Cursus Theologicus, Tomus I: In Primam Partem

Num. 1. Since the Prooemium and the division of the whole work not a little conduce to the understanding of it, we therefore treat of both in the first place.

§ I. Why this whole work is titled Cursus Theologicus?.

Deservedly is this work titled Cursus Theologicus Summam Theologicam Angelici Doctoris D. Thom. complectens. For as the course of the arts is called Cursus, the metaphor being drawn from the act of running, by which we hurry forward and complete our journey in a short time; and it is called a course of Arts, that name being taken in the broader sense, according as it comprehends certain parts of philosophy, and therefore, so that this nomenclature be not dissonant from the thing which is designated by it, everything that is discussed in it ought to be treated briefly and succinctly, as far as is conveniently possible: so too this whole work is titled Cursus Theologicus. Theologicus, indeed, because treatises about God, or Theological treatises, are contained in it. Cursus, however, because the aforesaid treatises (although various and different, and elsewhere sufficiently diffuse, in which more than twelve volumes might deservedly be consumed), setting aside both many opinions of adversaries of little weight, and also not a few reasons of trifling weight against the true opinion, which are not drawn from the very entrails of D. Thomas, are distributed, briefly and succinctly as far as the matter treated of and its due division allow, into six volumes, just as that course of the arts is distributed into four, in this work: so that in this way this whole theological journey, which is otherwise the longest, and much longer, broader, and deeper than the journey of the arts, may be completed and run through in no long time: and thus this whole work may deservedly be marked with the name of a theological course, just as that course of the arts is marked with the title of a course.

Hence, just as in the course of the arts only those disputations are raised which are commonly circulated in the schools, although their guide, Aristotle, touched upon many others; so too this course, Theologicus, comprehending the Summa Theologica of the Angelic Doctor, will satisfy its office, if it has explained, out of the whole Summa Theologica of the same D. Thomas, all those questions and articles which are commonly treated of in the schools and usually dictated to students, and has raised those treatises and disputations needed for their more exact understanding, although the Prince of Theology, D. Thomas, has brought forward many others in his Summa Theologica. For as in the aforesaid course of the arts (let us persist in the example already adduced), the more difficult things having been discussed and explained, others are omitted, either because they are easy in themselves, or because, even if they would present difficulty in themselves, yet from the other, more difficult things already explained and accepted by the master, they can easily be learned, either by applying a little own effort and moderate labor: so too in the theological course, when all the more difficult questions of D. Thomas which are commonly circulated in the schools have been treated and explained, then deliberately the others will be omitted, either because they are easy in themselves, or because, even if they are difficult in themselves, yet once discussed, and submitted to examination along with all the others already treated, one can come to an understanding of them with easy effort, or with their own and moderate labor, and without the help of the master.

§ II. That this theological course and the course of the arts of our Complutensian College will be consonant with each other, and will mutually foster one another.

2 Now, since the course of the arts and the theological course are so coordinated with each other that the former precedes and prepares the way for the theological course, while the latter follows and is, as it were, the complement and the form of the former; let the former be as the morning star announcing the latter, and the latter, because it is theological and not because it is ours, be (so to speak) the sun following upon its own morning star: yet so that the one fosters the other, though under a different relation, and that each of them is necessary to the learned theologian, as it were to one who is being formed; the former indeed in the manner of a disposition, the latter in the manner, as it were, of a form: therefore this theological course, which the course of the arts of our Complutensian College of our Religion anticipated and levelled the way for, will be so joined with it, and they will mutually foster one another, as to be wholly consonant with each other and to have peace: and whatever has been explained and treated in the course of the arts, from which other theological difficulties either remain entirely evident or are deduced with the very greatest ease, will not be called again to examination in the theological course. Just as also those things which pertain to the course of the arts and were there omitted for just reasons, and which would greatly contribute to the theological treatises, will be discussed in this theological course.

§ III. Why in this work we do not begin from the explanation of the first and second question, 1 par., of D. Thomas, but from the third.

3 Hence a sufficient reason is given for several things. First indeed, why in this theological course we leave the prior and proemial question of the Angelic Doctor, and also the second annexed to it, untouched and unexplained. For what is principally usually discussed in that first question is this: what is the object of theology? whether it is itself a science? and whether it is one according to species? whether it is one simple quality? or whether it is subalterned to the science of the blessed? and what is required for this subalternation? and then how, with the subalternation to it and in the evidentness of the principles which it has, it is truly a science? and things of this kind. But these are quite clearly evident from those things which our Complutensian College has brought forward throughout, clearly and diffusely, in its Logica, disp. 19, and has applied in particular to Sacred Theology, explaining how God is its object and has an atomic unity. And therefore this theological course will abstain from discussing them again. Just as also those things which D. Thomas adduces in q. 2 are quite easy in themselves and do not require exposition, especially if we suppose those which are treated in the aforesaid disputation by our Complutensian College, and those which will be said by us in this volume 4; therefore we will not linger here.

4 Second, indeed, from what has been said a reason is given why this theological course should begin from the explanation of q. 3 of the Angelic Doctor, and this indeed for the two reasons already touched upon. First, because after the two prior questions, which we leave untouched for the reason stated, this third question follows in due order. And therefore, those having been set aside, the first place was due to this one, which introduces a special difficulty and demands a peculiar treatise for its explanation. Then, because in it is touched upon that greatest controversy about the principle of the individuation of material substance and of its accidents, and consequently about the principle of the purely individual distinction of any entity: which was deliberately omitted by our Complutensian College for just reasons, and in order to consult brevity; and which contributes greatly to many and very serious difficulties, and is usually treated of in the schools. And therefore this course, which ought to foster that course of the arts and to be fostered by it, could not but explain this third question of D. Thomas at least somewhat fully.

§ IV. Whence this whole work is to be divided, and what will be contained in its first and second volume?.

5 Third, then, from what has been said, it is deduced why and how this theological course, which is to be completed in six volumes, ought to be divided and cut into, as it were, distinct members. For, as we were saying recently, its object is God; and because the participation of knowledge must be according to the partition of the object, or its diverse consideration, therefore according to the diverse relations which we can discern in God, this course is to be divided. God therefore can be considered either in Himself, or, as they say, in the order, or quasi-order, to creatures, in such a way indeed that the consideration of God in Himself precedes the consideration of Him as He is, as it were, with respect to creatures; and therefore in the first place in our theological course we shall treat of God in Himself. Since, however, He in Himself can be taken in two ways, either as He is One or as He is Three; and those things which pertain to God as One are prior to those which pertain to Him as Three; therefore the discourse will be instituted first about God as One than about Him as Three. And so we shall give this first volume of our theological course to God as One, and in it we shall append five treatises. And in the first, on the Principle of the individuation of material substance and of the purely individual distinction of any entity, around the third question of this 1 par. of D. Thomas, there will be a disputation, so that thus it may be established that the divine is one, simple, and spiritual. For, as D. Thomas explains all these things, as it were by antithesis, He sets them before the eyes by explaining how in this the spiritual substance, most of all the divine, is distinguished from material substance, in that the latter is individuated from matter, as from the first root; the former, however, from itself: and the arguments which press to show that the material mode of individuation is sought from matter convince, by their opposite, that the immaterial substance, most of all God, is to be individuated in a more spiritual way. In the second, on the visibility of God as He is in Himself to the created intellect, or on the vision of God, together with the Angelic Doctor, q. 12. In the third, on the knowledge of God, around q. 14 of the most holy Preceptor. In the fourth, on the will of God, explaining question 19 of the same D. Thomas. In the fifth, finally, on predestination, together with the Angelic Doctor, quaest. 23 suae 1 part. a discourse will be woven. And the other divine attributes will not be treated in particular in this volume 1, both because in the schools this is not usually discussed in particular and dictated to students, and also because whatever difficulty the other attributes would bring will entirely follow from what will be said about these attributes of God already intimated.

6 Since, however, as we said, in the consideration of God in Himself, immediately after God as One, He Himself as Three follows, for that reason the second volume of our theological course will institute a discourse about God as Three, together with D. Thomas, from question 27 to question 43 of his 1 par. Nor will it stop there, but it will proceed, together with the Most Holy Preceptor, to the treatise on the Angels, from q. 50 of the same 1 par. to q. 64, and from q. 106 to q. 108.

The reason, however, for which after the treatise on God as Three we shall append that treatise on the Angels is this, because, as we asserted above, after the concept of God in Himself, as One and as Three, one comes in due order to Him Himself, as they say, in the quasi-order to creatures. And because this quasi-order is twofold, either that of the efficient cause or that of the final cause, and the order, or quasi-order, of the efficient cause is prior as regards being an existence simply such, namely as regards being a natural existence, and not only an intentional one: therefore God is treated of first as He is the efficient cause of creatures. And although God can be considered either according as He is the cause of creatures without determining it in the particular, of which of them He was the cause, or according as He is the cause of creatures in the particular, namely of those which in fact He produced; since, however, the former of these is prior, and it is not usually treated of in the schools in the common way, nor, if we suppose those things which our Complutensians have said in the book Physic., and the others which we shall assert about God as He is the cause of creatures in the particular, does it require a new exposition: therefore, although D. Thomas treated of this before the questions on the Angels, we shall nevertheless not raise special disputations about this matter in our volume 2; but we shall treat only of God as He is the efficient cause of creatures in the particular, namely of the Angels, and consequently of the Angels themselves proceeding from Him. And although several disputations could also be moved about man and his soul, and a special treatise on him instituted, so as to explain the mind of D. Thomas in this 1 par., from question 75 to question 90; since, however, our Complutensian College has treated of many things quite clearly in its course of Arts in the book de Anima: therefore nothing will be said on this point of set purpose in our theological course.

§ V. What will be treated in the third and fourth volume.

7 Then we shall give the third volume to the consideration of God as He is the last end of the rational creature, and to its beatitude; and also to the human acts, whether good or evil and sinful, considered in general, by which one arrives at God the last end, or recedes from Him; and finally to the supernatural principle of good acts, by which we merit eternal life, namely grace. And so this volume will comprise: first the treatise on the last end and beatitude, around those things which Divine Thomas discusses from question 1 of his First-Second to question 5, although we shall linger little on these; because very many things contained there will be evident from those which we shall treat of in this volume 1 in the treatise on the vision of God. Then also the treatise on human acts in general, around certain questions in which the Angelic Doctor treats of them in the same First-Second. Then, the treatise on sins, comprising those things which the most holy Preceptor discusses there from question 73 to 89. Then, finally, the treatise on grace in general, on sanctifying grace, or on justification, and merit, and consequently containing and explaining those things which the Angelic Doctor adduces from question 109 to the last question of his First-Second, namely question 114.

Perhaps, however, we shall also append another treatise on the laws before the treatise on grace.

8 Since, however, after the consideration in general of those things by which one arrives at God the last end, or recedes from Him, there remains the consideration of those in particular by which this very thing is done: therefore the fourth volume of our theological course will dispute of this point of set purpose. And although to accomplish this exactly it would be necessary to treat of all the virtues and vices in particular, nevertheless in this volume 4 a discourse will be woven only about the three theological virtues, namely faith, hope, and charity: because it is only about these that treatises and disputations are commonly held in the schools and dictated to students. Especially because, supposing those things which will be said in volume 3 around the First-Second of D. Thomas, and those which will be brought to light in particular in this volume 4 around these three theological virtues, a knowledge of the rest can easily be had without the help of the master. And therefore this fourth volume of our theological course will comprise and explain those things which D. Thomas treats of around these virtues in his Second-Second, and which are commonly taught and dictated in the schools.

§ VI. What will be discussed in the fifth and sixth volume.

9 Now, because our Redeemer Christ, who came to save sinners, and who was given as Leader and Teacher of the nations, has demonstrated to us in Himself this way of the virtues, by which one goes in a straight path to the heavenly fatherland, and from which we have receded by sinning; and because through Him all the benefits and gifts of grace are derived from God to us: therefore, for the consummation of the whole Summa Theologica, it was necessary that the Angelic Doctor should treat of this our Savior and of His peculiar benefits. And therefore, together with him, we shall give the fifth volume of our theological course to this author of so great a salvation as ours, and in it, through diverse treatises, we shall explain the whole matter of the Incarnation, from question 1 of the third part of D. Thomas to question 26.

10 Since, however, the special organs by which Christ the Lord communicates His grace to us are the sacraments, therefore Divine Thomas treats of them in general, from question 60 to 65 of his third part, and afterwards of Baptism, from question 66 to 71. Of Confirmation, however, question 72; of the Eucharist, from question 73 to 83. The questions on Penance, indeed, he began from question 84 and continued to question 90, which is on the parts of Penance, although, being prevented by death, he was unable to complete them: but those which were lacking up to the consummation of the work were added by his disciples from his other writings; which for this reason are called the additions to the third part: and in them, from question 1 to 28, are treated those things which were needed for a complete treatise on Penance. Then, from question 29 to 33, Extreme Unction is treated of, and Ordination from question 34 to 40. And finally, Matrimony is treated of from question 41 to 68.

Hence this sixth volume of our theological course will be entirely devoted to the explanation of the Sacraments, through which divine grace is derived from Christ into us as through certain heavenly organs and instruments. Yet we shall not for that reason treat in this last volume of all the Sacraments, but only of the Sacraments in general, of the Sacrament of the Eucharist, and of Penance: because it is not customary in the schools to discuss commonly about Baptism, Confirmation, Ordination, and Extreme Unction, nor are treatises on these Sacraments dictated by masters to students. Just as neither is a treatise commonly instituted on Matrimony among the scholastic theologians, although not a few discussions concerning it are raised among the moral theologians. We, however, intend to deliver the course of scholastic rather than moral theology; and therefore about the Eucharist and Penance, in which the very greatest number of scholastic questions are involved, we shall treat in this our theological course in an individual way. And so it is no wonder that we do not weave discussions about Matrimony, in which few things, or none, that present a new difficulty and pertain to scholastic theology are contained, especially since, as we have often said, once the other treatises already treated of, which are contained in this whole theological course, have been delivered, all things pertaining to moral theology will easily be added and drawn out of Divine Thomas.

11 From which it also follows that, when this last volume is brought to light by us, no other will be needed for those things which in 3 par. of D. Thomas are treated of after the questions on the Sacraments. For although the Most Holy Preceptor, from question 69 to 99, which is the last of the additions, in which all the questions of his whole Summa Theologica end, treated of those things pertaining to the resurrection of bodies and the final state, and also of death, which precedes the resurrection, and of the final judgment, which follows, of the rewards and punishments of those rising again; nevertheless, because some of these will be evident from those things which will be said in this volume 1 in the treatise on the vision of God, and in volume 3 in the treatise on beatitude; and the others are not usually called up to the scholastic schools: therefore we will abstain from making a discourse about them, and in this volume 6 our whole theological course will end.

§ VII. The guides of this our course are assigned, and at the same time it is explained more fully why it does not depart from the course of the arts of our Complutensian College.

12 In that course, however, as we have already hinted, we shall always have two things before the eyes. First indeed, that the voice of the Holy Fathers, and especially of Augustine and D. Thomas, may always sound and resound in it itself; that it may always pour forth their copious and abundant doctrine; that it may always drink from their most limpid and sweetest fountain, and pour out again the waters once drunk from it. For no one can cross this most deep sea of theology except with them as guides. Second, however, that all things which will be discussed in this theological course be always most consonant with those which the Complutensian College of our sacred Order has lately published in its course of Arts. Since, indeed, both this course and that one are drawn from the very entrails of Divine Thomas, and the entrails of the Angelic Doctor do not contradict themselves, but cohere mutually with a wonderful bond; so likewise the course of the arts and this theological course do not contradict each other, but will kiss each other with a friendly covenant and the kiss of an intimate peace.