Commentaria in Primam Partem Summae Theologiae
Tommaso de Vio Cajetan (1469–1534)
First published 1507
Cajetan's Commentaria in Primam Partem Summae Theologiae offers an article-by-article exposition of Aquinas's Prima Pars. Its discussions of sacred doctrine, analogy, divine knowledge, and creation became important reference points in the later Thomist tradition. The present digital edition follows the Latin text of the Leonine edition and includes English and Spanish translations. Coverage is currently partial.
✦ This work is being completed — add a section.
Praefatio ad Oliverium Carrafam
In Prooemium Summae Theologiae
Quaestio I: De sacra doctrina, qualis sit, et ad quae se extendat
Articulus I: Utrum sit necessarium, praeter philosophicas disciplinas, aliam doctrinam haberi
Articulus II: Utrum sacra doctrina sit scientia
Articulus III: Utrum sacra doctrina sit una scientia
Articulus IV: Utrum sacra doctrina sit scientia practica
Articulus V: Utrum sacra doctrina sit dignior aliis scientiis
Articulus VI: Utrum haec doctrina sit sapientia
Articulus VII: Utrum deus sit subiectum huius scientiae
Articulus VIII: Utrum haec doctrina sit argumentativa
Articulus IX: Utrum sacra scriptura debeat uti metaphoris
Articulus X: Utrum sacra scriptura sub una littera habeat plures sensus
Quaestio II: De Deo, an Deus sit
Articulus I: Utrum Deum esse sit per se notum
Articulus II: Utrum Deum esse sit demonstrabile
Articulus III: Utrum Deus sit
Quaestio III: De Dei simplicitate
Articulus I: Utrum Deus sit corpus
Articulus II: Utrum in Deo sit compositio formae et materiae
Articulus III: Utrum sit idem Deus quod sua essentia vel natura
Articulus IV: Utrum in Deo sit idem essentia et esse
Articulus V: Utrum Deus sit in genere aliquo
Articulus VI: Utrum in Deo sint aliqua accidentia
Articulus VII: Utrum Deus sit omnino simplex
Articulus VIII: Utrum Deus in compositionem aliorum veniat
Quaestio IV: De Dei perfectione
Articulus I: Utrum Deus sit perfectus
Articulus II: Utrum in Deo sint perfectiones omnium rerum
Articulus III: Utrum aliqua creatura possit esse similis Deo
Quaestio V: De bono in communi
Articulus I: Utrum bonum differat secundum rem ab ente
Articulus II: Utrum bonum secundum rationem sit prius quam ens
Articulus III: Utrum omne ens sit bonum
Articulus IV: Utrum bonum habeat rationem causae finalis
Articulus V: Utrum ratio boni consistat in modo, specie et ordine
Articulus VI: Utrum convenienter dividatur bonum per honestum, utile et delectabile
Quaestio VI: De bonitate Dei
Articulus I: Utrum esse bonum Deo conveniat
Articulus II: Utrum Deus sit summum bonum
Articulus III: Utrum esse bonum per essentiam sit proprium Dei
Articulus IV: Utrum omnia sint bona bonitate divina
Quaestio VII: De infinitate Dei
Articulus I: Utrum Deus sit infinitus
Articulus II: Utrum aliquid aliud quam Deus possit esse infinitum per essentiam
Articulus III: Utrum possit esse aliquid infinitum actu secundum magnitudinem
Articulus IV: Utrum possit esse infinitum in rebus secundum multitudinem
Quaestio VIII: De existentia Dei in rebus
Articulus I: Utrum Deus sit in omnibus rebus
Articulus II: Utrum Deus sit ubique
A clear title. – In the body there are two parts: first he distinguishes; second he answers the question with a single two-membered conclusion, according to the distinction proposed.
This is the distinction. To be in a place is twofold: as in a thing, and as in a place. It is proved: because a place is both a thing and a place.
The responsive conclusion, however, is: God is in both ways, according to something, everywhere.
It is proved with respect to the first mode. God gives being, power, and operation to all things: therefore, to all places. – With respect to the second, however. God gives being to all things filling places: therefore, He is in all places in a certain manner, as filling all places.
II. Concerning these, note that to fill a place is said in two ways: namely, formally and effectively. A located body fills a place formally; God does so effectively. And from this follows the difference stated in the text, that a body filling a place excludes other things, whereas God, in filling it, does not; rather, he makes other things to be located. And therefore in the conclusion it is not said absolutely that God is in a place as in a place absolutely, but in a certain respect, that is, in some manner; namely, because not formally but causally. The title, "from what the name means in the case of a body," is clear.