Greco-Christian stream·Opera Omnia Sancti Thomae (Complete Works of Thomas Aquinas)·Summa Theologiae·Secunda Secundae·Q5. Those who have faith
Source context
- Theme
- the subjects of faith — who possesses faith and under what conditions
- Soul-faculty
- Intellectual Soul
Steiner
- GA 130, 1911-12-02Steiner identifies faith as a force residing in the human soul that must be consciously cultivated, distinguishing it as an inner capacity rather than a merely inherited disposition.
- GA 135, 1912-02-21Steiner argues that contrasting faith with knowledge reflects superficial logic, and that those with genuine spiritual insight recognise faith as a prerequisite for the acquisition of knowledge across incarnations.
- GA 95, 1906-09-04Steiner notes that in the Middle Ages a specific form of instruction arose precisely for those who experienced an inner tension between faith and knowledge, identifying this as a historically conditioned need.
Cross-tradition
- Aquinas, Summa Theologiae II-II Q1–2Aquinas establishes that faith is an act of the intellect moved by the will under grace, and Q5 delimits its proper subjects — those capable of receiving the infused theological virtue — in structural parallel to Steiner's identification of faith as a soul-force requiring inner conditions for its activation.
- Islamic kalam (ilm al-yaqin)Classical Islamic theology distinguishes degrees of certainty (knowledge, inference, direct witnessing) among those who hold belief, showing cross-tradition congruence with Aquinas's graduated account of who properly possesses faith.
Q5. Those who have faith
Article 1
[II-II.q.5.a.1.arg.1] It would seem that there was no faith, either in the angels, or in man, in their original state. For Hugh St. Victor says in his Sentences (De Sacram. i, 10) that "man cannot see God or things that are in God, because he closes his eyes to contemplation." Now the angels, in their original state, before they were either confirmed in grace, or had fallen from it, had their eyes opened to contemplation, since "they saw things in the Word," according to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. ii, 8). Likewise the first man, while in the state of innocence, seemingly had his eyes open to contemplation; for Hugh St. Victor says (De Sacram. i, 6) that "in his original state man knew his Creator, not by the mere outward perception of hearing, but by inward inspiration, not as now believers seek an absent God by faith, but by seeing Him clearly present to their contemplation." Therefore there was no faith in the angels and man in their original state.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.arg.1] Ad primum sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod Filius Dei non assumpserit verum corpus. Dicitur enim, Philipp., II, 7, quod in similitudinem hominum factus est. Sed quod est secundum veritatem, non dicitur esse secundum similitudinem. Ergo Filius Dei non assumpsit verum corpus.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.arg.2] Further, the knowledge of faith is dark and obscure, according to 1 Corinthians 13:13: "We see now through a glass in a dark manner." Now in their original state there was not obscurity either in the angels or in man, because it is a punishment of sin. Therefore there could be no faith in the angels or in man, in their original state.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.arg.2] 2. Præterea, assumptio corporis 4 in nullo derogavit dignitati Divinitatis; dicit enim Leo papa in Serm. de nativ., c. II, col. 192, t. 1, quod « nec inferiorem naturam consumpsit glorificatio, nec superiorem minuit assumptio. Sed hoc ad dignitatem Dei pertinet, quod sit omnino a corpore separatus. Ergo videtur quod per assumptionem non fuerit Deus corpori unitus.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.arg.3] Further, the Apostle says (Romans 10:17) that "faith . . . cometh by hearing." Now this could not apply to angels and man in their original state; for then they could not hear anything from another. Therefore, in that state, there was no faith either in man or in the angels.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.arg.3] 3. Præterea, signa debent respondere signatis. Sed apparitiones veteris Testamenti, quæ fuerunt signa 2 et figuræ apparitionis Christi, non fuerunt secundum corporis veritatem, sed secundum imaginarium visionem, sicut patet Isa., vi, 1: Vidi Dominum sedentem, etc. Ergo videtur quod etiam apparitio Filii Dei in mundo non fuerit secundum corporis veritatem, sed solum secundum imaginationem.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.sc] It is written (Hebrews 11:6): "He that cometh to God, must believe." Now the original state of angels and man was one of approach to God. Therefore they had need of faith.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.sc] Sed contra est quod dicit Augustinus in lib. LXXXIII QQ., quæst. xiv, col. 14, t. 6: « Si phantasma fuit corpus Christi, fefellit Christus; et si fefellit, veritas non est. Est autem veritas Christus. Non igitur phantasma fuit corpus ejus. » Et sic patet quod verum corpus assumpsit.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.co] Some say that there was no faith in the angels before they were confirmed in grace or fell from it, and in man before he sinned, by reason of the manifest contemplation that they had of Divine things. Since, however, "faith is the evidence of things that appear not," according to the Apostle (Hebrews 11:2), and since "by faith we believe what we see not," according to Augustine (Tract. xl in Joan.; QQ. Evang. ii, qu. 39), that manifestation alone excludes faith, which renders apparent or seen the principal object of faith. Now the principal object of faith is the First Truth, the sight of which gives the happiness of heaven and takes the place of faith. Consequently, as the angels before their confirmation in grace, and man before sin, did not possess the happiness whereby God is seen in His Essence, it is evident that the knowledge they possessed was not such as to exclude faith.
It follows then, that the absence of faith in them could only be explained by their being altogether ignorant of the object of faith. And if man and the angels were created in a purely natural state, as some [St. Bonaventure, Sent. ii, D, 29 hold, perhaps one might hold that there was no faith in the angels before their confirmation in grace, or in man before sin, because the knowledge of faith surpasses not only a man's but even an angel's natural knowledge about God.
Since, however, we stated in I, 62, 3; I, 95, 1 that man and the angels were created with the gift of grace, we must needs say that there was in them a certain beginning of hoped-for happiness, by reason of grace received but not yet consummated, which happiness was begun in their will by hope and charity, and in the intellect by faith, as stated above (Question 4, Article 7). Consequently we must hold that the angels had faith before they were confirmed, and man, before he sinned. Nevertheless we must observe that in the object of faith, there is something formal, as it were, namely the First Truth surpassing all the natural knowledge of a creature, and something material, namely, the thing to which we assent while adhering to the First Truth. With regard to the former, before obtaining the happiness to come, faith is common to all who have knowledge of God, by adhering to the First Truth: whereas with regard to the things which are proposed as the material object of faith, some are believed by one, and known manifestly by another, even in the present state, as we have shown above (1, 5; 2, 4, ad 2). In this respect, too, it may be said that the angels before being confirmed, and man, before sin, possessed manifest knowledge about certain points in the Divine mysteries, which now we cannot know except by believing them.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut dicitur in lib. De ecclesiast. dogmatibus 5, cap. II, col. 1214, t. 8 op. Aug., « natus est Dei Filius non putative, quasi imaginatum corpus habens, sed corpus verum. » Et hujus ratio potest triplex assignari: quarum prima est ex ratione humanæ naturæ, ad quam pertinet verum corpus habere. Supposito igitur ex præmissis quod conveniens fuerit Filium Dei assumere humanam naturam, consequens est quod verum corpus assumpserit. Secunda ratio sumi potest ex his quæ in mysterio Incarnationis sunt acta. Si enim non fuit verum corpus ejus, sed phantasticum; ergo nec veram mortem sustinuit, nec aliquid eorum quæ Evangelistæ de eo narrant, secundum veritatem gessit, sed solum secundum apparentiam quamdam: et sic etiam sequeretur quod non fuerit vera salus hominis subsecuta; oportet enim effectum causæ proportionari. Tertia ratio potest sumi ex ipsa dignitate personæ assumentis; quæ cum sit veritas, non decuit ut in ejus opere aliqua fictio esset. Unde et Dominus hunc errorem per seipsum excludere dignatus est, Luc., ult., 39, cum discipuli conturbati et conterriti putabant se spiritum videre, et non verum corpus: et ideo se eis palpandum præbuit, dicens: Palpate, et videte, quia spiritus carnem et ossa non habet, sicut me videtis habere.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.ad.1] Although the words of Hugh of St. Victor are those of a master, and have the force of an authority, yet it may be said that the contemplation which removes the need of faith is heavenly contemplation, whereby the supernatural truth is seen in its essence. Now the angels did not possess this contemplation before they were confirmed, nor did man before he sinned: yet their contemplation was of a higher order than ours, for by its means they approached nearer to God, and had manifest knowledge of more of the Divine effects and mysteries than we can have knowledge of. Hence faith was not in them so that they sought an absent God as we seek Him: since by the light of wisdom He was more present to them than He is to us, although He was not so present to them as He is to the Blessed by the light of glory.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod similitudo illa exprimit veritatem humanæ naturæ in Christo per modum quo omnes qui vere in natura humana existunt, similes species esse dicuntur: non autem intelligitur similitudo phantastica. Ad cujus evidentiam Apostolus subjungit quod factus est obediens usque ad mortem, mortem autem crucis; quod fieri non po-tuisset, si fuisset sola similitudo phantastica.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.ad.2] There was no darkness of sin or punishment in the original state of man and the angels, but there was a certain natural obscurity in the human and angelic intellect, in so far as every creature is darkness in comparison with the immensity of the Divine light: and this obscurity suffices for faith.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod per hoc 1 Ita communius. Al: « humanitatis. » 2 In 3 Opus De ecclesiasticis dogmatibus Gennadio Massiliensi tribuitur. Marcionitæ et Manichæi omne corpus credentes esse a malo principio, ideoque malum, nec volentes Christum dici sordibus uteri muliebris in quinatum, corpus Christi dicebant fuisse phantasticum. Simon, Saturninus et Basilides Christum somniarunt suam Simoni Cyrenæo tribuisse effigiem, et Simonis effigiem assumpsisse, ut suo loco Simon Cyrenæus crucifigeretur. quod Filius Dei verum corpus assumpsit, in nullo est ejus dignitas diminuta. Unde Augustinus 1 dicit in lib. De fide ad Pet., cap. II, § 24: « Exinanivit seipsum, formam servi accipiens, ut fieret servus; sed formæ Dei plenitudinem non amisit. » Non enim Filius Dei sic assumpsit verum corpus, ut forma corporis fieret; quod repugnat divinæ simplicitati et puritati; hoc enim esset assumere corpus in unitatem naturæ; quod est impossibile, ut ex supra dictis patet; sed salva dictinctione naturæ, assumpsit corpus in unitatem personæ.
[II-II.q.5.a.1.ad.3] In the original state there was no hearing anything from man speaking outwardly, but there was from God inspiring inwardly: thus the prophets heard, as expressed by the Psalm 84:9: "I will hear what the Lord God will speak in me."
[II-II.q.5.a.1.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod figura debet respondere rei quantum ad similitudinem, non quantum ad rei veritatem: si enim per 2 omnia esset similitudo, jam non esset signum, sed ipsa res, ut Damascenus dicit in III lib. Orth. fid., cap. xxvi, col. 1095, t. 1. Conveniens 5 ergo fuit ut apparitiones veteris Testamenti essent secundum apparentiam tantum, quasi figuræ; apparitio autem Filii Dei in mundo esset secundum corporis veritatem, quasi res figurata per illas figuras. Unde dicit Apostolus Coloss., II, 17: Quæ sunt umbra futurorum, corpus autem Christi.
Article 2
[II-II.q.5.a.2.arg.1] It would seem that the demons have no faith. For Augustine says (De Praedest. Sanct. v) that "faith depends on the believer's will": and this is a good will, since by it man wishes to believe in God. Since then no deliberate will of the demons is good, as stated above (I, 64, 2, ad 5), it seems that in the demons there is no faith.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.arg.1] Ad secundum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod contritio non possit totaliter tollere reatum pœnæ, quia satisfactio et confessio ordinantur ad liberationem a reatu pœnæ. Sed nullus ita perfecte conteritur quin oporteat eum confiteri et satisfacere. Ergo contritio nunquam est tanta quod deleat reatum totum.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.arg.2] Further, faith is a gift of Divine grace, according to Ephesians 2:8: "By grace you are saved through faith . . . for it is the gift of God." Now, according to a gloss on Hosea 3:1, "They look to strange gods, and love the husks of the grapes," the demons lost their gifts of grace by sinning. Therefore faith did not remain in the demons after they sinned.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.arg.2] 2. Præterea, in pœnientia debet esse quædam recompensatio pœnæ ad culpam. Sed aliqua culpa per membra corporis exercetur. Ergo cum oporteat ad debitam pœnæ recompensationem ut per quæ peccat quis per hæc et torqueatur, Sap., xi, 17, videtur quod nunquam possit pœna talis peccati per contritionem ex-solvi 1.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.arg.3] Further, unbelief would seem to be graver than other sins, as Augustine observes (Tract. lxxxix in Joan.) on John 15:22, "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin: but now they have no excuse for their sin." Now the sin of unbelief is in some men. Consequently, if the demons have faith, some men would be guilty of a sin graver than that of the demons, which seems unreasonable. Therefore in the demons there is no faith.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.arg.3] 3. Præterea, dolor contritionis est finitus. Sed pro aliquo peccato, scilicet mortali, debetur pœna infinita. Ergo nullo modo potest esse tanta contritio quod totam pœnam deleat.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.sc] It is written (James 2:19): "The devils . . . believe and tremble."
[II-II.q.5.a.2.sc] Sed contra est quod Deus plus affectum cordis acceptat quam exteriorem actum. Sed per exteriores actus absolvitur homo a pœna et culpa. Ergo et similiter per cordis affectum, qui est contritio. Præterea, exemplum hujus de latrone habetur, cui dictum est Lucæ, xxiii, 43: Hodie mecum eris in paradiso, propter unicum pœnitentiæ actum. Utrum autem totus reatus per contritionem semper tollatur, supra quæsitum est, ubi hoc ipsum de pœnitentia quæ-rebatur.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.co] As stated above (1, 4; 2, 1), the believer's intellect assents to that which he believes, not because he sees it either in itself, or by resolving it to first self-evident principles, but because his will commands his intellect to assent. Now, that the will moves the intellect to assent, may be due to two causes. First, through the will being directed to the good, and in this way, to believe is a praiseworthy action. Secondly, because the intellect is convinced that it ought to believe what is said, though that conviction is not based on objective evidence. Thus if a prophet, while preaching the word of God, were to foretell something, and were to give a sign, by raising a dead person to life, the intellect of a witness would be convinced so as to recognize clearly that God, Who lieth not, was speaking, although the thing itself foretold would not be evident in itself, and consequently the essence of faith would not be removed.
Accordingly we must say that faith is commended in the first sense in the faithful of Christ: and in this way faith is not in the demons, but only in the second way, for they see many evident signs, whereby they recognize that the teaching of the Church is from God, although they do not see the things themselves that the Church teaches, for instance that there are three Persons in God, and so forth.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod intensio contritionis potest attendi dupliciter: uno modo ex parte charitatis, quæ displicentiam causat, et sic contingit tantum intendi charitatem in actu quod contritio inde sequens merebitur non solum culpæ amotionem, sed etiam absolutionem ab omni pœna. Alio modo ex parte doloris sensibilis, quem voluntas in contritione excitat. Et quia ille etiam pœna quædam est, tantum potest intendi quod sufficiet ad deletionem culpæ et pœnæ.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.ad.1] The demons are, in a way, compelled to believe, by the evidence of signs, and so their will deserves no praise for their belief.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod aliquis non potest esse certus quod contritio sua sit sufficiens ad deletionem pœnæ et culpæ; et ideo tenetur confiteri, et satisfacere, maxime cum contritio vera non fuerit, nisi propositum confitendi habuisset annexum; quod debet ad effectum adduci etiam propter præceptum, quod est de confessione datum.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.ad.2] Faith, which is a gift of grace, inclines man to believe, by giving him a certain affection for the good, even when that faith is lifeless. Consequently the faith which the demons have, is not a gift of grace. Rather are they compelled to believe through their natural intellectual acumen.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod sicut gaudium interius redundat etiam ad exteriores corporis partes, ita etiam dolor interior ad exteriora membra derivatur; unde dicitur Prov., xvii, 22: Spiritus tristis exsiccat ossa.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.ad.3] The very fact that the signs of faith are so evident, that the demons are compelled to believe, is displeasing to them, so that their malice is by no means diminished by their believe.
[II-II.q.5.a.2.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod dolor contritionis, quamvis sit finitus quantum ad intensionem, sicut etiam et pœna peccato mortali debita finita est; habet tamen infinitam virtutem ex charitate, qua informatur, et secundum hoc potest valere ad deletionem culpæ et pœnæ.
Article 3
[II-II.q.5.a.3.arg.1] It would seem that a heretic who disbelieves one article of faith, can have lifeless faith in the other articles. For the natural intellect of a heretic is not more able than that of a catholic. Now a catholic's intellect needs the aid of the gift of faith in order to believe any article whatever of faith. Therefore it seems that heretics cannot believe any articles of faith without the gift of lifeless faith.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.arg.1] Ad tertium sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod contritio parva non sufficiat ad deletionem magnorum peccatorum. Quia contritio est medicina peccati. Sed corporalis medicina, quæ sanat corporalem morbum minorem, non sufficit ad sanandum majorem. Ergo minima contritio non sufficit ad delendum maxima peccata.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.arg.2] Further, just as faith contains many articles, so does one science, viz. geometry, contain many conclusions. Now a man may possess the science of geometry as to some geometrical conclusions, and yet be ignorant of other conclusions. Therefore a man can believe some articles of faith without believing the others.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.arg.2] 2. Præterea, supra dictum est quod oportet de majoribus peccatis magis conteri. Sed contritio non delet peccatum, nisi sit secundum quod oportet. Ergo minima contritio non delet omnia peccata.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.arg.3] Further, just as man obeys God in believing the articles of faith, so does he also in keeping the commandments of the Law. Now a man can obey some commandments, and disobey others. Therefore he can believe some articles, and disbelieve others.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.arg.3] 3. Præterea, ex unione animæ ad corpus constituitur natura communis, quæ est species humana. « In Domino » autem « Jesu Christo non est communem speciem accipere, » ut Damascenus dicit in III lib. Orth. fid., cap. III, col. 994, t. 4. Non igitur assumpsit animam.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.sc] Just as mortal sin is contrary to charity, so is disbelief in one article of faith contrary to faith. Now charity does not remain in a man after one mortal sin. Therefore neither does faith, after a man disbelieves one article.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.sc] Sed contra, quælibet gratia gratum faciens delet omnem culpam mortalem, quia simul stare cum ea non potest. Sed quælibet contritio est gratia gratum faciente informata. Ergo quantumcumque sit parva, delet omnem culpam.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.co] Neither living nor lifeless faith remains in a heretic who disbelieves one article of faith.
The reason of this is that the species of every habit depends on the formal aspect of the object, without which the species of the habit cannot remain. Now the formal object of faith is the First Truth, as manifested in Holy Writ and the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the First Truth. Consequently whoever does not adhere, as to an infallible and Divine rule, to the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the First Truth manifested in Holy Writ, has not the habit of faith, but holds that which is of faith otherwise than by faith. Even so, it is evident that a man whose mind holds a conclusion without knowing how it is proved, has not scientific knowledge, but merely an opinion about it. Now it is manifest that he who adheres to the teaching of the Church, as to an infallible rule, assents to whatever the Church teaches; otherwise, if, of the things taught by the Church, he holds what he chooses to hold, and rejects what he chooses to reject, he no longer adheres to the teaching of the Church as to an infallible rule, but to his own will. Hence it is evident that a heretic who obstinately disbelieves one article of faith, is not prepared to follow the teaching of the Church in all things; but if he is not obstinate, he is no longer in heresy but only in error. Therefore it is clear that such a heretic with regard to one article has no faith in the other articles, but only a kind of opinion in accordance with his own will.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod contritio, ut sæpe dictum est, habet duplicem dolorem. Unum rationis, qui est displicentia peccati commissi, et hic potest esse adeo parvus, quod non sufficiet ad rationem contritionis; ut si minus displiceret ei peccatum quam debeat displicere separatio a fine: sicut etiam amor potest esse ita remissus quod non sufficit ad rationem charitatis. Alium dolorem habet in sensu, et parvitas hujus non impedit rationem contritionis, quia non se habet per se essentialiter ad contritionem, sed quasi ex accidente ei adjungitur; et iterum non est in potestate nostra. Sic ergo dicendum quod quantumcumque parvus sit dolor, dummodo ad contritionis rationem sufficiat, omnem culpam delet.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.ad.1] A heretic does not hold the other articles of faith, about which he does not err, in the same way as one of the faithful does, namely by adhering simply to the Divine Truth, because in order to do so, a man needs the help of the habit of faith; but he holds the things that are of faith, by his own will and judgment.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod medicinæ spirituales habent efficaciam infinitam ex virtute infinita quæ in eis operatur. Et ideo illa medicina, quæ sufficit ad curationem peccati parvi, sufficit etiam ad curationem magni, sicut patet de baptismo, quo et magna et parva solvuntur: et simile est de contritione, dummodo ad rationem contritionis pertingat.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.ad.2] The various conclusions of a science have their respective means of demonstration, one of which may be known without another, so that we may know some conclusions of a science without knowing the others. On the other hand faith adheres to all the articles of faith by reason of one mean, viz. on account of the First Truth proposed to us in Scriptures, according to the teaching of the Church who has the right understanding of them. Hence whoever abandons this mean is altogether lacking in faith.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod hoc sequitur de necessitate quod unus homo plus doleat de majori peccato quam de minori, secundum quod magis repugnat amori qui dolorem causat: sed si unus alius haberet tantum de dolore pro majori, quantum ipse habet pro minori, sufficeret ad remissionem culpæ.
[II-II.q.5.a.3.ad.3] The various precepts of the Law may be referred either to their respective proximate motives, and thus one can be kept without another; or to their primary motive, which is perfect obedience to God, in which a man fails whenever he breaks one commandment, according to James 2:10: "Whosoever shall . . . offend in one point is become guilty of all."
[II-II.q.5.a.3.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod non est inconveniens, imo necessarium dicere, quod in Christo fuerit natura quæ constituitur per animam corpori advenientem. Damascenus autem negat in Domino Jesu Christo esse communem speciem, Tapsensi restitutus fuit ex intrinsecis argumentis et præsertim ex auctoritate vetustissimi codicis Divionensis, Vigilii nomen præferentis. 2 Quidam quasi aliquid tertium resultans ex unione Divinitatis et humanitatis.
Article 4
[II-II.q.5.a.4.arg.1] It would seem that faith cannot be greater in one man than in another. For the quantity of a habit is taken from its object. Now whoever has faith believes everything that is of faith, since by failing in one point, a man loses his faith altogether, as stated above (Article 3). Therefore it seems that faith cannot be greater in one than in another.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.arg.1] Ad quartum sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod Filius Dei non assumpserit mentem humanam sive intellectum. Ubi enim est præsentia rei, non requiritur ejus imago. Sed homo secundum mentem est ad imaginem Dei, ut Augustinus dicit in lib. XIV De Trinit., cap. Ⅲ et Ⅵ, col. 1038, t. 8. Cum ergo in Christo fuerit præsentia divini Verbi, non oportuit ibi esse mentem humanam.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.arg.2] Further, those things which consist in something supreme cannot be "more" or "less." Now faith consists in something supreme, because it requires that man should adhere to the First Truth above all things. Therefore faith cannot be "more" or "less."
[II-II.q.5.a.4.arg.2] 2. Præterea, major lux offuscat minorem. Sed Verbum Dei, quod est lux illuminans omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum, ut dicitur Joan., Ⅰ, 9, comparatur ad mentem, sicut lux major ad minorem: quia et ipsa mens lux quædam est quasi lucerna illuminata a prima luce. Prov., xx, 27: Lucerna Domini spiraculum hominis. Ergo in Christo, qui est Verbum Dei, non fuit necessarium esse mentem humanam.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.arg.3] Further, faith is to knowledge by grace, as the understanding of principles is to natural knowledge, since the articles of faith are the first principles of knowledge by grace, as was shown above (Question 1, Article 7). Now the understanding of principles is possessed in equal degree by all men. Therefore faith is possessed in equal degree by all the faithful.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.arg.3] 3. Præterea, assumptio humanæ naturæ a Dei Verbo, dicitur Incarnatio ejus. Sed intellectus sive mens humana neque est caro, neque actus carnis: quia nullius corporis actus est, ut probatur in III De anima, text. 6. Ergo videtur quod Filius Dei humanam mentem non assumpserit.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.sc] Wherever we find great and little, there we find more or less. Now in the matter of faith we find great and little, for Our Lord said to Peter (Matthew 14:31): "O thou of little faith, why didst thou doubt?" And to the woman he said (Matthew 15:28): "O woman, great is thy faith!" Therefore faith can be greater in one than in another.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.sc] Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit in libro De fide ad Pet., cap. xiv: « Firmissime tene et nullatenus dubites Christum Dei Filium habere veram nostri generis carnem, et animam rationalem, qui de carne sua dicit: Palpate et videte, quia spiritus carnem et ossa non habet sicut me videtis habere, Luc., ult., 39. Animam quoque se habere ostendit, dicens: Ego pono animam meam, et iterum sumo eam, Joan., x, 18. Intellectum quoque animæ se habere ostendit, dicens: Discite a me, quia mitis sum et humilis corde, Matth., xⅠ, 29. Et de ipso Deus per Prophetam dicit: Ecce intelliget puer meus, Isa., LⅡ, 13.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.co] As stated above (I-II, 52, 1,2; I-II, 112, 4), the quantity of a habit may be considered from two points of view: first, on the part of the object; secondly, on the part of its participation by the subject.
Now the object of faith may be considered in two ways: first, in respect of its formal aspect; secondly, in respect of the material object which is proposed to be believed. Now the formal object of faith is one and simple, namely the First Truth, as stated above (Question 1, Article 1). Hence in this respect there is no diversity of faith among believers, but it is specifically one in all, as stated above (Question 4, Article 6). But the things which are proposed as the matter of our belief are many and can be received more or less explicitly; and in this respect one man can believe explicitly more things than another, so that faith can be greater in one man on account of its being more explicit.
If, on the other hand, we consider faith from the point of view of its participation by the subject, this happens in two ways, since the act of faith proceeds both from the intellect and from the will, as stated above (2, 1,2; 4, 2). Consequently a man's faith may be described as being greater, in one way, on the part of his intellect, on account of its greater certitude and firmness, and, in another way, on the part of his will, on account of his greater promptitude, devotion, or confidence.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut Augustinus dicit in lib. De hæresibus, hær. LⅣ, col. 40, t. 8, Apollinaristæ de anima Christi a catholica Ecclesia dissenserunt, dicentes sicut Ariani, Christum carnem solam sine anima suscepisse: in qua quæstione testimoniis evangelicis victi, mentem defuisse animæ Christi, sed pro hac ipsum Verbum in ea fuisse dixerunt. Sed hæc positio eisdem rationibus convincitur, sicut et prædicta. Primo enim hoc adversatur narrationi evangelicæ, quæ commemorat eum fuisse mira-tum, ut patet Matth., vⅧ. Admiratio autem absque ratione esse non potest; quia importat collationem effectus ad causam; dum scilicet aliquis videt effectum, cujus causam ignorat, et quærit, ut dicitur in princ. Metaph., cap. Ⅱ, in med. Secundo repugnat utilitati Incarnationis, quæ est justificatio hominis a peccato. Anima enim humana non est capax peccati, nec gra-tiæ justificantis, nisi per mentem. Unde præcipue oportuit mentem humanam assumi. Unde dicit Damascenus in III libro Orth. fid., cap. Ⅵ, col. 1006, t. 4: « Dei Verbum assumpsit corpus et animam intellectualem et rationalem; » et postea subdit: « Totus toti unitus est, ut toti mihi salutem largiretur: quod enim inassumptum, et incurabile est. » Tertio, hoc repugnat veritati Incarnationis. Cum enim corpus proportionetur animæ, sicut materia propriæ formæ; non est vere caro humana quæ non est perfecta anima humana, scilicet rationali. Et ideo si Christus animam sine mente habuisset, non habuisset veram carnem humanam, sed carnem bestialem; quia per solam mentem anima nostra differt ab anima bestiali. Unde dicit Augustinus in lib. LXXXIII QQ., qu. Lxxx, col. 93, t. 6, quod secundum hunc errorem sequeretur quod Filius Dei « belluam quamdam cum figura humani corporis suscepisset; » quod iterum repugnat veritati divinæ, quæ nullam patitur fictionis falsitatem.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.ad.1] A man who obstinately disbelieves a thing that is of faith, has not the habit of faith, and yet he who does not explicitly believe all, while he is prepared to believe all, has that habit. On this respect, one man has greater faith than another, on the part of the object, in so far as he believes more things, as stated above.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod ubi est ipsa res per sui præsentiam, non requiritur ejus imago ad hoc quod suppleat locum rei; sicut ubi est imperator, mi- Fulgentius, col. 697, cui liber prædictus restituendus est. In In lites non venerantur ejus imaginem: sed tamen requiritur cum præsentia rei imago ipsius, ut perficiatur ex ipsa rei præsentia; sicut imago in cera perficitur per impressionem sigilli; et imago hominis resultat in speculo per ejus præsentiam. Unde ad perficiendam mentem humanam necessarium fuit quod eam sibi Verbum Dei univerit.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.ad.2] It is essential to faith that one should give the first place to the First Truth. But among those who do this, some submit to it with greater certitude and devotion than others; and in this way faith is greater in one than in another.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod lux major evacuat lucem minorem alterius corporis illuminantis: non tamen evacuat, sed perficit lucem corporis illuminati: ad præsentiam enim solis stellarum lux obscuratur, sed aeris lumen perficitur. Intellectus autem seu mens hominis est quasi lux illuminata a luce divini Verbi; et ideo per lucem Verbi non evacuatur mens hominis, sed magis perficitur.
[II-II.q.5.a.4.ad.3] The understanding of principles results from man's very nature, which is equally shared by all: whereas faith results from the gift of grace, which is not equally in all, as explained above (I-II, 112, 4). Hence the comparison fails.
Nevertheless the truth of principles is more known to one than to another, according to the greater capacity of intellect.
The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas AquinasSecond and Revised Edition, 1920Literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican ProvinceOnline Edition Copyright © 2009 by Kevin Knight Nihil Obstat. F. Innocentius Apap, O.P., S.T.M., Censor. Theol.Imprimatur. Edus. Canonicus Surmont, Vicarius Generalis. Westmonasterii.APPROBATIO ORDINISNihil Obstat. F. Raphael Moss, O.P., S.T.L. and F. Leo Moore, O.P., S.T.L.Imprimatur. F. Beda Jarrett, O.P., S.T.L., A.M., Prior Provincialis AngliæMARIÆ IMMACULATÆ - SEDI SAPIENTIÆ
[II-II.q.5.a.4.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod licet potentia intellectiva non sit alicujus corporis actus; ipsa tamen essentia animæ humanæ, quæ est forma corporis, requiritur quod sit nobilior, ad hoc quod habeat potentiam intelligendi; et ideo necesse est ut corpus melius dispositum ei respondeat.
JSON: /api/sources/opera-omnia-aquinas/summa-theologiae/secunda-secundae/q005.json