Summa summae S. Thomae, Tomus III
Charles René Billuart (1685–1757)
Tractatus I: De fide
Prooemium
Dissertatio I: De objecto fidei
Articulus I: Quodnam sit objectum fidei?
[Faith is taken in various senses: 1° For fidelity in promises, as 1 Cor., X, 13: God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able, and elsewhere. 2° For conscience, Rom., XIV, 23: All that is not of faith is sin. 3° For confidence, Jas., 1, 6: Let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. Faith understood in this sense is abused by Lutherans and Calvinists, who say we are justified by faith, that is, by the confidence by which we trust that sins are forgiven us through Christ. Which acceptation of faith, although in this sense it is to be rejected, is nevertheless to be admitted absolutely as an effect of faith, indeed even of hope; for from the fact that we believe God and hope in him, confidence in him is born. 4° For veracity or the inclination to speak the truth, 2 Tim., II, 11: A faithful saying: for if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him. 5° For the doctrine itself, that is, the object of faith, Rom., X, 8: This is the word of faith which we preach.]
Faith is here taken 6° and properly for the supernatural virtue by which we believe truths revealed by God; and it is defined by the Apostle, Hebr., XI, 1: The substance of things to be hoped for, the evidence of things that appear not. But, because every habit is specified by its object, and from that its nature is known, the Author begins this treatise from the object of faith, treating of the habit of faith itself below, q. 4. Adhering to which method,
I say 1°: The formal object which, or, as others call it, the object of attribution of faith, is first truth in being,1 or God himself as God, exceeding natural reason; which I add, because God, as natural author, can be known by natural light independently of faith.
It is proved.2 That is the formal object of some habit which is principally attained by it, and by reason of which the other things are attained: thus health is the formal object of medicine, because it is principally attained by medicine, and by its reason the other things, pulse, urine, remedies, etc., are attained. Now first truth in being, or God, as true God, is that which is principally attained by faith; but the other things, as those pertaining to the humanity of Christ, to the sacraments, and whatever else is contained in the Sacred Scriptures, are attained in order to God as to that which is most excellent among all things, and that he may be known more and more. Therefore.
I say 2°: The formal object by which, or the proper quo, of faith is first truth in speaking, or the divine veracity revealing, connoting first truth in knowing, or the infinite wisdom of God.3
It is proved as to the first part. The formal object by which of faith in common is the veracity of the speaker; for in this the assent of faith is distinguished from scientific assent, that the motive of the assent of faith is the authority of the speaker, while the motive of scientific assent is the truth of the principle from which the conclusion is elicited. Therefore the formal object under which of divine faith is the veracity of God speaking and revealing.
It is proved as to the second part. Faith is certain and infallible. Therefore it must rely on an infallible motive. — I subsume. Now the divine veracity revealing does not have that it be infallible unless it connote the infinite wisdom of God. Therefore. — Proof of the minor. That the divine veracity revealing be infallible, it does not suffice that it cannot deceive out of malice, but it is required that it also cannot deceive out of ignorance, and therefore that God himself cannot be deceived in knowing. Now that God cannot be deceived in knowing proceeds from his infinite wisdom, by which he knows all things as they are, without any admixture of falsity. Therefore.
I say 3°: The adequate material object of faith is everything revealed by God: God himself primarily, the rest secondarily.
It is proved. The adequate material object of some power or habit is all that which it can attain, as it lies under its object, or under the formal ratio under which: thus every colored body is the adequate material object of the visual power, because it can attain it, as it lies under light, which is its formal ratio under which. Now faith attains everything revealed, as it lies under the truth of God revealing, which is its formal object under which, as was said: God however primarily, the rest secondarily, as was also said in the first conclusion. Therefore.
You will object against the first part of the second conclusion: The formal object by which of faith, or, which is the same thing, the motive of the assent of faith, is that into which the assent of faith is ultimately resolved. Now that into which the assent of faith is ultimately resolved is not first truth in speaking, but first truth in being, or the Godhead. Therefore. — Proof of the minor. To one asking why you believe the mysteries of faith, v. g., that God is trine, you rightly answer: « Because God revealed it. » And to one asking further why you believe God revealing, you rightly again answer: « Because he is first truth in speaking. » But finally to one asking why God is first truth in speaking, nothing else remains to answer than: « Because God is, or he is first truth in being. » Therefore.
Nothing else remains to answer, than that because God is, assigning the cause of the thing, I concede; assigning the cause of the assent, I deny. Indeed for this reason God is truthful or first truth in speaking, because God is; but not for that reason do I believe the mysteries of faith, v. g., that God is trine, because God is, or he is first truth in being, but because he is truthful. For the assent of faith (which is to be diligently observed) is not discursive, but simple, and it rests solely in the testimony of the speaker, otherwise it is no longer the assent of faith: thus to one telling me that Rome exists, I assent because he is truthful, and there faith rests; but if you ascend and ask further: « Whence is he truthful? » now you run outside faith. Similarly therefore, to one asking why I believe God revealing, I rightly answer: « Because he is truthful », and there faith or the assent of faith rests, nor could it be asked except foolishly why I believe truth or veracity; but if you ask further why God is truthful, now I shall answer, not as a believer, but as a theologian: « Because God is. »