Summa summae S. Thomae sive compendium theologiae
Charles René Billuart (1685–1757)
First published 1754
Charles René Billuart, O.P.'s Summa summae S. Thomae sive compendium theologiae (Liège, 1754) is his six-volume abridgment of the larger Summa S. Thomae hodiernis academiarum moribus accommodata (1746–1751). It condenses Aquinas's order and teaching into a reference manual while retaining the Dominican's characteristic distinctions, scholastic proofs, and historical material. The compendium belongs to the eighteenth-century consolidation of post-Tridentine Thomist education and helped carry Billuart's influential reading of Aquinas into later schools. Schola presents the Latin text with an English translation from its public-domain source.
Proemium I: De natura et dotibus theologiae
Tractatus I: De Deo et Ejus Attributis
Dissertatio I: De Dei existentia
Articulus I: Utrum Deum esse sit per se notum
Articulus II: Utrum sit Deus, et quibus rationibus demonstretur?
Articulus III: De Atheismo
Articulus IV: Utrum possit dari ignorantia invincibilis de existentia Dei?
Articulus V: An existant athei theoretici?
Dissertatio II: De natura seu quidditate Dei et Ejus attributis in communi
Articulus I: Quodnam sit constitutivum divinae naturae?
Articulus II: De attributis divinis in communi
Dissertatio III: De attributis in particulari quae pertinent ad divinum esse
Articulus I: De simplicitate Dei
Articulus II: De perfectione Dei
Articulus III: De bonitate Dei
Tractatus I: De infinitate Dei
Tractatus II: De immensitate Dei
Articulus IV: De immutabilitate Dei
Articulus V: De aeternitate Dei
Articulus VI: An Deus sit unus?
Dissertatio IV: De visione Dei a nobis
Articulus I: Utrum Deus, ut est in se, possit videri oculo corporeo?
Articulus II: Utrum intellectus creatus supernaturaliter adiutus possit videre Deum ut in se est?
Articulus III: Utrum aliquis in hac vita viderit, possitve videre Deum ut est in se?
Articulus IV: Utrum essentia divina videatur aut videri possit per aliquam similitudinem seu speciem?
Dissertatio V: De scientia Dei
Articulus I: Utrum in Deo sit scientia proprie dicta, eaque sit attributum?
Articulus II: De obiecto et divisione scientiae Dei
Articulus III: An et quae scientia in Deo sit causa rerum?
Articulus IV: In quo medio Deus cognoscat alia a se?
Dissertatio VI: De praescientia futurorum
Articulus I: Quid et quotuplex sit futurum?
Articulus II: Utrum Deus certo et infallibiliter cognoscat omnia futura absoluta, contingentia et libera?
Articulus III: Quomodo futura sint praesentia in aeternitate?
Articulus IV: In quo medio Deus cognoscat futura absoluta, contingentia et libera?
Articulus V: De scientia futurorum conditionatorum
Articulus VI: De scientia media
Dissertatio VII: De voluntate Dei
Articulus I: De voluntate Dei secundum se, et eius obiecto
Articulus II: De libertate Dei
Articulus III: Quotuplex sit voluntas in Deo, et an semper impleatur?
Articulus IV: De voluntate Dei circa salutem omnium
Articulus V: Utrum Christus sit mortuus pro omnibus omnino hominibus?
Articulus VI: Utrum Deus omnibus provideat auxilia sufficientia ad salutem?
Dissertatio VIII: De praedefinitionibus seu decretis divinis circa actus nostros liberos
Articulus I: Unde repetenda sit infallibilis efficacia divinorum decretorum circa actus nostros liberos?
Articulus II: Solvuntur obiectiones
Dissertatio IX: De providentia, praedestinatione et reprobatione
Articulus I: De providentia
Articulus II: De praedestinatione
Articulus III: Utrum praedestinatio sit ex praevisis meritis, an mere gratuita
Articulus IV: Solvuntur obiectiones contra utramque conclusionem
Articulus V: De reprobatione
Whether reprobation exists, and what it is?
I say 1°: There is in God a reprobation of certain persons1. For it pertains to the providence of the universal provider that, among the defectible things subject to it, it should permit some to fail, for the good of the whole universe. But by divine providence intellectual creatures, defectible by their own nature, are ordained to glory. Therefore it pertains to this providence to permit some to fail from that end, and this is called to reprobate. Likewise, God executes nothing in time that He has not decreed from eternity. But in time He reprobates some, as is clear from that text, Matth., XXV, 41: Depart from me, you cursed. Therefore.
I say 2°: Reprobation does not consist in the mere negation of predestination, but in a positive act by which God wills to permit some, by their own fault, to fail from glory, and on account of the fault to inflict the punishment of damnation.
The reason is that reprobation is an objective part of providence2; but providence implies a positive act both of the intellect and of the will. And otherwise possible angels and men could be called reprobate, because they are not predestined.
Hence you will infer 1° that reprobation, no differently than providence, of which it is an objective part, consists in an act of the intellect presupposing an act of the will.
You will infer 2° that reprobation is rightly defined by the Author3 as the providence concerning those who fail from the end, with the will of permitting the fault, and on account of the fault of inflicting the punishment of damnation; or, what is the same thing, the decree by which God wills to permit that some, by their own fault, fall from glory, and for the fault to inflict the punishment of damnation.
You will infer 3° that, although reprobation is one, it can nevertheless be divided into negative and positive, as into two inadequate functions. For when it is defined as the will of permitting that some, by their own fault, fail from glory, and on account of the fault of inflicting the punishment of damnation: insofar as it implies the will of permitting that some, by their own fault, fail from the end, it is called negative; not that it is not a positive act, as has been said, but because it effects nothing, but only permits, and to permit is, as it were, to be disposed negatively; but insofar as it implies the ordination of the fault to eternal punishment, it is called positive, because now it decrees something to be done, namely, the punishment to be inflicted. Whence negative reprobation includes only the term from which, namely, the glory from which the reprobate are permitted to fail; but positive reprobation includes, in addition, the term to which, namely, the pain of loss and of sense which God decrees for them.