Thomas Aquinas and Divine Friendship

Department of Theology & Religion
MA Optional module
SUMMATIVE ASSIGNMENT
Module code: THEO44630

Module title: The thought of Thomas Aquinas in Context
Name: Z0130765
College: St. John’s
Date: 24th April 2019
Degree programme: MAPGT Christian Theology
Full-time / Part-time
Please state word length: 4981 words

This must not exceed the stipulated word count. The word length includes
footnotes or endnotes, but excludes bibliographies, and tables, pictures and other
appended sections. Over-length essays will be returned for editing.
I certify that the material contained in this essay is my own, and that my indebtedness
to other writers, where it occurs, has been properly acknowledged. I am aware of the
guidelines concerning plagiarism in the MA Handbook.
Signature:
Date: 24th April 2019

Z0130765 THEO44630: The thought of Thomas Aquinas in Context Word Count: 4981
1
Thomas Aquinas and Divine Friendship
Introduction
For Thomas Aquinas the most rewarding life is a life united with God where, through
the working of the Holy Spirit, one comes to love and be loved by God and receives the
infused virtues of faith, hope, and love; love being the greatest of the three. This essay will
address Thomas Aquinas’ belief that love (caritas) is the same as friendship (philia), and
both are essential to the contemplative life of a Christian. We will see how Aquinas adapts
many of his concepts of friendship from Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, reshaping them into
a cohesive Christian theology of love and friendship beginning with God and progressing
outward until one can come to love even an enemy; without undermining or lessening the
richness of individual relationships.
Aristotelian Influences
Thomas Aquinas was one of the first scholars with opportunity to investigate
Aristotle’s works as they were becoming more available and he found Aristotle to be a wise
source on which to rely.1 He quotes Aristotle with the same amount of respect and repetition
as Church fathers like Augustine. Considering that Aristotle was one of the first to write on
friendship as a virtue and give weight and thought to the relationship,2 Aquinas looks to
Aristotle’s model quite often when crafting his own theology of friendship.3 Aquinas held
Aristotle in such high regard that simply titled him “the Philosopher”.4
Friendship did not have quite the same meaning to Aristotle and Aquinas as it does
today. For Aristotle friendship did not necessarily refer only to particular friendship between
1
Liz Carmichael. Friendship: Interpreting Christian Love. (T&T Clark International, 2007), 104.
2
Marie T. Farrell. “Thomas Aquinas and Friendship with God.” Irish Theological Quarterly, Vol. 61,
no. 3-4, (1995): 212–218. doi:10.1177/002114009506100305. 214
3
Marko Fuchs. “Philia and Caritas: Some Aspects of Aquinas’s Reception of Aristotle’s Theory of
Friendship.” Aquinas and the Nicomachean ethics. 203–219., doi:10.1017/cbo9780511756313.012. 203
4
Thomas Aquinas. ST II-II Q. 23 A. I. https://dhspriory.org/thomas/summa/
2
individuals or perhaps a small group. Friendship certainly refers to such relationships but it
was broad enough to include family, business, political, and social relationships.5 A
distinction, however is made between kinds of friendships because it is certainly true that a
political friendship is not the same as a close personal friendship. Thus there are friendships
of pleasure, of utility, and then true and virtuous friendship.6 It is this last category of
friendship which seems to most intrigue Aquinas; however, from this true friendship he
seems to work his way back to the lesser forms of friendship and links them together into a
coherent theology of friendship which fits within a theological framework.
Defining Friendship
According to Aristotle some of the defining aspects of friendship include mutual
interests, being useful or pleasing to the other, common concern for each other’s well being,
or as Marko Fuchs writes, “... (a) mutual benevolence; (b) not being hidden from either of the
friends; and (c) being founded in the goodness, pleasantness, or usefulness that each finds in
the other”.7 Aristotle also taught that if one is looking to the highest form of friendship there
will need to be some degree of equality or similitude between the friends.8 If there is an
inequality this does not mean that no friendship can be had but that friendship will face the
challenge of not letting the inequality cause friction in the friendship.9 Aquinas writes that
wishing good for another is not enough to form a friendship, “...for a certain mutual love is
requisite, since friendship is between friend and friend: and this well-wishing is founded on
some kind of communication.”10 Well-wishing is a part of friendship - built upon
5
Fuchs. “Philia and Caritas”, 204.
Daniel Schwartz. Aquinas on Friendship. (Oxford University Press, 2012), 2.
6
Farrell. “Thomas Aquinas and Friendship with God”, Page 213.
7
8
Ibid., 206.
9
Schwartz. Aquinas on Friendship, 43.
10
Aquinas. ST II-II Q. 23 A. I.
3
communication and shared interests. Common interests would ideally be linked to Christian
virtues like love, joy, and peace. Friendship based on common virtues make for better
friendships as the friends grow to be more altruistic.11 This should lead to a requited affection
where love is being returned one to the other. Thus for Aristotle, friendship necessitates that
love be mutual (unlike romantic love which can be passionate but not returned).12 It does not
seem that Aquinas agrees to the same extent, as we will see later on that friendship can be
given even to those who do not return affection, yet it is better when affection is returned.
Returning to virtue, Aquinas agrees with Aristotle that friendship itself is not only
best when virtue is part of the relationship but that friendship itself is a virtue. Aquinas
writes: “The Philosopher...does not deny that friendship is a virtue, but affirms that it is
"either a virtue or with a virtue….For its praiseworthiness and virtuousness are derived
merely from its object, in so far, to wit, as it is based on the moral goodness of the virtues.”13
Furthermore, for the Christian, friendship is a theological virtue - infused into the heart by the
Holy Spirit.14 Aquinas is not saying that only Christians can be friends or participate in
friendship, but that only Christians who have the infused virtue of charity will be able to
participate in the truest form of friendship.15 Thus friendship begins with God - with the
Trinity, “For Aquinas, divine friendship for the human person and for the whole of humanity
springs from the very life of mutual love and knowledge, which is to say eternal friendship,
existing within the godhead.”16 As with all other virtues there is habit which is needed for
11
Mark Vernon. “Plato, Thomas and the Daring Ethics of Friendship.” Theology & Sexuality, vol. 12,
no. 2, (2006), 203–216., doi:10.1177/1355835806061429. 209.
12
Vernon. “Plato, Thomas and the Daring Ethics of Friendship”, 205.
13
ST II-II Q. 23 A. 3. ad.1.
14
Thomas Ryan. “Aquinas on Compassion: Has He Something to Offer Today?” Irish Theological
Quarterly, vol. 75, no. 2, (2010), 157–174., doi:10.1177/0021140009360496. 157.
15
Fuchs. “Philia and Caritas”, 211. :
16
Farrell. “Thomas Aquinas and Friendship with God”, 216.
4
virtues to grow and take root. The same is true of friendship, “Aquinas agrees with Aristotle
that friendship is neither a feeling nor an act, but rather a state or habit...”17
Charity as Friendship
Aquinas also defines friendship as interchangeable with charity; or agape/caritas
love. For Aquinas friendship can be elevated to this self-sacrificing, abiding, true, and most
beautiful of all loves which is charity. Thus when Aquinas writes about charity, he is also
talking about friendship. The proof text for his view is found in John 15:15 when Jesus told
his disciples that he calls them not servants but friends. Aquinas writes, “Now this was said to
them by reason of nothing else than charity. Therefore Charity is friendship.”18 He then writes
that charity is the greatest virtue for in it we attain God himself: “Charity attains God Himself
that it may rest in Him….Hence charity is more excellent than faith or hope, and,
consequently, than all the other virtues…”.19 As mentioned previously, friendship is also
based upon communication and Aquinas sees the charity friendship God shows us as a means
of bringing the needed communication, “...inasmuch as He communicates His happiness to
us...of which it is written (1 Cor. 1:9): ‘God is faithful: by Whom you are called unto the
fellowship of His Son.’ The love which is based on this communication, is charity: wherefore
it is evident that charity is the friendship of man for God”,20 and a participation of Divine
charity.21 For Aquinas part of charity is the understanding that it is better to love than to be
loved: “Now to be loved is not the act of the charity of the person loved; for this act is to
love: and to be loved is competent to him as coming under the common notion of good, in so
17
ST II-II Q. 23 A. 2.
18
ST II-II Q. 23 A. I.
19
ST II-II Q. 23 A. 4.
20
Ibid.,A. I.
21
Ibid., A. 2 ad. 1.
5
far as another tends towards his good by an act of charity.”22 Man is first loved by God; God
is the initiator of love which man then reciprocates back to God. Man can learn to grow in
charity for others in that, it being a virtue and thus habitual, one can increase in love for God
and for others.23
Friendship with God
Now that we have a better understanding of what friendship means for Aquinas, and
where some of his foundationl thoughts arose, we can now proceed to understand where
Aquinas believes we find friendship and how such friendship ought to be ordered in the life
of the Christian. While Aquinas goes into great detail about the ordering of relationships, for
the scope of this study we will focus on the three broader categories of: friendship with God,
with friends, and with our neighbours and enemies. Aquinas also takes from St. Augustine
and his notion that, "Charity is a virtue which, when our affections are perfectly ordered,
unites us to God, for by it we love Him."24 But this love is not in us without God - God must
come and show us love first, “… charity can be in us neither naturally, nor through
acquisition by the natural powers, but by the infusion of the Holy Ghost…”.25 An order then
immediately emerges for if one cannot even fully participate in friendship without God, then
God being primary in friendship is necessary for any friendship to exist at all: “...love of
charity tends to God as to the principle of happiness, on the fellowship of which the
friendship of charity is based. Consequently there must needs be some order in things loved
out of charity, which order is in reference to the first principle of that love, which is God.”26
22
ST II-II Q. 27 A.1
23
ST II-II Q. 24. A4 ad. 3.
24
ST II-II Q. 23 A. 3
25
ST II-II Q. 24. A2
Carmichael. Friendship, 110.
26
ST II-II Q. 26 A.1
6
Indeed love for God ought to be so significant that comparatively the love you have for others
seems almost like hate. Now, of course, as we will see in the next section - one must not hate
others, but there is use of hyperbole to show just how extraordinarily great ought to be one’s
love for God. Indeed in Scripture we are commanded to love God even more than family:27
Now we ought to hate our neighbor for God's sake, if, to wit, he leads us astray from God,
according to Lk. 14:26: "If any man come to Me and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
end children, and brethren, and sisters . . . he cannot be My disciple." Therefore we ought to
love God, out of charity, more than our neighbor.28
We are to love God above family, friends, and above ourselves; God is to be our first love.29
This love that man has for God should not be in part but in whole.30 We will see that this is
different from how man is to love people who are imperfect. Friendship with God raises
objections according to Aristotle’s definition of friendship which presents the idea that there
should be some commonality and equality.31 Marko Fuchs responds to this critique when he
writes:
The non-Aristotelian aspects and features of Aquinas’s conception of caritas as friendship

with God can be summarized as follows: unlike Aristotle’s, Aquinas’s highest form of perfect
friendship is not a relation between equals but one between highly unequal partners….
Aquinas uses it to characterize his idea of perfect friendship instead. For an Aristotelian
philosopher on the one hand, this interpretation of what the mutuality of benevolence means
in Aquinas’s perfect friendship may seem odd. The Thomistic theologian, on the other hand,
may argue that at this point we are dealing not with natural but supernatural relations, which
are mediated not primarily by natural knowledge but by faith.32
This means that since God is so other than humans the rules are a bit more pliable when it
comes to friendship with God. Along with this are the understandings of the deification of
man and the person of Christ.33 Thomas Ryan writes that, “Without belief in human
27
Ibid., A.7 ad.1
28
Ibid., A.2
29
Ibid., A. 3 ad.3
30
ST II-II Q. 27 A.5
31
32
Ibid., 213-14.
33
7
deification in Christ, [Aristotle] could not envisage friendship between God and human
beings.... For Aquinas, on the other hand, these were integral to our graced share in the divine
nature and to the process of divinization.”34 Ryan continues on to say that it is by sharing in
the, “...Trinitarian life,” that we partake in deification, a sort of spiritual transformation which
elevates man to be able to have communion with God.35 This is of course only possible
because of the incarnation. Because Christ came in human flesh and died and rose again to
break apart the dividing wall between God and man and become the mediator, this opened the
door to not only communication between God and man, but to relationship, love, and
friendship.36 Christ also gives us his righteousness and takes our sin so that man might be free
to love God and to be made worthy of God’s love.37 God’s friendship makes man loveable
and grants him the capacity to love in deeper and truer ways than before. In many ways this is
the gospel - that God came to redeem man and make him his friend.38 This is why Friendship
is charity and the thing to desire above all else.39
Once man is given the ability to love God and is made His friend by the infusion of
the theological virtues by the indwelling Holy Spirit he is able to share in a friendship with
God where one’s desires can change to mach the desires of God and will the same things. For
this is yet another way in which man gains commonality with God. Of course, there is a limit
to how much humans are able to will what God wills, because man is often left ignorant of
God’s will, or is not able to understand God’s will.40 Nevertheless all we must do is pray that
God’s will be done, and trust when we are limited to understand and act when we do have
34
Thomas. “Aquinas on Compassion”, 169-170.
35
Ibid., 169.
36
ST I I-II Q. 23 A. I
37
38
Ibid., 215.
39
Schwartz, Aquinas on Friendship,114.
40
Ibid., 45.
8
understanding of God’s will.41 This desire to know and live in God’s will is part of the
contemplative life which is the most important part of life according to Aquinas. In being
able to communicate with God, there is the ability to grow “in conformity with God’s will”
through prayer, the sacraments, and contemplation.42 By the grace of God man becomes
better at living and loving according to God’s will and in so doing his love for God and others
blossoms into greater and more self-sacrificial love.43
Love of Self
Aristotle wrote that one must first love themselves before they can love others: “(1)
we must wish him, on account of his virtuous qualities, all the good that we wish for
ourselves, and (2) we must have a well-ordered relation toward ourselves.”44 Aquinas takes
this thought and pushes it to see where friendship with God extends and how God’s
friendship with us orders our loves.45 The first person after God that Aquinas believes one
ought to love is himself. Now this may seem strange and I believe that in many ways it does
not quite fit with the description of friendship, but is more used as a means of understanding
proper and healthy love. First, love of self does not mean selfishness, or even the modern
ideas of “self-care” but rather Aquinas takes from Lev. 19:18 which says that one ought to
love their friend as they love themselves.46 For Aquinas this means that love first begins with
the self and extends outward. Thus the love for self should be upright and good so that the
same love extends to others:
... just as unity is the principle of union, so the love with which a man loves himself is the
form and root of friendship. For if we have friendship with others it is because we do unto
41
Ibid., 48, 51.
42
43
Schwartz, Aquinas on Friendship, 114.
44
45
ST I I-II Q. 25 A. 4
46
Ibid.
9
them as we do unto ourselves.... among these other things which he loves out of charity
because they pertain to God, he loves also himself out of charity.47
Aquinas continues:
God is loved as the principle of good, on which the love of charity is founded; while man, out
of charity, loves himself by reason of his being a partaker of the aforesaid good, and loves his
neighbor by reason of his fellowship in that good….Therefore man, out of charity, ought to
love himself more than his neighbor: in sign whereof, a man ought not to give way to any evil
of sin, which counteracts his share of happiness, not even that he may free his neighbor from
sin.48
It seems that Aquinas is wanting to make sure that goodness and truth are never usurped by
what man might think is “love” for his friend. If man loves God first, and then loves his soul
and that his soul would honor God, then when it comes to loving his friend he will only love
his friend so far as that love honors God and does not cause himself to sin. That said, while
the soul must not suffer injury from sin one may suffer bodily injury for the sake of the
friend,49 just as Christ suffered on the cross for the sake of our souls;50 though when not
necessary to suffer bodily for the sake of a friend one ought to love their own body.51 While I
would hesitate to call this self-love friendship,52 in that one cannot have mutual affection,
shared interests, etc. with one’s self, and because a friendship requires at least two persons, I
believe Aquinas’ main idea is that friendship with others will not be properly oriented until
one understands who they are before God and allows their friendship with God to rightly
order their loves by putting their love for God and obedience to his will first.53
Friendship with Others
47
Ibid.
48
ST I I-II Q. 26 A. 4
49
ST I I-II Q. 26 A.5
50
ST I I-II Q. 26 A. 4 ad.2
Gerald J Beyer. “The Love of God and Neighbour According to Aquinas: An Interpretation.” New
Blackfriars, vol. 84, no. 985, (2003). 116–132., doi:10.1111/j.1741-2005.2003.tb06281.x.122-23.
51
ST II-II Q. 25 A.4
52
53
10
With a proper understanding of God first, then one’s soul, man can properly engage
with loving those who are near and dear to his heart. This would include people generally
classified as friends as well as family and other close relationships. For the Christian who has
the infused virtue of charity given by God he or she is now able to love others for God’s sake
and by His love: “for God is the principal object of charity, while our neighbor is loved out of
charity for God's sake.”54 The friend ought to desire that they might share in the joy of God
together.55 For the Christian their joy in friendship is to have their common interest be
primarily united in love for God:56 “Now the aspect under which our neighbor is to be loved,
is God, since what we ought to love in our neighbor is that he may be in God. Hence it is
clear that it is specifically the same act whereby we love God, and whereby we love our
neighbor. Consequently the habit of charity extends not only to the love of God, but also to
the love of our neighbor.”57
Aquinas does spend a good deal of time questioning which of our neighbours out to
be loved first, and what is the order in which we ought to love others, such as does family
come before a friend and do we love those closest to us or those who are more godly first? In
the scope of this essay there is not time to delve deeply into this question; however, it is
important to understand that the ordering of such loves and deciding who is to receive more
time and affection ought to always be related back to God and with whom God will be most
loved and glorified. Thus one ought to obey God’s commands to care for family and care for
one another.58
54
ST I I-II Q. 23 A. 3 ad. 1
55
Ryan. “Thomas: Aquinas on Compassion”, 171.
56
ST I I-II Q. 26 A.2
Fuchs, “Philia and Caritas”, 215.
57
ST I I-II Q. 25 A.1
58
ST I I-II Q. 26. A.6, A.7
11
A critique that often comes of Aquinas’ teachings on friendship is that friendship
loses its depth because Aquinas is able to show how friendship love extends out to even our
enemies. However, to assume that Aquinas is dismantling close and intimate friendships is to
misunderstand him. He clearly writes that not all will be loved to the same degree59 and this is
normal and good, for love ought to be stronger with those to whom we are closest: “Love can
be unequal in two ways: first on the part of the good we wish our friend. In this respect we
love all men equally out of charity: because we wish them all one same generic good...
Secondly love is said to be greater through its action being more intense: and in this way we
ought not to love all equally.”60And:
... we love more those who are more nearly connected with us, since we love them in more
ways. For, towards those who are not connected with us we have no other friendship than
charity, whereas for those who are connected with us, we have certain other friendships,
….Consequently this very act of loving someone because he is akin or connected with us...can
be commanded by charity, so that, out of charity both eliciting and commanding, we love in
more ways those who are more nearly connected with us.61
A similar critique of Aquinas on this point is the concern that friends and family
become objects by which to love God rather than people to love for themselves. While it is
true that God’s love enables humans to love and thus they love because of God, it is not fair
to say that Aquinas does not understand the need to love others as themselves rather than as a
means to God.62 Mark Vernon helpfully explains: “... by nurturing good selfishness over bad
selfishness, the best sorts of friendship can become a ‘school of love’ that nurtures godly
characteristics within the Christian.”63 Thus it is by loving our friend well that we also love
God, but if we try and love the friend to get to God we have not truly loved the friend.64 One
59
ST I I-II Q. 26. A.6 ad.1
Beyer, “The Love of God and Neighbour according to Aquinas”, 119.
60
ST II-II Q. 26. A.6
61
ST I I-II Q. 26. A.7
62
63
64
Beyer. “The Love of God and Neighbour according to Aquinas”, 123, 131
12
might say, the Christians’ love for God motivates his or her love for others.65 There is of
course a sense in which the friends we see are more “real” to us than God whom we do not
see, and so Aquinas acknowledges that just as a friendship ought to flow from God, in a
smaller way friendship can also flow back to God from our friendships with others. We can
interact with humans in ways we cannot with God and thus as we learn to love those close to
us we can also learn to understand better God’s love for us and our love for Him.66
Friendship with Neighbours and Enemies
As mentioned previously there are different degrees of love and Aquinas is aware of
the danger of making friendship too generic as just love for everyone. Thus, while
acknowledging that there is a difference between the traditional close friendship based on
common interests etc., which Aristotle speaks of in his Nicomachean Ethics, the Christian is
blessed by the infused virtue of charity which enables his friendship to become so much more
than simply close friends with whom one enjoys spending their time. As the Christian comes
to better understand God’s love for them, and as their love for their friends and family is
transformed by the working of the Holy Spirit in their lives they can learn to extend such love
even to those with whom they do not share things in common and even those who are their
enemies.
There are two important concepts to this point: the first is that Aquinas gives a reason
for why we ought to love our neighbours and friends - which is for the sake of our first
friend: God. Just as one might love a friend’s children or family members while not having a
real relationship with them, it is for the sake of their friend that they learn to show love to the
65
Ibid., 117.
66
S T II-II Q. 26 A.2 ad.1
Beyer. “The Love of God and Neighbour according to Aquinas”, 128.
13
others in their friend’s life.67 If God is this friend and he made all people, then in the same
way we must love them because they belong to God.68 This even extends to sinners - for
whom Christ showed His own love when he died on the cross.69 Thus one might say that
friendship, while it can be interchangeable with charity, the two words provide a helpful
distinction: one has friends whom they love with philia and caritas and all others whom are
loved from caritas.70
The question that then arises for Aquinas is whether is it greater to love a friend or an
enemy. He seems to believe that neither is better for they both are good and both can be
argued to be above the other: “Now it is better to love one's friend, since it is better to love a
better man...Therefore it is more meritorious to love one's friend than to love one's enemy.”71
But:
... it is better to love one's enemy than one's friend, and this for two reasons. First, because it
is possible to love one's friend for another reason than God, whereas God is the only reason
for loving one's enemy. Secondly, because if we suppose that both are loved for God, our love
for God is proved to be all the stronger through carrying a man's affections to things which
are furthest from him, namely, to the love of his enemies...72
To be clear, when Aquinas is talking about loving one’s enemies he is not saying to love sin
or promote sinful behaviour in our love, but to love them as men and not as sinners.73 As Liz
Carmichael so aptly writes, “...love of enemies is directed to the person qua human, not qua
enemy which would be to love the evil in them ...”74 If one can manage to love God, family
67
68
S T I I-II Q. 23 A. I
Beyer. “The Love of God and Neighbour according to Aquinas”, 118.
69
ST I I-II Q. 23 A. I
70
ST I I-II Q. 23 A. I ad 3.
71
ST II-II Q. 23 A. I
72
Ibid.
73
ST I I-II Q. 25 A.8
74
Carmichael. Friendship,123.
14
and friend, others, and even one’s enemies, then they have truly begun to understand love in
its perfect form.75
Conclusion
For Aquinas friendship is the greatest relationship man can have both with God and
with other people. If man persists in the habitude of friendship as a virtue he will also grow to
be able to extend his love for others more deeply as well as more broadly. Friendship is a
school to learn how to love better. As Mark Vernon writes, “... if friendship can be an
overarching principle in someone’s life, not merely something shared between two people,
then a close friendship is likely to make those people love others more, even when they
barely know them….To put it another way, Thomas wants to ‘free us’ from a moralist notion
of charity based upon an imitative Christology that merely stresses doing good…”.76 We do
not do good merely for the sake of doing good, but rather we learn to love for the sake of
Charity.
One cannot write about Aquinas without talking about the contemplative life. Tying
friendship back to his overarching topic of the contemplative life, it is clear that friendship for
Aquinas is necessary for the contemplative life, for the contemplative life is about knowing
and loving God. To fully understand this one must, in the active life, love God and neighbour
which will in turn edify and perfect the contemplative life.77 In a similar way, the more one
contemplates the love of God the better one will be able to love their neighbour in the active
life.78 Thus when one allows the Holy Spirit to direct one to love God, self, neighbour, and
even enemies they will be partaking in the true joys of knowing God who is Love itself .
75
ST II-II Q. 25 A.9
76
77
Beyer, “The Love of God and Neighbour according to Aquinas”, 126.
78
Beyer. “The Love of God and Neighbour according to Aquinas”, 127 -128.
15
Bibliography
Beyer, Gerald J. "The Love of God and Neighbour According to Aquinas: An Interpretation."
New Blackfriars 84, no. 985 (03, 2003): 116-32.
doi:10.1111/j.1741-2005.2003.tb06281.x.
Carmichael, Liz. Friendship: Interpreting Christian Love. T&T Clark International, 2007.
Farrell, Marie T. "Thomas Aquinas and Friendship with God." Irish Theological Quarterly
61, no. 3-4 (09 1995): 212-18. doi:10.1177/002114009506100305.
Fuchs, Marko. "Philia and Caritas." Aquinas and The Nicomachean Ethics: 203-19.
doi:10.1017/cbo9780511756313.012.
McDonough, William. “"Caritas" as the "Prae-Ambulum" of All Virtue: Eberhard

Schockenhoff on the Theological- Anthropological Significance and the Contemporary
Interreligious Relevance of Thomas Aquinas's Teaching on the "Virtutes Morales
Infusae"” Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Fall / Winter
2007), pp. 97-126 URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23562732 Accessed: 27-11-2018
15:31 UTC
Ryan, Thomas. "Aquinas on Compassion: Has He Something to Offer Today?" Irish

Theological Quarterly 75, no. 2 (04, 2010): 157-74. doi:10.1177/0021140009360496.
Schwartz, Daniel. Aquinas on Friendship. Oxford University Press, 2012.
Vernon, Mark. "Plato, Thomas and the Daring Ethics of Friendship." Theology & Sexuality
12, no. 2 (01 2006): 203-16. doi:10.1177/1355835806061429.

Thomas Aquinas and Divine Friendship

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thomas Aquinas and Divine Friendship

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Department of Theology & Religion

Module code: THEO44630

Please state word length:​ ​4981 ​words

Date: 24th April 2019

richness of individual relationships.

coherent theology of friendship which fits within a theological framework.

According to Aristotle some of the defining aspects of friendship include mutual

some kind of communication.”10 Well-wishing is a part of friendship - built upon

Aquinas also defines friendship as interchangeable with charity; or ​agape/caritas

of bringing the needed communication, “...inasmuch as He communicates His happiness to

and for others.23

Friendship with God

The non-Aristotelian aspects and features of Aquinas’s conception of caritas as friendship

is ​charity and the thing to desire above all else.39

blossoms into greater and more self-sacrificial love.43

same love extends to others:

Friendship with Others

the love of our neighbor.”57

ought not to love all equally.”60And:

Friendship with Neighbours and Enemies

loved from ​caritas.70

its perfect form.75

McDonough, William. “"Caritas" as the "Prae-Ambulum" of All Virtue: Eberhard

Ryan, Thomas. "Aquinas on Compassion: Has He Something to Offer Today?" ​Irish

Schwartz, Daniel. ​Aquinas on Friendship​. Oxford University Press, 2012.

You might also like

Please state word length: 4981 words

Aquinas also defines friendship as interchangeable with charity; or agape/caritas

is charity and the thing to desire above all else.39

loved from caritas.70

Ryan, Thomas. "Aquinas on Compassion: Has He Something to Offer Today?" Irish

Schwartz, Daniel. Aquinas on Friendship. Oxford University Press, 2012.