Showing posts with label outline. Show all posts
Showing posts with label outline. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

1 Corinthians 14, first look with St Thomas

Chapter 14 of First Corinthians is an extended consideration of two charismata in particular: prophecy and speaking in tongues (and a brief mention of interpretation of tongues). Speaking in tongues is the gift most often associated with the "Charismatic Movement", so it will be helpful to understand that better. And also, since prophecy is a better gift and St Paul wants us all to seek it (Desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy), this too is worth considering.

In the commentary on 12, St Thomas said about these gifts:

  • prophecy is the grace to manifest what is known to God alone (such as future contingents)
  • speaking in tongues allows one to overcome the barrier of language
  • interpretation of tongues allows one to understand the difficult words of Scripture
In Chapter 14, however, St Paul talks about speaking in tongues as not understandable by men and as only edifying oneself, rather than the whole community. Let's see what St Thomas has to say about this... An outline is always a good way to start.

  • Prophecy excels the gift of tongues
    • reasons on account of the nonbelievers
      • More useful in exhortation (5-12)
      • More useful in praying (13-17)
    • reasons on account of the believers
  • How the gifts of prophecy and tongues should be used
Early on, St Thomas says "For the explanation of the entire chapter, three things need to be known beforehand: (1) what is prophecy, (2) how many kinds of prophecy are in Scripture, (3) what is speaking in tongues."
  • Prophecy is the sight or manifestation of future contingents or of things transcending human understanding
  • Four things are required for this
    • An image in the imagination which is the likeness of the thing shown
    • Intellectual light which allows the intellect to know beyond natural knowledge
      • Nebuchadnezzar and Pharoah had dreams but were not prophets; Daniel and Joseph interpreted the dreams and were prophets
    • Courage to announce the things revealed
    • Working of miracles which lends certitude for prophecy
  • Prophets differ inasmuch as they possess these four things differently
  • The prophecy referred to in this chapter belongs to one who "has the intellectual light to explain imaginary visions made to himself or someone else"
  • The gift of tongues is the actual speaking of foreign languages
  • As for this chapter, "When the Apostle mentions here about speaking in a tongue, he means an unknown language not interpreted; as when one might speak German to a Frenchman without an interpreter, he is speaking in a tongues. Hence, all speech neither understood nor explained, no matter what it is, is properly called speaking in a tongue." St Thomas says "whatever speech" because any speech that is truly such (and not just noise) has some meaning, whether it is known or not.
What is meant by speaking in tongues becomes more clear when he comments on verse 5 (I'm paraphrasing):
  • He says that men are sometimes moved by the Holy Spirit to speak something mystical, which they do not understand--this person has the gift of tongues
  • One who speaks in tongues and interpret is better than one who is prophet--because to interpret difficult things is what the prophet does (so St Thomas here seems to identify the prophet and the interpreter of tongues); so such a one is both a prophet and has the gift of tongues
In verse 6, St Paul talks about his own gift to speak in tongues:
  • This can mean either foreign languages or any speech (sign) that is not understood
  • Things about which Paul speaks:
    • revelation, by which the mind is enlightened to know divine things
    • knowledge, that is, about earthly things that leads to building up of faith (Thomas interestingly excludes geometry and astronomy...)
    • prophecy, which is about future events (this is more particular than the sense above)
    • doctrine, which is about moral acts
He finishes his account of verse 11 by exhorting us, "Don't be barbarians to one another."

That's all I'm going to do for now. I'll probably write more on this later.

Saturday, September 21, 2013

Charismatic Gifts, Division of 1 Corinthians 12

Recently I've talked with many who associate themselves with the "charismatic" movement in the Church. Seeking clarity in understanding, I go to St. Thomas to see what he has to say... The following is from his commentary on First Corinthians, the place in Scripture that deals most with the charismata. Outlines will now commence.

After the greeting, the main division is:
  • Things pertaining to all: the sacraments (ch. 1-15)
  • Things pertaining to some (ch. 16)
Under that first heading is considered:
  • The sacraments themselves (1-11)
    • Baptism (1-4)
    • Matrimony (5-7)
    • Eucharist (8-11)
  • The thing signified and contained by them: grace (12-14)
    • Charismatic graces (12)
    • Charity, which is prefered above all these (13)
    • Comparison of charismatic graces (14)
  • The thing signified but not contained: glory (15)
All right, things to notice: Whoever would have characterized the sacraments as the main purpose and the ordering principle of this whole letter? This is intersting and worth considering more later. As for our present purposes (which are chapters 12-14), we should probably note one translation detail.

What the translator calls "charismatic graces" are called "gratiis gratis data" by St. Thomas. Graces given by grace? Another translation I found was "gratuitous graces", which means about the same. The word "charismatic" comes from the Greek for gift or grace, so that's probably a good translation too. I'll keep calling them "charismatic graces", since that's easier and more normal sounding than the Latin or the phrase "gratuitous graces". Also, it will hopefully have a connection with what is meant by those in the charismatic movement.

Now the whole commentary on chapter 12 is about 20 pages (really 10, since the pages are Latin/English). First, I'm going to just copy and paste the text, outlining according to St. Thomas. This could be messy. I will provide explanation within it, in brackets. And I'll probably break up the outline as convenience requires.

  • [He states his intention]
    • 1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be uninformed.  
  • [He follow his intention]
    • [He shows the need for spiritual graces]
      • 2 You know that when you were heathen, you were led astray to dumb idols, however you may have been moved.  
      • 3 Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God ever says "Jesus be cursed!" and no one can say "Jesus is Lord" except by the Holy Spirit.  
    • [He presents the distribution of graces, v. 7-31]

[Distribution of graces]
4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5 and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; 6 and there are varieties of working, but it is the same God who inspires them all in every one. 
  • [Manifestation of the division of graces]
    • [Division of specific graces]
      • [Lays down condition of charimatic graces]
        • 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.  
      • [Distinguishes them, v. 8-10] 
      • [Describes their action, responds to errors]
        • 11 All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.
    • [He applies a likeness]
      • 12 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body--Jews or Greeks, slaves or free--and all were made to drink of one Spirit. 14 For the body does not consist of one member but of many. 15 If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. 16 And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? 18 But as it is, God arranged the organs in the body, each one of them, as he chose. 19 If all were a single organ, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. 21 The eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you," nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you." 22 On the contrary, the parts of the body which seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23 and those parts of the body which we think less honorable we invest with the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, 24 which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior part, 25 that there may be no discord in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. 26 If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together. 27 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.
  • [Division of operations {ministrationum}]
    • [Assigns order of ministries]
      • [Principal ministries]
        • 28 And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers,
      • [Secondary ministries]
        • helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues.
    • [Manifests distinctions among them]
      • 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?
    • [Orders their affections for ministries and graces]
      • 31 But earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way.
Charismatic graces are ordered to the salvation of men. Only God can work this internally, but men can aid in this only by outwardly persuading.
[Distinction of specific graces, 12:8-10]
  • [Faculty of persuading]
    • [about divine things] 8 To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom,
    • [about creatures] and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit,
    • [about matters of faith] 9 to another faith by the same Spirit,
  • [Faculty of confirming persuasion through divine signs]
    • [Something only God can do]
      • [with benefit] to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit,
      • [without benefit] 10 to another the working of miracles,
    • [Something only God can know]
      • [future contingents] to another prophecy,
      • [the human heart] to another the ability to distinguish between spirits,
  • [Faculty of proposing persuasion intelligibly]
      • [to overcome language barrier] to another various kinds of tongues,
      • [to explain what is obscure in Scripture] to another the interpretation of tongues.
Later, I will probably gather together key passages on understanding the charismatic gifts in general. Verses 7-10 in this chapter are probably the most important for understanding the charismatic gifts in themselves, but chapter 13 is most important for understanding their worth--which is subordinate to that of charity. Most of chapter 13 is spent showing that charity (1) avoids all evil and (2) accomplishes much good. And he then considers the vision of God.

Chapter 14 and its commentary is somewhat longer, but goes into detail about two particular charismata: prophecy and speaking in tongues, comparing the two and explaining their proper use.

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

St. Thomas' Division of Scripture


[I'm taking this text, with a few minor corrections, from http://dhspriory.org/thomas/Principium.htm (I didn't see a copyright...). My reason for copying it here is to manifest the divisions, by formatting them with bullet points. Just a small visual aid.]
This is the book of the commandments of God, and the law that is for ever. All that keep it shall come to life: but they that have forsaken it, to death. — Baruch 4.1
According to Augustine in On Christian Doctrine 4:12 one skilled in speech should so speak as
to teach, to delight and to change; that is,
  • to teach the ignorant, 
  • to delight the bored 
  • and to change the lazy. 
The speech of Sacred Scripture does these three things in the fullest manner. 
  • For it firmly teaches with its eternal truth. Psalm 118:89: ‘Your word, O Lord, stands firm for ever as heaven.’ 
  • And it sweetly delights with its pleasantness. Psalm 118.103: ‘How sweet are your words to my mouth!’ 
  • And it efficaciously changes with its authority. Jeremiah 23:29: ‘Are my words not like fire, says the Lord?’
Therefore in the text above Sacred Scripture is commended for three things.
  • First, for the authority with which it changes: ‘This is the book of the commandments of God.’ 
  • Second, for the eternal truth with which it instructs, when it says, ‘and the law that is for ever’. 
  • Third, for the usefulness with which it entices, when it says, ‘All that keep it shall come to life.’
The authority of this Scripture is shown in three things.
  • First, its origin, because God is its origin. Hence it says, the commandments of God’. Baruch 3.37: ‘He found out all the way of knowledge.’ Hebrews 2:3: ‘For it was first announced by the Lord and was confirmed unto us.’ Such an author is infallibly to be believed, both 
    • on account of the condition of his nature, because he is truth; John 14:4: ‘I am the way and the truth and the life.’ 
    • And on account of his fullness of knowledge; Romans 11:33: ‘Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God!’ 
    • And also on account of the power of the words; Hebrews 4:12: ‘For the word of God is living and efficient and keener than any two-edged sword.’
  • Second, it is shown to be efficacious by the necessity with which it is imposed. Mark 16.16: ‘He who does not believe shall be condemned.’ The truth of Sacred Scripture is proposed in the manner of a precept, hence the text says, ‘the commandments of God’. These commandments 
    • direct the intellect through faith: ‘You believe in God, believe also in me’, John 14:1; 
    • inform the affections with love: ‘This is my commandment, that you love one another’, John 15:12; 
    • and induce to action: ‘Do this and you shall live’, Luke 10:28.
  • Third, it is shown to be efficacious by the uniformity of its sayings, because all who teach the sacred doctrine teach the same thing. 1 Corinthians 15:11: ‘Whether then it is I or they, so we preach, and so you have believed.’ And this is necessary because 
    • they all had one teacher. Matthew 23:8: ‘Your teacher is one.’ 
    • And they had one spirit, ‘Have we not walked in the same spirit?’ 
    • and one love from above, ‘Now the multitude of believers were of one heart and one soul’ (Acts 4:32). Therefore, as a sign of the uniformity of doctrine, it says significantly, ‘This is the book.’
The truth of this teaching of Scripture is immutable and eternal, hence the words, ‘and the law that is for ever’. Luke 21.33: ‘Heaven and earth will pass away but my words shall not pass away.’ This law will endure for ever because of three things:
  • First, because of the power of the lawgiver. Isaiah 14:27: ‘For the Lord of hosts hath decreed, and who can disannul it.’ 
  • Second, on account of his immutability. Malachi 3:6: ‘For I am the Lord and I do not change’; Numbers 23:19: ‘God is not a man, that he should lie: nor like the son of man, that he should be changed.’ 
  • Third, because of the truth of the law. Psalm 118:86: ‘All your commandments are faithful.’ Proverbs 12:19: ‘The lip of truth shall be steadfast for ever.’ 3 Ezra 4:38: ‘Truth remains and gathers strength eternally.’
The usefulness of this Scripture is the greatest: ‘I am the Lord your God who teaches you profitable things.’ Hence our text continues: ‘All who keep it shall come to life.’ Which indeed is threefold:
  • First it is the life of grace, to which Sacred Scripture disposes. John 6:64: ‘The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.’ For through this life the spirit lives in God. Galatians 2:20: ‘It is now no longer I that live, but Christ lives in me.’ 
  • Second is the life of justice consisting in works, to which Sacred Scripture directs. Psalm 118.93: ‘Your decrees I will never forget, for by them you have given me life.’ 
  • Third is the life of glory which Sacred Scripture promises and to which it leads. John 6.69: ‘Lord, to whom shall we go? you have the words of everlasting life.’ John 20:31: ‘But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.’
The Division of Sacred Scripture
Sacred Scripture leads to this life in two ways, by commanding and by helping.
  • Commanding through the mandates which it proposes, which belong to the Old Testament. Sirach 24-33: ‘Moses commanded a law in the precepts of justice.’ 
  • Helping, through the gift of grace which the lawgiver dispenses, which pertains to the New Testament. Both of these are touched on in John 1:17: ‘For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.’
Hence the whole of Sacred Scripture is divided into two principal parts, the Old and New Testaments, which are mentioned in Matthew 13:52: ‘So then every Scribe instructed in the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings forth from his storeroom things new and old.’ And Song of Songs 7:13: ‘In our gates are all fruits, the new and the old, my beloved, I have kept for you.’
The Old Testament is divided according to the teaching of the commandments, for the commandment is of two kinds, the binding and the warning.
  • The binding is the command of a king who can punish transgressors. Proverbs 20:2: ‘As the roaring of a lion, so also is the dread of a king.’ 
  • But a warning is the precept of a father who must teach. Sirach 7:25: ‘Do you have you children? Instruct them.’ 
The precept of a king is of two kinds,
  • one which establishes the laws, 
  • another which induces to observance of the law, which is customarily done through his heralds and ambassadors. 
Thus it is that three kinds of command are distinguished,
  • that of the king, 
  • that of the herald 
  • and that of the father. 
On this basis the Old Testament is subdivided into three parts, according to Jerome in his prologue to the Book of Kings.
  • The first part is contained in the law which is proposed by the king himself. Isaiah 33:22: ‘For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our King.’
  • The second is contained in the Prophets who were, as it were, ambassadors and heralds of God, speaking to the people in the person of God, and urging them to observance of the law. Haggai 11:13: ‘And Haggai, the messenger of the Lord, as one of the messengers of the Lord, spoke.’
  • The third is contained in the works of hagiographers, writers who were inspired by the Holy Spirit and spoke as for themselves and not for God. Hence they are called saintly writers because they were writers of the sacred, agios meaning ‘sacred’, and graphia meaning ‘scripture’. Thus the precepts found in them are paternal. As is evident in Proverbs 6:20: ‘My son, keep the commandments of your father.’
  • Jerome mentions a fourth kind of book, namely, the apocryphal, so called from apo, that is, ‘especially’, and cryphon, that is, ‘obscure’, because there is doubt about their contents and authors. The Catholic Church includes among the books of Sacred Scripture some whose teachings are not doubted, but whose authors are. Not that the authors are unknown, but because these men were not of known authority. Hence they do not have force from the authority of the authors but rather from their reception by the Church. Because there is the same manner of speaking in them and in the hagiographical works, they are for now counted among them.
The first part, which contains the law, is divided into two parts, insofar as there are two kinds of law, public and private.
  • A private law is imposed for the observance of one person or one family. Such law is contained in Genesis, as is evident from the first precept given to man, ‘But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil ‘you shalt not eat’ (2:17), and to Noah, ‘Saving that flesh with blood you shall not eat’ (9:4), and to Abraham, ‘And again God said to Abraham: And you therefore shalt keep my covenant, and your descendants after you in their generations’ (17:9).
  • The public law is that which is given to the people. For the divine law was given to the Jewish people through a mediator, because it was not fitting that the people should receive it immediately from God. Deuteronomy 5:5: ‘I was the mediator and stood between the Lord and You and at that time to show you his words.’ Galatians 3.19: ‘What then was the Law? It was enacted on account of transgressors, being delivered by angels through a mediator.’Thus a twofold level is found in legislation. 
    • First, when the law comes from the Lord to the mediator, and this pertains to three books, Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. Hence we frequently read in them, ‘God spoke to Moses.’ 
    • Second, when the law is given to the people by the mediator, and this pertains to Deuteronomy, as is evident from its very beginning, ‘These are the words which Moses spoke to all Israel.’
These three books are distinguished by the three things in which a people should be ordered.
  • First, precepts bearing on equity of judgement, and this is found in Exodus
  • Second, in sacraments with respect to the establishment of worship, and this in Leviticus
  • And third, in offices, with respect to the administration of the community, and this in Numbers.
The second part, which is the prophets, is subdivided insofar as a herald ought to do two things. He should
  • manifest the beneficence of the king, so that men will be inclined to obey, 
  • and he should declare the edict of the law.
There is a threefold divine beneficence that the prophets expose to the people.
  • First, the effect of heredity, and this in Joshua, of which Sirach 46:1 says, ‘Valiant in war was Joshua.’ 
  • Second, the destruction of armies, and this in the book of Judges, of whose destruction Psalm 82:10 says, ‘Do to them as to Midian, as to Sisera.’ 
  • Third, the exultation of the people, which is twofold, namely 
    • the private exaltation of one person, and this in Ruth
    • and a public which is of the whole people, and this in Kings, which benefice God grants to them. Ezekiel 16.13: ‘And you were adorned with gold and silver.’ For these books, according to Jerome, are placed in the rank of prophets.
In other books which are commonly said to be of the prophets, the prophets posed divine edicts for the observance of the law. And this is said,
  • first, in general, in the major prophets who were sent to the whole people and called for the observance of the whole law; 
  • second, in particular, and this in the minor prophets, different ones of whom were sent for different reasons to special tribes, as Hosea to the ten tribes, Joel to the old men of Israel, Jonah to the Ninevites, and so with the rest.
The major prophets differ according to the different ways the prophets sought to lead the people to observance of the law, namely, cajoling by the promise of benefits, frightening with the threat of punishment, arguing by condemnation of sins. Although each of these is found in every prophet,  
  • Isaiah chiefly cajoles, as is said in Sirach 48-27: ‘With a great spirit he saw the things that are come to pass at last, and comforted the mourners in Sion.’  
  • Jeremiah chiefly warns, hence Jeremiah 3 8-4: ‘He weakened the hands of the men of war that remain in this city.’ 
  • But Ezekiel argues and scolds. Ezekiel 16-3: ‘Your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite.’
They can be distinguished in another way, insofar as  
  • Isaiah chiefly foretells the mystery of the Incarnation, which is why he is read during the time of Advent by the Church, 
  • and Jeremiah the mystery of the Passion, hence he is read in Passiontide, 
  • and Ezekiel the mystery of the Resurrection, hence his book finishes with the raising of the bones and the repair of the temple.  
  • Daniel, however, is included among the prophets insofar as he predicted future events in a prophetic spirit; although he did not speak to the people in the person of the Lord, he dealt with the divinity of Christ. Thus the four prophets answer to the four evangelists, and also to the call to judgement.
The third part, which contains the hagiographic and the apocryphal books, is subdivided according to the two ways fathers instruct their sons in virtue, namely, by word and deed, since in morals examples are no less important than words.
  • Some teach by deed alone, 
  • some by word alone, 
  • some by word and deed.
By deed, however, in two ways.
  • One, instructing about the future by warning, and this in Joshua, whom Jerome places among the hagiographs. For although one is a prophet because of the gift of prophecy, this is not his office, because he was not sent by God to prophesy to the people. Hence what is said in Wisdom 8:8 can be applied to the prophet: ‘She knows signs and wonders before they are done.’ 
  • In another way, speaking of past events as examples of virtue. There are four principal virtues, namely 
    • justice, which serves the common good, an example of which is given in Chronicles, in which the condition of a whole people who were governed with justice is described. 
    • The second is temperance, an example of which is given in Judith, which is why Jerome says, ‘Take Judith as an example of the chaste widow.’ Judith 15. 11: ‘For you have acted manfully, and your heart has been strengthened, because you loved chastity.’ 
    • Third is fortitude, which has two attributes. 
      • To attack, and an example of this is found in the Book of Maccabees
      • and to endure, and an example of this is found in Tobit 2:12: ‘Now this trial the Lord therefore permitted to happen to him, that an example might be given to posterity of his patience.’ 
    • The fourth is prudence, 
      • by which dangers are avoided, and an example of this is given in Ezra. For in that book we are shown how Ezra and Nehemiah and other princes prudently guarded against the plots of enemies wishing to impede the building of the temple and the city. 
      • It also pertains to prudence wisely to repel the violent, and an example of this is given in Esther, where it is shown how Mordecai and Esther handled the deceptions of the most powerful Haman.
The hagiographical and apocryphal books which instruct by word, are divided insofar as words work in a twofold way to instruct,
  • in one way, by asking for the gift of wisdom. Wisdom 7:7: ‘Wherefore I have wished, and understanding was given me, and I called upon God, and the spirit of wisdom came upon me.’ This is how the Psalter instructs, speaking to God in prayer. 
  • In another way, by teaching wisdom, and this in two ways according to the twofold work of wisdom, 
    • one of which is to expose the liar, and Job who drove out errors by way of disputation exhibits this. Job 13.3-4: ‘But yet I will speak to the Almighty and I desire to reason with God, having first shown that you are forgers of lies and maintainers of perverse opinions.’ 
    • The other work is not to lie about what it knows, and thus we are instructed in a twofold way, because either wisdom is commended to us, and this in the book of Wisdom, or the precepts of wisdom are proposed, and this in the three books of Solomon, which indeed differ according to the three grades of virtue that Plotinus, in Enneads 1.1.2.2-7, distinguishes, since the precepts of wisdom ought to concern only the acts of virtue. 
      • In the first grade, according to him, are political virtues, whereby a man moderately uses the things of this world and lives among men, and this in the Proverbs
      • In the second grade are the purgative virtues, whereby a man regards the world with contempt, and this in Ecclesiastes, which aims at contempt of the world, as is clear from Jerome’s prologue. 
      • In the third grade are the virtues of the purged soul, whereby a man, wholly cleansed of worldly cares, delights in the contemplation of wisdom alone, and this is found in the Song of Songs
      • In the fourth grade are the exemplar virtues existing in God, concerning which precepts of wisdom are not given but are rather derived from them.
In word and in deed Sirach instructs. Hence the precepts of wisdom in praise of fathers close his book, as is clear in Chapter 44 and after.

The New Testament, which is ordered to eternal life not only through precepts but also through the gifts of grace, is divided into three parts.
  • In the first the origin of grace is treated, in the Gospels. 
  • in the second, the power of grace, and this in the epistles of Paul, hence he begins in the power of the Gospel, in Romans 1:16 saying, ‘For I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes.’ 
  • In the third, the execution of the aforesaid virtues is treated, and this in the rest of the books of the New Testament.
Christ is the origin of grace. John 1:16-17: ‘And of his fullness we have all received, grace for grace. For the Law was given through Moses: grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.’ In Christ a twofold nature is to be considered,
  • a divine, and the Gospel of John is chiefly concerned with this, hence he begins, ‘In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.’ 
  • And a human, and the other Gospels treat chiefly of this, and they are distinguished according to the threefold dignity that belongs to the man Christ. 
    • With respect to his royal honour, Matthew speaks. Hence in the beginning of his Gospel he shows that Christ descended from kings and was adored by the Magi kings. 
    • With respect to his prophetic honour, Mark speaks, hence he begins with the preaching of the Gospel. 
    • With respect to his priestly dignity, Luke speaks, and he begins with the temple and the priesthood and ends his Gospel in the temple, and frequently returns to the temple, as the Gloss says about Luke 2.46: ‘And they found him sitting in the temple in the midst of the teachers.’
In another way,
  • Matthew might be said to speak of Christ chiefly with respect to the mystery of the Incarnation, and thus he is depicted in the figure of a man.  
  • Luke, with respect to the mystery of the Passion, and therefore he is depicted as a bull, which is an animal to be immolated.  
  • Mark, with respect to the victory of the Resurrection, and thus he is depicted as a lion. 
  • But John, who soars to the heights of his divinity, is depicted as an eagle.
[The part dealing with the power of grace as exemplified in the epistles of Paul is missing from the text, but this outline is given at the beginning of his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans.]
The execution of the power of grace is shown in the progress of the Church, in which there are three things to consider.
  • First, the beginning of the Church, and this is treated in the Acts of the Apostles, hence Jerome says, in his preface to the Pentateuch, that ‘The Acts of the Apostles seem to give the bare history of the birth and to clothe the infant Church.’ 
  • Second, the progress of the Church, and to this is ordered the apostolic instruction of the canonical epistles
  • Third, the end of the Church, with which the whole content of Scripture concludes in the Apocalypse, with the spouse in the abode of Jesus Christ sharing the life of glory, to which Jesus Christ himself conducts, and may he be blessed for ever and ever. Amen.

Wednesday, June 5, 2013

Further division of the first 10 Psalms

After seeing St. Thomas' neat division of the Psalms, I wondered just how well his division really works in characterizing the Psalms in each section. So naturally I looked to his commentary on the first Psalm to see if he further divides the first chunk of 10, but alas there did not appear to be a further division. Somewhat disappointed, I moved on. Today I happened to open his commentary on the second Psalm and behold, I found the division. I should have paid more attention to the first line of the commentary on 1: "This Psalm is distinguished against the whole work, for it does not have a title but is (as it were) the title of the whole work." So Psalm 2 is where the division becomes effective.

  • State and process of the human kind in general (1)
  • Tribulations of man (2-10)
    • Invokes divine help against tribulations (2-7)
    • Gives thanks for being heard (8-9)
      • Thanks for all given to whole human race (8)
      • Thanks for what is given to him be destruction of his enemies
    • He shows the confidence received (10)

  • In tribulations, a man prays for 2 reasons
    • That he might be freed (2-6)
    • That his enemies might decrease (7)
  •  In praying that he might be freed
    • Implores help against those troubling him openly (2-4)
      • Recalls their machinations (2)
      • Implores help against those rising up now (3)
      • Trusting he is heard, he invites others to trust God (4)
    • Implores help against those trying to deceive him (5-6)
      • He prays against them (5)
      • He prays his fall might be fixed (6)
Rereading the Psalms with these things in mind, in looks as though this outline does indeed capture the shape of the Psalms. The difficulty is that so many other things are mentioned in the Psalms that it is hard to say what about it is distinctive enough to characterize its place within the larger division. For example, 7 is supposed to be about the punishment of the enemies. The first part asks to be saved from them, the next is about how he should be punished if he has done wrong, and then the rest is about that. Hm, I suppose that's plenty. Even the part where he says "if I have done wrong," this is showing that he does not want his enemies to suffer because he is malicious, but because he loves justice, willing to suffer the same if he deserves it. The division also makes some sense out of Psalm 8's place. Within the first 80 or so Psalms, only a few manage to go the whole way through without mentioning enemies of some sort. Psalm 8 just barely mentions them, "thou hast founded a bulwark because of thy foes, to still the enemy and the avenger."

One more interesting note. St. Thomas says in his commentary on 6 that each of the Penitential Psalms corresponds to one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Surely you have seven and seven, but it would take more reading to see how they relate (St. Thomas is not more specific).

Friday, May 24, 2013

St. Thomas' Division of Matthew

He starts with this major division:
  • Entrance of Christ's humanity into the world (1-2)
    • Generation (1)
    • Manifestation of his generation (2)
  • His course of life (3-20)
    • Preparation for teaching  (4)
      • Baptism
      • Temptation
    • Teaching itself (5-20)
      • Doctrine of Christ (5-12)
      • Power of this doctrine (13-16)
      • The end to which it leads (17-20)
  • His departure (21-28)
    • Certain preambles (21-25)
      • Provocation of persecutors (21-23)
        • Provoked by his glory (21)
        • Provoked by his knowledge  (22)
        • Provoked by his justice (23)
      • Strengthening of disciples (24)
      • Judgment (25, he starts talking about this in 24)
    • Passion of Christ (26-27)
      • Things done to him by the Jews (26)
      • Things done to him by the Gentiles (27)
    • Triumph of the Lord's Resurrection (28)
Just so as not to make the table too big, the further subdivision of the section on his teaching itself will be below:
  • Doctrine of Christ (5-12)
    • Doctrine for all (5-9)
      •  Proposed in words (5-7)
      • Confirmed through miracles (8-9)
        • By which men are freed from bodily evils (8)
        • And from spiritual evils (9)
    • Institution/instruction of ministers (10)
    • Refutation of adversaries (11-12)
  • Power of this Doctrine (13-16)
    • Shown in words (13)
    • Shown in deeds (14-16)
      • ostendit ad quos effectus se extendat per similitudinem factorum (14)
      • ostendit sufficientiam evangelicae doctrinae (15)
      • quomodo in puritate conservanda sit (16)
  • End to which it leads: future glory (17-20)
    • Demonstrated in Transfiguration (17)
    • Departure to future glory (18-20)
      • How one is to come to it (18-19)
        • The common way (18)
        • The way of perfection (19)
      • Reprehends those who seek it inordinately (20)
That's about as orderly as it gets. Eventually, I will have to take the time to read his commentary in full as it is still not clear to me all of those parts of that Gospel are about what he says it is. It would be worth the time it takes to reread the whole Gospel of Matthew with this division in mind.

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Divisio Textus for Exodus

Given that the text is called Exodus, or the "going out", perhaps it would be fitting to divide the text according to the leavings that occur in it. A few come to mind right away: Moses going out from his mother at the beginning, Moses going out of Egypt near the beginning, (then after returning) Moses and all of the Israelites going out of Egypt (the central event), and then Moses going out from the people to see the Lord and going out from the Lord to teach and govern the people (this happens several times, but the most important one is probably when he encounters the idolatry of the people).
  • Israel in Egypt (1-14)
  • Israel out of Egypt (15-40)
All right, that's seems like the most significant divide. Often a story is characterized by the major conflict in it: these two parts have different conflicts. The first one is Pharaoh against Moses and the Lord, the second one is the chosen people against Moses and the Lord. Yet this conflict ends after the sorrow with the Golden Calf, so that may be the next place to make a division. Let's see... At chapter 19, "on the third new moon" is when the Israelites have reached the wilderness of Sinai. If my Hebrew Calendar reading skills are working correctly, that means it is 40 days between leaving Egypt and entering Sinai. Then later on in chapter 24 it says that "Moses was on the mountain 40 days and 40 nights" (v. 18). Then chapter 32 is the Calf incident. Then he goes back up the mountain and is there another 40 days and nights (34:28). At the end of that chapter he comes back down and the work on the tabernacle is begun, and finally erected at the beginning of the second year. So:
  • Exodus to Sinai: 40 days (15-18)
    • Moses and the people sing (15)
    • The Lord feeds the people with manna and quail (16)
    • The Lord gives water; war with Amalek (17)
    • Jethro counsels the institution of judges
  • First Ascent of Mount Sinai: 40 days (19-31)
    • Approach (19)
    • Spoken to all:
      • 10 Commandments (20:1-20)
    • Spoken to Moses:
      • Instructions about idolatry and an altar of earth (20:21-26)
      • More ordinances (21-23)
        • About slaves (21:1-11)
        • About civil matters, with punishments (21:12-22:19)
        • About religious matters, no punishments by men (22:20-23:33)
    • Moses, Aaron, and Aaron's sons worship (24:1-11)
    • Moses returns to the Lord alone (24:12-18)
      • Tabernacle instructions (25-31)
  • Golden Calf (32)
  • Second Ascent of Mount Sinai: 40 days (33-34)
    • Moses argues for the people and sees God (33)
    • God renews the covenant with Moses and gives laws pertaining to worship (34:1-28)
    • Moses returns, glowing from his encounter with the Lord (34:29-35)
  • Building the Tabernacle (35-40)
Before the first ascent there are all sorts of conflict: the people are hungry and thirsty and they wish they had never left Egypt in the first place. This conflict reaches its peak in Golden Calf, where they commit the greatest sin against God and 3000 of them are slain. This is the end of the conflict, for when Moses next asks something of the people for the Lord, they give him far more than is needed. Now to go back to the first part of Exodus, here is a basic division, just for the sake of completion:
  • The Exposition
    • Pharaoh oppresses the Hebrews (1)
    • Moses leaves Egypt (2)
    • Moses meets the Lord (3-4)
      • "I am who am."
  • The Execution
    • Moses and Pharaoh (5-10)
    • The institution of Passover (11-13)
    • The Exodus (14)
That division could probably use some further explanation, but it gives some immediate intelligibility to the text. If the Exodus (the chosen people leaving Egypt) is the central event in the book, then the text should be divided around that. "The Exposition" involves events necessary for that Exodus, yet one would not say it had in anyway begun, since Moses (the Lord's chosen instrument of the Exodus) is not in the place of oppression for most of it. Once Moses is back in Egypt, the Exodus is his sole concern. After chapter 10, Moses no longer speaks to Pharaoh, so that seemed like a fair place for the next division. Also, the Passover (which is the perpetual commemoration of the Exodus) is a significant enough event to merit its own place. To divide further, a natural spot would be when the plagues begin, which is also after a genealogy (the main feature which divides the Book of Genesis). There is a very brief genealogy of Moses in chapter 18 which precedes the third new moon, so it is possible that the genealogies here are also meant to divide.

To talk about the significance of this whole book in the light of Christ would take a long time. That the Exodus is the chief sign of our redemption from the Old Testament is emphasized by the current Easter Vigil liturgy which has the following instruction:
"At least three readings should beread from the Old Testament, both from the Law and from the Prophets, and their respective Responsorial Psalms should be sung. Never, moreover, should the reading of chapter 14 of Exodus with its canticle [Ex. 15] be omitted." (Roman Missal, 3rd Edition, p. 364)
There is plenty to be said about Christ being our Paschal (i.e. Passover) lamb and the first-born of all creation (Col. 1:15). There is the revelation of the Lord's name and the gift of the 10 commandments. It seems one could use the Book of Exodus in its entirety as a guide for putting together a rather complete Catechism which would cover the main aspects any Catechism needs to cover (Creed, Sacraments, Commandments, Prayer).

Perhaps some of the most obscure (and seemingly obsolete) parts are those concerning the ordination of the priests or construction of the tabernacle. This will seem the case to anyone not aware that everything in the Old Testament is a sign pointing to the New Covenant. The following page has articles from St. Thomas are great for at least the beginning of an explanation of such texts:
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/2102.htm
Article 4 for the tabernacle and Article 5 for the laws concerning the priesthood are the ones in particular that I have in mind. The bodies of those article give a general reason for why there are such commandments, but then in the replies to the objections there are many particular reasons (both literal and spiritual) for each individual precept and instruction.

The 10 commandments and the revelation of the Lord's name are each wonderful for many reasons. The 10 commandments lay out the principles of our entire moral life (practical philosophy) and the Lord's name teaches us about how entirely other God is from every other creature (speculative philosophy). To write on these extensively would be to write about the whole of philosophy.

The next division I write up will be the Gospel of Matthew and then, some time later, the Book of Leviticus.

Saturday, May 18, 2013

St. Thomas' Proem to the Psalms

Causes of the Book of Psalms
  • material: all of theology; and since all divinity is found in Christ, the matter of this book is Christ and his members
    • creation
    • governance
    • reparation, that is, Christ
    • glorification
  • form or mode: deprecative/laudative
    • He gives other modes used in Scripture: narrative, hortatory, dispute
  • end: prayer, i.e, the raising of man's mind to God (done in 4 ways)
    • admire the loftiness of his power
    • excellence of eternal beatitude
    • divine goodness and holiness
    • divine justice
  • agent/author: the Holy Spirit
He then makes other divisions and explanations: four ways in which this book is the word of glory, three ways of prophecy, three translations available. He lays down an important rule from St. Jerome, namely, that "events are to be expounded as prefiguring something about Christ or the Church." He says this after bringing up a council which rejected as heresy the position that these Psalms do not speak explicitly about Christ.

 St. Thomas then looks at 3 ways of dividing the Psalms.
  • The first is by dividing them into 70 and 80, numbers which come from 7 and 8. 7 signifies the present life, and 8 the next life. Again, 7 signifies the Old Law (for they observe the 7th day) and 8 signifies the New Law (which observes the 8th day)
  • The second is the five-book division discussed in the earlier post: he basically disregards it
  • The third is a threefold division into 50 psalms each, corresponding to the three states of the faithful: penance, justice, and eternal glory
  • The state of penance is signified by the tribulations suffered by David
    • Twofold attack and tribulation is prayed against
      • Attack against the entire people of God (Ps. 41-50)
      • Attack against the just man
        • By persecutors in temporal order
          • From special persons
            • Absalom, i.e., loved ones (Ps. 1-10)
            • Saul, i.e., outsiders (Ps. 11-20)
          • From the whole people (Ps. 21-30)
        • By those who live unjustly (Ps. 31-40)
 Well, that's the division he gives of the first 50. Thankfully, he wrote a commentary on the Psalms through 54, so we have his division of the next 50 as well (in his commentary on psalm 51). Even without that, it will take some time going through the psalms more carefully to see if what St. Thomas says corresponds well to the text. Certainly I had noticed a theme of tribulation. It always seemed like there was a just man (perhaps a sinner in need, but one who trusted God), some sort of enemy, and then God.

Before closing this, it is worth remembering the end of the Psalms: to raise the mind to God, to be united with him. Let us pray for this end.

A bonus text from St. Gregory the Great on Ezekiel, related to the heart: "the voice of psalmody if it is done with the intention of the heart, prepares the way for almighty God through it to the heart, so that he may pour in mysteries or the grace of compunction, by an intent soul or prophecy."

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

Outline of De ente, Chapters 5 and 6



Chapter 5: Further conclusions

About God
  • [1] Some philosophers say God does not have any essence
    • This is because his essence is not other than his existence
  • [1] God is not in a genus
    • Things in a genus have a common nature, but a diverse existence
    • Since God's nature and existence are the same, he cannot have a common nature and a diverse existence
    • Therefore, God is not in a genus
  • [2] God is existence only, but this does not mean he is the existence of any given thing
    • The existence of God is such that no addition can be made to it
    • The common existence, although it does not include any addition in its account, it also does not exclude it
    • Therefore, the existence of God is not the common existence
  • [3] God has all perfections

About creatures
  • [4] Intellectuals substances are finite and infinite in different ways
    • They are finite insofar as their existence is received and therefore limited by the capacity of their nature, "finite from above"
    • They are infinite insofar as they are not limited or cut off by being received into matter, "infinite from below"
  • [4] Individuation never ceases in the human soul
    • Individuation of the human soul depends on the body for its origin
    • Once the human soul begins to exist at all (that is, once it has "absolute existence"), it acquires its own individuated existence
    • This existence always remains individuated
  • [5] Genus, species, and difference are found in separated substances on account of their essence being other than their existence; yet the proper accidents belonging to them are unknown to us
  • [6-7] How the genus/species in separated substances differ from in composed substances
    • In composed substances
      • Genus is taken from what is material in the essence
      • Difference is taken from what is formal in the essence
    • In separated substances
      • Difference cannot be taken from part of the essence, but must be taken from the whole essence
      • Genus is also taken from the whole essence, but in a different way
      • Genus is taken from what is common among separated substances, namely, from their immateriality and what follows up it, such as intellectuality
      • Difference is taken from what is diverse in them, namely, from the various grades of perfection; not just any perfections, but ones belonging to the species themselves (just as animals have a higher grade of perfection than plants)
  • [8] Essence as found in composed things

Chapter 6: How essence exists in accidents
  • [1] How accidents exist, and how this differs from substance
    • Accidents do not have existence through themselves but only through a subject; this is unlike substances which do not exist in a subject
  • [1] Essence in accidental and substantial forms are alike
    • This is because they both have incomplete definitions
    • Their definitions are incomplete inasmuch as the definition of an accidental form requires the subject in which the accident exists, and the definition of a substantial form requires the matter in which it exists (just as the body is in the definition of the soul)
  • [2] Essence in accidental and substantial forms are unlike
    • The substantial form of itself does not have existence apart from that to which it comes (some matter), yet when it is conjoined to matter, an essence begins to be since the substantial form is part of a complete essence
    • The accidental form comes to a being which is already complete in itself; therefore, the accident does not cause the existence of the subsisting thing to which it comes, but gives it a "second existence" and only causes something which is accidentally one; nor is an accident part of a complete essence
  • [3] All accidents are caused by substances
    • That which is most of all and most truly in any genus is the cause of those that are it in that genus (e.g. fire is the cause of heat in other things)
    • Substance, most of all and most truly having essence, are first in the genus of being, and therefore are the cause of accidents which have being in a secondary way

[The rest of chapter 6 is omitted, since it will probably not be on the final.]

Tuesday, April 30, 2013

De ente Outline, Chapter 4



Chapter 4: How essence exists in separated substances

  • [1] Intelligences are not composed of matter and form
    • This is repugnant: They are called "separated" substances, that is, separated from matter
    • A demonstration that they are immaterial
      • Forms are not intelligible in act except when separated from matter and its conditions
      • Nor are they intelligible except through the power of an understanding substance
      • Therefore, an understanding substance must be free from matter and its conditions
  • [2] One cannot even say there is a special kind of matter that belongs to intelligences
    • If unintelligibility belonged to matter insofar as it was bodily matter, then it would belong to bodily matter in virtue of some bodily form
    • But form is the principle of intelligibility in things, and even the bodily form is intelligible when separated from matter
    • Therefore, unintelligibility belongs to matter itself
    • And therefore, intelligences do not have any matter
  • [3] It is possible for forms to exist without matter
    • Whatever things are such that one is the cause of existence in the other, that one is able to exist without the other (this is not convertible)
    • Form and matter are such that form gives existence to the matter; therefore, matter cannot exist without form but form can exist without matter
  • [4] Differences between the essences of composed and simple substances
    • Main difference:
      • Essence of composed substance contains both form and matter
      • Essence of simple substance is only the form
    • First consequent difference:
      • Essence of composed substance can be signified as whole (man) or part (humanity); and only as it is signified as whole can it be predicated of individual (Pete is a man, but Pete is not humanity)
      • Essence of simple substance can only be signified as whole, for there is no other part to which the essence would stand (as form stands to matter in the composed)
    • Second consequent difference:
      • Essences of composed things are multiplied according to the division of designated matter; there can be many individuals in one species
      • Essences of simple substances cannot be received into matter and therefore cannot be multiplied; there is only one individual of each species
  • [5] Existence (esse) is not part of every essence
    • No essence can be understood without those things that are parts of its essence
    • However, every essence can be understood without understanding anything of its existence (e.g. one can consider man without considering his existence)
    • Therefore, existence is something other than essence
      (except for the following...)
  • [5] There is at most one being which has its existence the same with its essence
    • Multiplication comes about in the following ways
      • Addition of a difference (as nature of genus is multiplied into species)
      • Form is received into diverse matters (as nature of species multiplied into individuals)
    • Cannot be through the addition of a difference
      • If something were existence alone, then to add a difference would mean that it is no longer existence alone
    • Cannot be through the addition of matter
      • Then it would not be subsistent existence, but a material thing
    • Therefore, allowing that something is the same with its existence, there can only be one of these
  • [6] There is at least one being has its existence the same with its existence; a proof for God’s existence
    • Everything whose existence is other than its nature would have existence from another
    • Everything which has something through another is led back to one (as to a first cause) which has that something through itself
    • Therefore, there is something which is the cause of existence for all things that is existence itself
    • Otherwise, one would go on infinitely
    • (Note: Even though God is the same with his existence, this does not mean that his existence is self-evident to us. Since God’s essence is hidden to us, we can only learn through argument that God exists and that he is the same with his existence.)
  • [7] There is potency in separated substances (even without matter/form)
    • Everything that receives something is in potency with respect to that
    • That which has been received is the act of the one receiving
    • Therefore, the essence which is an intelligence is in potency to the existence which it received from God, and the received existence is its act
  • [8] There is a multitude of separated substances
    • It would be impossible for a multitude unless there were potency
    • The multitude is possible because there is a distinction between them according to grade of act and potency
      • The higher intelligence, closer to the first, has more of act and less of potency
      • One way of conceiving this is that by one concept, many things are understood; and the higher the intellect, the more can be understood through a single concept
      • The extremes of this are man, who must join his concepts and use arguments to go from considering one thing to another, and God, who understands all things through one concept
  • [9] On the act and potency in the human soul and material things

De ente Outline, Chapter 3



Chapter 3: How the logical intentions (genus, species, difference) belong to essence

  • [1] How universal notions (genus, species) are in an essence
    • It is impossible that a universal notion belong to the essence as signified through mode of part (“humanity”)
    • It is impossible that universal notion belong to essence existing outside the singulars (as the Platonists say)
      • For then species/genus would not be said of the individual (e.g. one cannot say Socrates is that which is separated from him)
    • Therefore, universal notions belong to the essence as signified through the mode of a whole (such as “man”) since it implicitly contains the individuals
  • [2-3] Essence as signified through mode of whole can be considered in two ways
    • According to its proper notion (absolute consideration)
      • Nothing is true of this except what belongs to it insofar as it is this sort of thing; all else is a false attribution
      • e.g. rational belongs to man absolutely considered, white or black do not, one or many do not
    • According to the existence it has in this or that one
      • This allows accidental predication of it on account of that in which it is
      • e.g. man is white (since Socrates is white), though white does not belong to man as man
      • Essence in this way has a twofold existence
        • Either in singulars or in the soul
    • Nature of man absolutely considered does not include existence at all, but it also does not exclude it
    • This nature absolutely considered is predicated of individuals
  • [4] How the universal notion belongs to the essence (more precisely than in [1])
    • Universal notion does not belong to essence absolutely considered
      • For then, wherever humanity was found, commonness would be found; but commonness does not exist in individuals
    • Universal notion does not belong to essence according to the existence it has in individuals
      • For human nature is not found in individuals in its unity
    • Therefore, universal notion belongs to essence according to the existence it has in the understanding
  • [5] How the intellect abstracts from what is universal
  • [6] Although “Socrates is a man” and “Man is a species”, it is not true that “Socrates is a species”
    • For species does not belong to man according to the existence it has in Socrates or absolutely considered
    • Species belongs to man only as an accident consequent upon its existence in the intellect, but not to man as man
  • [7] How predicability is in the notion of a genus
  • [8] Summary

Thursday, April 25, 2013

Outline of De ente, Chapters 1 and 2



Prologue
  • “Small error in the beginning is a great one in the end.”
  • Outline
    • What is signified by “being/ens” and “essence”
    • How essence is found in diverse things
    • What it relates to the logical intentions (genus, species, difference)
  • Understanding should go from composed things to simple things
  • Therefore, we will consider ens and then essential

Chapter 1: What ens and essentia mean
  • [1] Ens per se is said in two ways
    • What is divided through the 10 genera
    • What signifies the truth of propsitions
  • The second way is said of anything (even “nothing” and “blindness”); the first way is only of what posits something in the thing
  • [2] “Essence” is from “ens” in the first way, and is that through which something is in its genus and species
  • [3] Other names for essence:
    • “Whatness/Quidditas,” since the genus and species tell what a thing is
    • “What it was to be,” that is, that through which something has it to be a what
    • “Form,” through form is signified the exactness of anything
    • “Nature,” taken to mean everything that can in any way be seized upon by the understanding, or it means the essence of thing as it is ordered to its proper operation
    • “Essence,” since through it and in it a being/ens has existence/esse
  • [4] Since ens is first said of substances, so essence is most properly in substances
    • Furthermore, essence is in composed and simple substances
    • But in the simple in a more noble way since they cause the composed ones
    • The simple essences are more hidden, so we begin with the composed

Chapter 2: How essence exists in composed substances
  • [1-2] What the essence of a composed thing is not
    • Not the matter alone
      • A thing is knowable and in its genus/species through essence
      • Matter is not a principle of cognition, nor does it place in genus/species
    • Not the form alone
      • Essence is signified by the definition of a thing, but natural things have matter in their definition (otherwise their definition would be like math definitions which do not have matter in them)
    • Therefore the essence comprehends matter and form
    • Not the relation between matter and form (or any other accident)
      • This would be an accident and extraneous, and would not make the thing known
      • Nor do accidents make a thing be simply, but only in a way (secundum quid); e.g. whiteness only makes a thing to be white, whereas the form makes a thing to be simply
  • [3] This account agrees with many philosophers and with reason

Important distinction: Designated and undesignated
  • [4] Difficulty: Since matter is the principle of individuation, it may seem that an essence that contains matter is only the essence of a particular; universals could not be defined
  • Solution:
    • Principle of individuation is not matter taken in any way
    • Principle of individuation is signate or designated matter, matter considered under determinate dimensions
    • This designated matter is not in the definition of man as man, but would be in the definition of Socrates
    • Undesignated matter is in the definition of man (not this bone or this flesh, but bone and flesh absolutely)
    • Therefore, the essence of man and Socrates do not differ except by according to the matter being designated (signate) or undesignated (non-signate)
  • [5] The essence of genus and species also differ according to designation, but not in the same way
    • Designation of an individual with respect to species is through matter under determinate dimensions
    • Designation of a species with respect to genus is through a difference taken from the form of the thing
      • Also, it is through something that is somehow in the genus
      • Whatever is in the species is in the genus in an indeterminate way
    • If this were not so, one could not predicate the genus of a species (e.g. one could not say man is an animal)
  • [6-7] Body is said in many ways
    • “Body” as it is in genus of substance (this is the sense taken below)
      • Said about that which has such a nature that the 3 dimensions can be designated in it
    • “Body” as it is in genus of quantity
      • Said about those 3 dimensions which can be designated in a body
    • “Body” can signify with precision
      • In this way, to add anything would put that thing outside of the signification of body; man would not a be a body in this sense
      • Body in this sense is therefore a part of a man (soul is the other part), and not the genus of man; in this sense, man has a body
    • “Body” can signify without precision
      • In this way, it signifies a certain thing that has such a form due to which 3 dimensions can be designated in it, but it allows that there be further perfections
      • Body in this sense will be the genus of animal and man, for it will implicitly contain everything in animal and man; in this sense, man is a body
  • [8] Animal stands to man in the same as body to animal

Genus, difference, species each signify the whole essence
  • [9] Genus, difference, species and definition signify the whole, but in diverse ways
    • Genus signifies whole as a certain denomination determining that which is material in the thing without a determination of the proper form
      • It is taken from matter, but is not matter
    • Difference signifies whole as a certain denomination taken determinately from the form
    • Definition or species signifies the whole and comprehends both the determinate matter (which genus designates) and the determinate form (which difference designates)
  • [10] Consequences
    • Man is a rational animal, but is not made up of rational and animal
    • Conversely, man is made up of body and soul, but is neither body nor soul (Taking body with precision, so that it is a component of man)
    • Man is only “composed” of rational and animal, inasmuch as the understanding of man is composed of the understanding of rational and the understanding of animal
    • [11] One genus predicated of many does not mean one essence in the many, for the unity of the genus is from indetermination
  • [12-14] How “humanity” and “man” signify the essence
    • Just as the genus signifies the whole species contained in it implicitly, so the species signifies indistinctly the whole that is essentially in the individual
    • “Man” can be predicated of an individual man, and it signifies the whole essence through the mode of a whole
    • “Humanity” signifies the whole essence through the mode of a part, for it signifies that by which a man is a man
      • Since individuated matted is not that by which a man is a man, it is not included in the signification of the word “humanity”; for this reason, it cannot predicated of an individual man