§ 108. THOMAS AQUINAS. 667
its own powers to discover the higher truths pertaining to God, such as the doctrine of the Trinity.1 The ideas which the natural mind can reach are the prceambula fidei, that is, the ideas which pertain to the vestibule of faith. Theology utilizes the reason, not, it is true, to prove faith, for such a process would take away the merit of faith, but to throw light on doctrines which are furnished by revelation.2 The ology is the higher science, both because of the certainty of its data and on account of the superior excellence of its sub ject-matter.3 There is no contradiction between philosophy and theology. Both are fountains of knowledge. Both come from the same God.
As between the Scriptures and the Fathers, Thomas makes a clear distinction. The Church uses both to arrive at and expound the truth. The Scriptures are necessary and final. The testimony of the Fathers is probable. Thomas' controlling purpose is to properly present the theology of the Church as he found it and nothing more.4
Philosophy and theology pursue different methods in searching after truth.5 In philosophy, knowledge based upon the visible creation goes before faith. In theology, or the doctrina fidei, faith looking to God as He is in Himself, pre cedes knowledge. The existence of God is not exclusively a matter of faith. It has been demonstrated by philosophers by irrefragable proofs. Anselm's ontological argument, Thomas rejected on the ground that a conception in the mind — esse in intellectu — is something different from real existence — esse in re. He adduced four cosmological arguments, and the argument from design.6 The cosmological arguments are:
1 Summa, I. 32, 1 ; Migne, I. 888, I. 1, 1 ; Migne, I. 607.
2 Summa, I. 1, 8 ; Migne, I. 615.
8 Tumpropter certitudinem turn propter dignitatem materice. Summa, I. 1, 6; Migne, I. 610.
* Seine Darstellung will gar nichts anders sein als das wissenschaftliche Bewusstsein der kirchlichen Lehre. Baur, p. 354.
6 Non eodem ordine utraque doctrina procedit, etc. See Werner, II. 151, and his quotation from the contra Gentiles.
6 See Kostlin, Beweise furs Dasein Gottes, in Studien u. Kritiken, 1876, pp. 10 sqq.
668 THE MIDDLE AGES. A.D. 1049-1294.
1. Motion presupposes an original mover. 2. An infinite series of causes, it is impossible to conceive. Therefore, there must be a First Cause. 3. The conditional demands that which is absolute, and 4. that which is imperfect implies that which is perfect as its standard. As for the teleological argument, objects and events have the appearance of being controlled by an overruling design as an arrow being shot by an archer.1
Creation was not a necessity for God on account of any deficiency within Himself. It was the expression of His love and goodness. With Aristotle, Thomas agrees that by the natural reason the world cannot be proved to have had a beginning.2 The first four things to be created were the realm of spirits, the empyrean, time, and earthly matter. The garden of Eden was a real place. Geographers do not locate it. It is secluded by the barriers of mountains, seas, and a certain tempestuous region.3
In discussing the origin of evil, Thomas says that, in a perfect world, there will be all possible grades of being. The weal of the whole is more important than the well-being of any part. By the permission of evil, the good of the whole is promoted. Many good things would be wanting but for evil. As life is advanced by corruption in the natural world, so, for example, patience is developed by persecution.
The natural order cannot bind God. His will is free. He chooses not to work contrary to the natural order, but He works outside of it, prceter ordinem.* The providence of God includes what to us seems to be accidental. The man dig ging finds a treasure. To him the discovery is an accident. But the master, who set him to work at a certain place, had this in view.
From the divine providence, as the starting-point, the decree of predestination is elaborated. Thomas represented
1 Sicut sagitta a sagittante. Summa, I. 2, 3 ; Migne, I. 622 sqq.
2 Mundum incepisse est credibile, non autem demonstratibile vel scibile. Summa, I. 46 ; Migne, I. 1008.
3 Ideo scriptores locorum de hoc loco mentionem nonfecerunt. Summa, I. 102, 1 ; Migne, I. 1433.
4 Summa, I. 103, 7 ; Migne, I. 1446. Comp. Werner, II. 396 sqq., for the passages from contra Gentiles.