Aquinas: Commentary on The Sentences of Peter Lombard

Aquinas: Commentary on The Sentences of Peter Lombard
Aquinas Summa

Excerpts from Thomas’ Commentary on The Sentences of Peter Lombard
The text, in Latin and English, of Peter Lombard’s Sentences can be found at the following site: www.franciscan-archive.org/lombardus/index.html. Thanks to Br. Alexis Bugnolo for his translation.

Note to the reader: as this is a huge work, you may find that translations procede piece by piece, as there is time.Benevolens lector, commentarium istud is valde magnum, et passim verto quaestiones in linguam anglicam.

In I Sententiarum On the First Book of the Sentences
On the Prologue to the Sentences

Ego sapientia effudi flumina: ego quasi trames aquae immensae defluo: ego quasi fluvius Dorix, et sicut aquaeductus exivi de paradiso. Dixi: rigabo hortum plantationum, et inebriabo partus mei fructum. Eccli. 24, 40.

I, wisdom, have poured out rivers. I, like a brook out of a river of a mighty water; I, like a channel of a river, and like an aqueduct, came out of paradise. I said: I will water my garden of plants, and I will water abundantly the fruits of my meadow. Eccl. 24:40

Inter multas sententias quae a diversis de sapientia prodierunt, quid scilicet esset vera sapientia, unam singulariter firmam et veram apostolus protulit dicens Christum Dei virtutem et Dei sapientiam, qui etiam nobis a Deo factus est sapientia, 1 ad Corinth., 1, 24 et 30. Non autem hoc ita dictum est, quod solus Filius sit sapientia, cum Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus sint una sapientia, sicut una essentia; sed quia sapientia quod speciali modo Filio appropriatur, eo quod sapientiae opera cum proprietatius Filii plurimum convenire videntur. Per sapientiam enim Dei manifestantur divinorum abscondita, producuntur creaturarum opera, nec tantum producuntur, sed etiam restaurantur et perficiuntur: illa, dico, perfectione qua unumquodque perfectum dicitur, prout proprium finem attingit. Quod autem manifestatio divinorum pertineat ad Dei sapientiam, patet ex eo quod ipse Deus per suam sapientiam seipsum plene et perfecte cognoscit.

Among the many thoughts that have gone forth from various writers about wisdom, what, namely, is true wisdom, the apostle set forth one singularily firm and true thought, saying that Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God, who was also made by God into wisdom for us, 1 Cor. 1, 24 and 30. But this was not said as if to mean that only the Son is wisdom, since the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are one wisdom, as one essence; but that the Son is wisdom in that wisdom is proper to the Son in a special way, since the works of wisdom seems most to suit the properties of the Son. For it is through the wisdom of God that the hidden things of divine matters are made manifest, that the works of creatures are produces, and not only produced, but even restored and perfected: I say, by that perfection whereby each and every thing is called perfect insofar as it reaches its proper end. That the manifestation of divine matters belongs to God’s wisdom is clear from the fact that God himself knows himself fully and perfectly through his own wisdom.

Unde si quid de ipso cognoscimus oportet quod ex eo derivetur, quia omne imperfectum a perfecto trahit originem: unde dicitur Sapient. 9, 17: Sensum tuum quis sciet, nisi tu dederis sapientiam? Haec autem manifestatio specialiter per Filium facta invenitur: ipse enim est verbum Patris, secundum quod dicitur Joan. 1, unde sibi manifestatio dicentis Patris convenit et totius Trinitatis. Unde dicitur Matth. 11, 27: Nemo novit Patrem nisi Filius et cui Filius voluerit revelare: et Joan. 1, 18: Deum nemo vidit unquam, nisi Unigenitus qui est in sinu Patris. Recte ergo dicitur ex persona Filii: Ego sapientia effudi flumina. Flumina ista intelligo fluxus aeternae processionis quae Filius a Patre, et Spiritus Sanctus ab utroque, ineffabili modo procedit.

Hence if we know anything about him, it must be derived from him, because everything imperfect draws its origin from the perfect: hence it says in Wisdom, 9, 17: And who shall know your thought, unless you give wisdom? This manifestation is especially found to come about through the Son: for he is the word of the Father, according to what is said in John 1, and so the manifestation of the speaking Father and of the whole Trinity suits him. Hence it is said in Matt. 11, 27: No one knows the Father except the Son and he to whom the Son will wish to reveal: and John 1, 18: No one has ever seen God, except the Only Begotten who is in the bosom of the Father. Therefore the following is rightly said by the person of the Son: I, wisdom, have poured out rivers. These rivers I understand as the flowings of the eternal procession whereby the Son from the Father, and the Holy Spirit from both, proceeds in an ineffable manner.

Ista flumina olim occulta et quodammodo confusa erant, tum in similitudinibus creaturarum, tum etiam in aenigmatibus scripturarum, ita ut vix aliqui sapientes Trinitatis mysterium fide tenerent. Venit Filius Dei et inclusa flumina quodammodo effudit, nomen Trinitatis publicando, Matth. ult. 19: Docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti. Unde Job 28, 2: Profunda fluviorum scrutatus est et abscondita produxit in lucem. Et in hoc tangitur materia primi libri.

At one time these rivers were hidden and in some way poured together, both in the likenesses of creatures, and in the enigmas of the Scriptures, so that only a few who were wise held the mystery of the Trinity by faith. The Son of God came and in a certain way poured out the enclosed rivers, making known to the world the name of the Trinity, Matt. 28, 19: Teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Hence we have the words in Job 28, 2: He exained the depths of the rivers and brought hidden things to light. And in this we touch upon the matter of the first book.

Secundum quod pertinet ad Dei sapientiam est creaturarum productio: ipse enim de rebus creatis non tantum speculativam, sed etiam operativam sapientiam habet, sicut artifex de artificiatis; unde in Psalm. 103: Omnia in sapientia fecisti. Et ipsa sapientia loquitur, Proverb. 8, 30: cum eo eram cuncta componens. Hoc etiam specialiter Filio attributum invenitur, inquantum est imago Dei invisibilis, ad cujus formam omnia formata sunt: unde Coloss. 1, 15: qui est imago Dei invisibilis, primogenitus omnis creaturae, quoniam in ipso condita sunt universa; et Joan. 1, 3: Omnia per ipsum facta sunt. Recte ergo dicitur ex persona Filii: ego quasi trames aquae immensae defluo; in quo notatur et ordo creationis et modus. Ordo, quia sicut trames a fluvio derivatur, ita processus temporalis creaturarum ab aeterno processu personarum: unde in Psalmo 148, 5, dicitur: dixit, et facta sunt. Verbum genuit, in quo erat ut fierent, secundum Augustinum.

As it pertains to God’s wisdom, it is the production of creatures: for he has not only speculative wisdom concerning created things, but also operative wisdom, as an artisan of the products of his art; hence in Psalm 103: You have made all things in wisdom. And wisdom itself speaks, Proverbs 8, 30: I was with him forming all things. This also is found to be attributed in a special way to the Son, insofar as he is the image of the invisible God, to whose form all things were formed: hence in Coloss. 1, 15: Who is the image of the invisible God, the first born of all creation, because all things were made in him, and John 1, 3: All things were made through him. This therefore is rightly said in the person of the Son: I flow forth like streams of an immense water; in which we may note the order and mode of creation. The order, because as streams are derived from a river, so the temporal procession of creatures is derived from the eternal procession of persons: hence in Psalm 148, 5, it says: He spoke, and they were made. He begot the word, in which he was so they could come to be, according to Augustine.

Semper enim id quod est primum est causa eorum quae sunt post, secundum Philosophum; unde primus processus est causa et ratio omnis sequentis processionis. Modus autem signatur quantum ad duo: scilicet ex parte creantis, qui cum omnia impleat, nulli tamen se commetitur; quod notatur in hoc quod dicitur, immensae. Item ex parte creaturae: quia sicut trames procedit extra alveum fluminis, ita creatura procedit a Deo extra unitatem essentiae, in qua sicut in alveo fluxus personarum continetur. Et in hoc notatur materia secundi libri.

For always that which is first is the cause of those things that are after, according to the Philosopher; hence the first procession is the cause and reason for every following procession. The mode is signified in two respects: namely, on the part of the one who creates, who while he makes all things full, cannot be measured together with any; which is noted in that which is said, immense. Again, on the part of the creature: because as a stream procedes outside of the riverbed, so the creature procedes from God outside the unity of essence, in qhich as in a riverbed the flow of the persons is contained. And in this is noted the matter of the second book.

Tertium, quod pertinet ad Dei sapientiam, est operum restauratio. Per idem enim debet res reparari per quod facta est; unde quae per sapientiam condita sunt, decet ut per sapientiam reparentur: unde dicitur Sapient. 9, 19: Per sapientiam sanati sunt qui tibi placuerunt ab initio. Haec autem reparatio specialiter per filium facta est, inquantum ipse homo factus est, qui, reparato hominis statu, quodammodo omnia reparavit quae propter hominem facta sunt; unde Coloss. 1, 20: per eum reconcilians omnia, sive quae in caelis, sive quae in terris sunt. Recte ergo ex ipsius Filii persona dicitur: ego quasi fluvius dorix, et sicut aquaeductus exivi de paradiso. Paradisus iste, gloria Dei Patris est, de qua exivit in vallem nostrae miseriae non quod eam amitteret, sed quia occultavit: unde Joan. 16, 28: exivi a Patre et veni in mundum.

Third, which pertains to God’s wisdom, is the restoration of works. For a thing should be repaired by the same thing whereby it was made; hence the things that were made by wisdom would best be repaired by wisdom; hence it says in Wisdom 9, 19: For by wisdom they were healed, whosoever pleased you from the beginning. This reparation was done especially by the Son, insofar as he was made man, who, when the state of man was repaired, in a certain way repaired all things that were made for man’s sake; hence Coloss. 1, 20: through him reconciling all things, whether they are in the heavens or the earth. Rightly therefore it is said in the person of the Son himself: A like the river Dorix, and like an aquaduct went forth from Paradise. This paradise is the glory of God the Father, from which he went out into the valley of our misery not so that he would lose it, but because it was hiden: hence John 16, 28: I departed from the Father and I came into the world.

Et circa hunc exitum duo notantur, scilicet modus et fructus. Dorix enim fluvius rapidissimus est; unde designat modum quo, quasi impetu quodam amoris nostrae reparationis Christus complevit mysterium; unde Isaiae 59, 19: Cum venerit quasi fluvius violentus, quem spiritus Domini cogit. Fructus autem designatur ex hoc quod dicitur, sicut aquaeductus: sicut enim aquaeductus ex uno fonte producuntur divisim ad fecundandam terram, ita de Christo profluxerunt diversarum gratiarum genera ad plantandam ecclesiam, secundum quod dicitur Ephes. 4, 11: Ipse dedit quosdam apostolos, quosdam autem prophetas, alios vero evangelistas, alios autem pastores et doctores, ad consummationem sanctorum in opus ministerii, in aedificationem corporis Christi.

Two things are noted regarding this departure, namely the mode and the fruit. For the Dorix river is the swiftest; hence it designates the mode, as if by a certain impetus of love for our reparation, Christ completed the mystery; hence it is written in Isaiah 59, 19: For it will come like a violent river, which the spirit of the Lord drives on. Fruit is designated from where it is said like an aquaduct: for just as many aquaducts divided are produced from one source to make fertile the earth, so from Christ flowed forth the kinds of diverse graces to plant the Chruch, as it said in Ephesians 4, 11: He gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, others evangelists, others shepherds and teachers, for the completeness of the saints in the work of ministry, for building the body of Christ.

Et in hoc tangitur materia tertii libri, in cuius prima parte agitur de mysteriis nostrae reparationis, in secunda de gratiis nobis collatis per Christum. Quartum, quod ad Dei sapientiam pertinet, est perfectio, qua res conservantur in suo fine. Subtracto enim fine, relinquitur vanitas, quam sapientia non patitur secum; unde dicitur Sap. 8, 1, quod sapientia attingit a fine usque ad finem fortiter et disponit omnia suaviter. Suaviter autem unumquodque tunc dispositum est quando in suo fine, quam naturaliter desiderat, collocatum est. Hoc etiam ad Filium specialiter pertinet,qui, cum sit verus et naturalis Dei Filius, nos in gloriam paternae hereditatis induxit; unde Hebr. 2, 10: Decebat eum propter quem et per quem facta sunt omnia, qui multos filios in gloriam adduxerat. Unde recte dicitur: dixi: rigabo hortum plantationum.

And in this we touch upon the matter of the third book, in the first part of which it treats the mysteries of our restoration, and in the second part it treats the graces gathered for us by Christ. Fourth, which belongs to God’s wisdom, is perfection, by which things are preserved in their end. For if the end is removed, vanity is left, which wisdom does not suffer to be with it; hence it says in Wisdom 8,1, that wisdom reaches from end to end strongly and arranges all things sweetly. Each things is arranged sweetly when it is placed in its end, the end it naturally desires. This specially pertains to the Son, who, being the true and natural Son of God, led us to the glory of the fatherly heritage; hence we read in Hebrews 2, 10: It is was fitting for him on whose account and through whom all things were made, who had led many sons to glory. Hence it is rightly said: I said, I will water the garden of plantations.

Ad consecutionem enim finis exigitur praeparatio, per quam omne quod non competit fini, tollatur; ita Christus etiam, ut nos in finem aeternae gloriae induceret, sacramentorum medicamenta praeparavit, quibus a nobis peccati vulnus abstergitur. Unde duo notantur in verbis praedictis, scilicet praeparatio, quae est per sacramenta, et inductio in gloriam. Primum per hoc quod dicitur: rigabo hortum plantationum. Hortus enim iste ecclesia est, de qua can. 4, 12: Hortus conclusus soror mea sponsa: in quo sunt plantationes diversae, secundum diversos sanctorum ordines, quos omnes manus omnipotentis plantavit.

For preparation is necessary to achieve the end. Through preparation everything that does not fit the end is removed; so Christ also, to lead us to the end of eternal glory, prepared the medicines of the sacraments, by which the wound of sin is removed from us. Hence two things are noted in the words mentioned, namely preparation, which is through the sacraments, and a leading into glory. The first by what was said: I will water the garden of plantations. For this garden is the Church, of which is it said in Canticles 4, 12: My sister, the betrothed, is a closed garden; in which there are different plantations, according to the various orders of the saints, all which the hand of the Omnipotent has planted.

Iste hortus irrigatur a Christo sacramentorum rivis, qui ex eius latere proflexurent: unde in commendationem pulchritudinis ecclesiae dicitur in Num. 24, 5: quam pulchra tabernacula tua, Jacob., et post sequitur, 6: ut horti juxta fluvios irrigui. Et ideo etiam ministrii ecclesiae, qui sacramenta dispensant, rigatores dicuntur, 1 Corinth. 3, 6: ego plantavi, Apollo rigavit. Inductio autem in gloriam notatur in hoc quod sequitur: et inebriabo partus mei fructum. Partus ipsius Christi sunt fideles ecclesiae, quos suo labore quasi mater parturivit: de quo partu Isa. ult., 9: Numquid ego, qui alios parere facio, ipse non pariam? dicit Dominus.

This garden is watered by Christ, by the rivers of the sacraments, which flowed from his side: hence in the praise of the Church’s beauty it is said in Numbers 24, 5: How beautiful are your tents, Jacob., and after this, in verse 6: like watered garden beside a stream. And so also the ministers of the Church, who dispense the sacraments, are called irrigators, 1 Corinth. 3, 6: I have planted, Apollo watered. The leading into glory is noted in what follows: and I will water the fruit of my giving birth. Christ’s giving birth is the faithful of the Church, whom he bore like a mother by his labor: of which birth Isaiah writes in the last Chapter, v. 9: Shall not I give birth, I who make others give birth? says the Lord.

Fructus autem istius partus sunt sancti qui sunt in gloria: de quo fructu Cant. 5, 1: veniat dilectus meus in hortum suum et comedat fructum pomorum suorum. Istos inebriat abundantissima sui fruitione; de qua fruitione et ebrietate psalm. 35, 9: Inebriabuntur ab ubertate domus tuae. Et dicitur ebrietas, quia omnem mensuram rationis et desiderii excedit: unde Isa. 64, 4: Oculus non vidit, Deus, absque te quae praeparasti expectantibus te. Et in hoc tangitur materia quarti libri: in cuius prima parte agitur de sacramentis; in secunda de gloria resurrectionis. Et sic patet ex praedictis verbis intentio libri sententiarum.

The fruit of this birth are the saints who are in glory: of this fruit we read in Canticles 5, 1: My beloved will come into his garden and will eat the fruit of his apple trees. He will inebriate them with his abundant fruition; of this fruition and drunkenness we read in Psalm 35, 9: They will be inebriated by the abundance of your house. It is called drunkenness because it passes beyond all measure of reason and desire, hence in Isaiah 64, 4: Eye has no seen, O God, without you what you have prepared for those wait for you. And in this we touch upon the matter of the fourth book: the first part of which deals with the sacraments; in the second part deals with the glory of the resurrection. And so from the above words the intention of the books of the sentences is clear.

Huic operi magister prooemium praemittit, in quo tria facit. Primo reddit auditorem benevolum; secundo docilem, ibi, horum igitur Deo odibilem ecclesiam evertere, atque ora oppilare … volentes, in labore multo ac sudore volumen, Deo praestante, compegimus; tertio attentum, ibi, non ergo debet hic labor cuiquam pigro vel multum docto videri superfluus. Benevolum reddit assignando causas moventes ipsum ad compilationem huius operis, ex quibus ostenditur affectus ipsius in Deum et proximum.

The teacher presents a foreword to this work, in which he does three things. First he gains the reader’s good will; second, he makes the listener open to learning, where he writes, , wishing, of these things, therefore, to overturn the gathering hateful to God, and to shut their mouths …we are putting together this volume, with God’s help, in much labor and sweat; third, to make the reader attentive, where he writes Therefore this work should not seem to be too much either to anyone lazy or very learned. He gains the listener’s good will by showing the reasons that moved him to compile the work, among which he shows his love of God and neighbour.

Sunt autem tres causae moventes. Prima sumitur ex parte sui, scilicet desiderium proficiendi in ecclesia; secunda ex parte Dei, scilicet promissio mercedis et auxilii; tertia ex parte proximi, scilicet instantia precum sociorum. E contra sunt tres causae retrahentes. Prima ex parte sui, defectus ingenii et scientiae; secunda ex parte operis, altitudo materiae et magnitudo laboris; tertia ex parte proximi, invidorum contradictio. Harum autem causarum moventium duae primae insinuant caritatem in Deum, tertia in proximum; unde dividitur in duas.

There are three reasons moving him to produce this book. First, on his own part, the desire to be of good service in the Church; second, on the part of God, the promise of reward and help; third, on the part of his neighbour, the insistence of the requests of his associates. On the other hand, there are three reasons that would draw him away from the work. First on his own part, the limitations of his talent and knowledge; second, on the part of the work, the loftiness of the material and the greatness of the work; third, on the part of his neighbour, the contradiction of the envious. The first two of these reasons suggest charity toward God, the third suggests charity toward neighbour; hence the reasons are divided into two.

In primo ponit causas moventes quae ostendunt caritatem in Deum; in secundo causam quae ostendit caritatem in proximum, ibi, non valentes studiosorum votis iure resistere. Causis autem moventibus adiungit etiam retrahentes: unde primo ponit quasi quamdam controversiam causarum moventium et retrahentium; secundo victoriam, ibi, quam vincit zelus domus Dei.

In the first, he shows the reasons that move him that demonstrate love for God; in the second, he presents the cause that demonstrates love for neighbour, where he writes, not able lawfully to resist the votes of those who are studious. He adds to the reasons that moved him also the reason that could have drawn him away; hence first he presents a certain controversy about the reasons that move him forward and draw him away; second, he presents the victory, where he writes, which the zeal for the house of God has conquered.

Cupientes. In hoc notatur primo causa movens, scilicet desiderium proficiendi. Aliquid sonat immodicitatem. De penuria ac tenuitate nostra. Hic tangitur prima causa retrahens, scilicet defectus scientiae. Et dicitur penuria proprie defectus exterioris substantiae, unde transfertur ad defectum scientiae acquisitae. Tenuitate, quae proprie est defectus substantiae interioris, unde transfertur ad defectum ingenii. Cum paupercula, de qua Marc. 12 et Lucae 21. Gazophylacium. Gazophylacium repositorium dicitur divitiarum. Gazae enim Persice, divitiae latine dicuntur, et phylasso graece, latine servare; et quandoque sumitur pro arca in qua thesaurus reponitur, sicut 4 Reg. 12, 9: tulit Joiada pontifex gazophylacium unum etc., quandoque pro loco in quo arca reponitur, sicut Joan. 8, 20: haec locutus est Jesus in gazophylacio.

Desiring. In this passage, we note first the reason that moves him, namely, the desire to be of good service, or to make progress. It sounds somewhat of a lack of restraint. Of our poverty and leanness. Here he touches upon the first reason that draws him back, namely, the limitations of his knowledge. Properly speaking, poverty is a shortcoming of outer substance, hence it is used metaphorically for a shortcoming of acquired knowledge. Properly speaking, leanness is a shortcoming of inner substance, hence it is used metaphorically for a limitation of talent. With the poor woman, of whom we read in Mark 12 and Luke 21. Treasury. The treasury is the repository of riches. It is called Gazophylacium: Gazae in Persian are called riches (divitiae) in Latin, and phylasso in Greek is to keep (servare) in Latin, and sometimes it is taken to mean the chest in which the treasure is kept, as in 4 Kings 12, 9: Joiada, the high priest, took one treasure etc., and sometimes for the place in which the treasure is places, as we readin in John 8, 20: These things Jesus said in the treasury.

Hic autem significat studium sacrae scripturae, in quo sancti sua opera reposuerunt. Ardua scandere. Hic ponitur secunda causa retrahens ex parte operis, et dicuntur ardua divina quantum est in se. Scanduntur autem quasi triplici gradu. Primus est in dereliquendo sensum; secundus in dereliquendo phantasias corporum; tertius in dereliquendo rationem naturalem. Opus ultra vires. Hic ostenditur altitudo materiae per comparationem ad nos. Contra, Eccli. 3, 22: Altiora te ne quaesieris. Respondeo. Verum est ex confidentia propriarum virium; sed ex confidentia divini auxilii possumus elevata supra nostrum posse speculari.

Here, however, he signifies the study of sacred scripture, in which the saints put their works. To climb steep cliffs. Here is presented the second reason drawing him away on the part of the work, and divine matters as they are in themselves are called steep cliffs. Steep cliffs are climbed in three steps. The first consists in leaving behind the senses; the second step consists in leaving behind the imaginary images of bodies; the third step in leaving behind natural reason. A work beyond powers. Here is shown the loftiness of the material in comparison with us. An argument to the contrary, Eccl. 3, 22: Do not seek things higher than you. I answer. This is true with respect to a confidence in one’s own powers; but with confidence in divine help we can behold things that are raised above us.

Praesumpsimus. Contra, Eccli. 37, 3: O praesumptio nequissima. Ergo videtur quod peccaverit. Respondeo. Expone praesumpsimus, idest prae aliis sumpsimus. Vel dic, quod esset praesumptio per comparationem ad vires humanas; sed per comparationem ad Dei auxilium, quo omnia possumus, sicut dicitur Philipp. ult. 13: Omnia possum in eo qui me confortat, non est praesumptio. Consummationis fiduciam. Hic ponit secundam causam moventem ex parte Dei. In samaritano, sumitur de parabola quae est Lucae 10, per quam significatur Deus. In Psal. 120, 4: Ecce non dormitabit neque dormiet qui custodit Israel. Samaritanus enim interpretatur custos. Semivivi, hominis per peccatum spoliati gratia et vulnerati in naturalibus.

We presumed. To the contrary, Eccl. 37, 3: O wicked presumption. Therefore it seems that he has sinned. I answer. Openly we have presumed, that is, we have taken something before others or in their presence. Or say, that it would be presumption with respect to human powers; but with with respect to God’s help, whereby we are able to do all things, as it says in Philipp. last chapter, 13: I am able to do all things in him who comforts me, it is not presumption. Confidence in completion. Here he presents the second reason moving him on the part of God. In the samaritan, is taken from the parable in Luke 10, by which God is signified. In Psalm 120, 4: Behold, he who guards Israel will not slumber or sleep. The word “samaritan” translates as “guard”. Half-alive, of a half-alive man, a man who has been robbed by sin and wounded in his natural powers.

Duobus denariis, duobus testamentis, quasi regis imagine insignitis, dum veritatem continent a prima veritate exemplatam. Supereroganti, idest superaddenti, sicut sancti patres suis studiis fecerunt. Contra, Apocalyps. ult. 18: Si quid apposuerit ad haec, apponent Deus super illum plagas. Respondeo. Est apponere duplex: vel aliquid quod est contrarium, vel diversum; et hoc est erroneum vel praesumptuosum; vel quod continetur implicite, exponendo; et hoc est laudabile. Delectat. Hic colligit quatuor causas enumeratas. Quam vincit. Hic ponit victoriam. Zelus. Zelus, secundum Dionysium, est amor intensus, unde non patitur aliquid contrarium amato. Domus Dei, idest Ecclesiae.

Two denarii, the two Testaments, which are marked as if with the image of the king, and they hold the truth with is modeled from the first truth. Demanding more, that is, adding more, as the holy fathers did with their studies. On the contrary, Apocalypse, last chapter, 18: If anyone shall add to the these things, God will add plagues to him. I answer. To add can be taken in two senses: to add something that is contrary, or something that is different; and this is either erroneous or presumptuous; or to explain that which is contained implicitly, and this is praiseworthy. Delights. Here he brings together the four enumerated reasons. Which he conquered. Here he presents victory. Zeal. Zeal, or jealousy, according to Dionysius, is an intense love, and so it does not suffer anything that is contrary to the beloved. The house of God, that is, the Church.

Quo inardescentes, scilicet dum non patimur ecclesiam ab infidelibus impugnari. Carnalium, quantum ad illos qui inveniunt sibi errores, ut carnis curam faciant in desideriis, Rom. 13, sicut qui negant providentiam divinam in rebus humanis, et animae perpetuitatem, ut impune possint peccare. Animalium, quantum ad errantes, ex eo quod non elevantur supra sensibilia, sed secundum rationes corporales volunt de divinis iudicare. Davidicae turris. Hoc sumitur Cant. 4, 4: Sicut turris David collum tuum, quae aedificata est cum propugnaculis; mille clypei pendent ex ea, omnis armatura fortium.

In which, ardently burning, that is, while we do not suffer the Church to be deceived by those without faith. Of those who are carnal, with respect to those who find errors for themselves, so that they may be concerned with the flesh in their desires, Rom. 13, such as those who deny divine providence in human affairs, and deny the perpetual existence of the soul, so that they may sin without punishment. Of animals, with respect to those who err, because they are not raised above sensible thing, but want to judge of divine things according to physical criteria. Of the tower of David. This is taken from Cant. 4, 4: Your neck is like the tower of David, which is built with turrets; a thousand shields hang from it, all the armor of the strong men.

Per David significatur Christus: turris eius est fides vel ecclesia: clypei sunt rationes et auctoritates sanctorum. Vel potius munitam ostendere; quia ipse non invenit rationes, sed potius ab aliis inventas compilavit: et in hoc tangit unam utilitatem, scilicet exclusionem erroris. Ac theologicarum inquisitionum abdita aperire. Hic tangit aliam quantum ad manifestationem veritatis; et hoc in primis tribus libris. Nec non et sacramentorum ecclesiasticorum pro modulo intelligentiae nostrae notitiam tradere studuimus: et hoc quantum ad quartum.

By David, Christ is signified: his tower is faith or the church; the shields are the thoughts and authorities of the saints. Or perhaps rather to show the tower as fortified; because he himself could not find arguments, but rather he gathered together arguments that were discovered by others; and in this he touches upon one useful feature, namely, the exclusion of error. And to open the hidden matters of theological investigations. Here he toughts upon another matter with respect to the manifestation of the truth; and this is in the first three books. Also we have made an effort to pass on knowledge of the Church’s sacraments according to our small amount of understanding: and this with respect to the fourth book.

Non valentes studiosorum fratrum votis iure resistere. Hic ponit causam moventem, quae dicit caritatem in proximum, et primo ponit causam moventem; secundo retrahentem, ibi, quamvis non ambigamus omnem humani eloquii sermonem calumniae atque contradictioni aemulorum semper fuisse obnoxium. Linguae, ad praesentes, vel quantum ad communicationem doctrinae; stylo, propter absentes, vel ad perpetuandam memoriam. Bigas, idest linguam et stylum, quibus quasi duabus rotis vehitur a magistro in discipulum, agitat Christi caritas. Hoc sumitur 2 Corinth. 5, 14: Caritas Christi urget nos.

(They) not being able lawfully to resist the votes of the more studious brothers. Here he presents the reason that moves him, which he says is charity to neighbour, and first he presents the reason that moves him, and then the reason that draws him back, where he writes. Although we do contend that all speech of human eloquence has always been subject to the calumny and contradiction of the envious. Tongues, for those present, or with respect to the sharing of doctrine; with a pen, on account of those absent, or to perpetuate the memory. A pair of horses, that is, tongue and pen, whereby as if with two wheels he is carried by the teacher to become a disciple, is driven by the charity of Christ. This is taken from 2 Corinth. 5, 14: The charity of Christ drives us on.

Contra, Eccle.9, 1: Nemo scit, utrum amore an odio dignus sit. Ergo, etc.. Respondeo. Caritas dicitur uno modo habitus infusus; et hunc nullus potest scire se habere certitudinaliter, nisi per revelationem; sed potest coniicere per aliqua signa probabilia. Alio modo dicitur caritas amor multum appretians amatum; et sic aliquis potest scire se habere caritatem. Quamvis non ambigamus omnem humani eloquii sermonem calumniae atque contradictioni aemulorum semper fuisse obnoxium. Hic ponit tertiam causam retrahentem, scilicet contradictionem invidorum: et circa hoc tria facit. Primo ponit contradictionis evidentiam per simile in aliis; secundo contradictionis causam ex inordinatione voluntatis, ex qua error, ex qua invidia, ex qua contradictio oritur, ibi, quia dissentientibus voluntatum motibus, dissentiens quoque fit animorum sensus; tertio contradicentium nequitiam, ibi, qui non rationi voluntatem subiiciunt.

On the contrary, we read in Eccle. 9, 1: No one knows whether he is worthy of love or hate. Therefore, etc.. I answer. In one way, charity is called an infused habit; and no one can know if he possesses this infused habit with certainty, except by a revelation; but someone may guess by certain likely signs. In another way, charity is called a love that places a high value on the beloved; and so someone may know that he has charity. Although we do not doubt that every speech of human eloquence was always subject to the calumny and contradiction of the envious. Here he presents the third reason that draws him back, namely the contradiction of the envious, and he does three things. First, he presents the evidence of contradiction by a simile in other things; second, he presents the cause of contradiction for a disorder of the will, from which error, envy, and contradiction arise, where he writes, because with the motions of the will that dissent, the sense of their minds also becomes dissenting; third, he presents the wickedness of those who contradict, where he writes, they who do not submit their will to reason.

Calumniae, quae est occulta et particularis impugnatio; contradictioni, quae est aperta, et in toto, et universalis; obnoxium, quasi poenae vel noxae addictum. Veri ratione perfectum; idest, perficiebat secundum rationem veritatis, videlicet quantum ad illos qui male intelligunt, et tamen malum intellectum pertinaci voluntate defendunt. Complacet, quantum ad illos quorum voluntas inordinate post se trahit iudicium rationis, ut verum iudicetur illud quod placet. Offendenti, idest quod displicet.

Calumny, which is a hidden and particular attack; contradiction, which is open, and total, and universal; obnoxious (liable to, subject to), as if given up to punishment or injury. Perfect in true reason; that is, he perfected according to the reason of truth, specifically with respect to those who understand badly, and yet defend their bad understanding with an obstinate will. Pleases, with respect to those whose will inordinately pulls after itself the judgment of the reason, to judge the truth as it pleases them. Offending, that is, that which displeases.

Contra, 3 Esdrae, 4, 39: Omnes benignantur in operibus eius. Ergo etc.. Veritas secundum se semper amatur; sed per accidens potest haberi odio, et hoc accidens est infinitum: quia causae per accidens, secundum philosophum infinitae sunt. Deus huius saeculi. Sumitur 2 Corinth., 4, et exponitur de Deo vero, qui operatur invidiam, permittendo; vel de diabolo, cui saeculum obedit, qui operatur suggerendo. Diffidentiae, vel quia diffidunt de Deo, vel quia de eis diffidendum est ex ratione morbi, quamvis non ex potestate medici. Qui non rationi voluntatem subiiciunt. Hic ostendit contradicentium nequitiam; et primo ex inordinata professione; secundo ex simulata religione, ibi, habent rationem sapientiae in superstitione; tertio ex pertinaci contentione, ibi, qui contentioni studentes, contra veritatem sine foedere bellant.

On the contrary, 3 Esdras, 4, 39: All benefit in his works. Therefore etc.. The truth is loved on its own terms; but for accidental reasons the truth may be regarded with hate, and this accidental reason is without limnit; because causes that are by accident, according to the philosopher, are infinite. The God of this age. This phrase is taken from 2 Corinth., 4, and it is explained to refer to the true God, who works envy by permitting it; or it may be explained as referring to the devil, whom this age obeys, who works by suggesting. Distrust, either because they distrust God, or because there is some uncertainty about them because of illness, although not because of the power of the physician. Those who do not sumit their will to reason. Here he shows the wickedness of those who contradict; and first from disordered profession; second, from a pretense of religion, where he writes, They have the appearance of wisdom in superstition; third, from obstinate argument, where he writes, those who make a study of argument make war against the truth without honour.

Ostendit autem primo ex duobus eos esse inordinatos, scilicet quia voluntas non sequitur rationem, sed e converso; quod tangit ubi dicit: qui non rationi voluntatem subiiciunt: et quia rationem suam non subiiciunt sacrae doctrinae; quod notatur ibi, nec doctrinae studium impendunt. Somniarunt, quasi phantasiando, sicut homo in somniis. Sed ad fabulas convertentes auditum. Sumitur de 2 Timoth. 4. Fabula enim composita est ex miris, secundum philosophum, et isti semper volunt nova audire. Professio, idest studium. Docenda, idest digna doceri. Rationem, idest argumentum ad ostendendum sapientiam. In superstitione, superflua religione exterius simlulata. Quia fidei defectionem sequitur hypocrisis mendax.

First he shows that they are disordered for two reasons, namely, that their will does not follow reason, but the other way around; which he touches upon where he says: they who do not submit their will to reason: and because they do not submit their reason to sacred doctrine; which is noted where he writes: nor do they devote study to doctrine. They dream, as if by indulging in imagination, like a man in his dreams. But turning their hearing to fables. This is taken from 2 Timoth. 4. A fable is composed of marvels, according to the philosopher, and these men always want to hear new things. Professio, that is study or interest. Things to be taught, that is, things worth teaching. Reason, that is, an argument for demonstrating wisdom. In superstitione, excessive religious practice outwardly simulated. Because the lying hypocrisy follows the falling away from faith.

Sumitur 1 Timoth. 4, 1: Discedent quidam a fide, attendentes spiritibus erroris, et doctrinis daemoniorum in hypocrisi loquentium mendacium. Omnium verborum. Contra, Beda: Nulla falsa est doctrina, quae non aliqua vera intermisceat. Respondeo, illa vera quae dicunt, quamvis in se vera sint, tamen quantum ad usum eorum falsa sunt, quia falso utuntur eis.

It is citing 1 Timoth. 4, 1: Some will turn away from the faith and will heed spirits of error, and the doctrines of demons in the hypocrisy of those who speak a lie. Of all words. On the contrary, Bede says: There is no false doctrine that does not intermix certain true things. I answer, that the true things they say, although these things are true in themselves, yet they are false with respect to their use, because they use them falsely.

Pruriginem, idest inordinatum desiderium nova audiendi, sicut pruritus concitatur ex calore inordinato. Sumitur ex 2 Tim. 4, 3: Erit tempus, cum… ad sua desideria coacervabunt sibi magistros, prurientes auribus. Dogmate, propter hoc quod ratio voluntatem sequitur. Contentioni, quae, secundum Ambrosium ad Rom. est impugnatio veritatis cum confidentia clamoris. Veritas. 3 Esdr. 4, 38: Veritas manet, et invalescit in aeternum.

Itching desire, that is, an inordinate desire to hear new things, just as an itch is aroused by inordinate heat. This is citing 2 Tim. 4, 3: There will be a time when … people with itching ears according to their own desire will gather to themselves teachers. Dogma, for the reason that the reason is following the will. Truth. 3 Esdr. 4, 38: Truth remains, and grows strong forever.

Horum igitur Deo odibilem ecclesiam evertere atque ora oppilare… volentes, in labore multo ac sudore hoc volumen, Deo praestante, compegimus. Hic reddit auditorum docilem, praelibando causas operis: et primo ponit causam finalem quantum ad duas utilitates, scilicet destructionem erroris; unde dicit: odibilem ecclesiam: Psalm. 25, 5: Odivi ecclesiam malignantium: ne virus, idest ne venenum, in alios effundere queant: et manifestationem veritatis: unde dicit: lucernam veritatis in candelabro exaltare volentes.

As we desire to overthrow the church that is hateful to God and shut their mouths, we are putting together this volume, with God’s help, in much labor and sweat. Here he renders the listener open to learning, pouring forth the reasons for the work: and first he sets forth the final cause with respect to two useful features, namely, the destruction of error; hence he says: the church that is hateful: Psalm. 25, 5: I have hated the church of the evil-doers: so that they won’t be able to pour out their virus, that is, venum, to others: and the second use is the manifestation of truth: hence he says: Wishing to raise the lantern of truth in the candelabra.

Sumitur de Luc. 8, 15: Nemo accendit lucernam, et ponit eam sub modio. In candelabro, idest in aperto. Secundo tangit causam eficientem, scilicet principalem, Deo praestante: instrumentalem, compegimus: quia hoc opus est quasi compaginatum ex diversis auctoritatibus. Sudore, quocumque defectu corporali, qui sequitur laborem spiritualem. Tertio, ostendit causam materialem ibi: ex testimoniis veritatis, Psalm. 118, 152: Initio cognovi de testimoniis tuis. Quarto causam formalem quantum ad distinctionem librorum: in quatuor libros: et quantum ad modum operis: in quo maiorum exempla, quantum ad similitudines: doctrinam, quantum ad rationes, reperies. Vipereae, haereticae: haeretici enim pariendo alios in sua haeresi, pereunt sicut vipera.

This is citing from Luke 8, 15: No one lights a lamp and puts it under a bushel. In the candelabra, that is, in the open. Second, he touches upon the efficient cause, that is, the principal cause, with God helping: and the instrumental cause, we are putting together: because this work is put together, as it were, from various authors. Sweat, by whatever physical shortcoming, which follows spiritual labor. Third, he shows the material cause where he writes: ex testimoniis veritatis, Psalm. 118, 152: From the beginning I have known of your testimonies.. Fourth, he presents the formal cause for the distinction of the books: in quatuor libros: and with respect to the mode of the work: in which you will find examples of greater things, with respect to likenesses: doctrine, with respect to reasoned arguments. Vipers, heretics: for heretics in giving birth to others in their heresy perish like vipers. (translator: perhaps a typographical error in the Latin- it probably should be “give birth like vipers” – “peperunt” instead of “pereunt”).

Prodidimus, reseravimus. Adiicit viam. Complexi, amplexantes. Impiae, infidelis. Inter utrumque, scilicet, nec nimis alte, nec nimis humiliter: vel inter duos contrarios errores, sicut Sabellii, et Arii. Non a paternis discessit limitibus, secundum illud Proverb. 22, 28: Non transferes terminos antiquos, quos posuerunt patres tui. Non igitur debet hic labor cuiquam pigro, vel multum docto, videri superfluus. Hic reddit auditorum attentum: et primo ex utilitate operis, ibi:brevi volumine complicans patrum sententias. Sententia, secundum Avicennam, est definitiva et certissima conceptio. Secundo ex profunditate materiae, ibi: in hoc autem tractatu pium lectorem, qui secundum fidem intelligat, liberum correctorem, qui solum propter correctionem corrigat, desidero.

We put forth, we made known. He adds the way. Embraced, embraced with the mind. Impious, unfaithful. Between both, namely, neither too high, nor too humbly: or between two contrary errors, such as that of Sabellius and that of Arius. It has not partes from the limits of the fathers, according to Prov. 22, 28: Do not move the ancient limits that your fathers set. There this should not seem excessive either to anyone who is lazy, who anyone who is much learned. Here he makes the reader attentive: and first from the utility of the work, where he writes: in a brief volume bringing together the sayings of the fathers. A saying, according to Avicenna, is a definitive and most certain conception. Second, from the depth of the material, where he writes: I desire in this treatis the pious reader who understands according to faith, the free corrector, who corrects only for the sake of correction.

Liber enim, secundum philosophum, dicitur qui causa sui est, et non propter odium vel invidiam. Tertio ex ordinatione modi procedendi, ibi: ut autem quod quaeritur facilius occurrat, titulos quibus singulorum librorum capitula distinguuntur, praemisimus. Ad evidentiam huius sacrae doctrinae, quae in hoc libro traditur, quaeruntur quinque: 1 de necessitate ipius, 2 supposito quod sit necessaria, and sit una, val plures; 3 si sit una, an practica, vel speculativa: et si speculativa, vel scientia, vel intellectus; 4 de subiecto ipsius; 5 de modo.

For we call a free man, according to the philosopher, he who is his own cause, who does not act because of hate or jealousy. Third, from the ordering of the way of proceding, where he writes: so that that which is sought may be found more easily, we set forth the titles whereby the headings of the particular books are distinguished. As evidence of the sacred doctrine passed on in this book five things are sought: 1. on its necessity, 2 granted that it is necessary, whether it is one or many; 3 if it is one, whether it is practical or speculative: and if it is speculative, whether it is science or understanding; 4. on its subject; 5 on the mode.

Medieval University
Latin and English: vaxxine.com/hyoomik/aquinas/sent1.html

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
http://angelqueen.org/2012/11/02/aquinas-commentary-on-the-sentences-of-peter-lombard/
Get AQ Email Updates
AQ RSS Feed

2 comments on “Aquinas: Commentary on The Sentences of Peter Lombard

  1. The Four Books of Sentences (Libri Quattuor Sententiarum) is a book of theology written by Peter Lombard in the twelfth century. It is a systematic compilation of theology, written around 1150; it derives its name from the sententiae or authoritative statements on biblical passages that it gathered together.
    The Book of Sentences had its precursor in the glosses (an explanation or interpretation of a biblical text) by the masters who lectured using Saint Jerome’s Latin translation of the Bible (the Vulgate). A gloss might concern syntax or grammar, or it might be on some difficult point of doctrine. These glosses, however, were not continuous, rather being placed between the lines or in the margins of the biblical text itself. Lombard went a step further, collecting texts from various sources (such as Scripture, Augustine of Hippo, and other Church Fathers) and compiling them into one coherent whole. In order to accomplish this, the Lombard had to address two tasks: first, that of devising an order for his material, because systematic theology had not yet been constituted as a discipline, and secondly, finding ways to reconcile doctrinal differences among his sources. Peter Abelard’s Sic et Non provided crucial inspiration for the latter tasks.

    The Lombard arranged his material from the Bible and the Church Fathers in four books, then subdivided this material further into chapters. Probably between 1223 and 1227, Alexander of Hales grouped the many chapters of the four books into a smaller number of “distinctions.” In this form, the book was widely adopted as a theological textbook in the high and late Middle Ages (the 13th, 14th, and 15th centuries). A commentary on the Sentences was required of every master of theology, and was part of the examination system. At the end of lectures on Lombard’s work, a student could apply for bachelor status within the theology faculty.

    The importance of the Sentences to medieval theology and philosophy lies to a significant extent in the overall framework that they provide to theological and philosophical discussion. All the great scholastic thinkers, such as Aquinas, Ockham, Bonaventure, and Scotus, wrote commentaries on the Sentences. But these works were not exactly commentaries, for the Sentences were really a compilation of sources, and Peter Lombard left many questions open, giving later scholars an opportunity to provide their own answers.”

  2. In I Sententiarum – Question 1, Article 1.
    Utrum praeter physicas disciplinas alia doctrina sit homini necessaria

    Whether besides the physical disciplines some other doctrine is necessary to man

    Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod praeter physicas disciplinas nulla sit homini doctrina necessaria. Sicut enim dicit Dionysius in Epistola ad Polycarpum, philosophia est cognitio existentium; et constat, inducendo in singulis, quod de quolibet genere existentium in philosophia determinatur; quia de creatore et creaturis, tam de his quae sunt ab opere naturae, quam de his quae sunt ab opere nostro. Sed nulla doctrina potest esse nisi de existentibus, quia non entis non est scientia. Ergo praeter physicas disciplinas nulla doctrina debet esse.

    To the first question we procede. It seems that beside the physical disciplines no other doctrine is necessary to man. For as Dionysius says in his Epistle to Polycarp, philosophy is a knowledge of things that exist; and it is plain that when we apply this to particular things, that in philosophy we make determinate statements about every kind of existing thing; since it concerns both creator and creatures, both this that are by the work of nature, and those that are by our work. But no doctrine can be unless it is about things that exist, because there is no knowledge of that which is not. Therefore there should be no doctrine apart from the physical disciplines.

    Item, omnis doctrina est ad perfectionem: vel quantum ad intellectum, sicut speculativae, vel quantum ad affectum procedentem in opus, sicut practicae. Sed utrumquae completur per philosophiam; quia per domonstrativas scientias perficitur intellectus, per morales affectus. Ergo non est necessaria alia doctrina.

    Again, every doctrine is for the purpose of perfection; either for the intellect, such as the speculative doctrines, or for the human character that procedes to a work, such as the practical doctrines. But both of these are completed by philosophy; because the intellect is perfected by the demonstrative sciences, and the character is completed by the moral sciences. Therefore no other doctrine is necessary.

    Praeterea, quaecumquae naturali intellectu possunt cognosci ex principiis rationis, vel sunt in philosophia tradita, vel per principia philosophiae inveniri possunt. Sed ad perfectionem hominis sufficit illa cognitio quae ex naturali intellectu potest haberi. Ergo praeter philosophiam non est necessaria alia doctrina. Probatio mediae. Illud quod per se suam perfectionem consequi potest, nobilius est eo quod per se consequi non potest. Sed alia animalia et creaturae insensibiles ex puris naturalibus consequuntur finem suum; quamvis non sine Deo, qui omnia in omnibus operatur. Ergo et homo, cum sit nobilior eis, per naturalem intellectum cognitionem sufficientem suae perfectioni habere potest.

    Furthermore, all things whatsoever can be known by our natural intellect by the principles of reason, whether these have been passed on in philosophy, or whether they can be found by the principles of philosophy. But that knoledge that can be gained by our natural intellect is enough for man’s perfection. Therefore apart from philosophy no other doctrine is necessary. Proof of the middle term. That which can achieve its own perfection by itself is nobler than that which it cannot achieve by itself. But other animals and insensible creatures achieve their end by purely natural means; although not without God, who works all things in all things. Therefore man also, as he is nobler than they, can have knowledge sufficient for his own perfection by his natural understanding.

    Contra, Hebr. 11, 6: Sine fide impossibile est placere Deo. Placere autem Deo est summe necessarium. Cum igitur ad ea quae sunt fidei, philosophia non possit ascendere, oportet esse aliquam doctrinam quae ex fidei principiis procedat.

    On the Contary, Heb. 11, 6: Without faith it is impossible to please God. Pleasing God is the highest necessity. Since therefore philosophy cannot climb to the things that are of faith, there should be another doctrine that procedes from the principles of faith.

    Item, effectus non proportionatus causae, imperfecte ducit in cognitionem suae causae. Talis autem effectus est omnis creatura respectu creatoris, a quo in infinitum distat. Ergo imperfecte ducit in ipsius cognitionem. Cum igitur philosophia non procedat nisi per rationes sumptas ex creaturis, insufficiens est ad Dei cognitionem faciendam. Ergo oportet aliquam aliam doctrinam esse altiorem, quae per revelationem procedat, quae suppleat.

    Again, an effect that is non proportionate to its cause leads us only imperfectly to a knowledge of its cause. Every creature with respect to the Creator, from whom the creature is infinitely distant, is such an effect. Since philosophy does not move forward except by reasonings derived from creatures, philosophy is insufficient for making knowledge of God. Therefore there should be some other higher doctrine that takes revelation as its starting point to supplement philosophy.

    Ad huius evidentiam sciendum est, quod omnes qui recte senserunt posuerunt finem humanae vitae Dei contemplationem. Contemplatio autem Dei est dupliciter. Una per creaturas, quae imperfecta est, ratione iam dicta, in quae contemplatione philosophus, felicitatem contemplativam posuit, quae tamen est felicitas viae; et ad hanc ordinatur tota cognitio philosophica, quae ex rationibus creaturarum procedit. Est alia Dei contemplatio, qua videtur immediate per suam essentiam; et haec perfecta est, quae erit in patria et est homini possibilis secundum fidei suppositionem. Unde oportet ut ea quae sunt ad finem proportionentur fini, quatenus homo manuducatur ad illam contemplationem in statu viae per cognitionem non a creaturis sumptam, sed immediate ex divino lumine inspiratam; et haec est doctrina theologiae. Ex hoc possumus habere duas conclusiones. Una est, quod ista scientia imperat omnibus aliis scientiis tamquam principalis: alia est, quod ipsa utitur in obsequium sui omnibus aliis scientiis quasi vassallis, sicut patet in omnibus artibus ordinatis, quarum finis unius est sub fine alterius, sicut finis pigmentariae artis, qui est confectio medicinarum, ordinatur ad finem medicinae, qui est sanitas: unde medicus imperat pigmentario et utitur pigmentis ab ipso factis, ad suum finem. Ita, cum finis totius philosophiae sit infra finem theologiae, et ordinatus ad ipsum, theologia debet omnibus aliis scientiis imperare et uti his quae in eis traduntur.

    As evidence of this, it should be known that all who have had right sense have set forth the contemplation of God as the end of human life. The contemplation of God is of two kinds. One contemplation is by way of creatures, and this is imperfect for the reason already mentioned, and the philosopher thought that contemplative happiness was in this contemplation. But this is the happiness of the way (of the wayfarer in this life). All philosophical knowing is ordered to this contemplative happiness, which procedes from reasonings based on creatures. There is another contemplation of God whereby God appears directly by his essence; and this contemplation is perfect, because it will be in the fatherland (heaven) and is possible to man according to the supposition of faith. Hence those things that are for the sake of a certain end should be proportioned to that end, insofar as man is led by the hand to this contemplation while still in the state of the way (in this earthly life of the wayfarer) by a knowledge that is not derived from creatures but inspired directly by the divine light. This is the doctrine of theology. From this we can draw two conclusions. One conclusion is that this science rules all the other sciences as the principle science: another conclusion is that this science uses all the other sciences as vassals subordinate to itself. This is plainly seen in other arts that are ordered, where the end of one art is under the end of another, as the end of the art of pigment-making, which is the confection of medicines, (we would probably call this pharmacology), is ordered to the end of medicine, which is health. Hence the physician commands the maker of pigments and uses for this own end the pigments that the other makes. Thus, since the end of all philosophy lies below the end of theology and is ordered to that end, theology should command all the other sciences and use the things that are passed on in them.

    Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod quamvis philosophia determinet de existentibus et secundum rationes a creaturis sumptas, oportet tamen esse aliam quae existentia consideret secundum rationes ex inspiratione divini luminis acceptas.

    In response to the first objection it should be said that, although philosophy determines about things that exist and according to reasonings that are derived from creatures, there should still be another doctrine that considers existing things according to reasonings that are received from the inspiration of the divine light.

    Et per hoc patet solutio ad secundum: quia philosophia sufficit ad perfectionem intellectus secundum cognitionem naturalem, et affectus secundum virtutem acquisitam: et ideo oportet esse aliam scientiam per quam intellectus perficiatur quantum ad cognitionem infusam, et affectus quantum ad dilectionem gratuitam.

    And by this the solution to the second objection is clear: because philosophy is sufficient for the perfection of our understanding according to our natural knowledge, and it is sufficient for the perfection of our character according to acquired virtue: and therefore there should be another science by which our understanding is perfected with respect to infused knowledge, and our character is perfected with respect to a love that is produced by grace.

    Ad tertium dicendum, quod in his quae acquirunt aequalem bonitatem pro fine, tenet propositio inducta, scilicet, nobilius est eo quod per se consequi non potest. Sed illud quod acquirit bonitatem perfectam pluribus auxiliis et motibus, est nobilius eo quod imperfectam bonitatem acquirit paucioribus, vel per ipsum, sicut dicit philosophus; et hoc modo se habet homo respectu aliarum creaturarum, qui factus est ad ipsius divinae gloriae participationem.

    In response to the third objection, that with respect to things that acquire equal goodness for the sake of an end, the induced proposition holds true, namely, that it is nobler that that which it cannot achieve by itself. But that which acquires perfect goodness with many helpers and motions, is nobler than that which acquires only imperfect goodness by fewer helpers or motions, or by itself, as the philosopher says; and this is how man is with respect to other creatures, and man was made for a participation in the divine glory itself.

Leave a Reply