Cursus Theologicus, Tomus I: In Primam Partem

87 Because the mind of St. Augustine and of St. Thomas, with regard to this part, coincides with the mind of those other Holy Fathers who followed upon St. Augustine, and consequently it is of great importance to examine the mind of each of them; therefore, since we have already examined both what Augustine thought (so to speak, on the a priori side and then on the a posteriori side) and what the Angelic Doctor teaches, we must also approach the mind of that same Angelic Doctor a posteriori, so that thus from every quarter his mind may remain more transparent and clear.

§ I. Resolution of the difficulty, and its first foundation.

It must be said, therefore, that according to the mind of the Angelic Doctor, middle knowledge cannot be given, this conclusion being taken from certain signs and a posteriori. The prior and fundamental reason of this assertion is drawn from what was said in dub. 3, assertion 2, num. 67, and thereafter. For the reason then given for showing Augustine's mind on this point proves the present assertion, as will be clear to the one who looks into it.

88 It is proved, secondly. Because the Fathers of the Council of Trent did not approve, but rather rejected middle knowledge, in the way we shall say below: therefore it is a sign that it does not exist according to the mind of the Angelic Doctor. The antecedent will be clear from what we shall say in the following difficulty. The consequence, however, is proved. Because whatever was done in that Council, about which St. Thomas treated in his works, was all of it derived from the doctrine of the Holy Doctor. And so the doctrine of St. Thomas was like the Lydian stone, in which true gold was distinguished from false: so that that was reckoned to be true doctrine which cohered with the mind of the Angelic Doctor and was approved by him; but that was false which was out of tune with him, or which was at some time reprobated by him. And this indeed is clear from that oration which was delivered by the orator of that same Council before the Fathers on the day of the Holy Doctor, where these words occur: St. Thomas could not be present at the Church's Councils, being prevented by death; but behold, surviving and destined to live forever, he is with you: the good things, the treasures of his spiritual doctrine, he has handed down to you by hereditary right. Accordingly, no councils have been held without the sacred Doctor since his happy passage. For to pass over the other things, that which we hear, that which we see, that which we handle with our hands: why should we not with open voice testify to his praise? weigh your assemblies, which are very numerous; and to that honorable college of Doctors, every counsellor who approaches adds his weight, who does not adorn his opinion with the authority of St. Thomas as with a shining gem? But in that most distinguished recess of the Fathers, this Doctor, when asked for his opinion, gives it most frequently, and if any doubt or controversy has arisen, you think he is to be referred to with common votes as to the Lydian stone; and whoever shall have obtained him as the patron of his own judgment will not be subject to the uncertain chance of judgments, but that the decision ought to be given according to him.

§ II. The last foundation of the true opinion.

89 The assertion is proved, thirdly. For the most faithful and most well-known disciples of St. Thomas, both the older and the younger, that is to say the Dominicans, never found this middle knowledge in their Holy Doctor; as regards the older, this will be clear from what is to be said in the last difficulty of this disputation, and as regards the younger it is clear from all the Dominicans who in our own age have committed their writings to the press, such as Bannez, Navarrete, Nunno, Nazario, Gonzalez, Ripa, Zannardo, Ledesma, Alvarez, and Martinez, and from all those who publicly teach sacred Theology throughout the whole world: therefore it is a sign that this knowledge does not exist according to the mind of the Holy Doctor. The consequence is evident. Because it is incredible that all the approved and most renowned disciples and interpreters of St. Thomas, who are said to swear to his words, who daily turn over his writings with the utmost affection of soul, compare them, ponder them, chew the cud of them, and devote themselves with assiduous study to attaining his meaning, and join prayers to their reading, and who still within the walls of their own household strive after the true doctrine of St. Thomas with the greatest zeal, so that not one of them would have dared to defend in any way the opposing doctrine, to their greatest disgrace, anywhere found, nor received from their elders, this doctrine about middle knowledge, if it were truly in the Holy Doctor; especially since St. Thomas so very often hinted at it, or brought it into the open, if it were in his mind: indeed, very very often, or (better to say) on countless occasions, the opportunity of treating of it presented itself; as in the matter of the knowledge of God, of the will, of predestination, of the Incarnation, of grace, of the angels, and very many other things: as the Adversaries, admitting it in all these places and in many others, use it, to unravel many and grave difficulties.

90 It is confirmed, firstly. Because the aforesaid disciples of St. Thomas not only assert that they did not find, nor received from their elders, this doctrine about middle knowledge, but rather affirm that the opposing doctrine has always reigned in his school. And so, when Molina first brought it to light, they not only did not favour it, but even accused it in juridical form before the Supreme Pontiff: yet it is incredible that the aforesaid disciples of St. Thomas, distinguished by number, by antiquity, by wisdom, by religion, and by many other titles, most devotedly and most piously by the bond of the Angelic Doctor's profession, and very well versed in his writings, should not only have failed to find his opinion on this so celebrated and so often repeated difficulty, but that even all of them should have been deceived and so blinded as to accuse the true doctrine of St. Thomas before the Pontiff: therefore, and so on.

It is confirmed and explained, secondly. For as regards the mind of St. Thomas about middle knowledge, faith is rather to be given to the Dominican Fathers than to his adversaries: therefore, since those of them stand openly against it, it will be a sign that the Holy Doctor also stands against it. The consequence seems transparent. The antecedent, however, is proved. Because the Dominican Fathers, whenever in other matters they deliver their opinion in common about the mind of the Holy Doctor, have never been found openly to have departed from his true understanding, and consequently they are not to be believed to have departed from it in this matter either; whereas the adversaries are wont many times over in other matters to produce St. Thomas on their own side, although it is very certain that he himself stands for the opposite view, as is evident in the matters about the existence of created things and its distinction from essence, about the principle of individuation, about intension and remission, and elsewhere often.

91 It is confirmed and explained, lastly. Because the Dominican Fathers, being led by no passion against their adversaries, nor compelled by any necessity imposed from without (as they say), bring forward St. Thomas on their own side and against middle knowledge. But the adversaries, although they are not led by any passion against the Dominicans, are yet as it were compelled by a necessity, and they prop up the doctrine about middle knowledge by the authority of St. Thomas: therefore, as regards this question, that is, whether the aforesaid knowledge is or is not according to the mind of the Holy Doctor, faith is rather to be given to the former than to the latter. The consequence needs no proof.

The antecedent, however, as regards the first part, that is, as regards the Dominican Fathers, is shown by the following dilemma. For when Molina first published his middle knowledge, either this knowledge was commonly received in the school of those same Dominicans, that is, of the Thomists, as the doctrine of St. Thomas, or it was commonly rejected as something contrary to that same doctrine? The first cannot be said: because, had the aforesaid Fathers greatly (as it were) rejoiced in the increase and spread of the doctrine of the Angelic Doctor, they would not have assailed it so boldly, nor accused this knowledge before the Supreme Pontiff, if by their common reckoning it was then held to be Thomistic; otherwise they would indeed have brought not the Adversaries, but rather themselves and their own doctrine before the Pontiff, and so would have been rejected by him as madmen; since they were accusing that very doctrine which they themselves acknowledged was the doctrine of St. Thomas.

If, however, it be said that it was the second, then, being led by no passion against the Adversaries, they made answer against St.

Thomas against this middle knowledge. For what passion could render the Dominicans less worthy of credit in this, when they reject this middle knowledge published by the Adversaries in the public press, as something at variance with St. Thomas, when those same Dominicans had previously held it as certain among themselves? especially since the Fathers of the Society up to those times had followed the way and the doctrine of the Dominicans, and hence it is incredible that they were not on that account loyally (as was right) disposed towards them. For the same reason too, no necessity imposed from outside appears, by which they were compelled to affirm the doctrine about middle knowledge to be against St. Thomas: indeed, if they once felt it that way before, they could have been moved to this by no other necessity, except that which (so to speak) arises from within, that is, from the fact that they previously felt that very thing in the truth of their hearts.

92 As regards the second part, however, that is, that the Adversaries, being led by no passion against the Dominicans, prop up middle knowledge by the authority of St. Thomas, the same antecedent is clear enough. Because, as will be evident to the one who looks into it, that is, more clearly than the light of noonday, to think the opposite would be to squint in the same light: indeed, such a passion cannot be believed, let alone even faintly suspected, of men so learned, so grave, and so religious.

As regards the last part of that same antecedent, that is, that the Adversaries, being as it were compelled by some necessity imposed from outside (as they say), prop up the doctrine about middle knowledge by the authority of St. Thomas, this can be taken from the fact that many external things could and ought to have moved them to this very thing. For they saw that it was being brought by the disciples of St. Thomas before the judges of the faith, as being in some way suspect; they experienced how much prejudice the aforesaid knowledge would suffer, as it ran counter to them, from the authority of St. Augustine and of St. Thomas; they beheld Clement VIII refer the whole weight of this cause to the authority of each of the two Doctors; they heard badly of Molina, who asserted in his first Concordia that this knowledge was new and had been unknown to the ancient Fathers; they saw that under the title of novelty this knowledge was held in contempt by all the more serious theologians, and had to be assailed with keenness, and that it would stir up many adversaries against itself: by no other road could they have freed their middle knowledge from all these known dangers and storms, nay, from total ruin, than by fortifying it with the authority of each of the two Doctors and corroborating it; and so they were as it were compelled (against that which the very authors of this knowledge used to confess before this storm arose) to proclaim on every hand that it is frequently and clearly found in each of the two Doctors, Augustine and St. Thomas, and to bring forward the testimonies of each of them to prove that point. Who then does not see how, although the testimony of the Adversaries is always weighty, nevertheless with respect to this particular point it is not so firm for the purpose of establishing the mind of St. Thomas, as is the testimony of the Dominicans, which, for none of the aforesaid objections, could rationally be rejected?

93 All of which can be made clear by the elegant testimony of Master Alfonso Curiel, who, although in his own controversies he favours this middle knowledge sufficiently and is strongly inclined to it (although afterwards he retracted it, as we shall say in the last difficulty), nevertheless in the aforesaid place confesses that such a doctrine is at variance with the mind of St. Thomas, and even with that of his disciples. Which testimony cannot fail, as things stand, to have force. First, because of the outstanding wisdom and authority of this Doctor, known to the whole world. Secondly also, because the religious profession, whether that of the Dominicans or that of the Fathers of the Society, cannot in the least make him suspect, on account of a pious affection which he had towards his own men: indeed, he was bound to neither of them. Lastly, because in that place he leans rather towards the opinion of the adversaries; and consequently, if he truly could fortify it with the authority of St. Thomas, he would in fact do so, and yet would have to confess, against himself and against the opinion which he there chose in preference, that it is at variance with the doctrine of St. Thomas.