Investigation alone is not sufficient for true science. "When
facts have been established, it is necessary to rise and apply
ourselves to the study of the nature of corporeal things, to inquire
into the laws which govern them and the principles whence their order
and varied unity and mutual attraction in diversity arise" (p. 55).
Will the scientists of to-day pretend to be better reasoners than St.
Thomas, or more powerful in synthesis? It is the method and the
principles of St. Thomas that Leo XIII recommends: "If anything is
taken up with too great subtlety by the scholastic doctors, or too
carelessly stated; if there be anything that ill agrees with the
discoveries of a later age or, in a word, is improbable in any way, it
does not enter into our mind to propose that for imitation to our age"
(p. 56). Just as St. Thomas, in his day, saw a movement towards
Aristotle and philosophical studies which could not be checked, but
could be guided in the right direction and made to serve the cause of
truth, so also, Leo XIII, seeing in the world of his time a spirit of
study and investigation which might be productive of evil or of good,
had no desire to check it, but resolved to propose a moderator and
master who could guide it in the paths of truth.
No better guide could have been chosen than the clear-minded, analytic,
synthetic, and sympathetic Thomas Aquinas. His extraordinary patience
and fairness in dealing with erring philosophers, his approbation of
all that was true in their writings, his gentleness in condemning what
was false, his clear-sightedness in pointing out the direction to true
knowledge in all its branches, his aptness and accuracy in expressing
the truth -- these qualities mark him as a great master not only for
the thirteenth century, but for all times. If any persons are inclined
to consider him too subtle, it is because they do not know how clear,
concise, and simple are his definitions and divisions. His two
summae are masterpieces of pedagogy, and mark him as the
greatest of human teachers. Moreover, he dealt with errors similar to
many which go under the name of philosophy or science in our days. The
Rationalism of Abelard and others called forth St. Thomas's luminous
and everlasting principles on the true relations of faith and reason.
Ontologism was solidly refuted by St. Thomas nearly six centuries
before the days of Malebranche, Gioberti, and Ubaghs (see "Sum.
theol.", I, Q. lxxxiv, a. 5). The true doctrine on first principles
and on universals, given by him and by the other great Scholastics, is
the best refutation of Kant's criticism of metaphysical ideas (see,
e.g., "Post. Analyt.", I, lect. xix; "De ente et essentia", c. iv;
"Sum. theol.", I, Q. xvii, a. 3, corp. and ad 2um; Q. lxxix, a. 3; Q.
lxxxiv, a. 5, a. 6, corp. and ad 1um, Q. lxxxv, a. 2, ad 2um, a. 3, ad
1um, ad 4um. Cf. index to "Summa": "Veritas", "Principium",
"Universale"). Modern psychological Pantheism does not differ
substantially from the theory of one soul for all men asserted by
Averroes (see "De unit. intell." and "Sum. theol.", I, Q. lxxvi, a. 2;
Q. lxxix, a.5). The Modernistic error, which distinguishes the Christ
of faith from the Christ of history, had as its forerunner the
Averroistic principle that a thing might be true in philosophy and
false in religion.
In the Encyclical "Providentissimus Deus" (18 Nov., 1893) Leo XIII
draws from St. Thomas's writings the principles and wise rules which
should govern scientific criticism of the Sacred Books. From the same
source recent writers have drawn principles which are most helpful in
the solution of questions pertaining to Spiritism and Hypnotism (see
Coconnier, Lâme humaine", Paris, 1890; "L'hypnotisme franc",
Paris, 1898; Berthier, "Spiritisme et hypnotisme d'après S.
Thomas": appendix III to "L'Etude"). Are we to conclude, then, that St.
Thomas's works, as he left them, furnish sufficient instruction for
scientists, philosophers, and theologians of our times? By no means.
Vetera novis augere et perficere -- "To strengthen and complete
the old by aid of the new " -- is the motto of the restoration proposed
by Leo XIII. Were St. Thomas living to-day he would gladly adopt and
use all the facts made known by recent scientific and historical
investigations, but he would carefully weigh all evidence offered in
favour of the facts (see "L'Avenir du Thomisme" in Sertillanges, op.
cit., p. 327). Positive theology is more necessary in our days than it
was in the thirteenth century. Leo XIII calls attention to its
necessity in his Encyclical, and his admonition is renewed by Pius X in
his Letter on Modernism. But both pontiffs declare that positive
theology must not be extolled to the detriment of Scholastic theology.
In the Encyclical "Pascendi", prescribing remedies against Modernism,
Pius X, following in this his illustrious predecessor, gives the first
place to "Scholastic philosophy, especially as it was taught by Thomas
Aquinas", St. Thomas is still "The Angel of the Schools".
. . .
-- D.J. Kennedy
II. Writings.
A. General Remarks.
Although St. Thomas lived less than fifty years, he composed more than
sixty works, some of them brief, some very lengthy. This does not
necessarily mean that every word in the authentic works was written by
his hand; he was assisted by secretaries, and biographers assure us
that he could dictate to several scribes at the same time (Vaughan, op.
cit., vol. 1, p. 469). Other work' some of which were composed by his
disciples, have been falsely attributed to him. The most recent and
probably the most satisfactory, treatise on the authenticity of his
works is the series of articles b: P. Mandonnet, "Des cents
authentiques de S. Thomas d'Aquin" (Frihourg, 1910), originally written
for the "Revue Thomiste" (March-April, 1909). The "Disssertationes in
singula opera D. Th. Aquinatis" (Venice, 1750) of Bernard do Rubeis are
given in all important editions of the saint's works. A reliable and
convenient list is given by Fr. Sertillanges, O.P., in his "S. Thomas
d'Aquin" (2 vols., Paris, 1910).B. His Principal Works in Detail.
Amongst the works wherein St. Thomas's own mind and method are shown,
the following deserve special mention: -- C. Method and Style of St. Thomas.
It is not possible to characterize the method of St. Thomas by one
word, unless it can be called eclectic. It is Aristotelean, Platonic,
and Socratic; it is inductive and deductive; it is analytic and
synthetic. He chose the best that could he found in those who preceded
him, carefully sifting the chaff from the wheat, approving what was
true, rejecting the false. His powers of synthesis were extraordinary.
No writer surpassed him in the faculty of expressing in a few
well-chosen words the truth gathered from a multitude of varying and
conflicting opinions; and in almost every instance the student sees,
the truth and is perfectly satisfied with St. Thomas's summary and
statement. Not that he would have students swear by the words of a
master. In philosophy, he says, arguments from authority are of
secondary importance; philosophy does not consist in knowing what men
have said, but in knowing the truth (In I lib. de Coelo, lect. xxii;
II Sent., D. xiv, a. 2, ad lum). He assigns its proper place to
reason used in theology (see below: Influence of St. Thomas), but he
keeps it within its own sphere. Against the Traditionalists the Holy
See has declared that the method used by St. Thomas and St.
Bonaventure does not lead to Rationalism (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1652).
Not so bold or original in investigating nature as were Albertus Magnus
and Roger Bacon, he was, nevertheless, abreast of his time in science,
and many of his opinions are of scientific value in the twentieth
century. Take, for instance, the following: "In the same plant there
is the two-fold virtue, active and passive, though sometimes the
active is found in one and the passive in another, so that one plant
is said to be masculine and the other feminine" (3 Sent., D. III, Q.
ii, a 1. -- For other examples see Conway, O.P., op. cit., pp. 73
sqq.; Walsh, "St. Thomas Aquinas", in "Rosary Magazine", May,
1911.).III. Influences Exerted on St. Thomas.
How was this great genius formed? The causes that exerted an influence
on St. Thomas were of two kinds, natural and supernatural.A. Natural Causes.
(1) As a foundation, he "was a witty child, and had received a good
soul" (Wis., viii, 19). From the beginning he manifested precocious and
extraordinary talent and thoughtfulness beyond his years.B. Supernatural Causes.
Even if we do not accept as literally true the declaration of John
XXII, that St. Thomas wrought as many miracles as there are articles in
the "Summa", we must, nevertheless, go beyond causes merely natural in
attempting to explain his extraordinary career and wonderful
writings.IV. Influence of St. Thomas.
A. Influence on Sanctity.
The great Scholastics were holy as well as learned men. Alexander of
Hales, Blessed Albertus Magnus, St. Thomas, and St. Bonaventure prove
that learning does not necessarily dry up devotion. The angelic Thomas
and the seraphic Bonaventure represent the highest types of Christian
scholarship, combining eminent learning with heroic sanctity. Cardinal
Bessarion called St. Thomas "the most saintly of learned men and the
most learned of saints". His works breathe the spirit of God, a tender
and enlightened piety, built on a solid foundation, viz. the knowledge
of God, of Christ, of man. The "Summa theologica" may he made a manual
of piety as well as a text-book for the study of theology (Cf. Drane,
op. cit., p. 446). St. Francis de Sales, St. Philip Neri, St. Charles
Borromeo, St. Vincent Ferrer, St. Pius V, St. Antoninus constantly
studied St. Thomas. Nothing could be more inspiring than his treatises
on Christ, in His sacred Person, in His life and sufferings. His
treatise on the sacraments, especially on penance and the Eucharist,
would melt even hardened hearts. He takes pains to explain the various
ceremonies of the Mass ("De ritu Eucharistiae" in "Sum. theol.", III,
Q. lxxxiii, and no writer has explained more clearly than St. Thomas
the effects produced in the souls of men by this heavenly Bread (ibid.,
Q. lxxix). The principles recently urged, in regard to frequent
Communion, by Pius X ("Sacra Trid. Synodus", 1905) are found in St.
Thomas (Q. lxxix, a. 8, Q. lxxx, a. 10), although he is not so explicit
on this point as he is on the Communion of children. In the Decree
"Quam Singulari" (1910) the pope cites St. Thomas, who teaches that,
when children begin to have some use of reason, so that they can
conceive some devotion to the Blessed Sacrament, they may be allowed to
communicate (Q. lxxx, a. 9, ad 3um). The spiritual and devotional
aspects of St. Thomas's theology have been pointed out by Father
Contenson, O.P., in his "Theologia mentis et cordis". They are more
fully explained by Father Vallgornera, O.P., in his "Theologia Mystica
D. Thomae", wherein the author leads the soul to God through the
purgative, illuminative, and unitive ways. The Encyclical Letter of Leo
XIII on the Holy Spirit is drawn largely from St. Thomas, and those who
have studied the "Prima Secundae" and the "Secunda Secundae" know how
admirably the saint explains the gifts and fruits of the Holy Ghost, as
well as the Beatitudes, and their relations to the different virtues
(see Froget, O.P. "De L'habitation du Saint Esprit dans les âmes
justes, d'après la doctrine de S. Thomas d'Aquin", Paris, 1898).
Nearly all good spiritual writers seek in St. Thomas definitions of the
virtues which they recommend. Recently his minor works on the religious
life have been translated into English ("An Apology for the Religious
Orders", by St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Louis, 1902; "The Religious State",
"The Episcopate", "The Priestly Office", by St. Thomas, St. Louis,
1902).B. Influence on Intellectual Life.
Since the days of Aristotle, probably no one man has exercised such a
powerful influence on the thinking world as did St. Thomas. His
authority was very great during his lifetime. The popes, the
universities, the studia of his order were anxious to profit by
his learning and prudence. Several of his important works were written
at the request of others, and his opinion was sought by all classes. On
several occasions the doctors of Paris referred their disputes to him
and gratefully abided by his decision (Vaughan, op. cit., II, 1 p.
544). His principles, made known by his writings, have continued to
influence men even to this day. This subject cannot be considered in
all its aspects, nor is that necessary. His influence on matters purely
philosophical is fully explained in histories of philosophy (see e.g.
Gonzalez, O.P., "Hist. de la philosophie", II, Paris, 1890; Turner, op.
cit., pp. 343 sqq.; Vallet, C.S.S., "Hist. de la phil., Paris, 1886;
Jourdain, "La Philosophie de S. Thomas d'Aquin", 2 vols., Paris, 1858;
Hauréau, "Hist. de la Phil. scolastique", Paris, 1872-80;
Ueberweg, "Hist. of Philosophy", 2 vols., New York, 1903, I, pp. 443
sqq.). (Theologians who followed St. Thomas will be mentioned in THOMISM. C. St. Thomas's Doctrine Followed.
Within a short time after his death the writings of St. Thomas were
universally esteemed. The Dominicans naturally took the lead in
following St. Thomas. The general chapter held in Paris in 1279
pronounced severe penalties against all who dared to speak irreverently
(of him or of his writings. The chapters held in Paris in 1286, at
Bordeaux in 1287, and at Lucca in 1288 expressly required the brethren
to follow the doctrine of Thomas, who at that time had not been
canonized (Const. Ord. Praed., n. 1130). The University of Paris, on
the occasion of Thomas's death, sent an official letter of condolence
to the general chapter of the Dominicans, declaring that, equally with
his brethren, the university experienced sorrow at the loss of one who
was their own by many titles (see text of letter in Vaughan, op. cit.,
II, p. 82). In the Encyclical "AEterni Patris" Leo XIII mentions the
Universities of Paris, Salamanca, Alcalá, Douai Toulouse,
Louvain, Padua, Bologna, Naples, Coimbra as "the homes of human wisdom
where Thomas reigned supreme, and the minds of all, of teachers as well
as of taught, rested in wonderful harmony under the shield and
authority of the Angelic Doctor". To the list may be added Lima and
Manila, Fribourg and Washington. Seminaries and colleges followed the
lead of the universities. The "Summa" gradually supplanted the
"Sentences" as the textbook of theology. Minds were formed in
accordance with the principles of St. Thomas; he became the great
master, exercising a world-wide influence on the opinions of men and on
their writings; for even those who did not adopt all of his conclusions
were obliged to give due consideration to his opinions. It has been
estimated that 6000 commentaries on St. Thomas's works have been
written. Manuals of theology and of philosophy, composed with the
intention of imparting his teaching, translations, and studies, or
digests (études), of portions of his works have been published
in profusion during the last six hundred years and to-day his name is
in honour all over the world (see THOMISM).
In every one of the general councils held since his death St. Thomas
has been singularly honoured. At the Council of Lyons his book "Contra
errores Graecorum" was used with telling effect against the Greeks. In
later disputes, before and during the Council of Florence, John of
Montenegro, the champion of Latin orthodoxy, found St. Thomas's works a
source of irrefragable arguments. The "Decretum pro Armenis"
(Instruction for the Armenians), issued by the authority of that
council, is taken almost verbatim from his treatise, "De fidei
articulis et septem sacramentis" (see Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 695). "In
the Councils of Lyons, Vienne, Florence, and the Vatican", writes Leo
XIII (Encyclical "AEterni Patris"), "one might almost say that Thomas
took part in and presided over the deliberations and decrees of the
Fathers contending against the errors of the Greeks, of heretics, and
Rationalists, with invincible force and with the happiest results. But
the chief and special glory of Thomas, one which he has shared with
none of the Catholic doctors, is that the Fathers of Trent made it part
of the order of the conclave to lay upon the altar, together with the
code of Sacred Scripture and the decrees of the Supreme Pontiffs, the
Summa of Thomas Aquinas, whence to seek counsel, reason, and
inspiration. Greater influence than this no man could have. Before
this section is closed mention should be made of two books widely known
and highly esteemed, which were inspired by and drawn from the writings
of St. Thomas. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, composed by
disciples of the Angelic Doctor, is in reality a compendium of his
theology, in convenient form for the use of parish priests. Dante's
"Divina Commedia" has been called "the Summa of St. Thomas in verse",
and commentators trace the great Florentine poet's divisions and
descriptions of the virtues and vices to the "Secunda Secundae" (see
Berthier, O.P., "La divina commedia con commenti secondo la
scholastica", Turin, 1893; Ozanam, "Dante et la philosophie au
treizième siècle", Paris, 1845, p. 319; Jourdain, op.
cit., II, p. 128).D. Appreciation of St. Thomas.
(1) In the Church. -- The esteem in which he was held during his life
has not been diminished, but rather increased, in the course of the six
centuries that have elapsed since his death. The position which he
occupies in the Church is well explained by that great scholar Leo
XIII, in the Encyclical "AEterni Patris", recommending the study of
Scholastic philosophy: "It is known that nearly all the founders and
framers of laws of religious orders commanded their societies to study
and religiously adhere to the teachings of St. Thomas. . . To say
nothing of the family of St. Dominic, which rightly claims this great
teacher for its own glory, the statutes of the Benedictines, the
Carmelites, the Augustinians, the Society of Jesus, and many others,
all testify that they are bound by this law." Amongst the "many others"
the Servites, the Passionists, the Barnabites, and the Sulpicians have
been devoted in an especial manner to the study of St. Thomas. (See
Berthier, "L'Etude de la Somme Théologique de S. Thomas
d'Aquin", Paris, 1905, pp. 18 sqq.; Goudin, O.P., "Phil. D. Thomae",
Paris, 1886, introd. a 3; Touron, op. cit., V, cc. xi, xii.) The
principal ancient universities where St. Thomas ruled as the great
master have been enumerated above. The Paris doctors called him the
morning star, the luminous sun, the light of the whole Church. Stephen,
Bishop of Paris, repressing those who dared to attack the doctrine of
"that most excellent Doctor, the blessed Thomas", calls him "the great
luminary of the Catholic Church, the precious stone of the priesthood,
the flower of doctors, and the bright mirror of the University of
Paris" (Drane, op. cit., p. 431). In the old Louvain University the
doctors were required to uncover and bow their heads when they
pronounced the name of Thomas (Goudin, op. cit., p. 21). (On the
universities, see Touron, op. cit., 1. V, cc. IX, X; Echard, op. cit.,
I, 435, pp. 15 sqq.; cf. also THOMISM.)V. St. Thomas and Modern Thought.
In the Syllabus of 1864 Pius IX condemned a proposition in which it was
stated that the method and principles of the ancient Scholastic doctors
were not suited to the needs of our times and the progress of science
(Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1713). In the Encyclical "AEterni Patris" Leo
XIII points out the benefits to be derived from "a practical reform of
philosophy by restoring the renowned teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas".
He exhorts the bishops to "restore the golden wisdom of Thomas and to
spread it far and wide for the defence and beauty of the Catholic
Faith, for the good of society, and for the advantage of all the
sciences". In the pages of the Encyclical immediately preceding these
words he explains why the teaching of St. Thomas would produce such
most desirable results: St. Thomas is the great master to explain and
defend the Faith, for his is "the solid doctrine of the Fathers and the
Scholastics, who so clearly and forcibly demonstrate the firm
foundations of the Faith, its Divine origin, its certain truth, the
arguments that sustain it, the benefits it has conferred on the human
race, and its perfect accord with reason, in a manner to satisfy
completely minds open to persuasion, however unwilling and repugnant".
The career of St. Thomas would in itself have justified Leo XIII in
assuring men of the nineteenth century that the Catholic Church was not
opposed to the right use of reason. The sociological aspects of St.
Thomas are also pointed out: "The teachings of Thomas on the true
meaning of liberty, which at this time is running into license, on the
Divine origin of all authority, on laws and their force, on the
paternal and just rule of princes, on obedience to the highest powers,
on mutual charity one towards another -- on all of these and kindred
subjects, have very great and invincible force to overturn those
principles of the new order which are well known to be dangerous to the
peaceful order of things and to public safety" (ibid.). The evils
affecting modern society had been pointed out by the pope in the Letter
"Inscrutabili" of 21 April, 1878, and in the one on Socialism,
Communism, and Nihilism ("The Great Encyclicals of Leo XIII", pp. 9
sqq.; 22 sqq.). How the principles of the Angelic Doctor will furnish a
remedy for these evils is explained here in a general way, more
particularly in the Letters on the Christian constitution of states,
human liberty, the chief duties of Christians as citizens, and on the
conditions of the working classes (ibid., pp. 107, 135, 180, 208).