The Spirit of Truth
Discovering the Biblical Trinitarian Theology of saint Thomas Aquinas
Anton M. ten Klooster
Student ID: s 508 709 Graduation date: August 26th, 2009 The Spirit of Truth Discovering the Biblical Trinitarian Theology of saint Thomas Aquinas
Anton M. ten Klooster BA
MA-thesis Tilburg University Faculteit Katholieke Theologie
supervisor prof. dr. H.W.M. Rikhof
second censor dr. H.J.M.J. Goris
2 Table of contents
Foreword 5 Introduction 6 Saint Thomas Aquinas 8 The Middle Ages 8 The Order of Preachers 9 Life and work of Thomas Aquinas 9 Canonization in Avignon 12 Doctor Ecclesiae 14 Magister in Sacra Pagina 15 Commentaries on Scripture 15 The senses of Scripture 17 Aquinas’ perception of Scripture 19 Sources in interpreting Scripture 20 Reading John with Saint Thomas Aquinas 22 Place and date of composition 22 Threefold contemplation of the divinity of Christ 22 The doctrine of the divinity of Christ 23 Saint John the Evangelist 24 A different Gospel 24 The lectures on John 16:8-15 25 Divisio Textus 25 The Spirit of Truth 29 Visible and invisible missions 29 The Filioque controversy at the time of saint Thomas 30 The Filioque in the theology of saint Thomas 31 The Spirit manifests Christ because He proceeds from the Son 33 Speaking about the Spirit of Truth 34 The Spirit works in and through the apostles 36 From mundane disciples to apostles 36 Work of the apostles, work of the Spirit 37 The fruits of the Holy Spirit 39 The benefit of the Spirit for the world 39 The benefit of the Spirit for the disciples 42 The benefit of the Spirit for Christ 43
3 Biblical theology, speculative exegesis 44 The doctrine of the Filioque in the commentary on John 48 Criticism of saint Thomas' doctrine of the Filioque 48 Conclusion: Lessons from saint Thomas 50 Speculative exegesis 50 Biblical theology 51 Apostolic activity 51 Bibliography 52
Cover image: stained glass window depicting saint Thomas Aquinas, chapel of the Convict Salesianum in Fribourg, Switzerland. Author's photo.
4 Foreword
Doing academic theology is an intellectual journey. When doing theology with a good master, it is also a spiritual journey. This work is the result of having had saint Thomas as a master for a few years. When speaking and writing about matters of faith in his school, one gets to be “on fire” from time to time. This is exactly what happened in preparing this work. I was struck by the Spirit's fire, the fire of faith that makes us His disciples. In a more literal sense, our seminary was struck by fire. Quite a waste of a perfectly fine copy of De Lubac's Exégèse Médièvale and a leather-bound Summa!
But the more important fire came after those flames. At World Youth Day 2008 in Sydney, pope Benedict XVI presented to the youth of the world the theme “Receive the power of the Holy Spirit” to the youth of the world. It was there that I was really struck: receiving the Spirit is an imperative. One way to harken the call is to have an open mind, which is what I hope to demonstrate in these pages. The next part of the theme was “...to be a light unto the world.” Just as the disciples receive the power to actually go do something, so do we. Or, so should we.
A few people deserve special mention for introducing me to saint Thomas. First and foremost I think of dr. Eric Luijten, rector of studies at the Ariënskonvikt, who introduced me to saint Thomas and has stimulated me to learn more ever since. Dr. Harm Goris lectured on the Trinity and got me fascinated, probably laying one of the foundations for this work. In Fribourg, prof. Gilles Emery, let me read a Biblical commentary of saint Thomas, which formed the primary focus for my research. It was a privilege to have privatissimi with one of the leading scholars in Thomistic theology. That semester in Fribourg would not have been possible though without the generosity of many sponsors. I'm very grateful for what they enabled me to experience. In Fribourg, Hildegard Aepli and Fr. Thomas Ruckstuhl quickly made me feel at home, which made work a lot easier.
In writing this MA-thesis, prof. Herwi Rikhof supervised. Or rather: he let me do my thing and gave some pointers. This turned out to be the most productive way of working! Fr. Richard Edelin was so kind as to offer linguistic advise, since I'm writing in his and not my first language.
Thanks also go out to my fellow students at the Ariënskonvikt, rector Schnell and Fr. Ronald Cornelissen. They all suffered, and accepted, my “medieval moods.” After a day of studies it can be hard to get back in the 21st century!
It is my prayer that the following pages will be more than an intellectual journey. If these are just words on the Holy Spirit, it's just not complete. We touch upon the mysterious work of the Spirit, who penetrates our hearts and draws us into the triune life. The symbols of the Spirit are wind and fire... forces that can't be contained. It is not my intention to 'catch' the Spirit. I only hope that, at the end, you can pray wholeheartedly:1
Per te sciamus da Patrem Oh, may Thy grace on us bestow noscamus atque Filium the Father and the Son to know; Te utriusque Spiritum and Thee, through endless times confessed, credamus omni tempore. Amen. of both the eternal Spirit blest. Amen.
Utrecht, 29.VI.2009, solemnity of saints Peter and Paul,
Anton M. ten Klooster 1 From the hymn Veni Creator Spiritus, English translation by Robert Bridges (1899)
5 Introduction
When asked what my MA-thesis2 would be about, I answered: there are five lines of text in the Gospel of John, saint Thomas wrote five pages on that and I'm writing fifty pages about what saint Thomas wrote. This is, of course, only part of the story. It's not just a commentary on a commentary. In these pages, we'll see how Thomas understands his subject matter and what he learns from the Gospel of John. He learns that the relations in God are explained by what we see happening on earth. Jesus sends the Holy Spirit. This is so because Son sends the Spirit from all eternity. For saint Thomas, this is no arbitrary speculation but a deep truth found in a prayerful reading of Holy Scripture.
There are several ways to present our journey to this insight. One option would be to simply report the close reading of the commentary we have done. This is the so-called ordo inventionis, commenting on issues as they come up. Aquinas' Commentary on John follows this order. Another way of presenting is by presenting them in an ordo disciplinae, which seeks to demonstrate the logical order of things.3 This is the order saint Thomas chose for his Summa Theologiae because he thought it would be most comprehensible for his students. Since my intention is to be as comprehensible as possible, I have chosen to present my findings in an ordo disciplinae, starting with the base principles and gradually arriving at the heart of the matter.
The organization of this work is as follows. First, we look into the life and work of Aquinas to understand the author of our text. From this we learn how he saw his work, and also how saint Thomas' work can be a guide for us today. In a second step, we ask how Aquinas understood the text he commented on: as Holy Scripture. We will see what he considers to be the specificity of the Gospel of John. Having done this, we can take a closer look at a section of the commentary, that on John 16:8-15, where Christ tells the disciples about the coming of the Holy Spirit. Initially, we chose verse 12-15, the Gospel for Trinity Sunday in year A. In the commentary this is lecture IV of the sixteenth chapter. However, this forms a unity with lecture III, since these two together explain the three fruits of the coming of the Holy Spirit. Therefore we look at both lectures. The text is part of the farewell discourse that runs from John 12 to John 17.4
From there we dig deeper into his commentary on John 16:8-15. This is the core of this work: there we discover the Biblical foundations of Aquinas' Trinitarian theology. The central question is: what does saint Thomas read about the Trinity in this passage? Note that two fields of research cross: Biblical interpretation and Trinitarian theology. Where the two meet, one can speak of speculative exegesis, a reading of the Bible that is open to attaining so-called dogmatic insights. Base dogmatic rules also influence the reading. For example: an interpretation that leads to denying the divinity of the Holy Spirit is considered to be false.
The central idea of the speculative exegesis done by saint Thomas is that eternal processions are the ratio of temporal missions. More concrete the relation between procession and mission means that the Spirit fulfills the work of the Son because He proceeds from Him. The fulfillment of this work is done in and through the apostles, the human instrument of the Holy Spirit. The processions in divinis are at the basis of everything else, including creation itself.5 This will therefore be our starting point.
2 “Thesis” as in: “lengthy academic paper,” Encarta College Dictionary, New York, 2001 3 Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 285 4 Cf. Levering, Reading John, p. 114 5 I Sent. d 12 q 1 a 2 ad 3: “processio creaturarum exemplatur a processione divinarum personarum.” Cf. Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 53-68
6 It is to the themes mentioned that we limit ourselves. One could expand on Aquinas' Catena source, the exitus-reditus plan of salvation history reflected in the Summa, the influence of saint Augustine, Aquinas' uniqueness but also what he shares with contemporaries and so forth and so on. The scope of this work is saint Thomas' Biblical Trinitarian theology.
As said earlier, the foundation of this work is a close reading of a particular section of the Commentary on John. The fundamental insights on how saint Thomas understands the role of the Holy Spirit in fulfilling the mission of Christ and the instrumental work of the apostles are based on this study of the primary source. In order to understand how saint Thomas came to compose this primary source, and to see the relation between his dogmatic theology and his Biblical commentaries, we have consulted secondary sources. But it must be stressed that these serve to understand the primary source and to deepen and broaden the insights derived from this source. In recent years, more research has been done about the Gospel of John and its Trinitarian theology.6 This has inspired the subject but is not the basis of this work.
Saint Thomas wrote in Latin, and the original language is the most sound basis for interpretation. The fact that quotations are given in both Latin and English is a courtesy to the reader. For the English text of the Commentary on John, we give Weisheipl and Larcher's translation. Quotations from French sources are the author's translation. References to the Bible are according to the text and numbering of the New Revised Standard Version. Again, the Latin Vulgate Aquinas used is the basis for interpretation.
Although this is an academic work, following academic standards, it can also be read as a meditation on the Paschal Mystery. It is through this central mystery of faith that the Trinity is revealed to the faithful.7 Jesus Christ, the Risen Lord, sends the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the faithful. A gift to be used well, to fulfill the work of Christ in the world.
6 Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 271-320; Le Pivain, L'Action du Saint-Esprit; Dauphinais/Levering (eds.), Reading John with Saint Thomas Aquinas 7 Le Pivain, p. 142; Dauphinais/Levering, p. 78-91
7 Saint Thomas Aquinas
Before we embark on our exploration of the Commentary on John, it is helpful to get an impression of the life and works of its author, saint Thomas Aquinas. The commentary is a product of the author, and the author is shaped by the time in which he lived, the order of which he formed a part and the experiences he had in his own life.
The Middle Ages
In modern days, the adjective “medieval” is often used to insult. This is based on the misunderstanding that the medieval person was superstitious, dressed in rags, afraid of God and illiterate. Although illiteracy was widespread and toilet facilities were poor, the Middle Ages were also a time of great learning, the foundation of universities, debates on everything, rich in art and architecture. All this formed the basis on which the Europe we know today was built.8 We focus on the High Middle Ages, roughly 1100-1300. Europe was an open continent, where Aristotle's non- Christian philosophy ended up in the hands of monks by way of Islamic commentators.9 Mind you, it was the crusaders that brought these texts back from their journeys. This was a sign that the borders between Islam and Christianity were slowly closing. Another border closing was that between East and West, reaching a climax in 1054 when the pope and the patriarch of Constantinople excommunicated each other.10 But in the 13th century Europe was still much more open than it would be in the centuries to follow: Britannia did not rule the waves and the notorious border between Germany and France was non-existent. The Dominican order is a wonderful illustration for the openness of Europe: the order started in southern France and spread throughout all of Europe in a mere seven years.11
Monasteries, along with landlords and dukes, were an important factor in the governance of life. Monks like Bernard of Clairvaux, Hugh of st. Victor and Joachim of Fiora were well-respected leaders. The religious lived the life to a moral and religious standard that other people thought they'd never achieve.12 Although prayer was an important aspect of their life, the religious also devoted plenty of time to studies. Therefore, the religious were an important factor in the establishment of universities in Europe. Debates moved from market squares and courts to lecture- halls, with Paris and Bologna developing as the most prominent institutions of learning. Disputation with a master or among teachers was an important form of learning. One can see this reflected in the Summa Theologiae and the Quaestiones Disputatae.13 Some expressed their concern at hearing professors “cutting the invisible Trinity into pieces on cross-roads.”14 But soon, the universities were a very influental part of society. Society as a whole was perceived as ordered and guided by God.15 Each and every one had his place and his role to fulfill. Kings were chosen by God to govern the people, the religious to pray for the well-being of king and people and the people to work.16
8 Heer, p. 11, 21, 231 9 Craemer, p. 30; Heer, p. 13; Torrell, Initiation, p. 254; Chélini, p. 451 10 Heer, p. 12; Sesboüé, Wolinsky, p. 328-329; Chélini, p. 332 11 For the decline of this open Europe, cf. Le Goff, p. 204-205 12 Heer, p. 55-56; Chélini, p. 369-370; Le Goff, p. 336. This idea has not changed much since then... 13 Heer, p. 237-243, 261-262, 265; Chélini, p. 450 14 Stephen of Tournai, quoted in: Chélini, p. 447 15 Chélini, p. 335-339; Le Goff, p. 253-255 16 Also known as: bellatores (fighters), oratores (those who pray) and agricultores (farmers). Cf. Chélini, p. 337; LeGoff, p. 15, 245
8 The Order of Preachers
The High Middle Ages was a time of mendicant preachers, including -among others- the Waldensians and Cathars, eventually condemned as heretics.17 More accepted figures were Francis of Assisi and Dominic, who shared with Waldes a preference for poverty. They would be the founders of respectively the Order of Friars Minor (Franciscans) and the Order of Preachers (Dominicans).18 Dominic's mendicant life was a reaction to the mendicant-considered-heretic group of the Albigensians.19 His ambition was to spiritually renew the Church from within by returning to the core: studying and preaching the Word of God and following Christ in a life of poverty.20 Life itself was part of this testimony; the order tried to be “of one heart and soul,” just as the first Christian community is described.21 The secular clergy was not amused, since the mendicants' example was providing a stark contrast to and criticism of their own lifestyle.22
From the beginning on, the Dominicans lived in convents,23 where they shared a life of prayer, study and preaching.24 Most of the time preaching did not mean giving a sermon during Mass. It was common practice to preach on Sunday afternoon.25 To prepare this ministry, a brother would have a cella which provided him with the peace and quiet to study.26 Individually, the brothers were poor, but the community could posses a monastery, land and so forth. The possession of books was allowed because they were needed for the main occupation of the friars: study, rather than the manual labor most other orders performed. Soon, Dominican communities emerged all over Europe, often near universities, where the friars would actively recruit novices.27 The secular clergy at the universities was highly suspicious of the mendicants, perceiving them as a threat to their positions and academic freedom. They specifically feared the Dominicans, who were considered an extension of the long arm of the papacy.28 Apart from founding communities in the university cities, the Dominicans also set up their own institutions there, known as studia generalia, for the higher education of friars.29 This was part of a rapid development of the order. The first community started in1215 in Toulouse; when saint Dominic died in 1221 the Dominicans were present in all of Europe.30
Life and work of Thomas Aquinas
Nine years after the Order of Preachers was founded by saint Dominic in 1224, Thomas was born at the family castle in Roccasecca.31 Aquinas' father Landolph was a nobleman whose family had been
17 Heer, p. 194-198; as early as the 12th century Europe was “swarming with hermits, wandering preachers and foot- loose monks,” as Heer describes it. 18 The testimony of Dominic's successor as magister-general of the order, Jordan of Saxony, offers an authentic impression of the first years of the order. Cf. Von den Anfängen des Predigerordens, W. Hoyer, Leipzig 2002. Published in the series “Dominikanische Quellen und Zeugnisse.” 19 Humbrecht, p. 10-11; Heer, p. 210-211; Chélini, p. 425-426 20 Torrell, Initiation, p. 127-129; Dahan, p. 29; Smalley, p. 269; Le Goff, p. 326, 338 21 Acts 4:32; cf. Humbrecht, p. 22-23, 67 22 Torrell, Initiation, p. 111-114 23 The first was founded in 1217, two years after the order began. Cf. Humbrecht, p. 13; Torrell, Initiation, p. 634 24 Humbrecht, p. 12-14; Chélini, p. 433 25 idem, some homilies of saint Thomas have also been preserved. 26 It is important to realize that the studies are thus a means to an end, and not the end itself. Cf. Humbrecht, p. 52-57 27 Humbrecht, p. 14 28 Heer, p. 245; Chélini, p. 448-449; Le Goff, p. 193 29 Chélini, p. 436 30 ibidem 31 Most of the facts surrounding Aquinas' life have been researched thoroughly by J.-P. Torrell, so we extract most data from his Initiation à Saint Thomas d'Aquin
9 in possession of the county of Aquino since 1137.32 Some say he was related to the emperor, but solid proof of this relation is lacking.33 His brothers and sisters rose to powerful positions in either the church or the world.34 Since Thomas was the youngest son, he was destined for the Church. At the age of 5 or 6 he was sent to the Benedictine monastery of Monte Cassino, along with five ounces of gold that his father sent along “for the remission of his sins.” In 1239, due to unrest at the monastery, young Thomas was send to Naples for further studies at the studium generale there.35 There, Thomas came to know the recently founded Order of Preachers. Their life of poverty and study attracted him and he decided to join the friars. This was much to the dislike of his family. Soldiers were sent to fetch Thomas, who was destined to become abbot of Monte Cassino one day. But even constrained in a family castle, young Aquinas insisted on joining the order. The Dominicans complained to pope Innocent IV, but for the time being Thomas remained imprisoned. He spent his time wisely, reading the entire Bible and studying Peter Lombard's Sentences. When, after a year, Thomas was still resolved to join the order, his family returned him to Naples. The deposition of their powerful friend or relation Frederic II by pope Innocent IV also might have been a factor. The whole episode apparently did not harm relations with his family, but it probably strengthened his conviction that mendicant life was the form of life closest to that of the Lord, a position he later fiercely defended against attacks from secular clergy.36
Back in the Dominican order in 1245, Thomas was sent to Paris to study at the studium generale led by Albert the Great. Among other things, he studied the Ethics of Aristotle. Three years later Thomas followed Albert to Cologne, remaining there until 1252. It was probably during this time that the Dominican friar was ordained a priest. He also wrote his first commentary on Scripture, the Super Isaiam ad Litteram. The addition 'ad litteram' means that Aquinas only commented on the literal sense of the book. From his time in Cologne stems a famous tale: his fellow students called Thomas “the dumb ox from Sicily,” a reference to his massive physique and his silence during most table conversation. Master Albert, prophetically, responded: “We call him the dumb ox, but he will give us such a bellow in learning as will astonish the whole world.” But from the part of Albert, it was not just prophesy. He himself was an important factor in saint Thomas' formation. Altogether, Aquinas spent some seven years studying under the supervision of Albert the Great.37 One of the most significant contributions of Albert to Western civilization in general was making the works of the pagan philosopher Aristotle acceptable to Christian Europe.38 For now, we can simply note that it was Albert who stimulated Aquinas to study Aristotle and thus formed a major influence on his further academic career.
This career brought Thomas back to Paris in 1252. He was given an assignment as a bachelor, being recommended to the magister-general of the order by Albert. In more than one respect, it was a noteworthy assignment. First of all, Thomas was 27 years old whereas the minimum age to lecture as a bachelor was 29. Second, the University of Paris was a battlefield: secular and regular clergy were at odds and conflict about the use of Aristotle was brewing. Thomas was thought to be too mild for this climate, although this was disproved quickly after he took up his labor in Paris. His first task was to lecture on Peter Lombard's Sentences. Reportedly, he sought new ways of looking at Lombard's questions and answers. During his first stay in Paris, Thomas also wrote De Ente et Essentia and De Principiis Naturae.39 Some years after his arrival in Paris, in 1256, the university
32 Torrell, Initiation, p. 1-3 33 Heer, p. 273; Torrell, Initiation, p. 3-4 34 Torrell, Initiation, p. 5 35 idem, p. 6-8; Chélini, p. 453 36 idem, p. 11-18, 109-140 37 idem, p. 27-52; Chélini, p. 452-453 38 Craemer, p. 30-35; Söder, p. 2; Chélini, p. 451; Elders, p. 360-361. 39 Torrell, Initiation, p. 53-69, 635. Not all the works were actually hand-written. Many were dictated to one of
10 awarded a licentia docendi to Aquinas. Again, the age requirement was waived. His inaugural lecture was a commentary on psalm 103: Rigans montes de superioribus suis. Thomas was now Magister in Sacra Pagina, a teacher of Holy Scripture.40
In 1259, Aquinas returned to Italy. There he participated in the general chapter of Valencia where he was part of a committee charged with promoting studies. Their main recommendation was to give study priority over other obligations. Professors, to give one example, were allowed to miss the Office if they had to teach. Promising students were to be sent to a studium generale.41 With the chapter over and done with, Thomas went to Naples where he worked on the Summa Contra Gentiles. After two years there, he was sent to lead the Dominican convent in Orvieto. His task as lector was to care for the permanent formation of the friars, mainly in moral theology since most of them served as preachers and confessors. In his four years at the convent, Thomas completed the Summa Contra Gentiles, the Catena in Matthaeum, commentaries on Job and Paul and some smaller works including the Office for the Feast of Corpus Christi. His experience as a teacher for fratres communes gave him a good impression of what was lacking in the manuals of the time. This might have triggered him to compose a manual of his own, the Summa Theologiae.42
Work on the Summa began in Rome, where he was transferred in 1265. In the Eternal City, he was to establish a studium at Santa Sabina, today the headquarters of the Dominican Order. The reason for this was that the chapter had found the education of friars in the province to be below the Order's standards. In Rome, Thomas was free to determine the program for himself and the friars. On arrival, he was rather unsatisfied about both the level and the content of the studies. His first response was to take up his commentary on the Sentences, but he soon abandoned the effort and started working on the Summa, a manual aimed at “beginners.” In his three years in Rome, he finished the Prima Pars and also composed some smaller works.43
Meanwhile in Paris, tensions about the so-called Averroism were rising.44 And the secular and regular clergy were still not getting along too well, to say the least. All this might have led the order to call Thomas to Paris for a second period of teaching, although academic regulations forbade this. He arrived in 1268, staying for four years. The main focus of his writing during this time was commenting on Aristotle, a logical development in light of the ferocious debate about the validity of the use of pagan philosophy in Sacra Doctrina.45 Thomas' position was that it is licit to look at God's creation with our God-given reason. But reason is limited and what is necessary for salvation is revealed by God. This revealed truth can be investigated with reason.46 But the third stay in Paris was not all about Aristotle. In Paris, Thomas wrote some of his finest works, among which the Commentary on John, the Prima Secundae and Secunda Secundae of the Summa and a commentary on the letter of saint Paul to the Romans.47 The commentary on the letters of Paul was completed in Naples, were he returned in 1272 after finishing the academic year in Paris. In Naples he was to establish a studium generale, as ordered by the general chapter of Florence in 1272. The studium
Thomas' secretaries. Of only few parts of an authograph exist. Cf. Torrell, Initiation, p. 350-357. 40 Torrell, Initiation, p. 69-78, cf. supra, p. 15 41 idem, p. 141-144 42 idem, p. 171-175, 233-259, 635 43 idem, p. 207-211, p. 635-636. For a more detailed discussion of the Summa Theologiae and its pedagogy, cf. Torrell, Initiation, p. 211-228 44 Although there was indeed a larger debate about the relation between faith and reason, Averroism seems to be an invention of theologians. At least, no-one ever claimed to be an Averroist. There are some similarities with the battle against “modernism.” Cf. Elders, p. 360-361; Torrell, Initiation, p. 278-2284 45 Torrell, Initiation, p. 261-269; Bishop Tempier actively influenced the debate by issuing a condemnation of Averroist errors in 1270, followed by the condemnation of even more theses in 1277. 46 S. Th. Ia q 1 a 1 respondeo; cf. Hisette, p. 7 47 Torrell, Initiation, p.287-326, 636-637
11 alone formed the main part of the faculty of theology at the local university.48 Other works Aquinas finished during his two years in Naples were the Postilla super Psalmos and the Tertia Pars of the Summa.49 Life in Naples was not as complicated as the Parisian University: less controversy, closer to his family and a relatively lighter workload.50 It would be his last assignment.
Aquinas' last months were almost without production. In 1273, around the feast of saint Nicolas, something radically changed. After celebrating Mass he seemed transformed. It is generally assumed he had a mystical experience of some sort.51 He did not write or dictate anymore and disposed of his writing materials. When his stupefied secretary Reginald asked why, Thomas simply responded: “I can't do it anymore. Everything I have written seems like chaff compared to what I have seen.”52 This might sound like a denunciation of his earlier works, but it is not necessary to interpret it as such. Torrell argued that the “chaff” refers to his words. But the words point to a reality, to God. This is the “grain of reality within the chaff.” According to Torrell, “Thomas, having arrived at reality itself, had a certain right to feel himself detached with respect to the words, but this simply does not at all signify that he considers his work as without value. Simply put, he had gone beyond it.”53
One or two months after this episode, he was called upon to participate in the Council of Lyon, convened by pope Gregory X who was hoping to mend rifts with the Greeks. Thomas and his secretary Reginald left for Lyon, taking with him his own Contra Errores Graecorum. He was distracted as always and failed to notice a tree that had fallen on the road, so his head hit a branch. Since he assured Reginald he was alright, they moved along. While staying for the night in Maenza at his niece's castle, Thomas fell seriously ill. After a few days he felt somewhat better and asked to be taken to the Cistercian Abbey of Fossanova. Legend has it that he said: “When the Lord must visit me, it is better that He find me in a religious house than in a secular house.” On March 4th or 5th Reginald heard his Confession and Thomas received Viaticum. Three days later, on the early morning of March 7th, he died.54
Canonization in Avignon
After his death, Aquinas was both revered as a saint and branded as a heretic. Eventually the former position won, with the canonization by pope John XXII in 1323.55 After the funeral, he was buried in the abbey of Fossanova. Seven months after his death, his body was moved from the cloister to the main church. When exhumed, the body was in state of perfect preservation. The same preservation was reported in 1281 and 1288. Fossanova wasn't Thomas' final resting place. After different translations, his body was moved to Toulouse where it rests to this day.
But it was not just the corpse that wasn't left to rest. At the Parisian University, the controversy over Greek philosophy still wasn't settled. In 1277, bishop Tempier issued a condemnation of 219 theses
48 Torrell, Initiation, p. 360-364 49 The Tertia Pars was never completed, what he did write was composed in Naples 50 Torrell, Initiation, p. 389-390 51 Cerebral hemorrhage has also been suggested, based on the symptoms described in the sources. However, this does not explain the “chaff”-remark. This, his seemingly intact intellectual abilities and the fact that Thomas had already been known for his abstractio mentis, suggest a psychological and/or spiritual explanation. Cf. Torrell, Initiation, p. 430-432 52 Heer, p. 266, Torrell, Initiation, p. 424 53 Torrell, Initiation, p. 429, 432. Also: if he had denounced his own work, why would he even bother traveling to the Council in Lyon? 54 idem, p. 423-429. The body was moved on January 28th, now saint Thomas' feast day on the liturgical calendar. 55 idem, p. 470
12 that supposedly were taught at the Arts Faculty, some of which were thought to refer to Aquinas.56 But since the production of the list had been a rather hasty exercise, only 79 of the theses can be attributed to theologians of the Arts Faculty. Of another 72 the attribution is uncertain and the other 68 could not be identified at all.57 In any case, it was henceforth prohibited to teach or dispute these theses. There has been considerable debate on whether, three years after his death, Thomas Aquinas was an intended target. Some deny he was, other say that he was at least implied. The fact that one of Tempier’s successors in 1325 annulled some of the theses, exactly those thought to be of thomist inspiration, seems to support the latter position.58
The Averroist controversy and other doubts about Aquinas' orthodoxy were succesfully countered by his own Dominican Order.59 At the same time, devotion to Thomas flourished. The fact that the Cistercians were eager to have the body of Thomas in their possession is but one indication of an early veneration. In 1317, William of Tocco was charged by the general chapter to promote the canonization of friar Thomas. Tocco's Ystoria sancti Thome de Aquino now forms an important source for biographers. A year later he presented to the pope in Avignon a first list of miracles attributed to the intercession of Thomas. As a result, the cause for canonization was officially started. Inquiries were held, which resulted in another list of miracles. But, due to legal issues, a second process was required. This second round of inquiries started in 1321. A total of 112 persons were heard regarding post mortem miracles attributed to Aquinas. After this successful process, nothing stood in the way of canonization. On the 18th of July 1323, less than half a century after his death, Thomas Aquinas was proclaimed a saint by pope John XXII in Avignon. The bulla of canonization hardly mentioned Thomas' intellectual achievements. More attention was given to his exemplary life as a religious.60 Aquinas thought the apostolic life was the most perfect form of imitating Christ,61 the right mix of action and contemplation, since “it is better to enlighten than to shine in solitude.”62
Who was this friar seeking to enlighten others? Sources agree on one of the best-known features: his corpulence.63 This was not a sign of obesity though, since Aquinas spent little time at the table. His secretary had to remind him that he had to eat the one meal he usually ate.64 When at the table he would usually be absorbed in thought.65 His life consisted of prayer and study, in that order. He prayed before he studied, realizing that theology is a spiritual exercise.66 For him God was not the object of theology, as if God was a phenomenon to be studied. God is the subject of theology, all things are considered sub ratione Dei.67 This is his prayerful study. Saint Thomas was a serious and contemplative person, although not deprived of a sense of humor and joy. He saw his work as a humble service to God and the Church and did not seek ecclesial honors.68
56 Encouraged by the Franciscan, neo-Augustinian section at the University rather than at the order of the pope, as has been suggested. Cf. Hisette, p. 7, Torrell, Initiation, p. 436; http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/condemnation/ 57 Hisette, p. 7-14; Torrell, Initiation, p. 437 58 Torrell, Initiation, p. 438-439 59 idem, p. 451-463 60 idem, p. 465-476 61 Humbrecht, p. 52 62 Perhaps a criticism the Benedictine Order he left, S. Th. II-IIae q 188 a 6 respondeo; cf. Humbrecht, p. 52 63 Heer, p. 264; Torrell, Initiation, p. 39, 407 64 Torrell, Initiation, p. 399, 413 65 idem, p. 399, 422-423 66 idem, p. 416-419; Torrell, Maître Spirituel, p. 23; Congar, p. 160 67 S. Th. Ia q 1 a 7 respondeo; Torrell, Maître Spirituel, p. 11-16. The subject is the reality that a science seeks to know, in fact it has no other aim than knowing its subject. Concepts or conclusions derived from the understanding of reality are the object of science. Since God is not a concept or a conclusion -although J. Lennon argued the contrary-, He is not the object of theology. 68 Torrell, Initiation, p. 354, 410, 425
13 Doctor Ecclesiae
In the years before the canonization, Aquinas' doctrine was already considered to be of an extraordinary quality. Therefore he became known under titles as doctor venerabilis (1278) and doctor communis (1317). Almost three centuries after his death, the Dominican pope Pius V declared him Doctor Ecclessia, a Doctor of the Church.69
Throughout the centuries, the works of Aquinas have been recommended or prescribed by popes and councils. Over time, Aquinas' theology came to be seen as the highest human insight attainable. The Fathers of the Council of Trent reflected this mentality by placing the Summa Theologiae on the altar, together with Sacred Scripture and the decrees of earlier popes.70 A landmark encyclical, and the start of a neo-thomist revival, was Aeterni Patris by pope Leo XIII. In it, the pope wrote that “reason, borne on the wings of Thomas to its human height, can scarcely rise higher, while faith could scarcely expect more or stronger aids from reason than those which she has already obtained through Thomas.”71 Therefore all Catholic theologians should study the works of the Angelic Doctor, the pope wrote. This was reflected in the Code of Canon Law of 1917 which demanded of students and alumni of philosophy and theology to follow the doctrines and principles of the Angelic Doctor in everything, “considering them holy.”72 In the twentieth century, the popes continued to stress the importance of saint Thomas' work.73
At the Second Vatican Council, no Summa was placed on the altar. Its approach to saint Thomas appears to be a bit more down-to-earth. However, the Council still recommends Aquinas as a guide. Seminarians, “in order that they may illumine the mysteries of salvation as completely as possible, (...) should learn to penetrate them more deeply with the help of speculation, under the guidance of St. Thomas, and to perceive their interconnections. 74 Following the Council a new Code of Canon Law was prepared. It did not demand that seminarians consider the works of Aquinas holy, but studying him is still considered a prerequisite for a proper priestly formation. Seminarians “are to learn to penetrate more intimately the mysteries of salvation, especially with St. Thomas as a teacher.”75 The enduring relevance of Aquinas' theology was stressed by pope John Paul II in his encyclical Fides et Ratio. Pope John Paul lauds Aquinas for “pride of place to the harmony which exists between faith and reason. Both the light of reason and the light of faith come from God, he argued; hence there can be no contradiction between them. 76 He presents Thomas as a master of thought and a model of the right way to do theology. 77
Note the shift from considering Aquinas' doctrine holy to recommending him as a guide and a model for doing theology. Although changes of perception have occurred, saint Thomas has been and still is considered a safe guide for those doing theology. It is our hope and prayer that the Doctor Ecclesiae is just this for our journey through the Gospel of John and Trinitarian theology: a guide, not a definitive answer or the author of a closed system from which one can deduce answers to all questions. Saint Thomas was curious, in search of truth and open to questions; we hope to demonstrate the same mentality in the following pages.
69 Torrell, Initiation, p. 476; cf. pope Pius V, bulla Mirabilis Deus 70 Aeterni Patris #22 71 Aeterni Patris #18; cf. #21 72 CIC 1917 c 1366 § 2 73 To name but a few: Pius X, apostolic letter Donum Delectis, motu proprio Doctoris Angelici; Pius XI, encyclical Studiorum Ducem; Pius XII, speech Sollemnis Conventus; John XXIII, motu proprio Dominicanus Ordo 74 Optatam Totius #16; cf. decree Gravissimum Educationis #10 75 CIC c 252 § 3 76 Fides et Ratio #43; cf. SCG I c 7; S. Th. Ia q 1 a 1 respondeo 77 ibidem, cf. Paul VI, apostolic letter Lumen Ecclesiae #8
14 Magister in Sacra Pagina
We saw that Aquinas was Magister in Sacra Pagina at the University of Paris. Reading Scripture and drawing lessons from it was Aquinas' main occupation. We see this reflected in his writings: commentaries on the Psalms, Jeremiah and Lamentations, Job, the Gospels of Matthew and John, all the letters of saint Paul and the Catena on the four Gospels.78 The theological and philosophical works have their own place in the work of saint Thomas, but they are not his life’s work as far as it concerns profession. As we will see further on, Scripture is “the rule of faith” for saint Thomas.79 In the charter of the University of Paris, the task of a master was defined as legere, disputare et praedicare. Legere means reading the Bible and commenting on it. Having read, the master would dispute, disputare, which is another way of teaching. The Questiones Disputatae are a record of disputations saint Thomas had with other masters. Praedicare, preaching, was the third obligation of the masters. Having read and discussed the Bible, the next step is to preach the message received from these studies. More than parish clergy, the masters had the books needed for studies. So they were the logical homilists. Sermons could be held for a university public but also for “the clergy and the people of the city.” Aquinas, for example, held sermons on the Creed, the Our Father and the Hail Mary. His homilies are remarkably concrete and pastoral, compared to contemporaries.80
Commentaries on Scripture
Now saint Thomas was a theologian of his time, not a “Melchisedech of theology,” fully original and dependent on no-one.81 By the 13th century, when Aquinas took up teaching, there had evolved roughly three types of Biblical commentary: monastic, scholastic and academic exegesis.82 We find elements of all three in saint Thomas’ exegesis. The first type, monastic exegesis, is in its base form a collection of patristic commentaries on a certain book of Scripture. It is a form of commentary that is very suited to be read out loud in a refectory, as it was and is the practice in monasteries. This is also the form of the Catena Aurea saint Thomas wrote on the four Gospels. This is also referred to as “anthological commentary.” Scholastic exegesis was the next form that evolved. It was developed mainly by the different cloister schools, such as the Victorines. Their commentaries roughly start out with a close reading of the text, the disputing of it and offering a predication derived from the text: lectio, disputatio, predicatio; indeed, the core task of the master in a more compact form. It is in these works that the quaestio is born.83 The schools were also the most innovative in developing the spiritual exegesis, which we will explain when we treat the senses of Scripture. The base form is still that of a Gloss, a collection of remarks on the same text, not necessarily related to each other. But the final text is more structured than that of the monastic commentary. The character is less anthological and more continuous.84
The third and final stage of this development is the academic exegesis, developed from the thirteenth century to the end of the Middle Ages. Here the base form of the Gloss is replaced by a more sophisticated, structured text. When commenting on a text with this method, the first thing the Master would do is make a division of the text, in Latin: divisio textus. This forms the framework
78 Cf. Torrell, Initiation, p. 493-498. One could also include the inaugural lectures of 1256 as ‘miniature commentaries.’ 79 S. Th. IIa IIae, q 1 a 9; Super Ioannem 2656; Q.D. q. 17 ad arg.; in some obscure corners of the internet this has earned him the fame of being a Calvinist avant la lettre, cf: ->http://www.puritanboard.com/f35/thomas-aquinas- sola-scriptura-8564/ 80 Torrell, Initiation, p. 79-108 81 The term comes from Congar. Cf. De Lubac, p. 295-296; Torrell, Initiation, p. 496 82 Dahan p. 75; in the explanation of these three types, we follow Dahan closely. 83 idem, p. 97 84 Cf. Dahan, p. 151-154
15 for the commentary. The different elements of the text, as described in the divisio, form the stepping stones for further exegetical, historical and theological expositions. We will explore the academic exegesis in further detail as it is the final stage of a development in medieval exegesis. Not much later, the ways of theology and exegesis will begin to part.85
In general, one can say that the Middle Ages were a rich time for the development of exegesis. There was a myriad of commentaries and much appreciation for their diversity. Exegetes were not looking for the meaning of the text. Attributing only one meaning to Scripture would not honor the richness of the divine message.86 Many tools were used to uncover the riches of the Word of God. Here we explore those tools most used by saint Thomas in the Commentary on John. First and foremost: the divisio textus. The form first appeared in the 12th century, but its most developed form is found in commentaries on all sorts of texts in the 13th century.87 The main virtue of this form is that it requires the commentator to consider the text as a unity. Divisio textus helps the commentator and his readers to see and understand different elements in a text. One can make formal and theological distinctions. A formal distinction in three parts could be: the title, the tractatus and the epilogue.88 In the Commentary of John we find the theological distinction in a part that states the divinity of Christ and a part that demonstrates his acts in the flesh.89 As for saint Thomas' commentary on the letters of saint Paul and the Gospels, one cannot properly read them without making a division of the commentary itself. This is so because the commentary itself is based on a divisio textus of the Gospel. It is important to realise that there is not a “right” divisio of this or that text. A modern commentator often looks for “what the author meant.”90 The medieval commentator divides the text at will, and the variations in division are infinite.91 Again we encounter an appreciation for diversity. This does not rule out that some interpretations are considered false, namely when they are contrary to the Christian faith.92
Having divided the text, there are things that are not clear. These are also referred to as dubitationes. This could be translate as 'doubt' but that would not do justice to the medieval exegete's intention. His purpose would not be to doubt the Word of God. But aspects that are unclear, dubitationes, can lead to a deeper understanding of the divine message. In responding to a dubitatio the author can also rule out an erroneous or heretic interpretation of a certain passage. We encounter examples of this in our discussion of the Commentary on John.93 In some commentaries they are very similar to the quaestiones as we know them from the Summa Theologiae.94 Another, related, form is the nota, “a short expositon, based on the text.”95 A scholastic commentary often consisted almost exclusively of notae. In the academic commentary the note draws attention to this or that element of the text. The final paragraphs of the section we are discussing is full of notae, indicated by words as sed notandum, sed quaeritur, sed attende and, of course, sed nota.96
One other issue that merits attention, that of the author's intention. A modern reader might be interested in what John, Paul or Moses actually meant by a certain phrase, the sensus auctoris. This
85 Smalley, p. 292-293; Dahan, p. 446 86 Dahan, p. 141; Boyle, p. 5 87 Dahan, p. 272 88 This is saint Bonaventure's divisio textus for Ecclesiastes; cf. Dahan, p. 274 89 Super Ioannem 23 90 Boyle, p. 4-5; Dahan, p. 273; we are referring to the sensus auctoris 91 Dahan, p. 273 92 Boyle, p. 4-5 93 Super Ioannem 2103, 2104 94 E.g. Super Ioannem 2113 95 Dahan, p. 129 96 Super Ioannem 2108-2115
16 is, as J. Boyle rightly claims, a dead end.97 Simply because we cannot ask John, Paul or Moses what they meant. The received text is the basis for discussion. What one can search for is the intentio auctoris. To intend is “an act of the will insofar as the will moves to some end or goal.”98 According to saint Thomas, John intends to show the divinity of the incarnate Word.99 Understanding this intention helps us to understand the Gospel as a whole as well as separate sections. However, this is different from “what the author meant,” or how he would have understood his own text. This is so because the meaning of the Biblical text does not depend on the human author. It is God who is the principal author of the text.100 Saint Thomas specifically mentions the Holy Spirit as author. He is the primary efficient cause of Sacred Scripture. The human author is the instrument in His hands, the secondary efficient cause.101 Because God is the author, the text is Sacred Scripture. It is also because of the authorship of God that a text can have a literal and multiple spiritual senses.
The senses of Scripture
In saint Thomas' time, all authors assumed that Sacred Scripture had four so-called 'senses.'102 One can think of senses as multiple layers of meaning of the same word or phrase. This is a vast subject, but we will try to explain the central elements of this thinking. The idea pre-supposes two subdivisions. First: Scripture has a literal sense and a spiritual sense. The literal sense is present in any form of writing. In this sense, the word “Jerusalem” refers to a city in the Middle East. The term “literal” does not imply, for example, a creationist reading of Genesis 1. If this were so, the commentator would be out of work in no time! And Scripture would be a far less interesting and challenging book. The literal sense is much broader than that. For example: when saint Thomas interprets John 14:14 as a reference to the Filioque, this is considered a literal reading.103 This is so because the objects in the text (Son, Spirit) are not the figure (typos) of something else. They mean just that: Son and Spirit, literally. This, as well as metaphors, pertains to the literal sense.104 Because this is so, it is possible for a text to have more than one literal sense.105 “David” can refer to both the king and his house, in both cases this is the literal sense.
Second, the spiritual sense can be divided into three: the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. For all three the word Jerusalem reminds the reader of the actual city, but also refers to another reality. The object (res) refers to a spiritual reality, also intended by God. The first, allegory -also known as typology-, refers to a matter of faith. Prefiguration is a form of allegory. One of the more famous allegories in Scripture is that of the Paschal Lamb being the prefiguration of Christ.106 The moral, also called: tropological, sense provides instruction for the life in Christ. The anagogical sense offers insight into our final end. Saint Thomas also distinguished the spiritual sense in two subdivisions: the allegorical and anagogical sense instruct the faithful on what to believe, the moral sense instructs them on what to do.107 A famous verse, quoted below, explains the four senses.108 In
97 Boyle, p. 5 98 idem, p. 7; S. Th. I-II q 12 a 1 ad 4 99 Super Ioannem I; cf. Le Pivain, p. 29 100 Le Pivain, p. 29; Boyle, p. 6; Dahan, p. 41; De Lubac, p. 266. This does not rule out textual criticism, cf. Dahan, p. 223-228 101 Q.Q. 7 q 6 a 1 ad 5, a 3 respondeo; cf. Dahan, p. 41; Smalley, p. 297 102 De Lubac, p. 266; Dahan p. 241-242; Le Pivain, p. 31; S. Th. Ia q 1 a 10 respondeo 103 “He [the Spirit] will glorify me [the Son], because he receives from me and will declare it to you.” 104 Dahan, p. 434; Super ad Galatas IV 105 De Lubac, p. 279 106 In the Gospel of John, Jesus dies at the hour the Paschal Lamb is slain, John 19:14. The idea of the Paschal Lamb as allegory of Christ is also expressed in the liturgy of the Church: e.g. the preface of Easter and the hymn Ad Cenam Agni Providi 107 Q.Q. 7 q 6 a 2 respondeo 108 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 115-119; cf. Super ad Galatas IV
17 it, we see the senses, with the different interpretations of the word Jerusalem that come with them.
“Jerusalem” Littera gesta docet The letter teaches you what has A city in the Middle East occured quid credas allegoria what you must believe, the The Church of Christ allegory moralis quid agas morality, what to do The soul of the believer quo tendas anagogia what to tend toward, the The heavenly Jerusalem anagogy
Words in Scripture can signify multiple things because God is author of both the particular res and of Holy Scripture. In the Middle Ages it was common to refer to the Bible and Creation as “the Two Books of God.”109 For this and other reasons only Scripture can have an allegorical sense:110 only God in His eternal wisdom could have destined the Paschal Lamb to be the prefiguration of Christ. The history of spiritual interpretation starts in the New Testament itself. The virgin of Isaiah 7:14 is interpreted by Matthew as a reference to the Virgin Mary.111 Mark quotes Isaiah 40:3 as a description of John the Baptist.112 John sees the events of Palm Sunday prefigured in the words of Isaiah 40:9 and Zecharia 9:9.113 They all interpret Scripture with Scripture. And the medieval exegetes follow them in doing this.114 But the most famous example is Luke 24, the story of the disciples at Emmaus: “Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things about himself in all the scriptures.”115 Jesus also interprets Scripture with Scripture. “Interpres noster est Iesus Christus,” as saint Anthony preached.116 Jesus takes the disciples by the hand and guides them through Scripture. We are also taken by the hand when the Lord uses natural realities (e.g. a rock) to introduce to us spiritual realities (the strength of God). God knows that we are limited human beings and speaks to us in ways that we can understand.117 A spiritual reading of the Bible is based on this faith. B. Smalley correctly summarized the relation between these two as follows: “the literal sense of Scripture, therefore, is what the human author expressed by his words, the spiritual senses are what the divine author expressed by the events which the human author related.”118 One can liken the process to the wedding of Cana, where Jesus turned water into wine. In explaining the Scriptures he turns what seem like mere words into rich, meaningful communication.119
The Commentary on John, however, consists almost entirely of literal exegesis. This has to do, in part, with the fact that the exegesis is highly speculative. And the rule of the time was that theological speculation could only be based on the literal sense.120 We will explore saint Thomas' position on this and other issues, by taking a closer look at the main sources concerning his exegesis.
109 Dahan, p. 326; De Lubac, p. 265; Le Pivain, p. 31 110 De Lubac, p.278 111 Matthew 1:23 112 Mark 1:3 113 John 12:15 114 Dahan, p. 62 115 Luke 24:27 116 Sermo in Dom. III in Quadragesima; cf. Dahan, p. 63 117 Dahan, p. 51 118 Smalley, p. 300; cf. Boyle, p. 7; De Lubac, p. 285 119 De Lubac, p. 271 120 S. Th. Ia, q 1 a 10 ad 1; cf. Smalley, p. 300-301
18 Aquinas’ perception of Scripture
Scripture, to saint Thomas, is the Vulgate. We do not have indications that he studied Greek and/or Hebrew, although fellow Dominicans like William of Moerbeke were active translators. The Vulgate was the authoritative text for the time and was considered a solid base for exegesis.121 Scholars would memorize the text and be “impregnated by it.”122 The same goes for saint Thomas. We can assume he knew large sections of the Bible by heart and had a deep respect for the Holy Book. We learn more about this when we read how Aquinas describes the rules of his own exegesis. The main sources are the Questiones Quodlibetales, passages from the Summa Theologiae and his commentary on Galatians 4:24.123 We will highlight those aspects that help us understand how he perceived Scripture. Our main focus will be the status saint Thomas gives to Sacred Scripture. This will allow us to see that his theology is thoroughly rooted in his exegesis.
The relation between the senses makes clear what the basis of meaning is, for Aquinas. In the Questiones Quodlibetales he responds to the objection that a text can not have more than one meaning, as the Philosopher, i.e. Aristotle, says. Multiple senses would imply a plurality of meaning. He replies:124
A variety of senses -where one does not proceed Varietas sensuum, quorum unus ab alio non from the other- produces a plurality of speech; procedit, facit multiplicitatem locutionis; sed but the spiritual sense is always founded on the sensus spiritualis semper fundatur super literal [sense] and proceeds from it; therefore, litteralem, et procedit ex eo; unde ex hoc quod when Sacred Scripture is expanded on literally Sacra Scriptura exponitur litteraliter et and spiritually, there is no plurality in this. spiritualiter, non est in ipsa aliqua multiplicitas.
This response has two important aspects: the spiritual sense is one, and it is always founded on the literal sense. Spiritual interpretation presupposes the literal sense, so the first job for a commentator would be to understand the literal sense.125 In the next question saint Thomas explains the subdivision of the one spiritual sense into three: allegorical, moral and anagogical. His main authority for this claim is saint Augustine's commentary on Genesis.126 The literal sense, saint Thomas explains, “is correctly taken from the signification of the words.”127 In the spiritual sense the res is the figure of something else. This sense is directed towards the right actions (moral sense) and the right faith. What pertains to the right faith can either be a prefiguration of Christ and the Church (allegorical sense),128 or old and new together can signify the triumphant Church (anagogical sense). The commentary on Galatians 4:24 expands on this. This is the only place in the Bible where the word “allegory” is found. In the commentary, saint Thomas mentions God as “another intellect” guiding the human author, thus providing the spiritual sense.
The first question of the Summa also expands on the senses of Scripture, along the lines of what we just saw.129 Further on in the Summa we encounter the objection that Sacred Scripture is the rule of
121 Dahan, p. 176; Chélini, p. 18 122 Dahan, p. 24 123 Q.Q. 7 q 6 a 1,2; Q.Q. 12 q 17; S. Th. Ia q 10; S. Th. II-IIae 1 a 9; Super ad Galatas IV; cf. De Lubac, p. 273-276 124 Q.Q. 7 q 6 a 1 ad 1; author's translation 125 idem, S. Th. Ia, q 1 a 10 respondeo; cf. Le Pivain, p. 32 126 Q.Q. 7 q 6 a 2 sed contra 1 127 Q.Q. 7 q 6 a 2, respondeo 128 The apostles are also thought to be prefigured. For example by the “heavens” in the Psalms, and the twelve stones selected from the river Jordan in Joshua 4:3 129 S. Th. Ia q 1 a 10
19 faith, to which nothing may be added and from which nothing may be taken.130 Saint Thomas agrees with the objection, but accepts that elements can be taken from Scripture and be used to compose a creed, because not all faithful undertake the study of the Bible for themselves. This creed, drawn from Scripture by the Church is then also a rule of faith. But the most important rule is: nothing can be taken from or added to the divinely revealed truth. In a note to his commentary on the two final verses of John, Aquinas seems to formulate this even more strongly:131
We should note that although many have written Notandum autem, quod cum multi scriberent de about Catholic truth, there is a difference among Catholica veritate, haec est differentia, quia illi, them: those who wrote the canonical scriptures, qui scripserunt canonicam Scripturam, sicut such as the evangelists and apostles and the like, Evangelistae et apostoli, et alii huiusmodi, ita so constantly and firmly affirm this truth that it constanter eam asserunt quod nihil dubitandum cannot be doubted. Thus John says, “we know relinquunt. Et ideo dicit “et scimus quia verum that his testimony is true.” And: “If any one is est testimonium eius.” “Si quis vobis preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which evangelizaverit praeter id quod accepistis, you received, let him be accursed” (Gal 1:9). anathema sit.” Cuius ratio est, quia sola canonica The reason for this is that only the canonical Scriptura est regula fidei. Alii autem sic scriptures are the standard of faith. The others edisserunt de veritate, quod nolunt sibi credi nisi have set forth this truth but in such a way that in his quae vera dicunt. they do not want to be believed except in those things in which they say what is true.
After a quick reading, one might take this to be a position in support of the Sola Scriptura of the Reformation.132 Apart from the fact that this argument is anachronistic, it misses the point. Saint Thomas specifically speaks of canonical Scripture. That is: as opposed to non-canonical. According to Aquinas, the Gospel of John was written to counter false ideas about Christ that had appeared after the synoptics.133 However, the fact still stands that Scripture is the rule of faith. It is important to realise this as we explore saint Thomas' commentary on John. He is always loyal to the words of Scripture and would not dare to “overrule” it by his own or some one else's speculations. There are however authoritative voices that help his and our understanding of the Bible.
Sources in interpreting Scripture
These authoritative voices are one of Thomas' main sources in interpreting Scripture. In the Catena Aurea he collected commentaries from the Glossa and the Greek and Latin Fathers that formed the base for his commentaries on Matthew and John. Aquinas sometimes takes entire sections from Augustine and John Chrysostom and copies them to his own commentary, sometimes slightly altered.134 To the medieval theologian, the Church Fathers were not just any source. The consensus was that they were inspired by the same Spirit that inspired the authors of Sacred Scripture, therefore they were considered as and referred to as auctoritates.135 For saint Thomas, it is not “necessary” to believe the Fathers, but he considers their work a gift of the Holy Spirit.136 Saint Thomas did not read the Bible alone; he reads it united with the Church in time and history, and
130 S. Th. IIa IIae q 1 a 9 arg 1; cf. Torrell, Maitre Spirituel, p. 505 131 Super Ioannem 2656 132 To get an impression, one can perform a Google search with the terms “Aquinas Sola Scriptura” 133 Super Ioannem 10 134 He demonstrates a particular fondness for saint Augustine. Cf. Torrell, Maitre Spirituel, p. 507-508; Le Pivain, p. 26; Congar, p. 162-163, and Maillard's study of the In Ioannem in light of the Augustinian sources. 135 Dahan, p. 66; Q.Q. XII q 17 respondeo, ad 1; cf. Torrell, Maitre Spirituel, p. 228; Chélini, p. 450; Le Pivain, p. 26-29 136 Q.Q. XII q 17 respondeo
20 wishes to be “an echo of a tradition.”137
Among the works of the Fathers, Augustine's De Doctrina Christiana was held in particularly high esteem. It functioned as a manual for preachers and exegetes.138 One of Augustine's points was that a commentator should also use the liberal arts in his study of Scripture. Aquinas took this message to heart. This is why he studied the works of Aristotle. For example, in the Commentary on John we see him referring to a principle from the Physics to explain divine processions to the reader.139 It is perfectly acceptable for saint Thomas to use these principles, since they are derived from the Book of Nature, of which God is also the author. The Author can never contradict Himself.140 But using science and our God-given ratio is only a way of contemplating the mystery. When it comes to things divine “there is no other way of speaking than to speak of Sacred Scripture.”141
Last but not least, the main source in interpreting Scripture is Scripture itself. In his commentary on John, saint Thomas makes numerous references to other Scripture passages. Since God is considered to be the author of the one Bible, this is a logical procedure.142 In the Commentary on John, almost two-thirds of the quoted passages refer to books Aquinas had commented on earlier in his life. In this way his study of Scripture became a source for further studies. Another striking detail is saint Thomas' preference for the letters of saint Paul.143 His reading of the letters, and of all of Scripture is a prayerful one. This is reflected, for example, in the fact that Aquinas sees the Holy Spirit as the main teacher of Scripture;144 the reader must therefore be open to the same Spirit that inspired the writers of the sacred words. Therefore the exegesis of saint Thomas is not an academical exercise, but a spiritual one. Speculation, to him, is a form of contemplation.145 His is an “exégèse confessante.”146
137 Torrell, Maitre Spirituel, p. 507 138 Dahan, p. 390-391 139 Super Ioannem 2106; cf. Torrell, Maitre Spirituel, p. 504; cf. infra, p. 34 140 Dahan, p. 326; De Lubac, p. 265; Torrell, Maitre Spirituel, p. 504; Saint Thomas saw faith and science as two ways of looking at the same object, cf. S. Th. Ia q 1 a 1 ad 2 141 Contra Errores Graecorum I 1; S. Th. Ia q 36 a2 ad 1; cf. Torrell, Maitre Spirituel, p. 505 142 Le Pivain, p. 33 143 Torrell, Maitre Spirituel, p. 504 144 idem, p. 228, 506 145 idem, p. 22 146 Dahan, p. 37; cf. De Lubac, p. 266
21 Reading John with saint Thomas Aquinas
Place and date of composition
We learn from Torrell that the Lectura super Ioannem was probably composed during Aquinas' second period of teaching in Paris, which lasted from 1268-1272. In the last two years of this stay, Aquinas gave his course on the Gospel of John.147 In his work of commenting on the Gospels, Aquinas seems intent on following the canonical order, as he did when writing the Catena Aurea. The jump from the first Gospel to the fourth can be explained from the fact that John has a message that is radically different from the synoptics, Torrell argues.148
Threefold contemplation of the divinity of Christ
We will take a closer look at the prologue to see if Torrell is right. The opening words of the commentary are those of the prophet Isaiah, speaking of his vision of God:
“I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, and the whole house was full of his majesty, and the things that were under him filled the temple”149
Earlier in his life, during his stay in Cologne, Aquinas commented on this passage. He quoted the Church Father Hieronymus who “posed in a different way -and a better one- that the seat signified the majesty of the Son of God , because it is written in John 12:41: “Isaiah said this, because he saw his glory, and spoke of him [Christ].” The prophet truly saw God, but uses the figure of a man on a throne to “take the listeners by the hand.” In fact, all of the book of Isaiah has as its principal subject the manifestation of the Son of God, Thomas writes in the prologue of his commentary in Isaiah.150 In the prologue on John, he goes on to explain why the words of the prophet open the commentary on the Gospel:151
These are words of a contemplative and if we Verba proposita sunt contemplantis, et si regard them as spoken by John the Evangelist capiantur quasi ex ore Ioannis Evangelistae they apply quite well to showing the nature of prolata, satis pertinent ad declarationem huius this Gospel. Evangelii.
This is what makes the Gospel of John different. For as Augustine says: “the other Evangelists instruct us in their Gospels on the active life; but John in his Gospel instructs us also on the contemplative life.” Like Isaiah, John saw the divine Son.152 Both describe their encounter to the listeners. This specific quotation from Isaiah describes the contemplation of John in three ways, for John contemplated the Lord Jesus in a threefold manner: high, full and perfect.
“I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne” expresses that John's contemplation is high. The Lord seated on the throne is Christ. John contemplates the Lord in a fourfold height. A height of authority (“the Lord”), of eternity (“seated”), of dignity (“on a high throne”) and a height of incomprehensible truth (“lofty”). “It is in these four ways that the early philosophers arrived at the knowledge of God,” Aquinas concludes. Note that a philosopher would only come to one of these 147 Torrell, Initiation, p. 288; Le Pivain, p. 23 148 idem, p. 290-291; cf. Le Pivain, p. 44-48 149 Isaiah 6:1 150 Cf. Wawrykow, p. 47. This is what the Church still confesses today, by choosing readings from the prophet Isaiah for Advent. 151 Super Ioannem 1; Aquinas follows the interpretation of saint Augustine, cf. Le Pivain, p. 37 152 Cf. Levering, p. 41; Maillard, p. 289
22 four ways, not all four. These four aspects are then tied to the first lines of the Gospel to show that John had this knowledge of all four, whereas for example the Platonists came to knowledge of God only from His dignity. Their conception of higher ideas, although not mentioned explicitly here, led them to perceive a supreme cause of all being in which all that is participates.
“And the whole house was full of his majesty” expresses that John's contemplation is full. “Contemplation is full,” Aquinas writes, “when someone is able to consider all the effects of a cause in the cause itself.” John knew the cause itself, because he could write: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God.” (John 1:1) He also knew the effects of the cause, since he wrote: “through him all things came into being.” (John 1:3) Therefore, John's contemplation was full.
“And the things that were under him filled the temple” expresses that John's contemplation is perfect. “For contemplation is perfect when the person contemplating is led and raised to the height of the thing contemplated,” according to Aquinas. Now John taught not only how all things were made through the Word of God, but also “that we are sanctified by him and adhere to him by the grace which He pours in us.” The things “under him” are the sacraments -the communication of grace- that fill the “temple,” the faithful, “who are the holy temple of God.” (1 Cor. 3:17)
So, Aquinas concludes, “the contemplation of John was thus full, high, and perfect.” These three characteristics of contemplation belong to different sciences. “Perfection” belongs to moral science which is concerned with the ultimate end. “Fullness” belongs to natural science which considers things as proceeding from God. “High” belongs to metaphysics. As we saw, the Gospel of John contains in a united way what science has in a divided way, “and so it is most perfect.”
The doctrine of the divinity of Christ
After having sketched the characteristics of the contemplation of the Evangelist, Aquinas goes on to describe the intention saint John had when he wrote this Gospel. It is worthwhile to quote this heart of the prologue at length:153
In this way then, from what has been said, we Sic ergo ex praemissis colligitur materia huius can understand the matter of this Gospel. For Evangelii; quia cum Evangelistae alii tractent while the other Evangelists treat principally of principaliter mysteria humanitatis Christi, Ioannes the mysteries of the humanity of Christ, John, specialiter et praecipue divinitatem Christi in especially and above all, makes known the Evangelio suo insinuat, ut supra dictum est: nec divinity of Christ in his Gospel, as we saw tamen praetermisit mysteria humanitatis; quod above. Still, he does not ignore the mysteries of ideo factum est, quia postquam alii Evangelista his humanity. He did this because, after the other sua Evangelia scripserunt, insurrexerunt haereses Evangelists had written their Gospels, heresies circa divinitatem Christi, quae erant quod had arisen concerning the divinity of Christ, to Christus erat purus homo sicut Ebion et Cerintus the effect that Christ was purely and simply a falso opinabantur. Et ideo Ioannes Evangelista, man, as Ebion and Cerinthus falsely thought. qui veritatem divinitatis Verbi ab ipso fonte divini And so John the Evangelist, who had drawn the pectoris hauserat, ad preces fidelium, Evangelium truth about the divinity of the word from the istud scripsit, in quo doctrinam de Christi very fountain-head of the divine breast, wrote divinitate nobis tradidit, et omnes haereses this Gospel at the request of the faithful. And in confutavit. it he gives us the doctrine of the divinity of Christ and refutes all heresies.
153 Super Ioannem 10
23 The order of the Gospel “is clear from the above.” It serves the same double goal as all of sacred doctrine: to teach revealed truth and to refute error.154 Aquinas connects the words of the prophet Isaiah with the opening words of John to show how both communicate their knowledge of the divinity. This is, as it were, the summary of what was said about high, full and perfect contemplation. He presents the following scheme:
I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne In the beginning was the Word (1:1) and the whole house was full of his majesty through him all things came into being (1:3) and the things that were under him filled the the Word was made flesh (1:14) temple
The end of the Gospel “is also clear. Namely that the faithful become the temple of God, and become filled with the majesty of God; and so John says below (20:31) “These things are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.” This is, for Aquinas, “the matter [materia] of this Gospel, which is the knowledge of the divinity of the Word.”
Saint John the Evangelist
The prologue concludes with describing saint John himself, by his name, his virtue, his symbol and his privilege.155 His name means “in whom is grace.” And John had grace, since he could see the secrets of the divinity. It is believed that he also had the virtue of virginity. It is fitting that a virgin could see the Lord: “Blessed are the pure in heart,” Aquinas quotes Matthew 5:8. The end of the phrase, not quoted here but most likely implied, is: “for they shall see God.”156 And John did indeed see the divinity of the Lord Jesus. John's figure, in Christian iconography, is the eagle. The other Evangelists are portrayed by creatures that roam the earth: a man (Matthew), a bull calf (Luke) and a lion (Mark). But John is portrayed as an eagle: he flies “above the cloud of human weakness and looks upon the light of unchanging truth.” The fourth typical aspect of saint John is his privilege. He was the “beloved disciple” (John 21:20). Therefore Christ confided his secrets in a special way to him.
A different Gospel
So Torrell was right... the Gospel of John is of an entirely different matter than the synoptics. From the opening words “In the beginning was the Word” to the words of the apostle Thomas who acclaims the Risen Christ as “my Lord and my God” the Gospel is about the divinity of Christ. It is important to note that Aquinas does sees the Gospel not just as the proclamation of the truth but also as the response to heresies in the early Church. This basic knowledge helps us to understand certain choices saint Thomas makes while commenting on the Gospel. He always has the subject matter of the entire Gospel in mind: showing the divinity of Christ and refuting errors.
154 Cf. Emery, Trinity, Church and the Human Person, p. 7; Le Pivain, p. 40-41 155 Super Ioannem 11; cf. Le Pivain, p. 38-39 156 Cf. Le Pivain, p. 38
24 The lectures on John 16:8-15
Having explained how Thomas perceives the Gospel of John, we can take a closer look at our section of the commentary, that on John 16:8-15, where Christ tells the disciples about the coming of the Holy Spirit. Initially, we chose verse 12-15 only, the Gospel for Trinity Sunday in year A. In the commentary this is lecture IV of the sixteenth chapter. However, this forms a unity with lecture III, since these two together explain the three fruits of the coming of the Holy Spirit. Therefore we reflect on both lectures. The text is part of the farewell discourse that runs from John 12 to John 17.157
In the verse before our lecture, Jesus explains to His disciples why He must leave: “Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.” (John 16:7). This Advocate was already promised in John 14:15, 14:26 and 15:26. Now Jesus speaks of “when he comes,” that is, the Advocate. The passage Aquinas is commenting on is as follows.
8 And when he comes, he will prove the world 8 Et cum venerit ille, arguet mundum de peccato et wrong about sin and righteousness and de iustititia et de iudicio: judgment: 9 about sin, because they do not believe in me; 9 de peccato quidem quia non crediderunt in me; 10 about righteousness, because I am going to 10 de iustitita vero, quia ad Patrem vado et iam the Father and you will see me no longer; non videbitis me; 11 about judgment, because the ruler of this 11 de iudicio autem, quia princeps huius mundi world has been condemned. iam iudicatus est. 12 I still have many things to say to you, but you 12 Adhuc multa habeo vobis dicere; sed non cannot bear them now. potestis portare modo. 13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide 13 Cum autem venerit ille Spiritus veritatis, you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his docebit vos omnem veritatem. Non enim loquetur own, but will speak whatever he hears, and he a semetipso; sed quaecumque audiet loquetur, et will declare to you the things that are to come. quae ventura sunt annuntiabit vobis. 14 He will glorify me, because he will take what 14 Ille me clarificabit, quia de meo accipiet et is mine and declare it to you. annuntiabit vobis. 15 All that the Father has is mine. For this reason 15 Omnia quaecumque habet Pater mea sunt; I said that he will take what is mine and declare propterea dixi: Quia de meo accipiet, et it to you. annuntiabit vobis.
Divisio textus
As we saw, the divisio textus was one of the most important exegetical tools of the medieval masters of Sacred Scripture, and Aquinas was no exception. In the larger division, our section is part of the preparation of the disciples for life after Jesus' ministry, done by Jesus himself.
In the text of John 16:8-15, Thomas observes a tripartition. As he reads the text, Christ speaks of the use of the coming of the Holy Spirit in three ways: for the world, for the disciples and for Himself. These three ways are how the Spirit is of benefit; Thomas calls these the utilitas of the coming of the Spirit. The word can also mean “use,”158 and in lecture IV Aquinas speaks of “fruit.” This is to express that the divine person is not some gratuitous token of God's affection for us. The Spirit has a mission for this world, He is a gift that is of use for those to whom He is sent. His work bears fruit
157 Cf. Levering, Reading John, p. 114 158 Schütz, Thomas-Lexikon, lemma 'utilitas'
25 in those who receive Him.
This benefit is different for all three parties involved. The world will be rebuked or proven wrong, the disciples will be instructed and Christ will be glorified. This distinction leads us to the formulation of a raw version of the divisio textus. According to Thomas, saint John's text is divided into the following sections.
John 16:8-11 For the world: proven wrong Lecture III, 1-2 2092-2098 “He will prove the world wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment.”
John 16:12-13 For the disciples: instruction Lecture III, 3-5 2099-2104 “He will guide you into all the truth.”
John 16:14-15 For Christ: glorification Lecture IV 2105-2115 “He will glorify me.”
This serves as the framework for the commentary. But each of these elements raises questions, evokes doubts or have been prone to heretic interpretations in the past. Therefore, the commentary goes further than merely exposing the above mentioned structure. Saint Thomas rejects certain interpretations, mentions or quotes which are without reference interpretations of the Church Fathers, and thus proposes a finer substructure for the framework. To name a few examples: the words “he will guide you into all the truth” have sometimes received a gnostic interpretation. Thomas thinks this stems from a wrong understanding of the text. So, after having explained the text (2100), he explicitly excludes the gnostic interpretation (2101). In doing so, he isn't original. In the Catena Aurea, Thomas already quoted saint Augustine's commentary on John, who also refers to gnostic errors. Here he makes the words of Augustine his own, although the wording is slightly modified. In the first section of this tripartite text, Aquinas largely follows Augustine's interpretation. But after having done that, he also presents the alternative interpretation by saint John Chrysostom. From this we can derive that he doesn't think of Augustine's commentary, or his own, as the only possible interpretation. Different interpretations of the same text can occur and both be valid, as long as they are not heretical or in other ways erroneous.
Aquinas is aware that his own interpretation can also raise doubts, that is questions about the intention of a certain formula. Expounding on this, he further elucidates his interpretation. Therefore, after having said how the text mentions the consubstantiality of the Father and the Son (2110), he responds to known questions about this doctrine (2111-2113). This isn't a direct commentary on the text, of course, but it is necessary to mention these objections so as to exclude erroneous interpretations of Sacred Scripture.
These are just a few examples of how Aquinas comments on the Gospel. Later on in this study we will extensively dissect the portions of the commentary we just presented.159 These different aspects, however, are all placed within the larger framework we found. A divisio textus that explains all the
159 Cf. infra, p. 39-47
26 individual sections shows these different aspects within the larger structure. The bold text shows where a section on the benefits of the Spirit begins. Sometimes subsections have subdivisions of their own. In this case, I have indented the titles further. What we see here is the division of Aquinas' own text, which doesn't just follow the text of the Gospel of John, but also introduces several different aspects, such as wrong interpretations. The bold text and italics follow the structure of the Gospel, straight text are Aquinas' own remarks and explanations.
2091 Christ poses the threefold benefit of the coming of the Spirit
2092 He poses the benefit for the world (convinced of sin) (John 16:8) 2093 But isn't it Christ who convinces the world of sin 2094 About what exactly does He prove them wrong? 2095 He explains the benefit for the world (John 16:9-11) -the world is proven wrong about sin (John 16:9) 2096 -the world is proven wrong about justice (John 16:10) 2097 -the world is proven wrong about judgment (John 16:11) 2098 An alternative interpretation, that of st. John Chrysostom
2099 He poses the benefit for the disciples (instruction) (John 16:12-13) 2100 -First he poses the necessity of this instruction (John 16:12) 2101 -This instruction is not some sort of secret doctrine (gnosticism) 2102 -Then, he promises this instruction (John 16:13a) 2103 -He excludes a difficulty that could have arisen (John 16:13b) -It may seem that the Spirit is greater than Christ, which He isn't. 2104 -Why does He say “will hear,” since the Spirit hears from eternity?
2105 He poses the benefit for Himself (glorification) (John 16:14-15) 2106 -He mentions the fruit of the glorification (John 16:14a) 2107/2108 -He explains the ratio of this glorification (John 16:14b) 2109 -He mentions the manifestation of this ratio (John 16:15) 2110 -First, he mentions the consubstantiality of Father and Son 2111 -Response to an objection by Didymus 2112 -The distinction of persons 2113 -Response: whether relations in God are real? 2114 -Second, he draws the conclusion that the Spirit receives from the Son 2115 -Consubstantiality is said according to the order of origin
As we can see in this divisio textus, the first step for Aquinas is giving a commentary. It is only after having discussed the text that matters such as heretical interpretations and uncertainties regarding the text are discussed. Some of the subjects are highly theological, particularly in 2105-2115. These are some themes Aquinas had already lectured on and that formed the basis for his Summa.160
It is important to realize that the divisio textus is not meant to be the definitive answer to the question how saint John intended his Gospel to be. This is a possible division of the text, others are possible.161 One could also comment on Scripture and even refrain from making a division, as Aquinas did for his commentary on Isaiah.162 By looking at the structure, Aquinas explains what he
160 Cf. Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 273-274 161 Dahan, p. 271-275 162 Wawrykow, p. 44
27 feels are the main aspects of a text. In this case, they are the three benefits of the Holy Spirit. It is possible to stop there, but it also possible to go on making divisions up unto the level of single words.
As we saw there was not a clear distinction between theology and exegesis in the time of saint Thomas. This means that Bible influences doctrine and doctrine influences the reading of the Bible. For example: in the Middle Ages it was perfectly acceptable to assume that “the spirit of God floating above the waters” in Gen. 1:2 refers to the Holy Spirit. The faith in the Trinity resounds in the reading of Scripture. So in order to understand the medieval reading of Scripture one must understand the doctrines that are resounding. The hot debate at the time of saint Thomas was the discussion about the procession of the Holy Spirit. It resounds in the reading of the commentary and therefore we will need to acquire some understanding of the debate in saint Thomas' days.
28 The Spirit of Truth
Visible and invisible missions
What we find when we look at the commentary, and we see this reflected in the divisio textus, is that, in the end, the Spirit fulfills the work of Christ. He leads to the truth, and Jesus Christ is the Truth.163 Be it the world, the disciples or Christ: it is the Spirit who fulfills the ministry of Jesus Christ by proving wrong, instructing and glorifying. Why is this so? It is because the Spirit proceeds from the Son that He fulfills the work of Christ. In this way, the visible mission (the Spirit is sent by Christ) leads us to an understanding of the invisible mission (the Spirit proceeds from the Son).164 This is typical for Latin theology, in contrast to Greek theology.165
The studies of G. Emery have allowed us to see that the relation between visible and invisible missions is one of the pivotal points of Aquinas' theology.166 He writes: “Thomas' exposition on the visible mission rests on the theme of the sensory manifestation [manifestation sensible] and the way by which man comes to the knowledge of the mysteries of God.” Because it is natural for man to be led to the invisible through the visible, “the invisible mysteries of God are manifested to man through visible things; in this way, God has shown himself to some extent to man and has shown the eternal processions of the persons through visible creatures showing some indications; it is fitting that the invisible missions of the divine persons are shown through visible creatures.” The term “invisible mission” is problematic though, since “mission” always takes place in history.167 Referring to this procession as an invisible mission implies that they have a temporal character and that therefore God is not eternal. What we still can draw from his work is that the visible or temporal is a sign of the eternal. For example: the temporal mission of the Holy Spirit by Jesus Christ is the sign of the eternal procession of the Spirit from the Son.
At this point in the Gospel of John we are still speaking of the promise of the Holy Spirit. The visible manifestation of the Spirit's mission to the disiciples follow after the Resurrection and on the day of Pentecost. After the Resurrection, the visible sign of Jesus breathing on the disciples manifests the mission of the Spirit: “He breathed on them and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit.'” (John 20:22). At Pentecost, the visible sign is the tongues of fire resting on the apostles: “Divided tongues, as of fire, appeared among them, and a tongue rested on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability.” (Acts 2:3-4). These are the visible manifestations of the giving of the Holy Spirit to the disciples. At Easter to show the power of their ministry to forgive sins and at Pentecost to show their teaching ministry.168
What follows after this gift is the work of the Holy Spirit in and through the disciples: proving wrong, instructing and glorifying. This is the fulfillment of the work of Christ.169 This work is achieved by proving wrong, instructing and glorifying. The glorification, or clarification, of Christ is the summit of this fulfillment: the Spirit makes Christ known as He is: truly man and truly God.
163 Cf. Torrell, Initiation, p. 292; Le Pivain, p. 88, 99 164 Super Matthaeum 301: “Missio visibilis semper est signum missionis invisibilis” Cf. Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 290-298; Emery, Missions invisibles et missions visibles, p. 63 165 Emery, La Théologie Trinitiaire, p. 326-327 166 We follow the line of G. Emery's article “Missions invisibles et missions visibles” 167 S. Th. Ia q 43 a 2 168 S. Th. Ia q 43 a 7 ad 6; Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 480; Le Pivain, p. 91 169 Cf. Torrell, Initiation, p. 292
29 The Filioque controversy at the time of saint Thomas
When speaking of processions in divinis, saint Thomas presupposes the doctrine of the Filioque. However, it is also a fruit of his Biblical exegesis, as we will see later on.170 The problem is as follows: the original creed in Greek,171 reads “ek tou patros ekporeuomenon.” When the Latin translation read procedere for ekporeusein, clarification was needed, since procedere is a much more general term.172 The Filioque then, is a specification, of what it means to proceed in divinis.
Saint Augustine already spoke of the Spirit proceeding “at the same time from both” (simul ab utroque) as from one principle, although principally from the Father.173 The Council of Toledo inserted the Filioque into the creed in 589, along with proclaiming twenty-three condemnations of Arianism.174 From that moment on we find it mentioned in various councils. It must be said that at the time, it was still possible to conceive a peaceful co-existence of the two doctrines. Troubles started when French monks, under the influence of Charlemagne, provoked the Greeks by chanting the Filioque in Jerusalem. Over half a century later, relations got to the point where patriarch Photius called the Filioque “a heresy and an abominable blasphemy.”175 In 1014, at the request of emperor Henric II, pope Benedict VIII allowed the addition “and the Son” to the creed,176 so that the profession on the Holy Spirit reads: “and in the Holy Spirit, who is Lord and giver of life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son.” Forty years later, in 1054, after quarrels between the papal legate and the patriarch of Constantinople, mutual excommunication followed.177
The Council of Lyon, in 1274, was hoping to mend the rift between East and West. The Council Fathers had two of the greatest theologians at their disposal: the Franciscan Bonaventure and the Dominican Thomas Aquinas. It wasn't to be the finest hour for either of them: saint Thomas died on the way to the council. Saint Bonaventure participated and was created a cardinal, but died shortly afterwards.178 The council imposed a profession of faith on the Greeks, concerning various other doctrines along with the Filioque, about which they stated, closely following saint Augustine, that “the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, yet not as from two origins but from one origin.”179 In this way, the council was trying to reach out to the Greeks. The Greeks' main objection to the Filioque was that two spirations of the Spirit would mean two principles of divinity in God.180 The quoted passage is the response to that objection: Father and Son do not act as if they were two sources of divinity but according to their shared divinity.181 But although the council tried to reconcile East and West, the distrust between East and West was already far too great and the rift remained and expanded.182
170 Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 276 171 DS 150: “Eis to pneuma to hagion, to kurion kai sóopoion, to ek tou patros ekporeuomenon” 172 Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, The Greek and Latin Traditions; cf. Super Sententiarum I d 12 q 1 a 2 ad 3; Congar, p. 168 173 Sesboüé, Wolinsky, p. 324-325; McGrath, Christian Theology, p. 313-315 174 DS 470; Sesboüé, Wolinsky, p. 326-327 175 Sesboüé, Wolinsky, p. 326-328 176 DS 150, introduction to the Symbolum Constantinopolitanum 177 Sesboüé, Wolinsky, p. 328-329; the excommunications were lifted in 1965 by pope Paul VI and patriarch Athenagoras. 178 Torrell, Initiation, p. 425; Sesboüé, Wolinsky, p. 329-332; Heer, p. 266 179 DS 460: “Fideli ac devota professione fatemur, quod Spiritus Sanctus aeternaliter ex Patre et Filio, non tanquam ex duobus principiis, sed tanquam ex uno principio.” The text closely follows Augustine's De Trinitate, V, 14,15. Cf. Sesboüé, Wolinsky, p. 323 180 Sesboüé, Wolinsky, p. 325 181 idem, p. 331-332 182 ibidem
30 The Filioque in the theology of saint Thomas
The controversy surrounding the Filioque was twofold at the time of saint Thomas.183 It concerned both the doctrine itself and the problem of a clause being added to the Creed. We will address the problem of the addition to the Creed first, and then the base structure of the doctrine of the Filioque in saint Thomas' theology. We will only explore Thomas' explanation of the Latin position on the issue. His attitude towards the Greek theologians, to whom he never referred as heretics,184 is worth another three years of investigation.
Several errors had arisen since the time of the Council of Nicea, denying the divinity of both Son and Spirit.185 Arianism, for example, denied the divinity of the Son. The prologue to Aquinas' commentary on John also mentions Ebion and Cerintus, who posed that Christ was “purely human.”186 This called for an answer. The Latin theologians believed that these errors were contrary to the faith professed by the Council of Nicea. So, the Filioque does not find its origin in a dispute between East and West but is posed as a response to heresies concerning Christ. Therefore it was necessary to explicitly state the doctrine which was implied by the Council, namely that the Son was fully divine and received everything from the Father – including the breathing of the Holy Spirit.187 In this way, the Filioque is a response to the christological error of the Arians. If the Son is also the principle of the Spirit, He must be fully divine.
But by what authority could such an explanation be added to the creed? The first response is that a later council has the power to interpret the creed proposed by an earlier council.188 This is what happened at the Council of Toledo. The second response is that, according to the Latin Church, it is the pope who convenes councils and confirms their decrees. Therefore the pope also has the authority to explain the Council. This is what happened when pope Benedict VIII allowed the inclusion of the Filioque into the liturgical version of the Creed. Saint Thomas describes the nature of the problem and the authority of the Roman Pontiff:189
Because, therefore, at the time of the early Quia igitur in tempore antiquorum conciliorum councils the error of those teaching that the Holy nondum exortus fuerat error dicentium Spiritum Spirit does not proceed from the Son had not yet Sanctum non procedere a Filio, non fuit sprung up, there was no need to propose this necessarium quod hoc explicite poneretur. Sed explicitly. Later on, however, with the postea, insurgente errore quorumdam, in quodam emergence of the error of certain people, the concilio in occidentalibus congregato, expressum teaching was expressed at some council in the fuit auctoritate Romani Pontificis, cuius West,190 on the same authority of the Roman auctoritate etiam antiqua concilia congregabantur Pontiff by which the ancient councils had been et confirmabantur. Continebantur tamen implicite convened and confirmed. In any case the point in hoc ipso quod dicebatur Spiritus Sanctus a was contained implicitly in the statement that Patre procedere.
183 Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 321 184 And in this he is different from his contemporaries. Cf. Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 351; Torrell, Maître Spirituel, p. 179-181 185 Cf. DS 152; in 382 the Council of Rome condemned 24 positions, including the “sacrilege” of those who said the Holy Spirit was created by the Son and the heresy of those claiming that the Son was only born of the Virgin Mary. The Council explicitly condemns Sabellius, Arius, Eunomius, the Macedonians, Photinus and the Ebionites. 186 Super Ioannem 10 187 Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 336-337; Super Ioannem 2115 188 De Potentia, q 10 a 4 ad 13; cf. Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 337; cf. S. Th. IIa IIae q 1 a 9 ad 4 189 S. Th. Ia q 36 a 2 ad 2 190 Saint Thomas is unable to name the council. In the 14th century, research found that he referred to the Council of Toledo in 589. Cf. Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 339
31 the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father.
But the question isn't a judicial matter for saint Thomas. By the thirteenth century, the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son was seen as an essential element of the faith of the Church.191 For Aquinas, “Trinitate posita, it is necessary to recognize that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.”192 He has two foundations on which he builds his argument in favor of the Filioque: the Biblical and Patristic sources professing this faith on the one hand and speculative theological reasons on the other hand. As for the first foundation, in Sacred Scripture there are plenty of references to the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of the Son in several formulations.193 As we saw at the beginning of this chapter, Scripture also testifies that the Spirit is sent by Jesus Christ. To Aquinas, this visible mission is a sign of the procession of the Spirit. We will address this aspect in the following section. As for the Church Fathers, in their works there is plenty of support for the Filioque. Not just in the works of Saint Augustine and Hilary of Poitiers but also in the writings of the Greek theologian Didymus the Blind.194
There are also two main speculative reasons to pose a procession from the Father and the Son. The first reason is that of the distinction of persons by relative opposition and the argument that love always proceeds from a word.195 The argument of the distinction of persons is Aquinas' main argument and its simplicity is astonishing.196 First: there is one God in three persons. But we will need to distinguish these three persons. Otherwise there would be one God with three modes of appearance, lacking real distinction, which is the error of Sabellius.197 Aquinas is speaking of a faith that is both Trinitarian and monotheistic.198 When we distinguish divine persons, he argues, we cannot distinguish them by an absolute reality.199 That would imply an absolute distinction of persons, and therefore three gods. Only by their relations we can distinguish the persons and profess a faith that is both monotheistic and Trinitarian. Father and Son have a relation. We can only think the terms “father” and “son” in relation. There is no father without a son, nor a son without a father. So there is distinction and an inseparable connection in these terms; this is what we call relative opposition. Now, the Father has two relations: He is Father of the Son and He breathes (spiratio) the Spirit. He has relative opposition to the Son and Spirit. This distinguishes the Father from both the Son and the Spirit.
But what distinguishes the Son from the Spirit? If we do not pose a distinction, this would imply that they are one and the same person, which is the annihilation of the faith in the Trinity.200 How to distinguish them? As we saw, the Father is distinguished from the Spirit and Son because He begets
191 Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 321-333; Nicolas, Synthèse Dogmatique, p. 172-173 192 Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 276; cf. Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 321; S. Th. Ia q 36 a 2 ad 6 193 Acts 16:7; Rom. 8:2, 8:9; Jn. 15:26, 16:14; Gal. 4:6; cf. Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 325; Congar, p. 166 194 Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 328; cf. S. Th. Ia q 36 a 2 respondeo: “The Greeks themselves intend the procession of the Holy Spirit to have some kind of ordered reference to the Son. For they acknowledge that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Son and is from the Father through the Son.” This per Filium formula is found in, amongst others, Tertullian's Adversum Praxeam, saint Basil's De Spiritu Sancto, John Damascene's De Fide Orthodoxa and Cyril of Alexandria's De Adoratione in Spiritum et Veritatem. Saint Thomas says it's “acceptable” (potest dici) to pose a procession per Filium: S. Th. Ia q 36 a 3 respondeo. The procession ex Patre Filioque is “necessary,” S. Th. Ia q 36 a 2 respondeo 195 We follow chapter 11 of Emery's La Théologie Trinitaire: Le Saint-Esprit procède du Père et du Fils 196 S. Th. Ia q 30 a 2; q 36 a 2; I Sent. d. 20, q. 1 a. 1, ad 1; Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 340 197 Hill, The Three-Personed God, p. 45l; Torrell refers to it as a “pre-Trinitarian monotheism,” cf. Torrell, Maître Spirituel, p. 209 198 These terms are derived from Torrell, it is not featured in any Aquinas' works. “Monotheism” is a term that helps categorizing religions, it is -strictly speaking- not a theological expression. 199 S. Th. Ia q 36 a 2 respondeo 200 ibidem; cf. Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 250
32 the Son and breathes the Spirit; these are His relations of origin towards them. And this is the only way to distinguish divine persons, by their relations of origin.201 So if we are to distinguish Son and Spirit; there must be a relation of origin between them. As we already saw, Scripture offers indications that there is a relation of origin, since it speaks of the Spirit of Christ. But He cannot only proceed from the Son, because that would mean He does not have a relation with the Father. Therefore, it is necessary to say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son – as from one principle, one Spirator, breathing (spirans) the Holy Spirit.202 The Son receives everything from the Father, including the breathing of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit receives full divinity from the Father and the Son; and He is the bond of love which unites Father and Son. To saint Thomas, this is the only way to maintain that there is one God in three persons; distinguished yet not separate, fully participating in the divine essence.
The second speculative reason, love must proceed from a word, isn't as advanced and it isn't Aquinas' preferred defense of the Filioque doctrine. It is presented in his main theological works, but only after the main argument of relative opposition.203 Only in the Compendium Theologiae and De Rationibus Fidei, aimed at a larger audience, is this argument the main defense of the Filioque doctrine.204 The argument works with an analogy. When human beings love someone, they first have an idea of that person. You can't love a person you don't know. So you have an idea of that person (a 'mental word')205 and then you can love him or her. So love proceeds from the word.206 In divinis, Love also proceeds from the Word. That is, the Holy Spirit, who is love,207 proceeds from the Son; the Word that was “in the beginning” (John 1:1).
The Spirit manifests Christ because He proceeds from the Son
Having glanced at the main features of saint Thomas' Trinitarian theology, we can now take a closer look at lectures III-IV of John 16. This is where Aquinas finds the foundation for his ideas. As we saw, the Spirit manifests (manifestat: makes known) Christ. This points to the eternal reality that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Or as Aquinas put it earlier in the commentary on John: “as the Son, existing from the Father, manifests the Father (...), so the Holy Spirit, existing a Filio, manifests the Son.”208 This is also the line of reasoning followed in lectures III-IV. The Spirit is sent by the Son, because He proceeds from Him.
The central thesis209 leading our investigation is as follows: because the Spirit proceeds from the Son (eternal procession) and is sent by the Son (temporal mission),210 he makes known the Son (fulfillment of the mission of Christ). All that the Spirit does must be understood in this light. And this is what we will try to accomplish further on in this work.
Some further explanation can shed light on this thesis. In the third section of the commentary, Aquinas explains that the relation between the procession and mission is the leading principle in interpreting John 16, which is about the relations between Father, Son and Spirit. He summarizes
201 Cf. Super Ioannem 2115; Le Pivain, 76-77 202 Saint Augustine, De Trinitate V, 14; S. Th. Ia q 36 a 4 sed contra, respondeo, ad 1, ad 7 203 Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 342; cf. Le Pivain, p. 70-71 204 ibidem 205 “secundum similitudinem verbi mentalis,” S. Th. Ia q 36 a 2 ad 5 206 S. Th. Ia q 36 a 2 respondeo, ad 1 207 S. Th. Ia q 36 a 4 ad 1, q 37 a 1, sed contra, respondeo; q 38 a 2, respondeo; Le Pivain, p. 82-85 208 Super Ioannem 268 209 “Thesis” as in: “unproved statement, serving as a premise in an argument,” Encarta College Dictionary, New York, 2001 210 The term “temporal mission” is a tautology, since a mission is always temporal. We use it to emphasize the difference with the eternal procession.
33 this leading principle as follows:211
Now we see the reason why the Holy Spirit will Hic ponitur ratio clarificationis, quae est, quia glorify Christ: it is because the Son is the Filius est principium Spiritus sancti. Omne enim principle of the Holy Spirit. For everything quod est ab alio, manifestat id a quo est: Filius which is from another manifests that from which enim manifestat Patrem quia est ab ipso. Quia it is. Thus the Son manifests the Father because ergo Spiritus sanctus est a Filio, proprium est ut he is from the Father. And so because the Holy clarificet eum. Dicit ergo: Ideo “me clarificabit Spirit is from the Son, it is appropriate that the quia de meo accipiet.” Spirit glorify the Son. He says, “he will glorify me, for he will receive from me.”
Saint Thomas speaks of the “reason” why the Holy Spirit will glorify Christ. To be more accurate, he speaks of the “ratio” of the clarification of Christ. Clarification means “to give a clear knowledge” of Christ.212 The word “ratio,” in this context, does not refer to human reason or logical argument but to the order of things.213 It was the ratio of the apple to fall on Newton's head. It's what apples do, they fall down; at least in Aristotelean physics! In a similar way, there is also an order of the clarification, namely the processions in divinis.214 It is the ratio of the Holy Spirit to glorify Christ. Why? Because the Son is the principle of the Holy Spirit.
So the Spirit is “from the Son” and “everything which is from another manifests that from which it is.”215 Therefore the Spirit manifests the Son. Here saint Thomas refers to a metaphysical rule, also found in the works of Bonaventure and Albert the Great, that a reality proceeding from a principle returns or leads to this principle.216 Although Aquinas does not quote explicitly, we can also think of two passages in his commentary on Aristotle's Physics that explain this principle.217 Objects, in order to move, are moved by something else. By demonstrating the principle, the moved object manifests the mover. For example: a ball rolls by. By looking at the direction it came from, we can find the foot that moved the ball. In this way, the ball (moved object) manifests the principle of its movement (the mover, the foot). This is true, in some way, of how the Holy Spirit manifests Christ. He also manifests His principle, the Person He proceeds from.
Speaking about the Spirit of Truth
So the Spirit manifests the Son. He does not manifest an exterior principle from which He proceeds, but the Person from whom He proceeds in divinis and ab aeterno. The Spirit receives and has, but He has in a different way than we do.218 The Lord speaks to us in terms of the visible, but He refers to an invisible reality. But we cannot just apply the rules of the visible to the invisible, let alone to God. Thomas notes that there are three ways of speaking about receiving on earth, in the visible realm. Two of these three cannot be applied to God, the invisible reality. The first that cannot be applied is that “to receive” means “that which receives is one thing, and what is received is something else.” This is not so in God. The Spirit receives divinity, but He also is divinity. We cannot cut the Spirit into pieces. Secondly, in creatures, “the one who receives did not have at one time what he receives.” But the Son and Spirit receive from all eternity. What can be said of the
211 Super Ioannem 2107 212 Super Ioannem 2106: “Clarificabit me: idest, meam notitiam claram faciet.” 213 Cf. Schütz, Thomas-Lexikon, lemma 'ratio.' He offers 18 interpretations of the term 'ratio'! 214 S. Th. Ia q 43 a 2 respondeo 215 Cf. Albert the Great, I Sent. d. 31, a. 14, ad quaest. 2; Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 292 216 Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 293 217 In Physicorum VII, 1:2; VII, 8:1 218 Super Ioannem 2107
34 Spirit is that He receives according to the order of origin. He receives from the Father and the Son, proceeding from both.
It may seem a bit overly concerned to be this specific. There are, however, specific heresies saint Thomas knows of that stem from disregard of these rules of speech. Sabellius and Arius thought of divine processions, the technical term for “receiving” in divinis, as an action directed to an exterior principle. Arius held that the Spirit proceeds from the Son “like the coming of effect from cause.” This would mean that the Spirit is an effect from Father and Son, and therefore would be created. Sabellius took the procession “to be like the going of cause into effect, by setting it in motion or impressing its likeness on it.” That would mean that the Spirit is either moved by Father and Son or is an imprint of it, and therefore would be created.219 Because they work with a wrong understanding of “to receive,” neither Arius nor Sabellius is able to successfully pose a procession in God. A correct understanding presupposes that acts in God are somewhat similar to acts of the intellect. Intellectual acts do not leave the agent. When we think, the act of thinking is not directed towards something exterior to us but it remains within; it is an intrinsic act. In God, processions are also actions that do not leave the agent. How we should speak about this agent will be discussed at another point.220
The same care is expressed by saint Thomas when speaking about how the Spirit receives “from” the Son.221 One could interpret the word “from” as if the Spirit participates to some degree in the life and/or work of the Son. He proceeds from the Son in the same way love proceeds from a word, again: in an intrinsic act.222
219 For the response to both, cf. S. Th. Ia, q 27 a 1 respondeo 220 Cf. infra, p. 48-49, Zizioulas' criticism of substantive metaphysics 221 Super Ioannem 2108 222 Cf. supra, p. 33, on the Love-Word analogy.
35 The Spirit works in and through the apostles
Our original thesis was: because the Spirit proceeds from the Son (eternal procession) and is sent by the Son (temporal mission), he makes known the Son (fulfillment of the mission of Christ). The explanations just given demonstrate this, at least where it concerns the relation between Son and Spirit.
But we said more: the Spirit fulfills the work of Christ, and we can see this all through lectures III- IV. In each section, we gain a deeper understanding of the relationship between the Son and the Holy Spirit. What we also learn is that the Spirit fulfills his work in and through Jesus' disciples. The three benefits don't just happen nowhere, here they happen to the apostles. We will explore this further on, but first we must look at the apostles themselves.
From mundane disciples to apostles
It is interesting to note that when Aquinas speaks of disciples in our lectures, he refers to the time when Jesus was still with the twelve. When he speaks of their ministry after the descent of the Holy Spirit, he calls them apostles. There is a qualitative difference in them before and after they have received the Holy Spirit. Right at the beginning of our section of the commentary we can already see this.223
For as was already said, as long as the disciples Quamdiu enim discipuli carnaliter ad Christum were carnally224 attracted to Christ, the Holy afficiebantur, Spiritus sanctus non erat in eis, ut Spirit was not in them as he would be later. dictum est, eo modo quo postea fuit: et ideo non Consequently they were not as courageous then erant ita audaces sicut post eius adventum fuerunt; as they were after the Spirit came. “Their “Spiritu oris eius omnis virtus eorum,” scilicet power,” the power of the apostles, “came from Apostolorum. the Spirit of his mouth.”225 The first work of the Spirit seems to be to transform the disciples from mundane persons, carnally attracted to Christ, to apostles that believe in Christ according to His humanity and His divinity.226 A quick glance at the Index Thomisticus shows us that the world “disciple” often occurs together with the word “master,” as in a university professor. The time the disciples spent with Jesus is a preparatory time; they are to learn and their mission is yet to follow. At the time of their discipleship, the twelve were mundane, Aquinas writes.227 Only when they fulfill the work of the Spirit, are they referred to as apostles.228 But in order to be able (capax) to receive the Holy Spirit, one must have a contemptus mundi, a contempt for the world. As saint Thomas says in the Summa, when he speaks of the “law of the Gospel:”229
There is nothing in the written text of the Gospel In scriptura Evangelii non continentur nisi ea except what is concerned with the grace of the Spiritus sancti gratia, vel sicut dispositiva, vel Holy Spirit, either by disposing us for it or by sicut ordinativa ad usum huius gratiae. Sicut providing directions for the exercise of this dispositiva quidem, quantum ad intellectum, per grace. Thus as regards our minds, we are fidem, per quam datur Spiritus sancti gratia,
223 Super Ioannem 2093, italics and subscript added 224 “carnally,” means they adhere to Christ since they saw His miracles, teaching etc. But they did not see His divinity. 225 Ps. 33: 6. The NRSV reads: “and all their host by the breath of his mouth.” 226 Super Ioannem 2096 227 Super Ioannem 2093, cf. 2097 228 Cf. Super Ioannem 2095 229 S. Th. Ia IIae, q 106 a 1 ad 1, subscript added; cf. Torrell, Maître Spirituel, p. 321-325
36 disposed by faith, through which the grace of the continentur in Evangelio ea quae pertinent ad Holy Spirit is bestowed; here belongs everything manifestandam divinitatem vel humanitatem in the Gospel which is concerned to manifest Christi; secundum affectum vero continentur in Christ's divinity or his humanity. As regards our Evangelio ea quae pertinent ad contemptum attitudes and attachments, again, the Gospel mundi, per quem homo fit capax Spiritus sancti contains teaching about the contempt of the gratiae. Mundus enim, id est, amatores mundi, world, by which man becomes open to the grace non potest capere Spiritum sanctum, ut habetur of the Holy Spirit; for the world -that is, lovers Ioannes 14. of the world- cannot receive the Holy Spirit.230
It would be a misinterpretation of contemptus mundi to see this as a devaluation of God's creation. Latin and English can both distinguish between world/munda and earth/terra. The mere condition of being on earth is not wrong. But when we cling to earthly goods, when we become “lovers of the world,” the world becomes an obstacle on our path to God. Not because it is evil, but because we don't treat it as God intended us to.231 A beautiful passage from saint Augustine's Confessions adequately describes this:232
Too late have I loved You, O beauty so ancient, Sero te amavi, pulchritudo tam antiqua et tam yet ever new! Too late have I loved You. And nova, sero te amavi! Et ecce intus eras et ego behold, You were within, and I outside, and foris, et ibi te quaerebam, et in ista formosa, quae there I searched for You; deformed I, plunging fecisti, deformis inruebam. Mecum eras, et tecum amid those fair forms which You have made. non eram. Ea me tenebant longe a te, quae si in te You were with me, but I was not with You. non essent, non essent. Things held me far from You, which, unless they were in You, were not at all.
Saint Augustine chased after the goods of this world. In this way earthly things held him away from God, because he sought creatures rather than the Creator; satisfaction rather than fulfillment. It is in this light that we must understand the concept of contempt of the world in Aquinas, and not as if he thought of the world as something intrinsically evil.233
So before the twelve can become instruments of the Spirit, they have to be rid of their attachment to the world. And this is the work of the Spirit in the disciples. What follows is that the Spirit fulfills the work of Christ through the apostles.
Work of the apostles, work of the Spirit
Now if the ministry of the apostles is the fulfillment of the work of Christ, how is it then that the Spirit fulfills the work of Christ? As we saw, the first work of the Spirit is to convert the apostles. This idea is expressed at several points in our commentary. The Spirit fills their hearts,234 teaches the truth235 and illuminates the disciples, gives them trust to proclaim Christ and to work miracles.236 These three examples come from the three different sections: the benefit for the world, the disciples
230 John 14:17: “This is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, because he abides with you and will be in you.” 231 S. Th. Ia q 65 a 1 ad 3; Super Ioannem 1918; cf. Torrell, Maître Spirituel, p. 324; Le Pivain, p. 179-181 232 Saint Augustine, Confessions, Book X, 27 233 Torrell, Maître Spirituel, p. 324-325 234 Super Ioannem 2093 235 Super Ioannem 2102 236 Super Ioannem 2106, 2066
37 and Christ. Where it concerns the conversion of the twelve, it is an act of the Spirit in the disciples. But where it concerns the world and Christ, the work is achieved “through and in the apostles.”237 When we dig deeper into a passage about the work of Christ, the Spirit and the apostles, we can find an answer to the question: how does the Spirit work?238
Perhaps someone will say that Christ rebuked Sed forte diceret aliquis quod Christus solos only the Jews, but that the Holy Spirit, in and Iudaeos arguit, Spiritus autem sanctus in through the disciples, will rebuke the entire discipulis et per discipulos arguit totum mundum. world. But this is in opposition to the fact that Sed huic contrariatur quod Christus loquitur in Christ also speaks in and through the apostles, Apostolis et per Apostolos sicut Spiritus sanctus; just as the Holy Spirit does: “You desire proof “Experimentum quaeritis eius qui in me loquitur that Christ is speaking in me.”239 Christus.” One must therefore say that, “he will convince,” Et ideo dicendum, quod dixit: “Ille arguet rebuke, “the world,” as the one who will mundum,” qui invisibiliter penetrans corda vestra, invisibly enter into their hearts and pour his diffundet in eis caritatem, qua timore depulso charity into them so that their fear is conquered arguendi habebitis potestatem. and they have the strength to rebuke.240
The quotation at the heart of the text offers the key to understanding the principle at work. As he is accustomed to doing, saint Thomas uses Scripture to interpret Scripture. Somewhere between two and seven years earlier he commented on the Second Letter to the Corinthians.241 In that commentary he writes:242
Therefore, whatever a man does under the Quae ergo homo facit ex instinctu Spiritus sancti, inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is dicitur quod Spiritus sanctus facit; ideo Apostolus said to do. Therefore, the Apostle, because he quia a Christo motus hoc loquebatur, attribuit was moved by Christ to say this, attributed it to Christo tamquam principali, dicens “qui in me Christ as to the principal cause, saying, “that loquitur Christus.” Christ is speaking in me.”
This answers our question. Yes, the Spirit fulfills the work of Christ. And He does so in the apostles and with the apostles as His instrument. The apostles act, but they do so ex instinctu Spiritus sancti, and therefore we say that the acts they perform or are the subject of -proving wrong and clarifying- are the work of the Holy Spirit. In more theological terms: the mission of the Holy Spirit is to the apostles, after the Resurrection and at Pentecost.243
237 Super Ioannem 2106; Le Pivain notes that the Spirit is often associated with the verbs movere and impellere, p. 98 238 Super Ioannem 2093; Jn 8:14; Mt. 23 239 2 Corinthians 13:3 240 This is what we see happening at Pentecost: the disciples are afraid and lock themselves in. When the Spirit comes they open the doors and proclaim Christ, cf. Acts 2:1-12 241 Torrell, Initiation, p. 496-497 242 Super Secundum Epistolam Ad Corinthos 520 243 S. Th. Ia q 43 a 7 ad 6; Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire, p. 480; Le Pivain, p. 152-153
38 The fruits of the Holy Spirit
Having progressed in our insight into the work of the Spirit as saint Thomas sees it, we are still at the beginning of the text of John 16:8-15, although we did get a first grasp of the leading principle of Aquinas' interpretation of this text. In this chapter, we will return to the order of the text for a moment. We will try to show how the Spirit works, according to saint Thomas. And, if this idea is correct, we should also be able to see how this work is done through and in the apostles.
The benefit of the Spirit for the world
At the beginning of our reading, the Lord Jesus announces that the Spirit will “prove the world wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment.” (John 16:8) The world thinks it knows what these terms mean, but it doesn't. As we can observe, there is a tripartition within the first of the three benefits: sin, justice (or: righteousness) and judgment. This is included in the one work of proving wrong. And the Holy Spirit does this through the apostles. But first, He works in the apostles, as Aquinas writes:244
One must therefore say that, “he will convince,” Et ideo dicendum, quod dixit: “Ille arguet rebuke, “the world,” as the one who will mundum,” qui invisibiliter penetrans corda invisibly enter into their hearts245 and pour his vestra, diffundet in eis caritatem, qua timore charity into them so that their fear is conquered depulso arguendi habebitis potestatem. and they have the power to rebuke.
This is almost entirely a quote of saint Augustine's Commentary on John. But with one vital difference. Where Augustine speaks of the “freedom” to rebuke,246 Aquinas says “power.” In light of our earlier observations, we can see that the work of the apostles is the work of the Spirit. They do not merely have the liberty to prove the world wrong, they have received the power to do so. We see that the gift of the Spirit is indeed linked with power. The Spirit is given at Pentecost after being announced with the words: “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria and to the ends of the earth.”247 The other gift of the Spirit, at Easter, is also linked with power. Namely, the power to forgive sins: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”248
We also observe that, after the passage quoted above, Aquinas specifies that the Spirit himself is the power of the apostles: “The Spirit of his mouth is their power, namely of the apostles.”249 This is all part of the change from mundane disciples to apostles, as saint Thomas writes: “Again, he will convince the world because he will fill hearts which were before worldly and lead them to rebuke themselves.”250 And, he continues, “the Holy Spirit does this: Put a new and right spirit within me.”251 The commentary on the Psalm quoted speaks of the power of the devil in our lives. It is by the working of the Holy Spirit that we can overcome this power. When this right spirit has been formed in us, we can know God. The same is true for the disciples: they could only fully know
244 Super Ioannem 2093, in the translation we have changed “strength” to “power.” The Spirit diffuses charity because He is Love, cf. Le Pivain, p. 171 245 the hearts of the disciples 246 Catena in Ioannem c16 247 Acts 1:8, the Vulgate speaks of the “virtutem supervenientis Spiritus sancti” Cf. Lk. 24:50 248 John 20:23 249 Super Ioannem 2093, Ps 33:6. The NRSV reads “and all their host by the breath of his mouth.” 250 Super Ioannem 2093 251 Psalm 51:10; Super Ioannem 2093
39 Christ after they were rebuked and their eyes had been opened. And here Aquinas speaks specifically of them. The ministry of the apostles can only begin after they have been rebuked themselves. When Christ speaks of the benefit for the world, this includes His worldly disciples, who need the gift of the Spirit as much as anyone else. Theirs, however, is a special mission to be instruments of the Spirit in fulfilling the mission of Christ.
Having received that gift, the apostles have the power to prove the world wrong.252 The Holy Spirit is their power: “by the breath (Spiritu) of his mouth was all their host (virtus, power),” Psalm 33:6. In the same way, “the spirit of God took possession of Zechariah” who could then speak to the people (2 Chronicles 24:20). The latter reference seems to make more sense than the former. The Psalm, at first sight, speaks of the heavens singing God's praise whereas in 2 Chronicles the Spirit actually inspires a person. But when we turn to the commentary on the Psalm we read: “mystice per caelos intelligitur apostoli.” Other commentaries on the Psalms also give this interpretation. From this perspective, the reference makes a lot more sense. The heavens are the 'type' of the apostles.
In John 16:9-11 the Lord explains (exponit) this fruit with the words: “about sin, because they do not believe in me; about righteousness, because I am going to the Father and you will see me no longer; about judgment, because the ruler of this world has been condemned.” Aquinas' exposition follows the three points of sin, justice and judgment.253 Of the first two Aquinas explicitly says “and the apostles did this.”254
First, the world is rebuked for the sins it committed. The sin is explained in John 16:9: “because they do not believe in me.” The apostles rebuke the world, as Isaiah writes: “Announce to my people their rebellion, to the house of Jacob their sins”(Is. 58:1) and the apostles did this: “their voice goes out through all the earth.” (Ps. 19:4). Again, the heavens (caelos) mentioned in the Psalm are interpreted to be the apostles, whose voices reach out to the ends of the earth. The Psalms are read not only as a prefiguration of Christ but also as a prefiguration of the ministry of His apostles. They rebuke the sin of those who do not have faith in Christ.255 It is exactly “by faith [that] all other sins are remitted.”256
The Spirit also rebukes the world for the justice it neglected, “because I am going the Father and you will see me no longer.” There are two ways to explain this 'justice': the justice of Christ and the justice of the apostles. Where it concerns the apostles, their justice is not imitated. This justice is not by Law but by faith. Their faith is perfected when Christ returns to the Father. Before that moment, only His divinity is a matter of faith. When they can't see Him anymore, His humanity also becomes a matter of faith. The apostles rebuke those who do not imitate their faith: “There is no one who is righteous” (Rom. 3:10). In the commentary on Romans it seems to be suggested, that justice excludes saying 'there is no one who is righteous.' This quotation can be understood when we observe that saint Paul is quoting Psalm 14. The Psalm is indeed an accusation of the wicked by the righteous. Likewise, the apostles accuse those who do not believe in Jesus Christ. Where it concerns the justice, or righteousness, of Christ, the return to the Father rebukes those who said of Him: “We know this man to be sinner.”257 As Aquinas writes: “Christ descended because of His mercy, but his ascension was due to his righteousness.”
The third manner in which the Spirit proves the world wrong is judgement, which they held in
252 By proclaiming the truth of Christ, they automatically rebuke those who do not believe in Him; Le Pivain, p. 170 253 In the Marietti edition: 'sin' in 2095, 'justice' in 2096 and 'judgment' in 2097 254 Super Ioannem 2094 255 Super Ioannem 2095 256 ibidem 257 John 9:24; Super Ioannem 2096
40 contempt, “because the ruler of this world has been condemned.” The ruler of this world is the devil, the prince of worldly people.258 The devil “has been cast out by the grace and faith of Christ and by the Holy Spirit, cast out from the hearts of the faithful so that he no longer tempts from within as before, but from without. And so those who resolve to cling to Christ can resist.”259 The world is judged because it can resist the devil but instead consents to sin – in contempt of Christ's jugdment of the devil. This explains why Aquinas quotes proverbs and Ezechiel in his introduction to this verse:260 “when wickedness comes, contempt comes also” (Prov. 18:3) and “She has rebelled (contempsit) against my ordinances and my statutes.” (Ez. 5:6).
Now returning to our original idea: the Holy Spirit fulfils the work of Christ in and through the apostles. We saw that the apostles received power to rebuke the world. In sin, righteousness and judgment there is always a certain error, a twisting or denial of truth. The apostles rebuke this by the truth of faith, which they freely proclaim now that they have received the power of the Spirit.261
Rebuked because of... Truth denied: Work of Spirit in and through apostles “About sin because Lack of faith By faith all other sins “Announce to my they do not believe in are remitted. people their me” rebellion.” (Is 58:1) “About righteousness, Not imitating faith of Faith must be imitated, Fulfillment of faith after because I am going to apostles. Calling Christ Christ descends in ascension of Christ. the Father and you will “sinner.” mercy, ascends because Example of faith. see me no longer.” of righteousness. “About judgment, Imitating prince of the Devil is cast out by the Cast devil out of their because the ruler of this world, consenting to grace and faith of hearts.262 world has been sin. Christ and by the Holy condemned.” Spirit.
As we can see the central truth is this: one must have faith in Jesus Christ; the apostles are the example and the messengers of this truth.263 They are instruments of the Holy Spirit who works in them and gives them power to rebuke the world, as Aquinas posed at the beginning of this section of the commentary.264 The judgment of the world is not something the apostles seem to participate in. This work is formulated in perfect tense; it is not something to be accomplished but already done by Christ and the Spirit. It is something that takes places in the hearts of the apostles though. Why do they not participate in this work? In some way they do, since they will also have power to cast out demons. But God alone is the supreme judge of all creation. The work of the apostles is to announce to God's people their rebellion, so they will escape God's judgment.
We learn from the Catena Aurea that Aquinas follows most of what he found in saint Augustine's commentary. Saint Thomas also mentions, although less extensively, the interpretation of the Greek father, saint John Chrysostom.265 In his commentary the apostles do not have a central role. He does 258 Cf. supra, p. 36-37 259 Super Ioannem 2097 260 Super Ioannem 2094 261 Super Ioannem 2093, 2107 262 It is surprising that Aquinas does not mention Christ's promise that the apostles will also have the power to cast out demons, cf. Mt. 10:1-8; Mk. 16:17; Lk. 9:1-2, 10:17-20; Acts 5:16, 8:7, 16:18, 19:11-12 263 Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 296 264 Super Ioannem 2093 265 Super Ioannem 2098
41 mention that it is in power of the Spirit that the devil is cast out of the hearts of the faithful. As we will see, saint Thomas follows the element common to both Church Fathers: the Spirit works in the fulfillment of the mission of Christ.266 The benefit of the Spirit for the world is that the disciples become apostles and proclaim the Gospel of Christ to the Jews and to the nations. All are admonished to have faith in Jesus Christ. This work of the Spirit through the apostles is for the benefit of the world. It has a chance to know Christ.267
The benefit of the Spirit for the disciples
In the second section of our tripartite structure, Aquinas finds that the Lord poses the benefit of the Spirit for the apostles, which is their instruction. In the Gospel we read: “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own, but will speak whatever he hears268, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.” The subdivision, as we saw,269 is as follows: the necessity of the instruction is posed, the instruction is promised and doubt is excluded.
It is necessary that the disciples are instructed by Christ since there are “many things” they “cannot bear” at the present moment. This is illustrated by a quote from Job 26:14: “These are indeed but the outskirts of his ways; and how small a whisper do we hear of him! But the thunder of his power who can understand?” Jesus instructed his disciples, but not completely.270 Asking what these “many things” are is foolish.271 It is asking this very question that has led many astray. They claimed that there was a truth or secret doctrine not yet revealed in the Gospel which they possessed. Gnosticism is based on this idea. Aquinas firmly states that there is no such doctrine. “Indeed, matters of faith are presented to all the faithful.”272 The things the disciples cannot bear pertain to the the full knowledge of divine things, which they can't understand here as they will in heaven. Also they are yet to learn the spiritual understanding of the Scriptures,273 and the sufferings and dangers they were to undergo.
The promise of the instruction is connected with the promise of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit will teach all truth, since He proceeds from the Truth. He leads to the truth, which is to say He leads to Christ. That is, to “a better understanding of this truth in this life, and a fullness of understanding in eternal life.”274 All the truth also implies an understanding of the figures of the law. This is the spiritual understanding of Scripture. Aquinas found this in Didymus who refers to the 'types,' the typological reading of the Old Testament. One example is Moses being the prefiguration of Christ. A difficulty that can arise, according to saint Thomas, is that it may seem that the Spirit is greater than Christ because it is the Spirit who teaches Christ to the disciples. The response to this objection is that the Spirit teaches, but does so “by the power of the Father and the Son” for, as saint John writes: “he will not speak from himself” (John 16:13). The Spirit will speak to them by “enlightening their minds from within.”275 Obviously, we encounter the work of the Spirit in the apostles here. He also enlightens them about things to come: “He will declare to you the things that are to come.” This is not to say that the Spirit is yet to hear these things, but they are for the apostles
266 Cf. Torrell, Initiation, p. 292 267 Cf. Jn. 17:3 268 The Vulgate reads 'audiet,' in the future tense. 269 Cf. supra, p. 25 270 Super Ioannem 2100 271 ibidem. In the Catena we find Augustine calling this question 'absurdissime' 272 Super Ioannem 2101; cf. Mt. 10:27; there can be difference in the way things are presented. 273 This happens in Lk 24:45 to the disciples on the road to Emmaus. 274 Super Ioannem 2102; 'this truth' refers to the truth of faith. 275 This is what we pray for in the hymn Veni Creator: “Accende lumen sensibus.”
42 still in the future, namely the tribulations they will have to suffer.276 “God has foreknowledge of signs and wonders” (Wis 8:8), therefore it is fitting that the Spirit enlightens them about things to come. This is the spirit of prophesy referred to in Is. 41:23 and Joel 2:28.277 The instruction of the disciples means they will be led to the truth and will be heralds of that truth. But to proclaim Christ means they have to know Christ. The Spirit instructs them about this, and this is called the glorification of Christ.
The benefit of the Spirit for Christ
The third fruit of the Holy Spirit is the clarification or glorification of Christ.278 This is announced with the words: “He will glorify me, because he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine. For this reason I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.” Just as in the rest of our reading, these words receive a Trinitarian interpretation. And, again, it is a work of the Spirit in the disciples. They receive a clearer notion of Christ, receive the courage to proclaim Him and miracles are worked in and through the apostles.279 As we saw, the ratio of this work is the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son.280 It is in this section of the commentary that Thomas gives highly speculative interpretations of the text. This is to be understood in the larger construction of this section, as we will see later on. Here we find the strongest emphasis on the Filioque doctrine, with saint Thomas presenting the argument of relative opposition and the Love/Word analogy.281
Two things are to be distinguished here: the work of the Spirit through the disciples and the work in the disciples. To 'glorify' Christ does not imply to change anything in Christ but changes the way His followers see Him and proclaim Him. Glorification means that the disciples learn to see the glory of Christ, with which they have lived for three years. We can further specify our distinction: the public ministry of the apostles is the work of the Spirit through them. Augustine writes that “what is done in the Spirit, can be said to be done by the Spirit.”282 Aquinas limits himself to saying the apostles are “somehow impelled by that same Spirit.” But first the Spirit works in them so they know who to proclaim: Jesus Christ, truly man and truly God. He does this by the transformation and growth of the faith already present in them. The work of the Spirit changes something. This is what Christ says with the words: “He will glorify me.” To glorify Christ means to lead to the truth, since Christ is the truth, the way and the life (John 14:6). Having been led to the truth, the apostles proclaim it. What this means, we clearly see this in this scheme:283
Condition of disciples Work of Spirit Condition of apostles Faith in the humanity of Christ. “God has revealed to us through Faith in divinity of Christ. the Spirit.” (1 Cor. 2:10) Timid, did not dare to profess “The love of Christ impels Fear cast out. Confidence to Christ publicly us.” (2 Cor. 5:14)284 preach clearly, openly. Disciples, following the “All things are inspired by the Marvelous works accomplished
276 Super Ioannem 2104 277 ibidem 278 The terms are interchangeable: Super Ioannem 1826; Le Pivian, p. 137 279 Super Ioannem 2106 280 Cf. supra, p. 33-34 281 Super Ioannem 2108 282 Catena in Ioannem, c16 283 Super Ioannem 2106 284 Note that the 'love of Christ' can also be understood as the Holy Spirit, who is Love proceeding from the Word. The Catena reference to Augustine makes it plausible to interpret this as such. Cf. Congar, p. 169
43 miracle-working Christ. one and same Spirit.” (1 Cor. in and through the apostles. 12:11)
Now the reason the Holy Spirit glorifies Christ is that He proceeds from Him. And “everything which is from another manifests that from which it is.”285 He brings the apostles to the truth, since He is the Spirit of Truth, in a very real and literal sense: the Spirit proceeding from the Truth. This is expressed by the words “because he will take what is mine and declare it to you” (John 16:14). The Spirit takes, that is: receives286, the divine substance from the Son. Saint Thomas clarifies that this does not mean that the Spirit did not have divinity before He received it, He receives according to the order of origin.287 That is to say the Spirit does not receive from an exterior person, and does not receive something He didn't have before. This he declares to the disciples. He receives the divine substance, and instructs the disciples about the divinity of Christ, as we saw. The words “All that the Father has is mine,” show how the ratio of the glorification of Christ is manifested. By saying “all that the Father has is mine” (John 16:15)288, Christ speaks of His consubstantiality with the Father. “All” means that all of the divine substance is shared by Father and Son. This gives raise to the following objection:289 if all that the Father has also belongs to the Son, and the Father has 'fatherhood' then it follows that the Son should also have this. But no, both persons have this relation, but the Father as the one who gives and the Son as the one who receives. Aquinas further expands on this by asking how this giving and receiving takes place. It does so by an eternal generation, through the communication of the divine essence. The distinction, as we say, is in the order of possessing the divine essence: the Father as one who gives, the Son as one who receives. From both, that is also a Filio, the Spirit receives. This is what is said with the words: “For this reason I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you” (John 16:15). Since the Son is consubstantial with the Father, He also shares the communication of divinity to the Holy Spirit.290 What they communicate is the divine essence, not by an act of will but by nature.291
Glorifying Christ means that the disciples receive a clear notion of Christ. The promise is that the Spirit will give them this notion. It is also explained why the Spirit does this. He does so because He proceeds from Father and Son and that which is from another manifests that from which it is. The third fruit of the Holy Spirit, then, is the teaching to the apostles of the mystery of the divinity of Christ. This automatically includes the mystery of the Trinity. It is this mystery they are to proclaim, in the power of the Holy Spirit.292
Biblical theology, speculative exegesis
What one can notice when reading the final paragraphs of our section of the commentary is how highly speculative and apparently un-Biblical they are. This is an important aspect of modern criticism of saint Thomas. He is thought to be doing theology apart from Scripture, thinking of God in a splendid metaphysical isolation. But these paragraphs are to be understood in the larger framework of the commentary. These final sections are the climax or summary of what is said before. Many of the things that have been said before return in the final paragraphs of this section of the commentary. Most of the time Aquinas even wordily repeats key phrases:
285 Super Ioannem 2107 286 The Vulgate reads 'accipiet,' which means to receive. 287 Super Ioannem 2107 288 Saint Thomas divides verse 15 into two sections: “All that the Father etc.” and “for this reason etc...” 289 Drawing from the work of Didymus the Blind; Super Ioannem 2111; Catena in Ioannem, c16 290 Super Ioannem 2114; referring to Hilary of Poitiers and Didymus the Blind 291 Super Ioannem 2114 292 Cf. indeed they are promised power from on high in Lk. 24:49; this 'power' is given at Pentecost.
44 Appears in: Theme Returns:
2093 The work of the Spirit in and through the apostles 2107 2093 The Spirit casts out fear of the apostles so they can freely proclaim 2107 2096 The faith of the twelve was at first only in the humanity of Christ 2106 2103 The Spirit explains Christ, “because He is from another” 2107 2108 The expression “He receives from me” refers to consubstantiality 2115
Note that the first appearances are in all three sections of the commentary, that is, in the benefit for the world, the disciples and Christ. They all return in the third section, the benefit for Christ. This benefit, we saw, is the clarification of His divinity and consubstantiality with Father and Spirit. The returning theme is the work of the Spirit. More specifically, His work in the apostles: casting out fear, enlightening them about Christ, bringing faith. And also the work of the Spirit through the apostles: the proclamation to all creation of the truth they received. It is fitting that these themes return in the third section. When reviewing the commentary with this knowledge in mind, we can observe that the promise of the Holy Spirit is a promise to be guided to the full truth. The benefit for the world and the disciples makes it possible that the clarification takes place. The disciples need to be rebuked themselves and need to be instructed so they are able to grasp the clarification: after the coming of the Holy Spirit “they were able (capax) to grasp” the truth about Christ. But what benefit would this have to the world, if only the apostles receive this truth? The benefit for the world is that it has messengers to bring them this truth.
The truth about Christ is intertwined with the truth about the Holy Spirit. One cannot really speak of a person individually, since the person exists only in relation. This is the reason the Spirit glorifies Christ, as it is posed in 2107-2108 (John 16:14). In 2109-2115 (John 16:15), this reason is “further explained.”293 In the final five paragraphs Aquinas seems to draw the conclusion of this text, clearing the ground by responding to apparent questions about the Trinity. This is indicated by using phrases such as “note that,”294 “one might ask,”295 “He draws his conclusion”296 and “notice that.”297 So the commentary works toward this conclusion, as does the text of the Gospel in Aquinas' perception. In light of the prologue this is not surprising: in the final sections the truth is explained and errors are refuted. And this is what John's Gospel was written for, as the theologians of the Middle Ages saw it.298 We haven't expanded too much on it here, but the Catena shows that saint Thomas has certain errors in mind when adding his notes and questions to the commentary.
These ideas about Christ and His Spirit found their way from the study of the Scriptures to the Summa Theologiae. And exactly those parts we found to be the conclusion are referred to most. In the questions 28 to 43 of the Prima Pars there are extensive references to the Gospel of John.299 Of the eleven references to this section of the commentary, nine are from the conclusion. The other two are from 2107 and 2108, just before the conclusion. The questions that feature most references are 36 and 40-42, questions that concern the relations, processions and notional acts of the divine persons. What Aquinas writes in the Summa is nourished by what he learned from the Gospel of John. Perhaps not co-incidentally, the Prima Pars of the Summa and the Catena on John were 293 Super Ioannem 2105 294 Super Ioannem 2108, 2109, 2110, 2112 295 Super Ioannem 2113 296 Super Ioannem 2114 297 Super Ioannem 2115 298 Cf. supra, p. 23-24; Super Ioannem 10 299 Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 273-274
45 composed at the same time.300 So saint Thomas' theology is rooted in Scripture. But what about his specific way of interpreting of Scripture?
It is clear that the commentary is in parts highly speculative. This may give the impression that it is un-Biblical to interpret the verses as such. As we learned earlier the medieval way of reading Scripture is a more speculative one.301 But “only the canonical Scripture is the rule of faith” saint Thomas argued.302 Any theological idea must find its root and support in Sacred Scripture. Reading Scripture is not a solitary exercise, but is done within the community of the Church in time and space. Aquinas is not reading alone; the words of the Church Fathers resound. And also, the faith of the Church resounds; the faithful interpretation of Scripture. The expressions of this faith, such as the creeds, are rooted in Scripture. This is different from the neo-scholastic method of explaining dogmatic formulas, recalling that dogma constitutes the norm of the reading of the Scripture.303 Aquinas does not read Scripture aiming to find support for this thesis or that dogmatic formula. He is looking to discover, to dig up the truth contained in the words of the Gospel.
Respecting the verses of John as holy words, Aquinas would not dare to use them as an excuse for “theological kite-flying.” He does speculate on the text, but this is not contrary to a prayerful reading of the Holy Scripture. In the medieval understanding, the word speculation refers to contemplation. A speculative reading is a prayerful reading then.304 We must understand the commentary not only in the light of Aquinas' time but also according to the theological and metaphysical terms the Gospel of John provides. The use of the word accipere and the repetition of “He will receive from me” can also intrigue readers today. It invites to further meditation or speculation. The following scheme shows how the text provides the leads saint Thomas follows. As you can see it's not all far-fetched:
When He comes (John 16:8) Coming of the Spirit announced Because I am going to the Father (John 16:9) Relation of Son to Father There are many things you cannot bear now Something is yet to be revealed (John 16:12) The Spirit of truth guides into all truth (John Double use of 'truth' 16:13) He will not speak on his own (John 16:13) Some other must be involved But will speak whatever He hears (John 16:13) Something is communicated to the Spirit He will glorify me (John 16:14) Glorification, to show the splendour of Christ Because He will receive from me (John 16:14) The Spirit receives from Christ, but what? All that the Father has is mine (John 16:15) Father and Christ share everything Therefore I said: He will receive what is mine This shared 'thing' of Father and Son is received (John 16:15) by the Spirit of Truth
These verses almost scream out: the Spirit receives from the Father and the Son. Or as saint Thomas summarizes: “Although the Spirit of Truth proceeds from the Father, yet because all that the Father
300 Torrell, Initiation, p. 635-636 301 Cf. supra, p. 21 302 Q.Q. 7 q 6 a 1 ad 1; cf. supra p. 20 303 Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 319 304 Torrell, Maître Spirituel, p. 22
46 has is mine, (and the Spirit is the Spirit of the Father), the Spirit receives from me.”305 Throughout most of the commentary we see Aquinas expanding on these basic elements. The one step that is harder to make is understanding this text to be referring to 'receiving' from all eternity; to divine processions. This seems obvious when one considers that the divinity of Christ is the subject matter of the Gospel.306 Given the controversies and heresies surrounding the procession of the Holy Spirit, Aquinas deems it reasonable to assume these are some of the errors John is countering. The demonstration of truth includes the exclusion of error. The sources of the Catena Aurea also lead to this interpretation.307 Reading it as such, it is hardly “theological kite-flying” saint Thomas demonstrates. He is following the leads the text offers, reading the text with the Church Fathers.
305 Super Ioannem 2110; cf. Le Pivain, p. 90 306 Super Ioannem 10 307 Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 317
47 The doctrine of the Filioque in the commentary on John
By now, we have learned why the doctrine of the Filioque is so important to saint Thomas. Not because he wants to make a long nose at the Orthodox theologians. He is not reading Scripture in an aggressive way, looking for arguments. Saint Thomas speculates, meditates and finds that the words of the Gospel speak of the relations between Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And more specifically, in this section, of the Spirit receiving from the Son. The Father and Son share everything, the Spirit receives this “everything,” i.e. the divine essence. This is the central element in John 16:8-15 and of Aquinas' commentary on it.
From reflecting on the words of saint John with Aquinas, we have learned a few things about the Holy Spirit: He makes the fearful disciples into courageous apostles of Jesus Christ; teaches or rebukes the world through them; He glorifies Christ and does so because He receives from Christ. The latter is what we formulated in our preliminary thesis: because the Spirit proceeds from the Son (eternal procession) and is sent by the Son (temporal mission), he makes known the Son (fulfillment of the mission of Christ). And this is indeed what we learn from saint John's Gospel. Aquinas formulates this principle and it's consequences in more speculative terms. The central theological ideas he derives from the commentary are: the Spirit teaches by illuminating the hearts of the disciples; the Spirit teaches the truth because He proceeds from the Son who is the Truth; the Spirit receives from all eternity from the Son; the consubstantiality of Father and Son; and that the Spirit receives the divine essence from Father and Son. The theology of the Holy Spirit developed here is the same we find in the Summa Theologiae, where it is further speculated upon. The principal difference is that in the Summa saint Thomas can organize matters in a more orderly fashion whereas in the commentary he reflects on the themes as they come up.308
There have been voices claiming that Aquinas contributed to the Geistvergessenheit of Latin theology. According to this theory, doctrine of the Filioque would mean that the Spirit is in some way subjected to or is a function of Father and Son.309 Nothing could be further from saint Thomas Aquinas' understanding of the Holy Spirit as we have observed it. The doctrine of the Filioque means that the Holy Spirit becomes the centre: He is the Spirit of Truth. We need the Spirit to be led to the truth, to the Son. And when we see the Son, we see the Father.310 Without the Spirit we will not be led into the truth of the Son, and therefore not come to the Father. The doctrine of the Spirit of Truth makes the Spirit the centre of the Gospel. He is promised, He is needed to know “all truth.”
Most fittingly, the Church prays Sine tuo numine, nihil est in lumine in the hymn Veni Sancte Spiritus. This is what the doctrine of the Filioque says; it focuses our attention on the Holy Spirit. It is by the Spirit of Truth that fearful disciples become apostles of Christ and proclaim the Gospel to all nations.
Criticism of saint Thomas' doctrine of the Filioque
Centuries after saint Thomas wrote about the Spirit, in the years of the Second Vatican Council, a wave of criticism hit him. In a ground-breaking article, K. Rahner posed that “despite their orthodox confession of the Trinity, Christians are, in their practical life, almost mere monotheists. Should the doctrine of the Trinity have to be dropped as false, the major part of religious literature could well remain virtually unchanged.”311 The medieval theologians, Aquinas in particular, had 308 Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, p. 284 309 The latter is explicitly refuted by Augustine, Aquinas' Catena source. It is the heresy of the Macedonians to consider the Spirit as a “ministerium Patris et Filii”; Super Ioannem 2106; Catena in Ioannem, c16 310 John 14:9; Super Ioannem 2115 311 K. Rahner, Der Dreifaltige Gott als transzendenter Urgrund der Heilsgeschichte, in: Mysterium Salutis, Grundriss
48 divided the treatise on God in two sections: De Deo Uno and De Deo Trino.312 The deeper concern is that a strong emphasis on the unity of God had led to a sort of essentialism: stressing the one essence of God and 'forgetting' about the three related divine persons.
Later on in the 20th century, Orthodox theologian J. Zizioulas became a vocal proponent of this position. According to Zizioulas, Aquinas starts with naked substance and then goes on to speak about the persons within this substance. If this were so, the persons are just labels attached to the substance 'God.' He strongly objects to this supposed substantive metaphysics: “Outside the Trinity there is no God, that is, no divine substance, because the ontological principle of God is the Father.”313 This criticism is based on a misconception of saint Thomas' theology. He never starts with essence, continuing to pose that the Father is the principle without principle in God.314 Within the divine unity, the Son is generated by the Father and the Spirit is spirated by Father and Son. But the relations of origin are the source of everything, not a naked divine essence. The unity of this essence is safeguarded by the fact the relations are subsistent relations, not directed to an exterior other but relations in divinis.315
As for the distinction of De Deo Uno and Deo Trino: a formal distinction as such was never made by Aquinas. It does appear in 17th century editions, but one can obviously not blame saint Thomas for this. He does acknowledge that in the order of knowing one can distinguish between that which is common to the persons and that which is proper to a person.316 A Greek theologian can hardly object to this, given the fact that the Cappadocian Father saint Basil of Caesarea also speaks of a differentiation in understanding the truth.317
Zizioulas claims to make a radical choice for pneumatology, in contrast with an essentialist way of speaking about God.318 In saint Thomas, as we have discovered him, he will find an ally. All through the commentary it becomes clear that speaking of God means speaking of a mystery of love. A reader of Aquinas cannot speak of the return of creatures to God, without speaking of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is the center of attention, the thriving force of the Church.
Heilsgeschichtlicher Dogmatik, vol. II, p. 369-397 312 Already in the 11th century Stephen of Tournai lamented that professors were “cutting the invisible Trinity into pieces on cross-roads,”quoted in: Chélini, p. 447. 313 Zizioulas, p. 41; cf. Brown, p. 41. Zizioulas follows the Cappadocian Fathers, specifically Basil of Caesarea., cf. Hill, p. 47-48; Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, 249-263 314 S. Th. Ia q. 33 a. 1 315 Cf. Emery, Aquinas on Doctrine, p. 54-55; Congar, p. 161-166 316 S. Th. Ia q. 2 prol., q. 33 a. 3 ad 1; I Sent. d. 7, q. 1 a. 3, ad 4 317 Emery, Aquinas on Doctrine, p. 50 318 Zizioulas, p. 218
49 Conclusion: Lessons from saint Thomas
Much more could be said. Already in the introduction we noted that there are many issues that are not discussed in this work. This is good, because a student “should chose to enter not immediately into the ocean depths, but rather through small streams, for one should reach more difficult matters by going through the easier ones first.”319 From these small streams, however, there is plenty to be learned. When I started writing, I insisted that it would not be on the Filioque. It seemed too “theological” to me, too abstract. But I got a wake-up call from saint Thomas. The Filioque doctrine is not an invention of theologians; Sacred Scripture testifies to it. Of course, this is a product of a certain reading of Scripture. A reading from which we can learn a lot. In short, through the research done, I have learned important lessons in three major fields: exegesis, theology and life as a Christian.
Speculative exegesis
The main lesson the 21st century theologian can draw from saint Thomas is to have respect for Holy Scripture as just that: a Holy Scripture. Not the next text to be read and dissected, but the Word of God carefully read and listened to. An important aspect of his reading is that, when possible, Aquinas interprets Scripture with Scripture. The basis for this principle is that God is the author of Holy Scripture and warrants such interpretations. Moreover, it is a principle already practiced by the human authors of Scripture. In the Commentary on John, this is very visible since Aquinas had already commented on two-thirds of the passages he quotes. The lessons he learned from those comments are used to gain a deeper understanding of saint John's Gospel.
In the bigger picture it becomes clear that Thomas' respect for Scripture is not an academic principle, but part of his way of life. By praying, reading and studying Scripture, his language and thought became impregnated with it. We see this in little things: he will quote Scriptures rather than paraphrase them as some others did. For example: when speaking of the work of the Spirit he will use the word “power,” derived from the Acts of the Apostles. Given his respect for the Bible, saint Thomas avoids practicing Hineininterpretierung. However, norms derived from Scripture become rules of interpretation. To give but one example: Scripture testifies to the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, an interpretation that denies the Spirit's divinity must be false. Christian faith is presupposed when reading the text. This might be a clue to understanding the difference between medieval and modern exegesis. A second clue is the heavy use of the Church Fathers. Aquinas considers them part of 'his world,' not random voices from a distant past. Drawing on the material gathered for the Catena Aurea, he reads the Bible with the Fathers looking over his shoulder. Again, Scripture is still the norm. Saint Thomas often changes the wording of his sources to something that is closer to the text of the Vulgate.
One can hardly read John 16:8-15 without giving it a Trinitarian interpretation. In this, saint Thomas is not unique. What makes him seem strange to us is the value he gives to certain words and expressions, such as “to receive.” He feels that it is licit to use Scripture as a basis for theological speculation. The Bible is part of God's self-revelation, and read under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, points us toward God. We can follow the leads offered and speculate on them. Now the word speculation, in our modern understanding, may suggest a departure from the text. In the Middle Ages, however, speculation is another word for contemplation. To speculate is to meditate upon the words, to let them penetrate the soul and to stand in awe of the mystery of God's love.
319 Epistola de modo studendi, falsely attributed to saint Thomas. Cf. Torrell, Initiation, p. 525. Translation by prof. S. Perkins.
50 Biblical theology
His speculative exegesis leads saint Thomas to an interesting conclusion. Drawing from the Church Fathers and his own reading, he sees in John 16:8-15 a reference to the procession of the Holy Spirit. This is the central element and probably also the element most alien to a 21st century reader. Having accepted this idea, one enters into a meditation on the very being of God – led by the words of Scripture. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth,320 which means that He is as one proceeding from the truth. The Spirit will teach the disciples what they cannot bear now, making them apostles of Christ who fulfill His mission. In this way it is the Spirit who fulfills the work of Christ. Why is this so? It is because the Spirit proceeds from the Son that He fulfills the work of Christ. In this way, the temporal mission -the Spirit is sent by Christ- lead us to an understanding of the eternal procession -the Spirit proceeds from the Son. By following this pattern of thought saint Thomas demonstrates that he is a Latin theologian, a child of his time.
Aquinas is not intent on cutting God into pieces. He has deep respect for the mystery of the divine life. This can serve as an example for both neo-thomist system builders and those using Trinitarian theology for political agendas.321 The exemplary caution displayed by saint Thomas is the reason the magisterium has always proposed him as a safe guide for doing theology. He uses his God-given reason to ponder the mystery but is always aware of the limitations of this reason. This is why, in the end, only the Word of God is the rule of faith. There is a deep joy hidden in this: we can speak of God, as limited as it may be. We do not have to be speechless; we have the gifts to speak of Him and meditate on the mystery of his very being. In this we already have a taste of what it will be like in the heavenly Jerusalem, where we hope to be surrounded by His glory.
Apostolic activity
What began at Pentecost with the descent of the Holy Spirit on the disciples is continued in the Church. It is the task of all faithful, but of the clergy in particular, to proclaim to all nations as the apostles did. When finishing this work, I was training to do just that in my internship at Lumen Christi parish. One my core tasks was giving catechesis to confirmandi at the local schools. From time to time I could draw from saint Thomas' work to answer their questions and explain some of the material. Since Aquinas is a teacher himself and bestowed with a natural curiosity, I learned from the way he addresses questions that arise. Although this is most visible in the Summa Theologiae, the mentality is also present in the Commentary on John. Apart from the form, some of the content was also clarifying. How to explain the work of the Spirit at Pentecost to twelve-year- olds? Saint Thomas' response always suited them: the Spirit casts out fear and inspires the disciples to witness. Another task during the internship was giving homilies, also on Trinity Sunday. It was still challenging but having learned what I had learned, I felt much more freedom to speak about Father, Son and Spirit. Not about an object of study but about a reality, a living union of love rather than some divine isolated solitude as many perceive God to be these days.
Apart from these practical benefits, there is a deeper lesson. When I started, I was interested in theological ideas. Saint Thomas tells me to reflect and pray. And so I will finish.
God, grant that I may pray sincerely to you. Not to what I think You are, but to who You know Yourself to be.322 320 John 14:17, 15:26, 16:13; cf. Le Pivain, p. 90 321 To give but one example: E.P. Hahnenberg, Ministries – A Relational Approach, New York, 2003. In this work, Trinitarian theology is used in an effort to diminish the value of sacramental priesthood. Not to mention theologies contrasting 'spirit' with 'Christ.' 322 Free after: C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, letter IV
51 Bibliography
Sacred Scripture
Biblia Sacra, iuxta Vulgatam Clementinam, Matriti, 1965
The Bible, New Revised Standard Version
Latin editions of Aquinas
Catena Aurea in Quatuor Evangelia, volumen secundum, Expositionem in Lucam et Ioannem, Milan, 1925, p. 589-593
In Evangelia s. Matthaei et s. Ioannis commentaria, tomus secundus – Evangelium secundum Ioannem, Milan, 1925, p. 424-429 In indicating the loci, we follow the numeration of the 1952 Marietti edition.
Quaestiones Quodlibetales, Milan, 1956, p. 154-156
Summa Contra Gentiles seu De Veritate Catholicae Fidei, Milan, 1938
E. Alarcon. S. Thomae de Aquino Opera Omnia, Corpus Thomisticum, Pamplona, 2001 URL: http://www.unav.es/filosofia/alarcon/amicis/ctopera.html
English editions of Aquinas
J. Weisheipl, F. Larcher, Commentary on the Gospel of John. Aquinas Scripture Series, 4. Albany, 1980 URL: http://www.op-stjoseph.org/Students/study/thomas/SSJohn.htm
Blackfriars, Summa Theologiae – Latin text and English translation, Oxford, 1976
Secondary literature
Aristotle, Physics, translated by R.P. Hardie, RK. Gaye, Chicago, 1980
J.F. Boyle, Authorial Intention and the Divisio Textus, in: Reading John with Saint Thomas Aquinas – Theological Exegesis and Speculative Theology, Washington, 2005, p. 3-8
A. Brown, On the Criticism of 'Being as Communion' in Anglophone Orthodox Theology, in: D.H. Knight, The Theology of John Zizioulas – Personhood and the Church, Hampshire, 2007, p. 35-78
J. Chélini, Histoire Religieuse de l'Occident Médiéval, Paris, 2003
Y. Congar, Je Crois en L'Esprit Saint, vol. III – le Fleuve de Vie Coule en Orient et en Occident, Paris, 1980
I. Craemer-Ruegenberg, Albertus Magnus, München, 2002
G. Dahan, l'Exégèse Chrétienne de la Bible en Occident médiéval – XIIe - XIVe siècle, Paris, 1999
52 M. Dauphinais and M. Levering (eds.), Reading John with Saint Thomas Aquinas- Theological Exegesis and Speculative Theology, Washington, 2005
H. De Lubac, Exégèse Médièvale – Les Quatre Sens de l'Écriture, vol. II-II, Paris, 1964
H. Denzinger, A. Schönmetzer (eds.), Enchiridion Symbolorum – Definitionum et Declarationum de Rebus Fidei et Morum, 34th edition, Rome, 1966 (DS)
L. Elders, Thomas d’Aquin et Aristote, in: Revue Thomiste (1988), p. 353-376
G. Emery, Missions invisibles et missions visibles: le Christ et son Esprit, in: Revue Thomiste 106 (2006), no. 1-2, p. 51-99
G. Emery, La Théologie Trinitaire de Saint Thomas d'Aquin, Paris, 2004
G. Emery, The Doctrine of the Trinity in st. Thomas Aquinas, in: Th. Weinandy, D. Keating, J. Yocum, Aquinas on Doctrine – A Critical Introduction, New York, 2004, p. 45-65
G. Emery, Trinity in Aquinas, Ypsilanti, 2003
G. Emery, Trinity, Church and the Human Person – Thomistic Essays, Naples, 2007
F. Heer, The Medieval World – Europe 1100-1350, London, 1998
W. Hill, The Three-Personed God – The Trinity as a Mystery of Salvation, Washington, 1982
R. Hisette, Enquête sur les 219 Articles Condamnés à Paris le 7 Mars 1277, Louvain, 1977
Th.-D. Humbrecht, La Vocation Dominicaine, Paris, 2007
Pope John Paul II, encyclical Fides et Ratio, Rome, 1998
J. Le Goff (ed.), The Medieval World – The History of European Society, London, 1990
Pope Leo XIII, encyclical Aeterni Patris, Rome, 1879
D.-D. Le Pivain, L'Action du Saint-Esprit – dans le Commentaire de l'Evangile de Saint Jean par Saint Thomas d'Aquin, Paris 2006
M. Levering, Reading John with Saint Thomas Aquinas, in: T. Weinandy, D. Keating and P. Yocum (eds.), Aquinas on Scripture – An Introduction to His Biblical Commentaries, New York, 2005, p. 99-126
M. Levering, Participatory Biblical Exegesis – A Theology of Biblical Interpretation, Notre Dame, 2008
M. Levering, Scripture and Metaphysics – Aquinas and the Renewal of Trinitarian Theology, Oxford, 2004
P.-Y. Maillard, La Vision de Dieu chez Thomas d'Aquin, Paris, 2001
53 A. McGrath, Christian Theology – An Introduction, Oxford, 1995
J.-H. Nicolas, Synthèse Dogmatique – de la Trinité à la Trinité, Fribourg, 1985
Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, The Greek and Latin Traditions Regarding the Procession of the Holy Spirit, Vatican City, 1995
L. Schütz, Thomas-Lexikon, 3. Auflage von Enrique Alarcón vorbereitet, Pamplona, 2006 URL: http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/tl.html
Second Vatican Council, decree Optatam Totius – On Priestly Training, Rome, 1965
B. Sesboüé, J. Wolinski, Histoire des Dogmes, vol. I – Le Dieu du Salut, Paris, 1994
B. Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, Third edition, Oxford, 1983
J. Söder, Die Erprobung der Vernunft. Vom Umgang mit Tradition in De Homine, in: Albertus Magnus, Zum Gedenken nach 800 Jahren: neue Zugänge, Aspekte und Perspektiven, p. 1-12, Berlin, 2001
J.-P. Torrell, Initiation à Saint Thomas d'Aquin - Sa Personne et Son Oeuvre, Fribourg, 2002
J.-P. Torrell, Saint Thomas d'Aquin, Maître Spirituel – Initation 2, Fribourg, 2002
J. Wawrykow, Aquinas on Isaiah, in: T. Weinandy, D. Keating and P. Yocum (eds.), Aquinas on Scripture – An Introduction to His Biblical Commentaries, New York, 2005, p. 43-71
J.D. Zizioulas, Being as Communion, New York, 2002
54 55