Table of Contents | Words: Alphabetical - Frequency - Inverse - Length - Statistics | Help | IntraText Library
St. Thomas Aquinas
Summa Theologica

IntraText CT - Text

  • FIRST PART (FP: QQ 1-119)
      • Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] Out. Para. 1/3 - OF THE WORK OF ADORNMENT, AS REGARDS THE FOURTH DAY (THREE ARTICLES)
Previous - Next

Click here to hide the links to concordance


Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] Out. Para. 1/3 - OF THE WORK OF ADORNMENT, AS REGARDS THE FOURTH DAY (THREE ARTICLES)

We must next consider the work of adornment, first as to each day by
itself, secondly as to all seven days in general.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] Out. Para. 2/3

In the first place, then, we consider the work of the fourth day,
secondly, that of the fifth day, thirdly, that of the sixth day, and
fourthly, such matters as belong to the seventh day.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] Out. Para. 3/3

Under the first head there are three points of inquiry:

(1) As to the production of the lights;

(2) As to the end of their production;

(3) Whether they are living beings?


Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] Thes. Para. 1/1

Whether the lights ought to have been produced on the fourth day?

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] Obj. 1 Para. 1/1

OBJ 1: It would seem that the lights ought not to have been produced on
the fourth day. For the heavenly luminaries are by nature incorruptible
bodies: wherefore their matter cannot exist without their form. But as
their matter was produced in the work of creation, before there was any
day, so therefore were their forms. It follows, then, that the lights
were not produced on the fourth day.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] Obj. 2 Para. 1/1

OBJ 2: Further, the luminaries are, as it were, vessels of light. But
light was made on the first day. The luminaries, therefore, should have
been made on the first day, not on the fourth.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] Obj. 3 Para. 1/1

OBJ 3: Further, the lights are fixed in the firmament, as plants are
fixed in the earth. For, the Scripture says: "He set them in the
firmament." But plants are described as produced when the earth, to which
they are attached, received its form. The lights, therefore, should have
been produced at the same time as the firmament, that is to say, on the
second day.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] Obj. 4 Para. 1/1

OBJ 4: Further, plants are an effect of the sun, moon, and other
heavenly bodies. Now, cause precedes effect in the order of nature. The
lights, therefore, ought not to have been produced on the fourth day, but
on the third day.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] Obj. 5 Para. 1/1

OBJ 5: Further, as astronomers say, there are many stars larger than the
moon. Therefore the sun and the moon alone are not correctly described as
the "two great lights."

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] OTC Para. 1/1

On the contrary, Suffices the authority of Scripture.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] Body Para. 1/1
I answer that, In recapitulating the Divine works, Scripture says (Gn.
2:1): "So the heavens and the earth were finished and all the furniture
of them," thereby indicating that the work was threefold. In the first
work, that of "creation," the heaven and the earth were produced, but as yet without form. In the second, or work of "distinction," the heaven and
the earth were perfected, either by adding substantial form to formless
matter, as Augustine holds (Gen. ad lit. ii, 11), or by giving them the
order and beauty due to them, as other holy writers suppose. To these two
works is added the work of adornment, which is distinct from perfect. For
the perfection of the heaven and the earth regards, seemingly, those
things that belong to them intrinsically, but the adornment, those that
are extrinsic, just as the perfection of a man lies in his proper parts
and forms, and his adornment, in clothing or such like. Now just as
distinction of certain things is made most evident by their local
movement, as separating one from another; so the work of adornment is set
forth by the production of things having movement in the heavens, and
upon the earth. But it has been stated above (Q[69], A[1]), that three
things are recorded as created, namely, the heaven, the water, and the
earth; and these three received their form from the three days' work of
distinction, so that heaven was formed on the first day; on the second
day the waters were separated; and on the third day, the earth was
divided into sea and dry land. So also is it in the work of adornment; on
the first day of this work, which is the fourth of creation, are produced
the lights, to adorn the heaven by their movements; on the second day,
which is the fifth, birds and fishes are called into being, to make
beautiful the intermediate element, for they move in air and water, which
are here taken as one; while on the third day, which is the sixth,
animals are brought forth, to move upon the earth and adorn it. It must
also here be noted that Augustine's opinion (Gen. ad lit. v, 5) on the
production of lights is not at variance with that of other holy writers,
since he says that they were made actually, and not merely virtually, for
the firmament has not the power of producing lights, as the earth has of
producing plants. Wherefore Scripture does not say: "Let the firmament
produce lights," though it says: "Let the earth bring forth the green
herb."

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] R.O. 1 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 1: In Augustine's opinion there is no difficulty here; for he
does not hold a succession of time in these works, and so there was no
need for the matter of the lights to exist under another form. Nor is
there any difficulty in the opinion of those who hold the heavenly bodies
to be of the nature of the four elements, for it may be said that they
were formed out of matter already existing, as animals and plants were
formed. For those, however, who hold the heavenly bodies to be of another
nature from the elements, and naturally incorruptible, the answer must be
that the lights were substantially created at the beginning, but that
their substance, at first formless, is formed on this day, by receiving
not its substantial form, but a determination of power. As to the fact
that the lights are not mentioned as existing from the beginning, but
only as made on the fourth day, Chrysostom (Hom. vi in Gen.) explains
this by the need of guarding the people from the danger of idolatry:
since the lights are proved not to be gods, by the fact that they were
not from the beginning.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] R.O. 2 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 2: No difficulty exists if we follow Augustine in holding the
light made on the first day to be spiritual, and that made on this day to
be corporeal. If, however, the light made on the first day is understood
to be itself corporeal, then it must be held to have been produced on
that day merely as light in general; and that on the fourth day the
lights received a definite power to produce determinate effects. Thus we
observe that the rays of the sun have one effect, those of the moon
another, and so forth. Hence, speaking of such a determination of power,
Dionysius (Div. Nom. iv) says that the sun's light which previously was
without form, was formed on the fourth day.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] R.O. 3 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 3: According to Ptolemy the heavenly luminaries are not fixed
in the spheres, but have their own movement distinct from the movement of
the spheres. Wherefore Chrysostom says (Hom. vi in Gen.) that He is said
to have set them in the firmament, not because He fixed them there
immovably, but because He bade them to be there, even as He placed man in
Paradise, to be there. In the opinion of Aristotle, however, the stars
are fixed in their orbits, and in reality have no other movement but that
of the spheres; and yet our senses perceive the movement of the
luminaries and not that of the spheres (De Coel. ii, text. 43). But Moses
describes what is obvious to sense, out of condescension to popular
ignorance, as we have already said (Q[67], A[4]; Q[68], A[3]). The
objection, however, falls to the ground if we regard the firmament made
on the second day as having a natural distinction from that in which the
stars are placed, even though the distinction is not apparent to the
senses, the testimony of which Moses follows, as stated above (De Coel.
ii, text. 43). For although to the senses there appears but one
firmament; if we admit a higher and a lower firmament, the lower will be
that which was made on the second day, and on the fourth the stars were
fixed in the higher firmament.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] R.O. 4 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 4: In the words of Basil (Hom. v in Hexaem.), plants were
recorded as produced before the sun and moon, to prevent idolatry, since
those who believe the heavenly bodies to be gods, hold that plants
originate primarily from these bodies. Although as Chrysostom remarks
(Hom. vi in Gen.), the sun, moon, and stars cooperate in the work of
production by their movements, as the husbandman cooperates by his labor.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[1] R.O. 5 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 5: As Chrysostom says, the two lights are called great, not so
much with regard to their dimensions as to their influence and power. For
though the stars be of greater bulk than the moon, yet the influence of
the moon is more perceptible to the senses in this lower world. Moreover,
as far as the senses are concerned, its apparent size is greater.


Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] Thes. Para. 1/1

Whether the cause assigned for the production of the lights is reasonable?

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] Obj. 1 Para. 1/1

OBJ 1: It would seem that the cause assigned for the production of the
lights is not reasonable. For it is said (Jer. 10:2): "Be not afraid of
the signs of heaven, which the heathens fear." Therefore the heavenly
lights were not made to be signs.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] Obj. 2 Para. 1/1

OBJ 2: Further, sign is contradistinguished from cause. But the lights
are the cause of what takes place upon the earth. Therefore they are not
signs.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] Obj. 3 Para. 1/1

OBJ 3: Further, the distinction of seasons and days began from the first
day. Therefore the lights were not made "for seasons, and days, and
years," that is, in order to distinguish them.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] Obj. 4 Para. 1/1

OBJ 4: Further, nothing is made for the sake of that which is inferior
to itself, "since the end is better than the means" (Topic. iii). But the
lights are nobler than the earth. Therefore they were not made "to
enlighten it."

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] Obj. 5 Para. 1/1

OBJ 5: Further, the new moon cannot be said "to rule the night." But
such it probably did when first made; for men begin to count from the new
moon. The moon, therefore, was not made "to rule the night."

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] OTC Para. 1/1

On the contrary, Suffices the authority of Scripture.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] Body Para. 1/1

I answer that, As we have said above (Q[65], A[2]), a corporeal creature
can be considered as made either for the sake of its proper act, or for
other creatures, or for the whole universe, or for the glory of God. Of
these reasons only that which points out the usefulness of these things
to man, is touched upon by Moses, in order to withdraw his people from
idolatry. Hence it is written (Dt. 4:19): "Lest perhaps lifting up thy
eyes to heaven, thou see the sun and the moon and all the stars of
heaven, and being deceived by error thou adore and serve them, which the
Lord thy God created for the service of all nations." Now, he explains
this service at the beginning of Genesis as threefold. First, the lights
are of service to man, in regard to sight, which directs him in his
works, and is most useful for perceiving objects. In reference to this he
says: "Let them shine in the firmament and give life to the earth."
Secondly, as regards the changes of the seasons, which prevent weariness,
preserve health, and provide for the necessities of food; all of which
things could not be secured if it were always summer or winter. In
reference to this he says: "Let them be for seasons, and for days, and
years." Thirdly, as regards the convenience of business and work, in so
far as the lights are set in the heavens to indicate fair or foul
weather, as favorable to various occupations. And in this respect he
says: "Let them be for signs."

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] R.O. 1 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 1: The lights in the heaven are set for signs of changes
effected in corporeal creatures, but not of those changes which depend
upon the free-will.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] R.O. 2 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 2: We are sometimes brought to the knowledge of hidden effects
through their sensible causes, and conversely. Hence nothing prevents a
sensible cause from being a sign. But he says "signs," rather than
"causes," to guard against idolatry.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] R.O. 3 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 3: The general division of time into day and night took place
on the first day, as regards the diurnal movement, which is common to the
whole heaven and may be understood to have begun on that first day. But
the particular distinctions of days and seasons and years, according as
one day is hotter than another, one season than another, and one year
than another, are due to certain particular movements of the stars: which
movements may have had their beginning on the fourth day.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] R.O. 4 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 4: Light was given to the earth for the service of man, who,
by reason of his soul, is nobler than the heavenly bodies. Nor is it
untrue to say that a higher creature may be made for the sake of a lower,
considered not in itself, but as ordained to the good of the universe.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[2] R.O. 5 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 5: When the moon is at its perfection it rises in the evening
and sets in the morning, and thus it rules the night, and it was probably
made in its full perfection as were plants yielding seed, as also were
animals and man himself. For although the perfect is developed from the
imperfect by natural processes, yet the perfect must exist simply before
the imperfect. Augustine, however (Gen. ad lit. ii), does not say this,
for he says that it is not unfitting that God made things imperfect,
which He afterwards perfected.


Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] Thes. Para. 1/1

Whether the lights of heaven are living beings?

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] Obj. 1 Para. 1/1

OBJ 1: It would seem that the lights of heaven are living beings. For
the nobler a body is, the more nobly it should be adorned. But a body
less noble than the heaven, is adorned with living beings, with fish,
birds, and the beasts of the field. Therefore the lights of heaven, as
pertaining to its adornment, should be living beings also.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] Obj. 2 Para. 1/1

OBJ 2: Further, the nobler a body is, the nobler must be its form. But
the sun, moon, and stars are nobler bodies than plants or animals, and
must therefore have nobler forms. Now the noblest of all forms is the
soul, as being the first principle of life. Hence Augustine (De Vera
Relig. xxix) says: "Every living substance stands higher in the order of
nature than one that has not life." The lights of heaven, therefore, are
living beings.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] Obj. 3 Para. 1/1

OBJ 3: Further, a cause is nobler than its effect. But the sun, moon,
and stars are a cause of life, as is especially evidenced in the case of
animals generated from putrefaction, which receive life from the power of
the sun and stars. Much more, therefore, have the heavenly bodies a
living soul.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] Obj. 4 Para. 1/1

OBJ 4: Further, the movement of the heaven and the heavenly bodies are
natural (De Coel. i, text. 7,8): and natural movement is from an
intrinsic principle. Now the principle of movement in the heavenly bodies
is a substance capable of apprehension, and is moved as the desirer is
moved by the object desired (Metaph. xii, text. 36). Therefore,
seemingly, the apprehending principle is intrinsic to the heavenly
bodies: and consequently they are living beings.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] Obj. 5 Para. 1/1

OBJ 5: Further, the first of movables is the heaven. Now, of all things
that are endowed with movement the first moves itself, as is proved in
Phys. viii, text. 34, because, what is such of itself precedes that which
is by another. But only beings that are living move themselves, as is
shown in the same book (text. 27). Therefore the heavenly bodies are
living beings.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] OTC Para. 1/1

On the contrary, Damascene says (De Fide Orth. ii), "Let no one esteem
the heavens or the heavenly bodies to be living things, for they have
neither life nor sense."

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] Body Para. 1/3

I answer that, Philosophers have differed on this question. Anaxagoras,
for instance, as Augustine mentions (De Civ. Dei xviii, 41), "was
condemned by the Athenians for teaching that the sun was a fiery mass of
stone, and neither a god nor even a living being." On the other hand, the
Platonists held that the heavenly bodies have life. Nor was there less
diversity of opinion among the Doctors of the Church. It was the belief
of Origen (Peri Archon i) and Jerome that these bodies were alive, and
the latter seems to explain in that sense the words (Eccles. 1:6), "The
spirit goeth forward, surveying all places round about." But Basil (Hom.
iii, vi in Hexaem.) and Damascene (De Fide Orth. ii) maintain that the
heavenly bodies are inanimate. Augustine leaves the matter in doubt,
without committing himself to either theory, though he goes so far as to
say that if the heavenly bodies are really living beings, their souls
must be akin to the angelic nature (Gen. ad lit. ii, 18; Enchiridion
lviii).

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] Body Para. 2/3

In examining the truth of this question, where such diversity of opinion
exists, we shall do well to bear in mind that the union of soul and body
exists for the sake of the soul and not of the body; for the form does
not exist for the matter, but the matter for the form. Now the nature and
power of the soul are apprehended through its operation, which is to a
certain extent its end. Yet for some of these operations, as sensation
and nutrition, our body is a necessary instrument. Hence it is clear that
the sensitive and nutritive souls must be united to a body in order to
exercise their functions. There are, however, operations of the soul,
which are not exercised through the medium of the body, though the body
ministers, as it were, to their production. The intellect, for example,
makes use of the phantasms derived from the bodily senses, and thus far
is dependent on the body, although capable of existing apart from it. It
is not, however, possible that the functions of nutrition, growth, and
generation, through which the nutritive soul operates, can be exercised
by the heavenly bodies, for such operations are incompatible with a body
naturally incorruptible. Equally impossible is it that the functions of
the sensitive soul can appertain to the heavenly body, since all the
senses depend on the sense of touch, which perceives elemental qualities,
and all the organs of the senses require a certain proportion in the
admixture of elements, whereas the nature of the heavenly bodies is not
elemental. It follows, then, that of the operations of the soul the only
ones left to be attributed to the heavenly bodies are those of
understanding and moving; for appetite follows both sensitive and
intellectual perception, and is in proportion thereto. But the operations
of the intellect, which does not act through the body, do not need a body
as their instrument, except to supply phantasms through the senses.
Moreover, the operations of the sensitive soul, as we have seen, cannot
be attributed to the heavenly bodies. Accordingly, the union of a soul to
a heavenly body cannot be for the purpose of the operations of the
intellect. It remains, then, only to consider whether the movement of the
heavenly bodies demands a soul as the motive power, not that the soul, in
order to move the heavenly body, need be united to the latter as its
form; but by contact of power, as a mover is united to that which he
moves. Wherefore Aristotle (Phys. viii, text. 42,43), after showing that
the first mover is made up of two parts, the moving and the moved, goes
on to show the nature of the union between these two parts. This, he
says, is effected by contact which is mutual if both are bodies; on the
part of one only, if one is a body and the other not. The Platonists
explain the union of soul and body in the same way, as a contact of a
moving power with the object moved, and since Plato holds the heavenly
bodies to be living beings, this means nothing else but that substances
of spiritual nature are united to them, and act as their moving power. A
proof that the heavenly bodies are moved by the direct influence and
contact of some spiritual substance, and not, like bodies of specific
gravity, by nature, lies in the fact that whereas nature moves to one
fixed end which having attained, it rests; this does not appear in the
movement of heavenly bodies. Hence it follows that they are moved by some
intellectual substances. Augustine appears to be of the same opinion when
he expresses his belief that all corporeal things are ruled by God
through the spirit of life (De Trin. iii, 4).

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] Body Para. 3/3

From what has been said, then, it is clear that the heavenly bodies are
not living beings in the same sense as plants and animals, and that if
they are called so, it can only be equivocally. It will also be seen that
the difference of opinion between those who affirm, and those who deny, that these bodies have life, is not a difference of things but of words.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] R.O. 1 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 1: Certain things belong to the adornment of the universe by
reason of their proper movement; and in this way the heavenly luminaries
agree with others that conduce to that adornment, for they are moved by a
living substance.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] R.O. 2 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 2: One being may be nobler than another absolutely, but not in
a particular respect. While, then, it is not conceded that the souls of
heavenly bodies are nobler than the souls of animals absolutely it must
be conceded that they are superior to them with regard to their
respective forms, since their form perfects their matter entirely, which
is not in potentiality to other forms; whereas a soul does not do this.
Also as regards movement the power that moves the heavenly bodies is of a
nobler kind.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] R.O. 3 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 3: Since the heavenly body is a mover moved, it is of the
nature of an instrument, which acts in virtue of the agent: and therefore
since this agent is a living substance the heavenly body can impart life
in virtue of that agent.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] R.O. 4 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 4: The movements of the heavenly bodies are natural, not on
account of their active principle, but on account of their passive
principle; that is to say, from a certain natural aptitude for being
moved by an intelligent power.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[70] A[3] R.O. 5 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 5: The heaven is said to move itself in as far as it is
compounded of mover and moved; not by the union of the mover, as the
form, with the moved, as the matter, but by contact with the motive
power, as we have said. So far, then, the principle that moves it may be
called intrinsic, and consequently its movement natural with respect to
that active principle; just as we say that voluntary movement is natural
to the animal as animal (Phys. viii, text. 27).


Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] Out. Para. 1/1

ON THE WORK OF THE FIFTH DAY (ONE ARTICLE)

We must next consider the work of the fifth day.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] Obj. 1 Para. 1/1

OBJ 1: It would seem that this work is not fittingly described. For the
waters produce that which the power of water suffices to produce. But the
power of water does not suffice for the production of every kind of
fishes and birds since we find that many of them are generated from seed.
Therefore the words, "Let the waters bring forth the creeping creature
having life, and the fowl that may fly over the earth," do not fittingly
describe this work.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] Obj. 2 Para. 1/1

OBJ 2: Further, fishes and birds are not produced from water only, but
earth seems to predominate over water in their composition, as is shown
by the fact that their bodies tend naturally to the earth and rest upon
it. It is not, then, fittingly that fishes and birds are produced from
water.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] Obj. 3 Para. 1/1

OBJ 3: Further, fishes move in the waters, and birds in the air. If,
then, fishes are produced from the waters, birds ought to be produced
from the air, and not from the waters.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] Obj. 4 Para. 1/1

OBJ 4: Further, not all fishes creep through the waters, for some, as
seals, have feet and walk on land. Therefore the production of fishes is
not sufficiently described by the words, "Let the waters bring forth the
creeping creature having life."

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] Obj. 5 Para. 1/1

OBJ 5: Further, land animals are more perfect than birds and fishes
which appears from the fact that they have more distinct limbs, and
generation of a higher order. For they bring forth living beings, whereas
birds and fishes bring forth eggs. But the more perfect has precedence in
the order of nature. Therefore fishes and birds ought not to have been
produced on the fifth day, before land animals.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] OTC Para. 1/1

On the contrary, Suffices the authority of Scripture.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] Body Para. 1/1

I answer that, As said above, (Q[70], A[1]), the order of the work of
adornment corresponds to the order of the work of distinction. Hence, as
among the three days assigned to the work of distinction, the middle, or
second, day is devoted to the work of distinction of water, which is the
intermediate body, so in the three days of the work of adornment, the
middle day, which is the fifth, is assigned to the adornment of the
intermediate body, by the production of birds and fishes. As, then, Moses
makes mention of the lights and the light on the fourth day, to show that
the fourth day corresponds to the first day on which he had said that the
light was made, so on this fifth day he mentions the waters and the
firmament of heaven to show that the fifth day corresponds to the second.
It must, however, be observed that Augustine differs from other writers
in his opinion about the production of fishes and birds, as he differs
about the production of plants. For while others say that fishes and
birds were produced on the fifth day actually, he holds that the nature
of the waters produced them on that day potentially.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] R.O. 1 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 1: It was laid down by Avicenna that animals of all kinds can
be generated by various minglings of the elements, and naturally, without
any kind of seed. This, however, seems repugnant to the fact that nature
produces its effects by determinate means, and consequently, those things
that are naturally generated from seed cannot be generated naturally in
any other way. It ought, then, rather to be said that in the natural
generation of all animals that are generated from seed, the active
principle lies in the formative power of the seed, but that in the case
of animals generated from putrefaction, the formative power of is the
influence of the heavenly bodies. The material principle, however, in
the generation of either kind of animals, is either some element, or
something compounded of the elements. But at the first beginning of the
world the active principle was the Word of God, which produced animals
from material elements, either in act, as some holy writers say, or
virtually, as Augustine teaches. Not as though the power possessed by
water or earth of producing all animals resides in the earth and the
water themselves, as Avicenna held, but in the power originally given to
the elements of producing them from elemental matter by the power of seed
or the influence of the stars.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] R.O. 2 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 2: The bodies of birds and fishes may be considered from two
points of view. If considered in themselves, it will be evident that the
earthly element must predominate, since the element that is least active,
namely, the earth, must be the most abundant in quantity in order that
the mingling may be duly tempered in the body of the animal. But if
considered as by nature constituted to move with certain specific
motions, thus they have some special affinity with the bodies in which
they move; and hence the words in which their generation is described.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] R.O. 3 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 3: The air, as not being so apparent to the senses, is not
enumerated by itself, but with other things: partly with the water,
because the lower region of the air is thickened by watery exhalations;
partly with the heaven as to the higher region. But birds move in the
lower part of the air, and so are said to fly "beneath the firmament,"
even if the firmament be taken to mean the region of clouds. Hence the
production of birds is ascribed to the water.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] R.O. 4 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 4: Nature passes from one extreme to another through the
medium; and therefore there are creatures of intermediate type between
the animals of the air and those of the water, having something in common
with both; and they are reckoned as belonging to that class to which they
are most allied, through the characters possessed in common with that
class, rather than with the other. But in order to include among fishes
all such intermediate forms as have special characters like to theirs,
the words, "Let the waters bring forth the creeping creature having
life," are followed by these: "God created great whales," etc.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[71] A[1] R.O. 5 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 5: The order in which the production of these animals is given
has reference to the order of those bodies which they are set to adorn,
rather than to the superiority of the animals themselves. Moreover, in
generation also the more perfect is reached through the less perfect.


Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] Out. Para. 1/1

ON THE WORK OF THE SIXTH DAY (ONE ARTICLE)

We must now consider the work of the sixth day.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] Obj. 1 Para. 1/1

OBJ 1: It would seem that this work is not fittingly described. For as
birds and fishes have a living soul, so also have land animals. But these
animals are not themselves living souls. Therefore the words, "Let the
earth bring forth the living creature," should rather have been, "Let the
earth bring forth the living four-footed creatures."

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] Obj. 2 Para. 1/1

OBJ 2: Further, a genus ought not to be opposed to its species. But
beasts and cattle are quadrupeds. Therefore quadrupeds ought not to be
enumerated as a class with beasts and cattle.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] Obj. 3 Para. 1/1

OBJ 3: Further, as animals belong to a determinate genus and species, so
also does man. But in the making of man nothing is said of his genus and
species, and therefore nothing ought to have been said about them in the
production of other animals, whereas it is said "according to its genus"
and "in its species."

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] Obj. 4 Para. 1/1

OBJ 4: Further, land animals are more like man, whom God is recorded to
have blessed, than are birds and fishes. But as birds and fishes are said
to be blessed, this should have been said, with much more reason, of the
other animals as well.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] Obj. 5 Para. 1/1

OBJ 5: Further, certain animals are generated from putrefaction, which
is a kind of corruption. But corruption is repugnant to the first
founding of the world. Therefore such animals should not have been
produced at that time.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] Obj. 6 Para. 1/1

OBJ 6: Further, certain animals are poisonous, and injurious to man. But
there ought to have been nothing injurious to man before man sinned.
Therefore such animals ought not to have been made by God at all, since
He is the Author of good; or at least not until man had sinned.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] OTC Para. 1/1

On the contrary, Suffices the authority of Scripture.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] Body Para. 1/1

I answer that, As on the fifth day the intermediate body, namely, the
water, is adorned, and thus that day corresponds to the second day; so
the sixth day, on which the lowest body, or the earth, is adorned by the
production of land animals, corresponds to the third day. Hence the earth
is mentioned in both places. And here again Augustine says (Gen. ad lit.
v) that the production was potential, and other holy writers that it was
actual.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] R.O. 1 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 1: The different grades of life which are found in different
living creatures can be discovered from the various ways in which
Scripture speaks of them, as Basil says (Hom. viii in Hexaem.). The life
of plants, for instance, is very imperfect and difficult to discern, and
hence, in speaking of their production, nothing is said of their life,
but only their generation is mentioned, since only in generation is a
vital act observed in them. For the powers of nutrition and growth are
subordinate to the generative life, as will be shown later on (Q[78],
A[2]). But amongst animals, those that live on land are, generally
speaking, more perfect than birds and fishes, not because the fish is
devoid of memory, as Basil upholds (Hom. viii in Hexaem.) and Augustine
rejects (Gen. ad lit. iii), but because their limbs are more distinct and
their generation of a higher order, (yet some imperfect animals, such as
bees and ants, are more intelligent in certain ways). Scripture,
therefore, does not call fishes "living creatures," but "creeping
creatures having life"; whereas it does call land animals "living
creatures" on account of their more perfect life, and seems to imply that
fishes are merely bodies having in them something of a soul, whilst land
animals, from the higher perfection of their life, are, as it were,
living souls with bodies subject to them. But the life of man, as being
the most perfect grade, is not said to be produced, like the life of
other animals, by earth or water, but immediately by God.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] R.O. 2 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 2: By "cattle," domestic animals are signified, which in any
way are of service to man: but by "beasts," wild animals such as bears
and lions are designated. By "creeping things" those animals are meant
which either have no feet and cannot rise from the earth, as serpents, or
those whose feet are too short to life them far from the ground, as the
lizard and tortoise. But since certain animals, as deer and goats, seem
to fall under none of these classes, the word "quadrupeds" is added. Or
perhaps the word "quadruped" is used first as being the genus, to which
the others are added as species, for even some reptiles, such as lizards
and tortoises, are four-footed.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] R.O. 3 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 3: In other animals, and in plants, mention is made of genus
and species, to denote the generation of like from like. But it was
unnecessary to do so in the case of man, as what had already been said of
other creatures might be understood of him. Again, animals and plants may
be said to be produced according to their kinds, to signify their
remoteness from the Divine image and likeness, whereas man is said to be
made "to the image and likeness of God."

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] R.O. 4 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 4: The blessing of God gives power to multiply by generation,
and, having been mentioned in the preceding account of the making of
birds and fishes, could be understood of the beasts of the earth, without
requiring to be repeated. The blessing, however, is repeated in the case
of man, since in him generation of children has a special relation to the
number of the elect [*Cf. Augustine, Gen. ad lit. iii, 12], and to
prevent anyone from saying that there was any sin whatever in the act of
begetting children. As to plants, since they experience neither desire of
propagation, nor sensation in generating, they are deemed unworthy of a
formal blessing.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] R.O. 5 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 5: Since the generation of one thing is the corruption of
another, it was not incompatible with the first formation of things, that
from the corruption of the less perfect the more perfect should be
generated. Hence animals generated from the corruption of inanimate
things, or of plants, may have been generated then. But those generated
from corruption of animals could not have been produced then otherwise
than potentially.

Aquin.: SMT FP Q[72] A[1] R.O. 6 Para. 1/1

Reply OBJ 6: In the words of Augustine (Super. Gen. contr. Manich. i):
"If an unskilled person enters the workshop of an artificer he sees in
it many appliances of which he does not understand the use, and which, if
he is a foolish fellow, he considers unnecessary. Moreover, should he
carelessly fall into the fire, or wound himself with a sharp-edged tool,
he is under the impression that many of the things there are hurtful;
whereas the craftsman, knowing their use, laughs at his folly. And thus
some people presume to find fault with many things in this world, through
not seeing the reasons for their existence. For though not required for
the furnishing of our house, these things are necessary for the
perfection of the universe." And, since man before he sinned would have
used the things of this world conformably to the order designed,
poisonous animals would not have injured him.





Previous - Next

Table of Contents | Words: Alphabetical - Frequency - Inverse - Length - Statistics | Help | IntraText Library

Best viewed with any browser at 800x600 or 768x1024 on Tablet PC
IntraText® (V89) - Some rights reserved by Èulogos SpA - 1996-2007. Content in this page is licensed under a Creative Commons License