St Thomas Aquinas, Champion of Mary’s of Immaculate Conception

We now approach the testimony of another illustrious Doctor and Saint of the Church of God, who flourished in the thirteenth age—St. Thomas Aquinas, and who, from his learning, eloquence, sanctity, and zeal, has been beautifully endowed with the title of Angelic Doctor. St. Thomas was an advocate of Mary in the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. The following passages amply vindicate this privilege of the Blessed Virgin, and the honor of this illustrious champion of her prerogatives. ” The Supreme Artificer, in the plenitude of His power, hath made an image (mirror) clearer and more faultless than the brightest Seraph ; so that, God except, it is not possible to imagine anything more pure than the person of the most glorious Virgin ; concerning whom Anselm says, ‘ It behooved that the conception of Him should be made of the most pure Mary ; of that purity, than which, next to God, nothing could be esteemed greater.’ “  ( Fecit Summus Artifex, in ostensionem pleniorem artis suae, speculum, unum clarissimo clarius, Seraphim tersius, ut purius intelligi non possit, nisi Deus esset, personam, scilicet, gloriosissimae Virginis, de qua Anselmus; ‘decebat illius Conceptio hominis de Maria purissima fieret, ea puritate, qua major sub Deo nequit intelligi.” — Opus, vi, De Dilect. Dei el prox.)

What words could more clearly affirm the Immaculate Conception ? The Blessed Virgin is here declared to be clearer and more faultless than the brightest Seraph ; most glorious, and, God alone except, purer than anything which could be imagined. The word speculum, which occurs in the passage, is peculiarly forcible. It signifies a mirror ; and hence, an image of one’s self. In this case, therefore, the Blessed Virgin is called an image of her Creator. So was Adam called, when created in the image of God ; immaculate, from immaculate earth. This could not be said of the Holy Virgin, if the deadly blur of original sin obscured the mirror God had made. In the following, also, the Immaculate Conception is positively affirmed : ” It is therefore possible, that some creature may be found, than who nothing can be more pure among created things, provided it is not infected (or sullied) by the contagion of sin ; such was the purity of the Blessed Virgin, who has been exempt from original and actual sin.” ( “Ideo potest aliquid creatum reperiri, quo nihil purius esse possit in rebus creatis, si nulla contagione peccati infectum (vel inquinatum) sit, et talis fuit puritas B. Virginis quae a peccato originali, et actuali immunis fuit.” — Sentent. Distinc, 44, Lib. i, quaest. 1, art. 3.) Cardinal Lambruschini remarks, upon this passage, that the Angelic Doctor has not limited himself by saying, ” omni peccato originali caruisse;” for this was verified in Jeremiah, in John the Baptist, and in every child upon the reception of Baptism. But he says : ” a peccato originali et actuali immunis FUIT.” Now, if Mary was thus, according to St. Thomas, exempt from original sin, she could never have contracted it ; for if she had contracted it, even for an instant, it could not have been said of her, that she was immunis — exempt. There is no ambiguity of speech in this passage ; and it cannot be denied, that St. Thomas has thus recorded his positive belief in the Immaculate Conception. There is yet another passage, in this connection, in which he institutes a comparison between the Immaculate purity of God and that of the Blessed Virgin. He says : “Neither God, nor the Most Blessed Virgin, has had any sin ; this being the difference, God is exempt from sin by nature, the Blessed Virgin is exempt by special privilege.” The following passage occurs in all the old editions of St. Thomas’ works. Why it does not appear in some more recent editions, those who have tampered with their integrity must explain. In commenting upon the Epistle to the Galatians, chap. iii, he says : ” Of all, no woman hath been found exempt, at least from original or venial sin, except the most pure and most renowned Virgin Mary, who was exempt from every sin, original and venial.” (“Mulierem ex omnibus non inveni, quas a peccato omnino immunis esset ad minus originis, vel veniali, excipitur purissima, et omni laude dignissima Virgo Maria, quae omnino immunis fuit a peccato originali et veniali.” This passage may be found in the Venetian edition of St. Thomas, A. d. 1593, and in that of Paris, A. D. 1542.)

Bishop Wielmo, in his work Pro Defensione Sancti Thomae, says : ” Execrabilius est, quod nequam et scelesti homines quidam, vol ad Thomae auctoritatem enervandam, vel, ut ego quidem arbitror, ad suam aliquam opinionem, quse in controversiam, vertebatur, tanti viri testimoniis fulciendani et comprobandam egerunt.”

Gilles of Homo, who was the devoted disciple of St. Thomas, some years after the death of the saint, wrote a work entitled, Castigatorium in Corruptorem Librorum Thomae Aquinatis. Richard Klapoel, Hervy Noel, William Messelech, John of Paris, William Bollionio, Nicholas Madense, Durandelle and Archbishop Hugues, members of the Order of St. Dominic, have all written with vigor against those who have altered the writings of St. Thomas. And another Dominican, John Nicolai, in the Preface of his edition of St. Thomas’ works, published at Paris, 16G3, attests that this edition has been, with much care and study, purged of those typographical and other errors, by which the legitimate sense, and historical sincerity and truth, have been perverted.

The following is given on the authority of Bromiardo, a Dominican, who, in explaining the true sentiment of St. Thomas, expressed in the Summa, part 3, quest. 27, art. 2, says, ” St. Thomas places the excellence of her sanctification as to priority of time in this : that she was sanctified in her animation ; that is, in the conjunction of the soul with the body, in the womb of her mother.”( Sanctus Thomas ponit ejus sanctificationis excellentiatiam, quantum ad temporis prioritatem, in hoc, quod sanctificata fuit in sui animatione; id est, in conjunctione animae cum corpore in utero matris suae.)  This evidently affirms the Immaculate Conception in its passive sense, wherein the soul of the Blessed Virgin, being prevented by sanctifying grace, was rendered exempt from original sin. In another passage, St. Thomas, speaking of the Blessed Virgin, says, ” The Blessed Virgin is said to have merited to bear the Lord of all, not because she hath of herself merited the incarnation of the Word ; but because, on account of the grace given unto her, she hath merited that degree of purity and sanctity that she might be rendered worthy to be the Mother of God.” (B. Virgo dicitur meruisse portare Dominum omnium, non quia meruit ipsum incarnari, sed quia meruit ex gratia sibi data ilium puritatis et sanctitatis gradum ut congrue posset esse Mater Dei.”—Summa, part 3, ques.2)

What that degree of purity and sanctity was, of which the Saint speaks, we learn in his fourth Opusculum de Salutatione Angelica; where he says, ” The Blessed Virgin was most pure, with respect to every fault ; since she hath not incurred any sin, either original or venial.”(B. Virgo Maria purissima fuit quantum ad omnem culpam, quia nec originale, nec veniale peccatum aliquando incurrit.”)

That the Angelic Doctor believed and taught the Immaculate Conception, is conclusively proved by the passages here adduced. But the doctrine can, with no less force and certainty, be deduced from many of his general propositions. The following will serve as specimens of this : he says, “ Non posse festum celebrari nisi de sancto.”—”No festival can be celebrated except of what is holy.” But the Church celebrates the Immaculate Conception of Mary ; therefore, her Conception was holy. Again : ” Dubitari non posse Beatissimam Virginem sine peccato originali natam esse, quia Ecclesia ejus Nativitatem celebrat.“—”It cannot be doubted that the Most Blessed Virgin was born without original sin ; because the Church celebrates her Nativity.” But the Church also celebrates the Festival of the Conception of Mary; therefore, according to St. Thomas, she was, without doubt, conceived without original sin. To contradict himself was never a failing of so profoundly philosophic a scholar as the Angel of the Schools. His works all strictly harmonize with each other ; his sequences logically flow from his propositions ; and unless it could be supposed that St. Thomas wished to place himself in opposition with his own principles, it must be admitted that he as firmly believed as he eloquently expressed and resolutely maintained the Immaculate Conception of the Most Blessed Mother of God. Other grave and weighty questions occupied attention at the period in which ho flourished ; but had this one then assumed the prominence which it has since, or had he lived at the present epoch, doubtless he would not only have maintained the belief of the Immaculate Conception, but he would have brought the whole energy and force of his profound genius to bear upon this prerogative of the Blessed Mary ; and he would have stood foremost among those who have solicited its solemn definition as a Dogma. This conclusion is not drawn from a mere consideration of how he might be supposed to act in a given case ; but it is derived from the Saint’s own solemn declaration, made to the minister of religion from whose hands he was about to receive the Viaticum. St. Thomas then said, “I have taught many things concerning the most sacred body of our Lord Jesus Christ and concerning the other sacraments;I have written many things in the faith of Jesus Christ and of the Holy Roman Church. I subject all things to its correction ; I submit all things.”

( J. D. Bryant, M. D.; Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Published in 1855 A.D)