Plan

Chargement...
Couverture fascicule

Thomas of Sutton, O. P. (end)

[article]

Année 1934 43 pp. 219-233
doc-ctrl/global/pdfdoc-ctrl/global/pdf
doc-ctrl/global/textdoc-ctrl/global/textdoc-ctrl/global/imagedoc-ctrl/global/imagedoc-ctrl/global/zoom-indoc-ctrl/global/zoom-indoc-ctrl/global/zoom-outdoc-ctrl/global/zoom-outdoc-ctrl/global/bookmarkdoc-ctrl/global/bookmarkdoc-ctrl/global/resetdoc-ctrl/global/reset
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
Page 219

Thomas of Sutton, 0. P.

(End) *

Natural Theology

Sutton is in agreement with the majority of his contemporaries when he concludes that God is « summa simplicitas et pura actua- litas ». He supports his conclusion thus :

Manifestum est quod Deus non est compositus ex materia et forma, si enim esset sic compositus, materia eius participaret for- mam et esset perfectus per suam formam et bonus per earn, et ita esset bonus per participationem, et per consequens non esset primum bonum quia bonum per essentiam est prius quam bonum per participationem. Eodem modo probatur necessario quod Deus non sit compositus ex forma et esse ; illud enim quod habet esse et non est esse est ens per participationem, sicut illud quod habet ignem et non est ignis est ignitum per participationem. Si igitur Deus non sit suum esse, erit ens per participationem et non per essentiam ; non erit ergo primum ens, quod falsum est. Nec etiam potest dici quod Deus sit forma vel essentia in qua sit aliqua per- mixtio potentiae, quia actus simpliciter prior est potentia ; ergo actus purus est prior quam actus permixtus potentiae. Deus autem est primum ens ; ergo est actus purus cui nihil admiscetur de potentia (Quaest. 34, f. 336vb).

Among the more venturesome contemporaries of Sutton who refused to think of God as pure actuality and insisted on ascribing to Him passive potencies was Henry of Ghent (cf. Sum., Art. 35, q. 2, and Art. 59, q. 2) against whom Sutton directed his Quodl. I, q. 1, entitled « Utrum in Deo sit ponere aliquas potentias passivas ». I shall transcribe most of this quaestio, beginning on f. 154va :

* Cf. Revue néoscolastique, t. 36, février 1934, pp. 332-354; t. 37, mai 1934, pp. 89-104.

doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw
doc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-ccw doc-ctrl/page/rotate-cwdoc-ctrl/page/rotate-cw