A Biographical Overview of Thomas Aquinas
Hikari Ishido (000-06-6884)
1. The life of Thomas Aquinas
Thomas Aquinas was a greatly influential philosopher and theologian under the
tradition of scholasticism. He was the foremost classical proponent of natural theology,
and the initiator of Thomism. His influence on Western thought is considerable, and
much of modern philosophy was conceived in development or refutation of his ideas,
particularly in the areas of ethics, natural law, metaphysics, and political theory.
The life of Thomas Aquinas was comparatively uneventful, and he has not
been so fortunate in his biographers as, for example, St. Francis of Assisi. He was born
about the year 1225, not far from Naples, in the fortress castle of his family at
Roccasecca. Aquino was close by on the heights looking down on the valley of the Liri
through which the railway now passes. Not far off is Monte Cassino, the home of the
Benedictine Order, where St. Thomas received his first education. He was the seventh
son, and on both sides his family was illustrious. His mother, Theodora of Theate, was
of Norman stock; his father, of the Lombard nobility. In Thomas, therefore, North and
South met, and their influence is visible both in his personal appearance and in his
character and thought.
At age five, Thomas began to receive his early education at Monte Cassino but
after the military conflict that broke out between the Emperor Frederick II and Pope
Gregory IX spilled into the abbey in early 1239, his parents had him enrolled at the
studium generale (university) which had recently been established in Naples. It was
there that Thomas was probably introduced to the Greek philosophy of Aristotle as well
as Jewish theology of Averroes and Maimonides, both of which were to influence his
1
theological philosophy. It was also during his study at Naples that Thomas came under
the influence of John of St. Julian, a Dominican preacher in Naples, who was part of the
active effort by the Dominican order to recruit devout followers.
At age nineteen, Thomas resolved to join the Dominican Order. Thomas's
change of heart did not please his family, who had expected him to become a
Benedictine monk and perhaps the abbot of the powerful Montecassino Abbey near his
family's domains. In an attempt to avoid unnecessary interference, the Dominicans
arranged for Thomas to be removed to Rome, and from Rome, sent to Paris. However,
on his journey to Rome his brothers, seized him as he was drinking from a spring and
took him back to his parents at the castle of Monte San Giovanni Campano.
Thomas was held prisoner for two years in the family castles at Monte San
Giovanni and Roccasecca in an attempt to prevent him from assuming the Dominican
habit and to push him into renouncing his new aspiration. Thomas spent this time of
trial teaching his sisters and communicating with members of the Dominican Order.
Family members became desperate to dissuade Thomas, who remained determined to
join the Dominicans. At one point, two of his brothers resorted to the measure of hiring
a prostitute to seduce him. According to legend Thomas drove her away wielding a fire
iron. It is said that on that night two angels appeared to him as he slept and strengthened
his determination to remain celibate.
By 1244, seeing that all of her attempts to dissuade Thomas had failed, his
mother Theodora sought to save the family's dignity, arranging for Thomas to escape at
night through his window. In her mind, a secret escape from detention was less
damaging than an open surrender to the Dominicans. Thomas was sent first to Naples
and then to Rome to meet Johannes von Wildeshausen, the Master General of the
2
Dominican Order.
In 1245, Thomas started to study at the University of Paris' Faculty of Arts
where he most likely met Dominican scholar Albertus Magnus, then the Chair of
Theology at the College of St. James in Paris. When Albertus was sent by his superiors
to teach at the new studium generale at Cologne in 1248, Thomas followed him,
declining Pope Innocent IV's offer to appoint him abbot of Monte Cassino as a
Dominican. Albertus then appointed the reluctant Thomas magister studentium. When
Thomas failed his first theological disputation, Albertus prophetically exclaimed: "We
call him the dumb ox, but in his teaching he will one day produce such a bellowing that
it will be heard throughout the world."
In the spring of 1256, Thomas was appointed regent master in theology at Paris
and one of his first works upon assuming this office was Contra impugnantes Dei
cultum et religionem (Against Those Who Assail the Worship of God and Religion),
defending the mendicant orders which had come under attack by William of
Saint-Amour. During his tenure from 1256 to 1259, Thomas wrote numerous works,
including: Questiones disputatae de veritate (Disputed Questions on Truth), a collection
of twenty-nine disputed questions on aspects of faith and the human condition prepared
for the public university debates he presided over on Lent and Advent; Quaestiones
quodlibetales (Quodlibetal Questions), a collection of his responses to questions posed
to him by the academic audience; and both Expositio super librum Boethii De trinitate
(Commentary on Boethius's De trinitate) and Expositio super librum Boethii De
hebdomadibus (Commentary on Boethius's De hebdomadibus), commentaries on the
works of 6th century philosopher Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius. By the end of
his regency, Thomas was working on one of his most famous works, Summa contra
3
Gentiles.
In 1259 Thomas completed his first regency at the studium generale and left
Paris and returned to Naples where he was appointed as general preacher. Thomas then
completed his major works including Summa contra Gentiles (A Summary of Theology
against the Unbelievers), the Catena aurea, (The Golden Chain) and errores graecorum
(Against the Errors of the Greeks).
In February 1265, the new Pope Clement IV summoned Aquinas to Rome to
serve as papal theologian. In the same year he was ordered by the Dominican Chapter of
Agnani to teach at the studium conventuale at the Roman convent of Santa Sabina
which had been founded some years before in 1222. While at the Santa Sabina studium
provinciale, Thomas began his most renowned work, the Summa Theologiae, which he
conceived of specifically as suited to beginning students. While there, he also wrote a
variety of other works like his unfinished Compendium Theologiae and Responsio ad fr.
Ioannem Vercellensem de articulis 108 sumptis ex opere Petri de Tarentasia (Reply to
Brother John of Vercelli Regarding 108 Articles Drawn from the Work of Peter of
Tarentaise).
Aquinas remained at the studium at Santa Sabina from 1265 until he was called
back to Paris in 1268 for a second teaching regency. In 1268 the Dominican Order
assigned Thomas to be regent master at the University of Paris for a second time, a
position he held until the spring of 1272. Part of the reason for this sudden reassignment
appears to have arisen from the rise of "Averroism" or "radical Aristotelianism" in the
universities. In response to these perceived “evils”, Thomas wrote two works, one of
them being De unitate intellectus, contra Averroistas (On the Unity of Intellect, against
the Averroists) in which he blasts Averroism as incompatible with Christian doctrine.
4
In 1272, Thomas took leave from the University of Paris when the Dominicans
from his home province called upon him to establish a studium generale wherever he
liked and staff it as he pleased. He chose to establish the institution in Naples, and
moved there to take his post as regent master. He took his time at Naples to work on the
third part of the Summa while giving lectures on various religious topics. On 6
December 1273 Thomas was celebrating the Mass of St. Nicholas when, according to
some, he heard Christ speak to him. Christ asked him what he desired, being pleased
with his meritorious life. Thomas replied “Only you Lord. Only you.” After this
exchange something happened, but Thomas never spoke of it or wrote it down. Because
of what he saw, he abandoned his routine and refused to dictate to his friend Reginald of
Piperno. When Reginald begged him to get back to work, Thomas replied, “Reginald, I
cannot, because all that I have written seems like straw to me” (mihi videtur ut palea).
What exactly triggered Thomas's change in behavior is believed by Catholics to have
been some kind of supernatural experience of God. After taking to his bed, he recovered
some strength.
Looking to find a way to reunite the Eastern Orthodox churches with the
Catholic Church (in 1054, a lasting schism took place between the Catholic Church and
the churches in communion with the Patriarch of Constantinople, later known as the
Eastern Orthodox) Pope Gregory X convened the Second Council of Lyon to be held on
1 May 1274 and summoned Thomas to attend. At the meeting, Thomas's work for Pope
Urban IV concerning the Greeks, Contra errores graecorum, was to be presented. On his
way to the Council, riding on a donkey along the Appian Way, he struck his head on the
branch of a fallen tree and became seriously ill again. He was then quickly escorted to
Monte Cassino. After resting for a while, he set out again, but stopped at the Cistercian
5
Fossanova Abbey after falling ill again. The monks nursed him for several days, and as
he received his last rites he prayed, "I receive Thee, ransom of my soul. For love of
Thee have I studied and kept vigil, toiled, preached and taught...." He died on 7 March
1274, while giving commentary on the Song of Songs.
2. Thomas’s Philosophy and Theology
Thomas did not see philosophy and theology as merely compatible with one another,
and instead, he believed that correct philosophy can greatly aid theology. The aim of
God’s grace is not to destroy human nature, nor to act separately from it, but to perfect
it. Human reason, by the use of philosophy, can discover much that is true about the
world, mankind and even God. The purpose of divine revelation is to perfect human
philosophy by adding to it. Revelation does not basically oppose human philosophy, but
rather supplants it and brings it to completion and perfection. For Thomas, however, it
is always revealed theology that is primary, although his interpretation of revealed
theology was greatly influenced by Aristotle.
Thomas wrote extensively, i.e., commentaries on Scripture, philosophical and
theological treatises, commentaries on Aristotle. Two of his works are especially
outstanding: The Manual against the Heathen was written in the early 1260s. It was
written for the benefit of unbelievers, like the Jews and the Muslims. It exemplifies
Thomas’s nature/grace approach. Scripture and tradition are invoked only to confirm
conclusions already reached by reason. On this basis, Thomas seeks to establish the
existence of God, his attributes (such as love, wisdom, omnipotence), his creation of the
world, his providence and predestination. Thomas goes on to present those doctrines
which cannot be reached without Christian revelation, i.e., Trinity, the incarnation of
6
Jesus Christ, the sacraments and the resurrection of the body. These doctrines are,
according to Thomas, beyond the grasp of unaided reason, yet they are not contrary to
reason.
Thomas’s representative work, the Sum of Theology, is addressed to Catholic
believers rather than to unbelievers, the distinctive truths of revelation are not kept to
the end. Thomas, however, still distinguishes between those which can be discerned by
reason and those which can be known only by revelation. In this work he takes the
theology of Augustine which was presented in Neo-Platonist terms, and restates it in
Aristotelian terms. It is regarded as one of the greatest systematic presentations of the
Christian faith ever produced. Thomas did not complete this work, yet some of his
disciples supplied a supplement drawn from his other works to complete it. Near the end
of his life Thomas had a vision while saying mass, which caused him to stop writing.
He stated that in comparison with what had then been revealed to him, all that he had
written seemed like straw.
The Sum of Theology is divided into three parts, and the whole work is divided
into 512 questions. In each question, he begins by marshaling evidence which appears
to contradict his position. This consists of philosophical arguments or quotations from
authorities such as the Bible or the Fathers. He then counters this with a reason or a
quotation in favor of his own position. Then in a reply he resolves the question to his
satisfaction. Aristotle is the most frequently quoted philosopher, and Augustine tops the
list of theological authorities, after the Bible.
Thomas is renowned for his teaching about analogy. What do we mean when
we speak of God, e.g., “God is good” or “the Lord is my rock”? Is such language
univocal, i.e., do the words “good” and “rock” mean exactly the same as when used of
7
people or boulders in everyday language? If God is truly transcendent, then they cannot.
Is such language then equivocal, i.e., do the words mean something completely different
from their everyday usage, as a dog’s bark is totally different from a tree’s bark? If that
were so, we would have to think that we know nothing about God. This would
contradict Romans 1:20, which implies that the creation does tell us something about
God.
Thomas distinguishes two different types of statement about God. Some are
metaphorical, such as “the Lord is my rock”. This is a metaphor because the word rock
applies primarily to physical rocks and only in a secondary way to God, to draw out
certain points of comparison, such as God’s reliability. Other words are used properly
and strictly of God, as when we say that God is good. Such a statement lies between the
univocal and the equivocal. God’s goodness can be compared to ours, so there is a
ground for using the same word. However, the word good does not have exactly the
same meaning when applied to God and to man. Thomas uses the argument that man’s
goodness is distinct from his being (since man can cease to be good) while God’s
goodness is not.
If God and man are both called good, but in different senses, which sense is
primary? As regards our language, the latter is: It is human goodness that we know
primarily, according to Thomas. However, while the word rock applies primarily to
physical rocks, words like good apply primarily to God and therefore are used of him
properly and accurately not metaphorically. Thus, it is God who is the cause of all
creaturely goodness. Furthermore, God’s goodness is perfect. Therefore the word good
is used most appropriately of God. But our understanding of the term good is derived
from human goodness. In this way Thomas leaves us with a real, but imperfect,
8
knowledge of God: We can apprehend God but not comprehensively.
Thomas is also famous for his teaching on the eucharist. He expounded the
doctrine of transubstantiation, which had been barely stated at the Fourth Lateran
Council in 1215. If the substance of Christ’s body and blood are present in the eucharist,
what happens to the substance of bread and wine? There were three theories at that
time: (1) the substance of bread and wine remains alongside the substance of Christ’s
body and blood (consubstantiation); (2)the substance of bread and wine is annihilated
and replaced by the substance of Christ’s body and blood (annihilation); and (3) the
substance of bread and wine is changed into the substance of Christ’ body and blood
(conversion). When the term transubstantiation was first used of any of these theories in
the twelfth century, it could be used of any of these three theories. When the Fourth
Lateran Council defined the term, it was not understood to have decided between the
three theories. Thomas however argued that consubstantiation was heretical and
annihilation was false. By the following century, the term transubstantiation was
thought to refer to the conversion theory alone and the other two theories were deemed
to have been excluded by the Fourth Lateran Council. Thomas puts it:
Some have held that after the consecration the substance of the bread and wine remains in
this sacrament. But this position cannot be sustained. First of all, it would destroy the reality
of this sacrament, which demands that the very body of Christ exist in it. Now, his body is not
there before the consecration. But a thing cannot be where it was not before, except by being
brought in locally or by something already there being changed into it… Now it is clear that
the body of Christ does not begin to exist in this sacrament by being brought in locally. First,
because it would thereby cease to be in heaven, since anything that is locally moved begins
to be somewhere only by leaving where it was…For these reasons it remains that there is no
other way in which the body of Christ can begin to be in this sacrament except through the
substance of bread being changed into it. Now, what is changed into something else is no
longer there after the change. The reality of Christ’s body in this sacrament demands, then,
that the substance of bread be no longer there after the consecration. (Sum of Theology
9
3:75:2)
Thomas believed that after consecration (the recital of Jesus’ words at the Last
Supper over the bread and wine), the bread and the wine cease to exist because they are
changed into Christ’s body and blood. However, the undeniable fact remains that the
consecrated “elements” look, taste and smell like bread and wine. How is this
explained? The Fourth Lateran Council declared that Christ’s body and blood are
present under the figures or appearances of bread and wine. Thomas developed a
philosophical theory to explain this, using Aristotle’s distinction between “substance”
and “accidents”. Thomas maintained that in transubstantiation the substance of bread
and wine is entirely converted into the substance of Christ’s body and blood, while the
accidents of bread and wine remain unchanged. This means that to our senses they
appear to be bread and wine. But why should there be this deceptive appearance?
Thomas replies:
It is obvious to our senses that, after the consecration, all the accidents of the bread and wine
remain. Divine providence very wisely arranged for this. First of all, men have not the
custom of eating human flesh and drinking human blood; indeed the though revolts them.
And so the flesh and blood of Christ are given to us to be taken under the appearances of
things in common human use—namely bread and wine. Secondly, lest this sacrament should
be an object of contempt for unbelievers, if we were to eat our Lord under his human
appearances. Thirdly, in taking the body and blood of our Lord in their invisible presence,
we increase the merit of our faith. (Sum of Theology 3:75:5)
Thomas believed that the existence of God is self-evident in itself (though not to
us): "Therefore I say that this proposition, "God exists," of itself is self-evident, for the
predicate is the same as the subject.... Now because we do not know the essence of God,
the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are
more known to us, though less known in their nature — namely, by effects." (Summa
10
Theologiae, First Part , Question 2 “The existence of God”).
Thomas believed that the existence of God can be proven. In the Summa
theologiae, he considered in great detail five reasons for the existence of God. These are
widely known as the quinque viae, or the "Five proofs" (which take some of Aristotle's
assertions concerning the unmoved mover and asserts that God is the ultimate cause of
all things):
1.Motion: Some things are undoubtedly undergoing motion, though cannot cause
their own motion. Since Thomas believed there can be no infinite chain of causes of
motion, this leads to the conclusion there must be a first cause of motion that is not
itself moved by anything else, and this is what everyone understands by God.
2.Causation: Like motion, nothing can cause itself, and like motion there must be a
First Cause, called God.
3.Existence of necessary and the unnecessary: Our experience includes things certainly
existing but apparently unnecessary. Not everything can be unnecessary, for then once
there was nothing and there would still be nothing. Therefore, we are compelled to
suppose something that exists necessarily, having this necessity only from itself; in fact
itself the cause why other things exist.
4.Gradation: If we can notice a gradation in things in the sense that some things are
more hot, good, etc., there must be a superlative which is the truest and noblest thing,
and so most fully existing. This then, we call God.
5.Ordered tendencies of nature: A direction of actions to an end is noticed in all bodies
following natural laws. Anything without awareness tends to a goal under the guidance
of one who is aware. This we call God.
Concerning the nature of God, Thomas felt the best approach, commonly called
11
the via negativa (through negation), is to consider what God is not. This led him to
propose five statements about the divine qualities (In this approach, he is following,
among others, the Jewish philosopher Maimonides):
1.God is simple, without composition of parts, such as body and soul, or matter and
form.
2.God is perfect, lacking nothing. That is, God is distinguished from other beings on
account of God's complete actuality. Thomas defined God as the ‘Ipse Actus Essendi
subsistens,’ subsisting act of being.
3.God is infinite. That is, God is not finite in the ways that created beings are
physically, intellectually, and emotionally limited. This infinity is to be distinguished
from infinity of size and infinity of number.
4.God is immutable, incapable of change on the levels of God's essence and character.
5.God is one, without diversification within God's self. The unity of God is such that
God's essence is the same as God's existence. In Thomas's words, "in itself the
proposition 'God exists' is necessarily true, for in it subject and predicate are the same."
Following St. Augustine of Hippo, Thomas defines sin as a word, deed, or
desire, contrary to the eternal law. It is important to note the analogous nature of law in
Thomas's legal philosophy. Natural law is an instance or instantiation of eternal law.
Because natural law is that which human beings determine according to their own
nature (as rational beings), disobeying reason is disobeying natural law and eternal law.
Thus eternal law is logically prior to reception of either "natural law" (that determined
by reason) or "divine law" (that found in the Old and New Testaments). In other words,
God's will extends to both reason and revelation. Sin is abrogating either one's own
reason, on the one hand, or revelation on the other, and is synonymous with "evil"
12
(absence of good, or privatio boni). Thomas, like all Scholastics, generally argued that
the findings of reason and data of revelation cannot conflict, so both are a guide to
God's will for human beings.
Thomas argued that God, while perfectly united, also is perfectly described by
Three Interrelated Persons. These three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) are
constituted by their relations within the essence of God. Thomas wrote that the term
Trinitydoes not mean the relations themselves of the Persons, but rather the number of
persons related to each other; and hence it is that the word in itself does not express
regard to another." The Father generates the Son (or the Word) by the relation of
self-awareness. This eternal generation then produces an eternal Spirit "who enjoys the
divine nature as the Love of God, the Love of the Father for the Word.
And in Thomas's thought, the goal of human existence is union and eternal
fellowship with God. Specifically, this goal is achieved through the beatific vision, an
event in which a person experiences perfect, unending happiness by seeing the very
essence of God. This vision, which occurs after death, is a gift from God given to those
who have experienced salvation and redemption through Christ while living on earth.
This ultimate goal carries implications for one's present life on earth. Thomas
stated that an individual's will must be ordered toward right things, such as charity,
peace, and holiness. He sees this as the way to happiness. Thomas orders his treatment
of the moral life around the idea of happiness. Those who truly seek to understand and
see God will necessarily love what God loves. Such love requires morality and bears
fruit in everyday human choices.
13
3. Thomas’s Influences
Thomas viewed theology, or the sacred doctrine, as a science, the raw material data of
which consists of written scripture and the tradition of the Catholic Church. These
sources of data were produced by the self-revelation of God to individuals and groups
of people throughout history. Faith and reason, while distinct but related, are the two
primary tools for processing the data of theology. Thomas believed both were necessary
— or, rather, that the confluence of both was necessary — for one to obtain true
knowledge of God. Thomas blended Greek philosophy and Christian doctrine by
suggesting that rational thinking and the study of nature, like revelation, were valid
ways to understand truths pertaining to God. According to Thomas, God reveals himself
through nature, so to study nature is to study God. The ultimate goals of theology, in
Thomas's mind, are to use reason to grasp the truth about God and to experience
salvation through that truth.
Many modern ethicists both within and outside the Catholic Church (notably
Philippa Foot and Alasdair MacIntyre) have recently commented on the possible use of
Thomas's virtue ethics as a way of avoiding utilitarianism or Kantian "sense of duty"
(called deontology). Through the work of twentieth century philosophers such as
Elizabeth Anscombe (especially in her book Intention), Thomas's principle of double
effect specifically and his theory of intentional activity generally have been influential.
Thomas was a theologian and a Scholastic philosopher. However, he never
considered himself a philosopher, and criticized philosophers, whom he saw as pagans,
for always falling short of the true and proper wisdom to be found in Christian
revelation. Much of his work bears upon philosophical topics, and in this sense may be
characterized as philosophical. Thomas's philosophical thought has exerted enormous
14
influence on subsequent Christian theology, especially that of the Roman Catholic
Church, extending to Western philosophy in general. Thomas stands as a vehicle and
modifier of Aristotelianism and Neoplatonism.
Reference:
D'ARCY, M.C. (1930), Thomas Aquinas, London: Ernest Benn Limited (314 pages).
15