28 June 2007

Thomas Wasn't All Bad...

Nevertheless, sacred doctrine makes use of these authorities as extrinsic and probable arguments; but properly uses the authority of the canonical Scriptures as an incontrovertible proof, and the authority of the doctors of the Church as one that may properly be used, yet merely as probable. For our faith rests upon the revelation made to the apostles and prophets who wrote the canonical books, and not on the revelations (if any such there are) made to other doctors. Hence Augustine says (Epis. ad Hieron. xix, 1): "Only those books of Scripture which are called canonical have I learned to hold in such honor as to believe their authors have not erred in any way in writing them. But other authors I so read as not to deem everything in their works to be true, merely on account of their having so thought and written, whatever may have been their holiness and learning."--Summa Theologia, Part 1, Question 1, Article 8


Past Elder said...

Or how about this, from contra gentiles, book one, chapter nine, section two:

Now, to make the first kind of divine truth (those available to human reason -- pe)known, we must proceed through demonstrative arguments, by which our adversary may become convinced. However, since such arguments are not available for the second kind of divine truth (those not available by human reason and known only by God's revelation of them -- pe)our intention should not be to convince our adversary by arguments, it should be to answer his arguments against the truth, for as we have shown, the natural reason cannot be contrary to the truth of faith. The sole way to overcome an adversary of divine truth is from the authority of Scripture, an authority divinely confirmed by miracles. For that which is above the human reason we can believe only because God has revealed it. Nevertheless, there are certain likely arguments that should be brought forth in order to make divine truth known. This should be done for the training and consolation of the faithful, and not with any idea of refuting those who are adversaries. For the very inadequacy of the arguments would rather strengthen them in their error, since they would imagine that our acceptance of the truth of faith was based on such weak arguments.

Thomas wasn't a bad dude at all.

Anonymous said...

And THEN God came to Thomas in Person, One-to-one, and Thomas had firsthand experience of Him.

And thereafter said all his works were "straw" and never wrote again.

He was right, and I'd bet he would be quite frustrated to know how few people believe him.