Summa Slog

Q1A5:  I enjoyed this one the most so far.  What a question to ask!  Again, I see the influence of Greek philosophy here (please point out other sources if you see them) in assuming a hierarchy of sciences.  Sacred doctrine is held to be nobler than the other sciences.  That is no real surprise to me once you ask the question.  The key is to ask.  The Latin is instructive in this Article.  Nobler is from dignior.  Lower is from inferioris as higher comes from superiori.  

Q1A6:  So we are really talking about wisdom here, eh?  Excellent.  I may have mentioned this before, but one of the first things that appealed to me about the Christian religion was the wisdom literature (preceded only by my natural inclination to history - 1 and 2 Samuel as well as the Patriarchal narratives of Genesis fired my imagination).  Starting at about age 12 I loved the Book of Proverbs.  As a teenager and devotee of S. Kierkegaard, Ecclesiastes was especially enticing.  Then when I became Catholic as an adult, I was overjoyed to have new wisdom literature in Sirach and, well, Wisdom.  So Sacred Doctrine is wisdom.  I can accept that, but what about the wisdom I have obtained from Aristotle and Cicero?  Is that due to some Dantean proto-Christianity on the part of those great philosophers?

Q1A7:  God Himself is the object of this science.  We are studying Him above all.  When we study wisdom we are studying His wisdom.  When we study Man we are studying His children.    Fair enough.

Traveling tomorrow, but fully plan on finishing Q1.

Vale,
JR