6. Sacred Doctrine and the Necessity of Revelation

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Hierarchy of Knowledge and the Philosophy-Theology Distinction #

Primary Argument: The distinction between higher and lower knowledge belongs to the higher knowledge, not the lower. Therefore, the distinction between philosophy and theology belongs to theology, not philosophy.

• Philosophy cannot judge theology because it lacks the authority to do so
• Only theology can properly distinguish itself from philosophy
• This mirrors how Aristotle in natural philosophy distinguishes natural philosophy from geometry, and in first philosophy distinguishes first philosophy from natural philosophy
• Modern philosophers, having rejected faith, cannot recognize this hierarchy and must falsify theology as merely imaginative to place it below reason

The Greek Precedent: Greek philosophers (Plato, Aristotle) could judge the religion of poets because the poets spoke about gods through imagination, and imagination is less than reason. The poets anthropomorphized the gods (e.g., Zeus troubled by domestic conflict). However, modern philosophers falsely treat Christian theology as imaginative rather than as a higher wisdom.

The Augustine Principle: According to both Plato and Aristotle from their own principles, if we could share in God’s wisdom, that would constitute wisdom in a higher sense than philosophical wisdom. Yet moderns deny this despite the philosophical tradition supporting it.

Sacred Doctrine and the Summa Theologiae: Structure and Purpose #

The Prologue: Thomas writes the Summa to instruct beginners (following St. Paul’s image in 1 Corinthians: “I gave you milk to drink, not food”). He identifies three problems beginners face:

1. Multiplication of useless questions and arguments (excess)
2. Lack of proper ordering according to the order of learning (ἕξις—pedagogical method)
3. Following the exposition of books rather than logical progression; frequent repetition causing confusion and boredom

Thomas’s Methodological Response: The Summa proceeds breviter et lucide (briefly and clearly) according as the matter admits. Unlike Peter Lombard’s Sentences (which follows the exposition of books) or the Quaestiones Disputatae (which follow occasions of disputation), the Summa follows the order of learning.

Structure of Question 1: Ten articles examining:

1. The necessity of sacred doctrine
2. Whether it is a science
3. Whether it is one science or many
4. Whether it is speculative or practical
5. Its comparison to the sciences
6. Whether it is a wisdom
7. Its subject (God)
8. Whether it proceeds argumentatively
9. Whether it uses metaphors
10. Whether Scripture has multiple senses

Articles 1-6 address what kind of knowledge this is; Article 7 addresses the subject; Articles 8-10 address how it proceeds.

Article 1: The Necessity of Sacred Doctrine #

Aristotle’s Four Senses of Necessity (from Metaphysics V):

1. From intrinsic causes (what something is by nature): “Two is necessarily half of four”; “A triangle necessarily has interior angles equal to two right angles”; “Man is necessarily corruptible” (has matter as component)
2. From efficient cause (external compulsion): Strong winds necessarily move an object; being forcibly restrained necessarily prevents movement
3. For being (absolute necessity): Cannot exist without it (e.g., food for sustaining life)
4. For well-being (relative necessity): Not absolutely necessary to being, but necessary for doing something well (e.g., a horse for traveling distances efficiently; a car necessary for transportation in modern contexts)

The Question: In which sense is sacred doctrine necessary?

Objections Against Necessity:

• First objection: “Do not seek those things that are above you” (Ecclesiasticus 3). Reason ought not pursue what transcends it. But philosophy sufficiently treats all things, including God (theology is called part of philosophy). Therefore, sacred doctrine seems superfluous.
• Second objection: Teaching concerns being; what is known is truth, which converts with being. All beings are treated in philosophical disciplines, including God. Therefore, there is no need for sacred doctrine beyond philosophy.
• Third objection: Scripture divinely inspired is useful for teaching, refuting, correcting, and instructing in justice. But this seems merely to reinforce what reason already establishes.

Aquinas’s Response: Sacred doctrine is necessary in both senses 3 and 4 (for being and for well-being):

For Being (Absolute Necessity):

• Man is ordered toward an end (God, the beatific vision) that exceeds the grasp of reason
• Authority: Isaiah (also St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 2:9): “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man, the things God has prepared for those who love him”
• One cannot direct actions toward an unknown end. Therefore, man must have foreknowledge of his supernatural end to direct his intentions and actions to it
• Without revelation of this end, salvation is impossible
• The end must necessarily be foreknown by those who must direct themselves toward it

For Well-being (Relative Necessity):

• Concerning truths about God that natural reason can investigate: these must be revealed for three reasons:
  1. Few possess the ability: Few men have the mental capacity for philosophical inquiry into divine things
  2. Leisure required: Those with capacity often lack time, being distracted by necessities of life
  3. Extended time needed: Even those with ability and leisure must traverse a long path, during which many errors accumulate
• Result: Without revelation, most men would never know truths about God that reason can discover; those capable would know them only after long time with admixture of errors
• Principle: “The whole salvation of man depends on knowledge of this truth” (knowledge of God)
• Conclusion: For salvation to arrive “more suitably and more certainly” (convenientius and certius), divine revelation is necessary

Berquist’s Parallel: Like a student of philosophy needing some foretaste of first philosophy (wisdom) to direct all philosophical studies toward that end, so humans need revelation about their supernatural end to direct their entire lives.

Key Arguments #

The Structure of Necessity #

• Sacred doctrine is absolutely necessary (simpliciter necessarium) for knowing one’s supernatural end
• It is relatively necessary (secundum quid) for knowing truths about God that reason can investigate, due to the practical conditions of human life (few capable, lengthy investigation, propensity to error)
• Modern philosophy fails to recognize this because it has rejected the faith and therefore must deny the existence of a supernatural end exceeding reason

The Sufficiency of Philosophy Objection #

The critical objection is that since philosophy treats all beings (including God), and teaching concerns only what is true/real, philosophy sufficiently addresses everything sacred doctrine claims to teach. Aquinas’s response distinguishes:

• What can be known by reason alone (some truths about God)
• What must be known through revelation (the supernatural end itself and mysteries that transcend reason)
• Key point: Even naturally knowable truths require revelation for their certain, universal, and timely accessibility

Important Definitions #

• Sacra Doctrina (ἱερὰ διδασκαλία): Sacred teaching/doctrine; the theological science based on divine revelation, for which the teacher must instruct not only the advanced but also beginners
• Ordo discendi: The order of learning; the pedagogical sequence from what is simpler to what is more complex, from prerequisites to conclusions
• Necessarium simpliciter: Absolutely necessary; that which cannot be without it (for being)
• Necessarium secundum quid: Relatively or qualifiedly necessary; that which enables doing something well or appropriately (for well-being)
• Convenientius: More suitably, more fittingly
• Certius: More certainly

Examples & Illustrations #

Berquist’s Pedagogical Examples #

Logic and Philosophy:

• Logic is necessary for philosophy in the relative sense (for well-being)
• Philosophy can exist without formal logic (ancient Greek philosophers did so), but not well
• Aristotle, coming at the end of the golden age of Greek philosophy, discovered logic
• Without logic, philosophers made more mistakes than necessary and faced greater difficulties
• Therefore: Logic is necessary not for doing philosophy (it existed before logic was discovered), but for doing it well

Wisdom as the Philosophical End:

• A student cannot love wisdom without in some way knowing what wisdom is
• A philosopher cannot be such without loving wisdom; therefore knowing what wisdom is is necessary
• If wisdom is one’s end/goal, all philosophical studies (geometry, logic, natural philosophy, ethics) must be ordered toward eventually reaching wisdom
• One cannot order studies toward an unknown end; therefore, knowing what wisdom is (however imperfectly) is necessary to direct all philosophical thinking toward that end
• The student cannot pursue an end and direct activities toward that end without foreknowledge of the end

The Problem of Terrestrial Navigation:

• When Berquist taught in California and lived in the faculty city: everything needed was within walking distance
• In California: “You can’t get anywhere in California without a car”
• A car is necessary for well-being (efficient travel) though not for being (one could theoretically walk)

The Greek Critique of Poetic Theology #

Xenophanes’ Argument: If horses could make statues, they would make their gods look like horses. Similarly, Ethiopians make their gods black and snub-nosed; Greeks make theirs blonde. The poets imagine gods as superhuman beings concerned with earthly domestic affairs (e.g., Zeus disturbed by his wife’s involvement in the Trojan War). Such imaginative anthropomorphism can be judged by reason because imagination is less than reason, and reason can correct what imagination produces.

The Modern Failure: Modern philosophers, seeking to place Christianity below philosophy, must treat Christian theology as imaginative (as Thomas notes in Summa I, Q. 1, distinguishing how Scripture uses metaphor from how poets use imagination). But this is a fundamental misunderstanding. Thomas (Summa I, Q. 1) makes distinctions that “moderns cannot see” between proper theological use of metaphor and poetic imagination.

Notable Quotes #

“Because the teacher of Catholic truth ought to instruct not only those who are proficient, but it also pertains to him to instruct those who begin” — Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Prologue

“The intention of our work is those things which pertain to the Christian religion to treat in a way that is suitable to the instruction of beginners” — Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Prologue

“Man is ordered to God as to an end that exceeds the grasp of his reason… Whence it is necessary for the salvation of man that certain things become known through divine revelation which excel human reason” — Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, Q. 1, A. 1

“The whole salvation of man depends on knowledge of this truth [knowledge of God]” — Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, Q. 1, A. 1

“To this science is attributed that by which the most saving faith is engendered, nourished, defended, and strengthened” — Augustine (cited by Aquinas to show theology serves faith, not faith serves theology)

“Those things which are necessary for them to know are not treated in the order of learning” — Aquinas’s description of the problem with other theological treatments

“Breviter et lucide” — Thomas’s methodological commitment to proceed briefly and clearly

Questions Addressed #

Q: Is sacred doctrine necessary beyond philosophical sciences? A: Yes, in two senses:

• Absolutely necessary (for being): Because man must have foreknowledge of his supernatural end (beatific vision) to direct his life toward it; without revelation of this end, salvation is impossible
• Relatively necessary (for well-being): Because truths about God knowable by reason would be known by few, after long time, with many errors; revelation makes these truths universally, certainly, and timeously accessible

Q: Why can philosophy not make this distinction itself? A: Because the distinction between lower and higher knowledge belongs to the higher knowledge. Just as geometry distinguishes itself from arithmetic (and arithmetic cannot make this distinction), theology—as higher knowledge—must distinguish itself from philosophy. Philosophy lacks the authority to place itself below theology; only theology can recognize this hierarchy.

Q: How do we reconcile the necessity of revelation with Aristotle’s claim that God can be known by reason? A: We distinguish:

• What God can be known to exist (Vatican I: an article of faith)
• What God must be revealed to humanity practically (due to human limitations and the transcendent nature of the supernatural end)
• Even truths knowable in principle by reason become practically necessary to reveal for salvation to be suitably certain and accessible to all

Connections to Key Philosophical Principles #

Aristotelian Background #

• Four senses of necessity from Metaphysics Book V
• Order of learning (ordo discendi) as foundational to pedagogy
• The end must be foreknown to direct actions toward it (Ethics I)
• Distinction between speculative and practical knowledge (to be further explored in Article 4)

Theological Development #

• Vatican I teaching on natural knowledge of God: Establishes that reason can know God exists, yet revelation remains necessary
• First Vatican Council: Addresses both that reason can know God and why revelation is necessary for salvation
• Vincent of Lérins: On the unchanging nature of dogma through ages (cited by Berquist regarding perpetual validity of revealed truths)
• Paul VI, Mysterium Fidei: On the expression of dogmas through universal and necessary thoughts transcending particular ages

Methodological Principles #

• Thomas’s approach imitates Aristotle’s: questions precede demonstrations
• The prologue establishes pedagogical principles; the articles execute them
• Beginning with necessity (does it exist?) before determining nature (what is it?)