In this series, I’ll be diving into Thomas Aquinas’s monumental work, the “Summa Theologica,” focusing on key questions and articles that have shaped theological and philosophical thought over the centuries.
Question 1: The Nature and Extent of Sacred Doctrine
In addressing whether, besides philosophy, any further doctrine is required, Aquinas argues that sacred doctrine is necessary because it deals with divine revelation, which extends beyond what can be known through human reason alone, addressing ultimate human ends like salvation. While philosophy deals with natural reason, sacred doctrine addresses divine matters beyond reason.
Aquinas also explores whether sacred doctrine can be considered a science. He posits that it is indeed a science, but one that differs from others because its first principles are received through divine revelation rather than natural reason. He notes that these principles might not be self-evident to everyone, but they are accepted on faith, forming the basis of this science.
Further, he argues that sacred doctrine is one science because all its parts are ordered towards one end: understanding God. All truths within it are connected by this common aim. Aquinas clarifies that different aspects of sacred doctrine, such as moral or dogmatic theology, are not separate sciences but different facets of the same one, all relating to God either as principle or end.
He then discusses whether sacred doctrine is a practical science, asserting that while it contains speculative elements, its primary aim is practical, directing human actions towards the ultimate end, the beatific vision. The speculative knowledge within sacred doctrine serves this practical purpose, and moral theology is explicitly practical.
When considering whether sacred doctrine is nobler than other sciences, Aquinas claims that it is because its subject, God, is the highest good, leading to eternal happiness. He argues that even sciences like mathematics, with their certain principles, do not surpass sacred doctrine in nobility, as the certainty of divine revelation exceeds that of human sciences. He concludes that sacred doctrine uses other sciences but stands above them in dignity and purpose.
Aquinas also equates sacred doctrine with the highest form of wisdom, as it deals with the first cause and the ultimate end of all things. He states that God is the principal object of this science, with everything else considered in relation to Him; thus, creatures are studied as they relate to God, and other considerations are not superfluous but ways to understand God better.
On the matter of argumentation in sacred doctrine, Aquinas explains that it uses arguments not to prove faith but to clarify and defend what is believed by faith, showing that faith is not contrary to reason.
Regarding the use of metaphors in Holy Scripture, he states that they are useful for making divine truths more accessible by relating them to human experiences, expressing what is otherwise inexpressible through human language. He stresses that proper understanding and teaching prevent the misuse of metaphors.
Finally, on whether words in Holy Scripture can have several senses, Aquinas addresses objections like the potential confusion of multiple senses or the notion that truth should be singular. He counters by stating that words in Scripture can have multiple senses because they are divinely inspired, allowing for literal, allegorical, moral, and anagogical interpretations. The Church Fathers often interpreted Scripture in this multifaceted way, with the literal sense being primary, from which other senses are derived.
This post has covered Question 1 of Aquinas’s Summa Theologica, illustrating the foundational principles of sacred doctrine. I will continue this series with a plan to cover one question every day from this monumental work.
