What do you think?
Rate this book
Summa Contra Gentiles #4
Summa Contra Gentiles: Book Four: Salvation
Book Four of the Summa Contra Gentiles examines what God has revealed through scripture, specifically the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the end of the world. The Summa Contra Gentiles is not merely the only complete summary of Christian doctrine that St. Thomas has written, but also a creative and even revolutionary work of Christian apologetics composed at the precise moment when Christian thought needed to be intellectually creative in order to master and assimilate the intelligence and wisdom of the Greeks and the Arabs. In the Summa Aquinas works to save and purify the thought of the Greeks and the Arabs in the higher light of Christian Revelation, confident that all that had been rational in the ancient philosophers and their followers would become more rational within Christianity. Book 1 of the Summa deals with God; Book 2, Creation; and Book 3, Providence.
360 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1265
193 people want to read
About the author
Thomas Aquinas
2,672 books1,158 followersPhilosophy of Saint Thomas Aquinas, a Dominican friar and theologian of Italy and the most influential thinker of the medieval period, combined doctrine of Aristotle and elements of Neoplatonism, a system that Plotinus and his successors developed and based on that of Plato, within a context of Christian thought; his works include the
Summa contra gentiles
(1259-1264) and the
Summa theologiae
or theologica (1266-1273).
Saint Albertus Magnus taught Saint Thomas Aquinas.
People ably note this priest, sometimes styled of Aquin or Aquino, as a scholastic. The Roman Catholic tradition honors him as a "doctor of the Church."
Aquinas lived at a critical juncture of western culture when the arrival of the Aristotelian corpus in Latin translation reopened the question of the relation between faith and reason, calling into question the modus vivendi that obtained for centuries. This crisis flared just as people founded universities. Thomas after early studies at Montecassino moved to the University of Naples, where he met members of the new Dominican order. At Naples too, Thomas first extended contact with the new learning. He joined the Dominican order and then went north to study with Albertus Magnus, author of a paraphrase of the Aristotelian corpus. Thomas completed his studies at the University of Paris, formed out the monastic schools on the left bank and the cathedral school at Notre Dame. In two stints as a regent master, Thomas defended the mendicant orders and of greater historical importance countered both the interpretations of Averroës of Aristotle and the Franciscan tendency to reject Greek philosophy. The result, a new modus vivendi between faith and philosophy, survived until the rise of the new physics. The Catholic Church over the centuries regularly and consistently reaffirmed the central importance of work of Thomas for understanding its teachings concerning the Christian revelation, and his close textual commentaries on Aristotle represent a cultural resource, now receiving increased recognition.
Saint Albertus Magnus taught Saint Thomas Aquinas.
People ably note this priest, sometimes styled of Aquin or Aquino, as a scholastic. The Roman Catholic tradition honors him as a "doctor of the Church."
Aquinas lived at a critical juncture of western culture when the arrival of the Aristotelian corpus in Latin translation reopened the question of the relation between faith and reason, calling into question the modus vivendi that obtained for centuries. This crisis flared just as people founded universities. Thomas after early studies at Montecassino moved to the University of Naples, where he met members of the new Dominican order. At Naples too, Thomas first extended contact with the new learning. He joined the Dominican order and then went north to study with Albertus Magnus, author of a paraphrase of the Aristotelian corpus. Thomas completed his studies at the University of Paris, formed out the monastic schools on the left bank and the cathedral school at Notre Dame. In two stints as a regent master, Thomas defended the mendicant orders and of greater historical importance countered both the interpretations of Averroës of Aristotle and the Franciscan tendency to reject Greek philosophy. The result, a new modus vivendi between faith and philosophy, survived until the rise of the new physics. The Catholic Church over the centuries regularly and consistently reaffirmed the central importance of work of Thomas for understanding its teachings concerning the Christian revelation, and his close textual commentaries on Aristotle represent a cultural resource, now receiving increased recognition.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
January 25, 2024
I couldn't bring myself to rate this any higher than three stars, much as I don't like to give someone like Thomas Aquinas less than four. I just personally found this book a bit of a trudge. No doubt, there is much wisdom and rigorous argument here: Aquinas has an amazingly cool and thorough way of walking his reader through errors of interpretation, drawing them out so that an inattentive reader might become confused and think he's endorsing a statement, only to then shatter the foundational premise and reaffirm the truth of the Church teachings. And I did really enjoy his insightful expositions into the Holy Sacraments. I especially love reading about the Eucharist and transubstantiation, it being a concept I struggled with quite a bit when I began to take my own faith and its pillars more seriously. His defence of the concept of original sin, and its corresponding cure in baptism, was also very interesting - all of this helping me to appreciate the Church and its sacred role in the world anew.
He kind of lost me on his very detailed elaboration of the Trinity, however. I have never really struggled with that, and I feel like those who do are approaching it incorrectly by trying to philosophise and rationalise to the point that they find themselves in an intellectual quagmire, and endanger muddying what should be a deeper, intuitive recognition of God and the mysteries of the Christian faith. I fear what I have just said could only be interpreted along the lines of "just don't use your brain, and you'll be fine". But that isn't what I am trying to say. It's a hard one. But all the same, I found his attempt to logically defend the Trinity confusing and unnecessary.
Also, I wasn't so keen on his take on Hell, the fate of the damned and the nature of their suffering. It's a grim subject in any book, but not only did I find it unpleasant and a bit too jurisdictional here, I also did not agree with certain of the premises he based his argument on. Nor does the Church itself these days, such as that no one but a baptised Christian could possibly enter Heaven.
Finally, I did not agree with his ideas about the body-soul relationship in the next life. I may be departing from official Catholic doctrine here, but unless I greatly mistook either the theologian's words, or those of the official Catechism of the Catholic Church, I am inclined to believe his is not the position now accepted by the Church. It felt too much like the ridiculously macabre idea of Christian zombies rising from the grave, their souls and their temporal bodies (which I prefer to think of as accessories, even if their likeness, in some sense, persists to eternity) literally fused together for all time.
Of course, simply disagreeing with the writer is no grounds to rate it down, but on top of all this, I did just find his style and approach often exasperatingly hard to follow. Certainly, it's far from bad. I would totally encourage Catholics to read it; and I'm no less desirous to read more of Aquinas's work. But this particular book, within the larger work named Summa Contra Gentiles, cannot get higher than three stars from me.
He kind of lost me on his very detailed elaboration of the Trinity, however. I have never really struggled with that, and I feel like those who do are approaching it incorrectly by trying to philosophise and rationalise to the point that they find themselves in an intellectual quagmire, and endanger muddying what should be a deeper, intuitive recognition of God and the mysteries of the Christian faith. I fear what I have just said could only be interpreted along the lines of "just don't use your brain, and you'll be fine". But that isn't what I am trying to say. It's a hard one. But all the same, I found his attempt to logically defend the Trinity confusing and unnecessary.
Also, I wasn't so keen on his take on Hell, the fate of the damned and the nature of their suffering. It's a grim subject in any book, but not only did I find it unpleasant and a bit too jurisdictional here, I also did not agree with certain of the premises he based his argument on. Nor does the Church itself these days, such as that no one but a baptised Christian could possibly enter Heaven.
Finally, I did not agree with his ideas about the body-soul relationship in the next life. I may be departing from official Catholic doctrine here, but unless I greatly mistook either the theologian's words, or those of the official Catechism of the Catholic Church, I am inclined to believe his is not the position now accepted by the Church. It felt too much like the ridiculously macabre idea of Christian zombies rising from the grave, their souls and their temporal bodies (which I prefer to think of as accessories, even if their likeness, in some sense, persists to eternity) literally fused together for all time.
Of course, simply disagreeing with the writer is no grounds to rate it down, but on top of all this, I did just find his style and approach often exasperatingly hard to follow. Certainly, it's far from bad. I would totally encourage Catholics to read it; and I'm no less desirous to read more of Aquinas's work. But this particular book, within the larger work named Summa Contra Gentiles, cannot get higher than three stars from me.
March 6, 2025
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles Book IV. University of Notre Dame Press.
Structure and Flow
For Protestants, especially those from a biblicist background, Thomas’s method is surprisingly straightforward: the words in the bible are our principles (1:10). There is a shift in chapter twenty seven to the Incarnation. Aquinas shifts again in chapter 50 to original sin. His final shift, so it appears, lies in chapter 56, the sacraments.
The act of knowing, at least as regards theological knowing, mirrors, or at least echoes, the Trinitarian life of God. Regarding the Godhead, there is a generation of the Word in knowledge alongside and by a procession of the Holy Spirit in love. Man’s knowledge reflects this path of descent and ascent.
Book 1
Regarding the Trinity, Aquinas surveys the arguments of Photinus and Sabellius. Those two make generation to be a change from potency to act, as in the case from humans. By contrast, as he makes clear in the following chapter, generation is spiritual and intellectual, as God’s being and understanding are identical (11.7). As such, “the divine generation” is “according to an intellectual emanation” (11.9).
Cutting off questions regarding more than one Son in the Trinity, Aquinas notes because there is a single act of knowing, there is a single conception and generation (13.1-2). Therefore, he can say to Photinus and Sabellius, “the generation of the Word Himself is not like the process from potency to act; rather, it is like the origin of act from act” (13.3).
The Holy Spirit and the Will
“Therefore, since the Holy Spirit inclines the will by love toward the true good, to which the will is naturally ordered, He removes both that servitude in which the slave of passion is infected by acts against the order of the will (22.6).
Relations of Opposition
The church has always made herself clear regarding Trinitarian distinctions. For the Cappadocians, the persons of the Trinity were distinguished by relations of origin. Aquinas, not disagreeing but perhaps going in a different direction, argues that “distinctions between the persons must take place between some opposition (24.7).” He makes clear this is not an opposition of affirmation and negation, for such “would be a distinction between being and non-being.” The opposition, therefore, must arise from relation. Distinguishing the relative properties of Father and Son is easy: to be Father is to be Father of the Son. It is not immediately clear what the relative property of Spirit would be. That is why Thomas needs the category of relation of opposition. He can now argue the Holy Spirit is distinguished from both Father and Son by being from both Father and Son. Thomas goes into more detail: if the Spirit were not also from the Son, then when the Father intellectually generates the Son, it would be the same things as when he generates the Spirit.
The Incarnation
The Word united Himself to a human nature at the first moment of conception (43.4), assuming the body through the soul’s mediation (44.1).
Some Minor Points
Although I cannot go with Aquinas in his delineation of the sacraments, one cannot help but be stirred by some of his language. Speaking of confirmation, he notes “strength drives out inordinate terror” (60.1), making one a “front-line fighter for the faith of Christ” (60.2).
Conclusion
The subtitle should read, “Of the Trinity and Sacraments.” One expected the sacraments to be in Book IV of the series. The Trinity in Book IV is somewhat odd at first glance, given the thorough discussion in Book I. Perhaps we should no read too much into the ordering.
Structure and Flow
For Protestants, especially those from a biblicist background, Thomas’s method is surprisingly straightforward: the words in the bible are our principles (1:10). There is a shift in chapter twenty seven to the Incarnation. Aquinas shifts again in chapter 50 to original sin. His final shift, so it appears, lies in chapter 56, the sacraments.
The act of knowing, at least as regards theological knowing, mirrors, or at least echoes, the Trinitarian life of God. Regarding the Godhead, there is a generation of the Word in knowledge alongside and by a procession of the Holy Spirit in love. Man’s knowledge reflects this path of descent and ascent.
Book 1
Regarding the Trinity, Aquinas surveys the arguments of Photinus and Sabellius. Those two make generation to be a change from potency to act, as in the case from humans. By contrast, as he makes clear in the following chapter, generation is spiritual and intellectual, as God’s being and understanding are identical (11.7). As such, “the divine generation” is “according to an intellectual emanation” (11.9).
Cutting off questions regarding more than one Son in the Trinity, Aquinas notes because there is a single act of knowing, there is a single conception and generation (13.1-2). Therefore, he can say to Photinus and Sabellius, “the generation of the Word Himself is not like the process from potency to act; rather, it is like the origin of act from act” (13.3).
The Holy Spirit and the Will
“Therefore, since the Holy Spirit inclines the will by love toward the true good, to which the will is naturally ordered, He removes both that servitude in which the slave of passion is infected by acts against the order of the will (22.6).
Relations of Opposition
The church has always made herself clear regarding Trinitarian distinctions. For the Cappadocians, the persons of the Trinity were distinguished by relations of origin. Aquinas, not disagreeing but perhaps going in a different direction, argues that “distinctions between the persons must take place between some opposition (24.7).” He makes clear this is not an opposition of affirmation and negation, for such “would be a distinction between being and non-being.” The opposition, therefore, must arise from relation. Distinguishing the relative properties of Father and Son is easy: to be Father is to be Father of the Son. It is not immediately clear what the relative property of Spirit would be. That is why Thomas needs the category of relation of opposition. He can now argue the Holy Spirit is distinguished from both Father and Son by being from both Father and Son. Thomas goes into more detail: if the Spirit were not also from the Son, then when the Father intellectually generates the Son, it would be the same things as when he generates the Spirit.
The Incarnation
The Word united Himself to a human nature at the first moment of conception (43.4), assuming the body through the soul’s mediation (44.1).
Some Minor Points
Although I cannot go with Aquinas in his delineation of the sacraments, one cannot help but be stirred by some of his language. Speaking of confirmation, he notes “strength drives out inordinate terror” (60.1), making one a “front-line fighter for the faith of Christ” (60.2).
Conclusion
The subtitle should read, “Of the Trinity and Sacraments.” One expected the sacraments to be in Book IV of the series. The Trinity in Book IV is somewhat odd at first glance, given the thorough discussion in Book I. Perhaps we should no read too much into the ordering.
January 14, 2024
Some real gems in here. But the first two-thirds are slow going, and unsurprisingly, I found myself in frequent disagreement with Thomas as he unpacked his soteriology/eschatology. This book also exposed both the value and weaknesses of natural theology--the weaknesses in areas where Aquinas would build his argument from natural theology, and then argue on that basis that the Scriptures that seemed to disagree must be interpreted metaphorically.
June 29, 2025
This volume discusses Holy Trinity, Incarnation, Sacraments, and Eschatology. Regarding each issue, a number of heresies are first steel-manned, and then rebutted according to both Scripture and natural reason. When supernatural matters are expounded with ordinary principles and process of reasoning, however, tensions are almost always unavoidable, e.g., the modal consistency question of Divine Simplicity given Trinity. But just wrestling with them appears to be edifying. Even without ever perfectly resolving the tensions, unexpected philosophical fruits are yielded in the process.
May 10, 2017
Easily the least interesting part. The first 3 books were amazing, especially 1st and 3rd, which I would wholeheartedly recommend to everyone, but this part was, and this is strange in the context of Aquinas, too short. Most of these chapters deserved much more space and didn't have the clear gradual building the rest of the work is very characteristic for. Alongside that, considering he spends a lot of time speaking of mystery, Eucharist, confession and such, it is missing the zeal and beauty most other theologians will have. The cold, systematic style is perfect for hard philosophy, but this part was not about that.
Nonetheless, as a whole, Suma Contra Gentiles was a supremely interesting and enlightening experience and I'll certainly come back to both it and other works of Aquinas in the future.
Nonetheless, as a whole, Suma Contra Gentiles was a supremely interesting and enlightening experience and I'll certainly come back to both it and other works of Aquinas in the future.
June 30, 2025
Easily the least interesting part. The first 3 books were amazing, especially 1st and 3rd, which I would wholeheartedly recommend to everyone, but this part was, and this is strange in the context of Aquinas, too short. Most of these chapters deserved much more space and didn't have the clear gradual building the rest of the work is very characteristic for. Alongside that, considering he spends a lot of time speaking of mystery, Eucharist, confession and such, it is missing the zeal and beauty most other theologians will have. The cold, systematic style is perfect for hard philosophy, but this part was not about that. Nonetheless, as a whole, Suma Contra Gentiles was a supremely interesting and enlightening experience and I'll certainly come back to both it and other works of Aquinas in the future.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews