On prayer and the contemplative life · Aquinas Thomas
INTRODUCTION
This likeness between the two great Saints forms the theme of one of the _Responsories_ for the Office for S. Thomas in the Dominican Breviary. It is based on a famous vision. "There appeared to me as I watched in prayer," said Brother Albert of Brescia in his deposition, "two revered personages clothed in wondrous splendour. One of them wore a mitre on his head, the other was clad in the habit of the Friars Preachers. And this latter bore on his head a golden crown; round his neck he wore two rings, one of silver, the other of gold; and on his breast he had an immense precious stone, which filled the church with light. His cloak, too, was sewn with precious stones, and his tunic and his hood were of snowy white. And the one who wore the mitre said to me: 'Brother Albert, why art thou thus filled with wonder? Thy prayers are heard; for--listen: I am Augustine, the Doctor of the Church, and I am sent to thee to tell thee of the doctrine and of the glory of Brother Thomas of Aquin who is here with me. For he is my son; he in all things has followed my doctrine and that of the Apostles, and by his teaching he has illumined the Church of God. This is signified by the precious stones which you see, and especially by the one he carries on his breast, for it signifies the upright intention which he ever had in view in his defence of the faith and which he showed in his words. These precious stones, then, and especially that great one, signify the many books and works that he wrote, and they show that he is equal to me in glory save only that in the aureola of Virginity he surpasseth me.'"[21]
Cardinal Cajetan, from whose famous Commentary on the _Summa_ we have occasionally quoted, is unfortunately too little known. Born in 1469, and dying in 1534, he was the contemporary of Luther and the Reformers, and, as was to be expected, their most formidable opponent. A great student, a man of prayer as well as a man of action, his was the striking figure of the early portion of the sixteenth century. But his was a bold and independent mind, and he was not afraid to advance views which, though now commonly accepted, brought his works into a certain disfavour. This is especially to be regretted in the case of his Commentaries on the Bible. A thorough Greek scholar, possessing no mean acquaintance with Hebrew, he deserves, by reason of the clearness and precision of his thought, the title of "Prince of Commentators." Here, however, we are concerned with the devotional rather than with the critical aspect of his writings, and the reader will gain from some of Cajetan's terse and pithy comments a very great deal of instruction. In conclusion, a few words may be desirable regarding the method of S. Thomas.
S. Thomas divides his _Summa Theologica_ into three main parts. The _First Part_ treats of _God, the Exemplar_.[22] The _Second_, of _man made to the image of God_;[23] the _Third_, of _God Incarnate_, of His _Sacraments_ by which we attain to union with Him in this life, and of _Eternal Life_ to which we attain ultimately by our resurrection. Here we are solely concerned with the _Second part_.[24] It is subdivided into two portions, known as the _Prima Secundae_ and the _Secunda Secundae_ respectively, or as the _First_ and _Second_ portions of the _Second part_. In the _Prima Secundae_ the Saint treats of the _principles of Morals_--namely, of man's ultimate end and of the habits, acts, and principles by which he attains it. In the _Secunda Secundae_, after having laid in the _Prima Secundae_ the foundations of Moral Theology, he proceeds to treat of the _individual virtues_, firstly of the Theological Virtues, Faith, Hope, and Charity; then of the Cardinal Virtues, Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, and Temperance. Under each of these heads he treats of the _Gifts_ corresponding to each Virtue, of the _vices_ opposed to them, and of the _Precepts_ regarding them.[25] Apropos of the Cardinal Virtue of Justice, he treats of the Moral Virtue of _Religion_, which is comprised under Justice, since Religion may be defined as the offering to God the worship which is His due, _Question_ LXXXI. He then treats of _Devotion_, _Question_ LXXXII., and then of _Prayer_, _Question_ LXXXIII. These three _Questions_ we here present in an English dress.
After these Treatises on individual virtues, he passes to the consideration of those virtues which concern, not men as a whole, but only _certain classes of men_.[26] And first of all he treats of those _Gifts_ which are bestowed upon certain men not so much for their own benefit as for the good of others--viz., of Prophecy, of Ecstasy, of the Gift of Tongues, and of the Gift of Miracles. He then discusses the two kinds of _operations_ or "lives"--the _active_, namely, and the _contemplative_--which find a place in the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church. These treatises in reality constitute a commentary on 1 Cor. xii. 4-11. _Question_ CLXXIX., _On the Division of Life into the Active and the Contemplative_, is here given; as also _Question_ CLXXX., _On the Contemplative Life_; _Question_ CLXXXI., _On the Active Life_; _Question_ CLXXXII., _On the Comparison of the Active with the Contemplative Life_. S. Thomas then proceeds to treat of _various states of life_--viz., of the state of perfection, of the Episcopal and of the Religious state. Only one question raised in this connection concerns us here: _Whether_, namely, _Contemplative Religious Orders are superior to Active Orders?_ (_Question_ CLXXXVIII. 6). Each _Question_ is, as will be seen from the _Table of Contents_, divided into _Articles_.
The framework of what is termed an "article" of the _Summa_ is familiar to those who use that work, but it may not be amiss to explain S. Thomas's method in brief fashion. Each "article" is couched in the form of a question, thus: _Has contemplation its joys?_ And the Saint at once sets forth in succession three, sometimes more, arguments which seem to militate against the view he himself holds. These are commonly known as the _objections_. He then gives us a short paragraph opening with the words: _Sed contra_, or _But on the contrary_; and in this paragraph he gives some authority, generally that of Holy Scripture or one of the Fathers, for the view he is going to hold. This paragraph is generally known from its opening words as the _Sed contra_; there is no argument in it save from authority. He then proceeds to discuss the question from the standpoint of pure reason. This portion is known as the _Corpus articuli_, or _Body of the Article_, and in it the Saint presents his reasoning in clear, precise fashion. It will be apparent, of course, that many questions cannot be answered with a categoric _yes_ or _no_, but the precise sense in which certain terms in the discussion are to be used has to be clearly ascertained; according to the diverse ways in which they may be understood the answer will be affirmative or negative. It is important for those not familiar with S. Thomas' works to grasp this point; they must not, for instance, presume that because the opening "objections" seem to uphold one point of view S. Thomas is therefore going to hold the precise opposite. A good example of this will be found in the Article: _Ought we to pray to God alone?_
In the Treatises here presented the argument, though clear and precise, is hardly what we should call subtle, and this for the simple reason that the subject-matter does not call for subtle treatment. But what cannot fail to strike the most cursory reader is the tone of submission to authority and to the teachings of the Fathers which characterizes every page: "_Summe veneratus est sacros Doctores_," says Cajetan, "_ideo intellectum omnium quodammodo sortitus est_."[27] And the natural corollary of this is the complete self-effacement of the Saint. The first person is conspicuous by its absence all through the _Summa_, though the reader of the following pages will find one exception to this rule. And the more we study these Articles of S. Thomas the more we marvel; the thought is so concentrated and yet so limpid in its expression, that as we read it it seems as though no one could ever have thought otherwise. But read it, and then try to reformulate the line of argument which you have been following with such ease--and your mind halts, your tongue stammers! It is one thing to understand the thought when expressed, quite another to think such thoughts and express them. Hence the declaration made by Pope John XXII. when the question of the holy Doctor's canonization was brought forward: "Such teaching," he exclaimed, "could only have been due to miracle!" And on the following day in the Consistory: "He has brought greater light to the Church than all other Doctors; by one year's study of his writings a man may make greater profit than if he spend his whole life studying the writings of others!"[28]
The reader will sometimes feel inclined to smile at the quaint etymologies which occur now and again. But he must remember that these are given by the Saint for what they are worth. It was not a philological age, and S. Thomas made use of the _Book of Etymologies_ drawn up in the seventh century by S. Isidore of Seville. Besides the writings of S. Augustine, two Patristic works are cited with considerable frequency by S. Thomas in these pages: the _Opus Imperfectum_ of S. Chrysostom on S. Matthew's Gospel, and the works of Denis the Areopagite. The former is almost certainly not the work of S. Chrysostom, but rather of an Arian writer towards the close of the sixth century.[29] The writer known as Denis the Areopagite, owing to his being traditionally identified with S. Paul's convert at Athens, probably wrote about the close of the fifth century. Few works of Mystical Theology exercised a greater influence on the writers of the Middle Ages.[30] A word must also be said about the _Gloss_ to which S. Thomas so often refers, and which he quotes as an authority. The term "Gloss" was applied to the brief running commentaries on the Bible which were in vogue in the Middle Ages. These brief paraphrases were also known as _Postillae_, and they were frequently written in between the lines of the text of the Bible, whence the name _Interlinear Gloss_; or in the margins, whence the name _Marginal Gloss_. The _Glossa Ordinaria_, as it is called, is the best known of these commentaries.
It is usually attributed to Walafrid Strabo, a monk of the Abbey of S. Gall, who died in 849; but it is probable that Strabo took down his Commentary from the lips of Rabanus Maurus, a monk of the Abbey of Fulda, and afterwards its abbot. Rabanus was a most prolific writer, and has left Commentaries on nearly all the Books of the Bible. Even when Abbot he reserved to himself the Chair of Scripture;[31] he had had the great advantage of living for a time in Palestine. Another Biblical scholar to whom the _Glossa Ordinaria_ of S. Thomas's time apparently owed much, was Hugo a S. Caro, the Dominican Provincial in France, and afterwards Cardinal-Priest of S. Sabina. It was under his direction that the first Concordance of the Bible was formed, in which task he is said to have had the assistance of five hundred Friars.[32] He owes his title of Glossator to his well-known _Postillae_, or Brief Commentaries on the whole Bible. The _Glossa Interlinearis_ is due to Anselm, a Canon of Laudun, who died in 1117. Another famous Glossator was Nicolas de Lyra, a Franciscan who died in 1340--some sixty-six years, that is, subsequent to S. Thomas. Lastly, we should mention Peter the Lombard, commonly known as _The Master of the Sentences_, from his four books of _Sentences_, in which he presented the theological teaching of the Fathers in Scholastic fashion. This treatise became the Scholastic manual of the age. To him is due a Gloss on the Psalter and on Job, as well as a series of brief notes on the Epistles of S. Paul taken from the writings of the chief Fathers, S. Ambrose, S. Jerome, S. Augustine, etc. And the authority accorded to these Glosses in general is due to the fact that they constituted a running Commentary taken from the writings of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church.
Magne Pater Augustine Preces nostras suscipe, Et per eas Conditori Nos placare satage, Atque rege gregem tuum Summum decus praesulum. Amatorem paupertatis Te collaudant pauperes: Assertorem veritatis Amant veri judices: Frangis nobis favos mellis, De Scripturis disserens. Quae obscura prius erant Nobis plana faciens, Tu de verbis Salvatoris Dulcem panem conficis, Et propinas potum vitae De Psalmorum nectare. Tu de vita clericorum Sanctam scribis Regulam, Quam qui amant et sequuntur Viam tenent regiam, Atque tuo sancto ductu Redeunt ad Patriam. Regi regum salus, vita, Decus et imperium: Trinitati laus et honor Sit per omne saeculum: Qui concives nos adscribat Supernorum civium. Amen.
Text from Project Gutenberg, public domain in the United States.