Summa Theologica by Saint Thomas Aquinas PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Summa Theologica by Saint Thomas Aquinas PDF

Description

Summa Theologica by Saint Thomas Aquinas Summary The Summa Theologica is divided into three parts, and each of these three parts contains numerous subdivisions. Part 1 deals primarily with God and comprises discussions of 119 questions concerning the existence and nature of God, the Creation, angels, the work of the six days of Creation, the essence and nature of man, and divine government. Part 2 deals with man and includes discussions of 303 questions concerning the purpose of man, habits, types of law, vices and virtues, prudence and justice, fortitude and temperance, graces, and the religious versus the secular life. Part 3 deals with Christ and comprises discussions of 90 questions concerning the Incarnation, the Sacraments, and the Resurrection. Some editions of the Summa Theologica include a Supplement comprising discussions of an additional 99 questions concerning a wide variety of loosely related issues such as excommunication, indulgences, confession, marriage, purgatory, and the relations of the saints toward the damned. Scholars believe that Rainaldo da Piperno, a friend of Aquinas, probably gathered the material in this supplement from a work that Aquinas had completed before he began working on the Summa Theologica. The Summa Theologica, as its title indicates, is a “theological summary.” It seeks to describe the relationship between God and man and to explain how man’s reconciliation with the Divine is made possible at all through Christ. To this end, Aquinas cites proofs for the existence of God and outlines the activities and nature of God. Approximately one-half of the Summa Theologica then examines the nature and purpose of man. Finally, Aquinas

devotes his attention to the nature of Christ and the role of the Sacraments in effecting a bridge between God and man. Within these broad topical boundaries, though, Aquinas examines the nature of God and man in exquisite detail. His examination includes questions of how angels act on bodies, the union of body and soul, the cause and remedies of anger, cursing, and the comparison of one sin with another. Aquinas is attempting to offer a truly universal and rational view of all existence. Analysis Adopting Aristotelian principles and concepts, Aquinas attempts to explain the origin, operation, and purpose of the entire universe and the role that everything in the universe plays in the attainment of that purpose. Aquinas never doubts the truth of the tenets of his faith. Rather, he employs techniques of argument that he learned in the disputatios to state, defend, and elaborate those tenets. The grandiose scope of the Summa Theologica derives from Aquinas’s belief that a very significant portion of theology can be expressed and codified in a comprehensive and rational system. Aquinas writes not only as a philosopher who is intellectually interested in the pursuit of truth, he writes primarily as a Catholic who is convinced that the salvation of humanity itself is at stake. This conviction propels him toward a rational exegesis of topics the truth of which is ultimately derived and founded on divine revelation. When a specific topic so allows, Aquinas uses philosophical concepts and vocabulary to examine that topic. The primary topics admitting of such philosophical examination are the existence of God, the nature and limits of human knowledge, and the purpose of man. For most

other topics, Aquinas articulates a decidedly Catholic position on issues of Christian interest, such as the Holy Trinity, original sin, and the like. At first glance, it would seem astonishing and even counterintuitive that Aquinas reframes much of Catholic theology in terms of Aristotle’s preChristian philosophy. The pursuit of philosophy traditionally requires one to enter into debates with an open mind and to identify and re-examine one’s own core assumptions about a given issue, yet Aquinas enlists Aristotle not for his aid in the unbiased critical examination of the tenets of Catholic belief but rather for the explication and defense of those tenets. At the same time, though, Aquinas’s enlistment of Aristotle reveals Aquinas to be a remarkably fair, open minded, and indeed tolerant medieval thinker. He apparently believes that the fruits of the exercise of reason are not necessarily corrupt if the thinker is a non-Christian. This suggests that Aquinas believes that every human being, regardless of his or her beliefs, shares in humanity through the possession and use of reason. In this, Aquinas again reveals his indebtedness and allegiance to Aristotle, who had maintained that reason is the essential quality of humanity: it is that without which man cannot be man.

Summa Theologica: Proofs for the Existence of God Summary Question 1 of part 1 of the Summa considers the nature and extent of “sacred doctrine,” or theology. Aquinas concludes that, although theology does not require philosophy to promote knowledge of God, philosophy nevertheless can be of service to the aims of theology.

Question 2 of part 1 concerns the existence of God and is subdivided into three Articles. In the First Article, Aquinas maintains that the proposition “God exists” is self-evident in itself, but not to us, and thus requires demonstration. The Second Article concludes that such a demonstration is indeed possible, despite objections to the contrary. The famous Third Article addresses the question of whether God exists, and in this Article, Aquinas offers his Five Ways as proofs for the existence of God. First, we observe that some things in the world are in motion. Whatever is in motion is put into motion by another object that is in motion. This other object, in turn, was put into motion by still another object preceding it, and so forth. This series cannot go on backward to infinity, though, since there would otherwise be no first mover and thus no subsequent movement. Therefore, we must conclude that there is a first unmoved mover, which we understand to be God. Second, we observe that everything has an efficient cause and that nothing is or can be the cause of itself. It is impossible, though, that the series of causes should extend back to infinity because every cause is dependent on a prior cause and the ultimate cause is thus dependent on a previous cause. So if there is no first cause, there will be no intermediate causes and no final cause. But the absence of such causes clearly does not square with our observation, and so there must therefore be a first efficient cause, which everyone calls God. Third, we observe in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, as they come into existence and pass out of existence. Such things could not always exist, though, because something that could possibly not exist at some

time actually does not exist at some time. Thus, if it is possible for everything not to exist, then, at some time, nothing did exist. But if nothing ever did exist, then nothing would exist even now, since everything that exists requires for its existence something that already existed. Yet it is absurd to claim that nothing exists even now. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must be something the existence of which is necessary. Now, every necessary thing has its necessity caused by something else or it does not. Since it is impossible for there to exist an infinite series of causes of necessary things, we must conclude that there is something that is necessary in itself. People speak of this thing as God. Fourth, beings in the world have characteristics to varying degrees. Some are more or less good, true, noble, and so forth. Such gradations are all measured in relation to a maximum, however. Thus, there must be something best, truest, noblest, and so on. Now, as Aristotle teaches, things that are greatest in truth are also greatest in being. Therefore, there must be something that is the cause of being, goodness, and every other perfection that we find in beings in the world. We call this maximum cause God.

Summa Theologica: The Nature and Limits of Human Knowledge Summary In part 1 of the Summa, Aquinas begins his examination of the operation and limits of man’s intellect after discussing the soul and the union of body and soul. Questions 84, 85, and 86, each of which is subdivided into various Articles, address (1) the question of how the soul, when united with the body,

understands corporeal things; (2) the mode and order of understanding; and (3) what our intellect knows in material things. The soul knows bodies through the intellect by a knowledge that is immaterial, universal and necessary, although only God can understand all things. The cognitive soul has the potential to form principles of understanding and principles of sensation. Individual objects of our knowledge are not derived from Platonic forms but rather from the mind of God. Intellectual knowledge is formed by a conjunction of the passive senses and the active intellect. It is impossible for the intellect to understand anything without the mind forming phantasms, that is, mental images. The intellect understands by abstracting from phantasms and thereby attains some knowledge of immaterial things. Our knowledge of things, though, is not the same as knowledge of our phantasms, for, if the two types of knowledge were the same, then the taste of honey, for example, could be either sweet or bitter, depending on the state of the perceiver. Rather, the phantasms are the means by which we come to understand things. Knowledge of individuals is prior to knowledge of universals. The intellect is incapable of directly knowing individual things because it perceives them by means of phantasms. On the other hand, the intellect does perceive universals directly by means of abstraction. The intellect is potentially capable of understanding the concept of infinity insofar as it can form the idea of infinite succession, but it is actually incapable of comprehending infinity. Contingent things are known through sense experience and indirectly by the intellect, but necessary principles governing those contingent things are known only by the intellect. Although only God can know how the future will be

in itself, we nevertheless can have some knowledge of the future insofar as we have knowledge of causes and effects. Aquinas then proceeds to discuss additional questions pertaining to the soul, the production of the bodies of the first man and woman, human offspring, and man’s natural habitat. The Treatise on Divine Government concludes part 1 of the Summa. Analysis Aquinas’s discussion of man’s capacity for knowledge occurs within the context of his discussion of man’s soul. This fact is significant, for it indicates that Aquinas believes that the intellect is not a capacity separate from the soul but a component of the soul itself. To have a soul is to have reason and intelligence. Aquinas thus accepts Aristotle’s notion that rationality is the essence of man, although Aquinas does not equate man’s entire essence with rationality.

Summa Theologica: The Purpose of Man Summary The first part of part 2 of the Summa, consisting of 114 questions, offers an extensive discussion of man, who is said to have been made in God’s image. The first 5 questions, each of which is subdivided into various Articles, deal with man’s last end, the things in which man’s happiness consists, what happiness is, the things that are required for happiness, and the attainment of happiness.

First, in contrast to irrational animals, man has the faculty and will of reason. The will, also known as the rational appetite, seeks to achieve both its end and the good, and so all acts, being guided by the will, are for an end. Second, man’s happiness does not consist of wealth, honor, fame, glory, power, the goods of the body, or pleasure. In fact, man’s happiness cannot consist in any created good at all, since the ultimate object of man’s will, the universal good, cannot be found in any creature but rather only in God, who is the source of all good. Third, happiness is man’s supreme perfection, and each thing is perfect insofar as it is actual. Man’s final and complete happiness can consist only in contemplating the Divine Essence, although the possibility of this contemplation remains withheld from us until we are in the world to come. As long as man desires and seeks something, he remains unhappy. The intellect seeks the essence of a thing. For example, knowing an effect, such as a solar eclipse, the intellect is aroused and is unsatisfied until it discovers the cause of the eclipse. Indeed, the intellect desires to understand the essence of the cause. For this reason, the intellect is unsatisfied to know merely that the First Cause, that is, God, exists. The intellect seeks to penetrate farther to the very essence of the First Cause itself. Fourth, the things required for happiness must derive from the way in which man is constituted and designed for a purpose, since happiness consists in man’s attainment of that final purpose. Perfect knowledge of the intelligible end, actual attainment of the end, and delight in the presence of the end attained must all coexist in happiness. Happiness in this life, which is necessarily imperfect, requires rectitude of the will, the existence of the body,

and certain external goods and consists in the use of the intellect either speculatively or practically (i.e., with respect to morality). Perfect happiness, which is possible only in the life to come, consists in contemplation of the Divine Essence, which is goodness. Finally, man is capable of attaining happiness, that is, of seeing God, and one person can be happier than another insofar as she is better inclined to enjoy him. Happiness excludes the presence of evil, though, and since evil is present in this world, it is impossible for man to be happy in this life. Furthermore, man cannot attain perfect happiness because he is incapable of seeing God in this life. Imperfect happiness can be lost, but perfect happiness cannot. Neither man nor any creature can attain final happiness through his natural powers. Since happiness is a good surpassing anything that has been created, no creature, even an angel, is capable of making man happy. Happiness is the reward for works of virtue. Some people do not know what happiness consists in and thus do not desire it. The remaining questions of the first part of part 2 deal with a wide variety of issues related to the will, emotions and passions, virtues, sins, law, and grace. The second part of part 2, consisting of 189 questions, considers the “theological virtues,” such as faith, hope, charity, prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance, and the gifts of grace, such as the power of prophecy, that some people possess. Finally, part 3, consisting of 90 questions, concerns a wide variety of issues related to Christ, such as his nature, his life, the Resurrection, the Sacraments, and penance. A supplemental set of 99 questions concerns a wide variety of loosely related issues such as

excommunication, indulgences, confession, marriage, purgatory, and the relations of the saints toward the damned. Analysis Happiness is the goal of human life, and every human being is on the path toward the complete actualization of his or her potential. Indeed, humans’ actualization and realization of their potential is exactly what constitutes happiness. Humans’ potential, or what humans can be, consists in the contemplation of the Divine Essence. Happiness and the contemplation of the Divine Essence are thus identical and inseparable. The contemplation of the Divine Essence is not only necessary for happiness, it is uniquely sufficient. Nothing except the contemplation of the Divine Essence can bring happiness. No worldly or material good, such as fame, honor, glory, power, health, or even pleasure itself can bring happiness, as even pleasure is just a component of happiness. A state of happiness can exist only when the will no longer seeks anything. Since the will naturally seeks the Divine Essence, it will continue to seek, and thus to be unhappy, until it finds it. Aquinas applies Aristotle’s notions of efficient and final cause here, whereby human nature, in the form of the will, is the efficient cause and happiness, or contemplation of the Divine Essence, is the final cause. The will thus inescapably propels every individual to seek happiness. The process of becoming leads naturally to God, who is pure being and actuality. The culmination of this process, though, is possible only in the next life and only works of virtue, that is, performance of the will of God, can lead to this

culmination. Thus, the will achieves its goal, which is happiness, only when it is at one with the Divine Will. The remainder of the Summa examines these various works of virtue, as well as sin, and explains the role of Christ, who mediates between God and man. The supplement to the Summa, which was added to the Summa after Aquinas’s death, discusses sundry related issues that Aquinas presumably might have incorporated into his great work had he lived to complete it....