---

SECTION A

Outline of the Method

The method of Saint Thomas Aquinas (embodied in his Summa Theologica¹) is depicted here briefly as follows (see also Article 8 in Section D below for a detailed example applied to Creation):

---

SECTION B

Creation Challenged:
The Theistic Evolutionism of Teilhard de Chardin

A review of Saint Thomas Aquinas’ QUESTION XLV, Article 8 should be more than sufficient to correct the widespread error of theistic evolutionism being propagated by many (Teilhard de Chardin-influenced) clerics occupying positions of authority in liberal non-traditional factions of the Roman Catholic Church. But before proceeding to that article, it is imperative for readers to know that the (philosophical and theological) works of Teilhard de Chardin were officially condemned by the Roman Catholic Church in 1962. Consequently, any Catholic extolling such works or being wilfully influenced thereof is a heretic and a sophist. The following admonition (in Latin) from the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office dated 30 June 1962 was published in the (Italian-language) newspaper of Vatican City State, L’Osservatore Romano:²

The above condemnation was essentially reiterated in 1981 in response to a letter by the Cardinal Secretary of State that was misinterpreted by some of the press as a revision of the Holy See’s 1962 stand against Teilhard de Chardin. The following communique from the Holy See’s Press Office dated 11 July 1981 is quoted from the English-language edition of L’Osservatore Romano:³

Teilhard de Chardin (1881–1955), a (Jesuit) Roman Catholic priest, posited a (guided or directed) evolutionary precept that he refers to as orthogenesis.⁴ He states (in his usual sophistical but otherwise unimpressive discourse): The word orthogenesis conceals deep and real springs of cosmic extent.⁵ He further imbues this precept with creative or divine attributes, stating: Without orthogenesis life would only have spread; with it there is an ascent of life that is invincible.⁶ Teilhard de Chardin further posits that this orthogenesis or invincible ascent of life ultimately leads to man’s cosmic (but evolutionary-based) convergence with the divine at what he refers to as the Omega Point,⁷ thereby obviating (to those succumbing to his pedantically-convoluted sophistry) man’s fallen nature and the redemptive message of Christianity.

---

SECTION C

Creation Upheld (Part I):
Saint Augustine and the Essential Complementarity of Creation and Providence

The idea of nature embodying a creative or purposeful evolutionary principle is contrary to the account of creation in the Book of Genesis wherein its is explained that creation was completed in one week, with God having rested on the Seventh Day of that week:

1 IGitvr perfecti sunt caeli & terra, & omnis ornatus eorum.* 2 Compleuitq. Deus die ſeptimo opus ſuum quod fecerat : & ^‖requieuit die ſeptimo ab vniuerſo opere quod patrarat.* 3 Et benedixit diei ſeptimo; & ſanctificauit il lū : quia in ipſo ceffauerat ab omni opere ſuo quod creauit Deus vt faceret.* ^‖Exo.20.b.11.31.d17 Deu.5.b.14 Hebr.4.b.4
— liber genesis, hebraice beresith, ii: 1–3, Biblia Sacra, Vvlgatae Editionis (1598 A.D.)⁸

1 THe heauens therfore & the earth were fully finiſhed, and al the furniture of them. ✝ 2 And the ſeuenth day God ended his woorke which he had made : & ^⸬ reſted *″* the ſeuenth day, from al woorke that he had done. ✝ 3 And he bleſſed the ſeuenth day and ſanctified it : becauſe in it he had ceaſed from al his woorke which God created to make. Exod. 20, 11. Deut. 5, 14. Heb. 4,4. ⸬ God createth not new kindes of creatures, yet ſtill worketh. Io. 5,17.⁹ conſeruing & gouerning al things and createth ſoules, grace, and glorie of the ſame kind. S. Aug. li,4 de Gen. ad lit. c. 12.¹⁰
— the booke of genesis, in hebrew beresith, ii: 1–3, Holie Bible, Doway-Rhemes Edition (1582, 1609, 1610 A.D.)^11,12,13

The annotated reference to Saint Augustine (354–430 A.D.) in the original Douay-Rheims translation of Genesis 2:1–3 is evidence that the Roman Catholic Church has traditionally upheld the literal meaning of Genesis. That reference (i.e., Chapter 12, comprised of sections 22–23) reads (in part):

22. It could also be said that God rested from creating because He did not create henceforward any new kinds of creatures, and that even until now and beyond He works by governing the kinds that he then made. None the less, even on the seventh day His power ceased not from ruling heaven and earth and all that He had made, for otherwise they would have perished immediately. For the power and might of the Creator, who rules and embraces all, makes every creature abide; and if this power ever ceased to govern creatures, their essences would pass away and all nature would persish. [...]

23. Hence, the statement of our Lord, My Father works even until now, makes it clear that God continues the work by which He Holds and governs all creation. Another meaning might be taken if Christ said, "He works now." In that case there would be no need for understanding the continuance of the work. But a different meaning must be given to the words, even until now, because they indicate that God has worked from the moment He created everything.

[...]

[...] Therefore, we understand that God rested from all the works that he He made in the sense that from then on He did not produce any other new nature, not that He ceased to hold and govern what he had made. Hence it is true that God rested on the seventh day, and it is also true that He works even until now.¹⁴

It is clear that Teilhard de Chardin and others claiming that the natural creation (including man) is evolving toward perfection by either a supernaturally guided or naturally selective process, have failed to grasp certain necessarily distinct and separate attributes inherent in the concepts of creation and its governance thereof (i.e., providence), those attributes being the finality of creation and the continuity of its providence, including those aspects of providence relating to biological propagation and natural cycles.

The reader is advised to review Saint Augustine’s De Genesi ad Litteram or a translation thereof in its entirety.

---

SECTION D

Creation Upheld (Part II):
Saint Thomas Aquinas’ QUESTION XLV:
the mode of emanation of things from the first principle

QUESTION XLV comprises eight sub-questions or articles. Article 8 was selected to illustrate the method of Saint Thomas Aquinas as that article (further to Saint Augustine) clarifies the fundamental distinction between the creation’s completeness and its divinely governed continuance, thereby upholding the principle of creation against the sophistry of theistic evolutionism.

Article 8. Whether Creation Is Mingled with Works of Nature and Art?¹⁵

We proceed thus to the Eighth Article: It would seem that creation is mingled in works of nature and art.

Objection 1. For in every operation of nature and art some form is produced. But it is not produced from anything, since matter has no part in it. Therefore it is produced from nothing; and thus in every operation of nature and art there is creation.

Obj. 2. Further, the effect is not more powerful than its cause. But in natural things the only agent is the accidental form, which is an active or a passive form. Therefore the substantial form is not produced by the operation of nature. And therefore it must be produced by creation.

Obj. 3. Further, in nature like begets like. But some things are found generated in nature by a thing unlike to them, as is evident in animals generated in putrefaction. Therefore the form of these is not from nature, but by creation; and the same reason applies to other things.

Obj. 4. Further, what is not created, is not a creature. If therefore in nature’s productions there were not creation, it would follow that nature’s productions are not creatures; which is heretical.

On the contrary, Augustine¹⁶ distinguishes the work of propagation, which is a work of nature, from the work of creation.

I answer that, The doubt on this subject arises from the forms which, some said,¹⁷ do not begin by the action of nature, but previously exist in matter; for they asserted that forms are latent. This arose from ignorance concerning matter, and from not knowing how to distinguish between potency and act. For because forms pre-exist in matter in potency, they asserted that they pre-existed absolutely. Others, however, said¹⁸ that the forms were given or caused by a separate agent by way of creation, and accordingly, that to each operation of nature is joined creation. But this opinion arose from ignorance concerning form. For they failed to consider that the form of the natural body is not subsisting, but is that by which a thing is. And therefore, since to be made and to be created belong properly to a subsisting thing alone, as shown above (A. 4),¹⁹ it does not belong to forms to be made or be created, but to be concreated. What, indeed, is properly made by the natural agent is the composite, which is made from matter.

Hence creation does not enter into the works of nature, but is presupposed to the works of nature.

Reply Obj. 1. Forms begin to be in act when the composite things are made, not as though they were made per se, but only accidentally.

Reply Obj. 2. The active qualities in nature act by virtue of substantial forms, and therefore the natural agent not only produces its like according to quality, but according to species.

Reply Obj. 3. For the generation of imperfect animals, a universal agent suffices, and this is to be found in the celestial power to which they have been assimilated, not in species, but according to a kind of analogy. Nor is it necessary to say that their forms are created by a separate agent. However, for the generation of perfect animals, the universal agent does not suffice, but a proper agent is required, in the shape of a univocal generator.

Reply Obj. 4. The operation of nature takes place only on the presupposition of created principles; and thus the poducts of nature are called creatures.

The reader is advised to review all eight articles or sub-questions comprising Saint Thomas Aquinas’ QUESTION XLV: The mode of emanation of things from the first principle ²⁰ as well as the remainder of Saint Thomas Aquinas’ TREATISE ON THE CREATION in its entirety. ²¹

---

A Contemporary Application of the Method

For a contemporary scientific argument using the method of Saint Thomas Aquinas to refute atheistic evolutionism, see Appendix II: Evolutionism Refuted by the Ribosome. (It should be noted that the header word “ARTICLE” from the Summa Theologica is excluded in that and subsequent applications of the method of Saint Thomas Aquinas whereas the former header word is used in the Summa Theologica in the contex of a structured series of arguments.)

— FINIS —

---

1. Saint Thomas Aquinas, The Summa Theologica of Saint Thomas Aquinas (Vol. I and Vol. II), Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Revised by D. J. Sullivan, in Great Books of the Western World, Vol. 19 (Thomas Aquinas: I) and Vol. 20 (Thomas Aquinas: II), Robert Maynard Hutchins, Editor in Chief, and Mortimer J. Adler, Associate Editor, and published with the editorial advice of the faculties of The University of Chicago (Chicago: William Benton, Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1952).↩️

2. L’Osservatore Romano dated 1 July 1962 (specifically, Sabato 30 Giugno–Domenica 1 Luglio 1962, i.e., Saturday 30 June–Sunday 1 July 1962), p. 1.↩️

3. L’Osservatore Romano (English-language edition) dated 20 July 1981, p. 2.↩️

4. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, The Phenomenon of Man (New York: Harper Perenniel Modern Thought, 1959).↩️

5. Ibid., Book II, Chapter II, Section I, Subsection F. Controlled Addivity, p. 108.↩️

6. Ibid., p. 109.↩️

7. Ibid., Book IV, Chapter II, Section I. THE CONVERGENCE OF THE PERSON AND THE OMEGA POINT, pp. 257–264.↩️

8. BIBLIA SACRA VVLGATAE EDITIONIS, SIXTI V.P.M. IVSSV recognita atque edita. ROMAE. Ex Typographia Vaticana. M. D. XCVIII.↩️

9. ✝ But Iesvs anſvvered them, My father vvorketh vntil novv: and I doe vvorke. — the gospel according to s. iohn, v: 17, Holie Bible, Doway-Rhemes Edition (1582, 1609, 1610 A.D.).↩️

10. Saint Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram. See SANCTI AVRELI AVGVSTINI, DE GENESI AD LITTERAM LIBRI DVODECIM in CORPVS SCRIPTORVM ECCLESIASTICORVM LATINORVM, EDITVM CONSILIO ET IMPENSIS ACADEMIAE LITTERARVM CAESAREAE VINDOBONENSIS, VOL. XXVIII (SECT. III PARS 1), S. AVRELI AVGVSTINI, DE GENESI AD LITTERAM LIBRI DVODECIM ∙ EIVSDEM LIBRI CAPITVLA ∙ DE GENESI AD LITTERAM INPERFECTVS LIBER ∙ LOCVTIONVM IN HEPTATEVCHVM LIBRI SEPTEM, recensvit IOSEPHVS ZYCHA (PRAGAE, F. TEMPSKY ∙ VINDOBONAE, F. TEMPSKY ∙ LIPSAE, G. FREYTAG, bibliopola academiae litterarvm caesareae vinodobonensis, mdccclxxxxiiii), pp. 108–110. For an English translation of the reference from Saint Augustine, see St. Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis (Volume I, Books 1–6), Translated and Annotated by John Hammond Taylor, S.J., in Ancient Christian Writers, The Works of the Fathers in Translation, Edited by Johannes Quasten, Walter J. Burghardt, and Thomas Comerford Lawler (New York: Paulist Press, 1982), BOOK FOUR: Reflections on the Days of Creation and God's Rest, Chapter 12 God "rests" in the sense of not creating any new nature, but still "works" in the sense of governing creation., pp. 117–118.↩️

11. THE NEVV TESTAMENT OF IESVS CHRIST, TRANSLATED FAITHFVLLY INTO ENGLISH, out of the authentical Latin, according to the beſt corrected copies of the ſame, diligently conferred vvith the Greeke and other editions in diuers languages: Vvith Argvments of bookes and chapters, Annotations, and other neceſſarie helpes, for the better vnderſtanding of the text, and ſpecially for the diſcouerie of the Corrvptions of diuers late tranſlations, and for cleering the Controversies in religion, of theſe daies: In the English College of Rhemes. PRINTED AT RHEMES, by Iohn Fogny. 1582.↩️

12. THE HOLIE BIBLE FAITHFVLLY TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH, OVT OF THE AVTHENTICAL LATIN. Diligently conferred with the Hebrew, Greeke, and other Editions in diuers languages. With Argvments of the Bookes, and Chapters: Annotations: Tables: and other helpes, for better vnderſtanding of the text: for diſcouerie of Corrvptions in ſome late tranſlations: and for clearing Controversies in Religion. By the English College of Doway. Printed at Doway by Lavrence Kellam, at the ſigne of the holie Lambe. M. DC. IX.↩️

13. THE SECOND TOME OF THE HOLIE BIBLE FAITHFVLLY TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH, OVT OF THE AVTHENTICAL LATIN. Diligently conferred with the Hebrew, Greeke, and other Editions in diuers languages. With Argvments of the Bookes, and Chapters: Annotations: Tables: and other helpes, for better vnderſtanding of the text: for diſcouerie of Corrvptions in ſome late tranſlations: and for clearing Controversies in Religion. By the English College of Doway. Printed at Doway by Lavrence Kellam, at the ſigne of the holie Lambe. M. DC. X.↩️

14. Saint Augustine, loc. cit.↩️

15. Saint Thomas Aquinas, op. cit., Vol. 19 (Thomas Aquinas: I), FIRST PART, TREATISE ON THE CREATION (pp. 238–268), QUESTION XLV, the mode of emantion of things from the first principle (In Eight Articles) (pp. 241–250), Article 8. Whether Creation Is Mingled with Works of Nature and Art? (pp. 249–250).↩️

16. Ibid., p. 249, Footnote 3: “De Gen. ad Lit., V, II, 20 (PL 34, 330, 335).”↩️

17. Ibid., Footnote 4: “Anaxagoras, in Aristotle, Physics, I, 4 (187^a29); cf. St. Thomas, De Pot., Q. III, A. 8.”↩️

18. Ibid., Footnote 5: “Cf. St. Thomas, De pot., Q. III, A. 8. Averroes ascribed this doctrine to Plato—In Meta., VII, 31 (VIII, 180K).”↩️

19. Saint Thomas Aquinas, op. cit., Vol. 19 (Thomas Aquinas: I), FIRST PART, TREATISE ON THE CREATION (pp. 238–268), QUESTION XLV the mode of emantion of things from the first principle (In Eight Articles) (pp. 241–250), Article 4. Whether To Be Created Belongs to Composite and Subsisting Things? (pp. 244–245).↩️

20. Loc. cit.↩️

21. Loc. cit.↩️

---

WEB PAGE CONTROL
REVISION	0	1
DATE	2021-JAN-15	2023-DEC-30