Dist. 3, Part 2, Art. 1, Q. 2
Book I: On the Mystery of the Trinity · Distinction 3
Quaestio II
Utrum imago attendatur in his potentiis per comparationem ipsarum ad Deum.
Secundo quaeritur de potentiis in comparatione ad obiectum, utrum videlicet attendatur imago in eis per comparationem ipsarum ad Deum1. Et quod sic, videtur:
1. «Eo est anima imago, quo capax Dei est et particeps esse potest», ut dicit Augustinus decimo quarto de Trinitate2; sed est capax quantum ad partem superiorem: ergo etc.
2. Item, in eodem3: «Imago illius, quo nihil melius est, ibi quaerenda est et invenienda, quo mens nostra nihil melius habet»; sed hoc est superior pars: ergo etc.
3. Item, hoc idem videtur ratione, quia imago dicitur eo quod ducit in prototypum4: ergo cum illud sit Deus, non attenditur imago in his potentiis, nisi secundum quod ducunt in Deum; sed per has potentias homo ducitur in Deum, dum per eas convertitur in eum: ergo etc.
4. Item, Deus est obiectum virtutum theologicarum, in quibus consistit imago reformationis: ergo, cum idem sit obiectum utriusque imaginis, quia una est ductiva5 alterius et perfectiva, si Deus est obiectum unius, et alterius.
Contra:
1. Augustinus nono de Trinitate6 assignat imaginem in mente, notitia et amore, secundum quod anima meminit sui, intelligit se, diligit se: ergo videtur, quod imago attendatur per conversionem sui supra se.
2. Item, Augustinus duodecimo de Trinitate, capitulo quarto7: «Cum in natura mentis humanae quaerimus trinitatem, in tota quaerimus, non separantes actionem temporalium a contemplatione aeternorum, ut tertium aliquid iam quaeramus»: ergo trinitas imaginis attenditur secundum actionem temporalium, et ita per conversionem ad inferiora.
3. Item, secundum quod anima convertitur supra inferiora vel supra se, in ipsa8 est aequalitas et ordo et origo et omnia, quae concurrunt ad rationem imaginis.
4. Item, imago est in peccatoribus a Deo aversis, et in illis etiam qui nullo modo possunt reverti, ut sunt damnati: ergo ratio imaginis non attenditur penes conversionem ad Deum.
5. Item, necesse est, quantum ad perfectam rationem imaginis aequari cognoscentem et cognitum, sive dicentem et dictum; nam ista duo Patrem et Filium repraesentant; sed in conversione ad Deum non est talis aequatio: ergo etc.
Conclusio
Imago primo et principaliter est in potentiis animae, quatenus convertuntur in Deum; secundario vero in eis, quatenus convertuntur ad ipsam animam; quatenus vero convertuntur ad inferiora, non est in eis imago, sed vestigium Trinitatis.
Respondeo: Ad intelligentiam praedictorum tria oportet in imaginis ratione praesupponere: primo enim imago attenditur secundum expressam conformitatem ad imaginatum; secundo, quod illud quod conformatur imagini, per consequens conformetur imaginato; unde qui videt imaginem Petri, per consequens videt et Petrum; tertio, quod anima secundum suas potentias conformis reddatur his ad quae convertitur, sive secundum cognitionem, sive secundum amorem.
Quoniam igitur, cum anima convertitur ad Deum, sibi conformatur9, et imago attenditur secundum conformitatem: ideo imago Dei consistit in his potentiis, secundum quod10 habent obiectum Deum.
Rursum, quoniam anima est imago Dei, et quod convertitur et conformatur imagini, et imaginato11, ideo anima, secundum quod convertitur supra se, non recedit a conformitate; et ideo imago consistit in his potentiis, secundum quod habent animam pro obiecto.
Sed cum convertitur ad creaturas inferiores, illis conformatur, in quibus non est imago Dei, sed vestigium. Ideo12 potentiae animae, secundum quod habent inferiora pro obiectis, recedunt a ratione imaginis, quia recedunt a conformitate expressa.
Licet itaque in huiusmodi potentiis, secundum quod convertuntur ad inferiora, sit reperire trinitatem et aliquam conformitatem, similiter et in potentiis sensitivis, sicut ostendit Augustinus13; quia tamen deficiunt ab expressa conformitate, non reperitur ratio imaginis in eis. Unde Augustinus investigat in omnibus potentiis animae trinitatem, non quia in eis sit imago, sed ut a ratione imaginis excludat. Unde quaerens totam14 trinitatem in tota anima, quaerit eam in superiori et inferiori parte rationis et in sensu. Et hoc est quod dicit in illa auctoritate: «Cum in natura mentis humanae quaerimus trinitatem, in tota quaerimus»; non dicit, quaerimus imaginem. Unde Augustinus duodecimo de Trinitate, capitulo quarto15: «Quamvis in inferiori parte rationis inveniri trinitas possit, imago tamen inveniri non potest».
Concedendum est ergo, quod imago consistit in his potentiis, secundum quod ad animam convertuntur, primo tamen et principaliter, ut ostendunt primae rationes, secundum quod convertuntur ad Deum. Unde Augustinus his duobus modis assignat imaginem: prima est in mente, notitia et amore, secundum quod mens novit et amat se; secunda est in memoria, intelligentia et voluntate. Et in fine libri ostendit, completissimam rationem imaginis esse in comparatione ad Deum.
1. 2. 3. Ex his patet responsio ad primum et secundum et tertium: quia primum argumentum concedendum est, secundum vero concludit, quod in inferiori parte sit trinitas, et tertium, quod conformitas; sed haec soluta sunt, quia non est expressa.
4. Ad illud quod obiicitur de aversione peccatorum, solvendum quod non dicimus imaginem in his potentiis secundum conversionem actualem, sed aptitudinalem, quae nunquam relinquit potentias: sicut gressibilis etiam dicitur homo, qui habet pedes truncatos, quamvis non gradiatur.
5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod necesse est, in imagine cognoscens et cognitum adaequari; dicendum, quod non oportet, cognitum adaequari cognoscenti adaequatione rei ad rem, sed sub ratione cognoscibilis. Unde tantum est cognitum in intelligentia, quantum repraesentatur a memoria. Quod autem simpliciter adaequetur non oportet; adaequatur tamen, secundum quod anima convertitur supra se. Unde ratio imaginis quoad quid est plus in conversione ad Deum, quoad quid est plus in conversione animae supra se. In conversione ad Deum est plus, quia plus habet de ratione venustatis et conformitatis; in conversione ad se plus habet de ratione consubstantialitatis et aequalitatis.
I. Distinctio rationis in partem superiorem et inferiorem in corp. accipitur non ex parte ipsius potentiae, sed ex parte obiecti, quatenus anima attingit vel obiecta exteriora et inferiora, vel interiora et superiora, sive ut dicit S. Doctor: «Non est differentia nisi secundum aspectum», II Sent. d. 24, p. I, a. 2, q. 2; cfr. etiam ibidem p. II, a. 1, q. 1; Breviloq. p. I, c. 12; Itinerar. mentis, c. 1. — Alex. Hal., Summa p. I, q. 2, m. 3, a. 3. — S. Thom., Summa I, q. 79, aa. 9 et 10; de Verit. q. 15, aa. 1 et 2.
II. Quoad ipsam quaestionem: Alex. Hal., Summa p. II, q. 62, m. 5, a. 5, §. 2. — B. Albert., hic a. 22; Summa p. I, tr. 3, q. 15, m. 2, a. 2, subp. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 5, a. 1. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 1, q. 2. — Aegid. R., hic 2 princ. q. 3. — Ceteros vide in Scholio praecedenti.
---
Question II
Whether the image is found in these powers through their comparison to God.
Second, a question is asked concerning the powers in comparison to their object — namely whether the image is found in them through their comparison to God1. And it seems that it is:
1. «The soul is an image precisely insofar as it is capable of God and can be a participant in Him», as Augustine says in the fourteenth book On the Trinity2; but it is capable insofar as it pertains to the superior part: therefore, etc.
2. Likewise, in the same work3: «The image of that nature than which nothing is better is to be sought and found in us where our nature has nothing better»; but this is the superior part: therefore, etc.
3. Likewise, the same point seems evident by reason, because an image is so called insofar as it leads to the prototype4: therefore since that prototype is God, the image is not found in these powers except insofar as they lead to God; but through these powers the human being is led to God, when through them he is converted toward Him: therefore, etc.
4. Likewise, God is the object of the theological virtues, in which the image of reformation consists: therefore, since the object of both images is the same — because one leads to5 and perfects the other — if God is the object of one, He is also the object of the other.
On the contrary:
1. Augustine in the ninth book On the Trinity6 assigns the image in mind, knowledge, and love, according as the soul remembers itself, understands itself, loves itself: therefore it seems that the image is found through the conversion of the soul upon itself.
2. Likewise, Augustine in the twelfth book On the Trinity, chapter four7: «When we seek the Trinity in the nature of the human mind, we seek it in the whole mind, not separating the action of temporal things from the contemplation of eternal things so as to seek some third thing»: therefore the trinity of the image is found according to the action of temporal things, and thus through conversion toward lower things.
3. Likewise, according as the soul is converted upon lower things or upon itself, in it8 there is equality and order and origin and everything that concurs to the account of image.
4. Likewise, the image is in sinners who are turned away from God, and even in those who cannot return at all, such as the damned: therefore the account of image is not found according to conversion toward God.
5. Likewise, for the perfect account of image it is necessary that the knower and the known be equalized, or the one expressing and the one expressed — for these two represent the Father and the Son; but in conversion toward God there is no such equalization: therefore, etc.
Conclusion
The image is primarily and principally in the powers of the soul insofar as they are converted toward God; secondarily in them insofar as they are converted toward the soul itself; but insofar as they are converted toward lower things, the image is not in them — but the vestige of the Trinity.
I respond: For the understanding of the foregoing, three things must be presupposed in the account of image: first, the image is found according to express conformation to the thing imaged; second, that what is conformed to the image is consequently conformed to the one imaged — hence one who sees the image of Peter consequently also sees Peter; third, that the soul according to its powers is rendered conformed to those things toward which it is converted, whether according to knowledge or according to love.
Since therefore, when the soul is converted toward God, it is conformed to Him9, and the image is found according to conformity: therefore the image of God consists in these powers insofar as10 they have God as their object.
Again, since the soul is the image of God, and what is conformed to the image is also conformed to the one imaged11, therefore the soul, insofar as it is converted upon itself, does not depart from conformity; and therefore the image consists in these powers insofar as they have the soul itself as their object.
But when it is converted toward lower creatures, it is conformed to them — in which there is not the image of God, but the vestige. Therefore12 the powers of the soul, insofar as they have lower things as their objects, depart from the account of image, because they depart from express conformity.
Although therefore in these powers, insofar as they are converted toward lower things, one can find a trinity and some conformity — and likewise in the sensitive powers — as Augustine shows13 — yet since they fall short of express conformity, the account of image is not found in them. Hence Augustine investigates the trinity in all the powers of the soul — not because the image is in them, but in order to exclude them from the account of image. Hence, seeking the whole14 trinity in the whole soul, he seeks it in the superior and inferior part of reason and in sense. And this is what he says in that authority: «When we seek the Trinity in the nature of the human mind, we seek it in the whole» — he does not say «we seek the image». Hence Augustine says in the twelfth book On the Trinity, chapter four15: «Although a trinity can be found in the inferior part of reason, the image cannot be found there».
It must be conceded, therefore, that the image consists in these powers insofar as they are converted toward the soul, but first and principally — as the first arguments show — insofar as they are converted toward God. Hence Augustine assigns the image in two ways: the first is in mind, knowledge, and love, according as the mind knows and loves itself; the second is in memory, understanding, and will. And at the end of his book he shows that the most complete account of image is found in comparison to God.
1., 2., 3. From these things the response to the first, second, and third objections is clear: because the first argument is to be conceded; the second concludes that there is a trinity in the inferior part; the third that there is conformity — but these have been resolved, because this conformity is not express.
4. To the objection concerning the aversion of sinners: it must be said that we do not speak of the image in these powers according to actual conversion, but according to aptitudinal conversion, which never abandons the powers — just as a human being is called capable of walking even if his feet are cut off, though he does not walk.
5. To the objection that in the image it is necessary for the knower and the known to be equalized: it must be said that it is not necessary for the known to be equalized to the knower by the equalization of thing to thing, but under the account of the knowable. Hence the known is in the understanding to the extent that it is represented by memory. That it should be simply equalized is not required; yet it is equalized insofar as the soul is converted upon itself. Hence the account of image has in some respect more in conversion toward God, and in some respect more in the conversion of the soul upon itself. In conversion toward God it has more, because it has more of the account of beauty and conformity; in conversion toward itself it has more of the account of consubstantiality and equality.
I. The distinction of reason into a superior and inferior part, as taken in the body, is not taken on the side of the power itself, but on the side of the object — insofar as the soul reaches either exterior and inferior objects, or interior and superior ones — or, as the Holy Doctor says: «There is no difference except according to the aspect» (II Sent. d. 24, p. I, a. 2, q. 2); cf. also ibid. p. II, a. 1, q. 1; Breviloquium p. I, c. 12; Itinerarium mentis, c. 1. — Alexander of Hales, Summa p. I, q. 2, m. 3, a. 3. — St. Thomas, Summa I, q. 79, aa. 9–10; de Veritate q. 15, aa. 1–2.
II. On the question itself: Alexander of Hales, Summa p. II, q. 62, m. 5, a. 5, §. 2. — Blessed Albert, here a. 22; Summa p. I, tr. 3, q. 15, m. 2, a. 2, subp. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 5, a. 1. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 1, q. 2. — Giles of Rome, here 2 princ. q. 3. — For the rest see the preceding Scholion.
---
- Cod. X addit tantum vel etiam attendatur in eis per conversionem animae supra se vel etiam per conversionem ipsius super inferiora. Et videtur primo per comparationem ad Deum. Deinde post videtur expunximus quia ope plurimorum codd. et ed. 1.Cod. X adds: «or also whether it is found in them through the conversion of the soul upon itself, or also through its conversion upon lower things. And it seems [to be found] first through comparison to God». Then after videtur we have expunged quia on the authority of most of the codd. and ed. 1.
- Cap. 8, n. 11; vide hic in lit. Magistri, cap. 2.[Augustine, de Trin. XIV,] c. 8, n. 11; see here in the text of the Master, c. 2.
- Libr. XIV de Trin. c. 8, n. 11: Imago tamen naturae eius, qua natura melior nulla est, ibi quaerenda et invenienda est in nobis, quo etiam natura nostra nihil habet melius. — In his verbis Vat. contra mss. et ed. 1 ponit inquirenda loco ibi quaerenda. Plures codd. cum ed. 1 paulo post haec loco hoc.[Augustine,] On the Trinity XIV, c. 8, n. 11: «Yet the image of that nature than which no nature is better is to be sought and found in us where our nature too has nothing better». — In these words the Vatican ed., against the mss. and ed. 1, puts inquirenda in place of ibi quaerenda. Several codd. with ed. 1 a little later read haec in place of hoc.
- Ioan. Damasc., Orat. 1 de Imag. ait: Imago itaque est similitudo exemplar (πρωτότυπον) ita exprimens, ut aliqua ratione tamen ab eo differat. Et ibid. Orat. 3: Imago itaque est similitudo, exemplum et effigies cuiuspiam, in qua ille cuius est ostenditur.John of Damascus, First Oration on Images, says: «An image, therefore, is a likeness which so expresses the exemplar (prototypon) that it yet differs from it in some respect». And ibid. Oration 3: «An image, therefore, is a likeness, an example, and an effigy of someone, in which is shown the one whose it is».
- Aliqui codd. ut F M Y cum ed. 1 directiva loco ductiva. Cod. K (a secunda manu) ductiva vel directiva in cognitionem alterius. Mox Vat. praeter fidem mss. et ed. 1 post perfectiva addit propterea et post unius adiungit ergo.Some codd. (F M Y) with ed. 1 read directiva («directive») for ductiva («leading»). Cod. K (in a second hand) reads ductiva vel directiva in cognitionem alterius («leading or directive toward knowledge of the other»). Next, the Vatican ed., against the witness of the mss. and ed. 1, after perfectiva adds propterea, and after unius adds ergo.
- Cap. 4, n. 4, in cuius imaginis assignatione Vat. tum contra textum Augustini tum contra mss. et ed. 1 loco notitia ponit intellectu.[Augustine, de Trin. IX,] c. 4, n. 4. In whose assignment of the image the Vatican ed., both against Augustine's text and against the mss. and ed. 1, puts intellectu («understanding») in place of notitia («knowledge»).
- Num. 4, in quo textu loco temporalium in originali legitur rationalem in temporalibus.[Augustine, de Trin. XII, c. 4,] n. 4, in which text, in place of temporalium, the original reads rationalem in temporalibus.
- Sequimur codd. D F T adiungendo manifeste supplendum in ipsa.We follow codd. D F T in adding manifeste, and supplying in ipsa.
- Vat. conformatur et paulo post redditur.The Vatican ed. reads conformatur and a little later redditur.
- Restituimus meliorem lectionem mss. et ed. 1 loco quae ponendo secundum quod. Paulo ante in multis codd., ut A F G H K T etc. post imago abest Dei.We have restored the better reading of the mss. and ed. 1, putting secundum quod in place of quae. A little earlier, in many codd. (A F G H K T etc.), Dei is absent after imago.
- Ita maior pars codd. B D E H I K V W etc. cum ed. 1; alii omittunt vel convertitur et vel et conformatur. Vat. autem contra omnes codd. ponit et secundum quod conformatur imagini; codd. L O Y elipsim explendo post imagini addunt conformatur.So the majority of codd. (B D E H I K V W etc.) with ed. 1; others omit either convertitur or et conformatur. The Vatican ed., however, against all the codd., puts et secundum quod conformatur imagini; codd. L O Y, filling out the ellipsis, after imagini add conformatur.
- Aliqui codd. ut A T bb cum ed. 1 addunt ergo.Some codd. (A T bb) with ed. 1 add ergo.
- Augustini opinionem de trinitate in potentiis animae ad inferiora conversis vide XII de Trin., et de trinitate in potentiis sensitivis ibid. libr. XI. — Paulo ante post similiter a Vat. indebite omissam particulam et revocavimus ex mss. et ed. 1.For Augustine's view on the trinity in the powers of the soul as converted toward lower things, see On the Trinity XII; and for the trinity in the sensitive powers, ibid. book XI. — A little earlier, after similiter, we have restored from the mss. and ed. 1 the particle et, which the Vatican ed. had improperly omitted.
- Supplevimus ex mss. totam.From the mss. we have supplied totam.
- Num. 4: In hoc autem quod derivatum est in actione temporalium, etiamsi trinitas possit, non tamen imago Dei possit inveniri.[de Trin. XII, c. 4,] n. 4: «But in that which is derived in the action of temporal things, although a trinity can [be found there], nevertheless the image of God cannot be found».