Justin Hoch

THEO 317
Paper 4
12/14/13
In article 4 of question 44 of the Summa theologiae, Thomas Aquinas discusses the issue
of whether God is the final cause of all things. In order to come to the conclusion that God is the
final cause of all things, Aquinas responds to four objections rooted primarily in the works of
Aristotle. In his responses, Aquinas draws from Aristotles philosophy, but more so focuses on the
theological considerations as well. Aristotles principle of the four causes, mainly the difference
between the efficient cause and the final cause, provides a jumping point for Aquinas. For
Aquinas, God is both the creator of Good and the end goal of Good, for God causes goodness by
being good. As one works through article 4, one will see how Aquinas creates an Aristotelian
philosophy that incorporates God.
In order to understand Aquinas question and thus his entire argument, one must
understand what he means by final cause of all things. He is referring to the works of Aristotle, in
which Aristotle proposes four causes, one of which is the final cause. It is the reason something is
what it is, or the end, goal or purpose of something. The other cause relevant to Aquinas
argument is the efficient cause. The efficient cause acts as an agent and produces something; in a
way, this could be considered the first cause. Aquinas refers to both causes in order to conclude
that God can be both the first cause and the final cause.
Aquinas begins his work by proposing four objections, which he will respond to and
refute. The responses build upon the body of Aquinas argument; therefore, one must first
understand the objections. First, Aquinas says that God is not the final cause because God has no
need for an end.1 If God were acting for an end as a final cause does, it would seem that God
would have a purpose and need to that action. But what does God need? Those opposed to
Aquinas would argue that God needs nothing. Therefore it does not become Him to act for an

1 Summa theologiae (ST) 1. q. 44. art. 4. obj. 1.

end. If God does not act for an end, he cannot be a final cause. A final cause is the end, while the
efficient cause is the acting agent. This objection introduces the idea of a final cause and allows
Aquinas to later articulate why God acts, or for what reason or end does God act.
The second objection furthers the idea that God cannot be the final cause by claiming that God is
only the first cause. Aquinas cites Aristotles Physics, in which Aristotle emphasizes that the end
of generation, and the form of the thing generated, and the agent cannot be identical. 2 More
research into Aristotles Physics may be necessary, but it would seem that according to Aristotle,
the agent cannot be the same as the final cause. By mentioning the philosophy of Aristotle,
Aquinas inserts a common authority that those reading this would most likely understand. His
response to this objection does not completely dispel Aristotles philosophy, but Aquinas seeks to
combine faith and reason. By stating this objection, Aquinas sets himself up to discuss the role of
God as the first and final cause.
Next, Aquinas states a third objection, which expresses the relationship between God and all
things. While all things desire an end, all things do not desire God. 3 Therefore, if God isnt
desired, God cannot be the end. This objection begs the question then, What do all things
desire? According to Aristotle, the end or telos is the Good that is obtainable through reason
alone. By introducing this objection, Aquinas now has the opportunity to define his idea of the
telos and how it relates to all things. Lastly, the fourth objection states that God cannot be the
efficient cause and the final cause, for it would mean before and after exist in Him; which is
impossible.4 Because Aquinas has already established that God is the efficient cause of all
things, he must address this objection.
Having stated the objections to which he will argue, Aquinas pivots the conversation to start his
argument. Aquinas inserts an authority from Proverbs that states, The Lord made all things for

2 ST 1. q. 44. art. 4. obj. 2.

3 ST 1. q. 44. art. 4. obj. 3.
4 ST 1. q. 44. art. 4. obj. 4.

Himself.5 By incorporating Scripture, Aquinas combines revelation into his logical argument.
The verse implies that all things are made by God and exist for God. This quote serves to start his
argument, for it backs up his responses. Next, Aquinas discusses the properties of an agent. There
is always an end to an action by an agent.6 Thus, there must be a purpose to any action. While the
agent aims to create and the patient aims to receive, the end is one and the same. 7 The agent refers
to the one doing the action, and the patient has a passive role. However, some things can be both
and these things are called imperfect agents. 8 Having defined his concept, Aquinas can now
discuss Gods role. God cannot be an imperfect agent; rather, He intends only to communicate
His perfection, which is His goodness.9 God is the ideal of divine perfection and goodness.
Because all things want to achieve perfection, all things must look to God as the ideal of
goodness. Therefore the divine goodness, which is God, is the end of all things. 10
With God defined as the end of all things, Aquinas goes back through the objections and responds
to each one. In his reply to objection one, he draws on his definition that God is not an imperfect
agent. Since to act from need belongs only to an imperfect agent and God is not an imperfect
agent, God does not act out of need.11 Aquinas uses the definition found in his body of the article
to logically refute the first objection. Further, Aquinas notes that God acts only for His own
goodness, not for any gain.12 God gives his goodness, so those who desire it can come to know
it. He gives freely and abundantly to those willing to accept it. Having refuted the first objection,
Aquinas is one step closer to defining God as the final cause of all things.
In Aquinas reply to objection two, he refutes the authority of Aristotle in order to support his
argument that God is the final cause of all things. Aquinas stresses that the likeness of the created

5 ST 1. q. 44. art. 4. sed contra.

6 ST 1. q. 44. art. 4. corp.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 ST 1. q. 44. art. 4. rep. obj. 1.
12 Ibid.

thing is not the end, but it is made in the likeness of the creator.13 This is in response to Aristotles
Physics, in which Aristotle explains that the agent and the created thing cannot be identical.
While Aquinas does not disagree, he inserts God as the creator; thus, the created thing is made in
the likeness of God. Aquinas also states that the form of the created thing cannot be nobler than
the form of the creator.14 In this reply, Aquinas embraces Aristotles principle of the four causes,
but he does not solely rely on Aristotelian philosophy.
Furthermore, Aquinas interprets Aristotles view of the telos and incorporates God as the ultimate
Good. In his response to objection three, Aquinas makes the statement that all things desire God
as their end because God is the source of good things. 15 God as the creator of all things produces
in his likeness. Since God is good, things created in his likeness are good; thus, all things are
desirable. Using this logic, Aquinas defines God as the end of all things, and because the end is
the final cause, God is the final cause. In the reply to objection 3, Aquinas combines faith and
reason. He recognizes that desire can be intellectual or sensible, or natural, i.e. without
knowledge.16 As Aquinas utilizes the philosophy of Aristotle, he stresses the component of faith,
faith in the goodness of God.
Lastly, Aquinas defines God as the efficient, the exemplar and the final cause of all things. 17
God can be both the divine goodness and the creator. As the efficient cause, he creates mankind
and pushes mankind to search for goodness in the world. He exists as the exemplar in the way
that all things should desire to be like him. As the final cause, God acts as the pull, inviting all
things to participate in the likeness of him. While this requires faith, Aquinas recognizes the need
for reason, as this does not prevent [mankind] from mentally considering many things in Him. 18
Rather than rely only on reason, Aquinas creates a balance between faith and reason. Ultimately,

13 ST 1. q. 44. art. 4. rep. obj. 2.

14 ST 1. q. 44. art. 4. rep. obj. 2.
15 ST 1. q. 44. art. 4. rep. obj. 3.
16 Ibid.
17 ST 1. q. 44. art. 4. rep. obj. 4.
18 Ibid.

Aquinas replies point to the fact that God is the final cause of all things and thus, he is the end
goal and the epitome of goodness.