|
Objection 1: It would seem that in the state of innocence children
would have been born with perfect knowledge. For Adam would have
begotten children like himself. But Adam was gifted with perfect
knowledge (Question 94, Article 3). Therefore children would
have been born of him with perfect knowledge.
Objection 2: Further, ignorance is a result of sin, as Bede says
(Cf. FS, Question 85, Article 3). But ignorance is
privation of knowledge. Therefore before sin children would have had
perfect knowledge as soon as they were born.
Objection 3: Further, children would have been gifted with
righteousness from birth. But knowledge is required for
righteousness, since it directs our actions. Therefore they would
also have been gifted with knowledge.
On the contrary, The human soul is naturally "like a blank tablet on
which nothing is written," as the Philosopher says (De Anima iii,
4). But the nature of the soul is the same now as it would have been
in the state of innocence. Therefore the souls of children would have
been without knowledge at birth.
I answer that, As above stated (Question 99, Article 1), as
regards belief in matters which are above nature, we rely on authority
alone; and so, when authority is wanting, we must be guided by the
ordinary course of nature. Now it is natural for man to acquire
knowledge through the senses, as above explained (Question 55,
Article 2; Question 84, Article 6); and for this reason is
the soul united to the body, that it needs it for its proper
operation; and this would not be so if the soul were endowed at birth
with knowledge not acquired through the sensitive powers. We must
conclude then, that, in the state of innocence, children would not
have been born with perfect knowledge; but in course of time they would
have acquired knowledge without difficulty by discovery or learning.
Reply to Objection 1: The perfection of knowledge was an individual
accident of our first parent, so far as he was established as the
father and instructor of the whole human race. Therefore he begot
children like himself, not in that respect, but only in those
accidents which were natural or conferred gratuitously on the whole
nature.
Reply to Objection 2: Ignorance is privation of knowledge due at
some particular time; and this would not have been in children from
their birth, for they would have possessed the knowledge due to them at
that time. Hence, no ignorance would have been in them, but only
nescience in regard to certain matters. Such nescience was even in the
holy angels, according to Dionysius (Coel. Hier. vii).
Reply to Objection 3: Children would have had sufficient knowledge
to direct them to deeds of righteousness, in which men are guided by
universal principles of right; and this knowledge of theirs would have
been much more complete than what we have now by nature, as likewise
their knowledge of other universal principles.
|
|