Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It would seem that the temptation of God does not consist in certain deeds wherein the result is expected from the power of God alone. Just as God is tempted by man so is man tempted by God, man, and demons. But when man is tempted the result is not always expected from his power. Therefore neither is God tempted when the result is expected from His power alone.

Objection 2: Further, all those who work miracles by invoking the divine name look for an effect due to God's power alone. Therefore, if the temptation of God consisted in such like deeds, all who work miracles would tempt God.

Objection 3: Further, it seems to belong to man's perfection that he should put aside human aids and put his hope in God alone. Hence Ambrose, commenting on Lk. 9:3, "Take nothing for your journey," etc. says: "The Gospel precept points out what is required of him that announces the kingdom of God, namely, that he should not depend on worldly assistance, and that, taking assurance from his faith, he should hold himself to be the more able to provide for himself, the less he seeks these things." And the Blessed Agatha said: "I have never treated my body with bodily medicine, I have my Lord Jesus Christ, Who restores all things by His mere word." But the temptation of God does not consist in anything pertaining to perfection. Therefore the temptation of God does not consist in such like deeds, wherein the help of God alone is expected.

On the contrary, Augustine says (Contra Faust. xxii, 36): "Christ who gave proof of God's power by teaching and reproving openly, yet not allowing the rage of His enemies to prevail against Him, nevertheless by fleeing and hiding, instructed human weakness, lest it should dare to tempt God when it has to strive to escape from that which it needs to avoid." From this it would seem that the temptation of God consists in omitting to do what one can in order to escape from danger, and relying on the assistance of God alone.

I answer that, Properly speaking, to tempt is to test the person tempted. Now we put a person to the test by words or by deeds. By words, that we may find out whether he knows what we ask, or whether he can and will grant it: by deeds, when, by what we do, we probe another's prudence, will or power. Either of these may happen in two ways. First, openly, as when one declares oneself a tempter: thus Samson (Judges 14:12) proposed a riddle to the Philistines in order to tempt them. In the second place it may be done with cunning and by stealth, as the Pharisees tempted Christ, as we read in Mt. 22:15, sqq. Again this is sometimes done explicitly, as when anyone intends, by word or deed, to put some person to the test; and sometimes implicitly, when, to wit, though he does not intend to test a person, yet that which he does or says can seemingly have no other purpose than putting him to a test.

Accordingly, man tempts God sometimes by words, sometimes by deeds. Now we speak with God in words when we pray. Hence a man tempts God explicitly in his prayers when he asks something of God with the intention of probing God's knowledge, power or will. He tempts God explicitly by deeds when he intends, by whatever he does, to experiment on God's power, good will or wisdom. But He will tempt God implicitly, if, though he does not intend to make an experiment on God, yet he asks for or does something which has no other use than to prove God's power, goodness or knowledge. Thus when a man wishes his horse to gallop in order to escape from the enemy, this is not giving the horse a trial: but if he make the horse gallop with out any useful purpose, it seems to be nothing else than a trial of the horse's speed; and the same applies to all other things. Accordingly when a man in his prayers or deeds entrusts himself to the divine assistance for some urgent or useful motive, this is not to tempt God: for it is written (2 Paralip 20:12): "As we know not what to do, we can only turn our eyes to Thee." But if this be done without any useful or urgent motive, this is to tempt God implicitly. Wherefore a gloss on Dt. 6:16, "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God," says: "A man tempts God, if having the means at hand, without reason he chooses a dangerous course, trying whether he can be delivered by God."

Reply to Objection 1: Man also is sometimes tempted by means of deeds, to test his ability or knowledge or will to uphold or oppose those same deeds.

Reply to Objection 2: When saints work miracles by their prayers, they are moved by a motive of necessity or usefulness to ask for that which is an effect of the divine power.

Reply to Objection 3: The preachers of God's kingdom dispense with temporal aids, so as to be freer to give their time to the word of God: wherefore if they depend on God alone, it does not follow that they tempt God. But if they were to neglect human assistance without any useful or urgent motive, they would be tempting God. Hence Augustine (Contra Faust. xxii, 36) says that "Paul fled, not through ceasing to believe in God, but lest he should tempt God, were he not to flee when he had the means of flight." The Blessed Agatha had experience of God's kindness towards her, so that either she did not suffer such sickness as required bodily medicine, or else she felt herself suddenly cured by God.

Articulus 1

Argumentum 1

Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod tentatio dei non consistat in aliquibus factis in quibus solius divinae potestatis expectatur effectus. Sicut enim tentatur deus ab homine, ita etiam homo tentatur et a deo, et ab homine, et a Daemone. Sed non quandocumque homo tentatur, expectatur aliquis effectus potestatis ipsius. Ergo neque etiam per hoc deus tentatur quod expectatur solus effectus potestatis ipsius.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, omnes illi qui per invocationem divini nominis miracula operantur, expectant aliquem effectum solius potestatis divinae. Si igitur in factis huiusmodi consisteret divina tentatio quicumque miracula faciunt deum tentarent.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, ad perfectionem hominis pertinere videtur ut, praetermissis humanis subsidiis, in solo deo spem ponat.

Unde Ambrosius, super illud Luc. IX, nihil tuleritis in via etc., qualis debeat esse qui evangelizat regnum dei, praeceptis evangelicis designatur, hoc est, ut subsidii saecularis adminicula non requirat, fideique totus inhaerens putet, quo minus ista requiret, magis posse suppetere.

Et beata Agatha dixit, medicinam carnalem corpori meo nunquam exhibui, sed habeo dominum iesum christum, qui solo sermone restaurat universa.

Sed dei tentatio non consistit in eo quod ad perfectionem pertinet. Ergo tentatio non consistit in huiusmodi factis in quibus expectatur solum dei auxilium.

Sed Contra

Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit, XXII contra faustum, quod christus, qui palam docendo et arguendo et tamen inimicorum rabiem valere in se aliquid non sinendo, dei demonstrabat potestatem; idem tamen, fugiendo et latendo, hominis instruebat infirmitatem, ne deum tentare audeat quando habet quod faciat ut quod cavere oportet evadat.

Ex quo videtur in hoc tentationem dei consistere, quando praetermittit homo facere quod potest ad pericula evadenda, respiciens solum ad auxilium divinum.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod tentare proprie est experimentum sumere de eo qui tentatur. Sumimus autem experimentum de aliquo et verbis et factis. Verbis quidem, ut experiamur an sciat quod quaerimus, vel possit aut velit illud implere. Factis autem, cum per ea quae facimus exploramus alterius prudentiam, vel voluntatem, vel potestatem. Utrumque autem horum contingit dupliciter.

Uno quidem modo, aperte, sicut cum quis tentatorem se profitetur; sicut Samson, iudic. XIV, proposuit Philisthaeis problema ad eos tentandum. Alio vero modo, insidiose et occulte, sicut Pharisaei tentaverunt christum, ut legitur Matth. XXII.

Rursus, quandoque quidem expresse, puta cum quis dicto vel facto intendit experimentum sumere de aliquo. Quandoque vero interpretative, quando scilicet, etsi hoc non intendat ut experimentum sumat, id tamen agit vel dicit quod ad nihil aliud videtur ordinabile nisi ad experimentum sumendum.

Sic igitur homo deum tentat quandoque verbis, quandoque factis.

Verbis quidem deo colloquimur orando. Unde in sua petitione aliquis expresse deum tentat quando ea intentione aliquid a deo postulat ut exploret dei scientiam, potestatem vel voluntatem.

Factis autem expresse aliquis deum tentat quando per ea quae facit intendit experimentum sumere divinae potestatis, seu pietatis aut sapientiae. Sed quasi interpretative deum tentat qui, etsi non intendat experimentum de deo sumere, aliquid tamen vel petit vel facit ad nihil aliud utile nisi ad probandum dei potestatem vel bonitatem, seu cognitionem. Sicut, cum aliquis equum currere facit ut evadat hostes, hoc non est experimentum de equo sumere, sed si equum currere faciat absque aliqua utilitate, hoc nihil aliud esse videtur quam experimentum sumere de equi velocitate, et idem est in omnibus aliis rebus.

Quando ergo propter aliquam necessitatem seu utilitatem committit se aliquis divino auxilio in suis petitionibus vel factis, hoc non est deum tentare, dicitur enim II Paralip. XX, cum ignoramus quid agere debeamus, hoc solum habemus residui, ut oculos nostros dirigamus ad te.

Quando vero hoc agitur absque necessitate et utilitate, hoc est interpretative tentare deum.

Unde super illud Deut. VI, non tentabis dominum deum tuum, dicit Glossa, deum tentat qui, habens quid faciat, sine ratione se committit periculo, experiens utrum possit liberari a deo.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod homo etiam quandoque factis tentatur utrum possit vel sciat vel velit huiusmodi factis auxilium vel impedimentum praestare.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod sancti suis precibus miracula facientes, ex aliqua necessitate vel utilitate moventur ad petendum divinae potestatis effectum.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod praedicatores regni dei ex magna utilitate et necessitate subsidia temporalia praetermittunt, ut verbo dei expeditius vacent. Et ideo si soli deo innitantur, non ex hoc tentant deum. Sed si absque utilitate vel necessitate humana subsidia desererent, tentarent deum.

Unde et Augustinus dicit, XXII contra faustum, quod Paulus non fugit quasi non credendo in deum, sed ne deum tentaret si fugere noluisset, cum sic fugere potuisset.

Beata vero Agatha experta erat erga se divinam benevolentiam, ut vel infirmitates non pateretur, pro quibus corporali medicina indigeret, vel statim sentiret divinae sanationis effectum.