Bibliotheca Catholicaa library of libraries
Support
Summa Theologiae · I, q. 32, a. 4

Whether It Is Lawful to Have Various Contrary Opinions of Notions?

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, First Part, question 32, The Knowledge of the Divine Persons, article 4. About 2 min.

Read in the reading room → This article at New Advent

Text: Summa Theologiae, Project Gutenberg #17611, First Part (Prima Pars), translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province. The First Part of the Summa in the English Dominican translation (first printed 1911 to 1925; second and revised edition from 1920). A sample check on 2026-11-09 against pre-1931 printings at the Internet Archive (first printings of 1915 and 1916 and the second and revised edition of the 1920s) found that the article text matches, with no 1947 introduction, synopsis, or index. The phrase “From the Complete American Edition” in Gutenberg's catalog title is a provenance note only. Question and article numbers were added by the transcriber. Rights: Public domain (US)

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Objection 1: It would seem that it is not lawful to have various contrary opinions of the notions. For Augustine says (De Trin. i, 3): "No error is more dangerous than any as regards the Trinity": to which mystery the notions assuredly belong. But contrary opinions must be in some way erroneous. Therefore it is not right to have contrary opinions of the notions.

Obj. 2: Further, the persons are known by the notions. But no contrary opinion concerning the persons is to be tolerated. Therefore neither can there be about the notions.

On the contrary, The notions are not articles of faith. Therefore different opinions of the notions are permissible.

I answer that, Anything is of faith in two ways; directly, where any truth comes to us principally as divinely taught, as the trinity and unity of God, the Incarnation of the Son, and the like; and concerning these truths a false opinion of itself involves heresy, especially if it be held obstinately. A thing is of faith, indirectly, if the denial of it involves as a consequence something against faith; as for instance if anyone said that Samuel was not the son of Elcana, for it follows that the divine Scripture would be false. Concerning such things anyone may have a false opinion without danger of heresy, before the matter has been considered or settled as involving consequences against faith, and particularly if no obstinacy be shown; whereas when it is manifest, and especially if the Church has decided that consequences follow against faith, then the error cannot be free from heresy. For this reason many things are now considered as heretical which were formerly not so considered, as their consequences are now more manifest.

So we must decide that anyone may entertain contrary opinions about the notions, if he does not mean to uphold anything at variance with faith. If, however, anyone should entertain a false opinion of the notions, knowing or thinking that consequences against the faith would follow, he would lapse into heresy.

By what has been said all the objections may be solved.

Also online, linked only: the same translation at New Advent and the Latin text at Corpus Thomisticum. Neither is copied here.

Source: Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologica, First Part. Project Gutenberg #17611. Project Gutenberg record. Public domain in the USA. Outside the U.S., check local copyright rules. Project Gutenberg notices retained. The full Project Gutenberg license is kept in the hosted text.