Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It would seem that idolatry is not rightly reckoned a species of superstition. Just as heretics are unbelievers, so are idolaters. But heresy is a species of unbelief, as stated above (Question 11, Article 1). Therefore idolatry is also a species of unbelief and not of superstition.

Objection 2: Further, latria pertains to the virtue of religion to which superstition is opposed. But latria, apparently, is univocally applied to idolatry and to that which belongs to the true religion. For just as we speak univocally of the desire of false happiness, and of the desire of true happiness, so too, seemingly, we speak univocally of the worship of false gods, which is called idolatry, and of the worship of the true God, which is the latria of true religion. Therefore idolatry is not a species of superstition.

Objection 3: Further, that which is nothing cannot be the species of any genus. But idolatry, apparently, is nothing: for the Apostle says (1 Cor. 8:4): "We know that an idol is nothing in the world," and further on (1 Cor. 10:19): "What then? Do I say that what is offered in sacrifice to idols is anything? Or that the idol is anything?" implying an answer in the negative. Now offering things to idols belongs properly to idolatry. Therefore since idolatry is like to nothing, it cannot be a species of superstition.

Objection 4: Further, it belongs to superstition to give divine honor to whom that honor is not due. Now divine honor is undue to idols, just as it is undue to other creatures, wherefore certain people are reproached (Rm. 1:25) for that they "worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator." Therefore this species of superstition is unfittingly called idolatry, and should rather be named "worship of creatures."

On the contrary, It is related (Acts 17:16) that when Paul awaited Silas and Timothy at Athens, "his spirit was stirred within him seeing the whole city given to idolatry," and further on (Acts 17:22) he says: "Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious." Therefore idolatry belongs to superstition.

I answer that, As stated above (Question 92, Article 2), it belongs to superstition to exceed the due mode of divine worship, and this is done chiefly when divine worship is given to whom it should not be given. Now it should be given to the most high uncreated God alone, as stated above (Question 81, Article 1) when we were treating of religion. Therefore it is superstition to give worship to any creature whatsoever.

Now just as this divine worship was given to sensible creatures by means of sensible signs, such as sacrifices, games, and the like, so too was it given to a creature represented by some sensible form or shape, which is called an "idol." Yet divine worship was given to idols in various ways. For some, by means of a nefarious art, constructed images which produced certain effects by the power of the demons: wherefore they deemed that the images themselves contained something God-like, and consequently that divine worship was due to them. This was the opinion of Hermes Trismegistus , as Augustine states (De Civ. Dei viii, 23): while others gave divine worship not to the images, but to the creatures represented thereby. The Apostle alludes to both of these (Rm. 1:23,25). For, as regards the former, he says: "They changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of four-footed beasts, and of creeping things," and of the latter he says: "Who worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator."

These latter were of three ways of thinking. For some deemed certain men to have been gods, whom they worshipped in the images of those men: for instance, Jupiter, Mercury, and so forth. Others again deemed the whole world to be one god, not by reason of its material substance, but by reason of its soul, which they believed to be God, for they held God to be nothing else than a soul governing the world by movement and reason: even as a man is said to be wise in respect not of his body but of his soul. Hence they thought that divine worship ought to be given to the whole world and to all its parts, heaven, air, water, and to all such things: and to these they referred the names of their gods, as Varro asserted, and Augustine relates (De Civ. Dei vii, 5). Lastly, others, namely, the Platonists, said that there is one supreme god, the cause of all things. After him they placed certain spiritual substances created by the supreme god. These they called "gods," on account of their having a share of the godhead; but we call them "angels." After these they placed the souls of the heavenly bodies, and beneath these the demons which they stated to be certain animal denizens of the air, and beneath these again they placed human souls, which they believed to be taken up into the fellowship of the gods or of the demons by reason of the merit of their virtue. To all these they gave divine worship, as Augustine relates (De Civ . . Dei xviii, 14).

The last two opinions were held to belong to "natural theology" which the philosophers gathered from their study of the world and taught in the schools: while the other, relating to the worship of men, was said to belong to "mythical theology" which was wont to be represented on the stage according to the fancies of poets. The remaining opinion relating to images was held to belong to "civil theology," which was celebrated by the pontiffs in the temples .

Now all these come under the head of the superstition of idolatry. Wherefore Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. ii, 20): "Anything invented by man for making and worshipping idols, or for giving Divine worship to a creature or any part of a creature, is superstitious."

Reply to Objection 1: Just as religion is not faith, but a confession of faith by outward signs, so superstition is a confession of unbelief by external worship. Such a confession is signified by the term idolatry, but not by the term heresy, which only means a false opinion. Therefore heresy is a species of unbelief, but idolatry is a species of superstition.

Reply to Objection 2: The term latria may be taken in two senses. In one sense it may denote a human act pertaining to the worship of God: and then its signification remains the same, to whomsoever it be shown, because, in this sense, the thing to which it is shown is not included in its definition. Taken thus latria is applied univocally, whether to true religion or to idolatry, just as the payment of a tax is univocally the same, whether it is paid to the true or to a false king. In another sense latria denotes the same as religion, and then, since it is a virtue, it is essential thereto that divine worship be given to whom it ought to be given; and in this way latria is applied equivocally to the latria of true religion, and to idolatry: just as prudence is applied equivocally to the prudence that is a virtue, and to that which is carnal.

Reply to Objection 3: The saying of the Apostle that "an idol is nothing in the world" means that those images which were called idols, were not animated, or possessed of a divine power, as Hermes maintained, as though they were composed of spirit and body. In the same sense we must understand the saying that "what is offered in sacrifice to idols is not anything," because by being thus sacrificed the sacrificial flesh acquired neither sanctification, as the Gentiles thought, nor uncleanness, as the Jews held.

Reply to Objection 4: It was owing to the general custom among the Gentiles of worshipping any kind of creature under the form of images that the term "idolatry" was used to signify any worship of a creature, even without the use of images.

Articulus 1

Argumentum 1

Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod idololatria non recte ponatur species superstitionis. Sicut enim haeretici sunt infideles, ita et idololatrae. Sed haeresis est species infidelitatis, ut supra habitum est.

Ergo et idololatria, non autem superstitionis.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, latria pertinet ad virtutem religionis, cui opponitur superstitio. Sed idololatria videtur univoce dici latria cum ea quae ad veram religionem pertinet, sicut enim appetitus falsae beatitudinis univoce dicitur cum appetitu verae beatitudinis, ita cultus falsorum deorum, qui dicitur idololatria, univoce videtur dici cum cultu veri dei, qui est latria verae religionis.

Ergo idololatria non est species superstitionis.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, id quod nihil est non potest esse alicuius generis species. Sed idololatria nihil esse videtur.

Dicit enim apostolus, I ad Cor. VIII, scimus quia nihil est idolum in mundo, et infra, X, quid ergo? dico quod idolis immolatum sit aliquid? aut quod idolum sit aliquid? quasi dicat, non. Immolare autem idolis proprie ad idololatriam pertinet. Ergo idololatria, quasi nihil existens, non potest esse superstitionis species.

Argumentum 4

Praeterea, ad superstitionem pertinet exhibere cultum divinum cui non debetur. Sed cultus divinus, sicut non debetur idolis, ita nec aliis creaturis, unde Rom. I quidam vituperantur de hoc quod coluerunt et servierunt potius creaturis quam creatori.

Ergo inconvenienter huiusmodi superstitionis species idololatria nominatur, sed deberet potius nominari latria creaturae.

Sed Contra

Sed contra est quod Act. XVII dicitur quod Paulus cum Athenis expectaret, incitabatur spiritus eius in ipso, videns idololatriae deditam civitatem, et postea dixit, viri Athenienses, per omnia quasi superstitiosos vos iudico.

Ergo idololatria ad superstitionem pertinet.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, ad superstitionem pertinet excedere debitum modum divini cultus.

Quod quidem praecipue fit quando divinus cultus exhibetur cui non debet exhiberi. Debet autem exhiberi soli summo deo increato, ut supra habitum est, cum de religione ageretur.

Et ideo, cuicumque creaturae divinus cultus exhibeatur, superstitiosum est. Huiusmodi autem cultus divinus, sicut creaturis sensibilibus exhibebatur per aliqua sensibilia signa, puta sacrificia, ludos et alia huiusmodi; ita etiam exhibebatur creaturae repraesentatae per aliquam sensibilem formam seu figuram, quae idolum dicitur. Diversimode tamen cultus divinus idolis exhibebatur. Quidam enim per quandam nefariam artem imagines quasdam construebant quae virtute Daemonum aliquos certos effectus habebant, unde putabant in ipsis imaginibus esse aliquid divinitatis; et quod per consequens divinus cultus eis deberetur.

Et haec fuit opinio Hermetis trimegisti; ut Augustinus dicit, in VIII de CIV. Dei.

Alii vero non exhibebant cultum divinitatis ipsis imaginibus, sed creaturis quarum erant imagines. Et utrumque horum tangit apostolus, ad Rom. I. Nam quantum ad primum, dicit, mutaverunt gloriam incorruptibilis dei in similitudinem imaginis corruptibilis hominis, et volucrum et quadrupedum et serpentum.

Quantum autem ad secundum, subdit, coluerunt et servierunt potius creaturae quam creatori.

Horum tamen fuit triplex opinio. Quidam enim aestimabant quosdam homines deos fuisse, quos per eorum imagines colebant, sicut iovem, mercurium, et alios huiusmodi.

Quidam vero aestimabant totum mundum esse unum deum, non propter corporalem substantiam, sed propter animam, quam deum esse credebant, dicentes deum nihil aliud esse quam animam motu et ratione mundum gubernantem; sicut et homo dicitur sapiens propter animam, non propter corpus.

Unde putabant toti mundo, et omnibus partibus eius, esse cultum divinitatis exhibendum, caelo, aeri, aquae, et omnibus huiusmodi. Et ad haec referebant nomina et imagines suorum deorum, sicut varro dicebat, et narrat Augustinus, VII de CIV. Dei.

Alii vero, scilicet Platonici, posuerunt unum esse summum deum, causam omnium; post quem ponebant esse substantias quasdam spirituales a summo deo creatas, quas deos nominabant, participatione scilicet divinitatis, nos autem eos Angelos dicimus; post quos ponebant animas caelestium corporum; et sub his Daemones, quos dicebant esse aerea quaedam animalia; et sub his ponebant animas hominum, quas per virtutis meritum ad deorum vel Daemonum societatem assumi credebant.

Et omnibus his cultum divinitatis exhibebant, ut Augustinus narrat, in XVIII de CIV. Dei.

Has autem duas ultimas opiniones dicebant pertinere ad physicam theologiam, quam philosophi considerabant in mundo, et docebant in scholis. Aliam vero, de cultu hominum, dicebant pertinere ad theologiam fabularem, quae secundum figmenta poetarum repraesentabatur in theatris. Aliam vero opinionem, de imaginibus, dicebant pertinere ad civilem theologiam, quae per pontifices celebrabatur in templis.

Omnia autem haec ad superstitionem idololatriae pertinebant.

Unde Augustinus dicit, in II de doct. Christ., superstitiosum est quidquid institutum ab hominibus est ad facienda et colenda idola pertinens, vel ad colendam sicut deum creaturam partemve ullam creaturae.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod sicut religio non est fides, sed fidei protestatio per aliqua exteriora signa, ita superstitio est quaedam infidelitatis protestatio per exteriorem cultum. Quam quidem protestationem nomen idololatriae significat, non autem nomen haeresis, sed solum falsam opinionem. Et ideo haeresis est species infidelitatis, sed idololatria est species superstitionis.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod nomen latriae dupliciter accipi potest.

Uno modo potest significare humanum actum ad cultum dei pertinentem. Et secundum hoc, non variatur significatio huius nominis latria, cuicumque exhibeatur, quia illud cui exhibetur non cadet, secundum hoc, in eius definitione. Et secundum hoc latria univoce dicetur secundum quod pertinet ad veram religionem, et secundum quod pertinet ad idololatriam, sicut solutio tributi univoce dicitur sive exhibeatur vero regi, sive falso. Alio modo accipitur latria prout est idem religioni. Et sic, cum sit virtus, de ratione eius est quod cultus divinus exhibeatur ei cui debet exhiberi. Et secundum hoc latria aequivoce dicetur de latria verae religionis, et de idololatria, sicut prudentia aequivoce dicitur de prudentia quae est virtus, et de prudentia quae est carnis.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod apostolus intelligit nihil esse in mundo quia imagines illae quae idola dicebantur, non erant animatae aut aliquam virtutem divinitatis habentes, sicut Hermes ponebat, quasi esset aliquid compositum ex spiritu et corpore. Et similiter intelligendum est quod idolis immolatum non est aliquid, quia per huiusmodi immolationem carnes immolatitiae neque aliquam sanctificationem consequebantur, ut gentiles putabant; neque aliquam immunditiam, ut putabant Iudaei.

Ad 4

Ad quartum dicendum quod ex communi consuetudine qua creaturas quascumque colebant gentiles sub quibusdam imaginibus, impositum est hoc nomen idololatria ad significandum quemcumque cultum creaturae, et etiam si sine imaginibus fieret.