Alan Thomas

Agreeing with Aquinas simply because he asserted something is, ironically, not agreeing with Aquinas. “Sacred doctrine makes use of these authorities as extrinsic and probable arguments; but properly uses the authority of the canonical Scriptures as an incontrovertible proof, and the authority of the doctors of the Church as one that may properly be used, yet merely as probable. For our faith rests upon the revelation made to the apostles and prophets who wrote the canonical books, and not on the revelations (if any such there are) made to other doctors. Hence Augustine says (Epis. ad Hieron. xix, 1): ‘Only those books of Scripture which are called canonical have I learned to hold in such honor as to believe their authors have not erred in any way in writing them. But other authors I so read as not to deem everything in their works to be true, merely on account of their having so thought and written, whatever may have been their holiness and learning.’” (ST I, q.1, a.8, ad 2)

Based on Thomas' own principles, there can be no necessary bridge from accepting his views on natural theology/metaphysics to accepting his views on, say, transubstantiation or Mary because of the strict distinction between what is known by natural or supernatural revelation.