Scotus Academicus, Tomus primus: De Deo in se subsistente

From the preceding Question it is abundantly clear that some theological doctrine must necessarily be admitted, which lays open the principal and most necessary truths, which could in no way be detected with the help of philosophy and the aid of natural reason. Since, however, as we have already warned, theology is divided by reason of method into positive and scholastic; and since the heretics of this age most bitterly attack both; it is worth the effort to resolve whether both are necessary for the faithful and the Church, or whether one or the other is to be banished and rejected; that this may become the more evident

Note 1. Positive theology is so called for one or other of these three reasons. First, because it proposes and expounds the truths and articles of faith as certain and indubitable foundations, from which scholastic theology elicits its conclusions and forms the arguments by which it may illustrate the mysteries of faith and defend the Catholic dogmas against heretics and unbelievers. Second, because it is chiefly occupied with explaining and laying open the divine law and institution, which is called positive divine law. For just as human positive law is so called because it has been freely laid down by a Superior, and could simply not have been prescribed by him had he wished, and could still be freely revoked by him from authority, if it should so seem; in which positive law differs from natural law, because the latter is not such by some arbitrary institution and free precept of the Superior, but is such of itself and from its own nature, nor is it capable of any change: so positive theology is so called, which is wholly occupied with explaining positive divine law, namely the divine law, laying open the sacred Scriptures, as well as investigating the divine traditions and the decrees of the Church, which are called positive, divine, or ecclesiastical law; because it has been freely laid down and determined as much by God as by the Church. Third and finally, it is called positive from the positions and theses, because it treats the weightier controversies of faith and the positions, that is, the principal truths, so that from their declaration faith may be illustrated and persevere unshaken.

Note 2. Positive and scholastic theology do not differ from one another essentially, but only accidentally and according to a different manner of proceeding: since both have the same object, namely God, to be known under the notion of divinity through discourse, whether oratorical by positive, or philosophical by scholastic theology. Both acknowledge the same principles, the same assertions of faith, whether written or handed down. Both do not cling to setting forth the sacred Scriptures alone, but also gather and add the indubitable traditions of the Church; they unfold the ecclesiastical history; they scrutinize the decrees of the Councils; they search out the books and commentaries of the holy Fathers, in order to detect and lay open the Catholic truth hidden in them. Nevertheless they seem to differ from one another in this, that scholastic theology is more exact and accurate, and in treating and applying all these things preserves the philosophical method and the syllogistic order the more, so that it may detect the truths more evidently and persuade more efficaciously: for order is the midwife, just as, diametrically, confusion is the stepmother of all disciplines. Add that scholastic theology for the most part summons the help and light of natural philosophy, not only to dissolve with natural and philosophical reasoning the arguments hurled by heretics and unbelievers at the articles of faith, but also to persuade by natural reasons and philosophical considerations that the dogmas of faith are to be believed.

Note 3. This is the concord of the Church triumphant with the militant, that just as in the heavenly Church God willed the lower Angels to be taught and enlightened by the higher ones, so likewise in the earthly Church

Some indeed, says the Apostle ad Ephesios 4., he gave as Apostles, some as Prophets, others as Evangelists, others as Pastors and Doctors; and that for a twofold end: first indeed, he says, for the perfecting of the saints, in the work of the ministry, in the building up of the Body of Christ, until we all meet into the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, etc. Secondly, that, he says, we may no longer be little children, tossed to and fro and carried about by every wind of doctrine, in the wickedness of men, in craftiness for the circumvention of error.

As if he would say that God therefore established Doctors in the Church, both that they might manifest the divine truths, which they themselves behold more deeply, to the more unlearned company of the faithful; and that, with the torch and club of their doctrine, they might extinguish the heresies springing up and eliminate them from the Church. From which it is clear how much the faithful need Doctors: which indeed will be proved more evidently

Only conclusion. — Positive theology has always been useful to the Church of God and most necessary.

This is the assertion of all Catholics against the heretics, especially the Calvinists, who with their heresiarch contend that the sacred Scriptures lie open so evidently and manifestly, that no Doctor at all is needed to grasp and explain them.

Proof of the conclusion. For first, some doctrine must be admitted which lays open the genuine sense of the sacred Scripture, resolves its ambiguities, and detects the mysteries hidden under the simple coverings of words; by which it may build up faith, destroy heresy, and turn back and blunt against the heretics themselves the darts which they are wont to draw from the divine Scriptures and hurl at Catholics; but positive theology accomplishes all these things: therefore it must necessarily be admitted. The minor is plainly evident from the very definition and office of positive theology; for it is wholly occupied with the explanation of the Scriptures, that it may instruct the faithful, unlock the mysteries, and attack and overcome the false dogmas of the heretics with the same oracles of the Scriptures on which they wickedly relied; therefore Tertullianus, in the book De praescriptionibus, cap. 15, calls it the exercise of the Scriptures, inasmuch as it is wholly devoted to expounding and unlocking the divine Scriptures. — The major is therefore proved from sacred Scripture itself, for St. Paul says, 2. ad Timotheum 2: All scripture divinely inspired is useful for teaching, for reproving, for correcting, for instructing in justice; that the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work. By these four he detects and points out the principal offices of positive theology, which it draws from Scripture: First, it teaches the faithful the Catholic truth: Secondly, it reproves the heretics: Thirdly, it corrects the wicked: Fourthly, it teaches and instructs the unbelievers. Moreover he himself affirms, ad Ephesios 4., that God by his ineffable providence toward the Church gave her various ministers, but especially some Pastors and Doctors, for the perfecting of the Saints, in the work of the ministry, in the building up of the body of Christ, until we all meet into the unity of faith. He subjoins the reason: That we may no longer be little children, tossed to and fro, and carried about by every wind of doctrine, in the wickedness of men, for the circumvention of error. Whence he says, ad Titum 1.: The Bishop ought to hold fast the faithful word which is according to doctrine, that he may be able to exhort in sound doctrine, and to reprove those who contradict. Therefore he judges that there is some sacred doctrine, which the Pastors and Doctors of the Church ought to master, that they may teach the faithful, lest they be circumvented by the false dogmas of the heretics: for the heretics, says Tertullianus, in the book De praescriptione, cap. 14., parade the Scriptures, and by this their cunning immediately move some; in the very encounter, indeed, they weary the firm, capture the weak, and send away the intermediate with scruple. It is necessary, therefore, that there be some most expert men, who lay open the genuine sense of the Scripture, and unravel the snares which the heretics set for the faithful from the depraved sense of the Scripture.

Second proof. The sacred Scriptures have so profound and hidden a sense, and involve so many and such great difficulties, that the greatest erudition and the greatest study are needed to explain and interpret them, and accordingly it is necessary that some give all their effort to this explanation and interpretation; but this is done through positive theology: therefore it is to be admitted. The minor is evident: the major is proved: for first, nearly the same judgment seems to be passed on all the Scriptures, which St. Peter himself passed on the Epistles of St. Paul, in which, he says, Epist. 2. c. 3., there are some things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Almost all the holy Fathers confess the same thing: for Origenes, lib. 7. Contra Celsum, says: Other prudent men too, by searching the Scripture, have been able to find its understanding; although in truth it is obscure in many places. Ambrose, Epist. 14.: The divine Scripture is a sea, having in itself profound senses, the depth of the prophetic enigmas. Augustine, 12. Confess. c. 14.: Wondrous is the depth of your utterances, O Lord! whose surface, behold, lies before us, soothing the little ones! but wondrous is the depth. It is a horror to gaze into it: a horror of honor, and a trembling of love. The same, lib. 2. De doctrina Christiana, cap. 4., speaking of the reading of the Scriptures, says: But by many and manifold obscurities and ambiguities are deceived those who read rashly, understanding one thing for another: in certain places, however, they do not find what they might even falsely suspect; so obscurely are some things said, that they draw over them a very dense darkness. — He subjoins, however, the reason for this obscurity: That all of it (he says) I do not doubt was divinely provided, to tame pride by labor, and to recall the understanding from fastidiousness, to which things easily investigated generally become cheap.

St. Gregory agrees with him, Hom. 6. in Ezech.

Of great utility, he says, is the very obscurity of the utterances of God, because it exercises the mind, that it may be expanded by effort, and being exercised may grasp what the idle cannot grasp. It has also another greater good, because if the understanding of the sacred Scripture were open to all, it would become cheap, which in certain more obscure places refreshes what is found with so much the greater sweetness, by how much the more manifestly it is found.

And let Calvinus be gone, who, though contrary to himself, says in lib. 1. Institutionum, c. 7.: Scripture of its own accord presents no obscurer sense of its truth, than white and black things present of their color, and sweet and bitter things of their taste.

Third proof. Heretics twist the sacred Scriptures into a perverse sense in order to patronize their erroneous dogmas: therefore it is necessary that there be some Catholic Doctors who lay open the genuine sense of the same Scripture, by which the truth of faith may be the more easily defended. The consequence is evident. The holy Fathers prove the antecedent, in the first place Tertullianus, in the book De praescriptione haereticorum, cap. 39.: Nor am I in peril saying that the Scriptures themselves were so disposed by the will of God as to furnish material to the heretics; since I read that there must be heresies, which cannot exist without the Scriptures. Origenes, in lib. 3. De principiis, c. 21.: Of all these, he says, the cause of the false understanding, for those of whom we spoke above, was none other than that the holy Scripture is understood by them not according to the spiritual sense, but according to the sound of the letter. Hilarius, in libro 2. De Trinitate: heresy arises from the understanding, not from the scripture; and the sense, not the speech, becomes the crime. St. Augustine agrees, in tractatu 18. super Evangelium Ioannis: For neither, he says, were heresies and certain dogmas of perversity born, ensnaring souls and casting them headlong into the deep, except while the good Scriptures are not well understood; and what in them is not well understood is also rashly and boldly asserted. Vigilius Afer, in lib. 2. Contra Eutychem: This is the origin of all impieties, when the force of the heavenly sayings, violated by the vice of evil understanding, is not weighed according to the quality of its sense, but is diverted to other things at the whim of the reader, otherwise than the reason of the matter demands. Isidore Hispalensis, in lib. 8. Originum, c. 5.: Whoever understands the sacred Scripture otherwise than the sense of the Holy Spirit demands, by whom it was written, although he has not departed from the Church, can nevertheless be called a Heretic. Epiphanius Diaconus, in the 6th action of the 1st Synod: When some attempt to pervert right dogmas according to what seems to themselves, let no one wonder if they use the words of the Scripture. For all Heresiarchs too gather from the divinely inspired Scripture the occasions of their error, adulterating with malicious senses the things that were rightly said through the Holy Spirit.

Thirdly and finally, the truth of our Conclusion is strengthened from the universal practice of the Church; since we read that from its very beginning schools were instituted in which positive theology was publicly taught. Eusebius makes mention of such a school, lib. 5. Historiae Ecclesiasticae, cap. 10., where, speaking of the Alexandrian School, he says:

At the same time there presided over the School of the faithful a man most celebrated for the sake of doctrine, by name Pantaenus, since already from ancient times a School of sacred letters had been instituted in that city, which indeed continues even to our age and is said to be held by men most thoroughly equipped both in eloquence and in the study of divine letters: therefore the heretics wrongly attack and assail the Christian Academies, as a new invention begged from heathenism and pernicious to the faith.

The heretics object: If any reason and utility should persuade that positive theology is to be admitted, it is chiefly that it may interpret the sacred Scripture and resolve its various obscurities and ambiguities: but for this it is altogether useless: therefore it is to be rejected. The major is evident from what has been said. The minor they prove by various texts of the sacred Scripture itself, from which they strive to infer that it is so open, that to perceive its genuine sense no interpreter and no Doctor is needed. Thus Psalmo 18.: The precept of the Lord is clear, enlightening the eyes. Prov. 6.: The commandment is a lamp, and the law a light. 2. Petri 1.: We have the more firm prophetical word, to which you do well to attend, as to a lamp shining in a dark place: therefore so far is it from the case that the sacred Scripture is overspread with any obscurity; rather it is itself the light, which exhibits all the truths that it embraces in its bosom as irradiated with a certain divine splendor.

I deny the minor. And I distinguish its proof: that the sacred Scripture shines in the manner of a light in all its books and contexts, I deny; in some, namely the historical ones, I concede; for I confess that the sacred Scripture sometimes bears so open a sense, that it becomes manifest to any reader at first glance. But the Heretics must also confess that for the most part it is suffused with so great a darkness, that its genuine sense can be detected only either with God revealing, or with most learned men interpreting: as is evident both from the above-mentioned opinion of the holy Fathers, and from David himself, who although he knew to the highest degree the meaning and force of the words of the Hebrew language, in which the sacred Scripture was then written, nevertheless prayed suppliantly to God: Give me understanding, and I will search your law; Open my eyes, and I will consider the wonderful things of your law... Enlighten your servant, and teach me your justifications, Psal. 118. Whence St. Jerome rightly infers, Epist. ad Paulinum: If so great a Prophet confesses the darkness of ignorance, with what night of ignorance do you think us little ones, and almost sucklings, to be surrounded? This veil, however, is placed not only on the face of Moyses, but also in the Gospels, and the Apostles... Unless all things that are written are opened by him who has the key. David, who opens and no one closes, closes and no one opens, will be unfolded by no other opener.

The heretics insist: The sacred Scriptures are not difficult to understand except to proud men, and men blinded by malice, according to that saying of Paulus, 2. Corinth. 4.: If our Gospel is hidden, in those who perish it is hidden; in whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the Gospel of the glory of God should not shine unto them. Therefore for the faithful of Christ the sacred Scripture is not hidden, but open. — They confirm it from St. John Chrysostom, Homilia 3. de Lazaro, where, after he had shown that the Philosophers spoke obscurely, and did not uncover the truth, but covered it with many wrappings of words, he adds: But the Apostles and Prophets on the contrary made all things manifest, and brought them forth clear, as the common Doctors of the world; that each one by himself might be able to learn the things that are learned from reading alone: therefore to perceive them the faithful does not need an interpreter and a Doctor.

I answer the first. The Apostle in those words is not dealing with the easy or difficult understanding of the Scripture, but with the Evangelical faith, which many, when the Apostles preached, rejected out of malice and blindness of mind, because they judged the Evangelical truths to be repugnant to the pleasure of the senses and to natural reason. St. John Chrysostom, however, does not speak of the whole Scripture, but only of the historical books, which he declares easy to understand from the mere reading itself. For he adds: Take the book in your hands, read the whole history, and keep in memory the things that are known; and the things that are obscure and little manifest, run through frequently: but if by the assiduity of reading you cannot find what is said, go to the wiser man, go to the Doctor: therefore he judges that there are some obscure contexts, about which Doctors are to be heard and consulted.

The heretics object secondly, that although the sacred Scripture may be overspread with some darknesses, these are nevertheless to be resolved not by man teaching from without, but by God teaching from within; for the faithful ought to have God alone as Doctor, according to that prophecy of Isaias 51.: I will make all your sons taught of the Lord. And of Ieremias 31.: I will give my law in their hearts, and in their heart I will write it: a man shall no longer teach his neighbor, saying: Know the Lord; for all shall know me, from the least of them even to the greatest. Therefore we need no doctor, nor accordingly is positive theology needed.

I deny the consequence. For neither is that the sense of the aforesaid contexts; for Isaias and Ieremias are to be understood of the Evangelical Doctrine, which excelled over the Mosaic law in this above all, that it was handed down and expressed not through Prophets, but through the very Son of God himself, according to that saying of St. Paul, Hebr. 1.: God, speaking of old to the Fathers in the Prophets, in many ways and in many manners; in these last days has spoken to us in the Son: whence it comes about that all Christians are called Theodidacti, that is, taught of God, either immediately, like the Apostles and Disciples; or at least mediately, like the rest of the faithful.

— Or I say that the aforesaid Prophets compare the state of the new law with the old, so that the sense is that all the mysteries and secrets of faith will be much clearer in the Evangelical law than in the Mosaic, which was full of shadows and figures.

— Or finally I say that the aforesaid texts were predictive of that wonderful descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles on the day of Pentecost, and upon all the other faithful sons of the nascent Church, to whom with baptism the Holy Spirit was conferred, and the gift of knowledge, of prophecy, and kinds of tongues were divinely infused, so that any unlearned and rude persons became in a moment most wise.

The heretics press: From the first of Ioannes, 2. cap., You have no need, says Ioannes writing to the faithful, that anyone teach you: but the unction teaches you of all things: therefore the faithful need no Doctor either, nor consequently any theology.

I deny the consequence. For St. John does not intend that the faithful have no need of a man as Doctor; for to what end would he himself have written the Epistles for the instruction of the faithful? To what end would God have ordained in his Church pastors and Doctors for the perfecting of the Saints, as we said above? He wishes, therefore, only to curb the vain curiosity of certain faithful, who, taught by the Apostles, also listened to the Pseudo-Apostles, who, sowing tares, darkened the Catholic truths with their perverse dogmas. — Or I say that he is to be understood of Affective and Mystical theology, which not reading teaches, but unction; not the letter, but the spirit: not mortal man, but immortal God, who for the most part chooses the weak things of the world, that he may confound the strong. For it happens not rarely that any rude and unlearned persons, who scarcely know their letters, with God teaching within and divinely enlightening, perceive the most hidden mysteries of faith, and open and explain the recondite senses of the Scriptures more plainly than any most learned man could do. Concerning whom St. Augustine seems to speak, lib. 83. Quaestionum, q. 48., saying:

There are three kinds of things to be believed: some are those which are always believed and never understood, as is all history, running through temporal and human deeds: others which, as soon as they are believed, are understood, as are all human reasonings, whether about numbers, or about any disciplines whatsoever. The third, which are first believed and afterwards understood, such as are those things about divine matters which cannot be understood except by those who are clean of heart, which comes about by keeping the precepts, which are received by living well.