วีดีโอ

Wow, great question. You've put a lot into that question but you're on the right track. St. Thomas covers the Blessed Trinity in questions 27-43 in the Summa. I did videos on each of those questions which you can find on this same page (they're all named according to the question with ST meaning Summa Theologica and the 1 meaning Prima Pars, of the first part of the Summa. So go back and you will find specific videos on those questions having to do with those aspects of the Trinity and the particular persons. If you have time and interest, go back to ST 1 and watch them all as they all build upon each other. God bless- Dave

You're welcome, Tracy. Glad you're watching and learning! God bless you- Dave

St. Thomas agrees that it lacks being/ontology but you'd have to admit that anything that exists has to have some cause, in some manner, even accidentally as St. Thomas proposes.

@@thethomist If evil is without being, to ascribe a cause to it seems wholly wrong.

Yeah, I like that one too! Thomas had a way with words!

Thanks for the comment and I truly appreciate you visiting this channel and hopefully watching some of the videos. A good exchange of ideas is always a good thing. From what you write, would you describe yourself as a strict materialist? I honestly am your exact opposite- meaning that I can't understand how anyone could not believe in the supernatural beyond the material. It just doesn't make any sense to me that there would not be something beyond our sense experiences. This also leads into an interesting debate within theology/philosophy about Realism vs. Nominalism. Not sure if you have a dog in that race or not but I'd love to know your thoughts. God bless- Dave

I would be really surprised if you could even vaguely define both "natural" and "supernatural." @TboneWTF

​@@thethomist " I can't understand how anyone could not believe in the supernatural..." Can you please offer any credible and verifiable evidence to show that anything in the supernatural realm exists? Thank you.

@@lucasrinaldi9909 Natural would be that which is in accord with what a particular creature or being is able to do with the faculties that is possesses (I'm trying not to use the word naturally but it's tough). In other words, birds can fly and frogs leap and beavers build dams naturally because it's the way there were created. Supernature would be beyond what one is typically capable of doing. A frog flying would be beyond it's nature and hence, supernatural. Our being able to live under water would be supernatural because it's beyond what our nature typically affords. On the other hand, supernatural can mean something on the metaphysical realm, or beyond the physical, such as the angels and God himself. Our end is supernatural in the first sense, meaning beyond our normal capabilities.

@@TboneWTF You're not going to like this answer but in the first question of the Summa St. Thomas says those things that are given to us through Sacred Doctrine (the bible, teachings of the Church) are not only a science but a higher science than the physical sciences. And since God can't deceive us then those things He teaches us are more reliable than even the physical sciences. So we believe God because we trust Him and have faith in him and he has revealed that angels exist (they're supernatural from our perspective) so we believe it on faith and trust in God.

Thanks for the question. Yes, my email address is dave@studythesumma.com Regarding the indwelling question, this I believe can be answered on several levels. Previously, it it was asked in the Summa with regard to God being infinite (everywhere), that He is in each thing through His power meaning that He keeps things in existence through his power. But these things have their own essence and God is not 'in them' in regard to being a part of their essence because then they would not have their own autonomy outside of God (and we'd run the risk of Pantheism or these things 'being God and worthy of worship) But God dwells in the rational creature through Grace which is a quality of the soul. By this we participate in the life of God through Grace (and the theological virtues) but it doesn't mean that God is 'in us' in the sense of being our essence. I hope this helps a bit and it's a very important question.

interesting question. I don't know much about his personal life other than his being the personal tutor of Alexander the Great. He lived before the Incarnation so he can't be held responsible for not believing in Christ. If I had to guess I would say yes, as he did believe in one God and I believe he used his incredible intellect to lead many to a greater belief in God and to connect the physical world to such a belief. He's had a big impact on people of faith and was a huge influence on St. Thomas Aquinas, too. So the fruits of Aristotle's life are immense. What do you think about this?

Thanks for this interesting question. I have always thought of human nature being wounded/corrupted due to the fall while still remaining good in its essence (as opposed to some Protestant belief in total depravity). Anything that God creates is and remains good essentially despite the fall, even the demons in hell (a point STA brings up later in the Summa). I've never thought of the created world (trees, clouds, butterflies) as being corrupted by the fall as they didn't sin and can't sin. The order and harmony of the world was affected for sure (STA writes about this in the Summa) but remains essentially good. So I think there is no conflict with continuing to call the created world 'good' despite the fall, and even calling human beings good yet woulnded by the fall and due to concupiscence, with an inclination to sin. God bless- Dave

Glad to hear it! God bless you as you continue with the journey!

Great to hear and thanks for the update. No problem being a few days behind! Self-pacing is best and I know life can get busy! God bless you on the journey.

Glad to hear it, Michael. Thanks for letting me know and keep on rolling! It gets better and better as St. Thomas ties everything together in his typical orderly fashion! God bless!

Thanks for this analogy, Michael. The husband wife comparison is a good one especially when it comes to the intense love between Father and Son. I struggle with the whole idea of how the husband and wife, having the same human nature can have a 'nature unto himself.' Of course, the two of them sharing a nature is different from the three persons in the Trinity 'sharing a nature,' as St. Thomas explains. In the end, it's a great mystery. I really appreciate your comment and reflection.

@@thethomist i wonder what a richness of interior life St. Thomas lived. And he was also quite fearless in his humility. To continue with his work in spite of opposition. An amazing guy. I hope some day to talk with him, to share our Joy

@@michaelhughesdvm I agree with all you wrote and I look forward, God willing, to visit with him one day but I think there will be a long line to get to him! Although in heaven perhaps we won't have to talk with one person at a time with our enhanced intellects! With God's grace, we'll see one day! Thanks for the great comment.

@@thethomist communication in Heaven is very different. You won’t have wait. We will eternally fall deeper in love with the Trinity, and with each other through the Trinity. ( at least that’s the way I’ve been blessed to understand)

@@michaelhughesdvm I think you're right about communication in heaven although of course we'll have to wait to find out for sure! God bless!

Yes, St. Thomas definitely got some things wrong, like his teaching on the Immaculate Conception which was not yet a settled defined dogma. Whether he got this one wrong is open for a fun debate. God bless- Dave

Hi Brian. Glad you found us. I've only recorded about 29 of the segments and there are many more to come so you found it soon enough. Let me know if you have any questions or insights. I'm learning while I teach and can learn a lot from the bright people who are following the videos. God bless- Dave

I'll be joining Dave. I teach confirmation classes and what amazing questions to have the students ponder...yes im included in the pondering w them. As i learn. .thank you!

@@terihepburn7233 Teri, so happy that you're joining us for these videos. I hope you find studying the Summa helpful in your work in evangelization and your Confirmation classes. Let me know if you have any questions and your insights and comments are very welcome!

Thanks for the question. The difference between those two has to do with whether or not there is an obligation for one to be rewarded for that which one does regarding merit. With congruent merit there is no obligation for a reward to be given for what is done but with condign there is an obligation. Of course, between us and God there is no strict obligation that He reward but with due to His Divine Ordination, He does so through His Goodness. Hope that helps.

Congrats on making it this far! You must mean Treatise 2 right? Because Treatise 1 is only one question on Sacred Doctrine! Treatise 2 is on the One God which ends with Question 26. Either way, congrats on getting this far and hope you keep going! God bless- Dave

@@thethomist Sorry, yes, I meant to say no. 2! Thanks for the reminder!

You're welcome. Thanks for watching and for the feedback.

If it's a contradiction then God 'can't' do it.' Or as St. Thomas says, it's better to say it's not possible than to say God can't do it. Makes perfect sense to me. Ha ha on the Confirmation saint issue. Thanks for the comment.

@@thethomist what do you think about the scripture, “all things are possible with God”? Do you think Saint Thomas would just say that those things aren’t things?

@@ash5033938337 Good question. I think St. Thomas would say that this means all possible things are possible with God. Not all things are possible due to the law of non-contradiction.

Yes, it's a challenging lesson for sure, and hard to grasp. Thanks for the comment.

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, it's quite interesting to see how STA explains these two together and their connection. God bless- Dave

Thank you for this recommendation. I would like to get his perspective on this fascinating topic.

John Calvin didn’t believe in double predestination scholastic answer a catholic TH-camr and redeem zoomer notes this Thomas and Calvin agree on that point it’s just Calvin comes from a perspective of divine sovereignty and Thomas from divine providence I love both Calvin and Thomas I’m a Calvinist Protestant but I love and appreciate st Thomas

@@DekemaStokes Thank you for the comment and info. Did Calvin believe in free will?

@@thethomist great question sir I Honestly don’t think he did I think he believed in the will but it’s deprived of freedom of choice something of a enslavement but I’m not 100% sure I do have to do more research on his perspective of it tho I like St Thomas take on free will regardless of what I heard so far from Calvin I think St Thomas got it right and his interpretation of Augustine

@@DekemaStokes Thank you. That is my understanding as well but I've always thought of Calvin as a Double Predestination believer. if there is a heaven and hell and some go to both places and there is no free will it seems to set up a scenario for Double, wouldn't you think? Thanks for the conversation. Very interesting.

Thanks for the comment. It's ok to be skeptical of private revelations and we don't have to accept them. The Church doesn't mandate any belief in private revelations. God bless- Dave

Hi Tracy. Yes, St. Thomas certainly addresses this with his teaching on 2nd proof for God's existence (2nd question of the Summa). He identifies God as the Uncaused Cause which means is Eternal (one of His attributes) which means God has no beginning and no end. He is existence itself. It's a hard teaching for us to get our heads around due to the limitations of our nature but this is the teaching. Hope that helps.

With regard to the Protestant Reformation, it divided the Church up into tens of thousands of denominations which goes against Jesus' prayer for unity, that 'they may be one.' (from the gospel of St. John). Hope this helps. God bless and thanks for the question.

You're welcome. I'm glad you're enjoying them. I appreciate the feedback and encouragement. God bless you- Dave

Ha ha. I try to simplify it as much as possible but I don't consider anyone who studies the Summa to be a 'dummie!' Glad you're learning! God bless- Dave

Just look up Aeterni Patris by Pope Leo XIII on line and it will pop up. It's also at the beginning of most versions of the Summa that one buys. It's a very good read and should be read before one begins studying the Summa, in my opinion. God bless- Dave

Congrats! Glad to be on the journey with you!

Thank you very much for all of this information. I will review and I know it will shed some light on the parts that were confusing me. Glad you're along for the Summa journey. I appreciate your feedback as I'm constantly learning new insights from the Summa. God bless you- Dave

Thank you. God bless- Dave

It keeps getting better! St. Thomas orders the Summa so wonderfully! God bless- Dave

Hi David, great that you're watching from Ireland. i was there for two weeks this summer as my wife is a native of Belfast. Such a gorgeous country. I've been blessed to visit about eight times, including for our wedding in Northern Ireland (County Derry). Yes, if a second watch of the video helps, go for it! Glad you're journeying through the Summa with me and the others. God bless you- Dave

Yes, you're so right. The fatal flaw in studying the Summa is trying to understand it all especially on the first pass. The first time I read the Summa I was very easy on myself and just enjoyed learning a little bit here and there and eventually things start clicking. You're right on track! God bless- Dave

Oh, thanks for letting me know you're watching them and I hope that these teachings, guided by the Holy Spirit, will help you to belief that there is truly a God who loves you and is guiding all things through His providence. Please keep in touch and let me know your thoughts. God bless you on your journey. - Dave

@@thethomist Wow, thank you for your kind words. I have been an atheist all my life, to the point of arrogance and thinking that I definitely had the answer. However, I've recently been questioning my own beliefs and trying to substantially engage with material that I've never read before. I've also been struggling personally in life but a part of my arrogance is that if I believe, I want to actually believe. I don't want to do it out of vulnerability and brokenness, I feel like I owe that much. So I'm reading and watching as much as I can. If you have any materials you would recommend, I'd be grateful and happy to take a look! I just read Tolstoy's A Confession, and I'm going to start Augustine's Confessions.

Glad you're enjoying learning the Summa. Thanks for the feedback. I recommend this version which is the one I use when I want to actually read it as a physical copy www.amazon.com/Summa-Theologica-Thomas-Aquinas-Volumes/dp/0870610635/ref=sr_1_1?crid=12IDTMUZT7JIS&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ZwVp7_4AboOXcjDaDQfIvAhsOBVvo5f24_ZitKYH-KVD2bw08W_vEEd01__avq9XpaDpkXSXjHts9OhP2Rv0w3u2-pNaKlKJ-9_4fKXOl4dvdLmv8wKk7qu6_AzymuEARToIuYSz_Q-6ufQa-XBwddJJ-ACIiLRdFWH5ZeSuWHY3qTcGVhrMwg-gPHAOn5kOxWK3OLGvpH7GSk-Oilv8PiJZ6sx9HSjOZ3OqEg00DX4.PsADF1Ul9lk_y_6R-yU8LwHngtl5oExU9DBSBk8q2X8&dib_tag=se&keywords=summa+theologica+thomas+aquinas&qid=1720626958&sprefix=Summa+Theologica%2Caps%2C155&sr=8-1

You can also find it free on line. I use the on line version when preparing my videos so I can print it out and write on the copy, etc. God bless- Dave