Young Thomas Aquinas Goes to Sunday School

"Come on, Tommy boy! Sing with us! 🎶 I have decided to follow Jesus! No turn... 🎶"

Thomas: "On the contrary, Augustine says (De Praed. Sanct. ii, 14) that 'predestination is the foreknowledge of God's benefits.' But foreknowledge is not in the things foreknown, but in the person who foreknows them. Therefore, predestination is in the one who predestines, and not in the predestined. I answer that, predestination is not anything in the predestined; but only in the person who predestines. We have said above that predestination is a part of providence. Now providence is not anything in the things provided for; but is a type in the mind of the provider, as was proved above (I:22:1). But the execution of providence which is called government, is in a passive way in the thing governed, and in an active way in the governor. Whence it is clear that predestination is a kind of type of the ordering of some persons towards eternal salvation, existing in the divine mind. The execution, however, of this order is in a passive way in the predestined, but actively in God. The execution of predestination is the calling and magnification; according to the Apostle (Romans 8:30): "Whom He predestined, them He also called and whom He called, them He also magnified [Vulg. 'justified']." For more on this, see my forthcoming Summa Theologiae, 1st part, Q 23, A 2. See also Summa Theologiae, 1st part, A 23, Q 5."

"😐 ......Alrighty, then! I am sure you will like this new song. C' mon, Tom, join us! ♬ If you happy and you know it, clap your hands (clap👏 clap👏)! And if you are happ... ♫"

T.: "On the contrary, happiness does not consist in a sensitive operation. I answer that a thing may belong to happiness in three ways: 1) essentially, 2) antecedently, 3) consequently. Now the operation of sense cannot belong to happiness essentially. For man's happiness consists essentially in his being united to the Uncreated Good, Which is his last end, as shown above (Article 1): to Which man cannot be united by an operation of his senses. Again, in like manner, because, as shown above (I-II:2:5), man's happiness does not consist in goods of the body, which goods alone, however, we attain through the operation of the senses. Nevertheless the operations of the senses can belong to happiness, both antecedently and consequently: antecedently, in respect of imperfect happiness, such as can be had in this life, since the operation of the intellect demands a previous operation of the sense; consequently, in that perfect happiness which we await in heaven; because at the resurrection, 'from the very happiness of the soul,' as Augustine says (Ep. ad Dioscor.) "the body and the bodily senses will receive a certain overflow, so as to be perfected in their operations"; a point which will be explained further on when we treat of the resurrection (II-II:82-85). But then the operation whereby man's mind is united to God will not depend on the senses. You can read more on this in my forthcoming Summa Theologiae, 1st part of 2nd part, Q 3, A 3."

"😑 ......Thomas, sometimes, you really are no fun."

T.: "On the contrary, I answ..."

"Drop it."

T.: "Ok."

©

Words in grey are my own and not Aquinas'.

R. L. Dabney on Natural and Revealed Theology

R. L. Dabney (1820–1898).

R. L. Dabney's The Practical Philosophy: Being the Philosophy of the Feelings, of the Will, and of the Conscience, With the Ascertainment of Practicular Rights and Duties (1897) is a very interesting book (there is also an open-access online version). I have read and consulted its third book, "The Will," because it seems to have some significant similarities with Jonathan Edwards' approach to the matter. I hope to have the time to write something about it in the future, also consulting other relevant places from Dabney's works.

While I was browsing the book, I came across the last chapter of the volume where Dabney discusses moral duties in relation to God. He then concludes with some remarks on natural and revealed theology. I find his words quite interesting, and I thought to report them here.

By the prevalent native disposition of men, duty to God for its own sake alone is not preferred, but disliked. The light of Natural Theology can do no more than present to the mind objects which, were the mind fundamentally moral, would attract it; but which naturally and in fact do not attract the immoral mind. What effective resource has Natural Theology, then, to work this moral revolution in which alone true reform and moral blessedness can originate?
Whence, then, are the effectual remedies for guilt and immorality to come? Philosophy is silent; it has no answer. To ascertain the solution we must pass into the domain of Revelation, the inculcation of which is the function of the Christian Church. Here, then, our study must end. And this is the impressive proof of its inferiority to its elder and divine sister, Christianity, that Philosophy, after leading us up to the greatest and most urgent of all problems, and redisclosing to us our guilt and moral disease, is compelled to turn over the great question of the remedy to the recorded Word of God, and retire confessing her own weakness to heal and save. Has this long course of her training been therefore useless? No; it has trained our power of thought. It has shown us many truths which are valuable, though they may not claim the primal worth and infallible certainty of God's messages. And its best gift to us will be derived if we learn its closing lesson of humility and of reverence for the "more sure word of Prophecy."

 ~ R. L. Dabney, The Practical Philosophy (Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle Publications, 1984), 521.

©