What do you think?
Rate this book
Summa Contra Gentiles #3.2
Summa Contra Gentiles: Book Three: Providence Part II
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. This exposition and defense of divine truth has two main parts: the consideration of that truth that faith professes and reason investigates, and the consideration of the truth that faith professes and reason is not competent to investigate. The exposition of truths accessible to natural reason occupies Aquinas in the first three books of the Summa . His method is to bring forward demonstrative and probable arguments, some of which are drawn from the philosophers, to convince the skeptic. In the fourth book of the Summa St. Thomas appeals to the authority of the Sacred Scripture for those divine truths that surpass the capacity of reason. The present volume is the second part of a treatise on the hierarchy of creation, the divine providence over all things, and man’s relation to God. Book 1 of the Summa deals with God; Book 2, Creation; and Book 4, Salvation.
282 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1265
3 people are currently reading
127 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
April 10, 2017
This volume is mainly dealing with the natural law and the theology of grace, I liked it the most out of what I've read thus far and it seems the Tridentine fathers did too as a lot of this was later on made into dogma, having anticipated the Reformation by dealing with other heresies such as Pelagianism.
June 29, 2025
This volume discusses Providence, Miracles, Divine & Natural Laws, Evangelical Perfection, and the Economy of Grace. The most fascinating part is that the truth always seems to lie somewhere between the two extremes, both ends of which are errors. It takes much effort and exertion to struggle with controversial problems such as free will & predestination, and the process is often painful. In contrast, it is easy and cost-free to collapse everything into one side (absolute libertarianism) or the other (determinism). In this sense, errors are a kind of intellectual sloth, which consists in shying away from necessary toil, only through which one may attain truth.
January 7, 2024
My favorite this far of the Summa Contra Gentiles set. I am certainly not in full agreement with Aquinas, but there was much that was excellent in this volume.
June 4, 2024
THE THIRD VOLUME (Pt. II) OF THOMAS’S PHILOSOPHICAL MATERWORK
Thomas Aquinas (‘Thomas of Aquino’; i.e., present-day Lazio, Italy;1225-1274) was an extremely influential Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, theologian and Doctor of the Church. The title, ‘Summa Contra Gentiles’ basically means, ‘Summation against the Unbelievers’; it is his defense of Catholic Christianity against non-Christians. (He often cites Aristotle, who he refers to as ‘The Philosopher,’ as well as the Muslim philosopher Ibn Rushd [known as ‘Averroes’ in the West], who Thomas calls ‘the Commentator.’)
He explains, “If God foresees that this event will be, it will happen… But it will occur in the way that God foresaw that it would be. Now, he foresaw that it would occur contingently. So, it follows that, without fail, it will occur contingently and not necessarily.” (Pg. 56-57; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 94)
He points out, “just as the immutability of providence does not impose necessity on things that are foreseen, so also it does not suppress the value of prayer. For prayer is not established for the purpose of changing the eternal disposition of providence, since this is impossible, but so that a person may obtain from God the object he desires.” (Pg. 58; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 95)
He states, “just as speculative reason starts from some principle and proceeds through intermediaries to the intended conclusion, so does operative reason start from something that is first, and go through certain intermediaries to the operation, or to the product of the operation, which is intended. But the principle in speculative matters is the form and THAT WHICH IS; while in operative matters it is the end, which at times is the form, at other times something else. Also, the principle in speculative matters must always be necessary, but in operative matters it is sometimes necessary and sometimes not.” (Pg. 70; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 97)
He acknowledges, “Sometimes, indeed, though rarely, an event occurs in a different way, either due to a defect in the power of an agent, or to the unsuitable condition of the matter, or to an agent with greater strength---as when nature gives rise to a sixth finger on a man. But the order of providence does not fail, or suffer change, because of such an event. Indeed, the very fact that the natural order, which is based on things that happen in most cases, does fail at times is subject to divine providence. So, if by means of a created power it can happen that the natural order is changed from what is usually so to what occurs rarely---without any change of divine providence---then it is more certain that divine power can sometimes produce an effect, without prejudice to its providence, apart from the order implanted in natural things by God. In fact, He does this at times to manifest His power.” (Pg. 78-79; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 99)
He suggests, “Now, there are various degrees and orders of these miracles. Indeed, the highest rank among miracles is held by those events in which something is done by God which nature never could do… And even among these an order may be observed. For the greater the things that God does are, and the more they are removed from the capacity of nature, the greater the miracle is. Thus, it is more miraculous for the sun to reverse its course than for the sea to be divided.” ()g 82; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 101)
He argues, “a morally well-disposed intellect should not be the associate of, and provide protection for, scoundrels, while having nothing to do with the best men. Now, evil men often make use of these arts… Men do not make any progress by means of these arts in the goods of reason which are the sciences and the virtues, but, rather, in certain least import things, such as the finding of stolen goods and the catching of thieves, and such things. Therefore, the intellectual substances with whose aid these arts are exercised are not well disposed in relation to virtue… Moreover, some deception and irrationality are observable in the practices of these arts. In fact, arts of this kind need a man who is not engrossed in sexual matters, yet they are often used to arrange illicit affairs.” (Pg. 98; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 106)
He observes, “It is evident that every lawmaker intends to direct men by means of laws toward his own end, principally. Thus, the leader of an army intends victory and the ruler of a state intends peace. But the end which God intends is God Himself. Therefore, the divine law principally looks to the ordering of man towards God.” (Pg. 124; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 115)
He asserts, “Not… should it be deemed a slight sin for a man to arrange for the emission of semen apart from the proper purpose of generating and bringing up children, on the argument that it is either a slight sin, or none at all, for a person to use a part of the body for a different use than that to which it is directed by nature… because man’s good is not much opposed by such inordinate use. However, the inordinate emission of semen is incompatible with the natural good, namely, the preservation of the species. Hence, after the sin of homicide whereby a human nature already in existence is destroyed, this type of sin appears to take next place, for by it the generation of human nature is precluded.” (Pg. 146; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 122)
He advises, “it is naturally right for the body and the lower powers of the soul to be so managed by man that thereby his activity of reason, and his good, are least hindered and are, instead, helped. But, if it happens otherwise, the result will naturally be sinful. Therefore, drinking bouts and feastings, and inordinate sexual activities through which rational activity is hindered, and domination by the passions which do not permit free judgment of reason---these are naturally evil things.” (Pg. 164; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 129)
He observes, “In fact, earthly possessions are the source of worry, both in regard to taking care of their revenues and in regard to their protection against frauds and attacks. Moreover, the larger they are, the more people are required to take care of them… And thus, in this say, the very purpose of voluntary poverty vanishes, at least in regard to the many men who must concern themselves with the management of the possessions.” (Pg. 170-171; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 132)
He notes, “There is still a third way of living: that is for those who practice voluntary poverty to live from the labor of their hands… As a matter of fact, manual labor is necessary for the support of life… Now, it seems foolish for a man to give away what is needed and then to work to get it again. If, then, it is necessary after the adoption of voluntary poverty again to acquire by manual labor that by which a man may support himself, it was useless to give up all that he had for the support of life… Therefore, to live by the labor of one’s hands does not seem to be suitable to the intention of those embracing voluntary poverty.” (Pg. 171; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 132-133)
He continues, “Then, there is still a fourth way of living: that is, the followers of voluntary poverty may live on the goods which are offered them by others… And it seems that our Lord and His disciples practiced this way of life… However, even this way of life does not seem proper. For it does not seem reasonable for a person to part with his own goods and then live off another man.” (Pg. 173; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 132) Later, he adds, “Moreover, the counsel of voluntary poverty was given in order that man’s mind might be withdrawn from solicitude for earthly things and more freely devoted to God. But this way of living by begging requires a great deal or solicitude; in fact, there seems to be greater solicitude involved in getting things from others than in using what is one’s own.” (Pg. 175; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 132) He concludes, “solicitude for the means of living is not to be rejected entirely.” (Pg. 177)
He observes, “just as it was not expedient for every man to abstain from matrimony, so also it is not a good thing to do so at all times, if the increase of the race requires matrimony: whether because of a lack of men, as in the beginning when the human race began to multiply; of because of the small number of the faithful… Thus, the counsel of practicing perpetual continence was reserved to the New Testament, when the faithful are multiplied by a spiritual generation.” (Pg. 195; Bk. 3/II, Ch, 136)
He states, “man cannot merit divine help in advance. For everything is related as matter to what is above it. Now, matter does not move itself to its own perfection; rather, it must be moved by something else. So, man does not move himself so as to obtain divine help which is above him; rather, he is moved by God to obtain it… we make such progress by good works because we are preceded by divine help.” (Pg. 228; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 149)
He says, “So, since man’s operations must become perfect as a result of sanctifying grace… it is necessary for the love of God to be established in us through this grace… Thus, it is clear that grace, which directs us to the final divine vision, causes the love of God in us.” (Pg. 235; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 151)
This book will be “must reading” for anyone seriously studying Medieval philosophy and theology, or Catholic philosophy in general.
Thomas Aquinas (‘Thomas of Aquino’; i.e., present-day Lazio, Italy;1225-1274) was an extremely influential Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, theologian and Doctor of the Church. The title, ‘Summa Contra Gentiles’ basically means, ‘Summation against the Unbelievers’; it is his defense of Catholic Christianity against non-Christians. (He often cites Aristotle, who he refers to as ‘The Philosopher,’ as well as the Muslim philosopher Ibn Rushd [known as ‘Averroes’ in the West], who Thomas calls ‘the Commentator.’)
He explains, “If God foresees that this event will be, it will happen… But it will occur in the way that God foresaw that it would be. Now, he foresaw that it would occur contingently. So, it follows that, without fail, it will occur contingently and not necessarily.” (Pg. 56-57; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 94)
He points out, “just as the immutability of providence does not impose necessity on things that are foreseen, so also it does not suppress the value of prayer. For prayer is not established for the purpose of changing the eternal disposition of providence, since this is impossible, but so that a person may obtain from God the object he desires.” (Pg. 58; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 95)
He states, “just as speculative reason starts from some principle and proceeds through intermediaries to the intended conclusion, so does operative reason start from something that is first, and go through certain intermediaries to the operation, or to the product of the operation, which is intended. But the principle in speculative matters is the form and THAT WHICH IS; while in operative matters it is the end, which at times is the form, at other times something else. Also, the principle in speculative matters must always be necessary, but in operative matters it is sometimes necessary and sometimes not.” (Pg. 70; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 97)
He acknowledges, “Sometimes, indeed, though rarely, an event occurs in a different way, either due to a defect in the power of an agent, or to the unsuitable condition of the matter, or to an agent with greater strength---as when nature gives rise to a sixth finger on a man. But the order of providence does not fail, or suffer change, because of such an event. Indeed, the very fact that the natural order, which is based on things that happen in most cases, does fail at times is subject to divine providence. So, if by means of a created power it can happen that the natural order is changed from what is usually so to what occurs rarely---without any change of divine providence---then it is more certain that divine power can sometimes produce an effect, without prejudice to its providence, apart from the order implanted in natural things by God. In fact, He does this at times to manifest His power.” (Pg. 78-79; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 99)
He suggests, “Now, there are various degrees and orders of these miracles. Indeed, the highest rank among miracles is held by those events in which something is done by God which nature never could do… And even among these an order may be observed. For the greater the things that God does are, and the more they are removed from the capacity of nature, the greater the miracle is. Thus, it is more miraculous for the sun to reverse its course than for the sea to be divided.” ()g 82; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 101)
He argues, “a morally well-disposed intellect should not be the associate of, and provide protection for, scoundrels, while having nothing to do with the best men. Now, evil men often make use of these arts… Men do not make any progress by means of these arts in the goods of reason which are the sciences and the virtues, but, rather, in certain least import things, such as the finding of stolen goods and the catching of thieves, and such things. Therefore, the intellectual substances with whose aid these arts are exercised are not well disposed in relation to virtue… Moreover, some deception and irrationality are observable in the practices of these arts. In fact, arts of this kind need a man who is not engrossed in sexual matters, yet they are often used to arrange illicit affairs.” (Pg. 98; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 106)
He observes, “It is evident that every lawmaker intends to direct men by means of laws toward his own end, principally. Thus, the leader of an army intends victory and the ruler of a state intends peace. But the end which God intends is God Himself. Therefore, the divine law principally looks to the ordering of man towards God.” (Pg. 124; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 115)
He asserts, “Not… should it be deemed a slight sin for a man to arrange for the emission of semen apart from the proper purpose of generating and bringing up children, on the argument that it is either a slight sin, or none at all, for a person to use a part of the body for a different use than that to which it is directed by nature… because man’s good is not much opposed by such inordinate use. However, the inordinate emission of semen is incompatible with the natural good, namely, the preservation of the species. Hence, after the sin of homicide whereby a human nature already in existence is destroyed, this type of sin appears to take next place, for by it the generation of human nature is precluded.” (Pg. 146; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 122)
He advises, “it is naturally right for the body and the lower powers of the soul to be so managed by man that thereby his activity of reason, and his good, are least hindered and are, instead, helped. But, if it happens otherwise, the result will naturally be sinful. Therefore, drinking bouts and feastings, and inordinate sexual activities through which rational activity is hindered, and domination by the passions which do not permit free judgment of reason---these are naturally evil things.” (Pg. 164; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 129)
He observes, “In fact, earthly possessions are the source of worry, both in regard to taking care of their revenues and in regard to their protection against frauds and attacks. Moreover, the larger they are, the more people are required to take care of them… And thus, in this say, the very purpose of voluntary poverty vanishes, at least in regard to the many men who must concern themselves with the management of the possessions.” (Pg. 170-171; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 132)
He notes, “There is still a third way of living: that is for those who practice voluntary poverty to live from the labor of their hands… As a matter of fact, manual labor is necessary for the support of life… Now, it seems foolish for a man to give away what is needed and then to work to get it again. If, then, it is necessary after the adoption of voluntary poverty again to acquire by manual labor that by which a man may support himself, it was useless to give up all that he had for the support of life… Therefore, to live by the labor of one’s hands does not seem to be suitable to the intention of those embracing voluntary poverty.” (Pg. 171; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 132-133)
He continues, “Then, there is still a fourth way of living: that is, the followers of voluntary poverty may live on the goods which are offered them by others… And it seems that our Lord and His disciples practiced this way of life… However, even this way of life does not seem proper. For it does not seem reasonable for a person to part with his own goods and then live off another man.” (Pg. 173; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 132) Later, he adds, “Moreover, the counsel of voluntary poverty was given in order that man’s mind might be withdrawn from solicitude for earthly things and more freely devoted to God. But this way of living by begging requires a great deal or solicitude; in fact, there seems to be greater solicitude involved in getting things from others than in using what is one’s own.” (Pg. 175; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 132) He concludes, “solicitude for the means of living is not to be rejected entirely.” (Pg. 177)
He observes, “just as it was not expedient for every man to abstain from matrimony, so also it is not a good thing to do so at all times, if the increase of the race requires matrimony: whether because of a lack of men, as in the beginning when the human race began to multiply; of because of the small number of the faithful… Thus, the counsel of practicing perpetual continence was reserved to the New Testament, when the faithful are multiplied by a spiritual generation.” (Pg. 195; Bk. 3/II, Ch, 136)
He states, “man cannot merit divine help in advance. For everything is related as matter to what is above it. Now, matter does not move itself to its own perfection; rather, it must be moved by something else. So, man does not move himself so as to obtain divine help which is above him; rather, he is moved by God to obtain it… we make such progress by good works because we are preceded by divine help.” (Pg. 228; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 149)
He says, “So, since man’s operations must become perfect as a result of sanctifying grace… it is necessary for the love of God to be established in us through this grace… Thus, it is clear that grace, which directs us to the final divine vision, causes the love of God in us.” (Pg. 235; Bk. 3/II, Ch. 151)
This book will be “must reading” for anyone seriously studying Medieval philosophy and theology, or Catholic philosophy in general.
April 9, 2022
Part 2 of Book III is by far my favorite volume of the SCG, and now on this third reading I think I am seeing much more clearly the connections between the philosophy of St Thomas and the natural theology that he builds upon it. Over and over throughout this brilliant work, Aquinas shows the close harmony between metaphysics and more practical matters in a way that is both beautiful and clear. The synergy is breathtaking.
It is worth pointing out (not for the first time) that St Thomas is not something one understands at one go. The more one reads and re-reads his works, and about his works, the better they get, and the better one understands them. Obviously re-reads of so much monumental philosophy and theology are a tall order, and not for everyone! If you do not intend to invest the effort in understanding him well, that is completely natural; but please do withhold judgment on his work until or unless you *do* make that effort. The challenges of reading Aquinas are great, to be sure, but those challenges do not imply that making the effort to understand him is fruitless.
It is worth pointing out (not for the first time) that St Thomas is not something one understands at one go. The more one reads and re-reads his works, and about his works, the better they get, and the better one understands them. Obviously re-reads of so much monumental philosophy and theology are a tall order, and not for everyone! If you do not intend to invest the effort in understanding him well, that is completely natural; but please do withhold judgment on his work until or unless you *do* make that effort. The challenges of reading Aquinas are great, to be sure, but those challenges do not imply that making the effort to understand him is fruitless.
October 17, 2022
This volume is mainly dealing with the natural law and the theology of grace, I liked it the most out of what I've read thus far and it seems the Tridentine fathers did too as a lot of this was later on made into dogma, having anticipated the Reformation by dealing with other heresies such as Pelagianism.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews