FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1131   1132   1133   1134   1135   1136   1137   1138   1139   1140   1141   1142   1143   1144   1145   1146   1147   1148   1149   1150   1151   1152   1153   1154   1155  
1156   1157   1158   1159   1160   1161   1162   1163   1164   1165   >>  
s one. But if it be considered in relation to its effects, or to the mediate causes, this fate is multiple. In this sense the poet wrote: "Thy fate draws thee." _______________________ THIRD ARTICLE [I, Q. 116, Art. 3] Whether Fate Is Unchangeable? Objection 1: It seems that fate is not unchangeable. For Boethius says (De Consol. iv): "As reasoning is to the intellect, as the begotten is to that which is, as time to eternity, as the circle to its centre; so is the fickle chain of fate to the unwavering simplicity of Providence." Obj. 2: Further, the Philosopher says (Topic. ii, 7): "If we be moved, what is in us is moved." But fate is a "disposition inherent to changeable things," as Boethius says (De Consol. iv). Therefore fate is changeable. Obj. 3: Further, if fate is unchangeable, what is subject to fate happens unchangeably and of necessity. But things ascribed to fate seem principally to be contingencies. Therefore there would be no contingencies in the world, but all things would happen of necessity. _On the contrary,_ Boethius says (De Consol. iv) that fate is an unchangeable disposition. _I answer that,_ The disposition of second causes which we call fate, can be considered in two ways: firstly, in regard to the second causes, which are thus disposed or ordered; secondly, in regard to the first principle, namely, God, by Whom they are ordered. Some, therefore, have held that the series itself o[f] dispositions of causes is in itself necessary, so that all things would happen of necessity; for this reason that each effect has a cause, and given a cause the effect must follow of necessity. But this is false, as proved above (Q. 115, A. 6). Others, on the other hand, held that fate is changeable, even as dependent on Divine Providence. Wherefore the Egyptians said that fate could be changed by certain sacrifices, as Gregory of Nyssa says (Nemesius, De Homine). This too has been disproved above for the reason that it is repugnant to Divine Providence. We must therefore say that fate, considered in regard to second causes, is changeable; but as subject to Divine Providence, it derives a certain unchangeableness, not of absolute but of conditional necessity. In this sense we say that this conditional is true and necessary: "If God foreknew that this would happen, it will happen." Wherefore Boethius, having said that the chain of fate is fickle, shortly afterwards adds--"which, since it is deriv
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1131   1132   1133   1134   1135   1136   1137   1138   1139   1140   1141   1142   1143   1144   1145   1146   1147   1148   1149   1150   1151   1152   1153   1154   1155  
1156   1157   1158   1159   1160   1161   1162   1163   1164   1165   >>  



Top keywords:

necessity

 

Boethius

 
Providence
 

changeable

 

happen

 

things

 

regard

 
unchangeable
 

Consol

 

disposition


Divine

 

considered

 

subject

 

Therefore

 
Further
 

contingencies

 

ordered

 

effect

 

reason

 

Wherefore


fickle

 

conditional

 
dispositions
 
Gregory
 
Nemesius
 

disproved

 
repugnant
 

Homine

 
series
 
absolute

Egyptians
 

Others

 
dependent
 
shortly
 

foreknew

 

follow

 
unchangeableness
 
sacrifices
 

changed

 
proved

derives

 

principally

 

Objection

 

Unchangeable

 

eternity

 

circle

 
begotten
 

reasoning

 
intellect
 

Whether