Knowing the Love of Christ

An Introduction to the Theology of St. Thomas Aquinas

Michael Dauphinais, Matthew Levering

• Publisher: University of Notre Dame Press
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9780268077907
• Topic: Teologia e religione
• Subtopic: Teologia

Knowing the Love of Christ provides a thorough introduction to the theology of St. Thomas Aquinas in accessible language. As a complement to the many short introductions to St. Thomas's philosophy, this book fills a gap in the literature on Thomas—a comprehensive introduction to his thought written by theologians. With enthusiasm and insight, Michael Dauphinais and Matthew Levering make available the vast theology of Thomas Aquinas. Focusing upon the Summa Theologiae, Dauphinais and Levering illumine the profoundly biblical foundations of Thomas's powerful vision of reality. Drawing upon their own experience, the authors guide readers into grappling with the fresh and penetrating insights of St. Thomas. Students at all stages of theological education will find this book an enriching introduction to the mysteries of the Christian faith.

CHAPTER ONE

THE TRIUNE GOD

In Eastern Rite liturgies, before the reading of Scripture, the priest proclaims, “Wisdom! Be attentive.” The proper hearing of Scripture requires a contemplative attitude, a burning desire to know the Wisdom of God. St. Thomas traces this contemplative fire back to the inspired authors of Scripture itself. In the prologue to his Commentary on John, he argues that it was the grace of intense conversation with God, rooted in love, that enabled men such as Isaiah and St. John to express in human words the truth of God’s Word. As St. Gregory of Nyssa says in his classic treatment of contemplation, The Life of Moses, “The knowledge of God is a mountain steep indeed and difficult to climb—the majority of people scarcely reach its base. If one were a Moses, he would ascend higher and hear the sound of trumpets which, as the text of the history says, becomes louder as one advances. For the preaching of the divine nature is truly a trumpet blast, which strikes the hearing, being already loud at the beginning but becoming yet louder at the end.”¹ The higher we ascend toward the mysteries of the triune God, the more glorious and harmonious will the “notes” of Christian revelation sound in our ears.

The Contemplative Approach

This contemplative movement of ascent is inspired by the triune God’s “descent” in revealing himself through the missions of the Son and Holy Spirit in human history. Inspired by the incarnate Son, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, we are able to appreciate the contemplative path up the mountain toward the triune God that St. Thomas charts for us. This path begins with contemplation of God in his oneness. The contemplative ascent first investigates what belongs to God’s oneness so that the discussion of God as Trinity does not fall into tri-theism. The wonder of God is that in him three is one, and one is three. This truth acts like dynamite upon our limited notions of God.

Though many amateurs attempt mountain climbing, few undertake the most daring climb of all, the mountain of contemplative knowledge of God. Savoring the difficulty and thrill of the climb, let us follow St. Thomas on his ascent.

God Revealed to Moses

All theological insights into God’s oneness flow from contemplation of the way in which God revealed his name to Moses. Having attracted Moses’ attention by the miracle of a bush that burned without being consumed, God named himself “I am who I am,” “He who is,” or YHWH (Ex 3:14–16). The Jewish biblical scholar Nahum Sarna has this to say about God’s name in the context of the function of names in ancient Israel:

The name is intended to connote character and nature, the totality of the intricate, interwoven, manifold forces that make up the whole personality of the bearer of the name. In the present case, therefore, God’s reply to Moses means that the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) expresses the quality of Being. However, it is not Being as opposed to nonbeing, not Being as an abstract philosophical notion, but Being in the sense of the reality of God’s active, dynamic Presence.²

The name “I am who I am” identifies the God who reveals himself through the miracle of the burning bush as a fire that never diminishes because its fuel is never consumed. Consider the difference between this fire and other kinds of fire we know. The sun will burn for billions of years, but it will eventually burn out. Even now, its fuel is being consumed. Our lives, too, are like fires. Like a candle, our lives burn quickly or slowly, and sooner or later the wick will be consumed. In contrast, the miracle of the burning bush suggests that God, like the sun or like ourselves, is in act (aflame with energy) but that, unlike the sun, his act (energy) is always fully present, never diminished. The divine Act is infinite, unchanging Presence. Let us see what this means.

Finite Existence Depends upon Infinite Existence

In light of this revelation to Moses, St. Thomas seeks to contemplate God’s name “He who is.” Consider everything that exists in a finite (limited) way: a star, a bird, a memory, and so forth. All of these things exist, but none had to be. Existing and “existing as star” are not the same. “To be” does not mean “to be star.” If it did, everything that existed would have to be star. This distinction is that between existence and essence. Existence answers the question “is it?” Essence answers the question “what is it?”

Only a reality whose essence is existence, whose nature is simply Act, exists necessarily and in an unlimited, perfectly full, infinite mode. Everything else—a star, a bird, a memory—need not have existed and, once in existence, need not continue to exist in the same way. Such things do not exist in an unlimited or infinite mode. Rather, since “to be” does not mean “to be star,” a star possesses a finite and limited mode of existence.

St. Thomas shows that the existence of finite things—contingent beings such as stars, birds, humans, and so forth—depends upon the existence of infinite Act. Since a finite thing does not exist by its nature, every finite thing must be brought into existence. Consider the case of a human being. Before Jane is conceived, there was a possibility that a human being named Jane would come into existence. It was always possible that a human being would be born who would have the particular existence that Jane does. However, it took the procreative act of Jane’s parents to make that possibility actual. No finite thing can explain its own existence without reference to something that caused a movement from possible to actual existence. If Jane could trace her ancestry all the way back to the Big Bang, would that then explain her existence?

The answer is no. In any historical chain of finite causes, there remains the fact that existence is not a necessary attribute of any finite thing. For each finite thing, the question is ultimately, where does existence per se come from? Why, here and now, is there something rather than nothing? Every finite reality, at every moment, depends upon something else for existence. The original explosion is itself a finite mode of existence. Since the nature of “to be” is not “to be Big Bang,” the original explosion itself must have been a mere possibility. It did not have to occur. Its existence, too, must be explained by reference to something that caused a movement from possible to actual existence.

St. Thomas points out that if one had an infinite chain of finite things being moved from potentiality to actuality, and in turn moving other finite things from potentiality to actuality, what would explain the existence of the infinite chain of finite things? Just as each finite thing cannot in itself account for its existence, but instead must be “actualized” by a prior being, the same would hold for the infinite chain of finite things. The existence of the chain itself depends upon a movement from possibility to actuality caused by a being that does not receive its existence from anything else. In order to explain the existence of the chain of finite things, there must be a cause that is itself uncaused. In other words, there must be a cause which has existence not merely possibly, but by definition—a cause which is infinite actuality, infinite “to be.” This cause is “He who is,” infinite Act.

St. Thomas suggests other ways to identify “He who is.” For example, we find complexity and order in irrational things, which, lacking rational capabilities, could not have placed that order within themselves. From the pattern of a snowflake to the motions of the galaxies, examples of “the laws of nature” abound. These laws could not come from “nature” itself. “Nature” is not a rational being who could institute order in a complex system. Something must have given order to nature—and this orderer is “He who is,” because only God transcends the realm of “nature” and thus could give it an order.

Similarly, we find degrees of existence in the universe. The rock exists, but it does not exist as fully as the plant, which is alive. A worm exists more abundantly than a plant, since the worm not only is alive, but can move itself. A dolphin exists more abundantly than a worm, since dolphins have complex structures of communication. The existence of a human being is of a higher degree than that of a dolphin, because human beings have the power of knowing universal truths and loving them as good. Degrees of perfection in being indicate a standard of perfection in being, by which one thing is measured as existing more or less fully. Although God is not proportional to finite beings (because God is infinite), this standard of perfection that gives measure to all things is infinite Act, “He who is.”

Our Knowledge of God

A contemplative—one who, moved by love, has savored the sheer wonder of existing—will experience the joy and awe contained in the statement “God is infinite existence.” This statement does not reduce the mystery of the divine. God is incomprehensible. God infinitely surpasses any human concept of him. Our finite minds cannot even come close to grasping the infinite mode of being that is God. We can know what God is not, but we cannot know—in the sense of fully comprehending—what God is. Finite existence cannot comprehend infinite existence.

This includes even our knowledge of God by divine revelation in Jesus Christ. St. Thomas, nevertheless, argues that we do possess a greater knowledge of God through the revelation of grace than we could have by natural reason alone. We do know God more fully since he manifests more of his actions to us and he teaches us truths unattainable by natural reason, preeminently, that God is three and one. For instance, the knowledge that God justifies sinners through the passion (cross) of Christ makes known to us God’s great love and mercy.

Revealed knowledge does not overturn the normal structure of the way human beings attain knowledge through our senses. Revelation offers new sensible realities, such as the revelation of the Trinity at Jesus’ baptism, along with a greater intellectual light with which to perceive these realities, namely, the light of grace (1, q.12, a.13). The normal structure of human knowing remains the same: by an intellectual light, we perceive sensible realities. Revelation offers grace, which illumines our minds to perceive the meaning of the sensible realities of God’s marvelous deeds.

There exists a paradox or a dynamic tension at the heart of the revelation of God in Christ. On the one hand, God has revealed himself to us for our salvation in a way that far exceeds anything we could construct from our knowledge of the world. On the other hand, our knowledge of God’s revelation remains subject to the usual way we know things of this world. The dynamic tension exists in the New Testament. 1 John 1:1 depicts the concrete character of our knowledge of God in Christ: “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life”; whereas 1 Corinthians 13:12 reveals the profound limits of our present knowledge: “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood.” St. Thomas and Scripture consistently hold together knowing and unknowing.

If God transcends any words and concepts we derive from the world, how can we speak truly about God? As St. Augustine noted at the beginning of his Confessions, our language is inadequate to capture the majesty of God, but God himself has commanded that we praise him with our language. Language about God has an analogous character. St. Thomas considers analogous names with respect to a “prime analogate” (focal meaning) that serves as the standard for the proper application of the word in other cases. The various meanings are proportioned toward the focal meaning. Consider the word “healthy.” When used in the two phrases “a healthy dinner” and “a healthy Daniel,” it is used analogously. The word “healthy” here has two different meanings, but they are ordered to one focal meaning. We thus call a vegetarian dinner “healthy” though the focal meaning for healthy is the well-functioning human body. The vegetables in the dinner would be better described as “dead” than as “healthy.” What is signified is the perfection of health, but the manner of signifying is different with respect to a “healthy dinner” and a “healthy Daniel.”

By drawing on the structure of analogous words, St. Thomas shows how we can speak meaningfully of God’s perfections while maintaining that God is his perfections in a way unlike the way creatures possess their perfections. God is wise in a way wholly other than the way Socrates is wise. We can say of Socrates that he becomes wise, but we cannot say the same of God, for this would indicate that God is something distinct from his wisdom. We can understand God by means of various concepts, such as goodness, wisdom, and love, even while we understand that God is simple and one. This way of expressing our understanding of God shows both the inadequacy of affirmations about God and the appropriateness of making such affirmations. For example, when Scripture reveals that “God is love” (1 Jn 4:8), we must be cautious of identifying God with our preconceived notions of love. Moreover, even when we attempt to let the narrative of Scripture shape our concept of love, we know that our concept is never fully adequate to the perfection of God as it exists between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

God’s Simplicity

Although we describe God by a diversity of names, God’s essence is not diverse, but rather is simple. God’s simplicity has two implications. First, God is not in any way a “composite.” By contrast, creatures are composites of possibility and actuality, of matter and form, and of various attributes or characteristics. Since, as we have seen, God is sheer Act, there is no “possibility” or untapped potential in God that could be brought into “actuality.” God is already and eternally the infinite fullness of being, the fullness of actuality. God thus cannot be material or bodily. Everything material is a finite or limited form of existence, and thus is composed of possibility and actuality. God is pure spirit (cf. Jn 4:24). Moreover, God’s knowledge is God himself, God’s will is God himself, God’s mercy is God himself, and so forth. The attributes are distinct in our mode of thinking, but they are one in God. Consider that Jane’s intelligence is distinct from Jane herself. She is not her mind. She is a body-soul composite with various powers and faculties. On the other hand, God is any attribute that God possesses. Since God is sheer Act, there is no composition or potential for change in God. God is infinite, undivided Act.

Second, God’s “simplicity” means that God is not “a being” among the varieties of beings. Just as there is no proportion between infinite and finite, there is no proportion between infinite existence and finite existence. God cannot be a limited being among other beings. God is fully present everywhere and in all things not materially or spatially, but by sustaining finite existence in his eternal “now,” his active Presence. God, infinitely active, is unchanging in the sense that nothing can be added to or taken away from the perfectly full, glorious divine Act who is “He who is.” As God taught through the prophet Malachi, “For I the Lord do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed” (Mal 3:6). The vibrant fullness of divine Act sustains the existence of all human beings and sustains the covenants he has established with Israel and, ultimately, the New Covenant in Jesus Christ.

God’s Perfection

All perfections are perfections of being. Possessing a perfection means that one exists more perfectly, whereas possessing a defect means that one exists in a deficient or constrained way. Creatures are p...