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
Articulus III: Utrum Deus sit ubique per essentiam, praesentiam et potentiam
Articulus IV: Utrum esse ubique sit proprium Dei
Quaestio IX: De Dei immutabilitate
Articulus I: Utrum Deus sit omnino immutabilis
Articulus II: Utrum esse immutabile sit Dei proprium
Quaestio X: De Dei aeternitate
Articulus I: Utrum convenienter definiatur aeternitas, quod est interminabilis vitae tota simul et perfecta possessio
Articulus II: Utrum Deus sit aeternus
Articulus III: Utrum esse aeternum sit proprium Dei
Articulus IV: Utrum aeternitas differat a tempore
Articulus V: De differentia aevi et temporis
Articulus VI: Utrum sit unum aevum tantum
Quaestio XI: De unitate Dei
Articulus I: Utrum unum addat aliquid supra ens
Articulus II: Utrum unum et multa opponantur
Articulus III: Utrum Deus sit unus
Articulus IV: Utrum Deus sit maxime unus
Quaestio XII: Quomodo Deus a nobis cognoscatur
Articulus I: Utrum aliquis intellectus creatus possit Deum videre per essentiam
Articulus II: Utrum essentia Dei ab intellectu creato per aliquam similitudinem videatur
Articulus III: Utrum essentia Dei videri possit oculis corporalibus
Articulus IV: Utrum aliquis intellectus creatus per sua naturalia divinam essentiam videre possit
Articulus V: Utrum intellectus creatus ad videndum Dei essentiam aliquo creato lumine indigeat
Articulus VI: Utrum videntium essentiam Dei unus alio perfectius videat
A clear title. – Three things in the body. First, the responsive conclusion is proposed to the question affirmatively, namely: Those who see God, one will see more perfectly than another. Second, a false cause of this is excluded. Third, it is proved from a true cause.
II. As to the second point, note that the same object being seen better by one than by another can arise from two causes. First, because it is seen by one through a clearer species than by another: as we experience that we see better through a species in air than through one in water, and likewise through better spectacles. Second, it can also arise from a keener vision. – It is evident. For, given the identity of the visible object together with an equality of the species and of the visual power, it is impossible to imagine whence a better vision would come: for distance and medium, etc., all pertain to the quality of the species. – The text therefore sufficiently excludes the first cause, from the fact that that vision is not to occur through a species: but it embraces the second.
III. As to the third point, the conclusion is proved as follows. Among those who see God, one has greater charity than another: therefore greater desire: therefore he is more apt and prepared for the reception of God: therefore he has a greater light of glory: therefore a greater capacity for seeing God: therefore he will see God more perfectly than another. – The antecedent is supposed. The first consequence is evident from the terms, as are the second and third. For charity itself is the desire for God; but desire clearly involves a great preparation for the embrace of what is desired. That the light of glory is nothing other than a disposition for the reception of God has already been said1; and therefore it must correspond to the quantity of desire, as disposition corresponds to aptitude and preparation. The fourth consequence is proved: because it is not the light of nature, but the light of glory, that establishes the intellect in a certain deiformity; for from the fact that we become partakers of the divine nature we are able to see God himself. The last is evident.