Folia Theologica 17. (2006)
Hugh Barbour: Salvare Apparentia
SALVARE APPARENTIA 313 Ad secundum dicendum quod ad aliquam rem dupliciter inducitur ratio. Uno modo, ad probandum sufficienter aliquam radicem: sicut in scientia naturali inducitur ratio sufficiens ad probandum quod motus caeli semper sit uniformis velocitatis. Alio modo inducitur ratio, non quae sufficienter probat radicem, sed quae radici iam positae ostendat congruere consequentes effectus: sicut in astrologia ponitur ratio excentricorum et epicyclorum ex hoc quod, hac positione facta, possunt salvari apparentia sensibilia circa motus caelestes: non tamen ratio haec est sufficienter probans, quia etiam forte alia positione facta salvari possent. Primo ergo modo potest induci ratio ad probandum Deum esse unum, et similia. Sed secundo modo se habet ratio quae inducitur ad ad manifestationem Trinitatis: quia scilicet, Trinitate posita, congruunt huiusmodi rationes; non tamen ita quod per has rationes sufficienter probetur Trinitas personarum. St. Thomas is most explicit. In developing the intellectus fidei of truths which exceed reason the actual certainty of the conclusions of rational arguments taken from natural philosophy is not directly relevant. It suffices that the analogies drawn from them are intelligible, that they explain the "apparent" meaning of the terms of the dogma, not that they be in themselves "scientifically"—in our modern sense—validated. Thus their value as arguments is in no sense weakened by their being replaced by others, or even by being disproven on the level of natural philosophy. St. Thomas is categorical about the relativity of these arguments even when dealing with them in their own proper and strictly philosophical context. In the commentary on Aristotle's De caelo book 2, lectio 17 he treats of the same kind of natural arguments as those treated in the passage just quoted from the Summa: Illorum tarnen suppostiones quas adinvenerunt, non est necessarium esse veras: licet enim, talibus suppositionibus factis apparentia salvarentur, non tamen oportet dicere has suppositiones esse veras; quia forte secundum aliquem alium modum, nondum ab hominibus comprehensum, apparentia circa stellas salvantur. Aristotles tamen utitur huiusmodi suppositionibus quantum ad qualitatem motuum, tamquam veris. Is it not evident that the modus nondum ab hominibus comprehensus necessarily includes the discoveries of modern science? And yet the
