THE CONCEPT OF
SACRED THEOLOGY

JOSEPH CLIFFORD FENTON, S.T.D.,
λ
Assistant Professor of Dogmatic Theology
in the Catholic University of America,
Washington, D. C,

THE BRUCE PUBLISHING COMPANY
MILWAUKEE

Nihil obstat: H. B. Ries, censor librorum
Imprimatur: 4* Moyses E. Kiley, Archiepiscopus Milwaukiensis
May 31, 1941
Imprimatur: 4* Thomas M. O’Leary, DX>., Episcopus Campifontis
July 8, 1941

__
Copyright, 1941
The Brace Publishing Company
Printed in the U.S.A.

&X.IT5I

214331

THIS VOLUME IS OFFERED
IN MEMORY OF MY MOTHER,
MRS. ELIZABETH FENTON,
WHO DIED MARCH 15, 1941.

"0 God, Who hast commanded us to honor our father and
mother; lovingly have mercy on the soul of my mother, and
forgive her sins; and bring me to see her in the joy of eternal
brightness. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, Thy Son, Who
livest and reignest with Thee, in the unity of the Holy Ghost,
God, world without end. Amen.”
The collect for the priest’s mother, listed among the
various prayers for the dead in the Roman Missal.

INTRODUCTION
This book is meant to aid those who are professionally and
culturally interested in the science of sacred theology better to
appreciate the nature and the characteristics of this discipline.
Within the science of sacred theology are those lessons which
will tell man how he can attain an everlasting and ineffable
happiness in the next world and possess the justice, peace, and
security so tragically lacking in this world in our own time.
It is then a matter of the utmost importance that those who
are privileged to study this science should realize its nature and
its competence from the very outset of their course.
Every textbook on fundamental theology begins with some
explanation of the essence and the attributes of sacred theology
as a whole. Usually, however, because of the tremendous extent
of the matter which must be covered in a class of fundamental
dogma, the treatise on theology itself is very brief indeed. The
men of our own country and of our own time, who must rely
so much on the datum of sacred theology for the rebuilding
of civilization, stand in evident need of some more complete
exposition of the concept of theology than that which has been
presented in the ordinary manuals.
There has been no book on this subject in the English lan­
guage since the brilliant Clerical Studies of the Abbè Hogan,
in which the great Sulpician described the characteristics and
the dignity of each subject taken up in the regular courses
offered to candidates for the priesthood and Dr. Scannell’s
book, The Priesfs Studies, which was intended to aid those
continuing to advance in ecclesiastical science after seminary
days. However, since the appearance of these fine works, and
since the writing of the article on “Theology” by Monsignor
vii

\

viii

INTRODUCTION

Pohle in the Catholic Encyclopedia, the literature of this sci­
ence has been enriched by the.methodological treatises of such
men as Gardeil, Rabeau, Schultes, and Marin-Sola. It is only
fitting that the American student of today should have some
access in his own literature to the conclusions which have been
illumined through the discussions which followed upon the
production of these works.
The great effect of these discussions has been to show that
theological truth expresses the very meaning which can be
proved to belong to the body of revealed doctrine rather
than merely a teaching connected with the divine message.
The illustration and demonstration of this fact are the domi­
nant concerns in this book. If American students of our day
can be brought to realize clearly that the body of theological
literature sets forth the very meaning inherent in the teaching
which comes to man from the lips of our crucified Saviour,
then they will be able effectively to use this tremendous re­
source which God has given them for the happiness and the
perfection of their fellow men. On the other hand, if they
conclude, erroneously, that the body of theological teaching
is merely a doctrine connected with divine revelation, then
there is always the danger that they will seek to set aside this
treasure for spurious studies which claim to bring men directly
to the words and the meaning of our Lord. The setting aside
of the theological resource today would constitute an irrepa­
rable harm to those men who stand in such great need of it.
The last four chapters of this work are, of course, not in­
tended as even a complete outline of the history of sacred
theology. As a matter of fact very little has been done in the
line of a complete history of theology in postpatristic times.
Monsignor Martin Grabmann’s Geschichte der ftatholischen
Théologie is very incomplete although it is the best work avail­
able on this subject. It does little better than list and classify
by schools the names of post-Tridentine theologians. Likewise
the classical Nomenclator Literarius of Hurter, S.J., gives a
resume of the lives of theological writers and classifies them

INTRODUCTION

t

I
i
I
<
t
;
I
J
f
i
‘
I
I
i
I

by schools, but with few exceptions no attempt has been made
to analyze the teaching of the masters.
The present work is a development of a doctoral dissertation
completed ten years ago at Rome, while the author was a
student priest at the Angelico. The author was fortunate
enough to have this dissertation directed by that eminent
theologian, Father Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange. Fathers Friethoff and Ceuppens were the readers, Father Michael Browne,
since Rector Magnificus of the Angelico, and Father Mariano
Codovanni, now Master of the Sacred Palace, were of inestimable help by reason of their gracious counsel. It is the
sincere hope of the author that this book may cooperate in
some way in giving to American students a measure of that
lofty and correct notion of sacred theology which these great
professors expounded and realized.
The author wishes to acknowledge the kindness of his
friends, the Reverend John J. Reilly, Director of the National
Shrine of the Immaculate Conception and the Reverend Doctor
Cornelius Collins, National Director of the Archconfraternity
of Christian doctrine, both of whom have been of service in
the preparation of this volume.

■>

l
I

■4■'Ϊ

IX

The Catholic University of America,
Washington, D. C.
June 25, 1941.

WBMM

CONTENTS
Page
Introduction............................................................................ vii
Chapter

1. The Function and Necessity of Sacred Theology .

i

2. The Subject Matter......................

26

3. The Light of Sacred Theology ........

56

4. Certitude in Sacred Theology ......................................... 71
5. The Equipment of Sacred Theology — Part I . . . 82
6. The Equipment of Sacred Theology — Part II . . . 101
7. The Equipment of Sacred Theology — Part III

. . 149

8. The Scientific Character of Sacred Theology . . . 165
9. Opinions, Systems, and Schools................................... 181

10. Unity and Pedagogical Division in Sacred Theology . 198
11. The Development of Sacred Theology — The
Patristic Period......................................................... 217
12. The Development of Sacred Theology — The
Medieval Period . . ............................... · · · 231
13. The Development of Sacred Theology — The
Post-Tridentine Theologians..........................

· 247

14. Theology in America — Retrospect and Prospect . . 258
Index
2^5
“

xi

CHAPTER

I

THE FUNCTION AND NECESSITY
OF SACRED THEOLOGY
A. The Ordinary Definition. A man will profit by the
study of sacred theology only to the extent that he realizes
exactly what theology is. For this reason most of the writers
of textbooks in fundamental theology begin their works with
a treatise on the nature of the science and define it acceptably.
Thus Egger, Cotter, Dorsch, Pesch, and Dieckmann1 follow
Kleutgen and Scheeben in defining it as “the science of faith.”
Muncunill, Felder, MacGuiness, Tepe, Del Val, Hervé, Zubizarreta, Lahitton, Wilhelm-Scannell, Lepicier, and Diekamp2
’Egger, Enchiridion Theologiae Dogmaticae Generalis (Bressanone, 1932), 6th ed.,
pp. I and 2; A. C. Cotter, S.J., Theologia Fundamentalis (Weston, Massachusetts:
1940), p. 1; Aemilius Dorsch, S.J., Institutiones Theologiae Fundamentalis, Vol. 1,
“De Religione Revelata” (Innsbruck: 1930), ed. 3 and 3, pp. 2-4; Dr. Matthias
Joseph Scheeben, Handbuch der katholischcn Dogmatic, Vol. 1 (Freiburg im
Breisgau: 1873), p. 378; Hermannus Dieckmann, S.J., De Revelatione Christiana'
(Freiburg im B.: 1930), p. 4; Kleutgen, S.J., Institutiones Theologiae (Regensburg),
p. 1; Christianus Pesch, S.J., Praelectiones Dogmaticae, Vol. 1, Institutiones Propaedeuticae ad Sacram Theologiam (Freiburg im B.: 1924), ed. 6 and 7, p. 4. Most
of these authors follow Scheeben in teaching that theology is the science of faith in
a double sense. Objectively the content of divine faith is the thing considered in
this science. Subjectively the conclusions of theology are demonstrated from or by
the truths which we accept on the authority of God revealing.
’Muncunill, S.J., Tractatus de Vera Religione (Barcelona: 1909), No. 3; Hila­
rious Felder, OM.Cap., Apologetica sive Theologia Fundamentalis, Vol. 1, 2nd
ed. (Paderborn and Rome: J923), p. 2; Joannes MacGuiness, CM., Com­
mentarii Theologici, Vol. 1, 3rd ed. (Paris and Dublin: 1930), p. 1; Bernardus
Tepe, S.J., Institutiones Theologicae, Vol. 1 (Paris: 1894), pp. 1 and 2; Honoratus
Del Val, O.S.A., Sacra Theologia Dogmatica, Vol. 1, (Madrid: 1906), p. 1;
Canonicus J. M. Hervé, S.TJ3., Manuale Theologiae Dogmaticae, Vol. i (Paris:
1929), p. i; Josephus Canonicus Lahitton, S.T.D., Theologiae Dogmaticae Theses,
I

Il ιι··ι^ϋ»—ilin··!*—ι«»ιΙΙ·ΙΙ·Ι|ιί w » jllU'Ii li||i||^ί,|ΓΙιΙΙιΙΙ|
æaaHattaaMËiMM

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

a

offer modifications of a definition which Tanquerey-Bord’
gives as $the science which treats of God and of creatures, in
so far as they are referred to God, by way of revelation and of
reason.^ Charlier, a brilliant contemporary student of the na­
ture of theology, claims that a universally acceptable and most
general definition of this subject would be f‘a human discipline
based on revelation and developing itself in the light of that
revelation.”|
All of these common definitions of sacred theology agree in
describing it in function of its source. In this description they
are perfectly accurateJThe theologian actually draws conclu­
sions from principles which are true and are accepted as such
with the highest degree of certitude. He proceeds in a rigor­
ously scientific manner, and thus he develops a human dis­
cipline and utilizes the force of human reason. At the same
time the principles out of which the theologian draws his con­
clusions are actually truths which have been, revealed to the
world by God through Jesus Christ our LordjHe would have
no reason for accepting his conclusions as true if he did not
assent to the principles from which they are drawn with the
acceptance of divine faith. In so far, then, as sacred theology
draws out the implications and inferences contained in divine
teaching, it is truly the “science of faith.”
Accurate as these definitions are, they cannot be accepted as
adequately expressing the nature of theology. The mere stateVoL i (Paris: 1932), p. 1;'Joseph Wilhelm, D.D., Ph.D., and Thomas B. Scanned,
D.D., A Manual of Catholic Theology Based an Scheeben's "Dogmatic," Vol. 1
(London: 1909), Introduction, xvii; Valentinus Zubizarreta, O.C.D., Archbishop of
Santiago in Cuba, Theologia Dogmatico-Scholastica, Vol. 1, 3rd ed. (Bilbao: 1937),
p. 9; Alexius Henricus Maria Cardinalis Lepicier, O.SM., Institutiones Theologiae
Speculativae, Vol. I (Turin and Rome: 193*1), p. 18; (see also the much more
extensive work of the same author, Tractatus de Sacra Doctrina (Rome: 1927), p. in;
Franciscus Diekamp, S.TD., Theologiae Dogmaticae Manuale,, Vol. 1 (Paris,
Tournai, and Rome: 1933), p. 2.
*Ad. Tanquerey, S.S., Synopsis Theologiae Dogmaticae Fundamentalis, 24th ed.,
entirely revised by J. B. Bord (Paris, Tournai, and Rome: 1937), p. 2; R. P.
Herrmann, C.SS.R., in his famous Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae, Vol. 1,
7th ed. (Paris and Lyons: 1937), p. 3, makes use of both definitions.
4L. Charlier, OP., Essai sur le Problème Théologique (Thuillies: 1938), p. 12.

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

%

ment that this science draws conclusions from the very contentof divine revelation fails, in some way or another, to touch
upon that which is most characteristic of the actually existing
literature of sacred theology. Years ago Rabeau pointed out
the futility of attempting to explain the nature of this science
merely by indicating the syllogistic process used in the produc­
tion of its theses.5 Charlier attempted to clear up the difficulty
with his thesis that the traditional theologians had essayed an
impossible task in trying to explain sacred theology in function
of the Aristotelian notion of a science.6 Furthermore the con­
troversy between Marin-Sola and Schultes was sufficient indica­
tion that the textbook definitions can never serve to explain
how certain theses which had once been accepted as theological
conclusions could later be defined by the Church as expressing
the content of divine revelation.’
B. The Essential Function. The answer to these modern
difficulties must be sought in the direction taken by the defini­
tion of sacred theology, for Chis science cannot be explained
adequately other than in terms of its essential function and
purpose^ As it is expressed in its own tradition and literature,
fthis discipline is something more than a science which draws
conclusions out of that body of teaching which we accept as
true on the authority of God who has revealed itlWe would
fail completely to appreciate its real significance and vitality
if we imagined that it was concerned with a body of truth
connected with but not inherent in the message of Jesus Christ.
'Gaston Rabeau, Introduction a l'Etude de la Théologie (Paris: 1926), p. 218.
* Charlier, op. cit., p. 137.
’This was one of the most enlightening theological controversies of our time.
These two writers, and the , others who entered into the discussion with them,
debated the possibility of the Church’s defining as of faith a proposition which has
heretofore been received as a proper theological conclusion. In view of his conten­
tion that a proper theological conclusion is a truth which has been deduced out of
the body of divine revelation, Schultes denied this possibility. Marin-Sola opposed
him, maintaining that the theological conclusion presents a truth which is only
conceptually distinct from the body or revealed doctrine. The books in which
their theses are presented are, F. Marin-Sola, O.P., S.TM., L'Evolution homogene
du Dogme Catholique, 2nd ed., 2 Vols. (Fribourg, Switzerland: 1924). ReginaldusMaria Schultes, O.P., S.TM., Introductio in Hittoriam Dogmatum (Paris: 1922).

■ΜΗΜϋβΙ

IΛ 4

I

/

THE CONCEPT OF SACKED THEOLOGY

Sacred theology is actually that science which works toward
the clear and unequivocal expression of the divine message.
This faithful and exact setting forth of God’s teaching is the
essential function of sacred theology. ΪΓο this end all of its
complex equipment, its problems and conclusions and the very
> procedure by which the problems are resolved and the con/ elusions established are orientated. The work of explaining the
content of that teaching which God has given to the world
through Jesus Christ our Lord, and which is proposed for the
belief of men in the infallible magisterium of the Catholic
Church, actually specifies sacred theology. Sacred theology is
essentially a teleological discipline, and men can understand
it and use it properly only when they look upon it in relation
to its essential function.
Thus the man who realizes that sacred theology, by its very
nature, tends to state the teaching of our Lord clearly and
unequivocally will know how to answer the rather dangerous
claims of those writers who wish to get away from die scien­
tific complexity of scholastic literature and back to the limpid
simplicity of Christ’s own doctrine. çAll of the tremendous
intellectual and eruditional resources of sacred theology have
been concentrated on the work of expressing our Lord’s teach­
ing exactly as He gave itAThus, if one understands it aright,
the very complexity and the austere scientific form of technical
theology will appear as a mechanism by which we can focus
J the light of our minds on the very words and the meaning of
\ our Lord Himself.8 The scientific form of sacred theology is
not an end to itself. It is not calculated to distract men’s minds
from the teaching of the Gospel. Because of that very technical
apparatus, and not in spite of it, men are able to grasp and
teach the actual meaning of the message which God has given
to the world.
Sacred theology is organized for a definite function^ It aims
to set forth clearly and unequivocally the content of Christian
Ά. Gardeil, O.P., Le Donne Révèle et la Théologie, 2nd cd. (Juvisy, Seine et
Oise, 1932), p. 250. — Charlier, op. cit., p. 123.

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

f $/

revelation. A theological problem is a question relative to the
meaning of some portion of the message which God has given
to the world through Jesus Christ. The correct resolution of
such a problem, in other words a statement of what our Lord
meant and what the Catholic Church understood Him to
mean from the very beginning of her existence, constitutes a
theological conclusion. The process by which the conclusion
is proved to be the correct statement of our Lord’s meaning is
called the theological proof. Consequently the function which
motivates the entire operation of sacred theology has a domi­
nating influence in any adequate definition of this science.
C. The Essential Purpose Manifest in Theological
Literature. iThe only way in which this essential function
of theology can be demonstrated is through an appeal to the
literature of the science itself. (Che student must never forget
that in dealing with sacred theology, he is treating a subject
which has been taught for centuries. It has an extensive *and
''
tremendously developed literature and tradition. Consequently
when a man studies the nature of sacred theology, he is not
considering some possible kind of knowledge about God which
might be drawn from the content of divine revelation. He is
speaking about a definite discipline with easily ascertainable]
characteristics, a subject which is taught in the universities and
seminaries throughout the Catholic world today, and which
has been the dominating element not only in the Catholic
university tradition, but in the cultural and intellectual life of
the Church since its very foundation.
It would be perfectly possible, from an examination of the­
ological literature as a whole, to demonstrate that the science
is essentially meant for a clear and unequivocal exposition of
divine revelation. The theses of modem authors like Billot and
Diekamp or of classical authors like Valentia and Sylvius and
John of St. Thomas are obviously meant to express the content
of our Lord’s teaching.8 There is no question of mere deduction
’Many of the propositions advanced as theses by these men are actually state­
ments which have been defined as of divine faith by the Catholic Church.

6

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

for the sake of deduction in their list of conclusions. Indeed,
men like St. Thomas Aquinas and Melchior Cano have insisted
that “useless questions” should be excluded from the content
of theological teaching.1011If the actually existing science of
sacred theology had been definable merely as a knowledge
about God and the things of God in so far as these could be
known by a process of inference from the content of Catholic
dogma, then there could be no question of a “useless” conclu­
sion at all. If theology is to be described merely in function
of its principles, as a body of knowledge deduced from divinely
revealed truth, then obviously one inference or conclusion
would have the same scientific standing as any other. In that
case a man might object to a conclusion as incorrect, but he
could never logically attack it as useless. Actually a good pro­
portion of the theses set forth in the ordinary manuals of the­
ology, as well as in the classical masterpieces of this science,
have been defined as of faith by the Catholic Church.
However possible an appeal to all of the authors of theolog­
ical works might be, it is neither necessary nor highly scien­
tific. In the history of theological literature there have been
certain key works upon which others have depended, certain
writers who have given direction and form to the actually
existing theological tradition. In this way the Four Boo^s of
Sentences, written by Peter the Lombard, a twelfth-century
archbishop of Paris, were accepted as the official textbook in
the European universities from the twelfth until the end of
the sixteenth century. A good portion of the theological litera­
ture in that period took the form of commentaries on the
Sentences.11 The doctrine which men taught and studied as
sacred theology was obviously that which Peter the Lombard
had written, and that which we teach and study today is the
same science as that which was expounded in the great uni­
”St. Thomas Aquinas, the Prologue to the Summa Theologica, Melchior Cano,
O.P., De Lode Theologids, Liber XII, Caput IV, 5 I·
11 Cf. the articles on Peter the Lombard by Joseph De Ghellinck in the Catholic
Encyclopedia (Vol. XI, PP· 76S-769) and in the Dictionnaire de Théologie
Catholique (Vol. XII, columns 1941-2019).

-

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

7

versifies of long ago. As a result, that which was the character­
istic function for the theology of Peter the Lombard is likewise
characteristic of the actually existing literature and tradition
which stemmed from his work.
St. Thomas Aquinas has also exercised a unique influence
in the life of the theological tradition. The law of the Catholic
Church obliges teachers of theology in her universities and
seminaries to expound their science according to the principles
enunciated by the Angelic Doctor.12 By far the greater number
of modern theological writers have claimed to teach the doc­
trine of St. Thomas in their own works. Hence, if we can
show that both Peter the Lombard and St. Thomas Aquinas
regarded the subject that they taught as essentially orientated
toward the unequivocal presentation of the Christian message,
we shall have reasonable grounds for assuming that the actually
existing discipline of sacred theology must be defined and
understood in function of this work.
D. The Concept of Peter the Lombard. We find that the
Master of the Sentences expressed his notion of sacred theology
in the Introduction to the first of, the Four Booths, and in the
content of the volume as a whole. It was his intention in writ­
ing the Four Booths of Sentences, “to defend the faith with
the shields of the tower of David, or rather to show that it is
so defended ... to open up the profundities of theological
questions and to manifest the meaning of the ecclesiastical
sacraments to the best of his ability.”13 The context of the
volume shows very clearly that defense of the faith meant for
Peter the Lombard an accurate statement of Catholic dogma
as that dogma had been enunciated in the writings of the
Fathers. The theological investigation of which he spoke con­
sists in a statement and solution of questions raised about the
meaning of the dogmatic formulae which had entered into
the defense of the Catholic faith. The treatise on the sacra” Codex luris Canonici, canon 1366, §2.
’’Petrus Lombardus, Libri Quattuor Sententiarum, Prologus (I have used the
edition of Quarrachi, 1916).

8

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

meats was reserved for the last of the Four Booths of Sentences,
and in this book the Master followed exactly the procedure
adopted in his earlier books. Peter the Lombard made no at­
tempt to draw out all the possible implications and inferences
which might be deduced from the content of divine faith. He
was satisfied to consider those questions, the improper resolu­
tion of which might result in the perversion or the loss of the
faith for members of the Catholic Church. He professed to
act out of a “zeal for the house of God” which is the Church
of Jesus Christ. He offered his volumes as a means of over­
coming the efforts of the enemies of the faith. His only con­
cern was to remove any ambiguity which might be favorable
to these enemies of the Church through a clear statement of
the content of faith which would manifest the falsity of heret­
ical opinions.
E. The Concept of St. Thomas Aquinas. The attitude of
St. Thomas Aquinas, the Common and Angelic Doctor of the
Catholic Church, was identical with that of the Master of the
Sentences. In the Introduction to the Summa Theologica, the
greatest of all his literary works, he defines his labor as that
of a “teacher of Catholic truth.” It was his announced inten­
tion to “set forth those things which pertain to the Christian
religion dearly,”14 in such a way that beginners in the study
of the sacred doctrine might profit from his instruction. He
complains of the “useless questions” proposed in some of the
texts used in his time, questions which obviously are to be
, eliminated because they do nothing toward bringing out the
full force and clear beauty of that teaching which God has
given to the world through Jesus Christ our Lord. And when
the time arrived to consider the character of sacred theology
as a science, he used the deathless words of St. Augustine to
declare the scientific dignity of the sacred doctrine. It was the
\ contention of Augustine that to this science which we know
) as sacred theology, there could be attributed only that “by
which the most salutary faith which leads to true beatitude
14 The Prologue to the Summa Theologica.

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

9

is generated, nourished, defended, and strengthened.”15 St.
Thomas Aquinas, the man who developed the thought of
Augustine to its ultimate perfection, knew no other sort of
sacred theology.
The most striking and forceful expression of Aquinas’ con­
cept of theology, however, is to be found in his inaugural
discourse delivered on the occasion of his receiving the doc­
toral birettum from the hands of Emefic of Veire in April,
1256. He took as his text the words of Psalm 103, “Watering
the hills from on high, the earth shall be filled with the fruit
of thy works.” In this magnificent sermon16 St. Thomas saw,
under the image of the life-giving water which rains down
upon the hills and then flows to the fields below to give ver­
dure and fruitfulness to the countryside, the divinely revealed
doctrine which God has given to the world through Jesus
Christ. The hills were the prophets arid the Apostles who were
constituted as the divinely appointed bearers of the divine
message to the children of men. He considered the function of
the teachers of Catholic truth, or, in other words, the teachers
of sacred theology, since he was addressing himself to the
members of that faculty which had just given him his com­
mission to teach, to be the bringing of his divine message to
the children of men in such a way that men could profit from
its tremendous advantages. In this sermon we see very clearly
that the Angelic Doctor did not consider theology to consist
in any deductions which might be made out of the content of
Catholic dogma. Only that work which was directed toward
bringing the message of Jesus Christ to those for whom He
died upon the cross was worthy of the faculty of sacred
theology.
The Church itself has taken official cognizance of St.
”Pe Trinitate, Liber XIV, Caput I.
” This opusculum is entitled, Breve Principium Fratris Thomae de Aquino Quando
Incepit Parisius ut Magister in Theologia: De Commendatione Sacrae Scripturae. It is
listed as number 40 in the order of the opuscula arranged by Father Pierre Mandonnet, Ο.Ρ. It is found on page 491 of the fourth volume of the set of the opuscula
edited by Mandonnet and published at Paris in 1927.

10

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Thomas’ concept of sacred theology. In the Bull Redemp­
tionem Misit Dominus, of July 18, 1323, the document in
which the canonization of the Angelic Doctor was proclaimed
to the world, Pope John XXII was able to declare that the
meaning of the very text which the Saint had used in his
inaugural discourse had been fulfilled in his life and in his
teaching. All of the dialectical skill, and all of the tremendous
erudition at the disposal of St. Thomas had been utilized in
order that the little ones of Christ might receive His message
as our Lord Himself had given it, and as the Church which
He founded had understood it from the very beginning of
her existence.
F. The Counsel of Melchior Cano. The great theologians
who have developed and continued the tradition of St. Thomas
have understood theology as essentially a discipline devoted to
the unequivocal statement of the divine message. Thus, for
instance, Melchior Cano, one of the great glories of the
Thomistic school, manifested his concept of the science when
he counseled his students to advert always to the dignity of
their calling. “This rule will be in accord with reason and
particularly in accord with the authority of the saints; that
every theologian who is going to deal with the supernatural
(for this is his proper field), should consider well within him­
self the very name of theology; should often read his own
tide, that is the title of theologian; should not once but fre­
quently, that is as often as he is called upon to discuss his
subject, ask himself and realize that he is to treat of no ques­
tion except that which refers to the true and supernatural
philosophy of Christ, the apostles and the prophets.”17
Christ, the Apostles, and the prophets are the vehicles and
spokesmen of the divine public revelation, that which is pro­
posed for our belief in the infallible teaching of the Catholic
Church. Our Lord is the Great Prophet, and the others acted
as His heralds and His ministers. The true philosophy of
” Cano, op. cil., Liber ΧΠ, Caput IV.

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

II

Christ is the Christian message which comes to men in the
form of Catholic dogma. The theologian, in virtue of his posi­
tion is to be concerned with no other matter, according to the
teaching of Melchior Cano. The great Spanish writer is quite
impatient with those who have intruded useless and imper­
tinent matters into the field of the queen of the sciences.
G. The Protestatio Quotidiana of Francis Sylvius. The
same preoccupation with theology in function of its inherent
and essential purpose is manifest in the writings and in the
daily protestation of the great Douai theologian, Francis Syl­
vius. The editions of his work, published after his death, carry
the formula of a promise which he made to God every day,
a formula which is eloquent of the lofty and exact concept of
sacred theology on which the works of the outstanding the­
ologians are motivated. “I testify this day that I desire to live
and to die in the faith and in the unity of our holy mother,
the Church of Rome. I wish to order all my activity and my
studies to the glory of God, to the utility of the Church, and
to my own salvation and that of my neighbor. I shall neither
accept nor interpret Holy Scripture other than according to
the unanimous consent of the Fathers. Whatever I shall say
or write or teach, either on the Summa Theologica of St.
Thomas Aquinas, or in discussions, lectures, or other exercises
at any time or place, I shall say, write, and speak according
to the same unanimous consent of the Fathers. And if it should
happen (as it is only human to fail), that at any time I should
speak, write, or teach otherwise, from this very moment I hold
that statement as if it had not been said. So, may God love
me.”18 The unanimous consent of the Fathers, of which the
great Douai master speaks so carefully, is a norm for judging
the content of the faith itself. It was his explicit intention to
limit his teaching to that which was in accord with this crite­
rion. Sylvius intended, then, to set forth the actual message
which the Catholic Church offers to her children as the doc” The translation is that of the text cited in the preface to the edition of Sylvius’
Commentaries on the Summa Theologica (Antwerp, 1698).

i

12

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

trine revealed to men through Jesus Christ our Lord. The con­
tent of his teaching, and the content of the standard and
traditional theological literature of the Catholic Church in
every age mirrors the same tendency.
H. Revelation Given to Man in a Supernatural Way.
Since it is the immediate and essential function of sacred the­
ology to set forth and explain revealed teaching, and since
theology cannot be adequately understood nor defined other
than in the light of this function, it is obviously necessary that
we should understand exactly what sort of teaching this re­
vealed doctrine is. We can speak of revelation as an act on
the part of God. Understood in this way, or in its subjective
meaning, it is that operation by which God communicates a
body of doctrine to the human race, in a way distinct from
and superior to the way in which man naturally acquires his
knowledge.18 Likewise we can speak of revelation objectively,
that is as the body of teaching itself. Objectively, then, divine
revelation is a message which God has given to the human
race in this supernatural manner.20
When we speak of revelation as supernatural with reference
to the manner in which man acquires it, we obviously imply
that man is capable of natural knowledge, that is of under­
standing something about God, about himself and the world
in which he lives by the use of faculties which are founded
“ Cf. the teaching of the Vatican Council, in the Constitution "Dei Filius’’
(Denzinger, 1785); also the explanation of this chapter in Jean-Michel-Alfred
Vacant, Etudes Théologiques sur les Constitutions du Concile du Vatican, La
Constitution Dei Filius, Vol. j (Paris and Lyons, 1895), pp. 337-343; also Reginald
Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., S.T.M., De Revelatione per Ecclesiam Catholicam proposita,
Vol. i, 3rd ed. of the complete work (Rome, 1929), pp. 137-163; and Joseph J.
Baierl, S.T.D., The Theory of Revelation, Vol. 1 (Rochester, N. Y., 1927), pp. 20-36;
also the article "Revelation,” by lung in the Diet, de Theol. Cath., Vol. 13, columns,
2580-2618.
” Dieckmann, op. cit., pp. 144-145, prefers the term "preternatural,” but this is
not in accord with the wording of the Vatican Council nor with the ordinary signifi­
cance of “preternatural.” A thing is ordinarily spoken of as preternatural when it
is beyond the competence of some created nature, but within the scope of that
activity which springs from another. Thus, infused ideas would be preternatural to
man because, while they are outside of the scope of natural human activity, they
actually belong to the intellectual processes of created pure spirits.

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACKED THEOLOGY

13

in human nature itself.21 Man acquires this knowledge in a
natural way when he derives it by a process of abstraction from
the datum presented by his senses. Man’s nature is essentially
orientated toward the acquisition of knowledge in this way.
Consequently this manner of acquiring knowledge is natural
to him, or due to the very nature which he possesses.
However, the divine revelation which sacred theology is
organized to expound is acquired in a totally different way. In
making this revelation, God speaks to man and teaches him.
Objectively the divine revelation constitutes a body of truth
which man has received from God in the way in which a
disciple or a pupil accepts a teaching from his instructor. Man
has no inherent right to this instruction. He does not need it
in order to possess the kind of knowledge which belongs to
his human nature. Consequently we say that, considered from
the point of view of the manner in which it is received, the
divine revelation is something supernatural. It is a free gift of
God, immensely beneficial to man, but at the same time some­
thing which God does not have to give in order to fill out the
perfection of human nature as such.
We must be very careful to note that a thing is not super­
natural merely by the fact that it is acquired with the aid of
the divine power. As a matter of fact man receives from God
every bit of knowledge which he possesses, even that which
is acquired in a purely natural way. God is the First Mover
and the First Cause in every operation performed by His crea­
tures, and this holds for the operation of the human intelli­
gence as well as for any other sort of created activity. There
is not and there can never be a fiber or aspect of being and
reality which man does not receive from the merciful power
of his Creator. The criterion in the light of which a thing is
judged to be supernatural is the fact that this particular good
is not due to, nor demanded by, the nature of man. Considered
from the viewpoint of the manner in which man acquires it,
® See the Vatican Council (Denzinger, 1785), and the Anti-Modernist Oath
(Denzinger, 2145).

14

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the teaching which we call divine revelation is then definitely
supernatural.
There have been many instances in the course of history in
which God has so spoken to his creatures. Sacred theology,
however, is concerned with one definite message, that which
God has given to the world through Jesus Christ. That mes­
sage was imparted to the human race over an immense period
of time. The introductory portion was communicated to the
human race by the prophets and patriarchs, who were the
heralds and the forerunners of our Lord. The main body of
this message fell from the lips of the divine Redeemer Him­
self, and the concluding portion was entrusted to the Apostles
who were the ministers and the messengers of Christ. It has
been and it will be preached to the world with infallible cor­
rectness by that Catholic Church which is constituted as the
Mystical Body of Christ.
I. Mediate and Public Revelation. We speak of this defi­
nite doctrine as mediate and public revelation. It is mediate
in so far as it has been communicated by God to certain indi­
viduals, to be proposed by them to their fellow men. But as
mediate revelation it is just as truly the message of God when
it is received by its ultimate destinaries as it is when it first
comes to the prophet who is entrusted with and strengthened
for the function of bringing it to the rest of mankind. It would,
of course, have been perfectly possible for God to have brought
His teaching directly to each of those for whom it is intended.
But it pleased Him to deal with man according to the defi­
nitely social character of man’s own nature. He chose to select
certain men, instruct them directly, and then commission and
empower these prophets to bear His teaching to their fellows.
The revelation taught and expressed in sacred theology is
called public in that it is meant for all men, without restric­
tion. There may be, and as a matter of fact there have been,
revealed messages which were private. These communications
were addressed by God to one person or group of persons and
designated for the good of this limited number. The Christian

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

15

revelation, explained and taught in the process of sacred the­
ology, is meant to benefit all human beings.
J. Intrinsically Supernatural Character of Revealed
Truth. Most important of all for a proper understanding of
sacred theology, the revelation which is expounded in this
discipline is also supernatural in its very essence. The truths
which God has deigned to communicate to man in this mes­
sage are such that they could not be known naturally by any
creature, actual or possible. They are statements about the
intimate life of God, or as some of the theologians put it, about
God considered from the point of view of His own divinity.
God knows these truths by the very fact that He is God, but
there could be no creature who would be able to learn of them
by the unaided force of its own created nature. These essentially
supernatural truths, conveyed in Christian revelation, consti­
tute the order of mysteries™
God can and does offer men a clear vision of that infinite
Reality which is expressed in Christian revelation. In that
vision the saints in heaven find their ineffable and eternal
supernatural happiness. Men are placed in this world so that
they may prepare themselves to receive this beatific vision.
They are not meant to possess the clarity of vision here. Con­
sequently the only way in which the men of this world can
have a definite and certain knowledge of this order of super­
natural reality is through the supernatural assent of divine
faith. For, with divine faith, we assent to revealed truths, not
because we see or understand that they must be true, but
precisely on the authority of God who has revealed them, and
who can neither deceive nor be deceived. In the assent of divine
faith we accept with utter certitude a truth which is not evident.
K. Procedure of Theology Determined by Fact That
Its Essential Purpose Is the Teaching of Supernatural
Mysteries. As a result, the truths which sacred theology means
to expound and defend are such that man cannot possibly
“See The Vatican Council (Denzinger, 1795).

iWrWMWEiE

16

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

learn of them through the natural exercise of his own reason.
They could not be known in any way other than by the process
of revelation, and they can be accepted with certainty only on
the assent of divine faith. These truths which constitute the
central or essential portion of divine revelation remain no less
obscure, even after they have been revealed. The Subject with
which they are concerned is something which will be evident
to man only in the glorious clarity of the beatific vision. Sacred
theology, then, will never tend toward any clear and evident
grasp of the mysteries themselves, considered objectively. Thus,
it can never mean to prove that the mystery of the Blessed
Trinity is evident naturally, nor will it attempt to show that
even after revelation we can possess a clear knowledge of the
Triune God.
On the contrary, this science will begin its essential work
by bringing out the actual statements in which the divine
message has been proposed for the belief of men. Since the
Chief Prophet of this revelation is our Lord Jesus Christ, the
objective and scientific sacred theology must be a Christian
discipline. And because the revealed teaching is proposed to
men in the authentic magisterium of the Catholic Church,
and is not to be acquired independently of that magisterium,
sacred theology must also be the Catholic theology. It is the
business of sacred theology, as it has been understood by its
great scientific tradition, to set forth the content of revelation
exactly as it has been taught by our Lord, the prophets, and
the Apostles and as it has been understood and expressed by
the Catholic Church during all the years of its existence.
Then sacred theology must accept the task of defending this
revealed doctrine. This defense is accomplished in offering a
clear and unequivocal expression of its meaning, and in refut­
ing those incorrect interpretations which might be destructive
of the faith of Christians. Even though the Subject described
in this essentially supernatural revelation is not and will not
be evident to men as long as they live in this world, the state­
ments which contain that revelation have a definite and highly

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

17

important meaning. Sacred theology, then, can set forth the
correct meaning to be attached to these formulae, and then
demonstrate that this is the objective meaning. In accomplish­
ing this function, and not in merely drawing out the content
of implication from the dogmatic formulae themselves, sacred
theology fulfills the task entrusted to it, and does the work
which men like Peter the Lombard and St. Thomas Aquinas
understood it was to do.
L. The Purpose of Divine Revelation.23 Since sacred the­
ology can be defined and understood only with reference to
the teaching of divine revelation, we can know theology better
only in so far as we look upon it in the light of the purpose
and the necessity of that revelation. It is a fact that God has
given His supernatural message to man in order that man may
be prepared for an eternity of perfect happiness with Him in
heaven, a happiness consisting in the face to face vision, or the
intuition, of the very Reality which man has believed in this
world. God also intends that we should obtain this happiness
in the way most fitting for man to acquire a good. God intends
that we should earn it. According to the designs of divine
providence, those who have enjoyed the use of reason in this
world are meant to obtain the beatific vision, not only as
something acquired for them by the death of Jesus Christ, but
also as a reward which they themselves have merited in living
the life of grace. Thus God has given us the Christian revela­
tion in order that we may know the eternal good for which
we are meant to work and to prepare in this world.
The divine message which sacred theology is meant to teach
is something definitely worth having for its own sake. The
revealed truths actually perfect the mind which possesses them.
It is quite fitting that these truths should be known by men
who are invited by God to live as His adopted children, and
as the brothers of Jesus Christ. The primary and essential pur­
pose of the divine revelation is to direct men toward that eteraSee The Vatican Council (Denzinger, 1786).

Jl.hillllliilillllti|j
*
l~
^^T
*

,~"
^^^^^^
*

l8

______

_

-_______ _------ η—

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

nal beatitude which God wills that man should enjoy as his
only ultimate end.
However, there is another and a seriously important good
procured through divine revelation. As a matter of fact, man,
as he actually exists, is deficient in natural knowledge about
God and consequently in that understanding which is conse­
quent upon the natural appreciation of the Creator. It is a
real though secondary purpose of divine revelation to supply
for the shortcomings of man’s natural cognition, and to offer
him a knowledge about God, even in the natural order, which
is available to all, easily, and without that error which would
endanger or destroy man’s intellectual perfection.
M. The Necessity of Divine Revelation. It is the essen­
tial function of sacred theology to explain and teach a revela­
tion which is physically necessary for man. Such is the order
which the providence of God has instituted in the world that
man will not attain the eternal and supernatural happiness of
the beatific vision, which is, as a matter of fact, the only ulti­
mate beatitude available to him, apart from the definite revela­
tion which God has given to the world through Jesus Christ
and which He proposes and guards in the unerring teaching
of the Catholic Church. A thing is said to be physically neces­
sary when an end cannot be obtained independently of it. Since
the end which will not be obtained other than with the divine
revelation is the only ultimate good of man, we can realize
how profound is man’s need of the revelation which sacred
theology is ordered to expound.
This same Christian revelation is morally necessary for man.
A thing is said to be morally necessary for the attainment of
some good which, absolutely speaking, could be obtained with­
out this help, but which could not be obtained fitly and prop­
erly except through its influence. The Christian revelation is
morally necessary for the attainment of a knowledge of God
in the natural order which is available to all, with reasonable
ease and celerity, and without a serious and perverting admix­
ture of error.

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

IP

There can be no understanding of theology apart from a
realization of this necessity. A natural knowledge of God is,
of course, that which man can obtain through the exercise of
those faculties which are rooted in his own human nature.
As a rational creature, man is capable of recognizing the exist­
ence of a First Cause. He can and should be able to demon­
strate accurately and with perfect certitude that this First Cause
is simple, spiritual, eternal, immutable, one, good, and true,
resplendent with an infinite intellectual and moral perfection.
As a matter of fact the perennial Catholic philosophy contains
such demonstrations drawn out in their ultimate scientific
complexity, and utterly beyond the possibility of any legitimate
impeachment.
However, the long course of history shows us very clearly
that those men who have not had the advantage of the divine
revelation taught in sacred theology, have never made full and
perfect use of this naturally available knowledge about God.
The great masses of mankind who have not possessed the virtue
of divine faith have labored under the most ludicrous and dan­
gerous misconceptions regarding the divinity. A kind of knowl­
edge relatively far more perfect than the ordinary was included
in the traditional metaphysics of the Greek philosophers, but
even this science was burdened with serious errors. Certainly
it was beyond the competence of the great masses of the people
who had neither the time to cultivate it nor the inclination to
embark upon studies of such immense technical exigency.
The Christian revelation is supernatural in the manner in
which man receives it. Its primary and essential content is also
intrinsically supernatural, comprising the great mysteries of
the order of salvation. However, it also contains truths which
are themselves essentially natural. If man does not accept the
body of revelation with the assent of divine faith, he will not
possess the fullness of the natural knowledge about God which
is requisite for his perfect moral and intellectual life upon this
earth.
We must not, however, make the mistake of thinking that

20

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

apart from a supernatural revelation man could know nothing
whatsoever about his Creator. Neither must we believe that
whatever knowledge the human race has ever had of God is
something which it has acquired by way of divine revelation.
These errors, ordinarily designated as fideism and false tradi­
tionalism, have both been condemned by the Catholic Church.24
We must never forget that the human mind is capable of find­
ing out a great deal about God, and that men have actually
learned much about God through the exercise of their natural
faculties apart from any revelation whatsoever. Furthermore,
some of this knowledge about God, at least the fact of His
existence, is so easy to obtain that Holy Scripture justly calls
the person who denies God a “fool.”
In order that man may live a perfect intellectual and moral
life, however, he must possess an extensive knowledge about
God. When, as in a modern democracy, the government of
the state is dependent upon the moral and intellectual disposi­
tion of the populace as a whole, naturally that knowledge of
God must be widespread. Such a widespread and accurate
knowledge will not be possessed other than through that
Christian revelation which it is the essential function of sacred
theology to set forth. The man who strives to understand
sacred theology today cannot afford to overlook the real neces­
sity of divine revelation.
N. The Necessity of Sacred Theology. The place of the­
ology in the economy of human welfare is such that apart
from it mankind will not achieve its ultimate destiny. The
science of sacred theology, as distinct from the virtue of faith
itself, is an absolute requisite for the human race. Obviously,
however, sacred theology is not requisite for mankind in the
same way that divine revelation and the faith on which this
revelation is accepted are necessary. According to the great
“Both in the declarations of the Vatican Council (Denzinger, 1785), and the
Anti-Modernist oath to which reference has been made, and in the instructions
issued to Bautain (Denzinger, 1622-27), and Bonnetty (Denzinger, 1647-52),
by Pius IX.

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

21

Douai theologian, Francis Sylvius, “Theology considered as
the awareness of the principles of the science of theology,
which principles are the articles of faith, is necessary with the
necessity of means [physical necessity], for every one who
arrives at the use of reason. It is so necessary because without
it the end of man which is supernatural, could not be known
at all, and it is necessary that man should know this end so
that he can direct all his actions toward it.” With reference
to theology precisely as distinguished from the content of
divine faith, the same theologian writes: “Theology, in so far
as it involves, over and above a knowledge of the principles
[that is, of the articles of faith], the knowledge by which these
principles can be in some way explained and conclusions de­
duced from them, is not necessary for each individual, either
by way of means or by way of precept. It is, however, requisite,
both with the necessity of means and by reason of precept to
the Church itself, that is to the Christian republic.”25
It is thus the contention of Sylvius, expressing a doctrine
quite common among Catholic theologians, that in the actually
existing order of divine providence the Church must have
within its membership men who are endowed with the science
of sacred theology. This necessity must be explained by the
fact that sacred theology is essentially a discipline which tends
toward the explanation of Christian revelation. If we could
understand theology merely as a science which deduces con­
clusions from the content of divine revelation, then there
would be no ascertainable reason why the Catholic Church
should stand in need of this science for the accomplishment of
that work which the Son of God entrusted to her care.
Sacred theology is requisite for the Christian republic pre­
cisely because it is by its very nature that discipline which sets
out to expound the articles of faith, the key statements in that
revelation which men must accept on the authority of God if
they are to attain to eternal life. Now, it was the will of God,
expressed in the actual constitution of the Catholic Church as
“Sylvitu, op. cit., Commentary on I*, q. 1, art. 1.

22

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the unique authentic vehicle of revelation, that men are meant
to receive divine revelation from and in the Church from those
who possess the science of sacred theology. This very impor­
tant truth is manifest, not only from the actual experience of
the Church, as expressed in her history, but also in the words
of Sacred Scripture, as these are cited by Sylvius. Sylvius notes
that, according to St. Paul, the Church is so constituted that,
by the will of our Lord Himself, it counts within its ranks
Apostles and prophets, evangelists, pastors, and doctors for the
work of the ministry and for the edification of the body of
Christ.26 In other words, the Church was to include among
those who worked in its behalf teachers of the revealed word
of God, distinct at once from those who were the founders of
the Church and those who were the immediate destinaries of
divine revelation. These teachers, in so far as they employed
every human resource to set forth the divine message, actually
possessed and utilized the science of sacred theology.
The Apostle of the Gentiles made it a rule that the bishops
who were to be set up over the faithful whom he had con­
verted should embrace the faithful word which is in accord­
ance with doctrine, so that they might be able to exhort in
sane teaching and confute those who contradicted the word
of God.2T All human ingenuity was to be exercised in the
preaching of Christian faith. The application of human reason
to the task of teaching divine revelation actually constitutes
sacred theology. The great science which Peter the Lombard,
St. Thomas Aquinas, and their successors have expounded con­
stitutes the sort of activity which must exist within the Catholic
Church in order that the essential function of continuing the
teaching of Christ may continue.
O. The Worth of Sacred Theology. It is a matter of strict
and scientific accuracy to state that the study which we know
as sacred theology brings to the human race blessings and
benefits far greater than those which proceed from any other
“The Epistle to the Ephesians, 4:11, 12.
"The Epistle to Titus, 1:9.

OTggWtF

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

23

discipline within the competence of man. The highest and the
most perfect among the other functional sciences can aid in
bringing about an ordered and cultured life in this world.
They can serve to remedy the ills of the body and of the mind
and can contribute toward the attainment of justice for those
who live within the state. Sacred theology offers and is requi­
site for the accomplishment of a happiness which is never
ending, a blessedness which is so high above even the most
perfect temporal felicity which man can find in this world
that the human mind is unable to describe it.
Other disciplines may and do avert serious evils. Ignorance,
suffering, and injustice may be banished from among men
through certain studies which are purely natural in their scope
as well as in their method. Sacred theology, however, stands
alone among the sciences which men can acquire in that it is
capable of averting the most serious failure which man can
encounter, an eternity of anguish and futility. It is perfectly
true that we can recognize this tremendous value of sacred
theology only in the light of divine faith. The ultimate and
ineffable good which can only be procured with the aid of
this science, and the catastrophic evil which it cooperates to
avert are realities which cannot be recognized as such in the
light of merely natural evidence. They pertain to that order of
reality which man could never know apart from divine reality.
Nevertheless they remain realities. Men who live in a time and
in a land where realism is the rule cannot neglect them.
Moreover, sacred theology has a definite function to perform,
a contribution to make for our own civilization. We are quite
aware that the temporal ills to which individual men and civil
societies in our own time are subject can be cured or alleviated
only through the practice of Christian virtue and the recogni­
tion of the rights of God. The only discipline which is com­
petent to offer competent instruction on the Christian virtues
is sacred theology itself. This science alone can give to the
world the knowledge about God which is requisite for the
regeneration of our social order.

24

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

The peace and the security of nations, the social and eco­
nomic justice for which the men of our time strive so pas­
sionately, the stability and happiness of family and of individual
life; all of these benefits are to be obtained through the agency
of sacred theology. The man who takes up this study, who
wills to know and to appreciate those teachings which God
has given to men through Jesus Christ our Lord and which
are proposed for our belief in the magisterium of the Catholic
Church; the man who works to express that doctrine unequiv­
ocally and clearly is preparing for himself a glorious part in
the labor of human welfare.
Naturally sacred theology is even more strikingly valuable
to men in times of stress, when all of the values which civiliza­
tion has cherished through the ages are endangered. We must
be realistic enough to acknowledge the fact that those evils
which afflict our times are never going to be overthrown by
some new system, to be excogitated by some future genius.
There is never going to be a magic formula which will bring
men the happiness toward which they strive so pitiably. The
doctrine which is literally competent to save the world is that
which is enclosed in the traditional literature of sacred the­
ology. The men who are going to make the great contributions
toward human betterment are those who have the faith and
the courage to apply themselves generously to the task of
mastering sacred theology, and bringing its message to a
needy world.
P. The Explanation of William Estius. Long ago,
William Estius, another of the famous school of Douai, suc­
ceeded in bringing out the dignity of sacred theology very
forcefully. He could recognize the inherent value of the science
because he did not fail to look upon it in the light of its essen­
tial function, the objective teaching of divine revelation. “Since
the purpose and the use of theology is that through it man
should know God, and having known Him, should love Him,
and finally that he should rest in God as in his highest Good,
it is quite manifest that theology is a great good and that its

FUNCTION AND NECESSITY OF SACRED THEOLOGY

25

usefulness must be sought by all men. Thus rightly over all
the others this science deserves the title of queen in the realm
of living well and happily.”
Because he recognized that theology cannot be understood
apart from its essential function, Estius was able to see how
truly God Himself could be called the Author of this science.
“Finally its author and Principle is God, and Christ the Son
of God. ‘God is in heaven, revealing the mysteries — and no
man knows those things which are of God except the Spirit
of God—but the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of
the Father, He has told it.’ He cites the prophecy of Baruch
who states that no creature could know the ways of God’s
wisdom and then adds, ‘He who knows all things knows
these ways and His prudence has found them. He has found
all the way of discipline and has given it to Jacob His servant
and to Israel His beloved.’ ” God is the Author of revelation.28
In recognizing Him as the Author of sacred theology, Estius
acknowledges in this science more than a mere collection of
conclusions drawn from a revealed source. He sees sacred the­
ology for what it really is, that discipline which is essentially
orientated to the clear and correct teaching of God’s message
to men.
"Guillelini Estii, In Quatuor Libros Sententiarum Commentaria (Paris, 1696),
Praefatio,

CHAPTER

2

THE SUBJECT MATTER
A. The Material Object. The things treated in the
science of sacred theology naturally comprise those realities
about which we are instructed in that divine revelation which
we Catholics accept with the assent of divine faith. The sum
total of conclusions, teachings, or theses which sacred theology
presents to the student constitutes what is known technically
as the material object of the science.1 Strictly speaking, these
conclusions or theses which are characteristic of the science are
expressed in that portion of it which we know as scholastic
theology. All that is studied in the other departments of science,
relative to its history and development, to Sacred Scripture, the
councils, and the Fathers, is treated in so far as it is requisite
for a proper understanding of the content of scholastic theology.
The message which God has revealed to man, and which is
taught and expressed in the science of sacred theology consti­
tutes an organized body of doctrine. It must not be considered
as a collection of disparate and unconnected statements, but as
a real teaching, offered to accomplish a definite function and
possessed of a definite organic unity. As a matter of fact, the
faith by which we accept this revelation is defined by St. Paul
himself as “the substance of the things for which we hope, the
1 Carolus Renatus Billuart, O.P., Summa Sancti Thomae Hodiernis Academiarum
Moribus Accomodata, sive Cursus Theologiae juxta Mentem Divi Thomae, Vol. i
(Paris, 1904), p. 13, teaches that the adequate material object of faith is all that
which falls under virtual or mediate, divine revelation. There is no question about
the meaning of this term.

26

THE SUBJECT MATTER

T]

conviction about that which we do not see.”2 According to St.
Thomas Aquinas, the word substance in the definition of
St. Paul signifies a beginning.3 In other words, the faith is a
very real beginning in the sense that the same object, the
essence of God, the intuitive vision of which constitutes the
eternal and ineffable joys of heaven actually is accepted on faith
during the time of our pilgrimage in this world. The life of
heaven consists essentially in the vision of the Triune God.
“This is eternal life, that they should know Thee, the One
True God and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent.”4
B. The Formal Subject of Attribution. Since the hap­
piness of heaven consists in the vision of God Himself, the
revelation which God gives us in order to prepare us for the
life of heaven deals primarily with the same subject matter.
Now, that object which is known primarily in a science, which
is studied for its own sake and because of which all other mat­
ters treated by the science are considered, is called the obiectum
formale quod. Thus, according to the traditional terminology
of the theologians, God in His intimate life is the obiectum
formale quod, or the formal subject of attribution in the science
of sacred theology.3 When we say that this formal subject of
attribution is God in His intimate life, we mean God as He is
known naturally to Himself alone, and not merely in so far as
He can be known naturally by intellectual creatures, that is,
known as the First Cause of the created universe.
Now, it is axiomatic that a man will appreciate the content
and the procedure of sacred theology, only in the measure in
which he realizes the verification of the teaching about its
object. Actually in sacred theology God Himself is alone con­
sidered for His own sake. All the other subjects dealt with in
’The Epistle to the Hebrews, u:r.
’The Summa Theologica, Π*-Π“, q. 4, art. 1; also Quaestiones Disputatae, De
Veritate, q. 14, art. 2.
’The Gospel according to St. John, 17:3.
’Billuart, lac. cit., Joannes a Sancto Thoma, O.P., Cursus Theologicus, Vol. 1
(Paris, Tournai, and Rome), p. 203; St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I*,
q. I, art. 7; the commentary of Francis Sylvius on this article.

28

■
■

[
Γ

?,
' I

I
■ ?;i
:■
,'IÎi

Ii

«

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

this science are treated in so far as they contribute toward that
knowledge of God which He wishes us to possess by way of
faith in this world. A man will be a successful theologian, he
will have drawn out of his study the wealth of meaning to
which he is entitled, only when he sees each section of the
science contributing toward an enrichment of his concept of
God. In sacred theology a man learns about God, not only
when he studies those sections on the unity and trinity of God
and on the incarnation, but whenever he considers any portion
of the sacred discipline.
C. God, the Primary Object of Sacred Theology As Mani­
fest in the Division of the “Four Books of Sentences.” The
best way to prove that God in His intimate life constitutes the
obiectum formale quod of sacred theology is to look into the
various divisions of the science utilized by the outstanding au­
thors. The great masters of theology organized their studies so
as to take advantage of the fact that God is actually the central
object considered in this discipline. Peter the Lombard organ­
ized his Four Boo^s of Sentences in line with a concept which
expressed all that is best in the western tradition of education
and culture. Utilizing the terminology of St. Augustine, the
Master of the Sentences made the basic division of his work
follow upon the distinction between “things” and “signs.”*
This division was to remain classical in the university world for
generations after Peter the Lombard had died. According to
his explanations the “things” were those objects not used to
manifest something distinct from themselves. They comprised
those realities which were to be known for their own sakes and
in themselves. The “signs” were those objects which were
meant to bring to the mind a knowledge of realities distinct
from themselves.
The first three of the Four Books of Sentences dealt with the
“things” mentioned by the author. Among those “things,”
Peter the Lombard pointed out that some are to be enjoyed,
others are meant to be used, and still others are supposed to be
* Peter the Lombard, loc. cit.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

29

used and enjoyed. According to the teaching of the Sentences,
in explaining the master division of the work, the “things”
which are meant to be enjoyed are those things which actually
make us blessed. These are the Father and the Son and the
Holy Ghost. Thus the Three Divine Persons, or God consid­
ered in His intimate life, as He is at once the Author and the
End of the entire supernatural order, constitutes the center of
sacred theology as this science was expounded by Peter the
Lombard. The actual theological literature of medieval and
modern times was intimately dependent upon the work of the
Lombard. Thus a science which centered around God as the
One who is to be enjoyed, the One who is to be sought above
all others and for the sake of whom all other agencies are ex­
pected to act, is the sacred theology of our tradition.
All the rest of the matter of sacred theology is actually gath­
ered about the concept of God, according to the explanation of
Peter the Lombard. The world and the created things which
enter into it constitute the things which we are meant to use
for the attainment of God as our ultimate end. Ourselves and
the holy angels of heaven are the things which are meant to be
both used and enjoyed. The men with whom we are called
upon to associate and cooperate in this world are meant to live
a life which is a sharing of the intimate activity of God Him­
self. Many of them actually live this life of habitual grace. By
reason of their vocation, they and the saints and the angels in
heaven, together with those souls who expiate their faults in
the cleansing fires of purgatory are to be loved with that same
charity which is an act of benevolence and friendship toward
God. We are meant to enjoy their society in heaven, where they
are to live and share the intimate life of God Himself.
At the same time the saints and the men with whom we are
associated in this world constitute means which we are enabled
to use for the attainment of God’s glory and our own salvation.
Hiis concept of our social and individual life embodies a defi­
nite consecration of human activity to God. It manifests all that
is best in the cultural tradition which produced and continued

■a

30

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the work of Peter the Lombard, and shows in sharp detail the
highly developed theocentric aspect of the living sacred doc­
trine. For Peter the Lombard, one of the great exponents of
this doctrine, was brilliant enough to realize that theology
should consider all the realities of this world only with refer­
ence to God, our ultimate End. All the forces and resources of
the world were looked upon as means to be employed and
wealth to be expended for the attainment of the ultimate and
perfect human happiness. Actually some of these material
things are constituted by God Himself as “signs” or sacra­
ments, to signify the great mysteries of our redemption, and
then endowed by Him with the strength to bring about the
grace which they manifest. Our fellow men are to be looked
upon, in the light of the traditional theology, as brothers who
are meant to live with us in the eternal light of heaven, and at
the same time as forces and workers whose aid we are to enlist
in our own struggle toward salvation.
D. The Master Division of the Summa Theologica.
The theocentric character of sacred doctrine is even more strik­
ingly manifest in the master division of the Summa Theologica
of St. Thomas Aquinas, the book which replaced the Sentences
as the standard text for the theological schools of the west.
Every line in the theological writings of the Angelic Doctor
shows his conviction that God constitutes the obtectum formale
quod of the science to which he devoted his life and his talents.
All the content of his Summa Theologica centers about the
concept of God, and all of it contributes toward a more perfect
appreciation of the Creator. “Because the principal intention
of this sacred doctrine is to give a knowledge of God, not only
as He is in Himself, but also in so far as He is the Principle and
the End of all things, and especially of the rational creature
. . . looking to the exposition of this doctrine we shall treat
first of God, then of the movement of the rational creature
toward God and third of Christ, who, as man, is the Way by
which we go to God.”T
T Summa Theologica, the Prologue.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

31

Within these three divisions are grouped all the conclusions
which St. Thomas taught as the dicta of sacred theology. In
his explanation, then, God is actually the formal object of at­
tribution for the science in the very real sense that every state­
ment put forward in the science contributes toward a more
perfect grasp of that concept of God which He has offered to
the world in the content of divine revelation. St. Thomas de­
veloped his division in such a way that the master idea was
never overlooked. His order is calculated to make every part of.
sacred theology contribute to the elaboration of the idea of
God.
The First Part

The first of the three parts into which the SummaTheologica
is divided deals with God as He is in Himself, and in so far as
He is the Cause of creatures. That part of sacred theology
which deals with God as He is in Himself is divided between
the sections “de Deo Uno” and “de Deo Trino" The section on
the One God is subdivided into the treatises on the existence of
God and those concerning His nature and attributes.
a. the existence of god. Sacred Theology manifests the
necessity and the possibility of rational proofs that God really
easts, and then it sets forth the proofs themselves. In the light
of these demonstrations, it becomes evident that a First Cause
of the universe actually exists, since there could be no motion,
causality, necessity, beauty, and order among the things we see
in this world unless these realities had been communicated to
creatures by One who is the Cause of all being, and at the same
time is Himself subject to no causality whatsoever. The proofs
are peremptory and convincing. They utilize all of the force of
human reasoning, and all of the equipment of philosophical
tradition available to the science of sacred theology.8
b. the divine attributes. There are certain definite char­
acteristics which we must predicate of God, whose existence is
* Summa Theologica, q. a. (The First Question of the First Part tn the Summa
has reference to the nature of sacred theology.)

32

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

thus manifest in the proofs expounded in the treatise "de Deo
Uno.” These characteristics are called the divine attributes. As
they exist in God Himself, they are not really distinct one from
the other. According to the conditions of our human knowl­
edge, however, we must distinguish these various characteristics
in order to arrive at that knowledge of God which He expects
us to possess.
John of Saint Thomas, one of the outstanding contributors
to the literature of sacred theology, and one of the great com­
mentators on the Summa Theologica, points out three orders
among those attributes of God of which St. Thomas speaks.
*
The first order embraces what are termed the entitative attri­
butes, those by which we remove from our concept of God all
of those imperfections and limitations proper to created reality,
and recognize in Him that fullness of being and perfection
which characterizes His own nature. The first of these entita­
tive attributes is simplicity. In predicating this basic attribute
of God, we acknowledge that He is in no way subject to that
composition which must affect all bodies, and to a certain
extent all created reality. Consequently under the heading of
the divine simplicity, the theologian who follows the order of
St. Thomas considers the spirituality of God, His absolute in­
dependence of all other beings, and finally that prerogative
which the Thomists generally put forward as the metaphysical
essence of God, the fact that He is subsistent Being Itself, the
only One in whom the essence is not really distinct from exist­
ence. The other seven entitative attributes, in the order in
which they are treated by the Angelic Doctor are perfection,
goodness, infinity, immensity, immutability, eternity, and
unity™
The second order of the divine attributes includes those
which have reference to the knowability of God. In this section
“Joannes a Sancto Thoma, OJP., "The Isagoge” (in the Curita Theologicta, Vol.
1), p. 151. The Isagoge is the outstanding treatise on the order of the Summa
Theologica, and thus upon the inherent arrangement of theological teaching.
” The First Part, from question 3 to 11, inclusively.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

33

St. Thomas showed that God can never be known through the
operation of any sense faculty whatsoever. The created intel­
ligence, however, is capable of knowing God, when the ra­
tional sees Him as the necessary First Cause, upon whom all
the reality of the created and finite universe depends. Here
sacred theology explains this type of knowledge about God
and shows that it is perfectly within the natural competence of
any created intelligence. There is, however, another kind of
knowledge about God which must be considered by theology.
It is that which only God can possess naturally about Himself,
for He alone is capable by His own power of seeing Himself as
He really is. It is this type of cognition which God has decreed,
in all the fullness of His mercy, to give to His creatures. Some
of them possess it in the fullness of vision in heaven. Others
hold it by faith in the place of preparation which is this world.
The treatment of the second class of the divine attributes is
completed in the magnificent section of the Names of God.
The human concepts or ideas, of which names are the signs,
are, of course, incapable of expressing perfectly and adequately
the infinite reality which is God. Those concepts, however,
which express perfections which are in themselves unlimited,
perfections which do not include within their own natures any
limitation or potentiality incompatible with the divine essence,
can be applied to God and can express that divine reality inade­
quately and analogically. The statements about God which
make use of such analogy are perfectly correct, in spite of their
inadequacy. This portion of sacred theology which deals with
the analogy of those terms and concepts which are predicated
of God is one of the most important in all the extent of the
sacred doctrine.11
The third order of attributes comprises those which are
called operative. We predicate these of God to express His
activity. Some of those acts which we must predicate of God
arc in themselves purely immanent, that is acts which of their
very nature must begin and terminate within the same subject.
” Quations ta and 13.

34

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Others have reference to an activity of God, which, while it
is perfectly immanent in Him, results in the production of
beings distinct from Himself. Such causal activity is not en­
tirely immanent in so far as it is found in creatures.
Among the immanent attributes there are some acts which
belong to the intelligence alone, others which belong purely
to the will, and still others which are found in the practical
intellect, in which the intelligence is moved and used by the
will. In the first class, among the intellectual acts, St. Thomas
places the divine science or understanding, that wisdom which
is perfect in itself and which is the cause of all things distinct
from God. He then teaches about those ideas which exist in the
divine mind, the archtypes which serve as primary exemplars
for all created reality. There follows a consideration of the
divine truth and of that falsity which is utterly incompatible
with its perfection. The treatise on the divine knowledge is
completed with the section on the life of God, expressed in the
activity of the divine intellect.
In dealing with the will of God, St. Thomas teaches us that it
is an act by which God tends toward a good as known by Him,
an act which is sovereignly free with regard to any good other
than God Himself. He considers the will of God in itself, and
then in the acts of love and of joy. The treatise on the divine
will terminates with the consideration of those moral virtues
which are consonant with the absolute perfection of God—
divine justice and mercy.
In the line of the practical intellect, the order of the Angelic
Doctor treats of the divine providence, the plan existing from
all eternity in the mind of God, according to which all crea­
tures are brought to their ultimate end. Then it deals with that
particular providence of God with reference to those who are
to be in His courts for all eternity, the plan of the divine pre­
destination. This is treated directly, and then in terms of its
scriptural metaphor, the bool^ of life.12
Subsequent to the treatise on the purely immanent-attributes
’’Questions 14-24.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

35

of God, there comes the section on the divine omnipotence.
The entire tract on the One God is completed with considera­
tion of the divine beatitude, which consists in the perfect pos­
session of the divine and infinite good.13
c. the blessed trinity. The most important portion of all
sacred theology is that contained in the tract on the Blessed
Trinity. This tract is subdivided into three distinct parts, as it is
given in the Summa Theologica. In the first of these parts there
is a study of the divine processions, and of those relations which
are based upon the processions, and which distinguish the three
divine Persons, one from the others.14 In the second part of the
treatise there is a special consideration of the divine persons
themselves.15 St. Thomas taught first about the divine Persons
in general, that is, about those things which are to be predicated
of the person as such, and then he set forth the Catholic doc­
trine on each of the three divine Persons in particular. For the
primary study he organized a consideration of the meaning of
person itself, then the doctrine on the plurality of the persons
in God. He followed this with a treatise on the way in which
we are to speak of the divine Persons in accordance with the
rules of the authentic Catholic tradition and one on the various
notions or concepts used to designate the characteristics of the
individual persons.
When the Angelic Doctor taught about the divine Persons
individually, he utilized the various names which serve in
Sacred Scripture and in the writings of the Fathers to designate
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The Father is also
called the Principle and the Unengendered. The Son is also
designated as the Word and the Image. The Holy Ghost is
Love and the great Gift of God. In the masterful explanation
of St. Thomas, each one of these names serves to help men to
understand what God has revealed about the greatest of all the
mysteries.
“Questions 25 and 26.
“Questions 27 and 28.
“Question» 29-38.

*

$6

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

The third and final portion of the tract on the Blessed Trin­
ity is that in which St. Thomas takes up the various compar­
isons which can be made about the divine Persons.16 He com­
pares the Persons with the divine essence, with the relations,
and with the notional acts. They are then studied in com­
parison with one another and finally with reference to crea­
tures, to whom the Son and the Holy Ghost are truly said to be
sent, and in whom all of the three divine Persons may dwell in
a special manner. This manner of indwelling in the souls of
those who live the life of habitual grace, and who are animated
by the virtue of charity, is at once distinct from and superior
to the way in which God is actually in all of His creatures,
through His presence, His power, and His substance. This last
section of the tract on the Blessed Trinity is the tremendously
important treatise on the divine missions.
d. creation. That portion of sacred theology which, accord­
ing to the order of St. Thomas Aquinas, follows immediately
after the tract on the Blessed Trinity deals with God as the
cause of the created universe. The message which sacred
theology is organized to teach, that doctrine which we accept
with the assent of divine faith, contains a great deal of teaching
about what God has done for the world in which we live. This
section of the divine teaching has an obvious reference to God
as the obiectum formale quod of the science. There is no por­
tion of the teaching contained in this section, even the most
abstruse doctrine in the section on the angels, which is not
calculated to bring us the appreciation of God which we are
expected to gain through a science which has God in His
intimate life as its formal subject of attribution.
Under the heading of the divine causality in itself, St.
Thomas arranges the truth that God acts as a cause or principle
of the universe in three distinct ways. He is at once the Efficient
Cause, the Final Cause, and the Exemplary. Cause in the pro­
duction of those beings which depend upon Him for every
portion and aspect of their reality.17 The divine causality is best
Questions 39-43.

” Questions 44-46.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

37

expressed in the term “creation.” God created the world, and
did not merely form some pre-existing matter which had being
in some way independently of His causality. Thus it is abso­
lutely impossible that there should be an aspect or fiber of
reality or goodness in the world which was not brought into
existence by God and maintained in being by His omnipotence.
After treating of creation as such, St. Thomas goes on to
explain the content of divine revelation relative to the things
which God has brought into being.18 He divides off his matter
in such a way as to treat first of the created universe in general
and then of the various classifications into which created sub­
stances naturally fall. With reference to the universe as such,
the Angelic Doctor brings out the divinely revealed truth that
every fiber and aspect of that reality which is possessed by crea­
tures is something which has come from God. Thus the har­
mony of the world, and the inequality and distinction of the
creatures in it must be attributed to God Himself.
c. the angels. The three classes of creatures to which
divine revelation makes reference are those of purely spiritual
nature, called the angels, those whose nature is wholly corporeal, and those human beings who possess natures which can
be classified as both spiritual and corporeal.
The Summa Theologica summarizes in its treatise on the
angels all the truth which divine revelation offers to us about
the purely spiritual creatures of God.19 It describes the nature,
the properties, and the natural mode of activity of the angels.
The treatise terminates with an explanation of that life of grace
with which these beings were endowed from the very instant
of their creation. It tells of the trial which they underwent, of
the eternal glory and blessedness of those who persevered, and
of the sin and the ignominious punishment of those who failed.
f. the material world and man. What divine revelation
has to say about the purely corporeal creatures of this world is
summed up in the theological tract on the “worl^ of the six
“Questions 47-49.
“Questions 50-64.

'·

■

'

j
|

jj
jj

i
Π

jί
if
î
|
j
*

|

Î1

38

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

days” which follows directly after the tract on the angels in the
order of St. Thomas Aquinas.20 Briefly, this tract explains the
doctrine which is proposed for our belief in the opening chap­
ters of Genesis. The tract on man opens with a description of
the nature, the powers, and the natural mode of activity of
human beings.21 It passes on to the consideration of the condi­
tions which surrounded the creation of man, of the life of
grace with which the first man was endowed at the moment of
his creation and of the trial to which he was subjected. The
treatise on man closes with the doctrine on the sin of Adam,
with its disastrous effects for himself and for those who were
to be his descendants.
g. divine government. The entire first part of the Summa
Theologica terminates in the tract on the divine government.22
In this treatise St. Thomas explains the revealed teaching about
the administration over creatures which is proper to God Him­
self and the influence exercised by one creature upon another
under the order which the divine providence has established in
the world. The administration proper to God Himself is dealt
with under the headings of the divine conservation by which
God retains all of His creatures in existence and of the divine
concursus, in which He acts as the First Cause and the Prime
Mover in all the activity carried on by His creatures. In closing
this treatise, he tells us what divine revelation has to say about
the influence exercised on mankind and upon the material uni­
verse by the angels, about the power of men over the material
universe, and finally about the influence exercised by some
corporeal creatures upon others.

The Second Part
The second portion of sacred theology, according to the
order of the Summa Theologica, contains an explanation of the
revealed Catholic message about God in so far as He is the
” Questions 65-74.
” Questions 75-102.
“Questions 103-119.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

39

Final Cause of man. Thus it presents the teaching of Catholic
faith concerning human acts by which man advances toward
God, his last end, or turns away from Him. Because of the
great complexity of the matter involved, the second part of the
Summa Theologica is subdivided into two main sections. The
first of these, most frequently mentioned as the Prima Secun­
dae, contains the general teaching about human acts. The sec­
ond subdivision, known as the Secunda Secundae, deals with
human acts under the headings of the individual virtues ac­
cording to which they are classified and according to the
various states of life into which they are meant to enter.
The First Division
a. the end of man. This section opens with the considera­
tion of the ultimate end of man as the final purpose, in the
attainment of which man is to find the only perfect and eternal
happiness attainable by him.23 This ultimate end is God Him­
self, to be seen and possessed forever in the eternal and super­
natural clarity of the beatific vision. The key to the marvelous
success of St. Thomas in dealing with this most important por­
tion of sacred theology can be found in his never losing sight
of the fact that here as elsewhere, God remains the obiectum
formale quod. Every conclusion in his moral theology is orien­
tated toward the enlargement arid the perfection of our concept
of God. When we have finished the study of what the Angelic
Doctor wrote on human acts, we shall find that we have
learned to know God better, in so far as we can see His holiness
in those very operations of man which lead us toward Him.
B. human acts. All the rest of the first division of the sec­
ond part in the Summa Theologica is taken up with a study of
human acts and the principles from which these acts proceed.
St. Thomas deals separately with those acts which are primarily
moral and those which partake of morality but which, of them­
selves, are common to man and to the irrational animal. To the
first class belong such operations as are performed through the
spiritual or rational faculties in line with the ultimate end of
” Prima Secundae, questions 1-5.

40

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

man. These are studied, first of all materially as acts, and then
from the formal and precise point of view of their morality.
The acts which are primarily moral are, of course, those
elicited by the spiritual faculties themselves with reference to
the end of human endeavor, or the means by which this end is
meant to be attained.24 The will looks to the end or purpose of
human activity in acts which are designated as simple volition,
fruition or enjoyment, and intention. The will and the practical
intellect which is moved by the will cooperate for the achieve­
ment of those means which are ordered toward the end of man
in the acts of election or choice, counsel, consent, command,
and use.
Such acts derive their morality, that is are designated as
good or bad, with respect to the specific object toward which
they are immediately ordered, the purpose for which they are
performed, and the circumstances which surround them.25 The
acts which have reference to a purpose or end alone, rather than
to means which are ordered to the attainment of an end are
constituted as morally good in so far as they are in conformity
with the will of God or with His law, applied through the
dictates of man’s conscience. The other acts, as choice and
counsel, must be judged, not merely by reason of their own
object, but also in the light of the purpose for which they are
employed and the circumstances in which they are placed.
This portion of sacred theology naturally must give great con­
sideration to the nature of voluntary acts.
St. Thomas follows his treatise on the voluntary acts with
that on the passions.26 The passions partake of morality. They
are elicited by the sense appetite rather than by the will itself,
and when they occur a bodily change takes place in the subject
which performs them. They can be morally good or morally
evil in so far as they are directed by reason. In themselves, how- ·
ever, they are of the same type as the acts performed by irra"Questions 6-17.
"Questions 18-21.
"Questions 22-48.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

41

tional animals. The passions, as enumerated in the order of St.
Thomas are love and hatred, desire and flight, delectation and
sadness, all of which pertain to what is termed the concupiscible
appetite; and hope and despair, fear and rashness and anger,
all belonging to the irascible appetite. With the consideration
of these operations, the Angelic Doctor concluded his teaching
about the acts of man in themselves.
The next section of the Summa Theologica has to do with
those principles from which human acts proceed. The princi­
ples, as classified and explained by St. Thomas, are either in­
trinsic or extrinsic. He calls intrinsic principles those entities
like the virtues, vices, and gifts of the Holy Ghost which are
by their very nature sources from which human activity pro­
ceeds. The extrinsic sources are those which affect man’s activ­
ity in so far as he is instructed by God in the law or aided by
the force of divine grace.
c. habits, virtues, and vices. In the order of St. Thomas,
the section devoted to the intrinsic principles of human activity
opens with a discussion of habits in general.27 Those habits
which are good, and which dispose the potencies of man for
their proper operation are called virtues. In order to teach cor­
rectly about those virtues which have reference to the moral
life of man, sacred theology first considers the nature and the
properties of virtues as such, and the various classes into which
they fall.28 Then it describes and distinguishes the intellectual
virtues, those which perfect and dispose the mind for the
proper performance of its own activity. The speculative intel­
lect is perfected in the intellectual virtues of understanding,
wisdom, and science. Art and prudence are the virtues which
are rooted in the practical intellect.
The moral virtues perfect man’s will and appetite with refer­
ence to those things which contribute to the attainment of his
ultimate end. Some of these moral virtues are acquired, others
are infused. The acquired virtues are of the natural order
B Questions 49-54.
“Questions 55-67.

saaBSBasaa

42

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

while those which are infused pertain to the life which a man
leads as an adopted child of God and a brother of Jesus Christ.
The theological virtues, faith, hope, and charity, perfect man
for operation with reference to his ultimate supernatural end.
The seven gifts of the Holy Ghost, like the infused virtues
both moral and theological, dispose man for activity which
will lead him to God, his ultimate supernatural end.28 How­
ever, the acts which proceed from the gifts differ sharply from
those which have the virtues as their immediate principles with
reference to the manner in which they are produced. The acts
which proceed from the gifts, certain acts which are desig­
nated as the fruits of the Holy Ghost and as the beatitudes, are
performed in a way which is at once distinct from and superior
to that way in which man naturally acts. Hence these acts are
supernatural on two distinct counts—by reason of the object
with which they are concerned and by which they are specified,
and by reason of the very manner or way in which they are
elicited.
The treatise on the intrinsic principles of moral acts ends
with a consideration of those operations by which man turns
away from God and places his end in created things.30 These
acts are sins. The science of sacred theology studies the sin
itself, and then that by which a human act is rendered evil. A
sinful act has definite causes and produces certain definite
effects upon the soul.
d. the law and grace. St. Thomas deals with the extrinsic
sources of human acts in the great treatises on the law and on
grace, two of the most brilliant and important sections in all
the science of sacred theology. The tract on the law opens with
a consideration of the subject as such, and then passes on to
individual studies of the eternal, the natural, and the divine
positive law, both in the Old and in the New Testaments.31
This section of sacred theology ends with the discussion of the
Questions 68-70.
Questions 71-89.
Questions 90-108.

'

|
!

THE SUBJECT MATTER

43

necessity of grace, its nature and divisions, its cause and its
effects.32
The Second Division
In the order of the Summa Theologica the Secunda Secundae
embraces that portion of the science which we know as special
moral theology. This section considers in detail and specifically
those same acts which had been studied in their more general
nature in the previous portion of the work. The first division
within the Secunda Secundae itself is that which distinguishes
the acts which belong to a Christian as such from those which
pertain only to persons in certain states of life. The acts which
belong to the general course of Christian life are studied from
the viewpoint of the various virtues from which they proceed
and in function of which they are to be classified. These virtues
are, of course, either moral or theological. The intellectual
virtues as such are not considered since they are in themselves
indifferent to the moral excellence or evil of the person who
possesses them. One intellectual virtue, namely prudence, is a
subject of study in this section of sacred theology, but this is
due to the fact that it is also one of the moral virtues.
a. faith. St. Thomas opens his treatise on special moral
with the study of the virtue of faith™ He considers first the
habit of faith itself, and then the act of which this habit is the
principle. The gifts of the Holy Ghost which correspond to
faith are understanding and knowledge. Faith itself is opposed
by the vices of infidelity, heresy, and apostasy, while the sins
contrary to understanding and knowledge are culpable ignor­
ance, blindness, and obscurity with reference to the truths
which have been revealed by God. The treatise on faith closes
with the study of the commands which God has given us to
believe His teaching.
B. hope. After defining and explaining the virtue of hope™
“Questions 109-114.

“ Seainda Secundae, questions 1-16.

“Questions 17-22.

44

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the order of the Summa Theologica proceeds to the study of
the gift of fear of the Lord, which has to do with the matter
with which hope is concerned. The sins directly opposed to
hope are presumption and despair. These are described along
with the commands which God has given us relative to the
matter of Christian hope.
c. charity. The treatise on charity is quite extensive.35 In
the order of the Summa Theologica there is first of all a study
of the virtue itself, and then a consideration of the principal
act which proceeds from this virtue, the act of dilection. The
internal effects of charity are joy and peace; the external effects
beneficence, almsgiving, and fraternal correction. The exam­
ination of these precedes the study of the sins which can be
committed against this most perfect of all the virtues, the one
which actually gives form and perfection to all of the others
possessed by man himself.
Opposed to the act of dilection is the sin of hatred of God,
the most heinous of all those which can be committed by man.
Opposed to that joy which follows upon charity are the sins of
envy and sloth. Discord, contention, schism, war, quarreling
and sedition are all contrary to peace. Men can sin against that
beneficence which is consequent upon charity through the act
of scandal.
In teaching about the commands with reference to charity,
the order of St. Thomas considers the twofold precept for the
love of God and of our neighbor. The treatise on charity ends
with the study of the gift of wisdom, corresponding to this
virtue and the sin of stultitude which is contrary to wisdom.
d. the cardinal virtues and their parts. In the Summa
Theologica, St. Thomas considers all the moral virtues under
the heading of four. These four are the cardinal virtues, in so
far as all of the others may be properly defined with reference
to these. The other virtues are considered as parts of the four
cardinal virtues of prudence, justice, fortitude, and temper“ Questions 23-46.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

45

ance.36 They are parts in two different ways. The subjective
parts of a virtue are those divisions into which the matter of a
virtue naturally falls. They constitute the various species which
go to make up the genus which is the cardinal virtue itself.
Other parts are called potential. These differ from the cardinal
virtue in so far as the definition of the cardinal virtue can be
applied to any one of them, but not with its full force or mean­
ing. Thus, for example, religion is one of the potential parts of
justice. Justice disposes a man to render to another that which
belongs to that other, and to render what is due in perfect
equality. Since religion is the virtue which governs the service
which we owe to God because of His supreme excellence, it
is manifestly impossible to render to the One to whom service
is due all that is actually due to Him. Thus religion is classified
as an integral part of justice. There are still other parts of the
moral virtues, called integral parts in the technical terminology
of sacred theology. However, these integral parts are not prop­
erly virtues in themselves, but merely acts which cooperate to
achieve the end of the virtue.
E. prudence. The first among the cardinal virtues is pru­
dence.31 Its integral parts are memory, reason, understanding,
docility, alertness, providence, circumspection, and caution,
since all of these acts conspire to render conduct really prudent.
Among the subjective parts of this virtue, political, economic,
and military prudence are all distinguished from the quality
which perfects and governs the life of the individual man. For
potential parts, prudence has the virtues of eubulia, synesis, and
gnome.
Corresponding to the virtue of prudence, and attached to it
in the explanation of the Summa Theologica, is the gift of
“One of the best scientific explanations of the virtues through this division into
subjective and integral parts is to be found in the "Arbor Praedicamentalis rive
Generalis Divisio Omnium Virtutum usque ad Infimas Species” which terminates
the sixth volume in the 1878 edition (Paris and Brussels) of the Collegii Salmanticensis Carmelitarum Discalceatorum Cursus Theologicus. This work as a whole is
one of the outstanding commentaries on the Summa Theologica.
"Questions 47-56.

46
<Π

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

counsel. The vices which are opposed to prudence fall away
from the proper perfection of human conduct in two distinct
directions. Imprudence, inconsideration, recklessness, and in­
constancy are contrary to prudence as are the opposite vices
called prudence of the flesh, cunning, fraud, deceit, and over­
solicitude for the future. The treatise on prudence terminates
with a consideration of the divine commands concerning the
matter of this virtue. Like every other portion of sacred
theology, this treatise is orientated toward bringing out a more
perfect appreciation of God, as He has revealed Himself to us.
f. justice. The treatise on justice™ opens with a study of
the object of the virtue, the vice called injustice, which is
directly and immediately opposed to it, and the act which pro­
ceeds from it. It contains with the consideration of its subjec­
tive parts, legal, distributive, and commutative justice. Op­
posed to distributive justice is the vice which is known as the
acceptance of persons. Commutative justice is violated by those
acts in which injury is done to a man’s own person, to those
who are connected with him or to his property. A man’s person
may be violated by murder, unjust mutilation, beating, or un­
just incarceration. Injustice against those who live under a
man’s protection may be perpetrated by acts of impurity like
adultery. Injustice can also be done through taking or destroy­
ing a man’s goods without his permission, either with or with­
out his knowledge.
Commutative justice may also be violated by words. This
may be done by an unjust legal process, either in false judg­
ment or in false testimony. Furthermore, it may be done inde­
pendently of any legal process, through the acts of detraction,
slander, or derision.
After completing the consideration of the subjective parts of
justice, the Summa Theologica goes on to study the integral
parts which cooperate to perfect the act of this virtue. The in­
tegral parts of justice are two in number; to do good, and to
decline from evil.
"Questions 57-122.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

47

The potential parts of justice are those virtues in which the
full perfection of its definition cannot be realized. Since justice
is that quality by which we are disposed to render to another in
perfect equality that which is due to him, it is obvious that any
virtue which governs our relations with others can fall away
from the full perfection of the definition of justice in two dis­
tinct ways. Either it will fail to render to that other all which
is due to him in perfect equality or it will render a good which
is not due in the full and strict sense of the term. Under the
first heading the order of the Summa Theologica lists religion,
piety, and observance as potential parts of the virtue of justice.
Under the second heading are veracity, gratitude, vindication,
liberality, and affability or friendship.
In studying about the virtue of religion, the Summa Theolo­
gica considers first the essence of this quality and then the acts
which proceed from it. The basic acts of religion are, of course,
those elicited by the spiritual faculties, the act of devotion which
belongs to the will, and the act of prayer, the petition of fitting
things from God, which belongs to the intellect. Manifesting
these are the external acts, adoration, sacrifice, the giving of
tithes and offerings, the taking of oaths, vows, and adjurations.
The central and social act, manifesting all the rest and express­
ing the full perfection of man’s religion, is the act of sacrifice.
Opposed to the virtue of religion are the vices of superstition
and irréligion. This irréligion results in the temptation of God,
perjury, sacrilege, and simony.
The order of the Summa Theologica considers the virtue of
piety as that habit by which we are disposed to render to our
parents, our country, and our family that which is due to them.
It is characteristic of the scientific theological doctrine that in
the order of the Summa Theologica it is acknowledged that we
owe to all of these far more than we shall ever be able to repay.
It is in this category that we find the teaching on the virtue of
patriotism. The observance which is due to legitimate superiors
takes the form of dulia and of obedience, both of which are
treated at the end of the section on piety.

48

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

With reference to the other set of potential parts of justice,
gratitude is considered in itself and in conjunction with its op­
posing vice, ingratitude. Veracity is opposed by lying, by hypocricy, boastfulness, and irony. Adulation and quarrelsomeness
are contrary vices, both of which are opposed to that affability
or friendship which should characterize the man who is called
upon to live with God for all eternity. The liberality of the
morally good man is opposed at once to avarice and to prod­
igality. The treatise on justice concludes with the study of the
gift of piety which corresponds to this virtue and which must
be considered in the light of it.
g. fortitude. The third among the cardinal virtues con­
sidered in the order of the Summa Theologica is fortitude.™
After studying the nature of this virtue, sacred theology looks
at the vices which are opposed to it. These vices take the forms
of timidity and a reckless lack of fear, on the one hand, and
overboldness and a lack of any daring whatsoever, on the
other. The integral parts of fortitude consist in attacking difficulties and sustaining evils. The potential parts are mag­
nanimity, magnificence, patience, and perseverance. Among
the gifts of the Holy Ghost, that of fortitude corresponds to the
virtue of the same name.
H. temperance. The fourth and last among the cardinal
virtues is **
temperance. The order of the Summa Theologica
considers respectively the nature of this virtue, the vices directly
opposed to it, which are those of intemperance and insensibil­
ity, and the subjective parts of the virtue, which are abstinence
and chastity. The potential parts of temperance are the virtues
of continence, meekness, clemency, humility, and modesty.
I. THE CHARISMS AND THE DIVERSITY OF WORKS.

The SCCOnd

section of the Sum ma Theologica ends with the consideration
of those acts which pertain only to those who occupy a special
position or have attained a definite place in the spiritual life.
This last portion of the second part is divided into three sec” Questions 123-140.
“Questions 141-170.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

(

I

■

■
’

49

tions. In the first, St. Thomas considers the acts which are consequent upon the diversity of functions assigned by God in the
propagation of His teaching.41 To those men who were called
upon to assist in the first dispensation of the revealed teaching,
God gave certain favors or charisms, gifts which were bene­
ficial to the Church as a whole rather than to the immediate
recipients. Such charisms are prophecy, the gift of tongues, the
power of the word, and the grace of miracles. Much of that
which is considered in modern treatises on revelation is treated
by St. Thomas in his section on prophecy.
The second portion of this last section in the second part
deals with the diversity of works, those which are assigned to
the active and to the contemplative life.42 The last deals with
the diversity of ministrations, and under this heading the
Summa Theologica considers the episcopate and the religious
life as states of perfection.43

The Third Part
The third and last great section of the Summa Theologica
studies God as the Cause restoring to man those supernatural
benefits lost through the sin of Adam. As such it is a treatise
about Jesus Christ our Lord, who, as Man, constitutes the Way
by which we are to return to God. It is subdivided into three
sections. The first of these considers our Lord Himself. The
second deals with the sacraments, by means of which we are
united with Christ. The third considers the effect produced by
the passion of Christ, namely, the resurrection and the eternal
glory which men are to enjoy in their capacity of adopted
children of God in heaven.
a. the incarnation. According to the order of the Summa
Theologica, there is, first, a study of the fitness and the necessity
of the incarnation itself. This is followed by a consideration of
the actual union through which a created human nature
"Questions 171-178.
"Questions 179-182.
"Questions 183-189.

'

50

'

'l II

' llï ίϊ ΊΙ ΓΓ

ÎÏÏHil ΙΪΙΙΐίΙΉ*/

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

belongs to the uncreated person of God the Son. Then St.
Thomas goes on to give the revealed doctrine about the ex­
tremes involved in this hypostatic union. The second Person of
the Blessed Trinity, and He alone, has assumed this human
nature as His own. Furthermore, He assumed a perfect human
nature, complete with all of those parts and attributes which
should naturally belong to the children of men.44
Next, there is a study of the perfections and imperfections
assumed with the human nature of Christ, qualities which con­
tributed toward the achievement of that purpose for the sake
of which the Incarnation was accomplished. The perfections
were those of grace, of science, and of power.45 The imperfec­
tion was the passibility of Christ’s sacred body, his ability to
suffer and to die for the redemption of man.4’
B. the grace of Christ. The grace of Christ is considered
under a twofold aspect. St. Thomas first studies the habitual
grace in the human soul of our divine Saviour, through which
His human nature was rendered connaturally able to perform
the works of the supernatural order. After treating of the
nature and the fullness of this grace in Christ, the Angelic
Doctor describes that grace with which the human nature of
our Lord was endowed in virtue of His position as the Head of
the human race.
c. the human knowledge of christ. There are three
kinds of science or knowledge in the human mind of Christ.
First of all, there is the blessed science, which is nothing more
or less than the act of the beatific vision itself. Then there is the
infused knowledge, that which proceeds from species im­
printed in the human intellect of Christ by God, independently
of any human process of acquiring cognition. Finally, there is
the acquired knowledge, that which our Lord obtained in the
same way as that by which men naturally come to possess
knowledge in this world. In explaining the content of God’s
“The Third Part, Questions r-6.
“Questions 7-13.
“Questions 14, 15.

...
ij

Ml IÉÜ· ΜΜΜΜίΐιΜίΜΤΜ^^

214331
THE SUBJECT MATTER

i
:
i
t
;
'
!

51

message to man, sacred theology tells us about all these types of
knowledge, as well as about the unlimited power which was
possessed by Christ even according to His human nature.
The Summa Theologica proceeds to explain what are termed
the consequences of the hypostatic union. Under this heading
comes the study of the relationship of our Lord’s human nature
to the divine essence, to His being and to His operation, the re­
lations of Christ with reference to His eternal Father, and our
own relations to Christ.
d. communication of idioms. Because the Second Person
of the Blessed Trinity has assumed a human nature and sub­
sists in it, it follows that the characteristics of both the divine
and the human natures may correctly be attributed to the Per­
son who possesses both. The characteristics of one nature, how­
ever, must not be predicated of the other. Moreover, all expla­
nation of the doctrine about the Incarnate Word must be such
as to stress the truth that there is only One Being, One sub­
sistence, that of the Person who is both God and man, since He
subsists in both the divine and the human nature. At the same
time the operations of the two natures remain distinct one from
the other. Thus our Lord has two wills, the one divine, the
other human. The human will retains its own operation, the
real activity of which it is the connatural source.47
E. our lord’s subjection to his father. By reason of the
human nature which He has freely assumed out of love for
men, our Lord is really subject to His divine Father. He can
and does pray to Him in our behalf. Our Lord is constituted
as a priest, as a mediator between God and man. However, He
must not be thought of as an adopted Son of God, because sonship is the attribute of a person rather than of a nature and the
Person who has assumed the human nature is and remains for­
ever the natural Son of God. However, by reason of His human
nature, Christ is actually predestined, to eternal glory by His
divine Father.48; \ ·’? · ·
· ; ·.*
’

·· - ·♦ " *
"Questions 17-19.
,·
“Questions 20-24. ί ! t ; ; ζ-Γ

’■ Î*
·. *
·

52

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

f. our relation to Christ. The study of the communica­
tion of idioms, as the doctrine on the relationship of the human
nature to the divine essence in Christ is called, and the study
of the relations of Christ to the Father are followed by the ex­
position of the revealed doctrine about our relations to Him
who is our Saviour. Under this latter heading the Angelic Doc­
tor considers our duties toward Christ, and His activity in our
behalf. Our duties with reference to our Lord are brought out
in the question on the adoration of Christ, while His activity
in our favor is summarized in the question on His mediation.
These questions bring to an end the basic treatise on the
incarnation.49
G. THE REDEMPTION AND THE LIFE OF CHRIST. The Other
portion of the theological doctrine about our Lord is brought
out in the treatise on the redemption. This involves, in the
order of the Summa Theologica, a masterly treatise on the life
of our Lord. It opens with a study of the revealed doctrine rela­
tive to Christ’s entrance into this world. Included in this sec­
tion is a summary of what God has told us about the life and
the prerogatives of the Blessed Mother of God. There follow
treatises on the various mysteries of our Lord’s life, on His
birth and legal sanctification, His baptism, public life, and His
passage out of this world. The section dealing with our Lord’s
passion and death considers both the cause of His suffering
and the effects which that suffering produced. In the passion
of Christ God’s justice was satisfied through a sacrificial and
meritorious action which redeemed man and thereby effica­
ciously brought about man’s reconciliation with God. The trea­
tise on the redemption in the order of the Summa ends with a
consideration of Christ’s descent into limbo, His resurrection,
ascension, and His eternal glory and dignity in the kingdom of
heaven.50
H. the sacraments. The second portion of the third part
deals with the sacraments of' the- Catholic Church, first in gen“ Questions 25, 26.
“ Questions 27-59.

- ·■ *- -

~

'-·■·.
\·' 5 * » t :

THE SUBJECT MATTER

53

eral and then individually.51 The general treatise on the sacra­
ments looks first to the nature of a sacrament as a sign and then
to the necessity, the cause, the effects, and the number of the
sacraments. Among the effects it distinguishes between that
sacramental grace which is signified and produced by all of
them and the sacramental character which is signified and
produced by three only.
Each one of the seven sacraments is studied individually.
The nature of each is treated as it has been explained in the
course of divine revelation. Likewise there is an explanation of
the minister who is competent to administer each of these
sacraments, the effects produced, the subjects who can receive
them, and the individual characteristics of each. Thus it is the
business of theology to show how the sacrament of the Holy
Eucharist is likewise the sacrifice of the Mass, the great act
of worship for the people of the New Law. It is the act of
Christ’s Mystical Body and at the same time the sacrament
about which all the others are grouped, and by which they
are explained and finalized.
i. the last things. The Summa Theologica is an unfin­
ished masterpiece. St. Thomas died while he was still working
on the portion of the work which dealt with the sacrament of
penance. However, the order of the Summa is something in­
trinsic to the volume itself. At the very outset of the third part
the Angelic Doctor had made it clear that the entire work was
to be completed with the end of that third part. In the last
portion of this part he intended to explain the revealed doctrine
dealing with the effect achieved by the passion of Jesus Christ.
"’The treatise on the sacraments in general extends from questions 60-65 in the
third part of the Summa. The work was never completed. The last question St.
Thomas wrote in the Summa was the ninetieth of the third part. What was to
follow according to the order already described by him was taken from his Com­
mentary on the Fourth Booh of Sentences and added as a Supplement to the third
part of the Summa. This Supplement, arranged by Reginald of Piperno, contains
the rest of the treatise on penance and the other sacraments which are treated
subsequent to this and all of the doctrine on the last things. There are 99 or 101
questions in this supplement, according to the disposition followed in the ordinary
texts.

54

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

This portion of sacred theology includes the treatises on the
condition of the soul after death, the doctrine about purgatory,
hell, and heaven, and the teaching on the particular and the
general judgments. It concludes with the doctrine on the gen­
eral resurrection which will immediately precede the last
judgment.
E. Theology Actually Organized Around God As the
Formal Subject of Attribution. Each portion of sacred
theology in the order of the Summa Theologica has evident
reference to God. Not only is the general outline of the work
directed toward an understanding of the doctrine which God
has revealed to us about Himself, but each individual treatise,
question, and article keeps to this central and dominating
work of sacred theology. This concern with God so dominates
the Summa Theologica that it is perfectly correct to denomi­
nate, not only the science of sacred theology as such, but even
this particular work of theology as having God Himself for an
obiectum formale quod.
The order of the Four Booths of Sentences and that of the
Summa Theologica are manifestations of a perennial tradition
in the field of Catholic thought. They follow along the general
lines set down centuries before in the De Fide Orthodoxa of
St. John Damascene, and even earlier in the De Principiis of
Origen. Another exemplification of the same trend in the
teaching of sacred theology is to be found in the ordering of
the content of this science along the lines of the three theolog­
ical virtues of faith, hope, and charity. This order is found in
the Fnchiridion of St. Augustine and in the remarkable Com­
pendium Theologiae of St. Thomas Aquinas.52
The great modern manuals of dogmatic and moral theology
stress this same theocentric character. There is no portion of
sacred theology which can properly be understood until it is
“This division is mentioned at the beginning of the Enchiridion although the
matter of the book is not arranged very strictly in function of this division. The
Compendium Theologiae is another of the unfinished masterpieces of St. Thomas.
The second section, on hope, which is arranged according to the nature and the
petitions of the Lord’s Prayer is not complete. The third section was never begun.

THE SUBJECT MATTER

55

seen as a device for bringing us to understand something of
that message which God has revealed to man about Himself.
There is no process in sacred theology, however abstruse it may
be, which is not centered upon the task of bringing to the
student, and through him to the Christian world, the ineffable
beauty and simplicity of the message of Jesus Christ, the truth
about God.

CHAPTER

3

THE LIGHT OF SACRED THEOLOGY
The teaching which sacred theology offers is set forth under
the form of theses, known as theological conclusions. Theolog­
ical conclusions refer to the very same subject matter which is
expressed and described in those propositions which we accept
with the assent of divine faith. However, a man accepts a
statement on divine faith for one reason or motive and assents
to a theological conclusion for another reason.
A. Formal Reason for Acceptance of a Proposition Re­
ceived on Divine Faith Is the Authority of God Revealing.
The proposition of divine faith is one which we receive pre­
cisely because of the authority of God who has revealed it.
That proposition is included in the deposit of doctrine which
God has given to man through our Lord Jesus Christ. It comes
to us in the form of Catholic dogma, that teaching which the
infallible Church of Jesus Christ presents as having been revealed by God to be believed by all men.1 When it has been
thus presented, it is accepted solely because God Himself has
taught it.2
B. A Theological Conclusion Is Acceptable As Such
Only When It Has Been Demonstrated. The theological
conclusion as such, however, is not accepted in the same way.
Such theses are accepted only because it is demonstrably evi­
dent that they express the correct meaning of that message
’ Vatican Council (Denzinger, 1792).
’Vatican Council (Denzinger, 1789).

j
|
J
!

|
j
56

J

•i

THE LIGHT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

57

which constitutes divine public revelation. The motive for their
acceptance is not precisely the authority of God revealing, as
is the case with propositions of faith, but the demonstrated
evidence that these theses present the objective and traditional
significance contained in the divine teaching. This element of
proof differentiates sacred theology from that deposit of faith
which it is organized to expound. There can be no theological
conclusion apart from discursive rational activity, a demonstra­
tion in function of which the conclusion or thesis is acceptable.3
Now, it must be understood at the outset that the same
proposition can be at the same time accepted with the assent
of divine faith and established as a theological conclusion. A
glance through any competent textbook for this science will
show that the theologian takes Catholic dogmas and demon­
strates that these propositions actually express the meaning
which has always been conveyed in the divine message. A
good number of the theses set forth in the ordinary manuals
of sacred theology are dogmas of faith. Many of them are set
down as theses in the very terminology in which they have
been defined by the solemn magisterium of the Church.
Naturally there is nothing to prevent the theologian from
showing that a proposition actually accepted with the assent
’A thesis thus demonstrated as true is said to be seen in the light of virtual or
mediate revelation. Of. Summa Theologica, the First Part, q. t, art. 3. St. Thomas
speaks of all things which are divinely revealable {divinitus revelabilia), as com­
municating in the one formal reason of this science. Among the commentators,
Sylvius (commentary on the above article), says that while the Deity is the formal
object that is known in theology {obtectum formale quod), the formal object by
which or under which the things of theology are known {obtectum formale quo vel
sub quo, id est ratio formalis sub qua) is being revealed {esse revelatum). He
reasons thus, “That is the formal object sub quo of any science which is the reason
of its assent. But the reason (or cause) of theological assent is revelation, by which
the principles are immediately revealed, and the conclusions mediately; in so far,
that is, as they follow by means of discursive reasoning from revealed principles.”
John of Saint Thomas {op. cit., p. 377), speaks of this virtual revelation as the formal
reason under which the theological conclusion is rendered intellectually acceptable.
Billuart {loc. cit.) speaks of the obiectum formale quo oi theology as virtual and
mediate revelation. — Among recent authors Dorsch prefers to speak, of the obiectum
formale quo of theology as "demonstrability from the word of God.” He considers
the term “virtual revelation" too closely bound up with the theory of Father
Schultes, which he chooses to ascribe to Billuart {op. cit., p. 12).

58

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

of divine faith is a part of the revealed message. Again he may
establish as his thesis a proposition which has never been de­
fined at all, and in this case the thesis is merely a theological
conclusion. In any event he must demonstrate that his proposi­
tion really manifests the meaning which Jesus Christ our Lord
attached to the message which He gave the world. In the
clarity and force of that demonstration lie the motive and the
light which specify the science of sacred theology.
A proof or demonstration can, of course, be resolved into a
syllogistic process. Thus any proper theological conclusion can
be presented as the resultant of a syllogism expressing the
process in which this conclusion is shown to be true. Many of
those who have written about the science of sacred theology
attempt to explain it merely or mainly in terms of such a
1 syllogistic process. These men consider the statement that the
theological conclusion is correctly drawn from two premises,
at least one of which is a truth of divine faith, as an adequate
explanation of sacred theology.
C. Opinions of Schultes and Marin-Sola on Definability
of a Theological Conclusion Consider This Conclusion
Merely in Terms of Its Syllogistic Foundation. Now, to
essay an adequate explanation of the theological conclusion
■merely in terms of a syllogism is to engender a dangerous con­
fusion about the very nature of this science. The syllogism as
such is organized to give knowledge of a new truth, a state­
ment quite distinct from the principles out of which it has
been deduced. For this reason Father Schultes maintained that
the true theological conclusion could never be defined as of
faith since it was necessarily distinct, as a truth, from the
propositions of faith which had served as premises in the
theological demonstration.4 Father Marin-Sola, on the other
'Introductio in Historiam Dogmatum, pp. 195—203. The two conclusions given
here by Father Schultes express his doctrine most accurately. They are: (1) theo­
logical conclusions as such {quoad sc), that is doctrines which are only virtually
revealed, cannot be defined as dogmas; (2) theological conclusions which are such
with regard to us only {quoad nos tantum) can be defined as dogmas in so far
as the doctrine asserted in them is concerned, and even according to the mode

Î

i

THE LIGHT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

59

hand, held that the true theological conclusion could actually
be defined as a proposition which must be held on divine faith
since this conclusion was only conceptually distinct from the
premises out of which it had been inferred.5
D. A Conclusion Extrinsic to the Content of Revealed
Truth Can Never Be Defined As of Divine Faith. Now,
only that doctrine which has actually been revealed by God
can be defined by the Church and proposed to her children
as something which must be accepted on the word of God.
Father Schultes was perfectly correct in teaching that a propo­
sition actually inferred out of the content of divine revelation
could not be considered as intrinsic to the deposit of God’s
message. On the other hand, his doctrine that propositions once
considered theological conclusions and later defined as of
faith by the infallible magisterium of the Church were never
really conclusions in the proper sense at all, could never be
considered.as satisfactory. According to his teaching, the propo­
sition which has once been defined turns out to have been the
resultant of a process of investigation which was never a real
demonstration. Writers of one period in the history of the
Church might have supposed that they were demonstrating a
conclusion. The men of a later time would certainly see that
they had done nothing of the sort.6 They had merely examined
into the content of Catholic dogma and restated the revealed
truth in their own terminology. Consequently, according to
the teaching of Father Schultes, these later writers could merely
conclude that their predecessors had never actually performed
the work of scientific theology.
and the formulae by which the doctrine is expressed. However (they are not
definable) precisely in so far as they are known through syllogistic reasoning, but
in so far as, according to the judgment of the Church, they are contained in the
extent and the comprehension of formal revelation.
’Marin-Sola, op. a't., pp. 154-203.
’Schultes, op. cit., p. 197, actually cites a passage from Tanquerey to this effect.
"Sometimes it happens that a truth which was first thought to be only virtually
revealed, afterwards, the affair having been better considered, is seen as formally
and implicitly revealed.” Cf. Tanquerey, Synopsis Theologiae Dogmaticae, 19th
ed., p. 109.

6θ

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

E. As Manifest in Its Own Literature, and As Described
in the Vatican Council, the Theological Demonstration
Is a Complex Process and the Theological Conclusion Is
Not Extrinsic to the Body of Actually Revealed Doctrine.
Just as white light is composed of radiations of many diverse
colors, the crystal splendor of sacred theology is the resultant
of processes far too complex and diversified to be expressed
adequately even under the heading of the syllogism. We can
begin to appreciate the inherent order and perfection involved
in the theological process only when we have looked into the
actual content of the existing literature of the science. For St.
Augustine, St. Anselm, Peter the Lombard, and St. Thomas
Aquinas the theological conclusion was never classified merely
as an inference drawn from the content of revealed truth.
These men, like the great commentators of the golden age
and like the able writers of our own time, understood that
there were different kinds of intellectual activity which en­
tered into the process of sacred theology, and that this science
could never be considered and treated accurately except in
function of all these procedures.
In the dogmatic constitution, "Dei Filius,” the Vatican Coun­
cil drew up a schedule of this multiplex theological activity.
“When sedulously, piously and soberly it seeks from God some
understanding of the mysteries, reason, enlightened by faith,
attains that understanding which is most fruitful, both from
an analogy with those things which it knows naturally, and
from the connection of the mysteries among themselves and
with the last end of man.”T
When we look into the actually existing literature of sacred
theology, we find that the conclusions are established after
processes of analogy and comparison. The analogy is employed
in the choice of those terms which are to enter into the the­
ological conclusion while the proposition or thesis itself is
developed through the process of comparison. Out of this com­
plex activity comes the statement which expresses clearly and
’Denzinger, 1796.

THE LIGHT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

61

unequivocally the real meaning of divine revelation. The proper
theological conclusion is seen as acceptable in the light of this
demonstration.
I. analogy in sacred theology.8 We speak of a term as
analogous when it applies to two objects which are primarily
different but which have a certain unity of reference or pro­
portion. In this way it differs from the univocal term, which
conveys the same meaning whenever it is employed, and from
the equivocal term which is merely the same word applied to
two divergent and unrelated realities. Thus the term animal
is univocal when it is used with reference to man and to a
horse. The term banl^ is equivocal when it is applied to a
financial institution and to the side of a stream. The word
healthy is analogous when it is used with reference to a human
being in good physical condition and to a location which is
conducive to the acquisition of that condition by man.
The formal subject of attribution in the science of sacred
theology is, as we have seen, God Himself. Now, there is no
term which could possibly apply univocally to God and to
creatures. Whatever there is in the way of goodness and per­
fection in the created universe exists as something dependent
upon God. In Him all perfection subsists simple and immu­
table. Purely equivocal terms are, of course, quite incapable of
contributing the progress of knowledge. As a result the only
kind of term which can serve for the work of sacred theology
is that which we call analogous.
Not only are the terms which enter into those judgments
which form a part of man’s natural knowledge about God
thus analogous, but actually the propositions in which the
divine message itself is expressed are made up of these terms.
As we have seen, the message which we accept on divine faith
is a mediate revelation, that is one which we receive through
the ministrations of our fellow men. The doctrine itself is
supematurally acquired. As a matter of fact, it is essentially
* For a competent explanation of analogy in sacred theology read M. T-L
Penido, Le RdZe d’Analogie en Théologie Dogmatique .(Paris, 1931).

02

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

supernatural, something over and above the natural com­
petence and power of any creature, actual or possible. But the
terms in which this doctrine is couched are words intelligible
to any man.
In the course of explaining the meaning inherent in the
divine message, the theologian is forced to examine many
terms and expressions which might be used with reference to
God. Thus for example, long ago when the exigencies of the
controversies about the Blessed Trinity impelled the defenders
of the Catholic faith to say that there were three Persons in
God, these theologians had to show that the connotation of
the term person was such as to bring out the actual meaning
contained in the divine message. They were perfectly aware
that there was a world of difference between the created hu­
man person and the uncreated Son of God. They were careful
to insist that all of the limitations which were associated with
the individual human beings ordinarily designated as persons
were in no way to be attributed to the divinity. But at the
same time they pointed out that the objective meaning of the
term person was such that it could serve to designate the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, not, of course, with per­
fect adequacy but still correctly. The theologians investigated
the essential connotations of the word and then looked to see
if this meaning had been ascribed to God in the actually exist­
ing literature of the Catholic faith.
2. the process of comparison. The process of comparison
completed the theological operation. A question is asked about
the meaning inherent in one of the dogmatic formulae. The
answer can be given only after an inquiry into the content of
Catholic teaching as it is found in the inspired Scriptures and
in the organs of tradition. The statement to the effect that the
procession of the Son of God from the Father is an intellectual
generation is shown to express the actual meaning of the
divinely revealed message only after an examination into that
literature in which the Catholic teaching is contained and ex­
pressed. To be exact, the process does not involve drawing a

THE LIGHT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

63

conclusion out of the content of revealed truth. It serves merely
to manifest that content in such a way that there can be no
chance for ambiguity and error. It operates to bring out the
meaning which is within the content of Christian teaching.
In manifesting the errors which disfigure and destroy divine
faith, sacred theology actually defends the content of that
faith in the course of its traditional procedure.
The light of sacred theology, that is, the motive through
which the characteristic utterances or theses of sacred theology
are rendered acceptable, involves erudition as well as mere
reasoning. The parallel between the process of metaphysics
and that to which sacred theology is consecrated by its very
nature, a parallel suggested by Father Marin-Sola, is certainly
not extensive. The metaphysician is devoted to the investiga­
tion of a naturally observable reality. In the pursuit of his
studies he naturally avails himself of the resources supplied by
the great human literature of his own science. However, the
best that this literature can afford is a certain aid or direction
toward the more effective observation of the reality itself. The
essential task remains the study of this naturally observable
reality, and in the final analysis the metaphysician will be
judged by his understanding of this object rather than in
function of his appreciation of the literature pertaining to his
science.
On the other hand, the theologian is consecrated to the study
of a message. It is his business to express the content of this
definite teaching in such a way that the danger of ambiguity
is removed. It is the message taught by Jesus Christ our Lord.
It is contained only in Holy Scripture and in the apostolic
tradition of the Catholic Church. This Church is given the
privilege and the duty of declaring that message with infallible
accuracy until the end of time. As a result the theologian can
hope to find the objective meaning of the message, or what is
the same thing, the correct resolution of the problem with
which he is confronted, only in and through the literature of
the Catholic Church. Consequently his is a task for the accom-

64

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

plishment of which a definite erudition is absolutely necessary.
The theologian can never hope successfully and scientifically
to resolve the problems with which he is confronted apart from
the resources of his own literature. When a question is asked
about the meaning of the dogmatic formulae, he cannot re­
spond after an observation of the Object to which these for­
mulae have reference. He must seek enlightenment from the
content of the message itself. He will find that message in the
authentic sources of Sacred Scripture and tradition and in the
pronouncements of the Catholic Church and of its teachers.
In order to act as a theologian, then, he must know that
literature.
F. Theological Demonstration Exemplified in Writings
of Peter the Lombard. One of the finest examples of the way
in which the light of sacred theology actually works is to be
found in the procedure of Peter the Lombard in his First Boo\
of Sentences. The Master began his work by expounding the
revealed teaching about the Blessed Trinity. Thus, after the
opening chapters in which he sets forth the nature and the
divisions of his theological work, he proceeds immediately to
state exactly what God has revealed and what the Church
proposes to us about this central mystery of our faith. He an­
nounces that his teaching must neglect neither the ineffable
unity of the divine nature nor the perfect distinction of the
divine Persons and then he brings out the order which governs
his scientific procedure. He uses the words of St. Augustine
himself in the declaration of that order. These words are so
perfectly illustrative of the light of sacred theology, both con­
sidered in themselves and in so far as they are explained by
the actual teaching of Peter the Lombard, that it is well worth
while to cite them.
“First it must be demonstrated, according to the authorities
of the Holy Scriptures, that the faith is actually what it is
claimed to be. Then we must use Catholic reasons and apt
analogies for the defence and the assertion of the faith against
those garrulous reasoners who are stronger in confidence than

THE LIGHT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

65

they are in ability, in order that, resolving their problems, we
may more perfectly instruct the docile man. Our instruction
must be such that the enemies of the faith may lay the blame
for their failure upon their own minds rather than upon the
truth itself or upon our exposition of it, should they fail to
find what they seek.”9
Thus the great Master of the Sentences proposes to divide
off his actual theological investigation into three distinct steps.
First of all, there is to be the consultation of the “authorities
of the Holy Scripture.” In the First Booi{ of the Sentences this
step turns out to be a combination of the “proof from Scripture”
and the “proof from tradition” so popular in later manuals
of this science.10 Peter the Lombard alleges from both the Old
and the New Testaments texts referring to the mystery of the
Trinity. However, he offers his citations with the interpreta­
tions of the Fathers themselves in such a way that his teaching
represents the scriptural doctrine as it is taught by the Catholic
Church itself. The two chapters which he devotes to this task
tend to show that the dogmatic formulae, as they have already
been set down, are contained in and taken from the authentic
sources of revelation, Scripture, and tradition.
The “apt analogies” which Peter the Lombard promised to
integrate into his theological exposition turn out to be the
famous “trinities” of St. Augustine.11 There are certain vestiges
of the Blessed Trinity found in the created mind or soul. In
explaining these Peter the Lombard, like Augustine before him,
shows the aptness of the terms used in Sacred Scripture and
in the teaching of the Catholic Church to serve as instruments
for teaching about the Triune God. All the expositions of
theological analogy which have ever been written have been
explanations of that traditional procedure which Peter the
Lombard incorporated into his volume.
The “Catholic reasons,” however, form the crowning points
*The First Book of Sentences, Dist. Π, Caput 3.
” Op. at., Chaps. 4, 5.
” Dist. ΠΙ, Chaps. 1-3.

66

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

in the theological activity of Peter the Lombard. In them the
light of sacred theology completely attains its object. Hitherto
the matter of the Booths of Sentences has been merely declara­
tive. Now the note of inquiry is introduced. Certain miscon­
ceptions about the content of Catholic dogma and certain
objections against it are brought forward. Actually the objec­
tion is based upon a misconception.
The Master of the Sentences sets his first objection in the
form of a dilemma. It was an argument which aimed at the
very heart of the doctrine about the Blessed Trinity, a conten­
tion that the teaching about the generation of the Divine Son
from the Father would involve a denial either of the Trinity
itself or of the teaching about the divine Unity. He resolves
that dilemma and then brings forward an objection against
the validity of his response, again couched in the form of a
dilemma. This second objection is triumphantly resolved and
the resolution stands as a statement of the doctrine of the
Blessed Trinity which utilizes the resources of the scientific
tradition in the interests of accuracy and clearness.
This statement, however, is challenged in the name of the
opponents of Christian doctrine. This last objection is, in turn,
resolved and the entire question again summarized. The treas­
ures of patristic teaching are investigated, and the meaning of
the Fathers is shown from the context of their own writings.
“Behold from these and from many other authorities it is
evidently shown that we must say and concede that the One
God is the Trinity and that the one substance is the three
persons as conversely the Trinity is said to be the One God
and the three Persons are said to be the one substance. . . .
Now let us return to the previous question, where we inquired
whether God the Father begot Himself God or begot another.
To this we answer that neither alternative can be accepted.”
One last objection must be overcome, an objection taken
from the terminology of St. Augustine himself. “Still Augus­
tine says in his letter to Maximus that God the Father begot
Himself another God, using these words. ‘The Father, that

THE LIGHT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

67

He might have a Son of Himself, did not lessen Himself, but
He so begot of Himself another Self that He would remain
whole in Himself and would be as much in the Son as He
is alone.’ ”
Peter the Lombard then concludes this portion of the dis­
cussion. “This can be understood to mean that He has begotten
of Himself One other than Himself, but another Person, not
another God, or to mean that He begot Himself another, who
is what He is Himself. For although, with reference to the
Son, the Father is another Person, He is not another thing,
but one and the same.”12
Throughout the course of Peter the Lombard’s reasoning
there is an appeal to the actual content of Christian faith as
that faith is contained in its proper sources and vehicles. The
Master uses as principles the articles of faith themselves. These
articles, according to the terminology of St. Thomas are the
various points which enter into the divine message and bring
with themselves some special difficulty. They are the various
headings under which the content of divine revelation is clas­
sified. Peter the Lombard appeals now to the teaching on the
unity of God, and now to the doctrine on the distinction of
the three divine Persons. Out of these articles of faith he
reasons with cold scientific accuracy to the establishment of
his own conclusions. And this conclusion is certainly not to
be assigned to what we might call the penumbra of divine
truth. The conclusion has to do with the actual meaning of
the divine message and, of course, with the manner in which
this objective meaning must be expressed.
We have seen that the Master construed this process as a
defense of the Catholic faith. The theses which he established
were set forth as contradictions to certain misconceptions, which
incidentally were prevalent and dangerous in his own time.
Some of these false interpretations of the divine message were
such as to destroy or pervert the faith of those who were de­
ceived into accepting them. Others would at least becloud and
“Dist. IV. Chap. 3.

68

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

obscure the belief of men. In destroying these misconceptions
through the establishment of legitimate theological conclusions
the Master of the Sentences succeeded in protecting the faith
of those who were the recipients of the message of God.
G. The Process of St. Thomas Aquinas. The two processes
mentioned by the Vatican Council and employed by Peter the
Lombard are also to be observed in the theological works of
the greatest of the Doctors, St. Thomas Aquinas. With match­
less success he pointed out the “apt analogies,” the analogies
with those things which we know naturally, and which can
be of service to us in expressing the message which God has
given to us through Jesus Christ. In the portion of the Summa
Theologica in which he covers the same matter as that set
forth in the section of the First Boo\ of Sentences to which
we have had reference, the Angelic and Common Doctor of
the Catholic Church makes use of doctrinal history for the
establishment of this theses. His was characteristically the
genius of order. Thus he was able to divide off his matter more
effectively than his predecessors had done and to deal with
each point with more perfect accuracy and precision. While
his method was quite superior to that of Peter the Lombard,
the direction of his inquiry was exactly the same. He reasoned
from the articles of faith to ascertain the objective meaning of
that divine message which we hold on faith. He asked ques­
tions about the content of divine revelation, and then resolved
these questions by an examination of the terms involved and
finally through a recourse to the authentic declarations of
Catholic dogma.
H. The Contradictory to a Demonstrably Erroneous
Statement About the Content of Christian Doctrine Is a
Proper Theological Conclusion. In considering the light of
sacred theology we must not lose sight of what we might term
the negative process through which many of its theses are
evolved. The proper theological conclusion is very frequently
set forth explicitly as the response to a question. The improper
response is studied, and is seen as improper precisely in so far

THE LIGHT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

’

69

as it involves a denial of some article of faith. Since such a
statement is obviously false, its contradictory is obviously true.
The demonstration that proposition “A” involves a contradic­
tion of an article of faith is by that very fact the establishment
of proposition “B,” its contradictory, as a proper theological
conclusion. Such a conclusion is obviously intrinsic to the
divine message. It could never be properly construed as a mere
inference drawn from the content of Catholic dogma. It is a
statement which the Church could define as revealed truth if
the opportunity or the necessity were to arise.
I. Theses Actually Proposed As Theological Conclusions
Have Reference to the Meaning of the Divinely Revealed
Message. The intrinsic character of the proper theological con­
clusion can be seen quite plainly through an examination of
post-Tridentine writings in this science. Such men as Suarez,
Sylvius, the Salmanticences, and Billuart, to name only a few
of them, set forth very clearly the theses they intended to
demonstrate as theological conclusions. Some of their conclu­
sions were set down as opinions, as statements which only
probably expressed the meaning of the divine message. Others
were named as certain. These latter theses, which alone are
theological conclusions in the strict and perfect sense of the
term, are always shown to state the meaning actually conveyed
in divine revelation and actually propounded by and in the
Catholic Church. The processes of analogy and comparison
are utilized to show first the significance of the terms which
enter into the thesis and then the fact that this particular thesis
actually conveys the meaning of God’s teaching.
J. Importance of a Proper Concept of the Motive Which
Dominates Sacred Theology. It is vitally important that the
students of our own day and of our own country appreciate
the nature of this light of sacred theology. There has never
been a time when men were more sorely in need of the treas­
ures contained in the traditional Catholic science. It is impera­
tive that they should realize that it contains, not merely a
complexus of statements reasoned, as it were, out of the con-

βΝΜΗίΜΜβίΚ!^:

70

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

tent of divine revelation, but actually the teaching of the living
God. The labors of the scholastics, the immense treasures of
erudition and insight which enter into the literature and the
equipment of this science are ordered so that through them
the little ones of Christ may hear His voice, and through His
words may find the peace and the happiness they desire.
There would be little point in attending to the study of
sacred theology in our days if its light merely shone out upon
certain statements associated with the content of God’s mes­
sage, statements which constituted a sort of penumbra for
divine revelation. The light of sacred theology actually shines
upon the very truths which God has revealed to us. We under­
stand a truth precisely as a theological conclusion when we
can demonstrate clearly that this statement actually belongs
to the content of that message which God has given to the
world through Jesus Christ. A man should be willing to work
and to utilize the resources of this greatest of the sciences, to
apply all of the exact precision of which the human mind is
capable when he knows that through this study he can state
exactly what fell from the lips of his Saviour.

CHAPTER

4

CERTITUDE IN SACRED THEOLOGY
Sacred theology is a certain discipline because the proposi­
tions which it puts forward as its theses or conclusions are
offered firmly and objectively as true. There is neither fear nor
danger that the strictly theological conclusion might turn out
to be erroneous. Furthermore, precisely because of its nature
and its functions, sacred theology is able to endow its conclu­
sions with a sureness definitely superior to that possessed by
the dicta or the theses of any other science. Consequently we
say that the certitude of sacred theology is higher than that
offered by any other science which man can obtain.
A. The Designation of Theological Theses. Naturally we
are speaking of the certitude offered by sacred theology by
reason of its own proper characteristics and processes. There are
certain theses listed as proper theological conclusions which still
possess a certitude quite superior to that which pertains to
sacred theology as a science. A glance at the list of theses set
forth in any manual of this discipline will show that some of
them are put forward as of faith. Other conclusions again are
offered as proximate to faith. Still other designations are cer­
tain, more common, common teaching, more probable, and
probable. The intrinsic certitude of sacred theology as such is
shown by the fact that there are conclusions which are certain
merely by the force of theology itself.
B. The Thesis “De Fide.” The propositions listed as of faith
are those which the Catholic Church has infallibly declared to
7»

72

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

have been revealed by God to the world through Jesus Christ
our Lord. As such they are statements which must be believed
firmly and constantly by all the faithful. These statements are
accepted as true, not because they constitute the object of any
demonstration but because of the authority of God Himself,
who can neither deceive nor be deceived. Neither the declara­
tion of the Church nor, a fortiori, any theological reasoning,
enter into the motive of divine faith. However, the Catholic
Church has exclusive infallible authority to teach the divine
message. When she chooses to exercise that infallible power
and to declare that this particular truth was actually revealed
by God as something to be accepted by all men with the assent
of divine faith, the proposition which she sets forth is accepted
on the authority of God who has revealed it, and for no other
reason. As a result the assent with which these propositions of
faith are received and professed by the faithful is stronger and
more certain than the acceptance given to any other sort of
proposition which can be formulated by man in this world.
The strength of that certitude which faith enjoys proceeds
from the very mind of God.
In spite of the fact that they possess a degree of certitude
far superior to that which can proceed from sacred theology
itself, the de fide propositions can be, and actually are, legiti­
mate theological conclusions. Both the function of theology
and the status of the dogmatic formulae make this clear. It is
the work of sacred theology accurately and unequivocally to
express the content of divine public revelation. To the accom­
plishment of this end it considers problems or questions about
the meaning of the divine message and resolves these problems
scientifically in such a way as to prove that the solutions offered
actually are intrinsic to the content of revelation.
The propositions of faith have been set forth by the Church
precisely to resolve questions about the meaning and content
of the divine message definitively. Obviously, then, there is
nothing to prevent the theologian from raising the same prob­
lem and setting forth the same solution, demonstrating clearly

CERTITUDE IN SACRED THEOLOGY

73

that this proposition really expresses the meaning of that mes­
sage which our Lord preached to the world as divinely re­
vealed. The proposition is eminently capable of theological
proof, even though it is above the realm of theology in so far
as it has been defined by the Church. The theological exposi­
tion of this proposition is something which belongs to the
technical equipment of the man who is charged with the
privilege and the duty of teaching Christian doctrine. Thus
the propositions of faith are rightly set forth as theological
theses in the actually existing literature of this science.
C. The Thesis Not Presented As Certain. On the other
hand, a statement which is merely probable or more probable is
not the resultant of a perfect theological demonstration. It is not
completely evident that this proposition actually expresses the
meaning of divine revelation because the proof of the proposi­
tion is not perfectly cogent. However, there are conclusions
which can be set down as certain even though they have not
been defined as such in the solemn teaching of the Church.
The certitude attaching to such propositions is distinctly and
solely theological.
D. The Thesis Presented As Certain Solely By Reason of
Theological Demonstration. The theologically certain con­
clusion is one which men accept, not solely on the authority
of God revealing, but precisely because this science demon­
strates clearly that it expresses the actual and objective mean­
ing of the divine teaching. Because it is demonstrably a part
of the divine message, it rejoices in a certitude higher than
that which accrues to the theses of any other science obtainable
by men. But precisely because a human process of demonstra­
tion is requisite to show that this proposition is the correct ex­
pression of the divine teaching, its certitude is essentially
inferior to that of the faith itself.
The theological demonstration, the analogies and the com­
parisons enter into the very motive of the theological conclu­
sion. If a man should be asked why he assents to the proposi­
tion “the Son of God became Incarnate,” he could only answer

ίϋίΟΜΜβΜΐ

74

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

that he accepts it on the authority of God who has revealed it.
This statement is presented to man as a part of the divine
message, and moreover as obviously pertaining to the body of
revealed doctrine. But, on the other hand, should a man be
interrogated as to why he assents to this proposition, “the gen­
eration of the Son from God the Father is an intellectual gen­
eration,” he would have to answer that he accepts this teaching
because it is scientifically demonstrated that it expresses the
actual meaning contained in the divine message. After examin­
ing the meaning of the terms involved in this proposition, the
theologian can show that the statement expresses the meaning
of Holy Scripture according to the unanimous interpretation of
the Fathers. However, the Church has never officially proposed
this statement as something divinely revealed, and so, as it
stands, it is acceptable only in function of the theological
demonstration from which it proceeds.
E. The Individual Theologian and Corporate Character
of Sacred Theology. As a result the individual theologian nec­
essarily disclaims any sort of infallibility for his own conclusions
as such. Like Peter the Lombard and St. Thomas Aquinas
before him, he submits his writings to the Church herself for
correction, explicitly disavows any teaching of his which might
be opposed to the doctrine of the Church, and welcomes any
objective criticism and correction which might come from
contemporary or subsequent authors. Obviously the theologian
does not consider the formulas of faith themselves as subject to
correction of any type whatever. However, he is convinced that
it is possible for him to explain the content of that faith in
an inept or unfortunate manner. He can be mistaken in con­
sidering an inadequate demonstration as something adequate.
His very willingness to accept correction constitutes a testi­
mony that the proof alleged for the conclusion actually enters
in to the obiectum formale quo of sacred theology.
We must not forget that sacred theology is a social and not
merely an individual discipline. It is, so to speak, the property
of the Catholic Church as a whole, a discipline which has

CERTITUDE IN SACRED THEOLOGY

75

developed in and for the Church with the passing of the ages.
As a result, although the individual theologian might be in­
exact in some of his theses and statements, the science as such
is endowed with a perfect certitude. The theologians of the
world, at any one time, and through the ages as well, consti­
tute what might be called the corporate faculty of sacred the­
ology for the Church. At the hands of this corporate faculty,
the theological conclusion is demonstrated clearly and evi­
dently to be the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church.
This corporate faculty has at its disposal resources adequate to
demonstrate clearly that the conclusions which it proffers are
actually expressions of the message which God gave to the
world through Jesus Christ. Furthermore, it possesses a living
and evident rule of faith with which the theological conclu­
sion can be compared, and in function of which it can be
established as an accurate statement of the divine teaching.
Thus for the science as such, the possibility and the legitimate
fear of error are entirely eliminated.
F. The Catholic Rule of Faith Alone Explains the Ob­
jective Certitude of the Theological Conclusion. Seen in its
proper perspective, the teaching on the certitude of sacred
theology stands as a projection of the doctrine on the Catholic
rule of faith. By the rule of faith we mean the standard in
function of which a man can judge the actual content of that
message which he is willing to accept on the authority of God
who has revealed it. Man wishes to believe all that God has
taught to the world through Jesus Christ and nothing else on
divine faith. However, he must have some way of knowing
exactly what is contained in that message in order to distin­
guish the real content of faith from the various counterfeits
with which he might well be faced. Now, the Sacred Scriptures
and the apostolic traditions contain all the content of divine
public revelation, unmixed with any element of superstition.
Consequently they constitute a rule of faith, which, however,
is not immediate, since these sources are not meant to be inter­
preted by the individual Christian authoritatively.

76

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

The living magisterium of the Catholic Church is alone
competent to present infallibly to those who seek it the con­
tent of the divine message which was preached by our Lord.
As a result this magisterium, available to all of those who are
willing to utilize it, stands as the immediate rule of faith, the
immediate and practical standard by which men can discern
the true content of Christ’s message.
Precisely because men have at their disposition this com­
petent, clear, and immediate rule of faith, the science of sacred
theology can offer a grade of certitude superior to that with
which the other sciences are endowed. Once the theologians
have ascertained the exact meaning of the terms in which
their problem is couched, they have a standard with which
they can compare this problem, and in the light of which they
can most surely resolve it. Like any other science, sacred the­
ology depends upon the evidence inherent in its own demon­
strations. And that evidence is forthcoming precisely because
of the nature of the Catholic rule of faith. In other words
there can be a science of theology endowed with a lofty and
firm certitude because God has chosen to present His message
to the world in the living, evident, and available magisterium
of the Catholic Church.
G. Evidence in the Theological Demonstration. We can­
not be too careful in describing the evidence which pertains to
the science of sacred theology. We must never allow ourselves
to imagine that the Object with which sacred theology is pri­
marily and essentially concerned becomes evident in function
of the involved logical processes which pertain to the opera­
tion of this science. Actually, of course, as long as we remain
in this world, that Object, God Himself in His Own divinity,
must remain the Object of faith. But sacred theology, “fides
quaerens intellectum” seeks and finds evidence of the meaning
of that message in which the doctrine about God is contained,
the message which we accept on the word of God with the
assent of divine faith itself.
The point is that there can be evidence of the meaning and

CERTITUDE IN SACRED THEOLOGY

77

the content of that message. The body of divine revelation is
so organized that through and in it we shall not be able to
see the Triune God. But in and through that message, in
accordance with the principles and the procedure of sacred
theology we shall be able to know that the generation of the
Son of God from the Father is really an intellectual generation.
The meaning of that message is clear. Misconceptions which
could pervert or destroy the act of faith itself are avoidable
precisely because the message is presented to us through an
available, living, and competent authority. It is only the clarity
with which the Catholic Church presents the divine message
to men that makes possible a certitude for scientific theology
superior to that which characterizes the findings of any other
human discipline.
H. A Proposition Extrinsic To and Merely Connected
With the Content of Actually Revealed Truth Cannot
Be Theologically Certain. The certitude proper to sacred
theology is, of course, strictly limited to those propositions
which convey the actual meaning of divine public revelation,
to those statements in other words which are “intrinsic” with
reference to the content of divine faith. The conclusion that
“the generation of the Son from God the Father” is a legiti­
mate theological conclusion and enjoys the fullness of the­
ological certitude precisely because it can be proven clearly that
this expresses the actual meaning of Sacred Scripture and the
teaching of the Fathers in proposing the word of God. Occa­
sionally, however, the literature of sacred theology will con­
tain statements or theses which have not this legitimate place
and dignity in the fabric of the discipline. For instance, there
is the thesis, found in a certain number of manuals, to the
effect that the souls in Purgatory are able to pray in our be­
half. Those who put this teaching forward never go so far
as to say that this doctrine was contained in the actual sources
of revelation. The most that can be said for the proposition,
according to the demonstrations which are alleged in its favor,
is that it is not contradicted in scripture and tradition. In the

78

h

H
I
r
j

I

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

literature of sacred theology this thesis can be traced back to
the refusal of certain theologians, most notably Richard of
Middleton1 and Juan de Medina,2 to accept the explanation
of St. Thomas Aquinas on this particular portion of sacred
doctrine.3
Thus the thesis that the souls in Purgatory are able to pray
for us can never be, in the strict and perfect sense of the term,
a theological conclusion. Neither can it ever possess the sort
of certitude with which the characteristically theological thesis
is endowed. In the last analysis it is quite incapable of receiv­
ing the type of theological proof which men like Peter the
Lombard and St. Thomas Aquinas described and exemplified
in their writings. Again, since such a proposition does not con­
stitute a part of the content of divine revelation, it can never
be defined as of faith by the Catholic Church.
I. The Ultimate Source of Theological Certitude. Ac­
cording to the teaching of St. Thomas, sacred theology derives
its superior certitude from the light of the divine mind itself.
“Other sciences have their certitude from the natural light of
human reason, which can err.” Sacred theology, on the other
hand, “has certitude out of the light of divine knowledge, which
cannot be deceived.”1 Since the certitude of theology is of
divine knowledge, it cannot be explained merely in function
of the syllogistic process by which its conclusions are derived.
Seen by virtual revelation, as the light of sacred theology is
commonly termed, the thesis in sacred doctrine is demon­
strated as an expression of the actual meaning contained in
divine revelation. The content of this divine and intrinsically
supernatural revelation is something which is seen naturally
by God alone. As a result the characteristic process of sacred
theology results in the demonstration that this particular con1 Richard of Middleton, O.F.M., Commentary on the Potirth Booh of Sentences of
Peter the Lombard, dist. 45, art. 7, q. 2.
’loannis Medinae, De Poenitentia, Restitutione et Contractibus (Ingolstadt,
Vol. i, p. 348.
’Cf. Fenton, The Theology of Prayer (Milwaukee, 1939), pp. 175-181.
* The First Part, q. 1, art. 5.

CERTITUDE IN SACRED THEOLOGY

79

elusion or thesis is a truth which has been seen and expressed
by God. Such a truth, and only such a truth can properly be
said to derive its certitude from the divine mind rather than
from the natural light of any created intelligence. The very
terminology and conclusions of the prince of the theologians
are sufficient evidence that he thought of the theological con­
clusion in function of the purpose to which the science itself
is dedicated, the expression of the true doctrine of Jesus Christ
our Lord.
Vincent Contenson gave as the reason why sacred theology
possesses a certitude superior to that enjoyed by the other sci­
ences which are naturally attainable, the fact that it utilizes a
medium or means “more infallible”5 than any found in a
purely natural domain. This more infallible medium is, of
course, divine revelation itself, proposed to us in the articles
of faith which are the proper principles of sacred theology.
The articles of faith, proposed to us in the infallible magis­
terium of the Catholic Church are so evident that, in resolving
problems about the significance of divine revelation in their
light, the theologian can arrive at a certitude far greater than
any he could possess through the examination of naturally
observable realities. The certitude that the proposition “the
Son of God is less than the Father” is at variance with and
contradictory to the content of the divine message is stronger
than the certitude he can have about an erroneous proposition
in any other science. The meaning of the divine revelation, as
it is proposed in the infallible magisterium of the Church is
so clear that demonstrations directed toward bringing out that
meaning can possess a superior certitude.
J. Theological Problems Not Yet Resolved. Naturally
there can be, and there actually are, problems which have not as
yet been resolved in the light of those articles of faith which
are infallibly guarded and proposed by the Catholic Church.
But the fact that a problem is not as yet solved in no way im’ Vincent Contenson, O.P., Theologia Mentis et Cordis {leasts, 1687), Vol. 1, p. 7.

80

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

plies an imperfect cognizance or proposition of divine revela­
tion by the Church. Rather it is an indication that the mean­
ing of the problem has not as yet been made perfectly clear.
The solution of theological problems, and the resultant gain­
ing of theological certitude may, in a sense be said to involve
an advance for the Church, and for her corps of theologians
as a whole, as well as for the individual or the individuals who
have labored toward a solution of the problem. The beautiful
citation which the Vatican Council has made from the "Com­
monitorium” of Vincent of Lerins applies to advance toward
theological certitude as well as to the history of dogma,
properly so called. “The understanding, the science, the wis­
dom, of individuals and of all men, of one man and of the
entire Church, should grow and progress vigorously by degrees
of times and of ages, but only in its own genus, in the same
dogma, in the same meaning, and in the same proposition.”’
K. The Certitude of Sacred Theology in the Life of the
Catholic Church. We can never begin to appreciate the force
of theological certitude until we examine it in the light of Cath­
olic history. In face of the lives and the activity of the great de­
fenders of the Catholic faith, the high certainty of sacred the­
ology is not merely a vague sort of ideal which it might be
well for men to possess. It has characterized the demonstrations
and the conduct of traditional theologians throughout the life
of the Catholic Church. It was precisely the certitude of sacred
theology which led to the unmasking of the various heresies
which have appeared during the course of Christian history.
Thus St. Athanasius, the theologian, was perfectly certain that
the terminology and the teaching of Arius constituted a denial
of the Christian faith. This certitude antedated the pronounce­
ment of the Church in the Council of Nicea, which officially
condemned the doctrines of the heresiarch. In function of this
theological certitude St. Augustine was able to detect the de­
structive errors inherent in Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism.
* Denzinger, 1800.

CERTITUDE IN SACRED THEOLOGY

81

In the same way Cajetan, Latomus, and Eck were perfectly
certain of the heresies contained in the teaching of Martin
Luther while Francis Sylvius was absolutely sure in his de­
nunciation of Jansenism. These men were endowed with a cer­
titude unquestionably more convincing than any other scien­
tific sureness which this world can know because they had at
their disposal the articles of faith clearly and unequivocally
interpreted in the living magisterium of the Catholic Church.

I

CHAPTER

h
■J

5

\

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY
—PARTI

A

A. The Theological Places. In the prosecution of its end,
the clear and unequivocal statement of the meaning inherent
in the divine revelation, sacred theology has at its disposal certain definite resources. According to the terminology of MeljI
chior Cano, O.P., who wrote the first great scientific treatise
I ; :
on this particular portion of sacred doctrine,1 these are com­
monly referred to as theological sources or "loci theologici”
ί'· ■
These are the forces which the theologian can utilize in formi, ;
ing conclusions which are seen as perfectly certain in the light
Ιοί virtual or mediate revelation.
According to the teaching of Cano, which is still classical
ΐ,
in this portion of sacred theology, these sources are ten in
p
number:
I «
i) The authority of Holy Scripture, which is contained in
h
the canonical books.
2) The authority of the traditions of Christ and of the
Apostles which, since they have not been written, but have
J
come down to us orally, are rightly called oracles of the living
I
voice.
< 1
3) The authority of the Catholic Church.
* '
•ί ,·
: i,
,· I

t ’ !

------ -

• I
S ·

1 Melchior Cano, O.P., De Locis Theologicis. The edition used in this work is
the three-volume set of the Opera Omnia Melchioris Cani, Episcopi Canariensium,
ex Ordine Praedicatorum, issued at Rome in 1900.

<
I
■ ;

Sa

ilk

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

83

4) The authority of the Councils, especially of the general
Councils.
5) The authority of the Roman Church, which is, and is
called by divine privilege, apostolic.
6) The authority of the ancient Fathers.
7) The authority of the scholastic theologians, to whom the
teachers of canon law are joined.
8) Natural reason, which appears in all of those sciences
naturally acquired.
9) The authority of the philosophers who follow the natural
light of human reason, and with them the masters of civil law.
10) The authority of human history, either written by trust­
worthy authors or expressed in serious national tradition.
Melchior Cano, in drawing up this list, adverted explicitly
to the fact that sacred theology, unlike any other science natu­
rally obtainable by man, makes its supreme appeal to authority
rather than to the evidence of the matter with which it is con­
cerned.2 Obviously this fact must influence all of the procedure
of sacred theology, and the choice of resources which are to be
exploited in attaining the end to which this science is
consecrated.
B. Classification. The divine message, which sacred the­
ology sets out to teach accurately and clearly, is contained in
Scripture and in tradition as in its proper sources. There is
not, nor will there ever be, any portion of that public revelation
which it is the business of the theologian to express, that is
not to be found in that collection of truth contained in Scrip­
ture and in tradition.
This divine message is taught and defended infallibly by
the Catholic Church, both through its ordinary magisterium
and in its solemn definitions and declarations. The organs of
this solemn magisterium are the Holy Father, speaking ex
cathedra and the various ecumenical councils of the Church.
The Fathers of the Church, and the scholastic theologians who
have been entrusted with the expression of her teaching are
*Uber I, Caput 2.

awywwagaa

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

authentic witnesses and proponents of Catholic teaching, even
though they are not individually endowed with infallibility.
In this way the first seven among the loci theologici enu­
merated by Melchior Cano are proper to this science. They
do not pertain to the equipment of any other discipline avail­
able to mankind. The last three are common to theology and
to other sciences as well. These are subsidiary instruments
which, however, can and must be utilized in order to attain
the purpose which is essential to sacred theology.
Each of the ten theological places contributes in its own
way to the perfection of that process which we know as vir­
tual or mediate revelation. Out of the radiance of all these
sources there is fused the proper light of sacred theology.
Naturally an introduction to the science must consider each
of them individually.
I. The Scriptures in Sacred Theology
A. The Inspired Writers and the Inspired Books. Sacred
Scripture, or the Holy Bible consists of those authentic writings
which enter into the Catholic Canon and are recognized by
the Church as divinely inspired. These writings are divided
into seventy-three books.3 The first forty-six of these books
constitute the Old Testament, written before the birth of Jesus
Christ and containing that portion of divine public revelation
which was given to the world progressively in preparation for
the coming of the Saviour. The New Testament, written after
the death of our Lord, and embodying a portion of His mes­
sage, is composed of the final twenty-seven books.
In saying that the books of the Bible are inspired, we use
the word inspiration in a special and highly technical sense.
Such inspired works are actually written by God Himself. He
is the principal Cause in the production of these volumes, and
the human authors who have produced them have acted as
instruments of God. Pope Leo XIII, in his encyclical “Proci*Cf. the Council of Trent, Session IV (Denzinger, 784).

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

85

dentissimus Deus’,’ has described the process of inspiration and
its effect in these words. “By His supernatural power He [the
Holy Ghost], so aroused and moved them [the inspired
writers] to write, and so was with them while they wrote, that
they conceived correctly, wished to write faithfully, and aptly
expressed with infallible truth all and only what he wished to
have them do.”4
The words of Pope Leo XIII indicate the formal effect of
inspiration upon the person and the faculties of that man who
has been chosen by God as His instrument in the production
of a book which is to have God Himself as an Author. However the place which Scripture occupies in the schema of
sacred theology is best understood when we look at the effects
of inspiration in the inspired work itself. It is Catholic teaching that the content of the inspired book includes all that God
willed should be written therein, and nothing else. It is in this
sense that the book is ascribed to God as to its principal Cause.
B. The First Cause and the Principal Cause. Now, we
must understand at once that when we say that God is the
principal Cause of Holy Scripture, we do not mean merely that
all of the movement and the activity by which these books
were produced were derived ultimately from Him. We are
aware, of course, that God is actually the First Mover of the
Universe, First not merely in the order of time but really in
the order of nature. As such he is the First Mover in every
activity which takes place in the created universe. The very
movement of the pen upon this paper as I write is something
which comes from Him, here and now. A creature may cause
the activity of other creatures, as I cause the motion of my
pen. However, in every instance the creature who acts as a
cause is himself moved in his very operation of causing. All
movement comes from God. Every fiber and aspect of being,
of truth and goodness and beauty must emanate from Him.
He is the One upon whom every being distinct from Himself
‘Denzinger, 1952.

f
)
/
I

|

j
|

|
|
!
|
I
!
|
|
I
!
;
i
f'

J

?

a»

86

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

depends absolutely and entirely. He acts in the activity of every
creature. This realization of the place of God as the First Cause
of the universe is essential for a correct motion of the divinity.
God is the First Cause of all things, but He is the Principal
Cause and the Author of those books which compose the Holy
Scripture. The notion of a first cause is quite distinct from
that of a principal cause. The First Cause is, as we have seen,
the source of all activity and goodness. It is the Pure Act,
Subsistent Being Itself. The principal cause, on the other hand,
is that which is adequate to the effect which is produced, or
to be more exact, it is that to which the effect produced is
proportioned and ascribed. Thus, while God is the First Cause
of every effect which is brought into existence, a creature may
truly be said to be the principal cause of some of these effects,
in so far as these effects lie within the sphere of the creature’s
competence. Naturally, where a creature is said to be the prin­
cipal cause of an effect, the word principal has no reference to
the position of God in the performance of this activity. Every
creature, in every portion of activity, real or possible, is sub­
ordinate with reference to God. The principal cause is so called
with respect to another cause which is not adequate for the
production of the effect which it really produces. Such a cause
which moves and acts only in so far as it is moved by the
principal cause toward the production of an effect which sur­
passes its natural powers is called an instrumental cause.
C. God the Author of the Inspired Books. Applying these
definitions to the matter of Sacred Scripture, it is evident at
once that the sacred books lie altogether outside the categories
of ordinary literary works. As a rational animal, competent
sensibly to express intellectual concepts, man is quite capable
of writing books. Thus the ordinary book, even one which
treats of God or which proposes revealed doctrine, is to be
referred to man as to a principal cause. In the production of
this book man utilizes instrumental causes, a pen or a pencil
or a typewriter or even another person who is employed as
an amanuensis. However, the finished volume is the message

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

87

of this individual man, the author. It is a message which he
is quite capable of delivering in virtue of the natural powers
with which he is endowed.
Obviously, then, it would be exceedingly improper to refer
to any ordinary book as one which has God Himself as an
Author. Yet this is perfectly true of Holy Scripture. These
books express a message which God Himself wishes to convey
to mankind. Obviously it is beyond the natural power of any
creature to act as the principal cause in the expression of a
divine document. What is conveyed, for example, in the gospel
according to St. John, is exactly what God wished to propose
to the children of men just as truly as what is contained in the
Summa Theologica is the teaching which was expressed and
given to the world by St. Thomas Aquinas. God is, then, the
Author and the Principal Cause of the books of Holy Scrip­
ture just as really as Peter the Lombard is the author and the
principal cause of the Four Booths of Sentences.
D. The Human Instruments in the Writing of the In­
spired Books. The inspired books had also, of course, their
human authors. SS. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all wrote
the gospels ascribed to them just as truly and actually as any
other men ever wrote the volumes which have appeared as
their own. Unlike other authors, however, these men and the
other inspired writers wrote the books of Sacred Scripture
precisely as instruments of God.
Yet it is perfectly true that these men did not write merely
in the capacity of stenographers, setting down material which
had come to them by way of simple dictation. In His infinite
wisdom and power, God is enabled to exercise a control over
the intelligence and the will of man such as no creature can
ever possibly possess. He alone can act and does act upon the
spiritual faculties of man in such a way as infallibly to bring
about the effect which He wills, while at the same time He
causes rather than impedes or prevents the very freedom and
spontaneity of human activity. In utilizing the sacred writers
as His instruments in the production of the inspired books,

88

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

God caused them to write as freely and spontaneously as any
other men ever acted in the production of literary works. These
inspired writers contributed as much toward the production
of their books as any other men have ever contributed toward
the writing of noninspired texts.
It would, then, be the ultimate in anthropomorphic confu­
sion to imagine that God was in some way limited to the use
of nonvital instruments in the production of the inspired books
of Holy Scripture. The inspired writers chose what they wished
to write, investigated their own material, and actually ex­
pressed what they wished to say. They employed those char­
acteristics of style and composition which belonged to their
own times and to their own peoples, as well as those qualities
which were proper to them as individuals. But, in utilizing all
of the resources of their own nature and of their own back­
ground, they were being moved by God, freely and infallibly
to write books which presented the very message which He
intended to communicate to men. With all the freedom and
the perfection of their activity, they acted as instruments of
the living God.
E. The Question of Verbal Inspiration. In the process of
considering the place of Holy Scripture in the economy of
sacred theology, it is pertinent to inquire whether the actual
words which go to make up the books of the Bible were chosen
by God or whether the message alone is from Him and the
actual words which convey that message were chosen by the
human authors, as competent to express the ideas involved in
the message itself. In this latter supposition the choice of the
individual words would have been made by the human authors
under the direction of a divine assistance in some way distinct
from the actual process of inspiration itself. This is the famous
question on verbal inspiration, a question which has important
repercussions in the field of theological methodology. On its
resolution depends the use which must be made of Sacred
Scripture in the production of the theological conclusion.
Teaching that inspiration itself does not extend to the choice

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

89

of the individual words which enter into the text of Holy
Scripture are such writers as Cardinal Franzelin,5 Hurter,6
Pesch,7 Dorsch,8 Felder,8 Vacant,10 and Egger.11 Pesch goes so
far as to speak of the opposite teaching as having been pro­
posed, not only by early protestant writers, but even by the­
ologians of the first class, as for example Bannez. He contends,
however, that the doctrine which holds that the process of
inspiration extends to the choice of the words which compose
the text of the sacred books is rapidly losing ground. Egger
considers his own thesis so strong that the opposite doctrine
is devoid of probability. However, this doctrine of verbal in­
spiration is found in the works of such modern writers as
Mangenot,12 Herrmann,13 Schultes,14 DeGroot,15 Tanquerey,16
Van Noort,17 Hugon,18 Diekamp,19 Zubizarreta,20 Bainvel21 and
Hervé.22 Actually it is the more common teaching in the
schools despite the fact that as eminent a modern writer as
’loannes Cardinalis Franzelin, S.J., Tractatus de Divina Traditione et Scriptura,
4th ed. (Rome, 1896), ρρ. 322 et seq.
’Hugo Hurter, S.J., S.T.D., Ph.D., Theologia Generalis Complectens Disputationes
Quatuor, 2nd ed. (Innsbruck, 1878), thesis 27.
I Christianus Pesch, S.J., Institutiones Propaedeuticae ad Sacram Theologiam, 6th
and 7th ed. (Freiburg im B., 1924), pp. 450 seq.
’Dorsch, op. cit., Vol. 3, De Inspiratione Sacrae Scripturae, pp. 202-212.
’Felder, op. cit., pp. 298-301.
’’Vacant, op. cit., p. 472.
II Egger, op. aZ, pp. 314—318.
13 Mangenot, article “Inspiration de l’Ecriture” in the Dictionnaire de Théologie
Catholique, Vol. 7, columns 2192-2207. The position of Mangenot and of Bainvel
is not as strong on this question as is that of other writers cited.
11 Herrmann, C.SS.R., op. cit., pp. 557-559.
“Schultes, O.P., De Ecclesia Catholica (Paris, 1931), p. 528.
13 J. V. DeGroot, O.P., S.T.M., Summa Apologetica De Ecclesia Catholica ad
Mentem Sancti Thomae Aquinatis, 3rd ed. (Regensburg, 1906), pp. 696-698.
“Tanquerey, Vol. 1, op. cit., p. 770.
” G. Van Noort, Tractatus de Fontibus Revelationis necnon de Fide Divina, 3rd
ed. (Bussum, Holland, 1920), p. 47.
“Edouard Hugon, O.P., S.TJd., La Causalité Instrumentale dans VOrdre Surna­
turel, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1924), pp. 51-72. This is one of the best theological treatises
on the matter in modern literature.
“Diekamp, op. cit., pp. 38-41.
* Zubizarreta, op. cit., 483-485.
eJ. V. Bainvel, De Scriptura Sacra (Paris, 19x0),"pp. 133-134.
“Herve, op. cit., pp. 592-593,

9O

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Bartmann23 opposed it and Berthier24 refused to pass judgment
on the matter.
The doctrine that the individual words as they stand in the
text of Holy Scripture are inspired by God and thus chosen
through the process of inspiration itself, is alone competent to
explain the function of Scripture in the process of sacred the­
ology. It is, moreover, the explanation which is clearly in
harmony with the teachings of the Church, as manifested in
the Providentissimus Deus and elsewhere. Ultimately, of course,
the books of Holy Scripture are the things inspired. Men are
said to be inspired in so far as they are moved by God to write
these books which have God Himself for an Author. If the
concepts and the judgments expressed in the books of Holy
Scripture had come by way of inspiration while the words by
which they are externally expressed had not been chosen
through this process, it would be very difficult to see how the
book itself could be called inspired. There is a world of differ­
ence between the part played in the production of a book by
the man who is responsible for most of the ideas expressed
in the book and that of the man who actually writes the
volume itself. Boswell wrote his Life of Johnson, in order to
publicize the ideas of the great lexicographer. But, although
the ideas which fill the book are those of Johnson, no one
would attempt to claim that he was the author of the book in
which these ideas are expressed.
One could never be called properly the author of a book
when he merely conveys certain teachings to another and then
leaves to his associate the task of selecting the words in which
these doctrines are to be expressed. If a man should claim
authorship of such a document, the modern American would
say that he had made use of a “ghost writer.” This sharp
Americanism, with its wealth of contemporary connotation,
" Monsignor Bernard Bartmann, Précis de Théologie Dogmatique, translated from
the 8th German edition by Marcel Gauthier, and French edition (Mulhouse, France,
I935)> P· 39·
"Joachim Joseph Berthier, OP., Tractatus de Locis Theologicis (Turin, 1900),

p. 80.

V‘

\

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

91

should be of some service to the theologian in demonstrating
or illustrating the inadequacy of any doctrine which claims
that God is the Author of the books of Holy Scripture and
then denies verbal inspiration. A person is actually the author
of a book only when he has conceived what he is to write, has
decided to write it, and has then given external verbal expres­
sion to the concepts which he desires to communicate.
There are opponents of the doctrine of verbal inspiration
who have professed to see in it a certain trace of anthropo­
morphic error. They conceive of verbal revelation as involving
a process in which God would speak orally to the sacred writer
while this latter merely set down on paper the words which
he had heard God dictating to Him. This concept of the doc­
trine of verbal inspiration is a sort of straw man set up for
polemic purposes exclusively, since no proponent of the tradi­
tional teaching ever advances any such explanation of his doc­
trine. It is true, however, that Bannez, to whom Pesch refers,
actually makes use of the term dictate in explaining the process
by which God produces the books of which He is the Author.25
So does Francis Sylvius,28 and so, for that matter does Pope
Leo XIII in the "Providentissimus Deus!m
There is nothing misleading or anthropomorphic about the
term itself. Considered in its formal meaning, as it enters into
a statement objectively describing the process of inspiration,
the term dictation signifies an operation by which a person
can become the author of a document or book in utilizing
another person as an instrumental cause. This is, of course,
exactly what God has done in the production of the books of
Sacred Scripture. The connotation of uttering words orally,
and the limitation of instrumental activity to the bare material
” Dominicus Bannez, O.P., Scholastica Commentaria in Primam Partem Sancti
Thomae Aquinatis (Madrid and Valentia, 1934), commentary on the eighth article
in the first question.
"Franciscus Sylvius a Brania Comitis, Controversiarum, Liber 1, q. I, art. 3
(p. 150 in the edition of the opuscula edited at Antwerp in 1698 by Father Norbert
D'Èlbecque, OF.).
"Cf. Denzinger, 1951.

jr"·»

92

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

side of writing belong to the human rather than to the divine
field of conduct. The whole context of the older writers, and
most certainly the text of Pope Leo’s encyclical show that such
a connotation never entered into the traditional teaching on
verbal inspiration. As a matter of fact, Sylvius and the writers
with whom he is associated in his defense of the traditional
teaching are at special pains to explain that all of the faculties
and the spontaneity of the human writers enter into the com­
position of the inspired books. The essential point of their
teaching is, however, that these human writers, acting freely,
were moved by God to produce a book which brought to the
children of men a message which He had conceived and thus
a book of which He is properly the Author.
It is also a common practice of the opponents of verbal
revelation to cite in favor of their own theses certain passages
from the Fathers of the Church, distinguishing between the
study of the words and the consideration of the meaning in
the investigation of Holy Scripture. Invariably, however, we
find that the texts cited, seen in their proper background, have
no reference whatever to the problem of verbal inspiration.
The sort of attention to the words of Holy Scripture which
the Fathers compared unfavorably with a study of its mean­
ing was obviously one which shut out any fruitful and properly
theological consideration of the inspired text. It was, and for
that matter it still is, perfectly possible for a man so to limit
his attention to the poetic or the grammatical structure of the
sacred books as to forget entirely the meaning conveyed in
them. It was, and is still possible for men to attempt an ex­
planation of these words contrary to that which is expressed
in the living and infallible magisterium of the Catholic
Church. This was the sort of word consideration against which
the Fathers so justly protested.
At the same time, however, the Fathers and the common
tradition which they expressed recognized clearly the divine
authorship of the written words which composed the various
books of the Bible. In their common way of citing the content

93

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

?

of the Scriptures, the expression “It is written,” they did not
refer to any mere mental word, communicated by God to the
mind of the inspired author. They meant the actual words
written in the inspired books, words that men might read.
F. Revelation and Inspiration. For a proper understand­
ing of Sacred Scripture as one of the theological places, it is
absolutely requisite that we appreciate the distinction between
revelation and inspiration. The act of revelation, considered
formally, consists in God’s speaking to man in such a way as
to teach him. Considered in its objective meaning, it signifies
the actual message or doctrine which God has communicated
to man. This revelation, then, constitutes a body of truth which
man has received from God in a way at once distinct from and
superior to the natural manner in which man derives his
knowledge. Revelation, then, involves the actual communica­
tion of truth not previously known by man.
Quite distinct from this is the concept of inspiration. As
authentically described by Pope Leo XIII, inspiration involves
the use of a man by God in the process of writing a book of
divine authorship. The human writer who is inspired, who is
used as an instrument by God in the production of one of those
books which enters into the canon of Holy Scripture, need not
necessarily have received by way of revelation those truths
which are expressed in the book which he writes as the instru­
ment of God. He may very well set down matters which he
has known by purely natural means. Thus the writers of the
historical books in both the Old and the New Testaments told
of happenings which they had seen themselves or about which
they might well have learned through conversation with actual
eyewitnesses. The writers of the doctrinal or sapiential books
might very well have set down material which was the com­
mon teaching among the faithful of their own time. Thus
while no revelation would be made immediately to the in­
spired writers in setting down such truths, the books which
they wrote as instruments of God naturally would convey a
message to mankind at large.

94

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Revelation and inspiration also differ by reason of the vary­
ing effects which they produce in the person who is acted
upon by God. A man cannot, of course, receive a revelation
from God without knowing very well that he is receiving a
divine communication. However, it would be perfectly pos­
sible for a man to be utilized by God as an inspired instrument
for the production of a book which has God Himself as an
Author without knowing the resultant volume was really the
work of God. If the book has God as an Author and contains
something of that message which man must possess in order
to attain the perfect happiness which should be his for all
eternity, it is only requisite that mankind should know that
this particular volume actually has God as an Author. This
knowledge must, of course, come by way of revelation. How­
ever, it is quite evident that this revelation need not necessarily
be made to the one who is employed by God as an instrument
in the production of the inspired book.
As we have seen, the inspired writer need not receive any
immediate revelation for the truths which he is to set down
in the volume which he writes as an instrument of God. How­
ever, the one to whom an immediate revelation is made can
receive this communication from God in many different ways.
By virtue of His infinite power, God is able to speak imme­
diately to man either by way of external objects or by acting
directly upon the human cognitive faculties. In dealing with
external things God can certainly make use of the oral or
printed word, as well as other signs which are fitted accurately
to convey to the recipient of the revelation the content of that
message which God wishes to communicate. When God acts
directly upon the cognitive faculties or powers of man, He can
produce His effect either upon the senses, external or internal,
or upon the intellect itself. Obviously when God chooses to act
immediately upon man’s intellect, neither the spoken nor the
written word is employed in the process.
When God wishes to have the recipient of an immediate
revelation communicate the divine message to the rest of man-

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

95

kind, the choice· of words in which this message is to be ex­
pressed is not necessarily involved in the revelation itself. But,
when that revealed message is expressed in one of the books
of Holy Scripture, then the very words in which the message
is conveyed arc selected according to the process of inspiration
which brought about the production of a book which has God
as its Author. Thus the characteristics which the opponents of
verbal inspiration predicate of the process of inspiration itself
are actually verified when they are applied to a noninspired
exposition of revealed truth to the children of men.
G. Infallibility of Holy Scripture. Precisely because they
have God as an Author who has selected the actual words of
which they are composed the books of Holy Scripture are
absolutely free of error. Obviously the presence of any mistake,
even the least consequential, in the pages of Holy Writ, would
be directly contrary to the infinite wisdom and veracity of
God. As a result, the theologian has at his disposal a group
of infallible documents which convey some of that divine mes­
sage which it is his business to express and teach with un­
equivocal perfection. Those books which God Himself has
written, which manifest the truth which God Himself wishes
the world to know, express the content of the Christian mes­
sage accurately, although they by no means express all of it.
H. Scripture Explained by the Church. Although the
text of Sacred Scripture, as a volume of which God Himself
is the Author, stands as absolutely free from error, it is un­
fortunately possible to use and explain that text erroneously.
Moreover, some parts of Holy Scripture are, according to the
testimony of the inspired writings themselves, quite difficult to
understand and interpret. However, God has chosen to present
these books to the world at the hands of a qualified teacher
which alone is competent infallibly to explain the message con­
veyed on the inspired pages. That infallible teacher is the
Catholic Church. As a result, Holy Scripture is utilized cor­
rectly by the theologian when it is explained in terms of that
objective meaning which its divine Author attached to it, and
i
i

r»rT^r~iJ*wi*waiW'i

96

'A
*
H»

&
ii

I <!
rg
*1

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

which is expressed in the unerring magisterium of the Cath­
olic Church. The meaning which the Church predicates of
one or another passage in Holy Scripture is not to be looked
upon as an outside interpretation of a document which is in
some measure common property. It is not one of the many
possible accurate interpretations of the inspired pages. Actually
it is the statement of that meaning which God the Author
gave to the message which He conveyed upon the inspired
pages. It is one which the theologian must utilize for his
correct interpretation of the revealed truth.
So complete is the supervision over the matter of Sacred
Scripture with which the Catholic Church has been endowed
by God that it is her duty and prerogative to assert which
books have actually been inspired by God. Only through the
divine and public revelation with which she is entrusted could
it be known that books like the Epistle of St. Jude, for example,
were inspired while others were not. Furthermore, it is the
duty and the prerogative of the Church to watch over the vari­
ous translations which are made of the inspired writings. Thus
she accepts as authentic and useful, not only for preaching but
for scientific theological disputation, the ancient Latin version
of the Bible which we know as the Vulgate. She forbids any
one to reject it.
I. The Use of Sacred Scripture in Theology. The the­
ologian, then, is expected to utilize Sacred Scripture for the
attainment of his own purpose. It consists of a set of docu­
ments containing a message which has come from God, a
message which He has expressed in a book which comes from
Him to the children of men. In the same sense that an ordinary
book contains what some author wishes to say to the world,
the books of which God is the Author obviously contain what
God Himself wishes the world to accept as His teaching. Al­
though the Bible by no means contains the entirety of the
divine message which God intends to have accepted by all
men, it differs from the other agency in which that message is
contained in that as the very terms in which the doctrine is

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

97

expressed are chosen by God. The Bible is thus one of the re­
sources at the disposal of sacred theology. It is properly also a
source of divine revelation. The teaching which it contains is
that which comes from God as His message. It is not merely
the divinely guided interpretation of that message.
In the investigation of these sacred books, according to the
living and ever available magisterium of the Catholic Church,
lies the great triumph of sacred theology. The man who begins
the study of the sacred doctrine will advance more perfectly
in so far as he is aware of this. Thus, for example, the scientific
perfection of that portion of the Summa Theologica which
deals with the processions and the relations in God can be
seen in all of its beauty and in all the perfect profundity of
its meaning only when a man realizes that it is meant to ex­
plain the significance of the words of our Lord, contained in
the Gospel according to St. John. “I have come forth from
God.”28

II. Divine Apostolic Tradition
The second among the theological places is, like Holy Scrip­
ture itself, also a source of divine public revelation. It is the
only other point at which we may look for the teaching which
God has given to the world through Jesus Christ. In other
words, all that God put into that revelation which He wills
that all men should accept in order to attain the only eternal
and perfect felicity which is available to them is contained
either upon the inspired pages of Holy Scripture or in the
divine apostolic tradition itself.
A. Traditions Within the Church. This divine apostolic
tradition is the unwritten teaching of the apostolic college, the
doctrine which they taught and presented to the Church as
having been the message of our Lord Himself, and thus
divinely revealed to man. The standard theologians of the
Catholic Church recognize, as distinct from this divine apos­
tolic tradition, certain other traditions which are merely aposaSt. John 16:28.

................................

98

- --- —----

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

tolic and others again which are merely ecclesiastical. The
merely apostolic tradition is teaching given to the Church by
the Apostles themselves, either individually or collectively. It
is, however, doctrine which the Apostles offered precisely on
their own authority, as the first teachers within the Church of
God. The ancient ecclesiastical traditions come from early
leaders within the Church, but again they rest upon the au­
thority of those leaders alone. They are not offered as having
been taught by Jesus Christ as a part of that divine message
which all men are called upon to accept with the assent of
divine faith. The divine apostolic tradition differs from these
in that it was given to the Church by the Apostles precisely
as expressing the content of divine public revelation.
B. The Priority of Tradition to the New Testament
Books. For the first few years in the life of the Catholic Church,
this divine apostolic tradition was the only source from- which
the characteristically Christian teachings, defended and pro­
pounded by that Church, were available to men. The first of
those inspired books included in the New Testament did not
make its appearance until the Church had been in existence for
more than a decade. The other books which go to make up the
New Testament were written before the end of the first cen­
tury. However, all of these books expressed the then existent
fund of divine tradition, although, of course, from time to
time, truths which had not hitherto been communicated to
man were set forth upon the sacred pages. No one of these
books claimed, singly or collectively, to express the entire con­
tent of Christian revelation. Actually, as is the case in St. Paul’s
Second Epistle to Timothy, they pointed to an already exist­
ing and well-known deposit of divine apostolic tradition.2*
C. The Existence of Divine Apostolic Tradition As a
Source of Revelation Distinct from Sacred Scripture. It is of
faith that not all of the public revelation which God has given
to the world is actually expressed and contained on the pages of
39 “Hold the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me in faith.
**
Second Epistle to Timothy, 1:13.

The

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

99

Sacred Scripture. For example, the truths of the Immaculate
Conception and of the perpetual virginity of our Lady form
a part of the content of Christian revelation, although they
are not taught explicitly in any inspired book. Those truths
which constitute this unwritten tradition enter into the rule
of faith in the same way as does Sacred Scripture itself. Like
the revealed truths set down on the inspired pages of the
Bible, these unwritten verities are infallibly taught, guarded,
propounded, and explained by the Catholic Church. Like the
truths contained in Sacred Scripture, these facts which are
stated in divine apostolic tradition are to be defended and ex­
pressed in the science of sacred theology.
D. The Unwritten Tradition. Naturally the theologian
must know where to find those truths which are contained in
the divine apostolic tradition. They are said to be unwritten
merely in the sense that they are not proposed on the pages
of inspired Scripture. However, they have been committed to
writing in noninspired works long ago. We can find this
tradition expressed in the works of the Fathers, in the docu­
ments of the councils, and in the formularies of faith adopted
and utilized by the Catholic Church. A doctrine can be recog­
nized as a component part of this oral tradition when a moral
unanimity among the Fathers who deal with this matter set
down as something which has been revealed to the world by
God through Jesus Christ our Lord, a truth which is not con­
veyed in the inspired words of Sacred Scripture.
What the Fathers and the councils mention as the content
of Catholic faith naturally includes all of the truth which has
been brought to the world through our Lord. That portion of
this public revelation which has always been proposed as such
by the Catholic Church, but which is not contained in inspired
Scripture constitutes the body of truth which is taught and is
to be sought in the divine and apostolic tradition. Naturally
this body of doctrine includes the authentic interpretation of
those truths which are conveyed in Scripture itself. The sense
or meaning of the Scriptures is something which the Church

... .

100

-

.—......

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

has possessed from the very beginning. The Scriptures would
be useless as a practical rule of faith apart from the divine and
apostolic tradition by which they are explained and under­
stood. But with the Scripture, this tradition constitutes the
great source in which all of the truth which is to be expounded
in the process of sacred theology is contained.

!

ji

CHAPTER

6

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY
— PART II
III. The Catholic Church

Only the first two among the theological places are spoken
of as sources of divine public revelation. All of those truths
which Christians accept on the word of God who has revealed
them are either set down on the inspired pages of Holy Scrip­
ture or contained in that deposit of doctrine which constitutes
the teaching which the Apostles gave orally to the Church as
having been communicated by God to man. The Scriptures and
the divine apostolic tradition are the agencies through which
the divine revelation has actually come to the human race. The
message which God gave to the world through Jesus Christ is
to be found only in these as in its proper sources.
A. The Function of the Church As Compared With That
of Scripture and Tradition^ The next among the theological
places, according to the listing of Melchior Cano, fulfills a
different function in the process of sacred theology. Scripture
and tradition contain divine revelation. The Catholic Church
teaches and defends it. Scripture and tradition together consti­
tute a definite rule of faith, but one which is mediate and re­
mote. The living magisterium of the Catholic Church, on the
other hand, constitutes an immediate or proximate rule of faith.
It is an agency through .vyhich miéijrmay have presented to
them the actual content uf. *divine
'revelation,
in such a way
that they may be preserved from .-error'and accept all and only
- *

· '-’WI

-

102

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

that which God has actually revealed in His public message to
men. The Church is the one divinely appointed force by which
the truths contained in Scripture and tradition are to be pro­
posed correctly to the minds of men.
Because the Church has a different function with regard to
revelation than that exercised by Scripture and tradition, there
follow certain consequences of importance for understanding
the role of the magisterium of the Church in the process of
sacred theology. The canon of Sacred Scripture is closed once
and for all. There never will be another book included in the
holy Bible. Furthermore, the content of the divine apostolic
tradition was, of course, closed with the death of the last
Apostle. Since that time there has not been, nor will there ever
be, another truth communicated by God to man as something
which all men must accept with the assent of divine faith.
However, the Catholic Church, the infallible defender and
proponent of the divine revelation, will go on until the end of
time in the successful accomplishment of her task of bringing
this divine teaching to the children of men. She will take that
body of truth which is expressed in Scripture and in divine
apostolic tradition, resolve correctly the problems which arise
about its interpretation, and unerringly condemn the teaching
which denies or misjudges revealed truth. Hers is a magister­
ium, a teaching office, unique in the history of mankind.
B. The Constitution of the Church. Naturally the
teaching function of the Catholic Church is exercised in ac­
cordance with the constitution which this divinely instituted
society received from its Founder. The Church is a real and
definitely visible society which Jesus Christ our Lord founded
while He lived upon this earth. He founded this society by
first of all gathering the first members and then organizing
them properly for the attainment of an end which He pointed
out to them. The men chosen by Jesus Christ as the first mem­
bers of the Church and 1Κς·bearers, pf the organization to their
fellow men were the Apostles;·; J"’.··.-: ί
Our Lord established'the-Catholic Church' as an hierarchical

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

IO3

and monarchical society. Its visible head in this world is the
Bishop of Rome who, as the successor of St. Peter, the prince
of the Apostles, is the Vicar of Christ. Under his direction the
bishops, who are the successors of the Apostles, govern and
instruct the churches confided to their care. These bishops,
with the priests and ministers subject to them, take the active
part in the great work of sanctification which is proper to the
Church and constitute as such the hierarchy of orders.
The members of this Church are those possessors of the bap­
tismal character who have not broken the bond of ecclesiastical
unity by heresy, apostasy, or schism and who have not been
expelled from the society through the incurring of the fullness
of excommunication. Only these are actually members of the
Catholic Church. Occasionally in our own times there have
been misunderstandings about the nature of membership with­
in this organization, misunderstandings engendered by a faulty
use and explanation of the term “soul of the Church.” The
soul of the Church is not a kind of organization, in some way
distinct from the “body of the Church,” which is the visible
organization of the Catholic society. Actually the Soul of the
Church is God the Holy Ghost. Those said to belong to the
soul of the Church are those who are in the state of habitual
grace, who enjoy that friendship of God which they could not
possess without at least intending to pertain as members to the
organization which our Lord instituted for the salvation of men.
C. The Two Ways in Which the Church Teaches
Infallibly. Now, this visible Catholic Church teaches the con­
tent of divine revelation infallibly in two distinct ways. First
there is the solemn magisterium, the solemn definition or
declaration which the Church may propose. Such a solemn
declaration or definition takes place when the Roman Pontiff
speaks ex cathedra, utilizing the fullness of his power in teach­
ing the universal Church on matters of faith or morals, or
when an ecumenical council together with and subject to the
same Roman Pontiff speaks definitively to the entire Church on
the matter of public revelation.

104

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

The second way in which the Church can teach infallibly
that doctrine which was revealed to the world through Jesus
Christ our Lord is through the processes of her ordinary magis­
terium. This ordinary magisterium or teaching office is exer­
cised in the continuous daily instruction given in the Church
throughout the world, by the competent authorities of the
Church. These competent authorities are the bishops, each in
his own territory and united under the supreme leadership of
the Roman Pontiff. The bishops carry on this instruction per­
sonally as well as through the priests and the other qualified
teachers subject to them.1
D. The Teaching Church. Thus the Holy Father and the
other bishops of the Catholic Church, in communion with and
subject to him, constitute the ecclesia docens, the teaching
Church. The priests who preach and instruct in the various
parishes, and in the schools, seminaries, and the universities of
the Church exercise their ministry precisely as helpers to the
bishops and as carrying on in a work which is entrusted to the
bishops in their capacity as pastors of souls. All of the other
members of the Church, that is those below the grade of bish­
op, constitute the ecclesia discens, that is the Church which
learns or is instructed.
The individual bishop, of course, is not endowed with the
prerogative of personal infallibility. It is possible for him to
teach erroneously on matters of faith and morals. He can assert
that some doctrine has been revealed by God through Jesus
Christ when, as a matter of fact, the teaching was not a part
of the divine message at all. On the other hand, it is possible
for him to deny the divine origin or the truth of a statement
which actually forms a part of the deposit of divine public
The ordinary magisterium is the continuous and, as it were, positive exposition
of divine revelation which the Church has conducted from the moment it began its
corporate activity. The solemn judgment, on the other hand, is a decision by which
the Church settles some problem which has arisen about the meaning inherent in
this divine message, a decision made either by the Holy Father speaking « cathedra
or by an ecumenical council. Cf. the Vatican Council, the Constitution Dei FUiut
(Denzinger, 1792), and the commentary in Vacant, op. cii., Vol. 2, pp. 84-89.

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

IO5

revelation. Furthermore, he can misconstrue or misstate dog­
matic formulas which are indicative of the content of that
revelation.
However, the episcopal college considered corporately and in
union with the Vicar of Christ on earth actually is endowed
with infallibility. When the ecclesia docens as a whole proposes
a statement as something which has been communicated by
God to man as a part of public revelation, then there is no pos­
sibility of a mistake. In this ordinary universal teaching the
infallibility which belongs to the Catholic Church as such is
actually exercised.
E. The Ordinary Magisterium. As a matter of fact this
ordinary and universal magisterium has been the means by
which many of the heresies which have attacked the faith of
Jesus Christ during the course of the centuries have been recog­
nized and destroyed. It was this teaching which quelled the
threats of Sabellianism, Montanism, and Pelagianism, to men­
tion only a few. Even in the numerous cases where the Church
has spoken in solemn judgment and definition, the heresy or
evil which she had set out to eradicate had long since been
recognized as such in the competent teaching of the universal
episcopate.
In the listing of Melchior Cano’s De Locis Theologicis, each
of the two organs of the Church’s solemn magisterium is recog­
nized and treated as a distinct theological place. The explana­
tion of the infallible teaching activity of the Church as such,
together with the manifestations of that activity which are
peculiar to the ordinary magisterium, falls under the heading
of the third among the theological places.
We must understand clearly that the expressions of the ordi­
nary magisterium of the Church which the theologian has at
his disposal fall under many different headings. This teaching
is to be found in the liturgical prayers of the Catholic Church,
in the great symbols or formularies which state the essentials
of her belief, in her canonical decisions, in the doctrine of the
approved catechisms and texts of sacred theology, in the pas-

106

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

toral instructions of the bishops, and, of course, in those pon­
tifical documents in which the Holy Father does not choose to
use the fullness of his apostolic power in teaching revealed
truth to the children of men. In all of these fashions the teach­
ing of the universal episcopate comes to the ecclesia discens. All
are resources which can and should be exploited by the theolo­
gian for the accomplishment of his task. These must enter into
the scheme of studies of the theologian in order that he may
possess the erudition and training so requisite for the attain­
ment of his purpose.
F. The Prayer of the Church. The authentic liturgical
prayers and practices of the Catholic Church are, of course, in­
fallibly expressive of the content of divine public revelation.
Prayer is essentially the petition of fitting things from God.
The fitting things which are asked of God in prayer constitute
our own ultimate and supernatural end and those benefits
which can and should be of service to us in the attainment of
that end. Because they pertain to the supernatural order, that
is to the category of those things which are intrinsically and
essentially beyond the competence of any created nature as
such, the only authentic information about these fitting things
is contained in the doctrine which God has revealed to the
world through Jesus Christ our Lord. God has told us about
the nature, the possibility, and the efficacy of our prayers as
well as about their direction and object. Finally, the standard
upon which all the petitions of the Catholic Church are based is
the formula which our Lord Himself taught to His Apostles,
the Lord’s Prayer.
As a result the content of those petitions which the Church,
the mystical body of Christ, makes to God is an expression of
the revealed doctrine itself.2 The petition asks for those things
which we hope to possess through the merciful omnipotence
of God. The things for which we hope are precisely those about
which we are informed in that doctrine which we accept with
the assent of divine faith. Since it is the infallible Church of
’Cf. Fenton, op. cit., p. 133.

■x/'·

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

(

,

i

*

•

<'
’

!

IO7

Jesus Christ which offers the prayers and which therefore
teaches the content of the faith in the formulas of those petitions, the official or liturgical prayers of the Catholic Church
unerringly express the content of divine public revelation. For,
after all, the act of prayer is expressed, not for the benefit of
God, but precisely for the benefit of those human beings in
whose favor the act of prayer has been instituted and integrated
into the religion of Jesus Christ. It is expressed for the benefit
of man in so far as man, through an appreciation of the for­
mulae in which the petitions of prayer are manifested, maÿ
come to realize the object of his own hope.
As a result, the theologian can accept as the product of the
ordinary magisterium of the Catholic Church the liturgical
formulae and directions. He can accept those prayers as in­
fallible indications of the meaning conveyed by Jesus Christ in
the message which He gave to mankind as divinely revealed
truth. Such prayers belong to the Church as a whole, and
definitely proceed from the universal magisterium.
G. The Symbols. The symbols or creeds in which, from the
earliest years of her existence, the Catholic Church has ex­
pressed the elements of her divine message must be received as
infallible utterances of the universal Church. There are many
of these authentic acts of the Catholic faith in existence. Some
of them, as a matter of fact, are in common use in the devo­
tional and liturgical life of the Church. One of these symbols
is that ancient profession of faith which we know as the
Apostles’ Creed. Another is the Creed of the First Council of
Nicea, and still another the closely related Creed of the First
Council of Constantinople, which is sung and recited at the
Mass.
In the breviary and in the rite for the process of exorcism,
the Catholic Church makes use of that magnificent formula
which is known as the Athanasian Creed. There are available,
furthermore, the Anti-Priscillianist symbol, sometimes called
the “Pides Damasi,” the creed of Toledo, the profession of faith
of the Council of Trent and in more recent times the anti­

Ιθ8

THE CONCEPT OF SACKED THEOLOGY

modernist oath. All of these are at the disposal of the theolo­
gian as infallible statements of the universal Church on the
content of divine revelation.
H. Catechisms and Authoritative Theological Manuals.
Catechisms and other approved books of Christian doctrine, in
so far as they are adopted by the ordinaries of the various dio­
ceses for teaching the content of the faith to the people of these
dioceses, may be said to express the ordinary magisterium of
the Catholic Church. Naturally, of course, not all of these
catechisms have equal value in declaring the content of God’s
message. Some of them have had a very restricted use. Others,
like the old standard Baltimore Catechism in our own country,
have really been important factors in teaching the faith to the
Catholics of an entire nation. Others again, like the Roman
catechism or the catechism of the Council of Trent have had
world-wide popularity and use. The unanimous teaching of
these catechisms can rightly be considered by the theologians
as an indication of the ordinary and universal magisterium of
the Catholic Church. The doctrine that is universally or un­
animously proposed in these doctrinal books, in such a way
that it is presented to practically all of the Catholics of the
world as revealed truth, is certainly a verity taught and ex­
posed infallibly in the ordinary and universal magisterium of
the Catholic Church.
Another class of books closely associated with the catechisms
in expressing the content of the Church’s ordinary magisterium
is the theological manual or monograph. Those which are
adopted and utilized officially in the training of candidates for
the priesthood within the Catholic Church have naturally
more authority along this line than others. In so far as they
are adopted and utilized by the episcopate, they may be said to
express the teaching of the bishops about the matters they treat.
To this extent, the manuals and the monographs of sacred
theology may be said to express in some way the ordinary
magisterium of the Church. The authority of the Scholastic
theologians actually constitutes a separate and distinct theolog-

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

IOÇ

ical place. However, the theological works to which we made
allusion must also be considered in their place as manifesta­
tions of the teaching of the bishops throughout the world. In
this light they appear as manifesting in some way the ordinary
magisterium of the Catholic Church. In this way the testimony
of the entire body of theological works utilized by the bishops
of a country or, a fortiori of the world, to the effect that this
certain statement is contained in the deposit of faith is good
evidence that such is the doctrine of the universal episcopate,
or at least of those bishops who authorize the use of these
textbooks.
I. Hierarchical Instructions and Allocutions. Naturally
the doctrine taught commonly in the pastoral instructions of
the bishops, in the diocesan synods, and in the plenary and the
provincial councils falls under the heading of the ordinary
magisterium of the Catholic Church. So, too, do the letters and
the allocutions of the Roman Pontiff in which he does not
choose to exercise the fullness of his apostolic power. Likewise
the rescripts and the decisions of the various Roman congrega­
tions, both in matters of doctrine and of discipline. This same
ordinary magisterium is expressed in the Ordinary preaching
from the Catholic pulpit and even in the nontechnical Catholic
writings on religion and spirituality. Obviously these nontech­
nical writings have considerably less influence in expressing
the ordinary magisterium of the Church than have those works
which are actually utilized in the course of Christian instruc­
tion. A lesser degree of competence is expected, and, unfor­
tunately, far too frequently found in the writers of such non­
technical works.
J. The Ecclesia Discens. The effects of this ordinary
magisterium of the Catholic Church are to be found in the
ecclesia discens itself. For this reason many of the theologians
of the Church have appealed to the faithful themselves several
times in the course of Christian history in favor of the correct
interpretation of Catholic doctrine. For example, St. Augustine
was able to point out triumphantly that the teaching of the

IIO ’

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Pelagian heretics ran counter to the Christian convictions of
the faithful themselves.3 Naturally no one would claim that the
ecclesia discens has an authority distinct or separate from that
of the Church teaching. Its authority, its competence to recog­
nize the true interpretation of the Christian message and to
repudiate a denial or misconception of this teaching is simply
an effect produced within the membership of the Church by
the doctrinal work of the hierarchy itself. The ecclesia discens
is very definitely not something to which the theologian might
appeal against any pronouncement of the ecclesiastical hier­
archy. As a matter of fact, it has no active or positive authority
in the doctrinal line whatsoever. It is cited by the theologians
of the Church as it was long ago by St. Augustine, simply to
show that some doctrine, proposed by an innovator, is in
obvious contradiction to the tenets of that faith which the
Christian people have ever received from their competent
authorities.
K. The Field Upon Which the Church Can Teach
Infallibly. It is essential for the theologian to realize that this
living and continuous teaching of the Catholic Church which
he is able to utilize for the correct interpretation of the message
of Jesus Christ is exercised primarily and essentially on the
content of that message. In whatever field the pronouncements
of the Catholic Church may fall, the primary intent of her
teaching is always to propound the content of the divine public
revelation. It is her divinely given commission to guard the
content of God’s revelation faithfully and well, and to teach it
infallibly to the children of men until the end of time.
The process of guarding and teaching the doctrine which
Jesus Christ proposed to the world as divinely revealed involves
not only decisions about the meaning of this message, but also
resolutions which have to do with the fields of sciences other
*Cf. St. Augustine, Contra lulianum, Liber I, Caput 31; Opus Imperfectum Contra
lulianum, Liber Π, Caput 2. There is an excellent explanation of this point in
Thomas Stapleton, Principiorum Fidei Doctrinalium Demonstratio Methodica, Liber
VII, Caput 17.

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

III

than sacred theology, declarations about what are known as
dogmatic facts, and the decisions which are incidental to the
canonization of a saint or the approval of a religious order. In
all of these fields the Church is able to speak infallibly in line
with her essential and central task of declaring the content of
divine public revelation. This extensive competence of the
Catholic Church guarantees the theologian a living and per­
fectly available standard by which to judge the proper mean­
ing which is contained in the message of Jesus Christ.
The domain in which the Church is competent to speak
infallibly, then, is exactly coextensive with the field of sacred
theology itself. The Church proposes and explains the content
of the divine message as a whole. She explains the significance
of the dogmatic formulae in which that message is expressed in
two ways. First of all she acts positively and sets forth the true
meaning, the doctrine which has actually been contained in
the authentic sources of divine revelation. Again she may act
in a negative manner, in condemning or reproving a state­
ment as a misinterpretation or a denial of Christ’s teaching.
In other words, the Church is perfectly competent to deal,
not only with truths already defined as having been revealed
by God, but also with those verities which are set forward
merely as true theological conclusions. She can, if she wishes,
take the very terminology of the theological conclusion as it
stands in the writings of an individual author, and then utilize
this terminology in order to define clearly and unequivocally
a truth which has been revealed by God. She has actually fol­
lowed that procedure in the case of St. Thomas Aquinas4 and
Peter the Lombard.5 On the other hand, she can condemn as
heretical or erroneous certain theses which other men have put
forward as theological conclusions or even as theological opin4 Compare the text of the Vatican Council, the Constitution Dei Filins, Chap. 2
(Denzinger, 1786), on the necessity of revelation with the terminology of St. Thomas
Aquinas in the Summa Theologica, Ia, q. 1, art. 1.
e The Fourth Council of the Lateran employed the terminology of Peter the
Lombard explicitly in its declaration of faith in the Blessed Trinity (Denzinger, 432).

Hi

112

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

ions, as she did with the theses of Jansenius® and Fenelon.’ The
important point for the theologian to remember is this. The
Catholic Church enjoys a competence and an infallibility with
reference to the theological conclusion as such. She can accept
or reject a statement precisely as a theological conclusion rather
than as a definition or a definitive resolution on matters of
faith. She can state that a proposition is acceptable precisely as
a theological conclusion, and she can act in this way utilizing
the infallibility with which she has been endowed by her
divine Founder.
Because she is empowered and commissioned to expound ,
infallibly the content of Holy Scripture, the Church is com­
petent to teach unerringly about theses which pertain primarily
to sciences other than sacred theology. Thus she can condemn
a theory or an hypothesis advanced, let us say, by an anthro­
pologist or an astronomer if this theory contradicts the doctrine
advanced in Holy Scripture. She can reprove a statement put
forward in the name of economics or sociology when such a
statement involves a denial or a misinterpretation of revealed
truth.
The Church is aware that in the Bible there are statements
which, while they contribute to the integrity of the revealed
message found in Holy Scripture, yet have implications in the
direction of other fields of learning. This eruditional, historical,
or scientific matter is, of course, not her primary concern. Her
primary and essential purpose is to guard and expound the
revelation which God has given to the world through Jesus
Christ. Part of that revelation, however, is to the effect that the
books of Sacred Scripture are inspired by God and that as a
result it is absolutely immune from error. Consequently it is in
the line of the Church’s power and duty to warn her children
‘The five errors contained in the book Augustinus, by Cornelius Jansenius, were
condemned by Pope Innocent X in the Constitution Cum Occasione of May 31,
1653 (Denzinger, 1092-1096).
'Twenty-three errors taken from the book Explications des Maximes des Saints
sur la Vie Intérieure, by Fenelon, were condemned by Pope Innocent XII in the
Brief Cum Alias of March 11, 1699 (Denzinger, 1327-1349).

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

IIJ

against untruths which contradict the teachings of Holy Scrip­
ture, even if these untruths are put forward in the name of
some secular science. The fact of the matter is that, since one
truth cannot contradict another, any statement which contra­
dicts the content of Holy Scripture, as this is authentically and
infallibly set forth in the magisterium of the Church, is false.
In denouncing the error, the Church does a favor to the pro­
fane science which is dedicated to the cause of truth. The
Church can recognize and denounce a statement which contra­
dicts the evidence of Sacred Scripture even when such a state­
ment has not an immediate religious connotation.
L. Dogmatic Facts. The theologian has also at his disposal
the authority of the Church on the matter of what are called
dogmatic facts. These are actions, circumstances, or conditions
attendant upon or connected with the teaching of divine reve­
lation in such a way that the revelation itself could not be
taught properly apart from the knowledge of the facts. Thus,
for example, when the posthumous book Augustinus, by Cor­
nelius Jansenius, made its appearance in 1640, and met with
ecclesiastical censure and condemnation, the partisans of Jan­
senius taught that, while the condemned propositions listed as
having been taken from the book in question actually were
false, still they had never been written by the author or con­
tained in the book, at least with the meaning which the Church
attached to them in condemning them. In 1656 and again in
1664 the Church, through the constitutions of Pope Alexander
VII, declared infallibly that the five propositions had been
condemned in that sense in which they had been intended by
Jansenius himself, and furthermore that the propositions had
been expressed in the Augustinus in the same sense as that for
which they had been reproved by the Church.8
These dogmatic facts lie within the competence of the in­
fallible teaching of the Catholic Church precisely because the
Church could not exercise the primary and essential function
which God has assigned to her without the power of judging
‘Denzinger, 1099.

j

114

j
el

!
!
1

;
j
J
I
I

j
I
i
,
!
I

î
p
(

1
ij

4
•s

ί
:

i
V

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

1 infallibly about circumstances connected with the actual prop­
; osition of revealed truth. The very fact that she possesses and
· actually exercises infallible authority in teaching about these
j dogmatic facts is an excellent indication of the nature of that
J magisterium which the Church enjoys in the exposition of
ί revealed doctrine. She is not sent merely to superintend the
t teaching of a dead and remote message. Her authority is over
ί instruction in a living doctrine, a body of truth which is ad* dressed to the minds of all men. She can judge that truth, not
’j merely in so far as it appears on the consecrated texts of her
j own inspired books. She can recognize, guard, and propound
this teaching as it appears on the pages of any document at any
time.
M. The Approval of Religious Orders and the CanonizaTiON of Saints. Not only can she recognize and guard the divine teaching which has been entrusted to her care when that
teaching appears on the pages of doctrinal works, but the Church
is competent to judge about the truths which she is commissioned to teach in the matter of approving religious orders and
canonizing saints. The message entrusted to the care of the
Catholic Church is a doctrine of perfection. It tells of the way
in which a man may advance in perfection by loving God ever
more and more efficaciously. Consequently the Church is quite
competent to decide that this particular rule or constitution is
fitted to engender and increase Christian perfection in the souls
of those who are to live under its direction. Furthermore, she
can judge competently that this particular man whom she
raises to the honors of the altar as a saint has actually directed
his life successfully in accordance with the precepts of that
revealed message which she is commissioned to teach. Sacred
theology can make use both of the rules which are followed in
the process of canonization and of the results obtained in each
particular inquiry.
N. The Use of a Living and Infallible Magisterium.
Thus the Catholic Church offers to its theologians the in­
estimable advantage of a teaching which presents the doctrine

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

II5

of Jesus Christ our Lord infallibly and clearly to the men of all
ages and of all lands. Her unerring declarations contain no
revealed message subsequent to that which came from God
through Jesus Christ, and which was completed with the death
of the last Apostle. She takes this divine revelation and presents
it to the men of the various lands and ages in such a way that
these men may realize exactly what our Lord included in the
content of his preaching and exactly what the men who heard
our Lord Himself understood and knew Him to mean.
Obviously, then, since the purpose of the theologian is to
state clearly and equivocally that same message which the
Catholic Church is privileged and commissioned to teach in­
fallibly, it follows that the theologian can resolve any of the
problems which are presented to him in the light of the
Church’s doctrine. The Church has always understood and has
always taught faithfully the entire content of the message
which came to men through Jesus Christ. As a result the
theologian, who seeks the resolution of the problem with
which he is confronted, a problem about the meaning inherent
in the teaching of Christ, can always find the resolution for
which he is looking in the authentic literature of Catholic
teaching. Naturally he must reason carefully and accurately
in order to show how the resolution of his own problem is
expressed in the pronouncements of the Catholic Church. But
his reasoning is successful in the measure in which he succeeds
in bringing out the infallible teachings of the Church in such
a way that men can grasp their real import.
IV. The Authority of the Roman Pontiff
A. The Primacy. As the Bishop of Rome, the Sovereign
Pontiff is the successor to St. Peter and the Vicar of Christ on
earth. By virtue of his office he possesses all of the power which
St. Peter enjoyed in his capacity as visible head of the Catholic
Church. There were, of course, certain charismatic powers and
certain privileges which St. Peter possessed as an individual
Apostle and which consequently were never transmitted to his

Il6

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

successors. But the primacy of jurisdiction which our Lord
conferred upon St. Peter when He established him as prince of
the apostolic college and as the leader of the Catholic Church
is something which comes to every man who has followed St.
Peter as Bishop of Rome.
In this primacy of jurisdiction are included the supreme
powers to govern and to teach the members of that Church
which was founded by Jesus Christ. The Sovereign Pontiff is
commissioned to rule over all of the members of the Church,
his fellow bishops as well as the faithful throughout the world,
in the way of eternal salvation. This power comes to the suc­
cessor independently of the consent of the other members of
the ecclesiastical hierarchy and, of course, independently of any
authority of a state.
B. The Teaching Power of the Roman Pontiff. The
primacy of jurisdiction with which the Holy Father is en­
dowed constitutes him as the supreme teacher and guardian
of the divine public revelation. Since he is the visible head and
leader of the Church, all of the doctrinal power inherent in
this institution is centered in his person. The infallibility which
he enjoys in setting forth the teaching of Jesus Christ is actually
the infallibility of the Church herself. In the words of the
Vatican Council, the teaching power of the Holy Father is
such that “when he speaks ex cathedra, that is when, using his
function as pastor and teacher of all Christians, he defines in
his supreme apostolic authority a doctrine on faith and morals
to be accepted by the universal Church, through the divine
assistance promised to him in St. Peter, he possesses that in­
fallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished His Church
to be equipped in defining doctrine on faith and morals.”
Thus, according to the proposition of the same Council, “such
definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of themselves
and not by reason of the consent of the Church.’”
The pontifical definition of which the Council speaks con­
sists in a solemn judgment of the Holy Father terminating
• Denzinger, 1839.

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

117

with absolute finality some question which has arisen about
the content of revealed truth. It is addressed to all those who
accept the message which Jesus Christ gave to the world as
divinely revealed. The science of sacred theology can avail
itself of such definitions as perfectly correct statements of God’s
teaching. The doctrine which is asserted in the pontifical defi­
nition is not some new teaching which God has revealed to
the Church as a whole or to its visible head. It is the unerring
statement of matter conveyed in that same divine message
which was complete with the death of the last Apostle. The
assistance which God gives to the Holy Father in preserving
him from the possibility of error in his definition of revealed
truth does not constitute a new revelation at all. The Holy
Father utilizes all of the resources of sacred theology in coming
to his decision. He has the guarantee from God Himself that
he will not define erroneously.
C. The Positive Definition. The infallible and solemn
definition of the Holy Father may take the form of a positive
statement or it may be proposed as the condemnation of an
heretical teaching. The formula incident to the positive statement is exemplified perfectly in the bull Ineffabilis Deus, in
which Pope Pius IX adverts explicitly to the use of his supreme
apostolic power in defining the doctrine on the immaculate
conception of our Lady. “For the honor of the holy and indi­
vidual Trinity, for the honor and the glory of the Virgin
Mother of God, for the exaltation of the Catholic faith and the
growth of the Christian religion; by the authority of our Lord
Jesus Christ, of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul and by our
own authority, we declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most blessed virgin Mary was at the
first instant of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege
of almighty God preserved free from all stain of original sin
because of the merits of Jesus Christ the Saviour of the human
race, is revealed by God and therefore is to be believed by all
the faithful firmly and constantly. Therefore, should any persons presume, which God forbid, to think in their hearts other-

i
j

>3
u
I
;

1

] ξ

a
Jr

j I
! f

J j
| I

jh
I1
11

■ 1
■;

Il8

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

wise than as we have defined, let them know and realize that
they are condemned by their own judgment, that they have
suffered shipwreck about the faith and that they have fallen
from the unity of the Church. Moreover, if they dare to mani­
fest what they think by word, in writing or in any other way
externally, they are subject to the penalties prescribed by law
for that very fact.”10
The various aspects of the solemn definition are brought out
in the words of the Ineffabilis Deus. In the first place, the
purpose which motivates the pronouncement as an ultimate
final cause is the glory of the Triune God. This is to be accom­
plished through the exaltation of the Christian faith and in the
growth and perfection of that worship which the Church of
Jesus Christ offers to the Creator. The faith is exalted in so far
as an erroneous judgment about its content is exposed for
what it is. The salvific teaching of Jesus Christ, so ineffably
beneficial to man, is brought to him in such a way that there
is no further danger that the full meaning and beauty of one
pronouncement contained in it may be obscured. Every pontif­
ical definition tends to the accomplishment of this purpose. It
was the privilege of the Ineffabilis Deus to bring about this
result in manifesting one of the privileges of our Blessed
Mother and thereby to pay her a special honor arid reverence.
The power by which the Sovereign Pontiff acts in formulat­
ing this infallible definition is ultimately the authority of our
Lord Himself. This authority was given by our Lord to St.
Peter when He confided the care of His lambs and of His
sheep to the prince of the apostolic college. Precisely because
it is a power which was meant to be exercised until the end of
time, it was given through St. Peter to all of those who were
to follow him in the see of Rome. Commissioned as he is, then,
to watch over and expound the teaching which Jesus Christ
presented to the world as divinely revealed, the Holy Father
speaks by the authority of St. Peter and. as his successor.
In the formula of the definition the name of St. Paul is asso” Denzinger, 1641.

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

IIÇ

ciated with that of St. Peter. This is not, of course, intended to
imply that the Apostle of the gentiles was the equal of St.
Peter in the ecclesiastical hierarchy. He was not the head of the
apostolic college nor was he the recipient of any primacy of
jurisdiction over the universal Church. He was, however, asso­
ciated with St. Peter during the early days of the Church in
Rome. As a result he is, and always will be named with the
prince of the Apostles as patron of the eternal city. Speaking
as the head of that Church, and as the successor to St. Peter,
the Holy Father also teaches with the authority of St. Paul
himself.
By nature the solemn exercise of the apostolic power by the
Holy Father is a declaration, a pronouncement, a definition.
The Holy Father declares, again infallibly, that the particular
dogmatic truth, expressed in the definite formula utilized in
the pronouncement, was actually revealed by God and forms
a part of that Christian message which all men must accept with
the assent of divine belief if they are to be joined to God in the
bonds of faith. Furthermore, the Vatican Council speaks of the
solemn declaration of the Catholic Church, in contradistinc­
tion to that ordinary teaching which is likewise infallible, as a
judgment. Both the Holy Father and the ecumenical council
are the organs of this solemn judgment.
This judgment differs from the ordinary course of Catholic
teaching in the employment of a definite dogmatic formula.
The Holy Father, as well as the general council which is sub­
ject to and united with him, can declare with infallible ac­
curacy that a definite truth, exactly as it is expressed and con­
veyed in this particular statement, has been revealed by God
and must be believed by all Christians. The individual organ of
the ordinary magisterium within the Catholic Church does not
possess this competence.
Such is the force of the definition set forth infallibly in the
solemn magisterium of the Church that the man who refuses
to accept the declaration sins against divine faith and loses the
virtue of faith itself, even though his refusal to accept the teach-

120

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

ing of the Church be secret. However, we must remember that
when the Holy Father asserts that the man who secretly refuses
to accept the solemn judgment of the Catholic Church fails in
or falls from the unity of the Church, he does not state that
such a man ceases to be a member of that Church. The Cath­
olic Church is, after all, a definitely visible organization. A
man enters its communion through the visible sacrament of
Baptism. He ceases definitely to be a member of this Church
only through the visible processes of heresy, apostasy, schism,
or through the full measure of excommunication. Still, how­
ever, faith in the teaching of Jesus Christ is one of those bonds
of unity which brings together the members of this Church.
The man who sins against this faith even in a secret manner
casts off the perfection of this unity. Open rejection of the
solemn pronouncements of the Church naturally constitutes
that manifest heresy by which men are separated from the
communion of this society.
D. The Condemnation of Heresy. When the Holy
Father does not exercise the fullness of his apostolic power in
defining a doctrine positively, he can utilize it in condemning
some teaching as heretical. When a statement is reproved as
being heretical, the Sovereign Pontiff in that very act defines
the contradictory to this pronouncement as something which
is contained actually in the deposit of divine public revelation
and which must be accepted by all on the word of God Him­
self. The contradictory to any statement comprises, of course,
the flat denial of this pronouncement rather than the assertion
which is most opposed to it. Thus the statement that “all men
are good” is contradicted in the contention that “not all men
are good.” The contrary, or extreme opposite pronouncement
would be that “all men are evil.” When a statement is con­
demned as heretical, the contrary is not thereby defined as of
Catholic faith.
The statement which is stigmatized as heretical need not
necessarily have been the contradiction to a formula previously
defined in the solemn magisterium of the Church. It suffices

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

121

that the teaching denied in the condemned proposition should
have been that which was proposed as divinely revealed in the
ordinary magisterium. In any case, however, a teaching is
qualified as heresy only when it stands as a direct and im­
mediate contradiction to revealed truth thus set forth. It is a
direct and immediate contradiction to Catholic dogma when it
denies a truth which has been asserted by the Catholic Church
as revealed, and not merely when it objects to some resolution
of a theological problem which the Church herself has not
settled.
E. The Qualification of Error. Now, when a con­
demned proposition denies, not an actual statement which the
Church has presented to the world as divinely revealed, but a
correct explanation of the dogmatic formula, then the offend­
ing statement is said to be erroneous. An error about the mean­
ing of revealed teaching is something distinct from and de­
cidedly less than the contradiction or rejection of the faith
itself. When the Sovereign Pontiff reproves a proposition as
erroneous, he teaches authoritatively that the contradictory to
this statement has at least the status of a real and therefore
certain theological conclusion. The student of sacred theology
can thereby utilize it as such.
The erroneous proposition contradicts, not the Catholic
dogma itself, but a conclusion drawn correctly from that
dogma according to the ordinary textbooks. As we have already
seen, such a conclusion, in order to enter into the status of the
theological thesis and consequently in order to justify the atten­
tion of the Catholic Church, must have to do with the mean­
ing of the revealed message itself. It must be propounded as
the solution to a problem about the significance of the dog­
matic formulas, and thus about the content of the revealed
message.
When such a solution has been advanced by the theologians,
but not as yet officially by the Church herself, then the denial
of this solution constitutes a theological error, and can be re­
proved as such with infallible accuracy by the Catholic Church

122

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

and by the Holy Father who is the visible head of that Church.
At another time, should circumstances warrant it, the teaching
authority of the Church could infallibly declare that this error
is actually heretical. In this statement the Church would state
unerringly that the offending proposition contradicted thé
meaning actually inherent in the revealed doctrine and thus
formally constituted a denial of matter which must be accepted
on the word of God.
F. The Other Doctrinal Censures. During the course of
the centuries the Roman Pontiffs have utilized a great many
designations other than those of heresy and error in reproving
teaching which is at variance with the Christian message. The
man who is interested in the study of sacred theology should
know the technical implications of these theological censures.
Most of them, as a matter of fact, were utilized in the con­
demnation by Pope Clement XI of the one hundred one prop­
ositions taken from the works of the Jansenist, Quesnel. In
the bull, Unigenitus, issued on September 8, 1713, Pope Clem­
ent declared and condemned Quesnel’s listed doctrines as “re­
spectively false, captious, ill sounding, offensive to pious ears,
scandalous, pernicious, rash, injurious to the Church and to its
practice, contumelious not only with respect to the Church but
also toward secular authorities, seditious, impious, blasphe­
mous, suspect of heresy, savoring of heresy, favoring heretics’
heresy and schism, erroneous, proximate to heresy, often con­
demned, and also heretical and manifestly renewing various
heresies and especially those which are contained in the notori­
ous propositions of Jansenius, taken in the sense in which they
were condemned.”11 Each of these qualifications has its own
definite technical significance.
The first and by all means the most important group of
theological censures have reference to the untruthfulness of the
doctrine contained in the reproved propositions. Naturally the
most serious of these is the qualification heretical attached to
any teaching. The next in importance is the designation
11 Denzinger, 1451.

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Ι2β

proximate to heresy. The statement which is proximate to her­
esy denies a proposition which, in the present status of dog­
matic development, could actually be defined as having been
divinely revealed to man, in other words, a thesis which is
proximate to faith. The proximate to faith proposition, how­
ever, has not as yet been proposed as divinely revealed in either
the ordinary or the solemn magisterium of the Church. Again
we must realize that the truth once revealed by God through
Jesus Christ has been taught perfectly by the Church since the
beginning. The proposition which expresses the meaning of
this truth, the proposition in this case which is proximate to
faith, has been formulated as the response to a question about
the meaning inherent in the divine message. Hitherto this
proposition has been demonstrated and recognized by the
theologians of the Church as the correct expression of that
meaning which was inherent in the dogmatic deposit. Now,
the Church herself is proximately prepared to pronounce that
this thesis actually represents and expresses what God Himself
conveyed in His message. The pronouncement that a proposi­
tion is proximate to heresy constitutes a declaration by the mag­
isterium of the Church that the contradictory statement has
been sufficiently demonstrated, and that the preliminary theo­
logical labor has been completed.
The qualification savoring of heresy, on the other hand,
marks a statement as dangerously ambiguous. Such a proposi­
tion is capable of explanation or at least interpretation in an
orthodox sense. But in view of the historical background of
religious teaching, as it actually exists, the proposition could
very well be taken as the expression of a heresy, especially when
it has been used by a heretic in summing up his own teaching.
Consequently the use of such a proposition, without proper dis­
tinctions and explanations, to explain the content of Christian
revelation would be such as to mislead the hearer and perhaps
influence him to deny Catholic dogma. When the Holy Father
stigmatizes a statement as suspect of heresy, he declares that
the heretical interpretation of the ambiguous proposition was

I24

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

most probably intended by the author in the work from which
the proposition was taken.
A statement marked as rash or temerarious denies a thesis
which has not as yet attained the full and perfect status of a
theological conclusion in the schools of the Catholic Church,
but which at the same time is so well grounded and so widely
known that any denial of it is improper. Such a qualification is
less condemnatory than the censure erroneous. This is manifest
by the fact that it has been the practice of the Sovereign Pon­
tiffs to specify certain teachings as erroneous or at least rash.
The temerity of such a condemned proposition may be either
positive or negative. It is said to be positive when this proposi­
tion contradicts or involves the denial of a widely known and
well-established theses. It is negative when some proposition is
advanced as an explanation of Christian revelation without any
valid reason being adduced in its behalf.
The censure which states that a certain doctrine cannot be
taught safely is, of course, equivalent to the qualification of
rashness. This terminology is employed, among other places, in
the condemnation of propositions relative to the sort of knowl­
edge which our Lord possessed by virtue of His human nature
and to the errors of the Ontologists. Furthermore, the Roman
Pontiffs have frequently designated statements as false. A false
proposition is not only erroneous, but at the same time the
designation of falsity implies that the condemned proposition
is a counterfeit of a true teaching, and as such liable to lead
Christians into serious evil by way of deception.
Besides those censures which stigmatize a condemned state­
ment for doctrinal incorrectness, there are others which have
reference to the form in which the offending doctrine is ex­
pressed. Thus when Pope Pius VI censured as captious a propo­
sition advanced by the false synod of Pistoia, he pointed out
that the statement in question had been so formulated as to
mislead the Christian people. The qualification offensive to
pious ears which has been frequently used by the Pontiffs
designates a proposition as one which is set forth in such a way

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

125

as to run counter to the established convictions of the faithful.
This censure was used, with others, when the doctrines of
Baius, Molinos, and Fenelon were condemned. Many of the
propositions so qualified pretended to set up higher standards
of morality and perfection than those which were accepted and
propounded by the Church itself. Such teachings could not
but offend loyal Catholics, since they continually derided those
doctrines which had always been presented by the Church.
Offensive teachings of this type are sometimes qualified with
the censure ill sounding.
There are still other doctrinal censures which stress the evil
effects which the condemned proposition tends to bring about.
In this class are allocated the censures of seditious, pernicious
in practice, derogatory to the practice of the Church, and the
like. Other qualifications designate the proscribed statements
as definite sins against faith or charity. Such are the censures
of blasphemous, scandalous, impious, or schismatic. A proposi­
tion can also be stigmatized as new, as already condemned or
as reviving an error which is already condemned. The new
proposition is, of course, a statement set forth as an expression
of Christian doctrine without any warrant on the part of the
traditional literature of sacred theology.
G. The Organs of Pontifical Teaching. The Roman Pon­
tiff exercises his teaching authority in many different ways.
Sometimes, of course, he teaches in and with an ecumenical
council in such a way that the doctrine advanced is given to the
world as that of the Holy Father rather than that of the coun­
cil itself. Thus the profession of faith of the Council of Trent
was included in the Bull, Iniunctum Nobis of Pope Pius IV.
At other times, and far more frequently, the Vicar of Christ
teaches through letters emanating from himself, documents
known as encyclicals, bulls, pontifical constitutions, and the
like. At other times he teaches orally, by means of the various
allocutions which he grants to those whom he wishes to in­
struct. Again he may exercise his teaching office through the
instrumentality of those curial congregations which he uses in

Z Δ

120

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the ordinary direction of ecclesiastical affairs, agencies like the
Holy Office, the Biblical Commission, the Congregation of
Rites, and the rest. The responses and instructions of these con­
gregations are usually directive. Most frequently they confine
themselves to the task of stating that this particular proposition
which is in question can or cannot be taught safely in the
schools of the Catholic Church. Naturally that infallibility
which is the prerogative of the Holy Father cannot be dele­
gated to any of these congregations.12
Even when the Holy Father speaks and teaches by personal
letter or allocution rather than through one of the agencies
provided in the curia, he only avails himself of his privilege of
infallibility on those occasions when he makes full use of his
apostolic power in defining a truth on faith or morals as some­
thing which must be accepted with divine faith by all Chris­
tians. Naturally he can speak and teach, even officially, in
such a way as not to demand definitive acceptance of his
doctrine from his subjects throughout the world. But even
when he does not define and thereby use the full measure of
his apostolic power, his words are of tremendous importance
in showing the content of divine revelation. The theologians
can and should avail themselves of the papal encyclicals and
the other documents which are so efficaciously indicative of
the divine revelation.
H. The Pope As a Private Theologian. His high office does
not in any way prevent the Holy Father from acting in the
capacity of a private theologian whenever it pleases him to do
so. In acting as a private theologian, he makes no use of his
apostolic power. As a result whatever writings he chooses to
produce in this capacity would have only such authority, as is
enjoyed by and attributed to the work of any other competent
worker in the field of sacred theology. It is the business of the
theologian to express, clearly and unequivocally, the content
of divine revelation. But in doing so he acts as a private mem­
ber of the Church contributing to that work of teaching which
«Cf. Joannes Gspann, Summarium Theologiae Dogmaticae (Paris, 1930), p. 12.

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

I27

is essential to the Church. Only the Church herself, in her au­
thentic magisterium, has the power to teach Christ’s message
with infallible accuracy.
I. Questions Not Yet Determined by Pontifical Defini­
tion. There are times when the teaching of the Holy See takes
the form of a declaration that some particular controversy has
not as yet been resolved. In that case the Pontiff forbids private
writers to attach any theological censure to the doctrine which
they reject. This has happened in the case of the thesis on the
Immaculate Conception of our Lady. On September 4, 1483,
in the Constitution Grave Nimis, Pope Sixtus IV stated explictly that the controversy on this matter had not as yet been
decided.13 Since the Apostolic See itself had not spoken, the
Pontiff sharply reproved those religious preachers who had
dared to tax with the note of heresy the doctrine of those
writers who did not agree with them. Later, however, Pope
Alexander VII, in the Bull, Solicitudo Omnium Ecclesiarum
of December 8, 1661,14 stated that the thesis which held that
our Blessed Lady had actually been conceived free from any
stain of original sin was now generally accepted throughout
the Catholic Church. This doctrine was ultimately defined and
the problem thus absolutely resolved by Pope Pius IX in the
Bull Ineffabilis Deus of December 8, 1854.15
The writings of Sixtus, Alexander, and Pius form the outline
of a perfect case history in the development of a problem which
the Catholic Church first reserved the right to resolve and then
at last settled definitely. The statement to the effect that our
Blessed Mother was conceived free from any taint of original
sin had first been proposed by private theologians in the form
of a theological conclusion. They had proposed this thesis as
the solution to the problem of the meaning which must be at­
tached to the title of our Lady as “full of grace.” They had
adduced demonstrations which showed that Mary’s plenitude
“Denzinger, 735.
MDenzinger, 1100.
“Denzinger, 1641.

-

128

iTTnimiiaaiiiSiÉM

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

of divine grace was such as to include a freedom from original
sin, even in the very moment of her conception. As a matter of
fact, John Duns Scotus, the greatest of all the Franciscan
writers, owes his title of Doctor Marialis to the fact that he was
one of the most brilliant and vigorous proponents of this
teaching.
The acceptance of this thesis, however, was by no means
universal. Before the time of Scotus some of the ablest teachers
in all theological history had unequivocally denied the thesis of
the Immaculate Conception. Among these professors was St.
Thomas Aquinas himself.
Finally, the Church took official cognizance of the con­
troversy. First she declared that no authentic and authoritative
decision had yet been given in this matter. Then she asserted
that the thesis of the Immaculate Conception had become the
common doctrine within her schools, and as such had to be
considered as a theological conclusion of definite standing. The
last step in the process was the infallible decision given in the
, words of Pope Pius IX, closing the discussion forever.
As a matter of fact, even the shortest acquaintance with the
literature of sacred theology is sufficient to show that there are
many controverted questions in this field even in our own
time. In the Studiorum Ducem of Pope Pius XI we have an
authoritative declaration to the effect that theologians are free
to choose among certain conflicting theses and accept those
which they deem true. There is, of course, a definite limit set
to the field of this choice. A man may hold a controversial
position “on those matters upon which authors of better note
are accustomed to dispute in the Catholic schools.” Such mat­
ters are subject to controversy not as yet closed either by the
solemn definition or judgment of the Catholic Church, or
through the common consent of theologians.
Among these controverted questions there are some which
the. Holy See has definitely indicated that it will some day
resolve. One of these is the debate about the necessity of some
form of a love of benevolence for God in that act of attrition

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

129

which is requisite for the remission of sins in the sacrament of
Penance. Pope Clement XII forbade the partisans of the con­
flicting teachings to attach the notes of theological censures to
one another’s doctrines, until such time as the matter had been
defined or decided by the Holy See itself.16 Likewise in the
matter disputed in the famous "Congregationes de Auxiliis”
and touched upon in the censures of Louvain and of Douai,
both Pope Paul V and Pope Clement XII forbade opposing
authors to tax one another with theological censures until such
time as the Apostolic See should have made a decision. Pope
Paul V actually announced that the decision on this matter,
which he said had been awaited for a long time, would be
given at some future date.
V. The Ecumenical Council
A. The Nature of a General Council. The second organ
for the solemn judgment or magisterium of the Catholic
Church is the general or ecumenical council. This council is a
gathering of the bishops who, together with and subject to the
Roman Pontiff, constitute the doctrinal hierarchy of the Cath­
olic Church. In the ecumenical council this hierarchy acts as a
unit. Thus the council can judge and define infallibly when it
teaches the universal Church about the content of the message
which was given to the world through Jesus Christ our Lord.
B. A List of the General Councils. There have been
twenty of these general councils. We shall list them according
to the time at which they were held and with the name of the
Pontiff who ruled the Church during the deliberations of the
assembly.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Nicea, 325, St. Sylvester.
First Constantinople, 381, St. Damasus.
Ephesus, 431, St. Celestine I.
Chalcedon, 451, St. Leo I.
Second Constantinople, 553, Vigilius.

"Denzinger, 1090 and 1097, with the notes which are attached.

yam

ISO

ii
i!ii

6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Third Constantinople, 680-681, St. Agatho.
Second Nicaea, 787, Adrian I.
Fourth Constantinople, 869-870, Adrian II.
First Lateran, 1123, Callistus II.
Second Lateran, 1139, Innocent II.
Third Lateran, 1179, Alexander III.
Fourth Lateran, 1215, Innocent III.
First Lyons, 1245, Innocent IV.
Second Lyons, 1274, St. Gregory X.
Vienne, 1311-1312, Clement V.
Constance, 1414-1418, Martin V.
Florence, 1438-1445, Eugenius IV.
Fifth Lateran, 1512-1517, Leo X.
Trent, 1545-1563, Paul III, Julius III, Pius IV.
Vatican, 1870, Pius IX.

C. Requisites for a General Council. In order that an as­
sembly may fulfill the requisites for an ecumenical council, it
must be called by the Holy Father, presided over by him, either
personally or through his delegates, and finally, most impor­
tant of all, its proceedings must be approved and ratified by the
Holy See. If this last condition is lacking the acts of the council
cannot be accepted as the solemn teaching and judgment of
the Catholic Church. Furthermore, an ecumenical council
differs from all others in that the bishops from all the parts of
the Christian world are invited and enough of them do take
part in the discussions and voting so that the resultant defini­
tions may properly be termed the expression of the entire
Catholic episcopate.
Not all of the twenty councils recognized within the Cath­
olic Church as ecumenical actually possessed all of the ecumen­
ical attributes. The First and the Second Councils of Constan­
tinople, for example, were ecumenical neither from the point
of view of their convocation nor from that of their celebration.
Bishops from the western church, that is from the Roman
patriarchate were neither invited to nor present at their deliber-

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

131

ations. They were recognized as ecumenical and given the
status of general councils solely through the positive will of the
Roman Pontiff. They were accepted by the Holy See as authen­
tic judgments of the universal hierarchy in the infallible
Church of Jesus Christ. Furthermore, even among the acts of
the twenty councils, only those decisions are valid which have
been approved and promulgated by the Holy See. In the case
where this approval is withheld, as it was from the twenty­
eighth canon of the council of Chalcedon, the rejected teaching
has no doctrinal value.
D. The Forms of Conciliar Teaching. In the doctrinal de­
cisions of these councils, set forth under the direction and with
the approval of the Holy Father, the theologian finds infal­
libly accurate statements about the content of divine public
revelation. Sometimes that teaching is put forward in the form
of a symbol or creed, as was done at the first councils of Nicaea
and Constantinople. At other times it comes in the form of
positive instructions, addressed to the universal Church or to
groups seeking reunion with the Church. Again, and very fre­
quently, it comes in the form of condemnations fulminated
against heretical teachings. The decisions of the ecumenical
council are infallible wherever the doctrine is presented as
having been revealed by God and taught by our Lord and the
Apostles. Again the council uses the fullness of its teaching
power when it anathematizes, or cuts off from the communion
of the Church, the proponents of the teachings which it
condemns.
In this way the chapters of the two constitutions, the Dei
Filius and the Pastor Aeternus set forth by the Vatican Council
must be accepted as the infallible expression of divine public
revelation. For, in the preamble to the Dei Filius, the constitu­
tion on the Catholic faith, Pius IX, speaking for the council
which he had convened and over which he had presided, states
explicitly that the council intends to “profess and declare in the
sight of all, the salutary doctrine of Christ.” And, in the preface
to the Pastor Aeternus we find that the fathers intend to set

Μ

Ι32

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

forth “the doctrine on the institution, perpetuity, and nature of
the sacred apostolic primacy, in which the strength and solidity
of the entire Church is established, to be believed and held by
all the faithful according to the ancient and constant faith of
the universal Church.” The canons are obviously infallible
declarations, since they invoke the penalty of anathematization
against those who presume to set forth the doctrines which the
council reproves.
The Fathers of the Council of Trent state that the man who
will not firmly and faithfully receive the doctrine on justifica­
tion which they have given in their decretum cannot be justi­
fied. They likewise anathematize those who held the heretical
teachings condemned in their canons. In the Council of
Florence the famous Decrees for the Greeks, the Armenians,
and the Jacobites are presented as the actual dogma of the
Catholic Church which must be accepted by those who wish to
enter into its communion. The Fourth Council of the Lateran
set forth its teaching in two different ways. First it condemned
the writings of the Abbot Joachim against Peter the Lombard.
Then it set forth its own formula of faith in the very words
which the Master of Sentences had utilized in forming his own
theological conclusions.
E. The Members of the General Council. Although by
divine right all of the bishops who are in communion with the
apostolic see can enter into an ecumenical council, the law of
the Catholic Church at present and for centuries past has
given the privilege of membership to others not of the episcopal
college. These include cardinals who are not bishops, abbots
who rule as ordinaries, or who, in other words have territorial
jurisdiction similar to that which bishops exercise in their own
dioceses, vicars and prefects apostolic. The superiors-general
of the great religious communities can also enter the council
and exercise the power of voting in the assembly.
F. Particular Councils. Lesser ecclesiastical councils, such
as plenary or national assemblies and provincial or diocesan
synods do not, of course, enjoy the prerogative of infallibility.

■·*·■--- »■-

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

-. *

S;·'

133

Some of the acts of such synods, however, constitute authentic
and infallible expressions of Catholic dogma because they have
been accepted and utilized as such by the Holy Father. Among
those councils whose acts may be used in this way by theolo­
gians are the Sixteenth Council of Carthage, the Second Coun­
cil of Orange, and the Eleventh Council of Toledo. Naturally
the universal value of their teaching is to be attributed to the
authority of the Roman Pontiff, rather than to the authority
of the individual council as such.
Even though the pronouncements of the particular councils
are not infallible, the fact that they are expressions of the
legitimate teaching authority within the Church and that they
are approved by the Holy See, gives them tremendous standing
in the theological field. Thus the decisions of the Councils of
Baltimore in our own country are matters of importance for
the theologian.

IB
4

VI. The Authority of the Fathers
A. Those Who Are Classed As Fathers of the Church.
The Fathers of the Church were those early ecclesiastical j
writers who were conspicuous both for the sanctity of their f
lives and for the orthodoxy of their teachings. As such they are
cited in the science of sacred theology as authentic witnesses of
the faith and of the practice in the ancient Church. On certain
points of doctrine the Church has given a special approval to
the teachings of individual Fathers. Thus the Council of
Ephesus accepted and utilized the Anathematizations of St.
Cyril of Alexandria on the matter of the hypostatic union.1’
Both Pope Hormisdas18 and the Second Council of Orange18
gave the weight of their authority to the writings of St. Augus­
tine on free will and the grace of God. The former cited books
of St. Augustine as expressing the revealed doctrine on this
I
"Denzinger, 113-124.
"Denzinger, 3027; cf. the ruling on the authority of St. Augustine made by
Pope St. Celestine I (Denzinger, 128).
"This council was held in 529. Its canons and decrees are found in Denzinger,
174-200.

134

ί

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

matter while the council formulated its own canons in the very
terminology of the great Bishop of Hippo.
Although there is a certain similarity between them, the con­
cept of a Father of the Church is quite distinct from that of a
Doctor. The Doctor of the Church is a saint who has been ap­
proved in a special way both for the holiness of his life and for
the orthodoxy of his teaching. There is no special way, on the
other hand, by which an individual is designated as a Father
of the Church. There are actually twenty-nine saints who are
honored as Doctors of the Church. Some of these, like SS.
Athanasius, Basil, Augustine, and Ambrose, are both Fathers
and Doctors. Others lived after the first ages of the Church and
are not designated as Fathers. Naturally, too, there are a great
many Fathers of the Church who, like SS. Clement of Rome,
Ignatius of Antioch, and Irenaeus, are not listed as Doctors of
the Church.
There are also a great many early ecclesiastical writers who,
by reason of a lack either of manifest sanctity or of unswerving
orthodoxy are not numbered among the Fathers. Among these
we must range such eminent figures as Origen, Tertullian,
Minucius Felix, and Lactantius. Naturally the writings of such
men participate to a large extent the authority which belongs
to the works of the Fathers themselves. Some who actually left
the communion of the Church, like Tatian and Tertullian,
wrote during their years as members of the Church. These
writings enjoy a considerable theological authority, not so
much because of any explanations offered by the individual
writers, but because they can bear witness to the teaching and
the practice of the Catholic Church at the time they were
written.
B. The Nature of Their Authority. The Fathers of the
Church can, of course, be studied and considered as private
theologians. Looked at in this way, the value of the testimony
offered by each writer is proportionate to the weight of the the­
ological reasons which he adduces. Thus the student of sacred
theology must not suppose that an interpretation or explanation

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

135

of some passage in Holy Scripture is necessarily valid and cor­
rect merely because someone among the Fathers has offered it.
Patristic literature can be studied and evaluated by the same
standards that are used to measure the worth of later theolog­
ical writings. In a given case, the reasoning of one Father may
be quite superior to that of another. Moreover, the individual
Fathers of the Church are not infallible. Erroneous teachings
or explanations are contained in the writings of various indi­
vidual Fathers. These errors were, of course, exposed as such by
the contemporary and subsequent writers of Catholic doctrine.
However, the particular and characteristic function of the
Church Fathers is their ability to speak and to teach as wit­
nesses of the Catholic faith during the early period of the
Church’s life. By reason of their temporal propinquity to the
Apostles, they were in a particularly good position to know the
content and the significance of the apostolic message. When
one Father, or a group of them, actually stated that some doc­
trine had been revealed by God and taught by Jesus Christ,
this testimony has naturally a tremendous weight and signifi­
cance. But when the Fathers unanimously profess that some
doctrine is a part of the divine public revelation, then their
testimony is absolutely irrefutable. The Church knows that the
unanimous teaching of the Fathers cannot be in error on a
matter of faith and morals. One Father might be mistaken. As
a matter of fact even a certain number of them might be. But,
according to the existing decrees of divine providence, it is im­
possible that all the Fathers should teach falsely on the matter
of divine revelation.
C. The Unanimous Consent of the Fathers and the Rule
of Faith. The Council of Trent identified the unanimous teach­
ing of the Fathers with the interpretation of the Church itself
as the standard for the correct explanation of Holy Scripture.20
Francis Sylvius’ express intention, manifest in his daily protes­
tation, to teach, write, and dictate his lectures in sacred doc­
trine “according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers” is
”The Council of Trent, Session IV (Denzinger, 786).

Ιβ6

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

typical of the attitude which governs the successful theologian.
The united voice of the Fathers constitutes a real rule of faith.
In order to have the unanimous consent of the Fathers to
indicate surely the divine origin of some doctrine treated in
sacred theology, we need not, of course, demand an explicit
declaration on the point from every writer who is listed as one
of the Fathers of the Church. On almost any given question
there will be a considerable number of the Fathers who have
left no instructions in writing. There is such a consent when
at least a moral unanimity of the Fathers who have actually
dealt with this subject teach the same doctrine as having been
revealed by God.
We say morally all of the Fathers, because the opposition of
one, or even of an inconsiderable number, to the teaching
which is common with the rest does not prevent the common
teaching from enjoying a certain unanimity. This moral un­
animity is all the more evident when a dissenting doctrine has
been recognized and abandoned by all the patristic writers who
came after the man who advanced it. It exists where it may
prudently be said that the Fathers as a whole advance this
particular teaching as something which has been given to the
world by God through the preaching of Jesus Christ and of
the Apostles.
D. Limits of the Patristic Period. It is important for us to
realize the limits of the patristic period. It has been generally
taught that St. Isidore of Seville was the last of the Fathers to
teach and write in the west while St. John Damascene ended
the patristic line in the oriental Church. However, there have
been scholars who have set forth the opinion that St. Bernard
of Clairvaux should be considered the last of the patristic
writers. As a matter of fact, Francis Sylvius, in the early sev­
enteenth century, even included SS. Bonaventure and Thomas
Aquinas in the list of Fathers.21
For the purposes of sacred theology the patristic period must
be restricted at least to the times of St. Isidore and St. John
“Sylvius, Controversiarum Liber Sextus, q. 1, art. 1.

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

137

Damascene. Later writers, like St. Bernard, and a fortiori St.
Thomas and St. Bonaventure actually utilized the Fathers but
should not be counted among them. The science of sacred
theology was comparatively well developed when they lived
and wrote. They should not, in any sense, be considered as im­
mediate witnesses to the faith and the customs in the early
Church. Their value lay in their masterful development of
sacred "theology as such rather than in their testimony about
the life of the primitive Church.
E. Using the Authority of the Fathers. The practical im­
portance of this theological place in the training of a successful
theologian cannot be overstressed in our own times. It is
a commonplace that a man cannot begin to qualify as a
theologian until he has gained a solid familiarity with patristic
literature. The doctrine which is expounded in the manuals
and monographs of modern theology is the same revealed doc­
trine which the Fathers of the Church set forth so successfully
in their own days. Actually the intention of the theologian is
to set forth the revealed deposit according to the unanimous
teaching of the Fathers. Naturally a knowledge of what the
Fathers actually taught is requisite for the achievement of this
purpose.
For example, the theologian who is studying the problem
of the efficacy of divine grace naturally strives to bring out the
same truth which St. Augustine expressed in his anti-Pelagian
writings, the documents which the Holy See itself accepted as
containing the Catholic explanation of this portion of the re­
vealed doctrine. It is his business, then, to know the works of
St. Augustine in order that he may be able properly and cor­
rectly to teach their content. We know that St. Augustine’s
teachings are brought out accurately in every approved manual
of dogmatic theology. At the same time, however, we can best
realize the profundity of meaning conveyed in the modern
texts when we look at their content in the perspective of St.
Augustine’s own writing.
Naturally the great extent of patristic literature will prevent

........................... Il

■ I Jit—awww«w^mMMMKSMaBB^B»,7*r !**9aa^8a

■e“*É?! “S!^“S^i£^!ÈsSSsiSSijÊÎïS

Ij8

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

all but the specialists in this line from knowing all parts and
phases of it intimately. At the same time it is perfectly possible
for the modern theologian who wishes to give his subject the
scientific attention which it so obviously deserves, to acquaint
himself with at least the outstanding monuments of patristic
learning. Thus he can assure for his own preaching and teach­
ing the outstanding advantage of the Fathers’ own presenta­
tion of divine revelation. He can enrich his own mind through
a consideration of the studied exactness by which they so suc­
cessfully defended revealed truth and overthrew the heresies
that threatened the people of God.
The patristic writings are eminently fitted to engender in
the student of sacred theology a living appreciation of the
purpose to which this science is consecrated. All of the resources
of erudition and of intelligence which God had placed at their
disposal were utilized toward the exact and unequivocal presen­
tation of divine revelation. Their writings and preaching pre­
served the Christian people of their own times from the dis­
aster of heresy. The works of St. Athanasius were, under God,
the agencies through which the Catholic people were saved
from the danger of rejecting the teaching of God while they
were confronted with the errors and the power of the Arians.
St. Augustine wrote in such a way that through his books un­
told numbers of Christians were preserved from the heresy of
the Pelagians. The theologian has at his disposal the works of
the Fathers themselves as well as the great books on patristic
literature which offer him the results of research into the
teaching of the Fathers carried on in the Catholic universities
throughout the world.

VII. The Authority of the Scholastic Theologians
A. Those Who Are Scholastic Theologians. Melchior
Cano wrote his treatise De Locis Theologicis before the custom
of distinguishing positive from scholastic theology had arisen.
As a result the “scholastic theologians” to whom he refers are
those exponents of Catholic doctrine who have made scientific

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

f

I39

use of the resources of sacred theology. They are the men who
have written during the postpatristic period as the academic
and traditional exponents of Catholic teaching. Excluded from
the ranks of the scholastics are, of course, heretical writers and
even those orthodox religious authors who have not achieved
scientific accuracy in their explanations of revealed doctrine.
Those writers whose stock in trade is a lively literary style
rather than exact expression of Christian doctrine have nothing
to contribute toward the development of theological
conclusions.
However, the type or the extent of a man’s literary produc­
tion have nothing to do with his qualification as a scholastic
theologian. The scholastic writer may be one who has pro­
duced Latin technical works as voluminous as those of Tostatus
or Suarez or merely vernacular articles in some review. He can
fill his books with all the refinements of technical terminology,
as did Cardinal Cajetan, or he can utilize a more popular
literary style to bring out the same exactness in the presentation
of Christian doctrine as Archbishop Kenrick did. It is essential
for a scholastic that his writings should form a part of the
traditional and scientific exposition of Catholic faith, recog­
nized and used as such by the Church.
There is a definite reason why the scholastic theologians
as such can be cited as authorities in the work of teaching
revealed doctrine. By far the greater number of these theolo­
gians have been priests who at one time or another were
charged with the teaching of sacred theology in some univer­
sity, seminary, or religious house. As such they have acted as
competent and authorized instruments of the hierarchy both
in training candidates for the priesthood and instructing those
priests who are preparing for theological degrees. It has been
their business to know and to utilize all of the resources avail­
able for the success of theological instruction. Their studies and
their professional anxiety to expound the content of divine
revelation clearly and unequivocally are manifest throughout
their writings. Their professional competence and the respon-

140

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

sibilities with which they are charged give them a unique cor­
porate authority.
B. The Nature of Their Authority. The authority of the
scholastic theologians belongs primarily to these writers as a
distinct class. Apart from the special approbation which the
Church gives to certain individual scholastics, and which must
be considered by itself, the authority of the individual theolo­
gian is directly proportionate to the value of those proofs which
he adduces in support of his propositions. When a scholastic
sets down a thesis, he is expected to offer evidence to show that
it should be accepted as a correct explanation of our Lord’s
message. Other theologians who deal with the same matter
must examine and evaluate the evidence which has been
brought forward. If the proof is valid, the thesis stands. Should
the evidence not be forthcoming, then the proposition has no
legitimate place in the field of sacred theology on the authority
of the previous writer.
However, when the entire body of scholastic theologians
asserts that some thesis is of Catholic faith, their testimony is
absolutely reliable. Because of the particular function of the
scholastics, if all of them should be in error on a point of this
kind, then the Catholic Church would be deceived. They are
the qualified exponents of Catholic doctrine in the schools of
the Church. Their unanimous testimony to the effect that a
definite doctrine has been revealed by God and is to be accepted
by all with the assent of divine faith mirrors the teaching of
the Church itself.
This unanimity of the scholastics must be reckoned in the
same way as that of the Church Fathers. The moral unanimity
in the scholastic testimony to the divine origin of a certain
thesis is in no way impaired if, in the course of academic his­
tory, a limited number of writers have called this thesis into
question. The fact that such a denial has been reproved by an
overwhelming number of theologians would constitute this
thesis as one attested by the moral unanimity of the scholastics.
The testimony of the theologians is valid even for proposi-

■·,··"™==————-------------------- ’- -

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

~~——^--^-^s.

I4I

tions which are put forward as theologically certain. When a
proposition is universally received as a theological conclusion,
then the contradictory to it may be qualified as a simple theo­
logical error. Should the teaching of the theologians be suffi­
ciently clear on a point that is not received with full unanimity,
the opposition to this thesis would take the form of a rash or
temerarious proposition.
C. The Field of Moral Theology. Owing to the exigencies
of the immediate subject matter, the authority of theologians as
such plays a far more evident role in moral than in dogmatic
theology. Dealing with the liceity of human acts, and neces­
sarily taking into account the circumstances and forces which
affect the morality of individual acts, an opinion in moral
theology acquires a definite probability by the fact that a cer­
tain number of serious authors accept and teach it. It is gen­
erally admitted that if five or six of these serious authors can
be cited in support of a proposition, then this thesis enjoys at
least what is called extrinsic probability. In other words, it is
supposed, unless the opposite can be established in any given
case, that it would be impossible to gather any number of
authoritative writers to assert a thesis devoid of probability.
This same extrinsic probability accrues to a proposition which
is put forward as an opinion in moral theology by one of the
great Doctors of the Church, like St. Thomas Aquinas or St.
Alphonsus.
D. The Field of Dogmatic Theology. In the field of dog­
matic theology the authority of scholastic theologians has its
own importance. The Salmanticences are typical theologians
when they allege the authority of their contemporaries and their
predecessors in the field of scholasticism in support of their own
theses. Naturally no one cites the authority of scholastic theo­
logians for those theses which have been defined as of faith
in the solemn magisterium of the Catholic Church. It would
be at least idle to quote even the greatest of the scholastics in
defense of the proposition that there are three distinct Persons
in the ineffable unity of the divine nature.

j

I42

i

I
i
,
I
!

!
;
h

' !
' i
, 5
F ·,
j

I
'

I1

j;
1
i

b
1;

!

{
j
's
i

j·
;

i

j

I
f;
I <
b ·
}
I

J:

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

However, it is distinctly important to cite those writers who
have taught, let us say, the doctrine of physical predetermination. This thesis is not accepted by a good number of the
writers in sacred theology, and as such it has not attained the
full perfection of a theological conclusion, at least in the universai teaching body of the Church. It could have no such
standing as it actually enjoys in the field of sacred theology if
it could not be shown that innumerable theologians who were
renowned at once for their accuracy of judgment and their
attachment to traditional teaching had propounded this teach­
ing as their own. The proofs alleged in favor of this thesis are
in themselves convincing. But the fact that it is a traditional
interpretation of Catholic doctrine, a fact that is attested in the
teaching of an unbroken line of scholastics, is itself an impor­
tant element in the demonstration which is offered in support
of the thesis. Naturally the writers who are quoted in support
of the opposite teaching constitute an historical evidence of its
probability.
E. The Use of the Scholastics’ Authority. Precisely because the testimony of the scholastic theologians constitutes a resource which should be employed in deriving conclusions on the
meaning of divine revelation, it is imperative that the student
of sacred theology should make himself familiar with the literature in which this corporate testimony may be found. A man
will never achieve any sort of competence as a theologian until
he is acquainted with the theses and the demonstrations which
are to be found in the outstanding modern manuals and mono­
graphs. These constitute the expression of the theological teaching in our own day. This teaching is naturally just as truly the
testimony of the Catholic Church as was the doctrine of those
theologians who have propounded the divine doctrine during
any previous century. Taken together they express the message
proposed by the Church of Jesus Christ.
At the same time a proper study of sacred theology demands
the consultation of the classical works written during the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries, the masterpieces of post­

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

M3

Tridentine doctrine. Such books as those of Suarez, Sylvius,
Vasquez, Valentia, Bannez, John of Saint Thomas, and the
College of Salamanca, to mention only a few of them, contain
a fullness of theological reasoning which most of the modern
manuals attempt to resume in a brief form. Furthermore, these
great commentators were careful to catalog the teachings of
their predecessors in such a way that the argument from the
authority of the scholastic doctors is found in their works
and brought out most clearly.
All of these men were commentators on St. Thomas Aquinas.
Consequently the meaning of their demonstrations and the
force of their testimony can be appreciated fully only when
their volumes are compared with the work which they set out
to explain. And, it is no exaggeration to say that the doctrine
of St. Thomas can best be understood when it is looked upon
in the light of Peter the Lombard’s writings. The old Arch­
bishop of Paris was the one to whom Aquinas himself habit­
ually referred as the Master. The student who wishes to under­
stand the authority of the scholastic theologians can find no
way of attaining his purpose other than through a consultation
of the scholastic writings themselves.
F. The Attitude of Church Toward the Corps of Scho­
lastic Theologians. A practical commentary on the authority
of the scholastic theologians is to be found in the severe attitude
which the Church has taken with regard to those who at­
tempted to undermine their prestige. Furthermore, the enemies
of the Catholic faith have habitually been strenuous opponents
both of the conclusions and of the methods of these scholastic
doctors. Michael Baius attacked a standard theological distinc­
tion as something fruitless, and St. Pius V condemned this very
proposition among others taken from his writings.22 The
quietist Molinos and the heretical synod of Pistoia were re­
markable for the opposition which they showed to the works
of the standard and traditional exponents of Catholic doctrine.
G. The Doctors of the Church. We could not appreciate
“Denzinger, 1034, also 1061-1063.

144

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the significance of the doctrinal authority which belongs to the
scholastic theologians were we to neglect those of whom the
Church has specially commended in naming them Doctors of
the Church. From a liturgical point of view, the naming of a
saint as a Doctor of the Church means that the Credo is recited
at his Mass, that a special and distinct Mass is said in his honor,
and that a specific office is assigned for his feast. Doctrinally
the naming of a Doctor constitutes a declaration by the Church
that this eminent servant of God was remarkable alike for the
holiness of his life and the effective orthodoxy of his teaching.
Naturally this effective orthodoxy is incompatible with the
presence of any substantial error about faith or morals in the
books which he gave to the Church. There is also a positive
connotation. Not only does the Church declare that there is no
serious error in any of his work, but by the very Jact that he
is constituted as a Doctor, she commends that portion of his
writings on which he may be said to have specialized and
because of which he is entered upon the list of the Doctors.
Thus, for example, the naming of St. John of the Cross as a
Doctor of the Church implied an ecclesiastical approval of
what he had written upon the mystical life. St. Francis of Sales
was commended for his spectacular success in bringing the
teaching on spiritual perfection to the attention of the laity.
St. Peter Canisius is a Doctor of the Church because of his
manifest clarity and sureness in the all-important work of
catechetics. St. Robert Bellarmine was one of the greatest con­
troversialists ever to have labored in defense of the Catholic
faith, while St. Alphonsus Liguori is the outstanding proponent
of Catholic moral theology, considered primarily in its legal
or casuistic aspects. St. Peter Damian wrote with matchless
brilliance on the ideal of clerical holiness. St. Albert the Great
succeeded admirably in explaining the relations between sacred
theology and its ancillary sciences.
St. Bonaventure and St. Thomas Aquinas are Doctors who
explained the entire content of sacred theology as it was taught
during the Middle Ages. Both wrote commentaries on the

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

I45

Four Books of Sentences by Peter the Lombard. St. Bonaven­
ture holds an especially high position in the history of mystical
theology.
H. The Authority of St. Thomas Aquinas. However, the
authentic declarations and commands of the Catholic Church
with reference to St. Thomas Aquinas give him a place apart
among the theologians. The Code of Canon Law, in its part
concerning ecclesiastical seminaries, commands that “professors
treat the studies of rational philosophy and of theology, and
the teaching of the students in these branches of knowledge,
entirely according to the reason, the doctrine, and the princi­
ples of St. Thomas Aquinas” and that they “hold these in­
violate.”23 The encyclical of the late Pope Pius XI, the Stu­
diorum Ducem, confirms this precept and thus renews the ap­
probations and the commands of the Roman Pontiffs since the
days of Pope John ΧΧΠ. However, in this same encyclical,
Pope Pius XI makes it quite clear that neither the precept of
the Code nor the teaching of the Studiorum Ducem forbid the
adoption, on controverted questions, of theses which have been
held by other competent theologians against the doctrine of the
Common and Angelic Doctor of the schools.
Taking the two declarations together, the intention of the
Church as manifest in the pronouncement of the Holy Father
is quite evident. While the Church does not wish absolutely
to forbid the holding of theses which are not in accord with
the teaching of St. Thomas, she insists that the candidates for
the priesthood being educated in her seminaries should learn
their theology from the Angelic Doctor. For, if professors of
sacred theology actually treat their science according to the
order or the method of St. Thomas, utilizing his theses or con­
clusions and observing the principles out of which he derived
his own doctrine, and thus instruct the students who are con­
fided to their care, then the process of seminary education must
be profoundly and essentially Thomistic. This is exactly what
the Catholic Church wishes the clerical education to be.
” The Code of Canon Law, Canon 1366, 5 2.

146

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Should the man who has been educated according to the
teaching of St. Thomas later choose to hold some theses not in
accord with traditional Thomistic doctrine, he is perfectly free
to do so, provided, of course, that the theses have been taught
heretofore by reputable theologians. However, the exceptional
approval given to the writings of the Angelic Doctor makes it
quite evident that the Church considers his teaching as sing­
ularly free from error and equivocation. She regards it as the
most scientific and efficacious process for propounding the
truths of divine revelation. The scientific principles upon which
his system is constructed, the characteristic conclusions which
he upheld, and the very order according to which he arranged
the content of sacred theology stand in the eyes of the Catholic
Church as particularly apt for bringing the student to realize
exactly the content of that message which God gave to the
world through Jesus Christ our Lord.
As a result, the manual or article in sacred theology utilizing
the doctrine of St. Thomas may be considered to stand on a
higher scientific plane, all other things being equal, than one
which propounds a teaching not in harmony with his. The
Thomistic work exploits resources of authentically approved
accuracy calculated to aid in the construction of that theo­
logical concept which the Church wishes her students to
possess. As such it is objectively preferable to those books which
set forth opposing theories.
In approving the teaching of St. Thomas, the Church nat­
urally does not mean to imply that each individual thesis set
forth by him must be accepted as true. In one definite case, the
thesis on the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mother of
God, St. Thomas was clearly in error. However, this teaching
in no way militates against the rest of his doctrine. Neither the
Angelic Doctor himself nor the great corps of his followers
ever attempted to bring out this denial of the Immaculate Con­
ception as a central part of his theology. Historically that which
was and is the characteristic teaching of St. Thomas, recog­
nized and proposed as such in the great universities and in the

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

I47

houses of studies of his own order, is the doctrine approved by
the Catholic Church.
I. The Authority of St. Alphonsus Liguori. In the field of
moral theology the Church has given special approval to the
writings of St. Alphonsus Liguori. This unique approbation
has been stated in a negative manner, by the declaration that
the Church has never found anything worthy of censure in his
writings. In this way St. Alphonsus has been pointed out as a
worthy guide in a field that offers more than ordinary measure
of difficulty. The province of moral theology has to do with the
education of those who are to administer the sacrament of
Penance, and thus to care for and direct the souls of Christians.
In such a field the official testimony that the doctrine of St.
Alphonsus is trustworthy and acceptable is of immense value
to the theologian.
J. The Authority of the Canonists. Melchior Cano
rightly attached the authority of teachers in canon law to that
of the scholastic theologians. The law is an ordinance of reason
promulgated for the common good, by the one who has charge
of a community. The law of the Church, then, looks to that
good which is the possession of God in the beatific vision by
those who, through their union with the Church, obtain the
gift of eternal salvation. Its purpose is the glory of God, to be
procured in the fullness of Christ in the sanctification and salva­
tion of those for whom Christ shed His blood. Canon law is
formulated by the Holy Father as the Vicar of Christ on earth,
and by the ecumenical council which is subject to and in com­
munion with him. It is thus the work of the hierarchy respon­
sible for the direction and the instruction of the people of God.
At present the canon law of the western or Latin Church is
codified in the 2414 canons which have been in force since
Pentecost, 1918. Among these canons we find several dogmatic
pronouncements. These naturally enjoy tremendous authority,
even though it is quite certain that Pope Benedict XV never
intended that these declarations of the Code should be received
as definitions.

148

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

But the very law of the Church is an expression of that direc­
tive force which orders Christians toward the attainment of
their final end. The men who have been charged with the
function of teaching that law are able authoritatively and com­
petently to show how the precepts and the counsels of our
Lord are made manifest in the society which He founded.
Thus their teachings are indicative of the actual content and
meaning of the message which God gave to the human race
through Jesus Christ. The teacher of canon law is able to in­
dicate the actual direction given by the living and infallible
Church.
With the authority of the theologians, the list of resources
proper to the science of sacred theology ends. The seven theo­
logical places with which we have dealt are those which will
be of service only in the task of ascertaining the meaning of
revealed doctrine. The subsequent places are those which are
of service in accomplishing the work of other branches of dis­
cipline. However, these are utilized, each in its own way, in
effecting the purpose of sacred theology.

CHAPTER

7

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY
— PART III
VIII. Human Reason
A. Limits of Competence of the Human Reason in the
Field of Theology. The competence of human reason in the
work of sacred theology has been clearly marked out in the
teaching of the Vatican Council. First of all both in the Council
and in many other pronouncements the Catholic Church has in­
sisted that human reason is utterly incapable of learning, by any
natural process whatever, those truths which are designated
as the revealed mysteries.1 These truths are outside the natural
field of competence of the human intellect, and for that matter
of any created mind, actual or possible. They are truths which
have reference to the intimate life of God, to God as He is
known by and in Himself rather than merely as the necessary
First Cause of creatures. These mysteries are intrinsically or
essentially supernatural. As such they would never be known
by any creature unless God had chosen to communicate them
by a process which is at once distinct from and superior to the
way in which the creature would naturally acquire his knowl­
edge. Thus not only are these truths of faith themselves in­
trinsically supernatural, but they have also been brought to
man in a supernatural way.
Not only would these mysteries have been entirely unknown
’The Vatican Council. The Constitution Dei Filius, Chap, i, on faith and reason
and the corresponding canon (Denzinger, 1795 and 1816).
149

-c

I50

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

had they not been revealed to man, but even after they have
been communicated by God and accepted by man with the
certain and intrinsically supernatural assent of divine faith
“they remain covered with the veil of faith and hidden in a
cloud, as long as we are pilgrims from the Lord in this life
for we walk in faith and not in light.”2 The clear vision and
understanding of the Object with which the divine message
is concerned is, of course, reserved for another life. The very
felicity of heaven consists essentially in the clear apprehension
of that same truth which we believe in divine faith.
B. The Direction of Human Reason in Theology. Human
reason, then, can never hope to attain, in this life, a clear vision
or understanding of the Thing which it considers in the science
of sacred theology in the same way that it can obtain evidence
of those objects which are studied in merely human disciplines.
All of the mind’s activity in the course of sacred theology
must be ordered toward a distinct end, the work of grasping
and understanding the message which contains these mysteries,
and appreciating that message in all the objectivity of its mean­
ing. Even though the Object described in them remains hid­
den, the sense of the formulas in which that divine message
is conveyed is perfectly clear. The theologian can utilize his
reason in order to grasp that meaning, in order to realize what
God teaches men in the message which He has communicated
to mankind through Jesus Christ. The divine public revelation
stands as a definite message. It is the business of the theologian
to exploit the resources of human intellectual activity in order
that he may know the definite significance of the teaching
which God has given to us about the Object we are to see in
the ineffable clarity of heaven.
The mode of this activity has been pointed out by the
Vatican Council. “When reason, enlightened by faith, seeks
from God seriously, piously, and soberly some understanding
of the mysteries, it obtains this most precious guerdon, both
tlbid. (Denzinger, 1796).

■kfeaik

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

151

by way of analogy with the things it knows naturally and
through the connection of the mysteries among themselves and
with the ultimate end of man.”3 This is the process by which
the theological process, properly so called, is educed. It is a
complex operation in which all of the force of human reason­
ing is meant to be employed.
We have already seen that the theological conclusion is
formed through the use of analogy and comparison. However,
in order to appreciate this function of reason in the develop­
ment of theological teaching, we must realize the special work.
it performs in studying the preambles of faith, fundamentali 7
theology, and the apology of dogma. The characteristically the-|
ological conclusion is drawn after a process of comparison with
the rule of faith. His operation presupposes a definite rational
procedure. Logically one must realize the existence of God
before he can take anything on His authority. The truths of
the natural order relative to the existence and the attributes
of God are known as the preambles of faith.
C. Proof of the Existence of God. The force of human
reason is obviously sufficient to recognize the One True God,
our Creator and Lord, as the principle and the end of all
things. According to the explicit teaching of the Catholic
Church, the existence of God becomes evident from a con­
sideration of the created universe itself. The Church speaks
quite explicitly and employs technical terms to bring out the
clarity and force of her message. She tells us in the Anti­
Modernist Oath that the human mind can actually demon­
strate the existence of God through the visible works of crea­
tion, as a cause is demonstrated from its effect.
*
God, then, has actually revealed to us that His existence can
be demonstrated. To deny this is to reject a statement which
we are meant to accept with the assent of Christian faith.
However, the human mind is perfectly capable of carrying out
the demonstration by the use of its own native forces. When
*1bid. (Denzinger, 1796).
4 Denzinger, 2145.

y.

*

I

I52

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the demonstration is completed, the man who has made it
sees the statement “God exists” as something evidently and
necessarily true.
Obviously, as St. Thomas has pointed out, it is impossible
at one time to have faith and evident knowledge of the same
truth. It is of the very essence of our faith that the object of
that faith be something not seen in the light of natural evi­
dence. For if the object is seen, then it is impossible to say that
the intellect assents to the truth of the judgment concerning
it precisely on the word of someone who tells us about it.
Consequently, once a man has actually made a demonstration
of God’s existence, he no longer accepts this truth precisely
on divine faith. The person who has neither made nor learned
the demonstration can, of course, accept this statement and
assent to it because of the authority of God who has revealed it.
A person must know and admit the fact of God’s existence
before he can accept any of the doctrine which constitutes
Catholic dogma. Furthermore, according to this same teach­
ing of the Vatican Council, the proof of God’s existence ac­
tually terminates in man’s acknowledgment that there is One
True God who is the Creator and Lord of all things. Then
according to this authentic declaration of the Catholic Church
the human mind is competent to prove by its own natural
forces the existence of at least some of the divine attributes.
Thus by the very fact that he has a human intellect, man can
see that the existence of things which are moved, caused, con­
tingent, partially perfect, and ordered to a purpose in this
world necessarily indicates the existence of a first Cause who
is not subject to motion or causality, who is absolutely neces­
sary, who is at once the fullness or perfection of being and the
Supreme Intelligence which orders all things distinct from
Itself to the attainment of their ultimate good. This One, who
is Subsistent Being itself, is shown to be simple, all perfect,
immutable, the Lord and Creator of all things.
D. The Formation of Theological Concepts. This activity
of human reason has necessarily a tremendous part to play in the

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

153

essential work of sacred theology. It results not only in a proof
of the existence of God, as that term is properly understood,
but in the formation of that basic concept of God which is
used throughout the course of the science. In showing God as
the evidently existing first Cause, human reason offers to sacred
theology a concept of God which is perfectly correct even
though it can never adequately bring out the full wealth of
perfection which is the Living God. This concept of God as
the first Cause is capable of being elaborated by the informa­
tion which the Creator has given us about Himself in the
course of public revelation.
What is revealed is, of course, a body of truth. It is axiomatic
that the truth is contained and expressed in the second act of
the mind, the judgment, rather than in the first which is the
simple apprehension. As a matter of fact the content of
divine revelation is conveyed to mankind in a certain body of
propositions. The terms which enter into those propositions
signify ideas which can be formed naturally by the human
mind. Thus, for example, when we say that there are three
Persons in God, we express one of the intrinsically supernatural
truths which it has pleased God to communicate to the human
race. But we express this mystery in a sentence composed of
terms well within the natural competence of the human in­
tellect. For it is quite obvious that man can naturally know the
meaning of the terms “to be” and “three” and “persons.” Like­
wise man can know what is .meant by the term “God.”
When a man has used his reason in the work of sacred the­
ology for demonstrating the existence of God, he is well aware
that the term means basically that self-subsistent Being whose
existence is made manifest from the activity and the reality of
visible mundane creatures. Should he fail to accept this basic
meaning, and presume to think of God merely as some in­
tangible reality who possesses human characteristics and powers
in a much more perfect way than man himself possesses them,
then he has fallen into the ever present trap of anthropomor­
phism, and he has made it impossible for himself accurately

/ λ

154

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

to accept and expound the revealed teachings about God our
Creator. But, on the other hand, if he utilizes this accurate and
correct notion of God which is elaborated through that process
in which God’s existence is demonstrated, man can grasp the
objective and traditional meaning of those intrinsically super­
natural truths which came into the world in the teaching of
Jesus Christ our Lord.
Thus human reason is competent to ascertain by its own
natural power the truths which constitute the preamble to
divine faith. In this work, through the proper demonstration
of God’s existence, and through the process of pointing out
those attributes or perfections which, according to the mode
of our human knowledge and predication, characterize the
divine nature, human reason makes one of its great contribu­
tions to the essential work of sacred theology.
E. The Work of Comparison. Again human reason, with all
its power of comparison and inference, has a theological func­
tion to fulfill in comparing any doctrine with the proper and
immediate rule of faith which is the doctrine given to the
Catholic Church by the Apostles, publicly accepted and set
forth within the Church as a teaching which all must accept
under penalty of exclusion from the unity of Christ’s mystical
body. This living apostolic teaching is, as we have seen, dis­
tinctly evident. The theologian can and should be able to use
his reason in such a way as to judge the acceptability of any
teaching in the light of this standard. He can examine a thesis
or an opinion in order to see if that statement is in open and
flagrant contradiction to the rule of faith. If this is the case, he
finds the proposition is heretical. Should this proposition, on
the other hand, contain inferences or implications which stand
in opposition to the rule of faith, then the proposition as it
exists is at least erroneous. In such judgments, however, human
reason acts with the full enlightenment of divine faith.
F. The Judgment of Credibility. Another function of hu­
man reason in the work of sacred theology is found in the judg­
ment of credibility with reference to Catholic dogma. It is a

âttiâiâ

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

155

cardinal principle of Catholic apologetics, stressed by the Vatican
Council,5 and again still more explicitly in the oath against the
Modernists,® that human reason is naturally able to see that
Catholic dogma is rationally credible. This dogma is the doc­
trine contained in Holy Scripture and in Tradition, and set
forth by the Catholic Church, either in her solemn judgment
or in her ordinary and universal teaching office as having been
revealed by God and as a teaching which all must accept on
the authority of God who has revealed it. When we say that
it is credible we mean that it can be received with the assent
of divine faith rationally and prudently. The basis of this judg­
ment of credibility is the fact that, first, no contradiction is
involved in the claim that Christian dogma is revealed, and
secondly, that this doctrine carries with it manifest or naturally
evident indication of its divine origin.
Human reason is competent to ascertain the possibility of
revelation by its own natural powers. In order to perform this
task a man must first see exactly what the Catholic Church
means by saying that the teaching which she is commissioned
to present to the world is actually revealed by God. Once it
has been seen that a divinely revealed doctrine is actually a
communication which God has addressed to man in speaking
to him and enlightening him on some matter which man did
not know previously, the mind can see clearly and naturally
that this orthodox concept of divine revelation involves no
self-contradiction, and at the same time is evidently compatible
with the manifest natural knowledge about God and man.
A man recognizes naturally an indication of the divine
origin of the Catholic message through a consideration of the
criteria of revelation. Among ' these criteria, miracles and
prophecies are of primary importance. Human reason can
easily demonstrate the possibility and the significance of
miracles by its own natural powers. So far as the possibility is
concerned it is fully within the natural competence of the
“Denzinger, 1790 and 1794.
‘Denzinger, 2145.

156

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

human mind to realize that the Creator of the world is in no
way subject to the physical laws which govern the created
universe. As a matter of fact these laws depend essentially upon
the One who has made the world. Thus it is evidently possible
for the Creator to perform within the created universe acts
which are visibly beyond the natural power of any creature,
actual or possible, and manifestly the work of that One who
is the absolute Master of the world. Such works are evidently
performed by God freely, and at the same time intelligently.
God knows all of the circumstances which surround the per­
formance of the miracle. So if a miracle or a series of miracles
should occur in answer to the petition of a man who cites these
effects as indications of the divine origin of the doctrine he
proposes, then it is evident that God freely sanctions that claim.
Human reason is naturally competent to ascertain, moreover,
that such miracles, and those prophecies which are miracles in
the intellectual order, actually substantiate the claim made by
Jesus Christ our Lord, that the doctrine which He preached
to the world is really divine revelation. As a result, human
reason can see that Christian revelation is credible that the
person who accepts it with the assent of divine faith acts
prudently and well. And this investigation of the criteria of
revelation, of which human reason is capable and which it
contributes to the integral work of sacred theology can con­
sider, not merely the physical miracles wrought by our Lord,
but the Church herself as a miracle, and all of the other indi­
cations that Christianity’s claim is valid. This evidence can be
seen by any person who is willing to examine the facts.
G. The Apology of Dogma. Finally there is another way in
which human reason contributes to the work of sacred theol­
ogy. The mind of man is naturally able to recognize the in­
validity of any objection urged against Catholic dogma.7
Reason will tell us, of course, that not every shout raised against
the Church, her practices, and teachings deserves the name
’Denzinger, 1797.

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

157

and the dignity of an objection. Actually an objection is a
process of reasoning, the conclusion of which contradicts the
teaching it opposes. Consequently, should the doctrine against
which objection is made be true, the objection is necessarily
false. Its imperfection can proceed from one of two sources:
Either the process of reasoning itself is incorrect, or at least
one of the propositions upon which the objection rests is
erroneous.
It is actually of faith that no one is or ever will be able to
show that any statement included in the fabric of divine
revelation is false. Furthermore, any objection urged upon
natural grounds can be shown to be false by the native powers
of the human mind. In any such case the theologian can reason
in such a way as to show with evident certitude either that the
reasoning process which enters into the objection is faulty, or
that one of the statements involved in the objection in such a
way that the force of the conclusion depends upon it is erro­
neous. Naturally this error can be either the misstatement of a
reality within the natural order or a faulty presentation of that
revealed doctrine which is the subject of attack.
One cannot turn a page of the standard theological litera­
ture without finding examples of human reason’s place in the
work of sacred theology. It is the glory of sacred theology that
in her service the human mind has demonstrated its most per­
fect powers and accomplishments. In her pages we find an
analysis of concepts and of statements clearer and more rigor­
ous than that which distinguishes the work of any other hu­
man study. The theologians of the Catholic Church have ever
realized that the doctrine they are commissioned to examine
and to propound is that which has its origin in the ineffable
beauty of the Triune God. It was preached on earth by Jesus
Christ the Son of God, and brought to the children of men by
the witnesses who were His Apostles.
The theologians have employed every device of which the
human mind is capable to expound that doctrine clearly and
unequivocally. They have labored with success to repel the

158

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

attacks raised-against it by false brethren within the Church
and by its enemies from without. In scholastic times they have
built up masterpieces of intelligence like the Summa Theologica
of St. Thomas Aquinas in which that doctrine has been set
forth. They have answered the objections against sacred doc­
trine with all the solid brilliance of a St. Robert Bellarmine or
a Francis Sylvius. In and through these works the best that
human reason has to offer is and will be devoted to the work
of sacred theology.
IX. The Authority of the Philosophers

A. Competent Philosophers. The authority of the philos­
ophers contributes to the work of sacred theology quite differ­
ently from human reason itself, and it is never used as a sub­
stitute for the work of reason. Philosophy, of course, is a name
which applies to the highest scientific knowledge within the
purely natural competence of the human being. It is the knowl­
edge of all things in function of their ultimate causes, in so far
as these can be known by the natural power of the human
mind. The philosopher is the man who considers this subject
professionally. Those philosophers have authority who have
actually instructed their fellow men on the ultimate and basic
explanation of the universe in such a way that their teaching
has been widely accepted. Or from a practical point of view
they are the men whose works and teachings must be con­
sidered in any objective and scientific history of philosophy.
Not all of those philosophers who have been important
enough to have influenced the history and the literature of this
subject actually can be used in sacred theology. Those who
have been proponents of the perennial philosophy, that sys­
tematic teaching which was set forth by Aristotle in the ancient
world, by St. Thomas Aquinas in the Middle Ages and by the
innumerable Catholic writers in our own modern times, can
be of service to philosophy. Although there have been and still
are important divergencies in the doctrine of these men, as a
group they recognize the basic problems of reality, agree on

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

I59

fundamental principles, and utilize the traditional wisdom of
humanity in setting forth their own conclusions. Those writers
and teachers whose tenets could not be classified within the
limits of the perennial philosophy, although they may have
been brilliant and learned, could not make the same contribu­
tion to the work of sacred theology.
B. The Definition of Terms. Naturally the easiest way to
understand the function of the authority of the philosophers in
the work of sacred theology is actually to examine the content
of theological literature for the use of this "place.’’ First of all,
of course, the authority of the philosophers is used in the line
of definitions. The medieval theologians, in describing the
characteristics of their own subject, spoke of it as a science.
They had recourse to the philosophy of Aristotle for the defini­
tion of a science, and St. Thomas with his school was able to
show that the Aristotelian concept of a science was verified in
that discipline which we call sacred theology. Likewise, then,
they discussed the practical and the speculative characteristics
of sacred theology, they utilized the terms practical and specu­
lative as they had been employed and defined by the corps of
philosophers who had preceded them.
In exactly the same way theologians examined the tradi­
tional meaning of the words person, nature, and supposit when
these terms were first employed in propositions expressing the
content of divine public revelation. As a matter of fact these
terms were not used in the divinely inspired pages of Holy
Scripture. Our Lord Himself had not employed them in teach­
ing His message to His Apostles, and these divinely appointed
witnesses had not utilized them for the expression of their
doctrine.
However, the authentic proponents of Christian doctrine
found these terms to be admirably suited for the expression of
Christ’s message in such a way as to preclude any possibility
of error and equivocation among those who had been exposed
to the heresy of Arius. The term “person” was fitted to desig­
nate the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The term

16θ

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

“nature” or “essence” was fitted to signify that in which the
Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost subsist, that which
is not distinct from any one of them while each of the three
Persons is really distinct from the two others.
In adopting these terms and in explaining their use, the
corps of Catholic theologians naturally had recourse to the
writings of traditional philosophers. Since the theological term
is meant by its very nature to give unequivocal expression to
the divine message, it is imperative that it should convey that
meaning which the great majority of cultured men have always
seen in it. It would have been no advantage whatever for the
Nicene fathers to have utilized the term “consubstantial” unless
the majority of men recognized a common meaning for “sub­
stance” and “substantial.” That common meaning is contained
and explained in the writings of philosophers. So it is that the
philosophers can and should be cited as authorities on the use
of the terms to be employed in sacred theology.
C. The Limits to Authority of the Philosophers. But,
while the authority of the philosophers can be alleged for the
meaning of terms which are used in theology, naturally their
consent has nothing to do with the actual proposition of divine
mysteries. The mystery as such is a truth about the intimate life
of God, a truth which is over and above the natural compe­
tence of any creature, actual or possible. Since it can be made
known to man only by the process of divine revelation, and
since it can be accepted with certitude only with the assent of
theological faith, it is evident that the philosopher who, as
such, is interested in what is objectively and naturally evident
about the ultimate explanation of the world in which he lives,
can never teach the content of these mysteries. He can only
deal with those matters in which the theologian, according to
the teaching of the Vatican Council, can find analogies to aid
him in his clear and unequivocal proposition of the revealed
truth.
D. The Preambles of Fatih. Naturally the authority of the
philosopher has a considerable part to play in elucidating the

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

l6l

preambles of faith. It is revealed by God that man can demon­
strate the existence of his Creator in so far as the movement
and the being of created reality are such as to show a necessary
dependence upon an actually existing First Cause. As a matter
of fact philosophers like Plato and Aristotle long ago demon­
strated God’s existence, using the very proofs or arguments
which the great Doctors of the Catholic Church have de­
veloped and incorporated into the fabric of sacred theology.
The theologian can and should allege these proofs at least as
valid evidence that the existence of God can be demonstrated
by those who have not accepted the content of divine public
revelation.
On this point, however, we must be very careful to avoid
a misconception which would vitiate the use of this theological
place. The authority of the philosopher, with reference to the
proof of God’s existence or in any other section of sacred the­
ology, in no way replaces the work of human reason. We do
not accept the proofs for the existence of God merely on the
word or on the authority of those philosophers who have suc­
cessfully made such a demonstration. A man has completed
the proof for the existence of God which belongs to sacred
theology only when it has become perfectly evident to him
that a contingent and caused being could not be or act except
in so far as it is kept in existence and in activity by One who
is Pure Act. A proof accepted merely on the word of another
is at best an exercise of memory.
The authority of the philosopher has been used, and properly
used, to show what the philosopher actually taught about that
Being whose existence is known by way of demonstration.
Thus it was perfectly legitimate for Francis Sylvius to insist
in his treatise, “De Motione Motoris,” that the Aristotelian
philosophers had found that their concept of that Being whose
existence is shown by the being and the movement of creatures
is a concept of One who moves those creatures in such a way
that every fiber and aspect of the movement, in so far as it is
real and good, can really be attributed to Him as a First Cause

162

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

and to the creature in so far as it is the secondary cause.*
8 In
citing the Christian disciples of Aristotle, as well as the great
philosopher himself, the Douai master shows clearly that the
proofs of the existence of God which they offer are such as to
demonstrate that God concurs with His creatures not only in
producing effects but also in acting upon the secondary cause
itself, attributing to that secondary cause every spark of reality
which belongs to its activity. Sylvius cites St. Thomas, not
only as a theologian but in his capacity as a philosopher, and
with him a host of writers who have contributed materially
to the enrichment of Catholic philosophy. And long before
him the master whom he loved and followed had consecrated
the authority of Aristotle in calling him the Philosopher, and
had utilized the good in the teachings of the Mohammedan
Averroes so well as to recognize him as the Commentator
“per excellentiam.”*

X. The Authority of the Historian

A. The Direction of this Authority. This last among the
theological places is an important instrument for the proper
presentation of theological truth. Sacred theology utilizes the
authority of historians and the force of human history partic­
ularly in the work of Christian apologetics. When she sets out
to establish the rational credibility of Catholic dogma, she is
faced with the task of showing that the teaching which Jesus
Christ our Lord set forth as divinely revealed actually was
certified by miracles and prophecies. The basic documents
which tell of the miracles and prophecies of our Lord, and
of His life and teachings, are the books of the New Testament,
particularly the four Gospels. Obviously in showing the ra­
8 Sylvius, De Motione Primi Motoris, Pars Secunda. This work is among those
included in the edition of the Opuscula published by Father Norbert D’Elbecque,
O.P., at Antwerp in 1698. Cf. also the article about this opusculum by Fenton in
the New Scholasticism for June, 1939.
8 St. Thomas and his fellow scholastics naturally used the authority of the philos­
ophers also to disprove assertions that the Christian teaching contradicted proposi­
tions which are evident in the light of natural reason.

THE EQUIPMENT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

163

tional credibility of Catholic dogma it would be useless to
appeal to the Gospels as inspired books. The inspired character
of Holy Scripture is, after all, the object of the very faith the
rational credibility of which we are attempting to manifest.
Consequently the authority of history is utilized to manifest
in the Gospels and in the other books of the New Testament
the factual, historical accuracy which engenders the proof of
credibility. The theologian makes use of the studies of St.
Irenaeus, Clement, Origen, Eusebius, and St. Jerome, among
others to show that the four Gospels are historically reliable.
The judgment of credibility which results from these historical
proofs is perfectly certain, from an objective point of view.
However, the certitude which accrues to it is entitatively in­
ferior to the certitude of faith itself. The certitude of the judg­
ment of credibility depends upon evidence adduced by the
human reason. The certitude of divine faith depends upon the
strength' and clarity of the divine intelligence.
The authority of historians and of those modern archeol­
ogists who have contributed so much to the advance of his­
torical science, is used extensively throughout fundamental
dogmatic theology. In teaching the thesis on the Church, we
rely upon the authority of the historians and the archeologists
to show that St. Peter lived in Rome and died there as the
bishop of that city. The writings of historians are used to
show how the ancient councils were summoned, and how
they acted under the direction of the supreme pontiff. And
again history is used to show exactly what the condemned
teachings of the early heretics were. It must not be forgotten
that one of the condemned propositions from the Augustinus
of Jansenius is historical in its form. In teaching that the Semi­
Pelagians had taught the same doctrine as that set forward by
some theologians of his own time, Jansenius fell into the evil
of heresy by a misuse of history.
B. Use of the Authority of the Historians. All of this
equipment, surpassing the resources of any other study which
men can pursue, is available and actually should be used in order

164

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

to set forth the teaching of Jesus Christ in all the force and
purity of its meaning. The theologian manifests his sincere love
of our Lord in laboring incessantly so that through his efforts,
and by his mastery of the content and the procedure of his
chosen science, the people of God may receive the salvific
supernatural doctrine which they need, free of adulteration
or ambiguity. In utilizing this matchless equipment for the
purpose of sacred theology the theologian, by the grace of
God, finds realized in himself that ideal which St. Thomas
Aquinas, the prince of the theologians, expressed in his in­
augural discourse as a Master of Sacred Theology in the old
University of Paris. He becomes a channel through which the
life-giving waters of divine grace flow down to the people to
bring them the serenity they need in this life and eternal
happiness in the next.

Μ

•ί»

CHAPTER

8

THE SCIENTIFIC CHARACTER OF SACRED
THEOLOGY
A. Theology a True Science. During the years, the main
body of Thomistic theologians have been adamant in their
assertion that sacred theology is a real science. They sponsored
this proposition, not out of mere loyalty to the terminology of
their favorite author, but as a basic truth about the nature of
theology itself. The concept of scientific knowledge which
they applied to sacred theology was that of St. Thomas him­
self, and basically that which had long ago been put forward
by Aristotle in his Second Analytics. According to St. Thomas
that knowledge is scientific which receives a certain assent in
so far as it is drawn from certain definite principles.1 The
object of scientific knowledge is that doctrine which is seen
as manifestly true, not by reason of its own evidence, but
in the light of other certain propositions from which it is
inferred.
The basic Aristotelian doctrine on the nature of a science is
brought out in this paragraph. “We suppose ourselves to pos­
sess unqualified scientific knowledge of a thing, as opposed
to knowing it in the accidental way in which the sophist
knows, when we think that we know the cause on which the
fact depends, as the cause of the fact and of no other, and
*In the Summa Theologica, Π*, Π“, q. 4, art. 1, and again in the Questiones
Disputatae, “De Veritate," q. 14, art. a, distinguishes the intellectual acts of science
from those of opinion, conjecture, suspicion, faith, and understanding.
165

ι66

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

further that the fact could not be other than it is.”2 He adds
that “the proper object of unqualified scientific knowledge is
something which cannot be other than what it is” and that
we know this object “by demonstration.” This demonstration
is “a syllogism productive of scientific knowledge, a syllogism,
that is, the grasp of which is co ipso such knowledge.” Certain
conditions must be fulfilled in the premises from which this
scientific knowledge is drawn. Such premises must be true,
primary, immediate, better known than and prior to the con­
clusion, which is further related to them as effect to cause.
Such is the rigorous Aristotelian notion of science which is
found verified in that discipline which we know as sacred
theology.
St. Thomas and the great commentators predicated the term
“science,” of sacred theology because the “sacred doctrine”
which they taught could be understood and treated properly
only when it was recognized as a science. Furthermore, an
examination of theological literature will show very clearly
that a good many denials that sacred theology is a science in
the strict Aristotelian sense of the term are really motivated
by failure to appreciate the full perfection of the study itself.
If we look at the actually existing accomplishments of sacred
theology we can see that it fulfills the requisites for a true and
perfect science.
We must not lose sight of the fact that the thing, in function
of which sacred theology is said to be a science, is the theo­
logical conclusion or thesis, properly so called. This thesis is the
response to a theological problem, the resolution of a difficulty
about the meaning inherent in divine revelation. The truth of
this resolution is established by a real process of reasoning,
through which it is shown that the true theological conclusion
* Aristotle gave his doctrine on the nature of scientific knowledge in the second
chapter of the first book of his Analytica Posteriora. We have used the translation
by G. R. G. Mure, ΜΛ, in the first volume of the Oxford edition (Oxford, 1928).
The Commentary of Sylvester Maurus, S.J., published in the Latin edition of the
works of Aristotle under the direction of Cardinal Ehrle, S.J., at Paris in 1885,
will be helpful for the understanding of this question.

SCIENTIFIC CHARACTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY

167

actually must be considered as a necessary expression of the
perpetual and public teaching within the Catholic Church.
The contradiction to the proper thesis can be shown to involve
a denial of or an error in the faith itself.
B. The Demonstrative Proof in Sacred Theology. In this
way it is obvious that the theologian knows “the cause upon
which the fact depends, as the cause of the fact and of no other.”
We are investigating within the order of sacred theology, we
must remember, and the thing about which we are concerned is
the meaning of a revealed doctrine rather than some naturally
evident object. If we 'are to consider the One about whom the
science of sacred theology is organized, then it is obvious that
we could never find anything which could be considered as a
cause in His regard. But there definitely is a cause or reason
why this resolution or this theological thesis is objectively
acceptable. That reason is the rule of faith, easily ascertainable
by the theologian or by anyone else. The theologian puts for­
ward his thesis as a certain or real theological conclusion be­
cause this resolution is demanded by the teaching of Jesus
Christ our Lord as that teaching has been guarded and set
forth in the infallible magisterium of the Catholic Church.
And thus the divine revelation which we accept on faith is
the cause of the theological conclusion.
It is the cause of this fact or conclusion and of no other.
Any resolution opposed to a proper theological conclusion
would be incompatible with our faith. The divine revelation
which is manifest in the magisterium of the Catholic Church,
then, demands this particular resolution to a problem raised
about its meaning. Thus the conclusion could not be other
than what it is. Thus far the basic Aristotelian definition of a
science is manifestly verified in sacred theology.
The conclusion is known by a demonstrative syllogism, if it
is to be considered as scientific in the sense expressed by the
great Stagyrite. This demonstrative syllogism is one the very
grasp or understanding of which constitutes scientific knowl­
edge. It is a real illative act, in which the mind shows an infer­

i68

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

ence and sees the conclusion precisely as something inferred.
Now, obviously there is no real inference, no passing from one
truth to another required in composing a statement set down
as a theological conclusion with precisely the same formula
as it has been defined by the infallible authority of the Cath­
olic Church. Thus the thesis that the true and historical Christ
immediately and directly founded His Church while He dwelt
among us is a statement contained in the Oath against Modern­
ists. A man could not make a syllogism of which the statement
of the oath would be a premise and the thesis would be a con­
clusion. But he would very definitely be compelled to go
through an actual and proper process of reasoning in order to
show that this thesis alone is expressive of the divinely revealed
truth contained in Holy Scripture and in Tradition, and ex­
pressed by the Church and by her teachers throughout the
course of history. He would have to demonstrate that a denial
of this thesis would be incompatible with scriptural and patris­
tic teaching.
Father Schultes spoke of the improper process of reasoning,
that is, the one in which there is no real transitus from one
truth to another, as alone capable of engendering a thesis
which could be defined as of faith.3 Actually, of course, the
existing theses manifest in the literature of sacred theology
show far more than an improper demonstration. The theo­
logical conclusion is meant to be established by proving that
it is the resolution demanded, not only by the express defini­
tion of the Sovereign Pontiff or the Ecumenical Council, but
by the divinely revealed doctrine as it is contained in Holy
Scripture and in Tradition. In all of this complex process of
showing that the sources of revelation and the declarations of
the Catholic Church render a denial of the theological conclu­
sion impossible, there is certainly a true process of reasoning.
A glance at a text of sacred theology, the Salmanticences for
example, will show that there is something more than im­
proper reasoning used in establishing a theological conclusion.
’Schultes, O.P., Introductio in Historiam Dogmatum, loc. cit.

SCIENTIFIC CHARACTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY

l6g

C. Premises in the Theological Demonstration. The
premise in this complex process which is the actual theological
proof fulfills all the requisites for Aristotelian science. The
doctrines which God has revealed to the world through Jesus
Christ our Lord are perfectly true. They are primary and in­
demonstrable truths for this science. That which we accept
with the assent of divine faith is seen immediately and in­
tuitively by God in that act of supreme intelligence which is
not distinct from His own essence. It is seen as true intuitively
by those who, according to the decrees of God’s mercy, enjoy
the eternal felicity of the beatific vision. There is no ulterior
truth in the light of which the content of public revelation
must be known and accepted because that revelation conveys
knowledge about the intimate life of God our Creator. As a
result these truths of faith, in the light of which we show that
the theological conclusion is actually a correct and unequivocal
statement of the meaning of revealed doctrine, are in them­
selves primary and indemonstrable.
They are better fyiotvn than the conclusions which are based
upon them, since the certitude of faith is indubitably superior
to that of theology. Furthermore, the doctrines of faith and
the pronouncement of those doctrines in the living magisterium
of the Catholic Church are certainly prior to the theological
conclusions as they enter into the study of sacred theology.
They are the causes of the conclusions, since the theological
conclusion is advanced as an explanation demanded by and in
the very content of Catholic teaching on the content of divine
revelation.
In this way, sacred theology as it has actually been taught
and expressed in the traditional Catholic literature by men
who have been recognized as its authentic and competent
proponents, is a science in the strict sense of the term. The
fact that the dogmas which serve as principles in this study
are accepted on the authority of God who has revealed them,
rather than seen intuitively as true by the theologians does not
prevent theology from proceeding as a science. However, we

170

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

can say that this science exists in a less perfect condition as
long as its principles are received on faith rather than known
in the light of the beatific vision. For the habit of theology
will not be destroyed by death. It will exist in a perfect state
in the glory of heaven.
D. Theology a Subalternate Science. Sacred theology is
qualified by St. Thomas Aquinas and by those writers who
constitute the Thomistic school as a subalternate science.4 The
term itself is not particularly important. St. Thomas himself
did not use it in the article in which he establishes and demon­
strates the scientific character of sacred theology. But the idea
conveyed in the term is absolutely essential for any proper
understanding of the science. A science is said to be subalternate
when it proceeds from principles which are known in the
light of a higher science. The principles which sacred theology
utilizes in establishing its conclusions are the dogmas of faith.
These propositions, as intrinsically supernatural, are seen to
be true in the light of God’s knowledge and in that beatific
vision by which the saints in heaven enjoy an ineffable and
eternal happiness in the possession of a truth and reality which
they could never hope to obtain by their own unaided natural
activity. The knowledge of God is properly called science, in
the accepted terminology of the theologians, not because it is
progressive and discursive, but because it recognizes the nexus
of causality in the realm of truth. The knowledge which the
blessed in heaven possess is a formal and physical participation
of this divine knowledge, and, as a result, it, too, must be con­
sidered as a science.
The propositions or teachings which theology uses to estab­
lish its own conclusions are thus seen as true in the light of a
higher science. They are supernatural truths, and the body of
truth which they constitute, that which we know as the de­
posit of faith is itself distinctively and intrinsically supernatural.
The theological conclusion is shown to be true in the light of
this supernatural doctrine and, moreover, it is shown to be a
* Summa Theologica, I*. q. 1, art. 2.

SCIENTIFIC CHARACTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY

171

manifestly objective statement of the real meaning contained
in the supernatural deposit of faith. From this point of view
all authors agree that sacred theology is fundamentally super­
natural. The truth which it sets out to expound and to elucidate
and in the light of which its conclusions are shown to be true
is a message about that very reality in the sight of which the
angels and saints in heaven find their eternal and ineffable
beatitude. In this way theology is necessary for the people of
God, not merely as some extrinsic means for attaining eternal
happiness, but as that science which teaches about the very
reality in which alone men can hope to find their eternal joy.
E. Theology Fundamentally a Supernatural Discipline
and Formally Natural in Character. But while sacred the­
ology is fundamentally supernatural, by reason of its mode of
procedure it is formally natural.5 The process of proof by which
it sets forth and establishes its conclusions is quite in accordance
with the natural method by which a man ascertains any other
kind of scientific truth. Thus sacred theology is distinct from
the gifts of the Holy Ghost. In these gifts of the Holy Ghost
man is rendered docile to that divine movement under which
he performs salutary acts in a way at once distinct from and
superior to the way in which he ordinarily acts in accordance
with the exigencies and the powers of his own nature. The
prayerful act of contemplation which a man performs under
the influence of the gift of wisdom is just as much his own
act as any other which he has ever elicited. But it is performed
in a different way. In the natural manner of acting in the
intellectual order as in the study of sacred theology, man
arrives at his full knowledge progressively, in the sense that
* Cf. Joannes a Sancto Thoma, Cursus Theologicus. In Quaestionem Primam Primae
Partis, disp. 2, art. 8. Many authors, as Molina, Zumel, and Contenson spoke of
sacred theology simply as a supernatural science. However, these men considered
it as specified by its obiectum formale quod rather than by the obiectum formale
quo. There was also a tendency among the older scholastics to distinguish between
a theological conclusion which was deduced from two premises, both of which are
received with the assent of divine faith and one which is derived from one premise
of faith and another known as true in the light of natural reason. Such a distinction,
however, is irrelevant in the light of modem studies on the theological method.

... ~LiT ' --^--^---'1■ _-5AjrO

Ι72

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the ultimate act depends for its perfection on those which have
gone before. The science of sacred theology is something ac­
quired, and required by study and application at least equal
to that required for the attainment of any other kind of sci­
entific knowledge. Those acts which are supernatural in the
manner in which they are performed are not acquired at all.
A man cannot be said to study for an act of contemplation.
The enlightenment which God granted, for example, to St.
Catherine of Siena was in no way dependent upon any pre­
vious study on her part. But the theological knowledge of a
Vasquez or a Sylvius was very definitely acquired. It was the
result of years engaged in reading and research. God could
give this knowledge to a man who had not prepared for it,
but in the existing designs of His providence He does not con­
cede it in this way. Theology is formally natural in the sense
that it will not be obtained and possessed except by those men
who are willing to study and labor to acquire it.
F. The Possessor of Sacred Theology. Because sacred the­
ology is fundamentally supernatural, it can be possessed only by
those men who believe what God has taught us through Jesus
Christ our Lord and proposed to us in the infallible magisterium
of the Catholic Church. The content of divine revelation is in­
trinsically supernatural. It can be seen as true by a creature only
in the essentially supernatural act of the beatific vision. In this
world, where men are meant to prepare themselves for that
eternal joy, it can be accepted with certainty only with the
assent of divine faith. For, when evidence is lacking, the only
kind of assent which a person who had not made an act of
faith could possibly give would be one based either on his own
choice or on the authority of some human being. But neither
the whim of one man nor the authority of any other creature
could ever engender an objectively certain assent in this matter.
It is characteristic of Christian faith that a man who denies
or doubts one article or dogma actually loses the gift of faith
itself. The motive of faith, the light in which all of the revealed
teachings are accepted, is the authority of God revealing.

.

SCIENTIFIC CHARACTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY

173

Should a man choose to reject that authority on one article, he
destroys the force of this motive in influencing any further
assent on his part. The man who rejects the teaching of God
on the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff, or on the Immaculate
Conception has cast out doctrines which are just as truly re­
vealed by God as are the dogmas of the Trinity and the In­
carnation. If he should choose to accept the doctrines of the
Trinity and the Incarnation, he could not do so because he
receives the authority of God. Thus a heretic, an apostate, or
an infidel cannot have the habitus of sacred theology because
he could never be able to propound its theses as certain scien­
tific conclusions. And, for that matter, an enemy of the Church
as such cannot possess that science which Peter the Lombard
so well declared that he took up out of a “zeal for the house
of God.”6 Theology demands the faith, and the love of the
faith and of the Church which is charged with the duty of
propounding it, that which Francis Sylvius called the “love of
the brotherhood.”7
G. The Classification of Sacred Theology in Terms of a
Speculative and Practical Science. As a true science which is
fundamentally supernatural sacred theology falls strictly within
the category, neither of speculative nor of practical disciplines.8
The speculative science is one which is worth while for its
own sake, one which is not ordered to human activity distinct
from itself as an end. The practical science, on the other
hand, is essentially directed toward the performance of certain
acts. Naturally all human science which is purely natural must
fall within one or the other of these two categories. All of
man’s intellectual activity is either for the sake of some end
distinct from itself or such as to constitute its own end or
purpose. The individual who studies a speculative science
like metaphysics may do so with the purpose of teaching it,
but the science itself remains speculative. On the other hand,
* The prologue to the first Booh of Sentences.
’ Liber Tertius Controversiarum, q. 1, art. 2.
• Summa Theologica, I·, q. 1, art. 4.

174

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

an individual may study a practical science, as ethics for exam­
ple, merely for the sake of information, but the science as such
is ordered toward the performance of proper human activity.
The science which God possesses is naturally not classified
with reference to man’s action. It is entirely outside of and
above both the category of the speculative and that of the prac­
tical. As a result sacred theology, which is a formal and phys­
ical participation of God’s own knowledge, is essentially out­
side that classification because it is not subject to the division
on which the classification is based. Strictly speaking, then,
sacred theology can be designated neither as a speculative nor
as a practical science.
In so far as we can predicate these terms of sacred theology,
however, it is evident that this science must be regarded as
more speculative than practical. Theology possesses within it­
self the full measure of perfection of both classes of science. It
is eminently speculative in so far as its formal subject is that
Reality in the vision and possession of which men hope to find
the only ultimate and eternal happiness available to them. As
that science which declares and demonstrates the objective
meaning of divine revelation, sacred theology is a kind of
knowledge which is definitely and primarily worth while for
its own sake. But it is also eminently practical since it tells of
God who is our ultimate End, and of the ways by which we
can attain the eternal beatitude God wills us to possess.
According to the teaching of John Duns Scotus, theology is
essentially a practical branch of knowledge.® Keen logician
that he was, the subtle Doctor did not dispute the actual con­
tent of St. Thomas’ teaching. His objection and his thesis are
based on his use of the word practical. He insisted that any
doctrine which has some orientation toward human activity
should properly be considered and designated as practical. He
was perfectly correct in his contention that the sacred doctrine
’loannes Duns Scotus, O.F.M., Commentaria Oxoniensia, In Prologo, q. 4 et 5,
art. 5. The edition used is that of Quaracchi, directed by Father Marianus Fernandez
Garcia, O.F.M., 1912.

SCIENTIFIC CHARACTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY

175

was meant to guide men in their progress toward eternal
happiness rather than merely to delight them with its sweet­
ness and profundity in this world. He was so enthûsiastic in
his concept of theology as a dynamic discipline, a source of
spiritual life and activity within a man, that he preferred to
adopt a terminology which does not express the equally im­
portant fact that sacred theology involves a knowledge of that
Being in whom alone we are to find our eternal happiness.
His terminology does not succeed in stressing that central
truth to the effect that sacred theology looks at its object, not
as this can be seen in the natural light of any created mind,
but as it appears in the light of the divine intelligence. And,
since sacred theology actually is a partaking of the divine
knowledge, it deals principally and primarily with the intimate
life of God rather than with those human acts by which we
attain to God.
H. Theology As Wisdom. The traditional teachers of sacred
theology are unanimous in referring to it as “wisdom.”10 When
they designated the science in this way they were pointing out
tremendously important characteristics which a study of its
literature brings out very clearly. Basically, wisdom is the
most valuable and perfect type of knowledge. As a result the
ancients were accustomed to speak of a certain restricted kind
of wisdom in every department of intellectual activity. The
knowledge of the architect is wisdom with reference to the art
or skill of the stonemason or the carpenter. These latter work
so as to dispose the materials in accordance with the architect’s
directions in such a way that these materials may be used in
the construction of the building over which the architect is in
charge. Thus his knowledge or plan directs the skill of the
workers, and conversely the workers’ art is subject to his
provision.
There is a wisdom in the order of human activity, that which
we know as prudence. Every other practical intellectual re­
source with which man is equipped is meant to contribute to
** Summa Tkrologica, I·» q. i, art. 6.

176

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the end of prudence, for the prudent man is one who judges
with practical correctness on each individual moral act with
which he is faced. There is likewise a wisdom in the specula­
tive line, the ultimate human wisdom in the natural order.
This is the first philosophy, that scientific discipline which we
know as metaphysics. This is above all other branches of
knowledge which lie within the purely natural competence of
man, because it deals with what is absolutely the ultimate
cause or explanation of reality. Every science deals with some
kind of cause. Otherwise it could not be a science. But meta­
physics explains reality in function of that One who is the
First Mover and the Last End of the Universe. Any branch of
learning which deals specifically with some cause which is itself
subject to God, is by that reason inferior to metaphysics in the
natural order.
However, sacred theology teaches about God from a much
more perfect and lofty point than does metaphysics. This latter
science knows about God only in so far as He is a cause, that
is to say only in so far as His existence and nature can be
known from an examination of that created reality which He
moves and holds in being. Sacred theology knows of God as
He knows Himself. It considers Him in His intimate life.
Hence sacred theology is a higher type of wisdom than even
metaphysics. While it is inferior to the gift of wisdom, because
of the fact that this latter operates in a supernatural manner in
offering a knowledge of God, sacred theology remains the
supreme science available to man.
I. The Dignity of Sacred Theology. This science, as we have
already seen, surpasses all others in the firmness of that certi­
tude which it engenders, and thus stands supreme among the
speculative sciences which man is capable of acquiring. It
directs man to an end which is absolutely ultimate and thus
it takes precedence over all of the practical disciplines within
the competence of man.11
In the hierarchy of practical sciences it is only natural that
Summa Theologica, I·, q. 1, art. 5.

SCIENTIFIC CHARACTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY

177

the discipline which leads and directs man to the achievement
of his goal surpasses all of the others. A practical science exists
for the sake of operation distinct from itself and this operation
in its turn is finalized and specified by the object to which it
is ordered. The science which is directed to a subordinate end
is naturally subject to the one which has reference to a higher
purpose. For example, the science of military operation as such
definitely takes precedence over the art of handling the
mechanized equipment for modern warfare. The only reason
why the mechanized equipment is used at all is to attain vic­
tory and the victory is won by the army as a whole. The art
of shipbuilding is subject to the science of navigation since
the purpose of the shipbuilder is to produce a vessel which
can be used fitly for transportation on water.
In the order of purposes, the end to which sacred theology
leads is supreme and ultimate. The other practical sciences
contribute to the attainment of ends which are themselves used
for the possession of that ultimate Good in which alone man
is to find the eternal beatitude he desires. Sacred theology is so
intimately connected with the attainment of this ultimate end
that in the corporate life of humanity this good will not be
obtained without the sacred doctrine.
J. Influence on Other Sciences. By reason of its character
as wisdom and as the supreme science within the attainment
of man, sacred theology can and must judge about the prin­
ciples and the conclusions put forward in other branches of
learning.12 Thus sacred theology occupies with respect to other
forms of intellectual activity a place analogous but not entirely
similar to that held by metaphysics. If a man wishes to estab­
lish the basic principles set forth in any lower science, even­
tually he must resolve his inquiry into questions about the first
principles of being, the principles of causality, of sufficient
reason, and of contradiction. All scientific knowledge is valid
in function of these principles, and it is the province of metau Summa Theologica, I*, q. i, art. 6, the responses to the second and the third
objections.

170

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

physics, and of this science alone to deal with them. Thus
metaphysics performs a general and positive function in set­
ting forth those truths which are implicit in every scientific
demonstration or explanation.
It is not within the scope of sacred theology positively to set
forth principles which enter into the fabric of the purely
natural sciences. Its sapiential judgment has a purely negative
influence. It is the business of sacred theology to examine the
teaching set forth in the name of these purely natural sciences
and to point out and correct any statement in opposition to
revealed truth. Naturally this function of sacred theology must
be considered very carefully in order that its scientific purpose
may be achieved. Considerable harm has been done to the
prestige of sacred theology in misinterpreting its influence on
other human sciences, and in claiming a control over the body
of human theology which the science itself rejects. Further­
more, even in dealing with the proper negative influence exer­
cised by sacred theology as a science upon other human studies,
care must be taken to see that the statement to which exception
is made actually is opposed to the content of Catholic faith.
For this reason only the professionally competent theologian
is qualified, as a rule, to express this critical judgment of the­
ology on the findings of the other sciences.
By reason of the divinely instituted order among the sci­
ences, purely natural disciplines can exercise no similar judg­
ment about the content of sacred theology. Thus it lies perfectly
within the competence of the theologian to declare and to
prove that this statement, set forth in the name and with the
apparatus of an inferior science, is incorrect. When that state­
ment contradicts the revealed teaching which God has given
to the world through Jesus Christ our Lord, then it is false,
and it is within the power of sacred theology to say so. God
is the Author of all truth within the natural order as well as
within the domain of supernatural revelation. He cannot con­
tradict Himself. And since divine revelation is set forth, not
as a dead letter but as a living doctrine in the infallible magis-

SCIENTIFIC CHARACTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY

179

terium of the Catholic Church, the theologian can know the
meaning of that revelation, and know it with perfect certainty.
In the light of this revelation he is competent to recognize
both the fact that this teaching has been contradicted, and
the erroneous character of the statement which involves the
contradiction.
Thus sacred theology is able to say with perfect certitude
that a statement denying the fact of creation, and put forward
under the heading of biology or of geology is utterly false. In
the formation of this judgment sacred theology makes use
only of those resources which constitute its essential equip­
ment. It has no need of the apparatus which is proper to the
physical sciences themselves. The statement which is criticized
by sacred theology is evidently false in so far as it contradicts
the manifest content of divine revelation.
It would be absolutely incorrect to assert that sacred theology
has or claims the power to deny scientific facts. There never
has been, and there never will be a truth enunciated by any
inferior science which contradicts the actual content of sacred
theology. The statement contradictory to the principles of
theology and set forth in the name of another science is either
a groundless hypothesis or a crass misinterpretation of a fact.
Even though the lower science in itself is not competent to
grasp the reason why sacred theology objects to this particular
teaching, the very fact that it can prevent serious error at least
in those fields which have some relation to revealed doctrine
makes this negative influence of sacred theology beneficial to
the sciences over which it is exercised.
As wisdom, it is the business of sacred theology to recognize
and point out the actually existing hierarchy of values in the
created universe. The man who possesses this science knows
the only ultimate and eternal end in which man is meant to
find his full happiness. Furthermore, in the light of that divine
revelation which sacred theology sets out to expound and
explain, the theologian is able to ascertain exactly how the
creatures of this world are meant to contribute toward the

l8o

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

attainment of that end. To put the matter concretely, the the­
ologian realizes that there are some possessions, like habitual
grace and the theological virtues without which a man will
not attain his eternal salvation. He knows well that all natural
or temporal goods are such that, used properly, they can con­
tribute toward the attainment of man’s supernatural end. Used
improperly they retard a man’s progress toward God or turn
him away entirely from his Creator. In the light of sacred
theology, the supreme scientific wisdom available to man, he
can recognize the order which God has placed in the universe,
and see the proper disposition of those agencies by which he
is meant to attain life everlasting and the temporal well-being
which he seeks in this world.

CHAPTER

9

OPINIONS, SYSTEMS, AND SCHOOLS
A. The Existence of Theological Opinions. We cannot
actually begin to appreciate the scientific character of sacred
theology until we realize the place and function of theological
opinions within the discipline itself. The properly scientific
conclusion, that in function of which sacred theology is char­
acterized as a true science, is perfectly certain. As a matter of
fact, the true theological conclusion is endowed with a cer­
titude higher than that possessed by the theses of any purely
natural discipline. Nevertheless, the discipline of sacred theol­
ogy, as it actually exists today and as it has been since it was
first brought into scientific order, includes theses which are put
forward merely as opinions. These are set forth in such a way
that the theologian allows for the possibility that the opposing
theses are true.
In one of the best modem manuals, that of Franz Diekamp,
a good number of these opinions are found. In the matter “De
Deo Uno” the author proposes the thesis “God does not know
things distinct from Himself, either existent or possible, im­
mediately in themselves” as the “more common teaching.”1
As a teaching which is merely “more common” it is not abso­
lutely certain. It is contradicted in theses of Scotists, Molinists,
and Nominalists, some of which are actually taught in the
schools, and which are not condemned by the Church. Thus
Diekamp recognizes the possibility that the meaning of divine
1 Diekamp, op. di., Vol. i, p. 211.

181

182

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

revelation may be that God really knows creatures, actual or
possible, immediately in themselves.
Again as a Thomist he teaches that the medium of the divine
knowledge of those free acts which are conditioned futures or
futuribles is the eternal conditioned divine decree itself.2 Here
he attaches no theological note and brings out clearly and
scientifically the opposite or Molinistic opinion. The Molinistic
opinion is ably and publicly defended in the Catholic schools,
and until the Church has made some definitive decision,
neither Diekamp’s teaching nor its opposite can be condemned.
Neither may lay claim to the full measure of scientific theolog­
ical certitude. Neither may be classed as a theological conclu­
sion in the strict sense of the term, because the denial of a strict
and perfect theological conclusion constitutes an error and may
be designated as such. Diekamp’s teaching in this case, like
that of any other Thomistic theologian, is aimed at showing
that his thesis is actually true, and that objections launched
against it fail to manifest any real weakness or improbability.
Thus it is an opinion in the strict sense of the word, a statement
to which the mind assents as motivated by real reasons, which,
however, are not in themselves sufficient to destroy the possibilty of the contradictory being true.
B. The “Sententia Fere Communis.” The “sententia fere
communis” is a true and certain theological conclusion in itself,
although it is not manifestly the doctrine of all qualified ex­
ponents of the sacred discipline. An example of such a thesis
in the theology of Diekamp is his declaration to the effect that
“God exercises vindictive justice most freely so that He can
forgive a penitent sinner without inflicting any punishment
whatsoever upon him.” As this thesis stands, according to the
great Munster theologian, it is perfectly certain, yet it cannot
actually be said to constitute the common doctrine of Catholic
'Idem, p. 217. The Thomists hold that, since every fiber and aspect of reality
in the creature is something produced by God as a First Cause, the only way in
which God could know the free activity of the creature is in that eternal plan by
which He has arranged for the production of this activity. The Molinists, on the
other hand, teach that these free acts of men are knowable by God in themselves.

OPINIONS, SYSTEMS, AND SCHOOLS

ΐ8β

writers. According to the Bull Sollicitudo Omnium Ecclesia­
rum of Pope Alexander VII, the thesis that our Blessed Lady
was in the first instant of her conception, preserved from the
stain of original sin had gained so many adherents that, at the
end of the year 1661 he could say that “now almost all Cath­
olics accept it.”3 It was a declaration that at this time the thesis
of the Immaculate Conception was “sententia fere communis.”
The common teaching is, of course, a proper theological con­
clusion which, by reason of the authority of a moral unanimity
of scholastic theologians, can be received as true Catholic doc­
trine. It would be at least rash to deny it.
C. The More Probable Opinion. However, when Diekamp
set forth the thesis that “those who are not predestined to glory
are negatively reprobated before their demerits are foreseen” as
more probable*
* he is establishing a real theological opinion but
merely qualifies it by stating that the reasons for holding this
opinion are definitely and manifestly stronger than those which
militate against it. In dogmatic theology these stronger reasons
are almost exclusively intrinsic. A proposition is said to be more
probable in so far as logically demonstrated that the actual
proofs offered in support of the opposite contention have not
the demonstrative value of those which support the thesis in
question. In moral theology, by reason of the multiplicity of
details attendant upon the classification of human acts, and by
reason also of the fact that the moralist’s teaching is frequently
in itself an authority for placing this particular act in this
definite category, the number of competent supporters of a
given thesis can give it an extrinsic probability. If six or seven
authoritative moral theologians teach that some act is licit or
illicit, the thesis is extrinsically probable by reason of that very
support. If the greater number of moralists support a thesis, it
is constituted as extrinsically more probable than its opposite.
’ Dickamp, op. cii., p. 248; the teaching of Pope Alexander VII is found in
Denzinger, 1100.
* Diekamp, op. cit., p. 282.

184

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

However, in moral as in dogma the ultimate appeal must be
to the scientific reasons alleged in defense of a thesis.
D. Theological Opinions and Development of Theology
and Dogma. A theological opinion exists where there is either
an actual controversy or at least the possibility of such a discus­
sion. It is set forth as the resolution to a real theological prob­
lem, a question about the meaning or significance of some part
of divinely revealed doctrine. Or we can say that it is a question
about the implications of some Catholic dogma, always recall­
ing that such an implication has reference to the dogma’s in­
trinsic meaning. The theological opinion is the first response
to some theological problems, that is, to those which may freely
be discussed in the Catholic schools. As time goes on the great
body of theologians can recognize more fully the truth of that
resolution which had first been taught tentatively, in the form
of a theological opinion. They can teach it as more probable,
then afterward as they progress corporately in their science,
they can put it forward as certain. The time can come when
the conclusion becomes the common teaching of theologians
and is defined as of faith.
An examination of the history of sacred theology and of the
history of dogma, which by the way are quite distinct fields of
research, will show us very quickly that not all dogmatic defi­
nitions have originated in this way. The teaching of Athanasius
against Arius was never a mere theological opinion. The hercsiarch stated that the Word of God had been made or pro­
duced, and had had a beginning. “There was a time when He
was not.” It was the business of the competent theologians of
that time to recognize and denounce the teaching of Arius for
what it was, a manifest and violent contradiction of Christ’s
doctrine. But the positive use of the term “consubstantial” to
denote the subsistence of the three divine Persons in One and
the same nature or substance was quite another matter. The
Fathers could and did show that the use of this term obviated
all of the errors which had sprung up about the Blessed
Trinity. The term itself was most probably condemned in the

OPINIONS, SYSTEMS, AND SCHOOLS

185

writings of Paul of Samosata, in so far as it contributed to the
expression of one of the errors propounded by this heretic. Men
had to be persuaded that this term, then, could be used properly
in teaching revealed truth in all of its purity and perfection.
We must not forget that the teaching Church herself differ­
entiates between the theological conclusion in the strict sense
of the term, and the mere theological opinion. The individual
Thomist, and the Thomistic school as a whole can be properly
sure that their theses constitute a correct statement of Catholic
teaching. But only the teaching Church which is entrusted
with the care and expression of that revealed word is com­
petent authentically and infallibly to declare that correctness.
As long as she allows these Thomistic theses to be opposed in
her schools, the Thomists cannot claim for them the full meas­
ure of theological certitude.
The theological opinion is very definitely a factor in the
development of dogma as well as in that of sacred theology.
The Vatican Council has used the words of St. Vincent of Lerins
to declare as a matter of faith that the understanding of one
man as well as that of the Church as a whole, can progress and
grow in its grasp of the revealed truth, and that this growth
always takes place in one and the same sense and meaning.5
There can be no question, of course, of new doctrines, of prop­
ositions which the ancient Church did not recognize as re­
vealed, but which the same Church in later years accepted as
having been communicated by God. Neither can there be
question of some statement which God added to the deposit
of faith after the death of the last Apostle. As a matter of fact
there has been no addition whatever to the content of public
revelation since the death of St. John the Evangelist. The
Church is and has been since her inception perfectly infallible
in her teaching of the revealed truth. Since she first camé into
being she has taught the entire doctrine which God gave to the
world through Jesus Christ our Lord without error.
Then the definite progress in dogma and in sacred theology
*The end of chapter four in the Constitution Dei Filiue (Denzinger, 1800).

186

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

has come in the process of resolving problems and questions in
such a way that the true and objective meaning which was con­
tained in the divine teaching is set forth continually in answer
to attacks against Catholic doctrine, and for the enlightenment
of the piety of the faithful throughout the ages. The theological
opinion is set forth as the teaching of a limited number of
theologians explaining the meaning of divine revelation with
reference to a particular problem.
E. The Thesis on the Immaculate Conception. In the time
of St. Thomas Aquinas the thesis of the Immaculate Conception
had the status of a theological opinion. As a matter of fact the
most prominent schoolmen refused to accept it. As time went
on a satisfactory theological explanation was given by John
Duns Scorns, and this thesis was generally considered as certain.
Finally it was defined by the Holy Father as having been re­
vealed by God to be believed of all men. The Church had
always believed that our Blessed Lady was “full of grace.” The
teachers of Catholic doctrine had recognized in her a singular
freedom from every trace of sin. The question of the expression
of this very truth with reference to the conception of our Lord
was raised, and the work of the theologians was to answer this
query by giving the true and exact meaning of the revealed
deposit. The opinion first offered and the definition ultimately
given are definitely intrinsic to this fabric of public revelation.
And the opinion is meant to resolve itself ultimately into a true
theological conclusion.
F. Schools and Systems As Expressions of Theological
Opinion. Theological systems and schools can only be under- '
stood in function of these opinions. Because of the strong or­
ganic unity of sacred theology, one real theological opinion set
forth by an author will naturally have its repercussions
throughout the fabric of his teaching. For example, St. Thomas
taught that essence and existence were identified in God and
really distinct in all creatures. He brought this teaching into
his question on the divine simplicity. It was his contention that
all created things were known by God, not in themselves, but

OPINIONS, SYSTEMS, AND SCHOOLS

187

in the eternal decrees by which they are brought into existence.
These teachings obviously influenced his doctrine on the divine
intelligence and will, and his theses on providence, predestina­
tion, and creation. Thus we can speak of the Thomistic system.
Those theologians who use St. Thomas as a teacher and who
propound his system constitute the Thomistic school. Obviously
not every individual who puts forward a personal explanation
or opinion could be said to have produced a system, or much
less founded a school. Only those opinions which have influ­
ence through the fabric of sacred theology as a whole can be
said to engender systems. And only those systems which have
been taught and expounded by serious and approved theolo­
gians in the Catholic universities and houses of study can be
said to be defended by a school.
When a man takes up the study of theology in our own day,
he is struck at once with the existence and the importance of
schools and systems. The most important systems in sacred
theology are actually taught by well-defined and powerful
schools, in such a way that the bulk of scholastic theological
literature is the product of one or another of these bodies. The
most important schools, those which have a practical monopoly
in the field of present-day theology are the Thomistic, the
Molinistic, and the Scotist.
G. Thomistic School. The Thomistic school propounds the
system of St. Thomas Aquinas. Its distinctive theses include, of
course, the real identity of essence and existence in God and
their real distinction in all creatures, and the causality of
God requisite not only for the production of any effect by a
creature but even for the activity of that secondary cause.
The Thomists teach that the actual efficacious grace which
God gives to men has its efficacy prior to any consent or co­
operation on the part of the man to whom it is given; that it is
efficacious from within, by reason of its own essence. Thus,
according to their common teaching, God by this efficacious
actual grace really predetermined the activity produced under
the influence of the grace to such an extent that every scintilla

188

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

of reality and goodness in the act is from God and from the
creature. However, according, to their doctrine the act and the
perfection come truly from God as from a primary cause, and
truly from the creature, but as from a secondary cause. In this
way the very determination of the creature comes from God.
God’s influence is prior to the movement of the creature with a
priority of nature rather than of time. It is in this sense that
the Thomist teaches that God premoves and predetermines
all created forces, even the human will in its free activity.
The Thomists teach that liberty or the freedom of the will
consists in the active indétermination of that faculty with
regard to any particular good, seen as conducive to but not
absolutely necessary for or identified with the good as such.
They are insistent upon the fact that the will is not free with
regard to its adequate object, the good as such in this world,
and God who is Subsistent Goodness as seen in the light of
the beatific vision, It is their contention that no particular
good, and not even God as He is known in this world, can
actually necessitate and determine the act of the human will.
And, since the will really acts and operates with regard to one
determinate object, the determination or the direction to this
particular object must come from the will itself. But, according
to Thomistic teaching the will acts and determines itself pre­
cisely in its capacity as a creature. Consequently the will acts
and determines itself in so far as it is moved and determined
by God, with that motion and determination which is always
prior with the priority of nature rather than of time.
This systematic teaching is manifest not only in the treatise
on divine grace, but also in that part of sacred theology which
deals with God’s government of His creatures. The Thomistic
school teaches unequivocally that God really operates in every
activity of every creature, since He is the source of every fiber
and aspect of good found in the created universe. The Thom­
istic proofs of God’s existence, particularly the first two among
them, are really an application of this same truth. Every motion
manifest in this world is an indication of God’s existence be-

OPINIONS, SYSTEMS, AND SCHOOLS

189

cause upon examination it becomes evident that , no creature
could move except in so far as here and now it is moved by
God. And the causality of creatures would be impossible were
it not for the fact that this same activity is from the creature
and from One who is Subsistent Being Itself.
H. Scotism and Thomism. Thomism shares the Catholic
schools of sacred theology with two systems and schools which
are opposed to it in very different ways. The Scotists are those
theologians who base their teaching upon that of John Duns
Scotus, the subtle Doctor of the Catholic schools. Scotus, like
St. Thomas the Common Doctor, expounded the entire con­
tent of sacred doctrine. And as St. Thomas set forth character­
istic and systematic opinions throughout the course of sacred
theology, the system of Scotus embraces every part of theology.
These masters differed in their basic description of sacred
theology. For St. Thomas it is a science in the strict sense of the
term, in itself outside of and above the classification of specula­
tive and practical as embracing the perfections of both cate­
gories to an eminent degree, but more truly speculative than
practical. For Scotus it lacks something of the full essence of a
science, and it is primarily practical. Their concepts of the
nature and function of sacred theology were practically iden­
tical, but they differed sharply in the definitions of those terms
which they applied to this discipline. Both were consummate
logicians. As a result both use terms consistently throughout
their works. Thus where there is a question of terminology in­
volved, the conclusion of one cannot scientifically be compared
with that of the other unless their respective definitions are
taken into consideration.
Sometimes, however, they differ on conclusions in a way
that is quite independent of any mere terminology. Thus, for
instance, St. Thomas and his school teach that, according to
the actually existing decrees of divine providence, the Son of
God would not have become incarnate were it not for the sin
of Adam. Scotus, on the other hand, insists that, even if Adam
had not sinned the incarnation would have taken place because

'

X

....... ""

I9O

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

God would not be perfectly glorified in the universe without
the Word made flesh.
An approximate comparison between the two schools, but
one which has definitely been overstressed, can be made by
stating that St. Thomas is intellectualistic while Scotus is
voluntaristic. Properly understood this comparison means
simply that the Common Doctor of the Catholic schools is
prone to explain the divinely revealed truth in function of the
divine intelligence. For him the divine intelligence is the cause
of the universe. The decree or command by which the created
universe came into being and is conserved in existence is in
itself formally an intellectual act. He does not deny the causal­
ity of the divine will, but, according to his doctrine the intellect
has a definite priority over the will. Scotus and his school see
the causal divine decrees as formally belonging to God’s will.
I. The System of Molina. The opposition of Molinism to
Thomism is of quite a different sort. Molinism is the system
which was advanced by Luis de Molina, a great theologian of
the late sixteenth century. Although Molina was a competent
moralist, his teaching on this portion of sacred theology has
little to do with the system or with the school bearing his
name. He set forth an explanation which in his opinion would
obviate difficulties inherent in earlier theological teaching on
the place of free will in the working of divine grace. Molinism,
then, is basically a theological teaching which aims to expound
Catholic teaching on free will, and to explain the operation of
divine grace in such a way as not to conflict with the central
and obvious fact of human liberty. It centers in this particular
treatise of sacred theology, and if it has its repercussions else­
where, these are only applications of the essential doctrine on
grace and free will.
Molinism, as Molina taught it, was very aptly summed up in
the “ConcordicZ itself in four principles.® The first and funda• Ludovicus Molina, S.J., Concordia Liberi Arbitrii Cum Gratiae Donit, Dit'ina
praescientia. Providentia Praedestinatione et Reprobatione. The pagination to which
we refer is that of the commonly used Paris edition of 1876. The four principles
basic to his system are proposed by Molina on pages 548-549 of this edition.

OPINIONS, SYSTEMS, AND SCHOOLS

'

I91

mental principle is that manner in wliich God concurs with
the work of his creatures. His influence is, according to Molina,
exercised in regard to natural acts of free will by way of a
general concursus, and in regard to supernatural acts by way
of special aids. This first and fundamental principle in the
teaching of Molina involves his own definition of liberty. A
man is said to be free in the strictest sense of the term, to have
liberty of the will when, “having posited all things requisite
for acting, he can act or not act, or can so perform one act that
he is also able to perform its opposite.”1 The “general” con­
cursus of which he speaks does not touch the secondary cause
itself, as if this secondary cause were to act when it had received
a prior motion from God, but it touches or effects the action or
the effect of the secondary cause immediately with this created
cause itself? According to this thesis, then, Molina declares that
God concurs immediately with the immediacy of a supposit
with secondary causes for the production of their operations
and effects. This happens in such a way that the secondary
cause immediately elicits its own operation, and through this
operation it produces a term or an effect. God, then, by His
general concursus immediately brings about that operation
with the secondary cause, and through that same operation or
action He produces the terminus or effect.
This vitally important and fundamental tenet of Molina is
set forth precisely as a denial of the famous thesis which St.
Thomas Aquinas enunciated in the Summa Theologica, in the
first part, question 105, article 5.’ It was the contention of the
Common Doctor that God actually operates by way of efficient
causality in all of His creatures in that He moves them to act
by applying their forms and powers to the actual operation,
and again in so far as He is the Creator of their powers and
still conserves them in existence. Molina admitted, of course,
the dependence of all created forms upon the conserving
’Molina, op. cit., p. io.
’Molina, op. cit., p. 153.
’Molina, op. a/., p. 152.

192

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

power of God, while the central and fundamental principle of
his own system is a denial that God actually moves the second­
ary cause to its act. It was his contention that the effective con­
cursus of God affected the operation and the effect, but not
the created force by which these effects were produced.
The second of the four principles in the light of which
Molina intended to clear up the difficulties inherent in the
older theological explanation of the relations of effective grace
and man’s free will has to do with the gift of final persever­
ance. It is his teaching that two factors are requisite for this
gift of final perseverance. One of these conditions or factors
must come from God, who decides to confer those helps with
which He foresees that the adult will freely persevere. The
other condition is on the part of the free will of the adult. It is
a condition without which God’s intention to confer these
definite aids would not be an effective will to grant the gift of
final perseverance. It consists in the adult’s free future and
persevering cooperation with these graces. This perseverance
is within the power of the adult.
The third, and by far the best known, of the four principles
is the famous thesis on the “scientia media” According to
Molina there is a kind of divine knowledge which is between
the free science of God and that which is merely natural. The
free science to which Molina alludes is that which the theolo­
gians of our day designate more commonly under the term
science of vision. It is the knowledge which God possesses of
His creatures, those things which exist, have existed, or will
exist in the created universe. Their existence, of course, depends
upon Him. He brings them into being and conserves them
freely. The “merely natural” knowledge is that of simple in­
telligence, by which God understands His own essence and the
infinite multiplicity of ways in which this essence may be
imitated in creatures. The “scientia medid’ of Molina was a
kind of knowledge distinct from both of these. It was that
knowledge by which God is said to understand, antecedently
to any free act of His own will, what any intellectual creature

I n
4i

OPINIONS, SYSTEMS, AND SCHOOLS

193

would do freely in any possible set of circumstances if God
were actually to place him in these circumstances. It was Mo­
lina’s contention that this principle showed that the liberty of
a created free will could stand with God’s perfect knowledge
of the future.
The fourth principle of Molina’s explanation is that God’s
action in establishing the actual order of things in the created
universe, an order in which he concedes to some and not to
others those aids with which he sees that they would cooperate
freely so as to attain eternal life, was in no way caused or in­
fluenced either by those who are to be saved or by those who
are to be lost forever. In this way he teaches the absolute
gratuitousness of predestination, and completes one of the most
ingenious theories which has ever been formed by the mind
of man.10
Molina himself was under no illusions about the novelty of
his own system. He had never seen this theory of his for ex­
plaining the concord of free will with divine predestination
taught by any previous theological writer. He had no doubt
that St. Augustine and the other Fathers would have approved
his teachings in their entirety had this teaching been known
to them. Had his system always been taught and explained,
Molina thought that the Pelagian heresy might never have
arisen, the Lutherans might never have dared so impudently
to deny the liberty of our will, contending that this liberty was
incompatible with divine grace, prescience, and predestination.
Moreover, his system might have prevented many of the faith­
ful from being disturbed by the opinion of St. Augustine and
from joining the Pelagians. In the light of his teaching, if it had
been offered at the time, the last of the Pelagians in Gaul,
those who are mentioned in the epistles of Hilary and Prosper,
might have been divorced from their heresy.11 The regrettable
fact was that this system had not been offered, and that all of
these disasters took place as a result. The amazing brilliance of
30 Molina, op, cit., p. 550.
“Molina, op, cit., p. 548.

,____ ' .........................................................................................■»■■».ιιιιlilii..........................................................................

I94

-ι,ιμμmaa

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the writer, his scrupulous honesty and clarity all serve to ex­
plain very well how Luis de Molina has had his school in the
Catholic universities for three hundred years.
J. Some Modern Concepts of Molinism. Before we begin to
compare Molinism and Thomism in their relations to presentday theology, it would be well for us to realize that many of
those who deny some of the four principles of Molina still ven­
ture to invoke his name upon their teaching. For example, one
of the most important modern theologians, Father Boyer, in his
Tractatus de Gratia Divina mentions a “system of congruous
vocation”12 as one of the Catholic theological systems offered
to explain the efficacy of divine grace. This system of “con­
gruous vocation” is the one which Father Boyer himself adopts.
He speaks of it as Molinistic and declares that there are many
ways within Molinism itself of explaining the divine concursus
in which efficacious grace consists. In his latest edition he
teaches, although less insistently than before, that this concur­
sus of God is prior to the act of the creature, that it is the cause
of the creatures application to its operation, and that it is thus
in the creature a true “praemotio physica.” This promotion is,
of course, in the teaching of Father Boyer, a motion to a de­
terminate act, although he rejects insistently the designation of
physical predetermination.
Father Boyer’s explanation is ingenious and intensely in­
teresting. At the same time, however, we must realize that
there is little scientific historical reason to speak of it strictly
as “Molinistic.” Molina did not attempt to explain the efficacy
of grace formally in function of the divine concursus at all.
According to his clearly expressed teaching a grace or super­
natural favor is efficacious, and is given as efficacious grace, in
so far as God foresees with infallible accuracy that the adult
will actually and freely cooperate with this grace and use it in
the direction of salutary activity. Moreover, the general con­
cursus of God, as defined and explained by Molina was not in
“Carolus Boyer, S.J., Tractatus de Gratia Divina (ter iam ad usum privatum
typis mandatis nunc primum publice editus) (Rome, 1938), pp. 304-323.

Μ

OPINIONS, SYSTEMS, AND SCHOOLS

195

any sense a moving of the creature. This secondary cause, ac­
cording to the Concordia does not act as first moved by the
Creator. In short, the explanation offered by Father Boyer
denies the fundamental principle on which the real system of
Molina rests.
Still this recent work is quite indicative of a modern attitude
toward the system and its founder. Today there is a tendency
to designate any explanation of efficacious grace which admits
the scientia media in any form whatsoever, and which denies
physical premotion as Molinism. Under this broad and some­
what negative heading there are naturally many individual
systems and schools. However, the teaching of Molina himself
is logical and clear, and quite incompatible with many opinions
which have since been offered in the name of his system. And,
for the theologian, the Concordia is and will remain the au­
thentic source for the study of Molinism.
K. Benefits Derived from Theological Controversy.
Naturally a considerable benefit accrues to the teaching Church
through the existence of these systems and schools, and from
the discussions which are engendered in their contact. We can
form an excellent idea of that benefit by comparing a good
treatise which appeared before the controversy occasioned by
the rise of Molinism, as for example the De Libero Arbitrio of
Richard Smith with a representative work on the same subject
after the controversy had taken form, a work like the treatise
De Gratia of the Salmanticences. There is an explicitness, a
technical perfection in the later works which but for the Moli­
nistic discussions, never would have appeared. The genius of
Molina seized upon the very fundamentals of the traditional
Thomistic teaching, and the Thomistic writers took advantage
of the controversy to develop their system to its full perfection.
A great work like the De Motione Primi Motoris of Sylvius
owes its very perfection to the fact that the Douai Master was
able to stress and explain the very points which had been
criticized by the brilliant Spaniard.
L. Abuse of the Theological School. But, like every other

>&

iMitfjBrii

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

beneficial agency, the theological system can very easily be
abused. There is always a strong temptation for the members
of a school to close ranks, and to act as members of a high
school debating team rather than as men privileged to work
toward the clear and unequivocal exposition of divine public
revelation. That temptation has overcome far too many of those
who have written or taught in the matter of the ThomisticMolinistic controversy. Certain writers of both schools were
reproved by Pope Clement XII for childishly attaching notes
of heresy to systems opposed to their own.13 Even in our own
time there have been Thomists who have attempted to find in
Molinism a resemblance to almost every kind of intellectual
vagary which has ever distressed the children of men. And
there have been Molinists who through an otherwise laudable
loyalty to their own system, have tried to assert that Molina
only put forward the true teaching of St. Thomas, while the
Thomistic school followed a theological invention of Dominigo
Bannez. Writing of this loose and unscientific variety does
good neither to the system it is supposed to support nor to the
great science of sacred theology.
The theological opinion, as we have already seen, is orien­
tated toward the scientific conclusion, the theological thesis
properly so called. And the man who studies and teaches one
system is meant to labor toward the certain possession of
theological truth. The science of sacred theology is such that
labor in its regard is, as Peter the Lombard put it, taken
up out of zeal for the house of God which is the Church of
Jesus Christ our Lord. The loyalty we owe to God and to his
Church in the study and the exposition of sacred theology cer­
tainly takes precedence over the loyalty we owe to any of these
splendid servants of God who have formulated theological
systems and founded theological schools. And in setting forth
any system with more obstinacy than enlightenment, we do
small service to the memory of the great theologian who
organized that system.
“A note to Denzinger, 1097.

OPINIONS, SYSTEMS, AND SCHOOLS

jpy

The man who attempts to discuss these systems must neces­
sarily make himself familiar with the classical works of the
schools themselves. Actually no one is competent to pronounce
on the comparative merits of Thomism and Molinism unless
he knows the texts of St. Thomas and Molina quite well. And
the man who utilizes these words in the spirit of the masters
will necessarily seek for that true and unequivocal expression
of the revealed truth which the masters themselves labored to
attain. St. Thomas and Molina, Suarez and Sylvius, were all
perfectly conversant with the technical literature of scholastic
theology. They were scrupulously honest and rigidly scientific
in their evaluation of that literature. They never allowed them­
selves to be animated by what best may be described as partisan
motives. Using their labors and working in the spirit which
dominated them, today’s theologians can advance the cause of
their science.

siaafti

UNITY AND PEDAGOGICAL DIVISION

CHAPTER

IO

UNITY AND PEDAGOGICAL DIVISION IN ·
SACRED THEOLOGY
A. The Nature of Theological Unity. Since it has one
function, one formal subject of attribution, and one motive in
the light of which its conclusions are acceptable, the science of
sacred theology has an organic unity unsurpassed among
branches of human knowledge. It pursues one purpose, the
clear and unequivocal statement of that teaching which God
gave to the world through Jesus Christ our Lord. It has one
formal object which is attained, or one formal subject of attri­
bution; namely, God in His intimate life.1 All the conclusions
of sacred theology are actually meant to bring us a more perfect
knowledge of God as He knows Himself, and as He has told us
about Himself in the content of Christian revelation. But the
ultimate and perfect basis for that unity which sacred theology
possesses is the oneness of its light or motive, the formal reason
under which alone all of its content is scientifically proper, the
light of virtual revelation.
B. The Connection of Theological Theses. This formal
unity of sacred theology is an affair of tremendous moment for
the study of the science. The result of this unity is that each con­
clusion has its repercussions through the entire content of sacred
theology. Consequently the study of sacred theology has always
progressed, not only by way of analysis, the detailed examina­
tion of each thesis which enters into the fabric of the science,
1 Cf. Summa Tieologica, I*, q. i, art. 3.
108

I99

but also along the way of synthesis, the view of these conclu­
sions in their proper order and background. Thus it is impos­
sible to gain any adequate knowledge of one thesis in sacred
theology apart from a realization of its relation to all the rest
of theological teaching. When the Abbé Anger wrote one of
the most brilliant modern treatises on the Church as the Mys­
tical Body of Christ, he was compelled to point out the rami­
fications of this teaching in every other portion of sacred
doctrine.2 When De la Taille and Vonier3 wrote their mono­
graphs on the essence of the Eucharistic sacrifice, they were
compelled to recall the doctrine on the sacraments in general,
the teaching on faith, and the treatise on the end of man.
The reason for this is quite clear. Every true theological con­
clusion is shown to be acceptable scientifically in so far as it is
shown to be the actual sense or meaning of the divine public
revelation. A perfect theological conclusion is such that the
denial of it would involve rejection of a definite portion of
revealed doctrine, or at least regrettable confusion in the ex­
position of that teaching. Even the theological opinion which
actually belongs to sacred theology sets itself forward as an
explanation of the meaning of divine revelation.
C. Practical Consequences of Theological Unity. So far
as the individual student is concerned, this high unity of sacred
theology is a matter of intense practical importance. It means
first of all, that the beginner cannot hope to have a concept of
those sections in sacred theology which he studies first which
will compare with the knowledge he will gain by studying this
same matter after he has been through the course in this
science. For example, the young man who studies the treatise
on the Blessed Trinity, and who is struck with the glorious
truth set forth in the section on the divine missions will find
that this teaching is seen in its full meaning only when he has
finished the treatise on divine grace, and learned to know the
’Abbe Joseph Anger, La Doctrine du Corps "Mystique de Jesus-Christ, 4th ed.
(Paris, 1924).
’Mauritius de la Taille, S.J., Mysterium Fidei, 3rd ed. (Paris, 1931), and Dorn
Anscar Vonier, O.S.B., The Key to the Doctrine of the Eucharist (London, 1925).

200

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

nature of habitual grace itself. Those who consider the necessity
of the Church for salvation will see the orthodox and scientific
conclusion on this matter in their proper meaning when they
examine them in the light of the Tridentine teaching on the
preparation for the justification of an adult.
For all practical purposes, then, the student cannot consider
the various treatises of sacred theology as hermetically sealed
off one from the other. He cannot begin to appreciate one
except in so far as he looks at it in the light of the others. In
many ways the early part of the nineteenth century constituted
a “Dark Age” in the history of sacred theology, and some ap­
preciation of the reason why this is so may be gained from
Cardinal Newman’s account of his experiences with con­
tinental theologians immediately after his conversion. These
men, professors of sacred theology, informed the distinguished
neophyte that it was not then the fashion to utilize the in­
tegrated teachings of St. Thomas and the great scholastics, but
\ that it was the custom to treat each section of sacred theology
J independently and separately.
Because it is the science in which the content of divine public
revelation is taught and expounded, the unity and profundity
of sacred theology are unsurpassed in the realm of human
study. The message which is the divine public revelation is
perfectly consistent within itself. If it is impossible that God
should put forward any statement in the content of divine
revelation which would be at variance with some truth which
could be observed naturally, it is all the more necessary and true
that the various statements which constitute the divine message
are perfectly in accord, one with the other. And, as a matter
of fact, both the dogmatic formula and the theological conclu­
sion are expressions of truth which God has brought out with
incomparable richness and profundity in the inspired books of
Holy Scripture, and which are set forth with magnificent clar­
ity on the pages of the Fathers. The one process of proof in
sacred theology manifests a practical and scientific unity.
D. Courses in Sacred Theology. The unity of sacred theol-

UNITY AND PEDAGOGICAL DIVISION

201

ogy is organic because the science itself is complex or com­
posite. The perfect oneness of the science shines out in all of the
academic or pedagogical complexity in which it is presented.
In the actually existing theological literature, and in the organ­
ization of theological teaching in the seminaries and universi­
ties empowered to grant pontifical degrees in this science, the
matter of sacred theology is divided into several distinct
courses. In its instruction for carrying out properly the com­
mands of the Apostolic Constitution Deus Scientiarum Do­
minus, the Congregation for Seminaries and Universities pre­
scribes three sets of courses to be taught by the University
Faculty of Sacred Theology.4 The first set, the principal courses
or disciplines, includes six headings:
5. Ecclesiastical History,
1. Fundamental Theology.
Patrology, and Chris­
2. Dogmatic Theology.
tian Archeology.
3. Moral Theology.
6. Canon Law.
4. Holy Scripture (Intro­
duction and Exegesis).
The second group, the auxiliary disciples or courses, con­
tains four subjects:
3- Ascetical theology.
1. Hebrew, Biblical Greek.
4. Theological questions
2. A systematic and histor­
pertaining to the East­
ical treatment of the
ern Church.
liturgy.

The third group which comprises special courses given to
candidates for theological degrees is not prescribed in the same
way as are the contents of the first two groups. The Congrega­
tion puts this list forward as a suggestion, rather than as a
definitive and obligatory set of instructions. The individual
‘The Apostolic Constitution Deus Samiarum Dominus, issued on May 24, 1931,
and the set of rules promulgated by the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries and
Universities on June 12 of that same year both have reference to the training of men
who are being prepared for degrees in the science of sacred theology. All of the
principal and auxiliary disciplines and a good many of those who are listed as
electives are actually taught in every seminary which prepares men for the
priesthood. All of these courses cooperate toward enabling the student to acquire
the habitus of sacred theology.

202

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

faculties are permitted and even encouraged to divide these
courses, to add others and otherwise to deal with the matter in
accordance with the needs of their students and the specialties
of their instructors. The tentative list set forth by the Congrega­
tion includes the following subjects:
1. Sacred History of the
Old and New Testa­
ments.
2. Biblical Theology of the
Old and New Testa­
ments.
3. Selected Questions on
Inspiration and Her­
meneutics, especially
about their relation to
fundamental and dog­
matic theology.
4. Exegesis of the most im­
portant texts of the
New and Old Testa­
ments.
5. Theological Doctrine of
some Fathers or Doc­
tors of the Church.
6. Selected Questions from
Patrology.
7. Interpretation of select­
ed texts from the
Fathers or St. Thomas
Aquinas.
8. Selected Questions from
speculative dogmatic
theology.
9. Selected Questions from
speculative moral
theology.

10. More recent problems
in Apologetics.
11. Mariology.
12. Pastoral Theology.
13. Mystical Theology.
14. Liturgical Theology.
15. Selected Questions from
Christian Archeology.
16. Sacred Eloquence.
17. Catechetics.
18. Pedagogy.
19. Ecclesiastical Historiog­
raphy.
20. History of religion.
21. History of dogmas.
22. History of the councils.
23. History of theology and
especially of the scho­
lastic method.
24. History and Sources of
Moral Theology.
25. History and Sources of
Canon Law.
26. History of the liturgy.
27. History of the Missions.
28. Missiology.
29. Sacred Art.
3°· Those ancient languages
useful for theological
studies.

UNITY AND PEDAGOGICAL DIVISION

203

E. Positive and Scholastic Theology. In the above list we
find included practically every kind of course which is given
in the Catholic schools of sacred theology today. The science
itself is perfectly and pre-eminently one, but the importance
and profundity of the subject matter, together with the tre­
mendous development of the science during the nineteen cen­
turies of its history render it imperative that it should be
brought to the student in a departmentalized form. According
to the ordinary pedagogical classification of these departments
or courses, the fundamental distinction is that of positive from
scholastic theology. The positive branch of sacred theology con­
centrates upon the sources or the apparatus of which the science
makes use in drawing and developing its own theses. The sec­
ond, and the essentially important branch, scholastic theology,
is directly concerned with the unequivocal and objective ex­
planation of divine revelation.
We must not allow ourselves to imagine that the scholastic
theologian, or the treatise in scholastic theology does not use
the sources and authorities on which theological conclusions
are based. Some modern manuals take great pains to insist
that their method is “positive as well as scholastic.” These are
ordinary manuals of scholastic theology for the most part. If
the writer makes no use whatever of the authoritative sources,
his work will not be theology at all. Actually that book or
course is classified as scholastic in which the content of the re­
vealed doctrine itself is exposed in the drawing of proper
theological conclusions. The properly positive treatise or lecture
is that in which the sources themselves are explained and ar­
ranged. We may consider general positive theology, and then
the particular studies which are listed under that heading.
F. General Positive Theology. Petavius and Thomassinus
are regarded as the founders of positive theology as such, or the
general study of sacred theology under the positive method.
Petavius intended to expound all the sections of sacred theology
in his Theologica Dogmata. However, his theology is meant
to be “not that polemic and subtle discipline which, almost

L .., ,Λ^ϋ

204

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

alone, had occupied the schools, and which consequently has
been properly designated as scholastic, but another more ele­
gant and fruitful.”5 This positive theology was directed to give
the place which had previously been accorded to dialectical
disputations to the study and the exploitation of the proper
resources of sacred theology. As a matter of fact Petavius justly
remarked that many of the ordinary theological books of his
time offered faulty and sometimes even misleading citations
from the Fathers.
To remedy what he saw to be a serious imperfection in the
theological literature of his time, he set forth the central thesis
of theology and then gave the scientifically exact and complete
citations of those patristic works in which the same thesis had
been upheld. He succeeded admirably in showing that the real
theological conclusion is established as such when it has been
shown to be the expression of that doctrine which has been
taught in and by the Catholic Church from its very inception.
He used his immense erudition and linguistic ability to show
the objective and traditional meaning of the Fathers and the
Councils, and in so doing he brought out one of the most
valuable works at the disposal of the modern theologian.
Petavius and Thomassinus used all of the proper resources
of sacred theology, and thus their works may be classed as gen­
eral positive theology. However, the literature of sacred theol­
ogy abounds in works of strictly positive orientation, in which
attention is focused upon these resources considered individ­
ually. Thus there are biblical studies, those on the Fathers, on
the Symbols, on the Councils, and on the liturgy. Furthermore,
we can consider as distinct studies in positive theology those on
the history of dogma and of theology, and that Christian arch­
eology which throws such valuable light upon the faith and the
practice of the infant Church.
G. Biblical Studies. Biblical studies include the introduc­
tion and exegesis. Introduction to Sacred Scripture, or Sacred
‘Dionysius Petavius, S.J., Opus de Theologias Dogmatibus (Bar-le-Duc, France,
1864), Vol. 1, p. I-

.... X

/F'b/l

Λ

UNITY AND PEDAGOGICAL DIVISION

205

Hermeneutics as the study is frequently designated, is one of
the most complex and important portions of sacred theology.
It opens with a study on the canon of scripture and on the
meaning of the term inspiration. The canon is the official list
of those books which are accepted by the Catholic Church as
works which have God Himself as their author. It is the first
business of Sacred Hermeneutics to study the formation and
the definition of the canon both for the Old and for the New
Testament, as well as the story of the promulgation of that
canon by the Catholic Church. The same branch of sacred
theology considers the meaning of inspiration, both with
respect to the book of which God is the Author, and to the
human writer whom God used as a free and complete instru­
ment in the writing of a canonical book.
The Introduction to Sacred Scripture then proceeds with a
consideration of the individual books which compose the Old
and the New Testaments. The student is taught the internal
and external evidence about the time when this book was
written, its human author, the language in which it was
written, and the integrity of the text which has come down to
us. There must also be a scientific consideration of any im­
portant objections which have been raised against the accept­
ability of any book. There follows a treatise on the literary
classification of the canonical books, and on the rules and kinds
of Hebrew poetry. The same study must also include a dis­
cussion of the various versions or translations of Holy Scripture,
and especially of the history and authority of that Latin version
which we know as the Vulgate.
In Hermeneutics we must also study the historical and reli­
gious background of the Holy Scripture. The historical study
includes a history of the chosen people up to the time of our
Lord, and the elements of ancient history of the peoples who
lived around Palestine and Egypt. This involves a serious study
of biblical archeology. It must be accompanied by an explana­
tion of the various ancient Oriental religions, to the practice
or existence of which allusion is made in the inspired books.

2o6

the concept of sacred theology

The introduction to the New Testament must include a scien­
tific life of our Lord, as well as a history of the Catholic
Church during the first century. Naturally, such historical
work demands a treatment of the political, ethnic, and econom­
ic geography of the Holy Land during biblical times, and an
explanation of such weights and measures among the Hebrews
and their neighbors as are mentioned in the sacred writings.
The introduction to Holy Scripture terminates with the prin­
ciples of exegesis. The student is shown how the real text of
Holy Scripture is and must be interpreted in accordance with
the teaching of the Catholic Church as manifest in the
unanimous consent of the Fathers. This includes a discussion of
the various types of meaning which the Holy Scripture is
capable of expressing.
That to which Hermeneutics properly constitutes an intro­
duction is exegesis, the actual explanation and interpretation
of the inspired writings. This exegesis can take the form of a
verse for verse commentary, or an explanation of the dogmatic
content of some book or group of books. The commentary is
the outstanding work of scriptural scholarship. The author,
utilizing all the resources of his erudition, sets forth each verse
of Holy Scripture, shows its authenticity and then, in the light
of traditional Catholic teaching, sets forth the meaning which
God attached to this portion of Holy Writ, and which the
Church as such has always found in it.
Using such commentaries, and sometimes including them in
their texts, many authors bring out the dogmatic content con­
tained in the Scripture as a whole, in one or the other Testa­
ment, in an individual book or group of books, or in some
passages which contain our Lord’s instructions. Thus there can
be an explanation of the parables in which our Lord brought
out the teaching on the kingdom of God, as well as theologies
of the New Testament and of St. Paul.
H. Patristic Theology. In the field of positive theology we
must also allocate the study of the Fathers and the other early
ecclesiastical writers. The study of this literature as a whole is

UNITY AND PEDAGOGICAL DIVISION

20?

known as Patrology. In this course the student learns the iden­
tity of those early writers whose works are indicative of the
belief within the early Church, the books they actually wrote,
and the time these books were produced. The student of
Patrology must know the topics on which the various Fathers
wrote, and must be familiar with the text of at least the most
important works. He is taught the best editions of these texts,
and the light which they throw upon the history of Catholic
dogma. Naturally, the field of Patrology is such that works of
specialization are rendered altogether necessary. We must have
individual studies on the teachings of each Father, as a whole,
or with particular reference to those parts of sacred theology
which he exposed most fully. From Patrology the theologian
is expected to draw that appreciation of the patristic expression
of Catholic thought without which he will be unable to draw
and appreciate scientific conclusions.
I. Symbolic and Conciliar Studies. Symbolic is that por­
tion of positive theology which considers the Catholic acts of
faith or creeds, with reference to the individual errors and
heresies excluded by them. Conciliar theology takes up the
study of the ecclesiastical councils, both ecumenical and par­
ticular. In order properly to exploit these tremendously impor­
tant resources of Catholic teaching, the theologian must know
what councils have actually been held, how they have been
assembled and sanctioned, and what they have pronounced.
For this reason the theologian must be familiar with the history
of ecclesiastical councils. Because of their relation to the true
councils, he must also be aware of those ecclesiastical gatherings
which never had the approval of the Church, councils like that
of Rimini in which false doctrine was proposed. The fact that
such councils put forward heretical teaching makes it easier
for the student to appreciate the true faith of the Catholic
Church as it was expressed and contradicted in early times.
This portion of positive theology concludes with a study of the
content and the history of the liturgy, in so far as this is expres­
sive of Catholic dogma.

208

j

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

J. History of Dogma. The most important part of all this
positive theology is that course in which the results of the others
are expressed and arranged, the subject which we know as the
History of Dogma. The dogmas are those assertions which are
contained in Holy Scripture and in tradition and proclaimed by
the Church either in her solemn judgment or in her ordinary
and universal magisterium, as having been revealed by God to
be accepted by all with the assent of divine faith. As a result,
the history of dogma is an entirely different thing from the his­
tory of revelation. This latter would pertain primarily to the
field of Scripture study. It would mark out the various stages
at which God added to the store of divine public revelation
which he confided first to the Israelitic authorities and then to
the Catholic Church. These additions were substantial. At defi­
nite times in the history of the true religion God gave to his
people some truth which hitherto they had not known. It was
a new statement which was not implied in the previously
existing revealed deposit in such a way that the believer could
actually deduce it from that doctrine which he had hitherto
held on the authority of God. Such additions to the revealed
deposit ceased definitively with the death of the last Apostle.
Consequently the history of dogma marks the various stages
in which precisely the same doctrine has been set forth infal­
libly and authoritatively by the Catholic Church. But, although
it is always the same teaching, with exactly the same sense
and meaning, it has been proclaimed more and more explicitly
as the years have gone by. As heresies have arisen, with danger
that misinterpretation of the Church’s dogmatic teaching
would result in a loss of faith, or as the Christian life and devo­
tion of Catholics have demanded, the Church has set forth her
divine teaching in such a way that danger of equivocation of
malinterpretation has been removed. It is the business of the
history of dogma to examine these dogmatic declarations and
to point out the process and the direction of this progressively
more explicit Catholic teaching.
K. History of Theology. Closely allied to History of

UNITY AND PEDAGOGICAL DIVISION

2O9

Dogma, yet really distinct from it, is the History of Sacred
Theology. In this latter course we look for the actual progress
of the science, rather than that of the dogmatic teaching of the
Church itself. The history of sacred theology sets forth the
various writers and schools that have contributed to the science,
and shows how those contributions were made. This is one of
the least developed sections in all of positive theology.
Although the history of theology in ancient and medieval
times has been written quite well, little serious work has been
done in the direction of an adequate and scientific expression
of the history of sacred theology since the Council of Trent.
L. Fundamental Theology. Scholastic theology is either
fundamental or special. Fundamental theology considers those
conclusions which have to do with the body of divine revela­
tion as a whole, while special theology considers the individual
doctrines which go to compose the message which God has
given to the world through Jesus Christ our Lord. Funda­
mental theology naturally begins with the explanation of the
nature, purpose, competence, and division of sacred theology
itself. Tliis reflective study of the science itself is called the
Methodology of Sacred Theology.
The second part of fundamental theology is the science of
Apologetics. Any extensive acquaintance with modern litera­
ture in this field shows that there is no section of sacred doc­
trine more widely discussed and more freely treated than this.
The questions are not so much about the truth of the conclu­
sions offered in apologetics. As a matter of fact, in few portions
of sacred doctrine is there such strong backing for individual
theses as in apologetics. The question in apologetics seems to
refer to the order and competence of the science. There are
authors who set forth their apologetics in the form of treatises
on the true religion. Others make it revolve around and lead
to the conclusion that belonging to the Catholic Church is a
requisite for eternal salvation, and that men are morally ob­
ligated to enroll themselves as members of the Church. Still
others, in accordance with the masterful methodology of

210

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Father Gardeil, consider apologetics as that study which dem­
onstrates the rational credibility of Catholic dogma as divine
revelation. This last view is in accordance with the teaching of
the Church and with the actual defense of the Catholic faith
through the centuries.
Ultimately apologetics is set forth as the rational defense of
Catholic truth. Its purpose is to show that it is prudent and
reasonable to assent to this teaching. Since the essential content
of Catholic dogma is intrinsically supernatural and as such
beyond the natural competence of any created intelligence, the
apologist cannot demonstrate the truth of this teaching. He
could never, for instance, show that the statement that there
are three Persons in God is evidently true in the same way that
the mathematician can actually demonstrate the truth of the
proposition that the sum of all the angles within a triangle is
equal to two right angles. Consequently the only procedure by
which the apologist can demonstrate, even to the man who has
not the faith, that it is not unreasonable to accept Catholic
dogma as divinely revealed, is to demonstrate clearly that this
dogma carries with it definite evidence that it really is what it
claims to be, a message which God has given to the world to
be believed by all men. To this end the apologist first shows
that there is no contradiction involved in that concept of divine
revelation which the Catholic Church predicated of its own
dogma. Then it shows the existence and the value of true
criteria of revelation, notably miracles and prophecies. Finally
it demonstrates that Catholic dogma as it is actually presented
to mankind is shown to be a true divine message in the light
of these criteria.
Apologetics differs sharply from an apology of dogma. This
latter belongs to the realm of special, rather than of funda­
mental theology. It consists in the defense of some individual
dogma or group of dogmas. In the apology of dogma the de­
fender can demonstrate that this individual teaching, for ex­
ample that of the real presence of our Lord Jesus Christ under
the appearances of bread and wine in the Sacred Eucharist, is

UNITY AND PEDAGOGICAL DIVISION

211

actually contained in the two authentic sources of divine reve­
lation. He can demonstrate to anyone that no contradiction is
involved in the true Catholic doctrine, and, furthermore, he
can show that any objection brought to bear against the true
meaning of divine revelation actually fails to achieve its
objective.
The apologetics to which we refer is, of course, the tradi­
tional science which is habitually presented as an integrating
factor in the organization of sacred theology. There are cer­
tain branches of study, or to be more exact, certain theories
about Catholic dogma which present themselves as the “new
apologetics.” In general these constitute attempts to show the
acceptability of Catholicism independently of miracles and
prophecies, the outstanding and primary motives of credibil­
ity. Those which attempt to show that miracles and prophecies
have no demonstrative value contradict authentic doctrine.
Others which merely attempt to supplement the effects of
miracles and prophecies are acceptable, but have no place in
the fabric of sacred theology as distinct studies. As a matter of
fact the traditional apologetics takes full cognizance of other
motives of credibility. Such approaches to apologetical methods
as the “immanentism” of Maurice Blondel and the “experi­
mental method” of Henri Morice are classified at “new
apologetics.”
The course of fundamental theology concludes with the
treatise on the Catholic Church. Naturally not all of the re­
vealed doctrine pertinent to the activity and the prerogatives
of the Church is included in this treatise, since the entire con­
tent of sacramental theology has to do with the Church’s life
and organization. But the teaching on the Church as the
divinely constituted and infallible exponent of divine public
revelation must hold a place apart in the organization of sacred
theology. Under this heading the student of fundamental
theology must consider the Catholic Church as the authorized
proponent and mistress of all revealed teaching.
The treatise on the Catholic Church first of all considers this

212

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

organization in function of its four causes. The efficient cause is
God Himself, since the Church was immediately and directly
instituted by the true and historical Jesus Christ while He
dwelt upon this earth. The final cause is the glory of God to
be accomplished in the fullness of Christ through the salvation
of souls. The material cause is the membership of the Catholic
Church, embracing only or all of those baptized persons who
have not been brought away from the unity of the Church
through heresy, schism, or the full measure of excommunica­
tion. The formal cause, that by which the members are bound
to one another under Christ their Head and Leader, is the
Blessed Trinity, and by appropriation, God the Holy Ghost.
Under His guidance the Church functions as a monarchical
and hierarchical society. It teaches, governs, and sanctifies.
The treatise on the Church which is integrated into funda­
mental theology does not deal extensively with the sanctifying
mission of the Church, since this treatment is within the proper
province of sacramental theology, of moral, and of ascetics.
But it does teach of the Church’s infallibility, of the matter in
the teaching of which the Church exercises her prerogative of
infallibility, and of those within the Church who are com­
petent to speak infallibly in setting forth divinely revealed
truth.
The Catholic Church itself is the Mystical Body of Christ,
and that portion of the treatise on the Church which is devoted
to explaining how that Church is actually joined to Jesus
Christ our Lord constitutes the theology of the Mystical Body.
The treatise concludes with an investigation into the necessity
of the Catholic Church and the relations which exist between
the Church and the state.
M. Special Dogmatic Theology. Special theology is either
dogmatic or moral. Sometimes there is a course in sacramental
theology in which all of the content of divine revelation which
has to do with the seven sacraments is expounded. Quite as
frequently, however, this teaching on the sacraments is divided
between moral and dogmatic, according to the exigencies of

^^^^ΐ^^·^^^ΜΙ^Κ^ΜΜϋϋ^^^ΜΜ··ίΜΜ··Ν··ΐΜ··

UNITY AND PEDAGOGICAL DIVISION

2Ιβ

the individual theses. Most of the currently used textbooks
divide the matter on the sacraments in this way.
Special dogmatic theology takes in all of those treatises
which are included in the first and the third parts of St.
Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica and in addition the part
on divine grace, which St. Thomas himself incorporated into
the Prima Secundae. Thus it takes in the treatises on the One
God, on the Blessed Trinity, on creation and the divine govern­
ment, on original sin, on divine grace, the incarnation, the re­
demption and the last things. It is in this part of sacred theol­
ogy that the great systematic controversies are discussed.6
N. Moral Theology. Moral theology is that portion of
scholastics which admits of the greatest number of pedagogical
subdivisions. The principles and the main conclusions of all
those branches of moral which today are taught as separate
courses are contained in the second part of the Summa Theolo­
gica. The most important and the fundamental part of this
content is presented today in that course which is designated
simply as moral theology. Under this heading the theologian
considers human acts, conscience which is the practical judg­
ment about the matter with which a person is immediately
concerned, laws, the sins, and the virtues in general. After this
general consideration, the theologian considers the individual
precepts of the moral order. Sometimes the division of these
commandments is made according to the decalogue and the
chief precepts of the Catholic Church. At other times they are
considered with reference to the virtues, to the activity of which
they are ordered. Then moral theology considers the particular
duties which follow from the acceptance of certain states in life,
with special stress being placed upon the duties of clerics and
‘Special dogmatic theology, as distinct from sacramental, is divided by Katschthaler into four parts. The first of these is theology strictly so called, embracing the
treatises on the unity and the trinity of God as well as that on God the Creator.
The second is Christology, which includes all of the doctrine about the Incarnation
and the Redemption. The third is Charitology which takes in the section on original
sin and on divine grace. The fourth and last is Eschatology, the teaching on the
final lot of man. Cf. Joannes Katschthaler, Theologia Dogmatica Catholica Specialis
(Regensburg, 1877), Vol. 1, introductio, pp. rii-xiii.

214

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

religious. The last, and the most extensive portion of moral
treats of the liceity of acts which are connected with the sacra­
ments. Two of the sacraments, penance and matrimony, de­
mand long and profound treatment in this branch of theology.
Moral theology deals with the liceity and the illicit character
of human acts. Because of its very nature the use of examples or
cases constitutes an excellent pedagogical means for learning
and explaining this discipline. For this reason the subject itself
is sometimes known as casuistic moral. The term must never be
used in a pejorative sense, since that teaching which is set forth
in the traditional moral textbooks has often been approved by
the Church herself. There is always unfortunately a tendency
among those who have never taken the trouble to master the
field of moral theology to find fault with it because it “does not
offer a high enough ideal.” As a matter of fact the moralist
fulfills one of the most important functions in the explanation
of Catholic teaching. Were he to confuse the counsels and the
commandments he would be guilty of making a fatal mis­
statement of that teaching which God revealed to men through
Jesus Christ. It is his immediate business to point out what God
has taught us as demanded by that life of grace which He has
conceded to us in this world. In order to teach this properly,
he must point out those acts which are not in accord with the
life of grace, and those which are so opposed to that life as to
be incompatible with it.
The principal subject of controversy in the realm of moral
theology is the nature of that reflex principle which a man uses
in order to take away the speculative doubt which might stand
in the way of his action. A man who has no objective means
for knowing whether the action proposed to him here and
now is licit or not must obviously have recourse to such a prin­
ciple. There have been those who have held the principle that
only in those cases where the act seems more probably licit, the
man can act. Others hold that a man acts properly if it is equally
probable, or even solidly probable that the act is licit. The
proponents of the first system are called probabiliorists. Those

UNITY AND PEDAGOGICAL DIVISION

215

who teach the second one are called equiprobabilists, and the
third is exposed by probabilists. There are also those who hold
that the importance of the act must be the ultimate norm. If
the act is such that illicit operation would be more serious, then
a stronger probability is required for its performance.
O. Spiritual Theology. When we consider the human
acts, not merely with reference to their liceity, but precisely in
so far as they are directed toward the perfection which God
asks of Christians, then we study them in that portion of sacred
doctrine known as spiritual theology. In this course we look at
the nature and the necessity of Christian perfection itself, and
then at the manner in which God brings the soul to it. Ascetical
theology tells about that portion of the soul’s advance toward
God in which the prayerful activity of that soul is conducted in
the manner which is natural to man. Mystical theology, on the
other hand, tells of that stage in the advance of the soul in
which it acts in a manner at once distinct from and superior
to the natural way in which man operates for the attainment
of an end. Both of these disciplines treat of activity which is
essentially and intrinsically supernatural. The prayerful activity
of the ascetic has the same supernatural orientation as that of
the mystic. The same supernatural organism of habitual grace,
the virtues, and the gifts of the Holy Ghost acts as a principle
of operation in each case. But the activity of the mystic, that
which is performed according to the manner of the gifts is
supernatural in manner or mode as well as in essence. The
mystic is said to be passive in so far as he is moved by God in
this supernatural manner.
The outstanding controversy in this field has to do with the
methodology of the science itself. Father Poulain is considered
the leading authority in holding that mystical theology has no
immediate contact with the field of ascetics.7 According to
this theory, mysticism has to do with those phenomena which
are properly classified as “gratiae gratis datae.” These are out’ The theory of Father Poulain, SJ^ is set forth in his classical Des Graces d’Oraisttn,
5th ed. (Paris, 1906). The work has been translated into English.

216

I

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

side the normal course by which God wills that the soul
should grow to its ultimate perfection in this life. As a result
the supporters of this theory maintain that the entire progress
of the soul to perfection is made according to the laws which
govern the activity which man performs in a natural way.
The other theory, which is taught in the greater number of
courses on spiritual theology, is that of which Father GarrigouLagrange was the outstanding proponent in our times.8 Accord­
ing to this teaching, the normal progress of the soul to the
highest stages of perfection brings the soul into a position in
which the demands of prayerful activity are beyond the
capacities of the natural mode of human operation. In this
way God normally guides men to and in the highest stages
of spiritual perfection by bringing them to act in the super­
natural manner. Thus mystical theology constitutes, not a
study of certain phenomena which may accompany the life
of grace, but the consideration of those activities which are
normally performed by those men whom God has deigned to
lead to the summit of the spiritual life.
P. Pastoral Theology and Missiology. The next special
subject attached to moral theology is pastoral. In pastoral we
consider the special duties of the priest toward the flock which
is committed to his care. The subject is of great practical im­
portance, although the principles which it elucidates are put
forward as conclusions in dogma and in moral.
Finally there is missiology, the study of the Catholic mis­
sions. This branch of sacred theology attaches itself to funda­
mentals, since it expounds the necessity of revelation and of the
Catholic Church with particular reference to the people among
whom the Church is being established by the missionaries. It
is attached to pastoral theology since it explains the duties of
the missionaries toward those to whom they bring the word
of God and the means by which the work of these missionaries
can be made most effective.
*Cf. Garrigou-Lagrange, Perfection Chrétienne et Contemplation (Saint Maximin,
Var, France, 1923), 2 Vols. There is an excellent English translation of this book.

k

CHAPTER

II

THE DEVELOPMENT OF SACRED
THEOLOGY —THE PATRISTIC
PERIOD
The present-day literary expression of sacred theology, in
manuals like those of Diekamp, Connell, and Hugon, in
monographs and encyclopedias, is the product of nearly two
millennia of development. And so clearly does this literature
bear within itself the marks of that development that no man
can approximate a scientific evaluation of sacred theology until
he is at least cognizant of the main stages in its history. More
clearly than any other discipline, sacred theology speaks with
the voices of those who have labored on it in the past. The
terms which are commonplaces in the modern manual were
selected and polished by the theological study of other times.
The rigorously correct conclusions are products of the most
painstaking examination and discussion in third-century
Alexandria, in thirteenth-century Paris, and in seventeenth­
century Douai.
A. Theological Reasoning Found in Holy Scripture.
Actually, of course, theological reasoning is as old as Christian
doctrine itself. Our Blessed Lord reasoned to show His at­
tackers that He did not drive out devils by the power of
Beelzebub himself. He showed them that while He overcame
the powers of darkness in single combat, the dominion of
Satan was still exercised over men. If He had been of the
house of Satan, then, of course, that house could not endure.
«7

/

X

2l8

1

w

«’

ι-y

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

The fact that it actually held dominion indicated clearly that
He was outside of it.1
St. Paul put down a denial of the general resurrection with
a perfect theological proof. “Now if Christ be preached that
He arose again from the dead, how do some among you say
that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there be no
resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen again. And
if Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and
your faith also is vain.”2 The Apostle of the Gentiles showed
clearly that the denial of one article of faith involved the de­
nial of another, and ultimately the destruction of the faith
itself. It was his way of proving that this doctrine actually
expressed the teaching of Jesus Christ our Lord.
B. The Apostolic Fathers. The literature of sacred the­
ology boasts of documents which come from the end of the
first century and from the early years of the second. Classified
as apostolic fathers are St. Clement of Rome (98), St. Ignatius
of Antioch (107), and St. Polycarp (155). Closely associated
with them are the ecclesiastical writers, Hermas (c. 140), Papias
(c. 150), and the authors of the Didache (c. 90), the so-called
Epistle of Barnabas (c. 130) and the letter to Diognetus (c. 150).
The most important of these writings are letters addressed to
individual communities or persons, to overcome some particular
difficulty. They explain the content and the meaning of Chris­
tian doctrine, but naturally without resort to any scientific
terminology. The teaching of Papias and Hermas was not
entirely reliable. But the letters of SS. Clement, Ignatius, and
Polycarp indicate very clearly the belief and teaching in the
primitive Church.
C. The Apologists. From the middle of the second cen­
tury, the apologetical literature of sacred theology began to
develop rapidly. We know of the writings of Aristides (c. 138),
a converted Athenian philosopher. The brilliant “Letter to
Diognetus,” a jewel of ancient Christian writing, is also a
'Matt. 12:24-30.
11 Cor. 15:12-21.

,.__ aa

SACRED THEOLOGY — PATRISTIC PERIOD

21Ç

work which defends the faith. So, too, were the books of St.
Justin Martyr (c. 165) the most important among the ancient
apologists, of Theophilus of Antioch (181), Athenagoras (193),
and Tatian (c. 180). These men wrote in Greek, while Tertullian (c. 222) and Marcus Minutius Felix (c. 185) founded
Latin theological literature with their defenses of the Catholic
faith against the attacks of the pagans. St. Justin and Tertullian wrote to show that the persecutions which raged against
the primitive Church were entirely unjustified. Minucius Felix
composed a preparation or introduction to the faith. Writing
in dialogue form, this brilliant spokesman of Catholicism re­
sponded to the arguments of the pagan and finally led his
adversary to seek the truth which Jesus Christ preached to men.
D. St. Irenaeus. St. Irenaeus (202-3), the bishop of Lyons,
wrote against the heretics, and in particular against the various
sects of gnostics who troubled the Church of his time. In the
course of his writing he set forth the content of Catholic faith
as a whole. His pitiless investigation of gnosticism and his
excellent exposition of the Catholic rule of faith have won for
him the designation of the first scientific theologian within
the Catholic Church.
E. Clement of Alexandria. At the same time his con­
temporary, Clement of Alexandria (202), was producing the
first of those literary works which were to be the glory of the
catechetical school of the Egyptian metropolis, the first organ­
ized and permanent school of sacred theology of which we
know. Using the terminology and sometimes even the men­
tality of the neo-Platonic philosophers of Alexandria, Clement’s
literary works set forth the apologetic arguments for the con­
version of a pagan, and then gave the neophyte direction for
attaining to the summit of Christian perfection.
F. Origen and His School. Origen (230), his great pupil
and successor, was by all means the most prolific writer in the
history of sacred theology. Apart from his tremendous scrip­
tural work in which he developed the allegorical exegesis
which had already appeared in the so-called Epistle of Barnabas

220

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

and his magnificent accomplishments for Catholic apologetics
in the work Against Celsus, Origen’s most important contri­
bution to theological literature was the famous volume, On
the Principles. This was a third-century Summa Theologica,
a complete and ordered exposition of Catholic doctrine. Like
the works of St. Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria, his books
were by no means free from error. Moreover, the order of the
treatise On the Principles suffers greatly by comparison with
the later books of the same motivation, works like the Ortho­
dox Pcûth of St. John Damascene, the Four Books of Sentences
of Peter the Lombard, and the Summa Theologica of St.
Thomas Aquinas. But we can gain some idea of Origen’s
genius, and his tremendous influence upon the development
of sacred theology when we realize that over five hundred
years were to pass before another man set to work on a plan
as extensive and scientifically ambitious as that which moti­
vated the production of On the Principles.
This volume is divided into four books. The first deals with
the three divine Persons and with created spirits, the second
with the material world and with man. The third book treats
of the foundations of the Christian world, and the fourth of the
inspiration and meaning of Sacred Scripture. This division was
improved upon by writers who lived centuries after the time
of Origen, but the master plan of On the Principles constituted
the material out of which the scientifically perfect theological
syntheses of later times were elaborated. Furthermore, Origen’s
treatise On Prayer, in which he discusses the nature of prayer
as petition and then explains it in function of the Pater Noster,
constitutes one of the great contributions to the literature of
spiritual theology. Tertullian had written previously on prayer,
and St. Cyprian of Carthage, his great admirer imitated this
Latin work. But neither achieved the scientific perfection at­
tained by the great professor of Alexandria.
It was the glory of Origen to have been the first among the
Catholic theologians to have founded a school. So overpower­
ing was his genius, that not only his pupils, like St. Gregory

SACRED THEOLOGY — PATRISTIC PERIOD

221

the Wonder-Worker and Firmilian of Caesarea, and his suc­
cessors in the schools of Alexandria, like St. Dionysius, St.
Athanasius, and Didymus the Blind, followed his teachings,
but actually his literary work was considered as a sort of public
property from which any man might borrow freely. Until the
end of the fourth century there is hardly an ecclesiastical writer
of importance who has not incorporated some of Origen’s
theses in his own writings. At the end of the fourth century
there arose three writers who were destined forever to break
the monopoly which Origen’s teachings enjoyed in the schools
of Christendom. St. Epiphanius, St. Jerome, and Theophilus
of Alexandria attacked the writings of Origen with pitiless
insistence. They pointed out the many flaws in his writings on
the Blessed Trinity, his doctrine on the successive trials which
all men were supposed to undergo, even after death, so that
ultimately all men would attain to the eternal happiness of
heaven, and finally his admitted abuse of the allegorical inter­
pretation of Holy Scripture.
As time went on the ex professo defenders of Origen came
to be'those who held the errors which Origen had taught,
rather than those who utilized the tremendous theological re­
sources which he had made available to Catholic scholars. It
was to this type of “Origenism,” the acceptance of all the
writings and opinions of the master without regard to the
opposition between some of these and Catholic truth, that men
like SS. Methodius, Epiphanius, and Jerome objected. It was
this same “Origenism” which stressed and exaggerated the
errors of the great Alexandrian and added some new ones on
its own account, which Pope Vigilius condemned in 543 and
which the Second Council of Constantinople, the fifth ecu­
menical council, proscribed ten years later.3 These condemna­
tions ended what might be called a definite Origenistic school.
However, they did not prevent future theologians from taking
advantage of the splendid scientific production of Origen him­
self and they were never intended to do so.
‘Denzinger, 303-211 and 223.

■2.-2.1

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

G. Tertullian and St. Cyprian. While Origen was build­
ing up the first scientific synthesis of theology in the east, the
great Tertullian (c. 222) was starting the traditional Latin the­
ological literature. Although it is quite probable that the
Octavius of Minucius Felix antedates the Apologeticus, one of
the earliest and most important of Tertullian’s theological
works and one which shows a sharp similarity to the Octavius,
the turbulent genius of the great African enriched the library
of sacred theology with writings on many phases of Christian
doctrine not touched upon by Minucius. Tertullian’s is the
glory of having first made Latin a definite theological lan­
guage, and of having left his followers a rich scientific
terminology.
From 197 until about 206 Tertullian wrote as an orthodox
Catholic theologian. From the latter time until about 212 he
leaned toward the heresy of the Montanists which he embraced
at the end of that period. His last writings were produced
while he was separated from the Church of God. Yet this
most tragic figure in the history of sacred theology definitely
left later writers in his debt. Ironically enough this brilliant
and harsh genius made some of his most useful contributions
when he attacked the Catholic position after having abandoned
it. His statement of the very doctrine he was opposing has been
of immeasurable value to historians writing on the history of
Catholic teaching, particularly on the sacrament of Penance.
St. Cyprian of Carthage (258) made magnificent use of the
orthodox writings of Tertullian. His principal contribution to
the literature of sacred theology was his teaching on the unity
of the Catholic Church. Despite some confusion and misstate­
ment, St. Cyprian is the first great master in the matter of
ecclesiology.
H. The Writings Against Arianism. The second and
most brilliant period of patristic theological writing began in
the fourth century with the campaign against Arianism. The
greatest leader in this theological warfare was St. Athanasius
(373). Associated with him were some of the most powerful

SACRED THEOLOGY — PATRISTIC PERIOD

22J

and brilliant writers who have ever written on sacred theology.
In the east there were the three great Cappadocians, St. Basil
the Great (379), St. Gregory Nazianzen (399) called the The­
ologian, and St. Gregory of Nyssa (395), the brother of St.
Basil. These men, together with St. Cyril of Jerusalem (386),
the great master of catechetics, explained the revealed teach­
ing of the Blessed Trinity in such a way as to destroy the prin­
ciples upon which Arius had constructed his heresy. The
Cappadocians were most interested in showing that the re­
vealed doctrine, as contained in Holy Scripture and in tradi­
tion required the use of the term “consubstantial” which
entered into the Nicene Creed. They showed that the denial
of this term involved an admission of heretical teaching. SS.
Athanasius and Basil through their writings on the monastic
life contributed much to the foundation of spiritual theology.
In the Latin west, the campaign against the Arians was
carried on by St. Hilary (366) and St. Ambrose (397). The
latter aided greatly in the development of moral theology as
well. St. Jerome (419) wrote brilliantly on dogmatic, moral,
and spiritual topics but made by far his most important con­
tribution in the field of Holy Scripture. To him we owe the
Latin version of Holy Scripture, the Vulgate, recognized as
the official Catholic text for use in preaching the word of
God. His Latin commentaries, and the Greek explanations of
St. John Chrysostom (407) are invaluable for Scripture study.
St. John Chrysostom was the greatest product of the An­
tiochian school of Christian science and his commentaries have
contributed a great deal to the development of sacred theology.
The Alexandrian school produced its last great figure in St.
Cyril of Alexandria (494), the leading figure in the Council
of Ephesus and the arch foe of Nestorianism. It was the priv­
ilege of St. Cyril to have vindicated for our Lady her title of
“Mother of God.”
I. St. Augustine and His Influence. By far the most im­
portant figure in patristic theology was St. Augustine, Bishop
of Hippo (430). His writings have dominated Latin theology

...........................

224

—

——Τ-~ΤΓΗΜ·

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

to an extent which has never been equaled. He wrote on the
mystery of the Blessed Trinity, and, in giving the death stroke
to Arian errors, he gave to sacred theology his masterful anal­
ogies of the revealed doctrine with the created “trinities” of
the spiritual order. In his books On the City of God, he
offered an invaluable explanation of history in the light of
Catholic apologetics. He showed that the Catholic faith was
beneficial to society and to the state, and exposed the hideous
fallacies of those who claimed that the acceptance of this faith
had sealed the doom of the Roman Empire. Furthermore, his
scriptural commentaries express the content of Catholic tradi­
tion with matchless scientific accuracy.
Like most of the other Fathers, St. Augustine’s most impor­
tant teaching was set forth against the heretics of his times.
He examined the problems raised by the objections of the
heretics, and then proceeded to demonstrate the true and tradi­
tional resolution of these problems. He gave particular atten­
tion to the extirpation of three heresies, all of which threatened
the Christians of his native Africa as Arianism and Nestorian­
ism had never done. These three heresies were Manicheanism,
Donatism, and Pelagianism.
Against the first of these three heresies St. Augustine wrote
profound treatises on the nature and the influence of the good,
for its adherents had been deluded into imagining that there
were two independent supreme principles, the one good and
the other evil. It was the work of the great Bishop of Hippo
to show clearly that according to the revealed doctrine which
the Manicheans claimed to accept, there is only one God, and
that all the things, spiritual and material, which He has created
are good in so far as they proceed from Him. Against the
Donatists, who erred about the Church and the sacrament of
Baptism, he wrote to demonstrate the unity of the Church,
the fact that it includes sinners as well as those in the state of
grace, and the absolute efficacy of that Baptism which a man
cannot receive more than once.
The greatest work of St. Augustine, however, was done

SACRED THEOLOGY — PATRISTIC PERIOD

225

against the Pelagian heresy. The positive teachings of the
Pelagians shifted as each previous position was battered down
by the logic of the Bishop of Hippo. But they denied the ab­
solute necessity of divine grace for the attainment of eternal
salvation, for faith, and for the beginning of good works. St.
Augustine brought all the force of his unrivaled scriptural
erudition, and all the power of one of the keenest minds ever
possessed by a human being to bear against this error. He
showed that the process of salvation in every one of its aspects
depends upon that help which God freely gives to man over
and above the exigencies of man’s nature. The terminology
he used to describe grace in its various functions is still em­
ployed in the literature and the lecture halls of sacred theology.
His anti-Pelagian writings made St. Augustine the great doc­
tor of the supernatural order. He distinguished more clearly
and explicitly than any writer before him between what is
due to human nature and what is a free gift of God. To the
attainment of his end he brought out the theology of original
sin and its effects, describing the weakness of human nature
which is consequent upon the fall of Adam. On the other
hand, he had to bring out the first great theological treatment
of predestination, since he had to show that the attainment of
eternal glory on the part of any man was consequent upon
the free gift of God to this man. Here, too, he taught the rela­
tion of man’s free will to divine grace and predestination. In
this field of grace and the supernatural, and the related tracts
on original sin and on providence and predestination, St.
Augustine is the approved exponent of Catholic teaching.
Pope St. Hormisdas declared in 520 that what the Catholic
Church teaches on grace and free will is to be found in the
various books of St. Augustine, and especially those to Hilary
and Prosper. The Second Council of Orange (529), confirmed
by Pope Boniface II and directed against the Semi-Pelagians,
used the very words and sentences of the great Doctor in con­
demning heretical tenets on original sin, grace, and prédestina-

226

J

I

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

tion.4 In his intensely personal writing against Pelagius and
his followers the great Bishop of Hippo had spoken for the
Catholic Church.
On the matter of grace and free will, then, it would not be
entirely true to say that St. Augustine founded a school. The
theological school is, after all, the proponent of a teaching
which is freely discussed in the Catholic Church. Those who
opposed the teaching of St. Augustine as set forth by the mas­
ter himself or by his great disciples, St. Prosper of Aquitaine
(c.226), St. Fulgentius (533), and St. Cesarius of Arles (543),
found their teaching condemned. Thus the Augustinian tradi­
tion in sacred theology was far greater than that of any school,
properly so called. When, over seven hundred years after the
death of St. Augustine, the young and flourishing universities
of Europe demanded a textbook for sacred theology, they
found one in the Four Booths of Sentences by Peter the Lom­
bard. The Sentences were accepted precisely in so far as they
expressed the living Latin theological tradition in the twelfth
century. That tradition was Augustinian. The Sentences, al­
though distinctly a personal work, are pieced together with
excerpts from the Fathers. And there is more of St. Augustine
in them than of all the others together. They use the authority,
the statements, and the terminology of St. Augustine for every
portion of sacred theology.
As a result the literature of western theology which was
developed in the universities dominated by Peter the Lombard
was itself pre-eminently Augustinian. Commentaries like those
of St. Thomas and John Duns Scotus used the authority of
St. Augustine as advantageously as had Peter the Lombard,
although St. Thomas availed himself of other patristic sources
quite freely. Later when the northern universities of Louvain
and Douai were setting forth their great theological treatises,
they made special use of St. Augustine. Sylvius and his fol­
lowers, like Randour and Van Coverden, claimed to be
Thomists and Augustinians. Later still, writers like Noris and
‘Denzinger, 3027 and 174-200.

SACRED THEOLOGY — PATRISTIC PERIOD

227

Berti set forth an Augustinian solution as one of the Catholic
systems for the problem of efficacious grace. This Augustinian
solution placed the efficacy of grace in a moral rather than in
a physical motion. In other words, it claimed for divine efficacious grace an operation along the line of final rather than of
efficient causality.
J. Misuse of St. Augustine’s Teaching. However, the authority of St. Augustine has been abused at certain periods in
die history of sacred theology. Michael Baius of Louvain
claimed the patronage of the Bishop of Hippo for his teaching
which was condemned repeatedly by the Sovereign Pontiffs
and disavowed by the important theologians in the northern
universities. The book which set off the disastrous heresy of
Jansenism was the Augustinus by Cornelius Jansenius, an at­
tempted solution of the problem of grace and free will with
respect to original sin in the light of St. Augustine’s writings.
Subsequent writers in the Jansenistic school claimed that the
teaching of Jansenius and their own books constituted simply
a restatement of St. Augustine’s doctrine.
The competent Augustinian scholars of their own times as
well as those who have come after them recognized very
clearly that the Jansenistic teaching was a travesty on that of
St. Augustine. When Libertus Fromondus and Sinnichius reproached the great Sylvius for having abandoned the teaching of St. Augustine when he condemned the book of Cornelius Jansenius, the old Douai master retorted dryly that they
did not refer to the same “Augustine” as the one he venerated,
for they sponsored an Augustine of Flanders while he followed
an Augustine of Hippo. As a matter of fact the heretics used
citations from the great African Doctor to draw conclusions
utterly at variance with his actual teachings.
In spite of the fact that St. Augustine threw light upon prac­
tically every department of sacred theology, he never set forth
the entire content of science in didactic order. All of his writ­
ings, numerous though they were, were intended as answers
to definite questions and as resolutions of definite heresies. It

!
|
1

I

j
!
J

j
i
j

j

|

228

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

remained for Peter the Lombard to synthesize the Augustinian
theology, using the principles enunciated by the saint himself.
K. Fifth-Century Fathers. Cassian (435), Faustus of Riez
(c.490), and St. Vincent of Lerins (c.450) were among those
who refused to accept St. Augustine’s teaching on grace in its
entirety. Cassian, despite his Semi-Pelagianism, laid the founda­
tion for the literature of spiritual theology in the west with
his reports and explanations on the teaching of the oriental
monks. St. Vincent of Lerins wrote so effectively on the devel­
opment of dogma and of sacred theology that the Vatican
Council incorporated his very statements into the Constitution
Dei Filius. Faustus of Riez exercised a tremendous influence
upon later theology, although the content of his work on grace
is of little value. In working to overcome false teaching on the
matter of predestination he came to oppose the doctrine of
St. Augustine himself. Any attempt to use his teaching on
grace and free will in later times was reproved by the standard
theologians.
Theodoret of Cyr (c. 458) and the pseudo-Dionysius (c. 500)
contributed a great deal to the development of sacred theology.
The former, the last great representative of the Antiochian
school, left sacred theology a valuable explanation of Holy
Scripture and historical works. Due to his unfortunate friend­
ship with the heretic Nestorius, whom he defended against
St. Cyril of Alexandria, his memory has suffered greatly. He
was one of those included in the condemnation of the three
chapters by the Second Council of Constantinople in 553/
Later he corrected the justly suspect views he had expressed at
the time of his controversy with St. Cyril.
Around the end of the fifth century there appeared in the
east some books written in the name of that Dionysius who
had been converted after hearing the sermon of St. Paul in
the Areopagus of Athens. To this day no man knows the
author of these works. Centering about the approach of the
human soul to God, these books stressed the necessity of anal‘ Denzinger, 213-228.

SACRED THEOLOGY — PATRISTIC PERIOD

22Ç

ogy for knowing God in this world, the order among the
spiritual creatures made by God, and the various stages of
purification by which God leads the soul to that contemplation
which is normally characteristic of the highest degrees of
sanctity in this world. On these points this teaching was eagerly
sought out and used by the great medieval theologians. St.
Thomas Aquinas has left us invaluable commentaries on the
pseudo-Dionysius and has utilized this doctrine in the Summa
Theologica itself.
In the west St. Leo the Great (461) was responsible for the
great triumph of orthodoxy over the monophysite heresy at
the Council of Chalcedon (451). His letters made him the
great doctor of the Incarnation in the matter of the hypostatic
union. The same doctrine, as well as that of the Holy See as
a rule of faith, was taught by St. Peter Chrysologus (450).
Nearly a century later St. Leontius of Byzantium (c.531) was
to summarize that same doctrine for the east. St. Gregory the
Great (604) made the outstanding contribution to moral the­
ology in patristic times. Boetius (524) used the equipment of
philosophy to explain the revealed doctrine. He did not utilize
Holy Scripture as extensively as did the other patristic writers,
but preferred to analyze the concepts which entered into sacred
theology. Cassiodorus (570) described the benefits accruing to
mankind through the study of sacred theology. St. Isidore of
Seville (636) is ordinarily reckoned as the last of the Latin
Fathers. A genius of encyclopedic erudition, he summarized
the theological learning of his times and left the way open
for the development of medieval writing.
L. St. John Damascene. The last of the great Greek
Fathers was St. John Damascene (c.753). Although his out­
standing polemic achievement was the defeat of the Iconoclast
heresy, he contributed more to the development of sacred the­
ology through his organization of the science than through
any treatment of a particular section. His masterwork is the
Source of Knowledge. In the first section of this work he listed
and explained the definitions of the terms used in sacred the-

liiiniMiMiι*ι «lititfi,

230

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

ology. He made valuable capital of the definitions and the
conclusions of Aristotle. In the second portion he sets off one
hundred and three distinct erroneous doctrines, contradictory
to Christian revelation, which had made their appearance be­
tween the first years of the Church and the middle of the
eighth century. But it is the third section, the work On the
Orthodox Faith which really has earned for St. John Damas­
cene the high place he holds in the history of sacred theology.
Arranged as a sort of commentary on the Nicene Creed, the
work offers a complete outline of Christian revelation. It is
divided into four books, as the volume On the Principles by
Origen had been before it.
In the first book St. John Damascene treats of the unity and
the trinity in God. The second treats of the works of God. The
third deals with the Incarnation, and the fourth with those
mysteries and doctrines which are mentioned at the end of the
Nicene Creed. It ends with a treatise on the last things. Among
other teachings, the famous double definition of prayer given
in the third book On the Orthodox Faith became a theological
commonplace. St. Thomas Aquinas incorporated this defini­
tion into his Summa Theologica and made all his teaching on
prayer depend upon it. It is evident that the division of St.
John Damascene influenced that of Peter the Lombard, and
through him the organization of all the theology of the west.

H

i

CHAPTER

12

THE DEVELOPMENT OF SACRED
THEOLOGY—THE MEDIEVAL
PERIOD
The medieval or part-patristic theologians fall naturally into
three classes. There are the early scholastics and the pre­
scholastics, those who served as the channels by which patristic
thought came to the great theologians and the universities of
the Middle Ages. The second group embraces the great masters
who taught during the golden age of the University of Paris.
The third includes those who followed the great scholastics,
either continuing their tradition or going off into those nomi­
nalistic theories which had a great deal to do with the origin
of Protestantism.
A. The Pre-Scholastics. The first group of theologians
played a great part in the development of the great scholastics’
doctrine. The writings of St. Thomas Aquinas contain a tre­
mendous number of citations from these earlier medieval
writers. In his Catena Aurea as well as in the other writings
he cites men like Paschasius Radbertus and St. Bede on the
same level and to the same effect as the patristic authors them­
selves. Modern investigation into the sources of Peter the
Lombard shows that in his Commentaries as well as in the
Four Booths of Sentences he makes liberal use of earlier scho­
lastics, sometimes incorporating considerable portions of their
works into his own.
St. Bede the Venerable (735) is one of the first and the most
331

>

\

232

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

important among these pre-scholastic writers. His chief con­
tribution to the development of sacred theology is made in his
explanation of Holy Scripture. Alcuin (804) was the principal
figure in the schools of Charlemagne, and as such prepared the
way for the great universities which developed out of the
Carolingian schools. His authority was greatly appreciated by
St. Thomas, although, like that of most of the writers of this
period, his scientific method was quite primitive. Rabanus
Maurus (856), the disciple of Alcuin, carried on his master’s
work of encouraging theological studies in his native Germany.
His teachings were widely quoted by subsequent theologians.
Several controversies on sacred doctrine aided the develop­
ment of sacred theology in the ninth century. Aeneas of Paris
(870) and the monk Ratramnus (c. 865) wrote against the
schismatic Photius of Constantinople. Alcuin had to attack and
destroy a kind of ninth-century Nestorianism in Spain, put
forward by Elipand of Toledo (809) and Felix Urgel (818),
as did Agobard of Lyons (840).
The monk Gotteschalc (869) taught an heretical doctrine
on predestination, holding that the predestination of the saints
to eternal happiness was entirely similar to that of the evil to
eternal death. Like Jansenism in later years, the doctrine of
Gotteschalc was an abuse of St. Augustine’s teachings. Hincmar of Rheims (882) took a leading part in the attack on
Gotteschalc, who was finally condemned by several synods. In
this controversy Hincmar was joined by Rabanus and St. Remy
of Lyons (875). At the suggestion of Hincmar the erudite and
brilliant John Scotus Erigena (c. 880) entered into the con­
troversy. However, his literary contribution was even more
unfortunate than those writings which Hincmar had opposed.
He in his turn was censured by Prudentius of Troyes (861) and
Florus of Lyons (c. 860), both competent theologians. Scotus
Erigena possessed one of the most remarkable minds of his
day, as attested by his ingenious but erratic treatise De Divi­
sione Naturae. However, he was not sufficiently concerned
with traditional Catholic doctrine to be an important figure

SACRED THEOLOGY — N1EDIEVAL PERIOD

233

in the history of sacred theology. His rash hypotheses actually
endangered the cause of speculative theology during the ninth
century.
The most important among the ninth-century controversies
was that on the Blessed Eucharist. Paschasius Radbertus (c. 865)
and Ratramnus both wrote De Corpore et Sanguine Domini.
Radbertus insisted upon the identity of the historical and the
eucharistie body of our Lord in the sacrament, while Ratram­
nus and Rabanus Maurus stressed the symbolism of the sacra­
ment without denying the real presence.
In the same century Jonas of Orleans (842) brought the west
a treatise against that Iconoclasm which had overrun the
Byzantine Empire during the previous century. Amalarius of
Metz (c. 850) gave the medieval world its textbook in liturgical
theology. Walifrid Strabo (849) and Haymo of Halberstadt
(853) wrote exegetical works and supported Paschasius Rad­
bertus in his controversy on the Blessed Eucharist. This pre­
scholastic medieval period ended with the writings of Ratherius
of Verona (974), Gerbert of Aurillac, who became Pope Syl­
vester II (1003), Fulbert of Chartres (1028), founder of the
great school of that city, Hugh of Langres (1051), Guitmund
of Aversa (1095), St. Peter Damian (1072), the great propo­
nent of ecclesiastical sanctity who is listed among the Doctors
of the Church, and Lanfranc (1089), the master of St. Anselm.
The heretical teaching on the Eucharist set forth by Berengarius of Tours (1088) occasioned an elaborate scientific treat­
ment of this sacrament at the end of this period.
The pre-scholastics performed a notable service in taking
the Christian doctrine, as it is contained in Holy Scripture
and in tradition, and expressing that doctrine in the language
and for the minds of the new western peoples. They accom­
plished their mission for the most part in writing the simplest
sort of didactic treatises, or in monographs destined to crush a
dangerous and crude misconception of Christian teaching. Their
work suffers in comparison with that of the great writers who
followed them, but these latter, with better and more complete

234

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

literary equipment, actually carried on the work to which the
earlier theologians had devoted themselves. The great scholas­
tics counted the works of their predecessors as valuable re­
sources, and they used them freely in the construction of those
splendid literary monuments which are the glory of the
medieval universities.
Work on the earlier scholastic writers is far from complete.
In recent years the investigations of men like Grabmann,
Longpré, and Landgraf have made the writings of the less
widely known among the earlier scholastics available to the
general public for the first time. Only in the light of these
earlier works can we understand the historic background of
the scholastic masterpieces, the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas.
B. St. Anselm. Generally counted as the first among
these early scholastics is St. Anselm of Canterbury (1109).
While he did not attempt to organize sacred doctrine as a
whole, St. Anselm treated various portions of sacred theology
with a profundity and scientific maturity which had never been
achieved by his predecessors since the days of the great Fathers.
He wrote on the motive of the Incarnation, on grace and free
will, on the Blessed Trinity, and on the proofs for the existence
of God. It is in this last field that his influence has been felt
most in sacred theology. After having written the masterpiece
he called the Monologion in which the traditional proofs of
God’s existence were set forth, he decided to attempt an easier
and simpler demonstration. This, as expounded in the Proslo­
gion v/as what we know today as the ontological proof for
the existence of God. His first premise was that God is con­
ceived as One who is superior to all others, One greater than
whom nothing could exist. Then he reasoned that such a being
must possess existence for, if it were nonexistent it would cer­
tainly be surpassed by a being which actually possessed it.
Consequently according to this reasoning God must exist.
The monk Guanilo of Marmoutiers was keen enough to
recognize the fallacy in this reasoning as soon as it had ap­
peared. He saw that it involved a totally illegitimate transitus

SACRED THEOLOGY — MEDIEVAL PERIOD

235

from the ideal to the real order. The being greater than whom
nothing could be conceived must possess existence, as it exists in
the mind, but there is no guarantee in this argument that such
a being exists in the order of reality. The great St. Thomas
Aquinas did little more than repeat the criticism of Guanilo,
merely adding that it is not at all certain that the idea of God
as depicted by St. Anselm is the basic concept which men
universally possess.
C. Other Twelfth-Century Writers. St. Anselm’s dis­
ciple, Anselm of Laon (1117), was spectacularly successful as
a teacher in his own time. He is the author of the earliest
organized compendium of sacred theology which we know to
have been written during the Middle Ages, the Sententiae.
Gilbert of Poitiers (1154) and John of Salisbury (1180) are
the two best-known products of the school of Chartres, a very
important center of theological and literary activity during the
twelfth century. John of Salisbury’s influence was literary
rather than strictly theological. Gilbert was condemned by the
Council of Rheims in 1148 for teaching false doctrine. Other
representatives of the Chartres school, such as Bernard of
Chartres (1129), Thierry of Chartres (1155), and William of
Conches (1145), were prone to misstate Catholic teaching.
Bernard of Tours (c. 1155) inaugurated the pantheistic teaching
which was to do much harm in the universities in later years.
D. Abelard. By far the most important center of studies
at this time was in Paris, and the theological life of this city
was dominated in the early years of the twelfth century by
two men, William of Champeaux (1122) and Peter Abelard
(1142). William’s personal writings are of much more interest
to the history of philosophy than to that of sacred theology,
for the individual work with which his name and reputation
are most intimately associated is the defense of realism against
the nominalism of Roscellin and the criticism of Abelard.
Theology thinks of him chiefly as the founder of the great
school of St. Victor which was destined to give so many bril­
liant theologians to the service of the Church.

236

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

The brilliant, turbulent, and tragic Peter Abelard influenced
the literature and the teaching of sacred theology as few men
have ever done. His rash dialectics and his evident anxiety to
shock and impress all with whom he came in contact led him
to definite misinterpretations of sacred doctrine. St. Bernard
of Clairvaux (1153) was too robust and keen a defender of
the faith to allow these errors to go unchallenged. Consequently
Abelard found himself condemned by the Council of Sens,
and the condemnation was confirmed by Rome.
The work which troubled many of Abelard’s contempo­
raries, but which contributed a great deal to the advancement
of sacred theology was known as Sic et Non. In this work he
took one hundred and fifty important questions in theology,
and then listed opinions of the Fathers for and against each
resolution. It was a bold venture. Some of his contemporaries
accused him of showing contempt for patristic teaching in
trying to demonstrate that the Fathers actually contradicted
one another. Actually Abelard’s method was faulty. But he
merely opened these questions for discussion, so that out of
this conflict of explanations the true theological conclusion
might be found in each case. To Abelard, and to those who
have profited by the scholastic method which he initiated, the
clash of opinions has been a means to an end, the certain ap­
prehension of truth. Abelard saw in the conflicting statements
of patristic writers a fact which admitted of and demanded
explanation. Merely to point out contradictory teachings was
to do comparatively little for the advance of sacred theology.
But in his own writings and especially through the works of
the men he trained, Abelard showed very clearly that he did
not regard the indication of conflicting statements as the ulti­
mate end of his studies. The movement he began was to bear
fruit in the works of Peter the Lombard and his other stu­
dents, and through them to form the method of Latin theology.
The first of the medieval canonists, Gratian (1155?)» applied
this same method to canon law and thus aided in the develop­
ment of moral theology.

SACRED THEOLOGY — MEDIEVAL PERIOD

237

Abelard wrote summaries of the entire content of sacred
theology. More important than these, however, are the Summae
and the Books of Sentences left by his pupils and successors.
There was no work in scholastic theology properly so called
which did not feel his influence. As a matter of fact the very
method which Abelard gave to the Church would very cer­
tainly have been discredited because of the naïve cocksureness
of its author had it not been for the excellent works in which
his own pupils utilized his procedure for the proper end of
sacred theology.
E. St. Bernard and the Victorines. The name of Abelard
is inseparably joined in the history of sacred theology with
that of his great opponent, St. Bernard of Clairvaux, whom
we honor as a Doctor of the Catholic Church. The most in­
fluential man of his time, and one of the most forceful char­
acters ever to have served the Church, the literary influence
of St. Bernard was brought to bear principally upon the field
of spiritual theology. His writings had the happy effect of
bringing the mystical teaching into close contact with moral
and dogma. His intensely personal love for our Lord’s hu­
manity, and the stress he placed upon devotion to our Lady
proved to be dominating factors in forming the corporate
spirituality of the Middle Ages. Less influential, but still tre­
mendously important were the spiritual and theological writ­
ings of the School of St. Victor, founded by St. Bernard’s
friend, William of Champeaux. Hugh of St. Victor (1141) and
Richard of St. Victor (1173) are the chief representatives of
this school.
F. Peter the Lombard. By far the most important of the
twelfth-century theologians for his influence on the history of
sacred theology was Peter the Lombard (1160). As Cayre re­
marks, the Lombard exhibited neither the profundity of St.
Anselm, the subtlety of Abelard, nor the originality of Hugh
of St. Victor. Nevertheless, this man was destined to supply
the world with the most spectacularly successful theological
textbook in history. Despite certain incidental errors, the Four

230

i

I

SACRED THEOLOGY — MEDIEVAL PERIOD

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Books of Sentences constitute a work which was definitely and
appreciably traditional. The terminology of the Fathers, and
in particular that of St. Augustine which dominates the vol­
ume, formed a welcome relief after the somewhat confused
verbiage of contemporary dialecticians. The University of Paris
used the Four Books of Sentences as a basic text in sacred the­
ology from the middle of the twelfth century. It was in use
throughout the university world until the end of the sixteenth
century. Thus, during the period when the most distinguished
theologians of the Catholic Church lived and worked, the
Four Books of Sentences were in use. The strongly traditional
nature of the Sentences brought the terminology and the men­
tality of subsequent works into a more direct line with the
thought and the expression of the Fathers. Where the school
of Chartres and even the Victorines were prone to employ
their own distinctive methods and disparate approaches to
theological problems, the literature after the Lombard was.
fused as one organic expression of Catholic thought. While
the Lombard and his commentators were by no means in
agreement on every point in the science of sacred theology,
the terminology and the process of sacred theology were so
unified that it was able to progress more perfectly after the
Sentences had been written.
The first of the Books of Sentences deals with the Trinity
and Unity of God. The second treats of creation, the angels,
the work of the six days, and man. The treatise on man in­
cludes the teaching on original sin and grace. The third book
deals with the Incarnation, the virtues, sins, and command­
ments. The fourth book treats of the sacraments, the sacramentals, and the last things. This perfection of the order
according to which St. John Damascene had disposed his
books On the Orthodox Faith was thus secured for Latin the­
ology as a whole. The great St. Thomas Aquinas improved
this order in the Summa Theologica, but it was definitely an
improvement of an already existing and scientifically correct
disposition.

239

The time of Peter the Lombard abounded in these ordered
expositions of all sacred theology. Between 1141 and 1148 a
follower of Gilbert of Poitiers wrote a volume called Sententia
Divinitatis. A Summa Sententiarum appeared in the middle
of the twelfth century. Gaudulph of Bologna (1155?), Peter of
Poitiers (1205) also wrote works which utilized the resources
of Peter the Lombard. Peter of Poitiers was the first important
commentator of the Lombard. The controversial theological
literature of the time came from Alan of Lille (1202), Peter
of Blois (1200), and Praepositinus (1210). Petrus Comestor
(1178) and Petrus Cantor (1197) worked in scriptural theol­
ogy. Roland Bandinelli, afterward Pope Alexander III (1181),
carried on the work of Gratian in canon law and thus in­
directly in the field of sacred theology.
G. The Early Thirteenth-Century Theologians of Paris.
The most spectacular advance in sacred theology was that
accomplished during the thirteenth century. The men who
brought about that advance were teachers at the great univer­
sities, and in particular at the University of Paris. During the
first years of the thirteenth century, that is up until the scho­
lastic year 1229-1230, the faculty of sacred theology in the
University of Paris was composed entirely of secular priests.
In that year Roland of Cremona, a Dominican (1259), took
one of the chairs and from that time until the end of the
medieval period the religious, and particularly the Friars
Minor and the Friars Preachers, played the most important
part in the literary productions of the faculty, even while the
membership of that body remained predominantly secular.
William of Auvergne (1249), Robert Courcon (1218), Stephen
Langton (1228), later Archbishop of Canterbury in England,
and Philip de Greve (1236) were among the most prominent
masters during the early years. These men were excellent tech­
nical theologians, well informed in Greek and Arab philos­
ophy, and yet in no way tempted to subordinate Catholic doc­
trine to the dicta of the philosophers. The brilliant Simon of
Tournai (c. 1219) was one of their number. The later univer-

"\

24O

l·

'i.

if ·

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

sity legends charged him with an impious arrogance which
certainly does not appear in his authentic writings. William
of Auxerre (1231) and Robert of Sorbonne (1274) who
founded the famed theological school named after him were
potent factors in the advance of the science in those times.
William of St. Amour (1272) and Gerard of Abbeville (1271)
were remarkable more for their attacks on the religious than
for any theological excellence.
The secular masters as a whole were, however, competent
and even brilliant individual scholars. As a group they had
made the University of Paris the capital of the intellectual
world, and had constituted the theological faculty of that uni­
versity as the most influential group of scholars in history.
They wrote well, and added to their commentaries on the
Four BooJ^s of Sentences their own magnificent syntheses of
Catholic theology. Still, because of their very position as indi­
vidual masters, they did not form schools nor establish definite
theological traditions. That function was reserved for the reli­
gious, particularly the Franciscans and Dominicans who were
to take their places in the already renowned faculty.
H. Alexander of Hales and the Franciscan Writers.
The first, in order of time, among the great religious doctors
of the university was the English Franciscan, Alexander of
Hales (1245). He wrote a Summa Theologica embodying all
the advances in sacred theology up to his time. It was divided
into four books. The first of these treated of God, the second
of the creatures God has made, the third dealt with Christ
and with the virtues, and the fourth with the sacraments and
the last things. He followed the tradition of St. Augustine as
it had come down particularly through St. Anselm and Hugh
of St. Victor, and thus he stands as the founder of the Fran­
ciscan theological tradition. That tradition was carried on and
developed by John of La Rochelle (1245), Odo Rigaldus (1275),
and William of Meliton (1260) who was charged with the
work of completing the text of the Summa Theologica actually
left unfinished by Alexander himself. The Franciscan theo-

k

ί

logical tradition, however, reached its epitome in the works of
St. Bonaventure (1274) and John Duns Scotus (1308).
I. St. Bonaventure. St. Bonaventure, the Seraphic Doctor
of the Catholic Church, gave definitive form to the Franciscan
theological tradition during the last years of the thirteenth
century. His tremendous influence on spiritual theology, the
scientific statement of Franciscan spirituality was expressed in
his masterpiece the Itinerarium Mentis ad Deum, as well as in
his writings on the life of St. Francis. The highly traditional
and Augustinian dogmatic and moral theology of St. Bonaven­
ture is found in his commentary on the Four Booths of Sen­
tences, his Disputed Questions, and the Breviloquium. This
latter book is divided into seven parts. In the first the Seraphic
Doctor deals with the revealed teaching on the Triune God.
The second part treats of creatures, the third of the corruption
of sin, the fourth of the Incarnation, the fifth of the grace of
the Holy Ghost, the sixth of the sacraments, and the last of the
state of the final judgment. His treatise De Reductione Artium
ad Theologiam is one of the outstanding contributions to the­
ological methodology.
J. St. Albert the Great. The outstanding Dominican
leaders on the Faculty of Sacred Theology in the university
were St. Albert the Great (1280) and his pupil St. Thomas
Aquinas (1274). St. Albert inaugurated a tradition in Parisian
theology by using the works and the definitions of Arab phi­
losophers like Averroès to further his task of explaining sacred
doctrine. The older secular writers for the most part, and the
Franciscans after them, had shown a marked aversion for the
writings of these Mohammedans. St. Albert was anxious to use
these writings, to strip them of the errors that covered them,
and to make the scientific and philosophical resources of the
Arabs available to Catholic students. He is best known for
his marvelous philosophical and scientific learning, and for
the use to which he put this learning in sacred theology.
K. St. Thomas Aquinas. St Albert’s pupil and successor,
St. Thomas Aquinas, is the most important figure in the his-

Μ'^~"'“ίΜί

ί'Τΐιίϊΐ··

242

~ίΐ-ΐιΤΎ·...^ίΑ.

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

ί

tory of sacred theology. Historically he may be said to have
accomplished for the Dominican tradition of St. Albert the
Great what John Duns Scotus was to do some years later for
the Franciscan school of Alexander and St. Bonaventure. But
this historical parallel would give only a very inadequate no­
tion of the real function of St. Thomas. Today the study of
these other masters is important from the standpoint of the
history of sacred theology. But the theologians of the world
use the writings of St. Thomas as texts. The central stream
of theological tradition which came down from St. Augustine
passed through Peter the Lombard to St. Thomas. The didactic
literature of sacred theology today uses the works of St. Thomas
as classical sources both for their terminology and their basic
conclusions. His writings occupy a place apart in the literature
of scholastic theology.
L. Followers of St. Bonaventure. St. Bonaventure is said to
have been an intimate personal friend of his great Dominican
confrere. But the men who had studied under St. Bonaventure
were among the most bitter opponents of St. Thomas’ theology.
John Peckham (1292), the Archbishop of Canterbury, William
de La Mare (1298), author of the first anti-Thomistic theolog­
ical treatise, the Correctorium Fratris Thomae, and Cardinal
Matthew of Aquasparta (1302) were all students of St. Bona­
venture, as was Richard of Middletown (1307?) who taught
at Oxford. This latter University had developed a strong Fran­
ciscan teaching of its own under Bishop Robert Greathead
(1253), Thomas of York (1260), and William of Ware
(c. 1270). Peter of John Olivi (1298), the Blessed Raymond
Lull (1315), Roger Bacon (1294), and Roger Marston (1298)
were Franciscan theologians who operated outside their tradi­
tional school. Some of Olivi’s theses were condemned by the .
Council of Vienne.
M. John Duns Scotus. However, the man in whose writ­
ings the Franciscan theological tradition crystallized and found
its best expression was John Duns Scotus. St. Bonaventure had
been the great scholastic rival of St. Thomas in the Faculty of

i

Μ
t

I

.V-;

SACRED THEOLOGY — MEDIEVAL PERIOD

243

Sacred Theology at Paris. His immediate disciples were out­
standing in their reaction against the distinctive systematic
theses of the Angelic Doctor. But when the time came for the
theologians of the Order to form a school, that school bore
the name of Scotus, and propounded his system.
Scotus’ principal literary work is the formidable Commen­
taria Oxoniensis, an explanation of the Four BooJ^s of Sen­
tences written during his professorship at Oxford. There is
another commentary, the Reportata Parisiensia which consists
in the class notes of his students at the foremost medieval uni­
versity. In these, and in the brilliant De Primo Principio he
drew up a system which retains its scientific vigor and value
even today. He differs from St. Thomas in practically every
part of sacred theology. However, a good many of these differ­
ences arise from the variant definitions used by the two men.
An instance in point is, of course, their teaching on the prac­
tical character of sacred theology. Using two distinct concepts
of practicality, Scotus reasoned that sacred theology is pre­
eminently a practical science while the Angelic Doctor held
it to be more speculative than practical.
The outstanding thesis of the Subtle Doctor was his doctrine
on the Immaculate Conception. In virtue of his proofs and
explanations, universities which had previously been at least
neutral on the matter came to require from candidates to their
chairs of sacred theology a profession of acceptance for this
teaching.
N. Successors of St. Thomas. The Dominican masters
contemporary with St. Albert and St. Thomas were, as a
whole, not identified with their tradition. Thus Roland of
Cremona (1271), John of St. Giles (1258), and Hugh of St.
Caro (1263) as teachers at Paris all taught the so-called Augus­
tinian system, used by the greater number of the secular and
Franciscan masters. This Augustinian system consisted in the
use of St. Augustine’s philosophy and philosophical termi­
nology in expressing theological conclusions. At Oxford the
Dominicans Robert Bacon (1248), Richard Fishacre (1248),

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

and Robert Kilwardby (1279) followed the same trend. The
last, a Cardinal and Archbishop of Canterbury, was a bitter
opponent of Thomism. St. Raymond of Pennafort (1275), who
contributed to the progress of moral theology, is not connected
with the Thomistic school.
However, the influence of the Thomistic doctrine was not
long in making itself felt. Peter of Tarentasia (1276), later
Pope Innocent V, used some of St. Thomas’ teachings in his
own writings. Ulric of Argentina (1275) also approached the
Thomistic tradition, as did the brilliant Augustinians Aegidius
Colonna or Giles of Rome (1316) and James of Viterbo (1307),
the author of one of the earliest treatises on the Catholic
Church. The Cistercian, Humbert of Prully (1298), and the
Carmelite, Gerard of Bologna (1317), also manifested strong
Thomistic tendencies.
John of Paris (1306) made one of the earliest explicit apol­
ogies for St. Thomas, his fellow Dominican, when he replied
to William de la Mare’s Correctorium. Ptolemy of Lucca (1327)
completed the text of the Angelic Doctor’s De Regimine Principum, while Hugh of Billon (1298) and William of Hozun
(1297) wrote in defense of Thomism.
O. The Secular Masters. Henry of Ghent (1293), Peter
of Auvergne (1304), and Godfrey of Fontaines (1306) were
the last representatives of the great independent secular tradi­
tion at Paris. They were frequently used and cited by the
sixteenth- and seventeenth-century theologians.
P. The Nominalists. With the fourteenth century a group
of writers who are grouped as nominalists had an unfortunate
effect upon the development of sacred theology. The precursor
of this group was the Franciscan, Peter Aureolus (1322). Its
most influential figures were another Franciscan, William
Occam (c. 1349), and
Dominican Durandus of St. Pourcain
(1334). Francis Mayron (1327), a Scotist, favored the develop­
ment of nominalism, while Gregory of Rimini (1358), an
author much cited by the theologians of later centuries, mani­
fested strong nominalistic tendencies.

SACRED THEOLOGY — MEDIEVAL PERIOD

Nominalism was a sort of “modernism” in the fourteenth
century, put forward as a “modern way” by the masters of
Paris themselves. The men who taught it had lost the funda­
mental spirit of sacred theology, and had grown to consider
the hairline distinctions of the great theologians as mere words,
devoid of any objective meaning. Naturally, the men who mul­
tiplied distinctions for the sake of manifesting their own in­
tellectual acumen rather than to explain accurately the con­
tent of divine public revelation were primarily responsible for
the appearance of this school. The school itself, in its reaction
against the great works of the past, represented a definite
lowering of theological standards. Those who reacted against
meaningless distinctions came unfortunately to reject even those
which were requisite for the proper elucidation of Catholic
dogma. In so doing they presented the world with an inferior
expression of Christian doctrine and prepared the way for
heretics like Luther whose misconstruction of this doctrine
degenerated into heresy.
John Buridan (c. 1358) was largely responsible for implant­
ing nominalism in the University of Paris. His disciple, Marsilius of Inghem (c. 1396), brought the movement with him to
the University of Heidelberg.
Peter of Ailly (1420) and John Gerson (1429) were by all
means the most important of those affected by nominalism at
the University of Paris. Both of these writers miscalculated the
nature of that authority which Jesus Christ gave to his Church.
They taught that a general council is actually superior to the
Roman Pontiff in authority and hoped by this solution to
resolve the problems which faced the Church in their day.
However, Gerson, a voluminous writer, contributed toward the
advance of moral and spiritual theology.
Q. Late Pre-Tridentine Writers. During the fourteenth
century the great traditional schools of theology continued to
advance. Hervé de Nedellec (1323), John of Naples (c. 1336),
and Peter of Palude (1342), all Dominicans, did much to ad­
vance Thomistic doctrine. John de Bassolis (1347), a Francis-

246

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

can, was studied assiduously at Louvain and Douai during the
seventeenth century as an authentic exponent of Scotus’ teach­
ing. Peter of Aquila (1370) was another outstanding four­
teenth-century Scotist. Peter Tartaretus (c. 1495) contributed to
the advancement of Scotism during the ’fifteenth century, as
did Nicholas de Orbellis (1455) and Stephent Brulefer (1483).
The pre-Tridentine Scotistic writing may be said to have
reached its highest point of perfection in the works of Trombeta (1518) and Lychetus (1520). The greatest figures among
the pre-Tridentine Thomists were Capreolus (1444) and Turrecremata (1468). Thomas de Vio of Gaeta, who has gone
down in history under the name of Cajetan (1534), and Syl­
vester Ferrariensis (1526) bring us to the dawn of modern
theology. Their commentaries give us answers to the difficulties
raised by the first Protestants. Cajetan’s commentary on the
Summa Theologica was the first of its kind, while Ferrarien­
sis’ explanations of the Summa Contra Gentiles is still printed
with the standard critical edition.
Outside the Thomistic and Scotistic schools, there were many
influential theologians. Among these were the Carmelites
Robert Walsingham (c. 1310), Gerard of Bologna (1317), John
Baconthorp (1348), Francis Bacon (1372), and Thomas Netter
Waldensis (1430). The latter was often used by post-Tridentine
writers. Thomas Bradwardine (1349) included so many in­
accuracies in his teaching that he has been considered a fore­
runner of Protestantism. His contemporary, Richard Fitzralph,
Archbishop of Armagh (1360), was hardly more successful.
In Spain Raymond of Sabunde (1437) and Alfonsus Tostatus
(1455), the latter a Bishop of Avila, were outstanding for their
erudition in sacred theology. In Germany, Gabriel Biel (1495),
the Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa (1464), and Dionysius the
Carthusian (1471) were important figures. The latter was by
all means the most influential independent theologian of the
fifteenth century.
ί

^.Λ.

CHAPTER

13

THE DEVELOPMENT OF SACRED
THEOLOGY — THE POST-TRIDEN­
TINE THEOLOGIANS
The reaction against the Protestant heresy, manifest in the
condemnation of Luther’s teaching by Leo X in the Bull
Exsurge Domine of June 15, 1520, and in the ecumenical
council of Trent (1543-1565), produced tremendous effects in
the development of sacred theology. First of all it destroyed
the influence of that nominalism which had done such harm
to this study during the preceding century and a half. After
the revolt of Luther this unscientific and unsatisfactory treat­
ment of sacred doctrine was discontinued. Second, it produced
the gradual departmentalization of sacred theology. There had
been treatises on moral theology, on fundamental dogma, and
on ascetics before the time of the reformation. But, after the
council of Trent, the organization of sacred theology began
to take the didactic form which it possesses today.
A. The Controversialists. The immediate reaction against
the errors of Luther and Calvin naturally developed where the
heresy was strongest. Among those who wrote as shock troops
for Catholic truth in Germany were John Eck (1543), Albert
Pighius (1542), Frederick Gnau (1552), John Cochlaeus (1552),
Jerome Emser (1527), Frederick Staphylus (1564), John Gropper (1559), the Dominican, von Hoogstraeter (1527), and St.
Peter Canisius, S.J. (1597). Louvain was represented by Adrian
of Utrecht (Pope Adrian VI, 1523), John Driedo (1535), James
*47

. ........... - ......

BUS

248

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Latomus (1546), Ruard Tapper (1559), Judocus Ravesteyn,
often cited as Tiletanus (1570), John Hessels (1566), John Molanus (1585), John Lens (1593), and William Lindanus (1588).
The newly organized University of Douai played a consid­
erable part in this first assault on the Protestant heresies.
Richard Smith (1563), of Worcester, England, was an excellent
theological controversialist, as were his fellow members of the
Douai faculty, Matthew Galenus (1573) and Matthias Bossemius (1599). The traditions of Catholic Oxford and Cambridge
appear in the controversial works of Cardinal William Allen
(1594), St. John Fisher (1535), Cardinal Reginald Pole (1558),
Gregory Martin (1582), who did the principal work on the
Douai version of Holy Scripture, Stephen Gardiner (1553),
and Nicholas Sanders, S.J. (1581). Thomas Stapleton (1598)
was the most influential theologian of this group. His work
was carried on by Matthew Kellison (1641) and by another
Richard Smith (1655) who became Bishop of Chalcedon and
Vicar Apostolic for England.
In France the outstanding controversialists were Claudius
d’Espence (1571), Claudius de Sainctes, O.S.A. (1591), Francis
Feuardentius, O.F.M. (1610), Nicholas Coeffeteau, O.P. (1623),
and Davy du Perron (1618). Their work was continued by
Cardinal Richelieu (1642), Francis Veronius (1649), and by
Bossuet (1704). In Spain the Catholic cause was upheld by
Alphonsus Ruiz de Virues, O.S.B. (1545), Peter Soto, O.P.
(1563), Alphonsus de Castro (1558), Andrew de Vega, O.F.M.
(1560), Didacus de Paiva de Andrada (1578), and Martin
Perez de Ayvla (1566), Dominic Soto, O.P. (1560), and Mel­
chior Cano, O.P. (1560). Cardinal Hosius (1579) wrote in de­
fense of the faith in Poland. In Italy the opposition to Prot­
estantism was carried on by St. Robert Bellarmine (1621),
Ambrose Catherinus (1533), Thomas Bozius, the Oratorian
(1610), as well as by Cajetan. St. Robert’s Controversies con­
stitute the outstanding individual defense of the Church in
those days. His works dealt with every point of Catholic doc­
trine which had been attacked by Reformers.

^MûSîra^âi^mâteâîg^S^^MK

SACRED THEOLOGY— POST-TRIDENTINE THEOLOGIANS

249

This formidable controversial literature naturally tended to
advance sacred theology as a science. Since the Protestants had
set forth a body of teaching centering around the notions of
grace and the supernatural, it was to be expected that there
should be some diversity of opinion on these points among the
Catholic authors themselves. The scientific elaboration of the
Catholic position as set forth in the works of the great con­
troversialists actually resulted in disputes.
B. Baianism and Jansenism. The first of these originated
at Louvain with the writing of Michael Baius (1589). Baius
despised the scholastic theologians and attempted to base his
teaching almost entirely upon the writings of St. Augustine.
Much as he read St. Augustine, however, Baius’ own literary
productions showed that he understood very little of St. Augus­
tine’s message. Baius’ own teaching was heretical, and it was
condemned four times by the Holy See. His own faculty of
sacred theology in Louvain took the lead in opposing the
teaching of Baius. Ruard Tapper, the most influential of the
sixteenth-century Louvain Doctors, Driedo, Tiletanus, and Lens
were bitter opponents of Baianism. Some sympathizers with
Baius remained, however, on the Louvain faculty for genera­
tions. One of these, Cornelius Jansen (1638), the Bishop of
Ypres, wrote a book of spurious Augustinian doctrine. The
teaching of that book was condemned as heretical. Those who
continued to accept the doctrine of Jansenius constituted an
heretical sect which was important until the early nineteenth
century. All of the important theologians since the early part
of the seventeenth century exposed the fallacies of Jansenism.
C. Thomist-Molinist Controversy. The second dispute of
importance was that between the Thomists and the Molinists,
the controversy which reached its climax in the famous “Con­
gregationes de Auxiliis” (1598-1605). Almost every one of the
important post-Tridentine theologians made some contribution
toward the solution of this problem. The discussion began in
the north when the Faculty of Sacred Theology at the Univer­
sity of Louvain censured certain propositions taught by Leonard

25Ο

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Lcssius, S.J. (1623), in 1586. Two years later the same state­
ments were censured much more severely by the theological
faculty at Douai. In Spain the teachings of Molina (1600) were
denounced by Dominic Bannez (1604). This debate was even­
tually carried to Rome where, in 1607, Pope Paul V forbade
the condemnation of either the Molinistic or the Thomistic
position until such time as the Apostolic See would see fit to
terminate the discussion.
D. Early Jesuit Theologians. In general the great theo­
logians of the Society of Jesus taught either the system of
Molina or some modification of it. Apart from Molina him­
self, the most prominent Jesuit theologians of this golden age
were Francis Suarez (1617), Gabriel Vasquez (1604), Gregory
of Valentia (1603), Cardinal John De Lugo (1660), and, of
course, St. Robert Bellarmine. Suarez was one of the most in­
fluential theologians in all the history of the Catholic Church.
He is one of the few men to have been cited universally, that
is by theologians of all schools and in every department of
sacred doctrine. Most of his extensive writing is in the form
of commentaries on the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas
Aquinas. However, his acceptance of the basic Molinistic posi­
tion brought him to differ with the Angelic Doctor in many
of his theses. Modern research has made the influence of Suarez
in the history of sacred theology still clearer. Vasquez and
Valentia were brilliant commentators of St. Thomas. The
former disputed many points with Suarez. De Lugo’s greatest
contributions were his monograph on faith and his teaching
on the Mass.
Others, equally brilliant in this first group of Jesuit theolo­
gians, and equally Molinistic in their views were Didacus Ruiz
de Montoya (1632), Harrubal (1608), Herice (1626), Granado
(1632), Hurtado (1646), Ripalda (1648), Turrianus (1635),
Becanus (1625), Tanner (1632), Coninch (1633), Platel (1681),
and Arriaga (1667). The earlier Jesuit theologians like Cardi­
nal Toletus (1596) and Henriquez (1608) taught a doctrine
more in accord with the Thomistic position.

SACRED THEOLOGY — POST-TRIDENTINE THEOLOGIANS

»

'

;

(

1

,

'

251

E. Post-Tridentine Dominican Writers. The literature of
modern Thomistic theology begins with Cajetan and Ferrariensis. But the school which was destined to play the most
striking part in the development of post-Tridentine Thomism
was the University of Salamanca in Spain. The Dominican
Francis of Vitoria (1546) wrote brilliantly himself, and taught
a line of scholars who were destined to leave their mark in the
history of sacred theology. Vitoria is considered as the founder
of the science of international law.
His outstanding pupil was the Dominican Melchior Cano,
the controversialist who wrote the first treatise on the theological places. Dominic Soto was another influential figure in
this Spanish Dominican school which included Cardinal Car­
ranza (1576) and Dominic Bannez, the great opponent of
Molina. Other great Dominican theologians of the golden age
were Bartholomew Medina (1581), Alvarez (1635), Massoulié
(1706), John of St. Thomas (1644), Ledesma (1616), Lemos
(1629), Antoine Reginald (1676), Porrecta (1614), De Medices
(1622), Gonet (1681), Goudin (1695), Araujo (1664), Nazarius (1646), Nuno (1614), Labat (167s), Nicolai (1673), Contenson (1674), and Godoy (1677).
F. University Theologians. The debate on the matter of
Molinism and Thomism was by no means confined to the
Jesuit and Dominican theologians. The great university faculties took an active part. At Louvain the outstanding commen­
tators of St. Thomas, John Wiggers (1629) and John Malderus
(1633), inclined toward the Molinistic position, although both
rejected the system of Molina as such. At the Sorbonne of
Paris, Gammache (1625), Duval (1637), and Ysambert (1642)
wrote commentaries on the Summa and rejected the Thomistic
explanation of efficacious grace. The most important secular
faculty at the time, that of Douai, was strongly Thomistic. The
characteristic Douai tradition of the great faculty was estab­
lished by William Estius (1613). His disciple and successor,
Francis Sylvius (1649), wrote one of the most valuable com­
mentaries on the Summa Theologica. The Douai Thomists

252

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

relied greatly on the works of St. Augustine and made a
brilliantly successful use of the same scientific equipment which
had been perverted by the Baianists and the Jansenists. Sylvius
with his confreres, George Colvenerius (1649), Theodore Van
Coverden (1658), and Valentine Randour (1653), fought bril­
liantly against the Jansenists. The Spanish Bishop Ferdinand
Martinez Mascarhenas (1628) was a strong defender of
Molinism.
Among the religious of orders other than that of St. Dominic,
the Augustinians, Puteanus (1623), Basilius Pontius de Leon
(1629), and the Irishman, Augustine Gibbon (1676), were
Thomists, as were the Benedictines, Curiel (1609) and Reding
(1692), the Cistercians Cabreyro (c. 1600) and de Lorea (1606),
and the great Mercedarian Francis Zumel (1607). The Car­
melite school produced some of the most brilliant Thomistic
writers in the history of sacred theology with Paul of the
Conception (1617), Leo of St. John (1671), Raymond Lumbier
(1684), Philip of the Blessed Trinity (1671), and the authors
of the most imposing work in all the history of Thomism, the
Cursus Salmanticensis in Summam Sancti Thomae, the pro­
fessors in the college of St. Elias in the university of Salmanca
from 1631 to 1700. The Salmanticences took account of every
important scholastic theologian who had preceded them.
The Franciscan school continued the Scotistic tradition for
the most part. Prominent among the post-Tridentine Francis­
cans were Luke Wadding (1657) and his fellow Irishmen
Cavellus (1626), Hickey (1641), and Ponce (1660). The Scotis­
tic school was also ably' represented by De Mazzara (1588),
Macedo (1608), and Smising (1626).
G. Positive Theologians. The seventeenth century also saw
the beginnings of a specifically positive theology with the writ­
ings of Petavius, S.J. (1652) and the Oratorian Thomassinus
(1695).
H. Eighteenth-Century Writers. In the eighteenth cen­
tury the theologians took advantage of the tremendous ad­
vances made by their predecessors. The previous writers had

ί

SACRED THEOLOGY — POST-TRIDENTINE THEOLOGIANS

253

manifested an almost encyclopedic erudition in the develop­
ment of their theological conclusions. Men like Suarez, Vasquez, and the Salmanticences had brought out every solution
advanced by their predecessors on the various problems with
which they were concerned. Suarez, Bannez, Molina, John of
St. Thomas, and others like them had subjected every conclu­
sion and opinion to a most rigorous logical investigation. Estius
and Sylvius had manifested a mastery of patristic thought, and
particularly of the teachings of St. Augustine. The eighteenth­
century writers devoted themselves particularly to the work
of stating the conclusions of their predecessors in a more com­
pendious and practical form. Outstanding among the eight­
eenth-century Dominicans were Billuart (1757), Gotti (1742),
De Rossi or De Rubeis (1775), Concina (1756), Gazzaniga
(1799), and Natalis Alexander (1724).
In the Scotistic school Frassen (1711) and Montefortino
(c. 1728) were the most prominent and influential figures. The
Capuchin theologian Thomas ex Charmes (1765) wrote an
excellent textbook. The Jesuits Noel (1729) and Antoine (1743)
wrote well, but by all means the most powerful exponent of
Molinism was the Sorbonne Doctor, Honoratus Tournely
(1729). Billuart’s famous work was intended as an answer to
Tournely’s writings. The Vincentian Collet (1770) continued
Tournely’s works. Other important theologians of the period
were St. Alphonsus Liguori (1787), the founder of the Redemptorists and the most modern theologian to be named as
a Doctor of the Church, Duhamel (1705), Amort (1775), and
Gerdil (1802). A distinctively Augustinian system for the solu­
tion of the problem on efficacious grace was proposed by Noris
(1704), Berti (1766), and Klupfel (1811). The Sulpician
Fathers, who were entrusted with the education of many secular
priests in France, exercised a great influence through the text­
books of De La Fosse (1745), Montaigne (1767), Legrand
(1780), and Regnier (1790).
I. Nontraditional Currents in Nineteenth-Century
Writing. The theological literature of the early nineteenth

254

k

31

ί

ί

j-

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

century suffers badly in comparison with that of earlier times.
The students of that time were prone to prefer the theories of
Descartes and Kant to the perennial philosophy which St.
Thomas and the other giants of the theological tradition had
expounded and employed. As a result, their interpretation of
Catholic dogma was colored by a false philosophy. Some of
them like Hermes (1831) and Gunther (1863) taught a kind
of rationalism in the name of sacred theology and attempted
to prove the very mysteries of divine revelation by the ordinary
processes of human reason. Others manifested no confidence
whatever in the power of man’s mind and lapsed into fideism
as did De Bonald (1840), Bautain (1867), Bonetty (1879), de
Lamenais (1879), and Ventura (1861). Gioberti (1852), Maret
(1884), and Ubaghs (1875) taught a kind of ontologism which
was orthodox. The ontologism of Rosmini-Serbati (1855),
however, was condemned by the Church.
J. The Traditional Schools in Modern Times. Good work
was done in the statement of Catholic teachings at the German
universities and seminaries by Moehler (1838), Lieberman
(1844), Klee (1839), Heinrich (1891), and the great Matthias
Joseph Scheeben (1888). The Jesuits Kleutgen (1883), Perrone
(1876), Franzelin (1885), Palmieri (1909), Camillus Mazella
(1900), and Emilio de Augustinis (1899) did outstanding work
in the development of sacred theology. The Dominicans were
represented by Lepidi (1922), Zigliara (1893), and Buonpensiere (1924). The Thomistic tradition was aided by the school
of Satolli (1910), Janssens (1925), and Monsignor Paquet of
Laval University in Quebec. These men were sometimes re­
ferred to as Cajetano-Thomists. Actually their teaching was
another one of the numerous attempts at a compromise be­
tween the Molinistic and the Thomistic positions. In spite of
a certain weakness inherent in their characteristic position,
these three writers did a great deal in bringing the text of St.
Thomas to the attention of the great number of Catholic uni­
versities and seminaries.
In positive theology the nineteenth century was quite rich.

SACRED THEOLOGY—POST-TRIDENTINE THEOLOGIANS

255

John Paul Migne (1875) published a tremendously extensive
Encyclopedia of ecclesiastical sciences, a course in sacred the­
ology and editions of the Latin and Greek Fathers. Many of
the volumes in these latter collections are still the best texts
available for certain patristic and early scholastic authors.
Hefele (1893) and Hergenroether (1891) continued the work
of conciliar theology which had been so well done by Mansi
(1729) and Hardouin (1729). Vacant (1901) wrote brilliantly
on the first dogmatic constitution of the Vatican Council, the
history of which was recounted by Granderath-Kirsch, Butler,
and Mourret. Murray of Maynooth in Ireland (1877) produced
the outstanding work on the Church in the nineteenth cen­
tury. Cardinals Wiseman, Manning, and Newman contributed
ably to English theological literature.
After the Vatican Council, and particularly after the con­
demnation of Modernism, the quality of Catholic theological
literature improved visibly. Besides the great post-Vatican
writers to whom we have already alluded, Catholic theology
has been enriched by the writings of the Thomistic school, so
much encouraged by the sovereign pontiffs. To this school we
must assign the European Dominicans, Hugon, GarrigouLagrange, Freithoff, Cordovani, Mingoja, Marin-Sola, Schultes,
Gardeil, Berthier, Congar, Charlier, Paris, and Simonin. Gardeil was the greatest master of theological methodology. His
Crédibilité et ΐApologétique has been of great importance in
fixing the object of apologetics. His writings on theology as
such, and on mystical theology have also exercised great im­
portance. Marin-Sola and Schultes took a leading part in a
controversy on the nature of sacred theology. Freithoff and
Merkelbach have written on Mariology, and the latter is, of
course, one of the acknowledged modern masters of moral
theology. By all means the most important of the European
Dominicans was Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, the great mas­
ter of the Angelico. With all the richness of his published
works, it is evident that his influence has been most strongly
felt in Apologetics, Spiritual Theology, and De Deo Uno.

256

ü
ίT

i

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

The contemporary Molinistic school has been defended
mostly by the Fathers of the Society of Jesus. Typical of the
thoroughgoing Molinists were Hugo Hurter, also the editor
of many patristic opuscula and the author of the invaluable
Nomenclator, Christian Pesch, Lercher, Lennerz, Tepe, and
Beraza. The great Cardinal Billot and his successor Charles
Boyer the patrologist and dogmatic theologian incline very
much toward the Thomistic position. Among the non-Jesuit
Molinists we may list Petroccia, Egger, Van der Meersch, Bartmann, and MacGuinness. The Thomistic cause has been up­
held outside the Order of Friar Preachers by Diekamp, Van
Noort, Hervé, Cardinal Lepicier, Lahitton, and the Carmelite
Archbishop Zubizarreta.
Recent dogmatic theology has been rich in monographs.
Lepin and the Jesuit Father Maurice de la Taille wrote ex­
planations of the essence of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, which
were disputed by the English writers Father Joseph Brodie
Brosnan, and the Dominicans Swaby and McNabb among
others. The controversy on the nature of apologetics has
brought out the writings of the immanentist Blondel and his
followers, and the rich treatises of the more traditional writers,
Bainvel, Garrigou-Lagrange, Dieckmann, Dorsch, Van Laak,
Felder, and Nicolas Marin Neguerela.
The great number of competent reviews which flourished
before the war in Europe, and the rapidly expanding theolog­
ical literature of our own land have made the early twentieth
century one of the truly golden eras of theological inquiry.
The results of modern theological labor have been expressed,
not only in reviews, textbooks, and monographs, but also in
the imposing theological encyclopedias. The Catholic 'Ency­
clopedia of our own country contains many articles of scientific
excellence, as do the German Lexicon filrTheologie und Kirche
and the still incomplete French Dictionnaire de Théologie
Catholique and the Dictionnaire Apologétique de la Eoi
Catholique, edited by Father D’Ales, S.J.
In the field of positive theology a tremendous amount of

^^KMîMlH^WttSBÎaSKâfifiKriMKSiMËHHMtaiHMMâHKÎMMlM

SACRED THEOLOGY — POST-TRIDENTINE THEOLOGIANS

257

work has been done by men like Duchesne, Battifol, Rouet
de Journel, S.J., Kirsch, Landgraf, and Grabmann. Father Denzinger, S.J. (1883) performed an invaluable work in the pub­
lication of his Enchiridion Symbolorum a collection of the
authentic declarations of the Church’s solemn magisterium.
The French theologian Cavallera wrote a similar work, the
Thesaurus Doctrinae Catholicae. The great Jesuit Cursus Scrip­
turae Sacrae continued the exegetical tradition of the Society
which had been manifest in the works of St. Robert Bellarmine,
Maldonatus (1553), Cornelius a Lapide (1637), an<^ Cardinal
Toletus, with the works of such great writers as Hummelaur,
Comely, and Bea. The Dominican scripture scholars under the
leadership of Lagrange, Voste, Ceuppens, and Abel, the great
Sulpician Fillion, and Father Vigoroux have helped to bring
about the excellent status of modern scripture studies.
In the field of moral theology, the post-Tridentine develop­
ment has been tremendous. The writers until the end of the
sixteenth century generally treated moral and dogmatic the­
ology together. But since the end of the sixteenth century the
literature of sacred theology has been enriched by a section
devoted to a casuistic and scholastic treatment of moral prob­
lems as such. This development may be said to have begun
with the Spanish writers Martin de Azpilcueta (1586) who is
usually cited in theological texts as “Navarrus,” the Jesuit
Cardinals Toletus, Azorius (1603), Sanchez (1610), and Men­
doza (1669). Many modern manuals are based upon the works
of Busenbaum (1668), Lacroix (1714), and Gury (1866). St.
Alphonsus Liguori is the great figure in the development of
moral theology. Among the manuals of moral theology most
influential, today are those of the Dominicans Prummer and
Merkelbach, the Jesuits Capello, Vermeersch, Noldin, Ferreres,
and Sabetti, the Redemptorists Aertnys and Damen, Marc and
Konings, and the Catholic University professor, Thomas Bouquillon (1902).

CHAPTER

14

THEOLOGY IN AMERICA — RETROSPECT
AND PROSPECT
A. The Defense of the Faith. In spite of its youth, the
Catholic Church in the United States is rich in theological
tradition. During the past century Archbishop Francis Patrick
Kenrick (1863) wrote valuable textbooks on dogmatic and
moral theology and took a leading part in the polemic theolog­
ical writing made necessary by the powerful and bitter opposi­
tion to Catholicism during the nineteenth century. Archbishop
Martin fohn Spalding (1872), Archbishop John Hughes
(1864), the illustrious convert Orestes Augustine Brownson
(1876), Bishop John Lancaster Spalding (1916), and the
founders of the Paulist congregation, Fathers Isaac Thomas
Hecker (1888) and Augustus Francis Hewit (1897), were lead­
ing figures in the glorious Catholic controversy of the nine­
teenth century.
The success of that controversial effort was based upon the
theological excellence of the writers. In order to cope with the
ever pressing objections against Catholic doctrine and practice,
the early American priests used the resources of theological
tradition. The pages of these writers manifest a familiarity
with the works of the sixteenth-century controversialists, par­
ticularly St. Robert Bellarmine and Francis Suarez, and the
best critical works of positive theology. The founders of Amer­
ican theology were good Scripture scholars and good students
of the Fathers. Indeed, Archbishop Kenrick’s revision of the
358

»

û^Mgi^M^WMrtÎMMSMâàSMi^SâiâaMiaËMl^ËâiMMKiHiMi

scriptural that so formidable a scholar as Cardinal John Henry
Newman left off work on his own revision when he learned
that Kenrick’s revision was in process of preparation.
259

l

THEOLOGY IN AMERICA — RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT

j
I

Douai version is one of the best to have appeared in the nineteenth century, and so well known was his ability in matters

I

!
I
I
j

advantage.
Those who have contributed to American theological litera­
ture have come from almost every racial stock in Europe. As a
matter of fact, many of the prominent nineteenth-century
writers were born abroad. Furthermore, the theological schools
of the United States have been staffed for a great part with
men who received at least part of their training in the various
universities, institutes, and seminaries of Europe. In this way
the current of American theological tradition has carried all
that is best in the tendencies and accomplishments of older
countries. But all of these tendencies and resources have been
formed and dominated, in American theological literature, by
that solidity and loyalty which is inherent in our tradition.
B. Latin Theological Literature. American theological
literature is by no means as extensive as that of France, Italy,
Germany, Spain, or even Belgium. Thus far it has been an
affair mostly of articles or small monographs. In the line of
Latin texts the United States has produced, apart from the
work of Archbishop Kenrick, comparatively few works. The
Apologetica of John Langan, S.J., the Theologia Tundameτιtalis of Cotter, S.J., the treatise De Sacramentis by Francis

200

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Connell, C.SS.R., the Alpha et Omega by John Moran, S.J., a
brilliant statement of theses on the one God and on the Trinity
are among the few texts in dogmatic theology written by
Americans. Mazzella, De Augustinis, and Tanquerey all wrote
their Latin texts while in this country, but all subsequently re­
turned to Europe. In moral the outstanding Latin work pro­
duced by an American author was the moral theology of
Thomas Bouquillon, one of the world authorities on moral,
and one of the original faculty of sacred theology in the Cath­
olic University of America.
C. Moral Theology. In the field of moral theology, par­
ticularly in its social implications, Monsignor John A. Ryan
has been an outstanding writer of books and articles. His work
on distributive justice has exercised a world-wide influence. The
Dominican writers, Callan, McHugh, and Farrell hive made
valuable contributions to theology. The first two have col­
laborated in Scripture studies and on a moral theology in Eng­
lish. Walter Farrell has published two of the four volumes
which will ultimately comprise his Companion to the Summa,
the first commentary on St. Thomas’ masterpiece to have been
offered in the English language. The Companion ranks as one
of the outstanding Thomistic works of modern times. Wellwritten articles by Monsignor James O’Brien of Cincinnati,
and Doctors William Allen, and Joseph P. Donovan, C.M.,
have enriched the literature of moral theology.
D. Dogmatic and Positive Studies. Dr. Joseph Baierl, Mon­
signor Fulton Sheen, and Dr. Paul Glenn are among the out­
standing American writers in fundamental dogmatic theology.
Bishop Strang wrote an excellent textbook for pastoral theology.
The late Monsignor William Kerby and Doctor Parente are
outstanding in spiritual theology. Fathers Gruden and Berry
are authorities in ecclesiology.
Among the outstanding writers on Holy Scripture in the
United States we must number Doctor Rudolph Bandas,
Fathers McGarry, S.J., McClellan, S.J., John Collins, S.J.,
Callan, O.P., McHugh, O.P., and Spencer, O.P. Doctor John

THEOLOGY IN AMERICA — RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT

f

261

Quasten’s work on Christian antiquity, continuing the research
of Kirsch and Dôlger has attracted world-wide attention. The
studies of Monsignor Peter Guilday have been invaluable to
students of modern theology. Father Bernard Otten, S.J., has
written well on the history of dogma.
E. Direction of American Theology. With their resources
of tradition and learning, the American theologians are well
equipped for the tasks which confront them. The improved
English version of Holy Scripture must bring in its wake a
complete and scientific commentary upon the sacred books,
and a good vernacular treatment of the various subjects cov­
ered in the introduction to Holy Scripture. In the field of moral
theology the work done by Dr. Bouquillon and Monsignor
Ryan must be continued. The former was outstanding for his
work on fundamental morals and education, while the latter
has done magnificent work in bringing out the Catholic teach­
ing on social justice. The full measure of that Catholic teaching
about human conduct is absolutely necessary in order that our
republic may operate successfully and preserve its resources
and advantages. It is the function of Catholic theologians to
manifest the basis of morality and point out the practical and
detailed application of moral principles in order that our
people may continue to constitute the great democratic state.
Such work has been accomplished in the recent books of
Doctors James Magner and John K. Ryan.
We must have more texts and monographs on dogmatic
theology, utilizing the wealth of resource at our disposal.
Despite the general excellence of European theological works
at the present time, the American respect for tradition and in­
herent love of accuracy should be able to make great advances.
The new American works in dogma will utilize the documents
of the existing theological literature in the only manner in
which they can be employed to best advantage. The students
of the future will have a far better presentation of the historical
background of individual theses than that given in even the best
European manuals. In these latter works there has been fre-

202

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

quently an unfortunate tendency to stress the theses of one or
another theological school at the cost of scientific exactness.
Thus the inquiry into the history of post-Tridentine theology
now being conducted at the Catholic University of America
will undoubtedly be helpful. The literature of those theologians
who wrote during the century and a half after the Council of
Trent constitutes an invaluable resource for the accurate and
unequivocal teaching of divine revelation. Lately several priests
of the Jesuit theological school of Granada in Spain have also
taken up this same field of theological research with spectacular
success. The publications of Fathers Lamadrid and Abelian,
among others, are worthy of note. The American theologians
must take cognizance of these endeavors and use the results
obtained for the enlightenment of their own people.
In the field of spiritual theology a great deal has been done,
and much more is necessary. The strong adherence to God
which alone can save our people demands the full force of
revealed teaching on our life in God. The weak and emotional
pietism which is expressed by some nontheological books of
devotion is not enough. Only in the clear and unequivocal
statement of sacred doctrine, as it has been stated in the works
of St. John Damascene, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. John of the
Cross, St. Teresa, and the great scholastic masters of spirituality
such as Vallgornera, Joseph of the Holy Spirit, and Le Gaudier
will the people of God find the enlightenment of which they
stand in need.
The Sovereign Pontiffs have urged and commanded the
teachers of sacred theology to utilize the principles and the
theses of St. Thomas Aquinas. The heartfelt loyalty of the
American schools to the Holy See will result in dominantly
Thomistic trend in our theology. The Thomism of American
writers like Connell, Farrell, and James O’Brien will certainly
not possess the contentious and antagonistic character which
has lessened the usefulness of some older works. The American
Thomism, like that of Ferland in Canada, is eminently irenic
and exact. The need of our people for an adequate and ac-

j
’
?
j
ΐ
;
|
Î
J
1

j

THEOLOGY IN AMERICA — RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT

!

,

'■

;

’

263

curate statement of revealed doctrine is far too pressing to
allow us to ignore or condemn the real theological acquisitions
of writers outside the Thomistic school. And at the same time
that need is too great to permit us a desultory choice among
systems. The teaching and tradition of St. Thomas, with their
incalculable force for the exact statement of Christ’s teaching
are at our disposal. The theologians of our time will use them.
Because of the intensely practical background of our theolog­
ical tradition, there is little likelihood that American Theolo­
gians will be misled into thinking of sacred theology as a mere
intellectual exercise, drawing from the body of revealed doc­
trine certain conclusions highly interesting yet not intimately
connected with the fabric of Christian life. That tendency re­
sulted long ago in the blighting reign of nominalism in the
schools. It brought about the aberrations of Cartesian and
eclectic theology in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth
centuries. In more recent times it has been manifest in a kind
of “liberal” Catholic writing which tended to overlook or mis­
state the necessity of the Catholic Church and build up bizarre
interpretations of the axiom “Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus."
Books of this sort have abounded in descriptions of shortcomings in the membership of the Catholic Church, and have
spoken disdainfully of Catholic devotional practices.
Fortunately such literature has shown little likelihood of
interfering with the development of American theology. The
virile tradition of our Catholic schools makes it quite improb­
able that American scholars will turn for enlightenment to the
amateurish and unscholarly works of “groups” and “move­
ments” dedicated to the reform of the Catholic body politic
rather than to the great scholastic tradition of sacred theology.
It is very easy to write and to speak about matters which per­
tain to the field of this science, but it is extremely difficult to
require it. In order to write and teach as a theologian a man
must utilize the various resources at his disposal for the proper
statement of that doctrine which God revealed to the world
through Jesus Christ our Lord. The theologian must see how

^3332S^i2EKS2!^S£ïSeS<»î^2SSSSÎSSS^Ü^^

264

"· · '“" ^»'
*»~J

i ^..»v···*

î-«■

_wg.
*ifci

THE CONCEPT OF SACRED THEOLOGY

the doctrine with which he is concerned is proposed in the
authentic magisterium of the Catholic Church. He must see
how it is expressed in the divinely revealed books which con­
stitute Holy Scripture, and then ascertain how it was taught
and developed by the Fathers. The theologian must have cog­
nizance of the literature of his own science, and know how his
teaching appears in theological tradition.
The science of sacred theology demands erudition as well as
intelligence. The Church in the United States of America,
strong in its faith and in loyalty to our Lord and His vicar on
earth, and endowed with that ability which our country has
used to attain its pre-eminence among the nations of the world,
can be expected to supply the necessary industry and to advance
the science of sacred theology as it was developed during its
golden age. The statement of divine revelation, a statement per­
fected by theological research and adapted to the men of our
age, is what God expects of America.

!^ΕϋΜΗββΜώβ®Μ6^^Μ^ί»ΜΗββΜ«®Ι

INDEX
a Lapide, Cornelius, 257
Abel, 257
Abelard, 235 S.
Abelian, 262
Abstinence, virtue of, 48
Acquired knowledge in Christ, 50
Acts of the will pertaining to morality,
40
Adrian of Utrecht (Pope Adrian VI),
247
Aegidius Colonna, 244
Aeneas of Paris, 232
Aertnys, 257
Affability, virtue of, 48
Agobard of Lyons, 232
Alan of Lille, 239
Albert the Great, St., 144, 241
Alcuin, 232
Alexander of Hales, 240
Alexander VII, Pope, and errors of Jansenius, 113; and thesis on Immaculate
Conception, 127; on belief in Immac­
ulate Conception, 183
Allen, Cardinal William, 248
Allen, Rev. Dr. William, 260
Allocutions, and ordinary magisterium,
109
Alphonsus Liguori, St., 144, 253, 257;
authority of, in moral theology, 147
Alvarez, 251
Amalarius of Metz, 233
Ambrose, St, 223
America, Scripture writers in, 260 f.;
theology in, 258 ff.
Amort, 253
Analogies in Peter the Lombard, 64 f.
Analogy in theology, 60 ff.
Analogy of divine names, 33
Angels in Summa Theologica, 37
Anger, Abbé Joseph, and unity of theol­
ogy, 199
1
Anselm of Laon, 235
Anselm, St, of Canterbury, 234 f.; and
St Augustine, 240; and theological
conclusion, 60
265

Anti-Modernist oath, 107 f.; and fideism,
20 n.
Antoine, 253
Apologetics, in the theological course,
209 ff.
Apologists, 218 f.
Apology of dogma, and apologetics, 210;
and reason, 156 ff.
Apostles’ Creed, 107
Araujo, 251
Aristides, writings of, 218
Aristotle, 158 f., 162; on nature of
science, 165 f.
Arius, teaching of Athanasius against,
184
Arriaga, 250
Ascetical theology, in theological educa­
tion, 215
Athanasian creed, 107
Athanasius, St., 221; and Arianism, 80;
and battie against Arianism, 222 f.;
result of works of, 138; teaching
against Arius not mere opinion, 184
Athenagoras, 219
Attributes, entitative, in Summa Theo­
logica, 32
Augustine, St, 223 ff.; and Alexander
of Hales, 240; and ecclesia discern,
no; and Pelagianism, 80; and theo­
logical conclusion, 60; authority of,
133; the Enchiridion, 54; Molina and,
193; statement of, on content of theol­
ogy, 8f.; system of, 243; teachings
abused, 232; tradition from, 242
Authority, extrinsic, 140; in moral theol­
ogy, 140; of historians, .162 ff.; of
Holy Scripture in Peter the Lombard,
64 f.; of Roman Pontiff, 115 ff.
,
Azarius,
Cardinal, 257
Bacon, Francis, Carmelite theologian, 246
1
Bacon,
Robert, 243
I
Bacon,
Roger, 242
]
Baconthorp,
John, 246
1
Baianism
and Jansenism, 249