The Metaphysical Demonstration of the Existence of God by Francisco Suárez
"The Metaphysical Demonstration of the Existence of God" by Francisco Suárez is a philosophical work that explores the existence of God through metaphysical reasoning, particularly focusing on the nature of being. Suárez divides the concept of being into infinite and finite categories, arguing that this distinction is essential for understanding the relationship between God and created beings. He posits that a necessary being, which is uncreated and self-sufficient, must exist, as it is impossible for existence to proceed to infinity without a foundational being. Suárez employs both a posteriori and a priori methods to suggest that there can only be one uncreated being—God—due to the intrinsic characteristics of such a being's essence.
The work also delves into complex theological concepts, such as the Trinity, and raises questions about philosophical proofs for God's existence, which has been a topic of ongoing debate among scholars and theologians. While acknowledging the limits of human understanding in fully grasping the divine nature, Suárez asserts that a real knowledge of God can still be attained. His arguments have influenced modern thinkers like Descartes and Leibniz, prompting continued discussions about the compatibility of rational thought with theistic belief. Overall, Suárez's contributions offer a significant perspective on metaphysical inquiry into the divine, inviting readers to consider the philosophical underpinnings of their beliefs.
On this Page
The Metaphysical Demonstration of the Existence of God by Francisco Suárez
First published:Disputationer Metaphysicae, 1597 (English translation, 2004)
Edition(s) used:The Metaphysical Demonstration of the Existence of God: Metaphysical Disputations 28-29, translated and edited by John P. Doyle. South Bend, Ind.: St. Augustine’s Press, 2004
Genre(s): Nonfiction
Subgenre(s): Essays; theology
Core issue(s): The Deity; the divine; God
Overview
The fifty-four disputations in Francisco Suárez’s Disputationer Metaphysicae provide a metaphysical foundation for work in theology by thoroughly analyzing the concept of being—what characteristics all beings share in common and what distinguishes the different types of beings. This work highly influenced modern philosophers such as René Descartes and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Disputations 28 and 29, the two disputations translated in The Metaphysical Demonstration of the Existence of God, are generally concerned with the division of being into the infinite and finite and the question of whether it is possible to prove, without recourse to divine revelation, the existence of an infinite, uncreated being—namely, God.
Disputation 28 discusses how to divide types of beings. Suárez concludes that the most apparent division of being is between the infinite and finite because of the radical disparity between God and creatures. While this is not the division that is most easily perceived by the senses, it is the most logical division and is therefore in accordance with the order of teaching. Some other divisions of being, however, are synonymous. For instance, the division of being into that which is necessary and that which is not necessary (or is contingent). A necessary being is one that must exist and cannot cease to exist. A contingent being either cannot exist or can cease to exist. Also, being can be divided into being by essence and being by participation. Being by essence means that the being has existence because of its essence (existence is a necessary attribute of the being’s essence). Finally, being can be divided into uncreated and created.
Disputation 28 also addresses the question of whether the division of being is equivocal, univocal, or analogous. This is a reformulation of the question of whether the concept of being can be posited of both God and creatures. If the concept is used equivocally, it is simply taken from what is known of creatures and imposed on God in order to understand him. Suárez notes that this argument was refuted by Thomas Aquinas and that if it were true, nothing of God could be learned from knowledge of the creatures he made. If the concept of being is univocal, then it means the same thing in relation to God as to creatures. If the concept of being is analogous, however, it is extended from its meaning in creatures to apply to God by means of a likeness or proportion. Suárez concludes that the concept of being is used analogously, and thus while it is impossible to fully know the nature of God, it is possible to have a real knowledge of that nature.
Disputation 29 is concerned with the question of whether natural reason unaided by divine revelation can prove that God exists. The first question is whether it can be proven that there is an uncreated being. The second question is whether it can be proven that there is one uncreated being.
Whether there is an uncreated being can be proven in a physical or metaphysical manner. Because Suárez rejects the physical manner, he begins with the metaphysical principle that “everything which is made, is made by another. ” This is true whether a thing is created, generated, or made in some other sense. This principle is proven by the fact that a thing lacks being before it is made, but for it to be made, there must be something that already has being to make it. As a result, because causation cannot proceed to infinity, there must be an uncreated being. Left unproven, however, is whether there are one or more uncreated beings.
Suárez notes that there are two basic methods of proving that there is one uncreated being, which we call God. First, the proof proceeds a posteriori, from God’s effects, and the second proof proceeds partially a posteriori and partially a priori. The demonstration completely a posteriori states that beauty, order, and the interconnection of the whole universe necessarily show both that it is governed by and draws its origin from one being. Nevertheless, this proof cannot provide sufficient certainty because it is only certain as to those things that come within the bounds of human cognition by way of natural reasoning or philosophy. As a result, it is necessary to seek a demonstration of the existence of God that proceeds a priori. The demonstration a priori begins with an attribute of God that has been demonstrated a posteriori and, from that, works to a demonstration of other attributes.
The demonstration a priori begins with the demonstration a posteriori that God is a being that is necessary and self-sufficient. Recall, Suárez is attempting to prove that there must be only one uncreated being. He begins by noting that whenever it is possible for individual or singular beings to have a common character that is multiplicable (that is, they share a common essence), it is not part of their essence to be singular. Now, such singular beings are singular, but that is because, in addition to their essence, they also exist. A necessary and self-sufficient being, however, of its essence exists and is therefore singular. In other words, the existence (and, therefore, singularity) is part of the essence of an uncreated being. As a result, because singularity is part of the essence of an uncreated being, it is not possible for there to be more than one uncreated being.
Christian Themes
Because the purpose of The Metaphysical Demonstration of the Existence of God is to treat solely of what can be known by reason without the aid of revelation, Suárez addresses theological issues only when necessary to further explain a particular philosophical point. Nevertheless, there are a number of issues raised by Disputations 28 and 29 that are of general interest for their influence on Christian principles and issues.
The most obvious issue of interest to modern Christians is the possibility of a philosophical proof for the existence of God. Whether such a proof is even possible is still hotly contested and has been a source of continual debate among philosophers and theologians throughout modern times. The possibility of a proof still continued to receive considerable support through the time of Descartes, but such support has waned considerably since the criticisms leveled by David Hume and Immanuel Kant. Working within the tradition of negative theology, which emphasizes the incomprehensibility of God, some contemporary theologians and philosophers have questioned whether it is even appropriate to attempt to know God on a purely philosophical level.
Of a more theological nature, however, Disputations 28 and 29 contain interesting discussions of aspects of the doctrine of the Trinity (that God is three persons, but one god), of the nature of God’s free will, and of how, in accordance with principles of logic, it would appear that there must have been a first man. For instance, the question about the Trinity is how the primary division of being into infinite and finite is possible because either each person in the Trinity is finite (which is impossible for divinity) or infinite (which means that infinity is multiplied). Suárez, however, concludes that there is no difficulty because the three persons share in the same divine essence—thus, they are not finite, but neither is infinity multiplied.
Sources for Further Study
Copleston, Frederick. Later Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy: Ockham, Francis Bacon, and the Beginning of the Modern World. Vol. 3 in A History of Philosophy. New York: Image Books, 1993. Copleston’s nine-volume work is rightly called the best history of philosophy in the English language. His discussion of Suárez is both thorough and concise.
Doyle, John P. “Francisco Suárez: On Preaching the Gospel to People Like the American Indians.” Fordham International Law Journal 15 (1991): 879-951. A fascinating discussion of the legal theory of one of the founders of modern international human rights doctrine.
Doyle, John P. “The Suarezian Proof for God’s Existence.” In History of Philosophy in the Making: A Symposium of Essays to Honor Professor James D. Collins on His Sixty-fifth Birthday, edited by Linus J. Thro. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 1982. A thorough summary and critique of Disputation 29.
Fichter, Joseph H. Man of Spain: Francis Suarez. New York: Macmillan, 1940. An enjoyable biography of Suárez intended for an intelligent general audience. It emphasizes the historical events surrounding Suárez’s life.
Garcia, Jorge. “Francisco Suárez: The Man of History.” The American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 65 (1991): 259-266. A brief overview of Suárez’s life and the importance of his works both in his own time and in the history of philosophy.