De locis theologicis

Brother Francis of Vitoria, reader most worthy, whom Spain received by God’s singular gift as its supreme teacher of theology, used to say—I heard him after I left his school—that he took great delight in my talent, but feared that, elated and exuberant because of some excellence in it, I might boast immoderately and, grown too self-important, tread on my teacher’s footsteps not only freely and cheerfully but even rashly and licentiously. For he had heard that I did not approve one opinion of his, and then another. I wish that the things he said out of excessive indulgence toward a son were truly said of me. But if we cannot attain such excellence of talent by imitation, in our will at least we come very close and try to reproduce our teacher. Indeed, if anyone approves my teaching—which I wish were worthy of the learned!—if he approves my judgment in matters—which I wish were worthy of my surname!—or the polish of my style—which I usually employ more elegantly than scholastics are accustomed to in their books—then in this we are learned, prudent, and eloquent: that we follow this man as the best guide in all these matters and obey his precepts and admonitions. As for the moderation of spirit that this most modest man wished for in me, I took pains to disappoint his fear. Whether I succeeded, others will judge more impartially. Certainly, if there is any fault of rashness in me, I can scarcely excuse or conceal it by any other consideration

than knowing that however excellent and outstanding talent may be, it is of little value unless it is governed by the bridle of prudent understanding and a defined moderation of spirit. Yet I do not usually approve those who, as if bound by an oath or even by superstition—to use Fabius’s words—think it wrong to depart from a conviction once adopted. A theologian need not swear allegiance to anyone’s rules. The work toward which he himself strives is greater and more excellent than that he should always tread in his teacher’s footsteps, if indeed he is to attain distinction in theology. I remember hearing my own teacher say, when he began to explain the second part of the Second Part to us, that so great was the weight to be given to the opinion of St. Thomas that, if no better reason came to hand, the authority of so holy and learned a man would suffice for us. But he also warned that the holy Doctor’s words should not be accepted without discrimination and examination. Rather, if he said something too harsh or improbable, we should imitate his moderation and care in a similar matter: he neither withdraws trust from authors approved by the suffrage of antiquity, nor passes over to their opinion when reason calls him in the opposite direction. I observed this precept most diligently. For I have never submitted any opinion—not only of St. Thomas, but even of my teacher—to my own judgment, and yet it was never my intention to swear by my teacher’s words. For that man was naturally moderate, and at times he even disagreed with St. Thomas; in my judgment, he gained greater praise by disagreeing than by agreeing, so great was his reverence in dissent. But enough of this; we shall often say many things in praise of our teacher. Let us now return to the remaining parts of the work we proposed. I promised three books on the use of the theological loci: one in scholastic disputation, another in the exposition of Sacred Scripture, and the last specifically against each of the enemies of the Christian faith—heretics, pagans, Jews, and Saracens. For I assigned books 12, 13, and 14 to these matters. And, to return to my teacher, if he had wished to treat especially the use of the loci in school debate, he could have written most gravely and copiously. But since no monuments of his talent have been committed to writing, no work of erudition, no gift of learning survives, we have turned all our effort and care to writing on this subject. Since all theology is fruitful and productive, with no part of it uncultivated or neglected, there is no more fertile or abundant field in it than the use of the loci and the arguments drawn from the theological loci. Therefore, as much as I can strive in spirit and labor—if writing this is labor rather than pleasure—I shall do so to ensure that, since my teacher supplied me with all the first principles of these matters, I do not appear to have failed my teacher in turn. We publish the learning of this most illustrious man for memory and render him, though by no means equal to his talent, at least according to our own ability, due gratitude and thanks. Yet I ask those who take up these writings to imagine something greater of my teacher than I am able to express.