§ 108. THOMAS AQUINAS. 665
rather than upon his originality of thought.1 He was not a great scholar and, like Augustine, he knew no Hebrew and little Greek. Abselard, Bonaventura, and Albertus Magnus seem to show a wider familiarity than he with the ancient authors, patristic and profane, but they differ widely. He leaned much upon Albertus Magnus.2 Albertus had an eye more for the works of nature, Thomas for moral action. As was the case with the other Schoolmen, so Thomas had as his chief authorities Augustine and Aristotle, quoting the latter as "the philosopher." He was in full sympathy with the hierarchical system and the theology of the mediseval Church and at no point out of accord with them.
The Summa theologica, true to its author's promise, avoids many of the idle discussions of his predecessors and contem poraries.3 The treasures of the school and Church are here gathered together, sifted, and reduced to an elaborate but inspiring and simple structure. The three books treat re spectively of God, man, and the Redeemer, the sacraments being included under the last head. The matter is disposed of in 518 divisions, called questions, and these are divided into 2652 articles. Each article states the negative and positive sides of the proposition under discussion, the arguments for and against it, and then the author's solution. The same uniform threefold method of treatment is pursued through out. This method would become insufferably monotonous but for the precision of Thomas' statement and the interest of the
1Eicken, D. Philosophic d. Th. von Aq., p. 4, says, er gehort nichtso wohl zu den schaffenden als zu den ordnenden Geistern. " He belongs not so much to the originating as to the organizing minds." He repeats this judg ment in his Thomas von Aquino und Kant, p. 27. He who would charge the Middle Ages with confused and abstruse deductions must look for examples elsewhere than in Thomas.
2 Following Sighart, Life of Albertus Magnus, and Landerer, in art. Al bertus, in Herzog, 2d ed. XV. 575, Stockl says, 11.421, 734, that "Thomas stands wholly upon Albert's shoulders. Thomas finished what Albert began." Thomas received a strong impulse from Albert, but he went out especially in the departments of ethics and apologetics into regions not fully explored by his great teacher.
3 Multiplicatio inutilium qucestionum, articulorum et argumentorum. Prologue.
666 THE MIDDLE AGES. A.D. 1049-1294.
materials. Each article is a finished piece of literary art. Here is an example on the simplicity of God.1 The question is asked whether God is body, utrum Deus sit corpus. In favor of an affirmative reply is: 1. The consideration that God seems to have a body, for a body has three demensions, and the Scriptures ascribe to God, hight, depth, and length, Job 11: 8. 2. Whatever has a figure, has a body. God seems to have a figure, Gen. 1 : 26, for He said, "Let us make man in our image." 8. Everything that has parts, has a body. A hand, Job 40 : 4, and eyes, Ps. 24: 15, are ascribed to God. 4. God has a seat and throne, Isa. 6:1. 5. God has a local termination which men may approach, Ps. 24 : 5.
But on the other hand must be noted what is said in John 4: 24, "God is Spirit." The absolute God, therefore, is not a body. 1. No body moves that is not before moved and God is the first mover. 2. God is the first entity, primum ens. 3. God is the noblest among entities.
The answers to the objections are: 1. That the Scripture passages, attributing to God bodily parts, are figurative. 2. The expression " image of God " is used simply to indi cate God's superior excellency over man and man's excellence over the beasts. 3. The ascription of corporeal senses, such as the eye, is a way of expressing God's intelligence.
Theological speculation is, with Thomas, not an exhibition of theological acumen, but a pious employment pursued with the end of knowing and worshipping God. It is in keeping with this representation that, on his way to Paris, he is re ported to have exclaimed, he would not give Chrysostom on Matthew for all the city. It is also related that during his last years in Naples the Lord, appearing to him, asked what reward he desired, for he had written well on theological questions. Thomas replied, " None other, Lord, but Thy self."
Thomas made a clearer distinction between philosophy and religion, reason and revelation, than had been made before by any of the Schoolmen. The reason is not competent by
1 De Dei simplicitate, I. q. 3 ; Migne, I. 626 sqq.