HE S I LE N CE OF S HOMA
OSEF PEPER
THE SILENCE OF ST. TOMAS Tee Ess
T RANS L ATED Y J O H N M U R R A Y S . J AND A N I E L ' C O N N O R
R RR C CC
Copyright© by Pantheon Books Inc.
REERY L ED By aangemn with Panhon Book nc Sond Pntin, ginal Gen Tt: Ub Ths vn ui Pilsphi Ngtiva Kosel Verlag, Muc
Mufcred in the UA
TETS H Life and Wor Hi Personaity Hi Conception of the Word The End s Sence
erceiig the Unexpressed The idden Key: Creation "To e True Means to e Creatiey Though hing Can e Known ecase They Are Create hing e Unfathomabe ecase They e Create Hope he Stcture of Creatrey Knowedge
o 5 57
68
hat Teiess? What s homsm? rom Kerkegaard to Sartre Distrst of Sytema Phosophy hom Aqinas egatie Phiosophy ote on Create Thn an act
o
8
Inexhable Light Te End of "Pue Phosphy Tomism Atttde Tt and Timeess oscript Conological Table Noes Noes Notes
102 105 108 1 14 118 120
ON THMAS QUNA
IFE AND WOK
A chance eusal f any f ugusne's wngs, even a page fm hs ms absac wk, On te Tnt, wil cnvey he unmsakable mpessin: hs was hugh and wen by a man esh and bld Bu le smene ake a smia gimpse n he tgh sucue f he Summ Teooc f S Thmas Aqunas, and he will be emped ask: Wee hese senences ealy se dwn by a lving man did n ahe he becve cnen m lae sel undsubedneihe blued n wamed by he beah f a livng inke? he val d cs f Augusne's hnking neve allw f ge hei suce n hs esnal lie, fm which hey spng fh lke he bls!m fm is and sem u e anguage S mas suggess is gn n a livng mind as lie cysal suggess the essenal liqd fm whch is fmed Ye ny n supecial inepeain wuld ne ine fm e unubled and unuied seen i e wk a e au himelf lived feedm fm ue ne ubancs O
n Thms uin
he hand, s ceanly clea ha he Summ Teooc can nly e he wk f a hea funda menally a peace S hmas dd n dscve an map u hs maesc ulne f Chsan eachng he slence f he clse cell I was sme dyllc spee f eemen cu fm h happengs n he wld ha he lived u hs lfe Such pesenans, as unue hsy as hey a mpemssly spled, n nly cl, ahe cl many paculas he cnvennal p s f hmas hey fequenly hav an eec gaphcal sudes whch make hghe clams o ccuacy. he ey fac ha a wk f such npeu ecy n such eep, adang peac cul gw fm a f whch, fa fm eng unle cnsumed self n sfe, gves an nsgh no he specal qaly f he man Hs wk, ncden aly, shws mmedae een nd evdence f uspeny cmbave ca mnd, wc, hweve, even n he hea f ale, was neve d ced fm he nms f uh and le and cn sequenly neve ls s fundamena peace h wng On te Peecton o te Stul Le gnang n hs fyh yea, ends w h fllwng _d: If anyne wshes we gans s, I w wecme F ue and false w n n bee way be evealed and uncveed
n Thoms quin
th resstce to codcto, ccordg to the sayg: Iro s sharpeed by o (Prov : 17) A betwee us ad them may o j uge, Who s blesse ete Ame " Cout Ldu of Aquo, Lord of Loretto d elcasro, was oe of the os oya vasals of the ohestaufe Eperor Frederck II Dur the yars of te sharpest suggle betwee Eperor d Pope hs yougest so Thoas was preparg hself for oce both reote ad supero o the coctte pesy oce of preachg the tut e w sudyg at the Beedcte Abbey of ote Casso whch at that te also seed s pera castle, suaed o the border be ee ohesaufe ad papa terrtory der these crcumstaces, Thoa could hardly· expect secure lfe sheltred from exteal dsurbaces d dagers I the rst mohs of the year 2 whe rederck II wa excomucated, ote Casso came decy to the zoe o bate. The garrso of he castle, ha of whch had to be suppored by the abbey, w ore tha doubled The forca tos were expaded by order of the Eperor hm self, who had rst etered hs Sca kgdo twety years prevously at ths very spot I ths se ar, the oks had to leave ther moaster
n Thm un
ong their company was the fteenyearo homas Aqunas. his exodus led he boy to Naplesto the eginning of his paricular desty it took h peranently out of seclusion and thrust into the heated center of all the intellectual battles of tha ime. he Unversity of Naples, founded i he year of Thomas's birth, was the rst "pure stae univrity,not a "school for seminarians bu a school for iperial ocials.1 Frederick II had designed it to work against the Church. Here, accordng to custom, Thomas studied the "libera arts. What is most important is that, under th tutelage of the rshman, Peter of ibernia, he ecame acquainted with the writings of Aristote which were at that time extremely suspect in th hurch. "istotelian! was an abusive epithet i th mouths of the orthodox, comparable to ilist, freethiner, man of the "Enghtenmen. I was n aes, to, that te me tat uba "youth ovement, which was lling the rans o he rst generation of the mendicant orders, w rst kndled in the heart of the young nobema. hese two words, "Aritotle and "endicants dicate te two most important disputes which th rt haf o the thirteenth centy rock hrstendo wth a pssionate vioec w c 6
n Thm un
carcely understand Both Arstotl and the edcant orders stood in the idst of a stor f approvals and ejections At the tie when Thoa cae to aples, hadly a decade and a half afte the death of St Francis of Assis 1226), the two endicant orders had not yet achieved any gener recognton On the contray, all papal recogntons and privlege could not prevent the representatves o the establshed societythe teporal lords, the rsng, uban iddle class and the secular clegy ro callng these rearkable new "poo en "deented (whch was partly understandable), and even "heretical or "sons of the AntChrist Th, of course, did not ste the upsurge of the oung spiritual oveent, nourshed as it wa y o any sources, aong the the fundaenta storical pulse of the tes Above a t attracted, a they were ts ghtf ortion, young en of oble irth We also ko at both the Franciscan and the Doica conents Paris received any recrts fro the stent ody Te records ae sila for te nersity of Bologna, and qute probably the sae as te of the Unversty of Frederick at aples For a these young en, vents such a t ollowing ust have been like the illuination of en ighing and a char to capture the n ea a proessor a th U
· n Ts uins
vety of Pars, Jean of St Gles, was deverng ecture on evangelcal poverty n the Dominca Prory of St. Jacques. As he spoke, he was so carred away by hs subject that he broke o hs lecture and begged the Pror for the habt. Then, himself become a Domncan, he went on to sh hs ecture Oe could consder ths report legendary, were t not a fact that n ths very way the Domncans acqured a cha, ther second, at the Unversty of Parsa char whch Thom Aqunas w to occupy tenty years later. he ower nherent n all these new thngs drew the young beral arts student rresstily to th dscussons and forced hm to a decson. At the age of twenty, hom entered the Order of St Domnc whch combes the deal of poverty wth that of study. In more than one way ths dcson must hav een a provocaton to Frederck I, snce homas was the son o one o hs vassas An t s pobable that to Count Landuf of Aqunowhose brother was abbot of poerful Mote Csno, and who doubtless preferred to thk of hs son rather as a successor to ths almost prncely oce than as mendicant frarthe whole mendcant order movmnt must have appeared as somethg postvely fro and dsrepuable, a judgment whch hs hole famy was lkly to concur
Ths uin
d thugh t wuld be bsud t see Thmass decisin mives f iics, even ec clesiasical liics (he yung man had edy lmsed he sueiiy f tuh ve wldly we), in he dising mi f mids dmi ed by we liics his enance in mendi cn de migh easiy hve been cnsued as decisin agains he Eme nd f he Pe, s whse icua fiends nd s he new cm muniies f Fanciscans nd Dminicns wee e ded ccdingy, e hase wih which the ias Peches sed hmas u f he imeil disic nd w fm his fmily is hughly ndesndabe. hey sen him fhwih n he wy t� ad ais. Bu hms did n ive s easiy he lce f his fuue fme. n he wy he was cued by his bhs nd hed isne ee ae mny indi cins h his was dne wihu he cnset even te ssisance f he Eme himself. I ny case, Pe Inncen V esed usuccess uy e Empe agans s ac vence. hmas ws imisned in his fe's casle f S Givnni f ve yea unil, wih he id f hs sise, e nay succeeded in making his esce. He esumed immeaely he ineued jey to Pais I is newhy h mas's tveli comnin, Jhnnes eunicus, en Me
n Th uin
eneral of the order, and later his teacher, Albe the Great, were both Germans Johannes eutoni as a Westphalian from the ecclesiastical disict arond Mnster n this same year 1 4 when homas oved on to France, a General Conci was eig sembled at Lyos, which dethroned meror and disinherited his le While this threateg stor brewed i the West, hom arrived i Paris, a city so eminently the metropolis of heologia studies that Scholastic research could lai tha i he entire medival era no Summ Telgc was written which does not relate to iversit near Notre Dame Cathedrl homas ond the Friars Preachers of St Jacqes recarious situation hey, as ell as th sans, ould hardly show themselves i th see withot being insulted or attacked. he Kg France, Sait Lois later o become e St hom, who was some en years his o ad oun t necessay to eta a oya ar to the convent to protect it agaist assault In whol order, special prayers wer prescribed egging od to ut an end to this evil, which was rywhere rampant, ut particularly acute in Paris homas, he only a little over twenty, and eaus of his strength, his slow movements nd haracteristic silence, dubbed by his fellow studets b ox, robably di not suer nly 0
n Thos in
fm hse ccumsances hugh, f cuse, they d nt cnvey he idylic icue f a eaceful cse cell. even f que anhe s mus have claimed hs ene aenn: In he yea f Thmass ava, lbeus Magnus bean each n Pas The fiendsh ha develed u f his encune f mase and uil and he fuifulness f hei m mn wk wee change he inelleual face f he Wes few yeas afe he s meeng, n 1248, he yea n which he fundain sne f Clgne Cahedal was lad, bh lbe and Thmas wee ansfeed Clgne lbe was nsuced esablsh hee a cllege f he Fias Peaches F Thmas, hese yeas held he gf f ffu silence and nellecual ening The half way mak f his say n Clgne ccded wh he alfway mak f he cenuy f Thmas, i was leady he halfway mak f hs life. The yeas Clgne wee ended by ee m e ase enea, hannes Tucus, n whch Thmas was summned eae himself f a eaching assignmen whch led h back Pais Meanwhile, a he Univesiy f Pais, he ld bae beween he secula clegy and he men cans had bus new ame I was nw a ale eween s f eachng as well f 11
n Thms uins
teaching chais. And it was a battle not always hon oably waged. The headstong defendes of the aditional foces, led by the pugnacious Willia of St. Amou, made use of vey questionable eap ons. Lies, calumny, falsication, and slande ee by no means uncommon. But on the othe hand it is lso epoted that the omican scholas teoize the pofessos of the secula cleg and even he ecto of the uivesity wit thei pessue tactics. This was the whilpool into which Thomas as etuing A new pesonal contct awaited him, with the Fancisan Bonaventue. t is tue that the old annals mae scant mention of a fiendship between these two saintly teaches of Chistendom. Ye thee is a compelling tuth in the though that these two geat ones, above the feuds of thei followes wee lined in fiendship. Thomas and Bonaventue, who had enteed thei espective odes in th m hv a ha h m tying situ�tion. Both me, as mendicants, had bee efused pemission to begin an independent teach g cous at te univesity. As the esult of a explici papal ode, both wee nally ganted pession o the same day. t seemed at st that, fo Thomas, the peission aone wou not e enough, o the nivesit boycotted his inaugua lectue. And late on 12
Ths ui
g ne of hs ectures, a oca of the phosophi
ca facuty ad a foowr of Wam of St. Amou who had mahe be baished), got u ad oudy rected a oem ampoog te medcats t, such hapegs coud ot prevet Thoma rom becomg oe of the most beoved ad ceerated teacers at te Pars uvrsty In tese stormy eary years of hs rst teachg assgme, Tomas composed s rst work, On Essnce nd Estence, a work with the sarp carity of a moutan aorama. Te osy ad ds gracefu tempest of srfe ad jeaousy wch he had to work ad no bee abe to coud te miro f sge sentece. The arst, amost conteorary, bography of Tomas, wch w wrtten y am of Tocco, Pror at Beeveto, etons repeatedy his eormous power of cocetrato. ie e was wrtng te Summ Cont Gentes, requenty seemed hs seses were nubed Once, wie ctatg at nght, he d no notce hat he cande he was odg ad bued down ad se s ers Te Summ Cont Gentes, wc spite of its tite s anytg but a poemca work, was wri en Itay After he had taug tree years as fu rofessor of teooy at te Uiversit of Pars, Tmas was caed o te apa cour oftn o ated os days at Vterbo or Orvieto Fro 13
n Ths uins
the utl hs death, Toas never remane tha two or three ears the same pace or he sae oce. He taught three ears at the court of rba V. After that he wet to Rome for two ears, wth the assget to esabsh thre a college for hs order. At ths te he coceved the oute ad bega workg o the rst par of the S eoloic hs eorous ma work, o whch he labored for seve ears, wthout shg t etrely. Ater these two years Rome, a ew pope, Cemet V, caled hm oce aga to the papal court at Vterbo. The atempt, prevousy ade, to appot the medcat frar Achbshop of aples had be frustrated by hs own resstace, ve though he had bee caocally desgated.2 n Vterbo, Thomas aga saye oly two years Those were the years whch the tragedy of the ast of the Hohestaufes, the boy Korad, wa osummated At that te, Thomas wrote h ease n the oernanc o rnce, wch cntas, aog oher thgs, the magcet chapte n the reward of kgs. That, 23, the forer professor of the ersty of Pars should be caed back for a seco te to Pars at the dreco of hs orde wa anst a custom n the thrteent cetury ow v a f hs tlectual powrs, a erh
n hm uin
t an his unsaabe calm, evientl rgently needed at the uversty Thms, fr th thrd te, tk te rad t Pars. (Here it may b nted that, as a mendcat frar, Thms made a thes jeys n ftuess he had t take a sh t crss the atersn much the same ay s hi teacher, lbe, h walked thrugh neary the hle f Ee durng hs lng lfe, earnng hereby hs ncame the Bt") The reng teacer s aated n ne sng acn, ut by three The attle aganst e mendcats had ceased t center arud teach g chas; nstead, the attacks were n drected agast te thelgcal and regius rncles f te rders The tw addtal factns, bth arused by the key wrd rstte," ere s caed ugustansm and Lat verrsm e shall have ccasin t treat f tese t psng theries and the cncts they arused. It aears that Thmas belnged t that race men whse mpsng calm grs rprtn t te e ad um arud tem eve ne hm t se s cmure," remarked ne f hs cnfrres wh had lg ved n the same rry t h t all events, the rductivty f thes years Parnce agai t ws ly a threeyear erdasse uderstadg n ts ref, em d erid Tms rte, addtin t s
n Ths uin
olemic aphlets oluinous comentaries on nearly all the major ors of Aristotle and on al he epistles of t. Paul as el as the gospel of t John He produced the great Qestones Dsp tte on the irtues, and, as a short sumary of he hole of theology, the opend eoloe Finally, he rote numerous reatises for the S eoloc In these ors Thomas did not ithdra from the intellectal conict Rather, the ors listed are for the most part contributions to it. And hen, in 2 7 2 his superiors recalled hi from Paris (apparently on a sudden decision), their main intention was to cool the heat of that conict In any case, his successor in the teaching chair in cled ore strongly toward te Augustian, i.e. the traditional direction. It also deserves to be mentioned that among the students of t Thomas at Paris was a Florentine Domnican Remigio de' Girolami, h in later years was to ecome the eacer of is felloczen, ae
Thomas was once more commssioned to found a college for the order, this time at the place of his rst decision: Naples But in the year after, the Pope summoned h to a new eneral Council at Lyons. Toard the end of the inter 7374 Thomas set out on the long journey whose goal he did not reach n the ay, in the Cstercian monatery of Fossanoa, he fel mortally an a sho 6
n Thm n
e ate e not qute fty yeas ol Late n e same year, Boaveture also e, at te ery ouncl to wc bot me a been calle te caonzaton rocess, te abbot of Fossa nova teste ue oat tat te communty a not celebrate te Mass of te Dea at te funeal o t Tomas but, stea, te Mass Os ]ust, n ono of a oly cofessor, te ntrot of wc begns wt e wors: Te mout of te just man sa me tate wsom an s togue sall s ea ugment: te law of s o s n s ea"
ERSONALITY
t a been sa tat te wor of t Toma e most mersoal of te ene tteent cen t t s tue tat, n te tty olues of s pe On, tere s aly a sngle eately ersona tra t dscveruess we cosder s ery absece as a mrror o s ersoaly s oubless an accet, toug a sgcant one tat only oe etter of St Tomas as come own to uste lete e wrote, sortly befoe s ea, to te abbot o Mnte Casso Ts sngle eter oweve, eals wt a textua culty Greg
n Ths uin
y ommentary on o and too much ex ression of exert oiion to aord the oportuniy as Goethe uts itof preserving the mmediacy ds Unttelbe) of livig existence" and revea ng it to us. hose, however, who kne homa ersonally must have sensed from his immediate resence he ualities of saintliness And he must have been sin gularly imressivea man of tall and erect bearing at oce strong ad sensitive with a mighty and commanding forehead, ·his ski gleaming like golden wheat, his face shinig ith a radiance that was never extinguished. here could be no doutng he secial holiess of this frir, ho freuently could e seen acig u and down he conven halls in great strides, head erect, alone, mediating he witnesses at the canonization rocess, many f whom had long been associated ith homas, had nothing to reort conceing unusual acetic exers or mrttos ut ty tsd tt homas loved eace that he was saring regardig hmself, humble, and full of goodness for his fel lows. e a a lover of poverty ad his heart a entirely directed toward the divine One articular rait as named most freuently by the more than thirty witesses, and often in rst lace: stts St. homas must have been a man f uch uity and radiace of character that ever B
n Th uin
oe comig nto his resence seeme to ee soe thing ke a fresh, coo breeze. When Thomas was h risoner in the soation of the caste of San Gioani, his brothers ha tred in varous ways to tu him fro hs ecision to become a mendicant frar. (Regina, one of the two brothers who had imrisoned hm, was a oet of some note n hs own ay, known artcua for ove oms the veacuar. Swedis schoa edted these oems durng the rst Wor Wa.) 3 One day the brthers snt a racticed co tesan nto Thomas's chamber We know ony tat he turned her out roughy. However, t seems that the twentyyearod a went in those ew o ents through a terrfyng nteror strugge. W am of Tocco wrtes Thomas immedatey there fter coapsed at the threshod of his chamber and e exhausted into a deep seep out of which he awoke wth a ou scream. The scream was cause b an exceedny panfu operaton. ange ad grdd m tty with a cncture order to make m noabe aainst a future temptaton to m urty. Toward the end of his fe Thomas reate a of this to hs frend and secretary, Regad of ieo. Snce we nowadays thnk that a a man needs or acuson of ruth s to x hs br mo o ess 19
n Tho Auin
vigorously, and sinc w considr an scec a roach to knowldg hardly snsib, w hav lo th awarnss of t clos bond that links th know g of truth to th condtion of urity. Thomas says that unchastity's rstbo daughtr s blndnss o th sirit Only h who wants nothig for himslf, who is not subjctivly "ntrstd, can know th uth On th othr hand, an imur, slshly cor td willtolasur dstroys both rsolutnss of sirit and th abilty of th sych o listn silnt attntion to th languag of ralty. To rciv ths languag, i, to gras th truth of ral thingsths s th tru assion of St. Thomas. This fundamnal characr trait lads us to an un drsanding of his astonshing courag and is no lss astonshing humlity hn Thomas for in stanc rangd himsl on th sid of th gan Aris totl against th tradtional hilosohicotologica trnds (an undraking ruiring grat boldnss), e s n om a st sn t t tonal doctrns or om a mania or novations, but rathr bcaus his intrid aroac to truth rcognd t voic o ralty in Arstotl's work. This sam tridity mad him ask, his o entry on te ook o ob whhr Job's bol convrsaion wit t Lod God dd not volate rvncto wch h gav the almost outragous answr: trut os not change accoring to the 0
n Th uin
tdg o the erso to whom t s ddressed h who seks trutfuy s nnerbe, o e who y e hs dersry.5 othe cet of ts courge s show cdent ertnng to st yers n Prs whe the eyes of Euoe were xed o hm. t uc nd fo dsutton of some cot vers ots of hs techng, hom, fter cm resentng hs rguments, hd o hestto to su mt them for te n decso decs o to the Bsho of Pr Pr nd te t e unersty fcuty fcuty (Mny yers ter, th ery Frcscn John Peckm, become ch bsho of Cnterbury, who was homas's ooet n the dsute, reced the ncdent wth gret rto) If homs, t the heght of hs fme techer, ws cbe of such humty, we he to see n t ot so much the sgn of modest sefec et, but rther the courge toce truth, to whc eogs the co cour urg gee to see n n tess tes s ether ethe r ess o ore th ts remses wrrt hs trqu co ge, ether frd of rejecton or oery eger o ro ro, , sows tht th t oms ws hy free of a sefmortnce. We he ryer he wrote whch he sks God to et hm be cheerfu wthout fng to froty, d become tue thot fg fg nto omousness. ·
e ecome use to see teec
n Ths uin
isu somting in t natur of a fncing matc o at ast of a contst wt victors an vanus An by an arg suc isuts ar carri o ac coing to t t ruls of suc su c contsts omas wou wou av tougt it unbarably sfimortat a ay on son of is "victory ovr Avrros or Sigr of Brabant For im, an intllctua isut was a common striving for t victory, not of on of t contnrs, but of trt Evn t rring arty, says, is mritorious for rror, too, may srv to i uminat trut Accorigly, in is isuts wit oonnts of contrary ositons, omas violats a gting cos H calngs t oont ot at t wast sot in is ositiontoo ca a ro cur for omas, o was nob in mor ta nambut, ratr, mts im rcisly in t ara of is strongst argumnts Oftn noug omas is t rst to to bring t actua forc of ts agumnts to igt; frunty, it is troug s formulos tt t bctos of s vrsari gai in rsuasiv rsuasiv owr us, in t stuy of suc a wo as t S ont Gentiles it is a x aratng xrinc to s an intri min mt t ssntia ustions suary, wit no attmt at sisting tm caot touc on on t tm "omas a t th an rman sint about th voto wi ll
n Ths Ths uin uin
hch he as the ece of truth. To lead a m ro error to truthth he conidere the gretet ervice which one man can render another.7 And nothig charcterized ho the techer o tongy h pryer nd hope tht hi fe woud ot out out tt h teching Once he coud coud no onger onger tech, then fe te ight as we be tken ay fro h. eching, or hoas, oethig other an greter thn to ipart y one ethod or another the ndig of reerch"; oethn other and greter than the report o a thiker o the ret of h qry, not to ention the ways and bywy of h erch echig s a proces that goes on between vng vng en. he tecer ooks not ony t the trth of things t the sae tie he ook at the faces fac es of lvg en who deire deir e to kow k ow ths truth. Love of trth and ove of enony te o together consttte techer. No sa prt of the whoe ork of St. ho was wrtten i answer to reuets of friendsoeties the request o a prnce or, jt as oten, the reqet o a nobody Once a yong conrre ro Vence a benner," subitted to him no es thn hirtysi epaate quetion, which were not even cery oued, nd reqeted nwer wihin our y y hoas, ho ho cod eitey he excuse mef ith th exceve dends de on hm b ore mportant work not ony sppe 23
n To Auin
wer but alo forulated the queton more recely; and n addition to that, e met the requeed tie it Teaching deand above all ele the capacity of urvey and of iplication, and the abiliy and effort to think fro the preie of a beginner. Thi capacty of ue ipcaio St. Thoa poeed to a high degree, and he bent every eor to take hi tuden' point of view a a premie. The be energie and he bet part of hi life he devoted ot to a work of reearch" bu to a textbook for beginner, which i nonethele the reult of the deepet erion ino ruh. e Su eolo gic i exprely wrien d euditione incipien iu, for he inucio of beginner, a i plainly tated everal te in the preface. n hi preface Thoma menton he boredo produced by the verfailiar, and he cofuion experienced by einner hrough he excee of iplaced cholarsip. he ecig eod of . o, coeorarie report, faciaed hi udent preciely through i frehne and originaliy. To quoe Martn Grbnn, ho w te r to eliinate the underbruh of cholaic" hrpliing, which ad already becoe raditional in the hirteenh cenuryto be revived, i i true, n new profuion by the lte Scholaic. What aounding capaciie of urvey an ipl
n To n n
caton are reveaed in the threeod dvion o the S eoloic: n he r prt we wi trea o God, in he econd, o the turnng back o piritendowed creature to God, in te third of Chrit, ho i in Hi Huanity the ay on which we wi ucceed o God"8 hat power o ipication in a enence uch the oowin, which embrace a s o Chritian teaching on ie: Three nd o knowedge are neceary to ma for hi avation the knowedge o what he mut eieve, the knowedge o that or which he mut pray, and the knoedge o wha he u do The rt i taught in the creed o our Faih, he econd n the prayer prayer o the Lord, Lord, the thrd in the comcom mandment9 The ntiate uion, n thi towering nd, o the nnate git or probng, graping, and iuminating reaty to it depth, and he capacity or giving it inpired and convincng or a teacher, ecoe ovrwheingy evden in the terey forue eeven cper n e r bk o he S ont Gentiles n th chapter, that and perhap unatched even in Thoa own work, he undertae o decribe the ordered tructure o tota reaty, budng t up ro one to ange an to God He, n a truy ravhing range o viion Th i what it ay ay 2
n Tho in
Where things die in natue, e nd dieent mode of emanation The moe ths emanaton takes pace he innermost eaty of a thig, the higher is its oder of beng No of a hngs the inanate take the owest ace and fo the no emanation is possibe cep by the action action of one one on anothe . The next hghe ode ate inanimate bodies is oed by the pants hose emanation poceeds fom within inasmuch as the pants inne juice is coneed into seed, which being committed to the so gow to ne pant Accodingy, we nd here the st aces of ife, since iing things are those which moe hemsees ito actiity Neetheess, the pants ife sti impefect, fo athough its emanation poceeds rom rom withi withi that that which emanates emanates emeges out of it and is utima utimate tey y eney outside it Thus from the j uice of the tee, rst the bossom is poduced and then the it which, athough sti connected ith the ee, outside its ba. hen the fuit is ipe it sepaates itsef etirey fom the tee, fas to the eath, and brngs foth ou o its on sea oce a ne ant ndeed, we consider the mat mat cae caeu uy y e sha see s ee that the st pncpe of this emanation s something extane ous, fo the ne juice of the tee is sucked up by the roots from the eath, hence the pant das its nou hment. Aboe the ee of pant e is a hger ee that of the senstie sou the poer emanation heeo, though beginning fo ithout, teminates ithi Aso, the fue the eanation poceeds, the more z6 .
.
On To T o n
oe peneate wtn, fo the sensibe obec pesses a fo on he extea senses, whence i passe o the imagation and, fuhe sti, o he stoehous of the memoy. et eey pocess of this kd of emanaton, the beginning and the end ae dieen subects, fo no sensitie powe eects on itsef Theefoe, his degee of e tanscends that of pan insomuch as it is moe timate and ye it is not a pe fect e, since the emanation is aways fom one hing o anothe. The highest highest degre degreee of fe, theefoe, is ha ha which is accodg to inteect, fo the eect eec on tsef and can undesta undestand nd itsef. Thee Thee ae, howee the nteectua nteect ua e seea ees to be b e dist distin ingu guiished sh ed.. The huma hu mann inte inteect ect,, atog atoghh it is is capabe of knowg itsef, st tkes the begig of ts knowedge fom
th thou out.t. Man s not abe to kno wthou wt houtt a sense age Moe pefect is te ife of the ange, whose know g spirit does not acque sefknowedge fom with ot, ot , but bu t athe knows knows itsef though itsef. Een so, ife ha sti not eache its ast and highest step, becase the anges spiritua mage of itse, athough whoy within it, is sti not one with its eing o h ange, to know and to be ae not the same thg. Th highest peection of ife eongs to God, Whose destanding s not distin disting gished ished fom fom is eng e ng
or ts true eect, ts soveregnl constructe passage should be ed the a The languag f St. Thoms does not ave the qualt of eaut
n Tho in
proper to a work of we nd it, for intane, n Augutine it i beautiful a perfet intruent beauul And yet, there are in the writg of St Tho nuerou hapter whoe entene ove in uh rhythi dene toward their conluso their nal therefore," tht one an think of no ore ting oprion than that with the de terined tride of the nal eure in an organ fugue by Johann Sebtian Bah It would be trange indeed a halow judgent of the hu nit h dereed the eret of lnguage houd hve been barred to the very an who gave Chri endo the hy Ad oo e devote Ltens Dets.
NCEPTION F THE WORLD
e ve area ee e two oppog theorie at the Univeri of Pari agat who Tho had to efend hi own poition on God an he word hey were, ry, the traditiona d preoinatg tren, pririy philoopia but o eoogi, whi we re autoed to eignae Auginini an eondly, tin Averroi Fr th vewn of thee two o pog heorie we ave, pera, the bet oppr
n o in
nity of makng cear the unique character of St Thomas's teacing. In the se between Thomas Aquinas and meeva Augusniansm two of the most reveaing oints dispute were the foowing Toma taught the uity of the substantia fo, whie Augustinianism accepted sevel fomgiving pries n man Thomas sserted tat a ou know edge, cuding te spiritua, and aso ou know edge of God, took its starting point (and therefore ways emained somehow dependent upon) sense erception,10 whe Augustiniasm caimed that pitua knowedge ws independent of sense ereption. At rst sigt, tis appears to be a petty quare between schoos" But for Thoms t noved nothing ess tan the saving of reaton as a sibe eaity from any attempt at reduction, deauation, or sheer anniation What s the meaning of these two theses of St Thomas? They mean tat in man there is not one the souwhich is the rea" man, and another athe oy, a sepaae reaitywhich the intrument or even the prison of the soul; rather body and so are an immediate existentia unity And fuhe, that the rea" man is not the so aone but precsey ths existentia unity of body and so. The body beongs to the essence of man11 he secnd thesis mans that t s not th spta
n Tho i
whch i the tiate bearer of o knowedge, bt composed of body and soul Therefore, or knowedge is aways image of our ow being; knowedge is, ike our being itsef, an nd oube unity of spitual and corporal (sentient rincpes Thee these mean more than they recty eress In them is mirrored, as we have aready remarked, that ation of the natura reaty of creation which is so characterisic of St Thoma Al created thngs are good because they were create y God For the sae reason, they have reaity and eectiveness of the own, which may t be ignore or obiterated tough mang absolute one way or oher the spitua or religous eement in man Moreover, the reaity of creaton man, the natua ight of his reason, his ve ense, a the poers f his being, have their ace and assigent the makeup of m n e oer d, one m we sy o ugustine, wthout vioating he reverence due to ths great aint d great thinker, that, as the htory f hrstian teachg shos, his work fas more easiy nto the danger of being consted or, rather, construed in the sense of a deactuaation and deauation of the visibe reaity of creation) Of coe, Thomas s aso aware o the injury caused t creatio through original sin In fact, he ee ay 30
On To n
at te more deeply a man recogne the re eng of created things, the more this knowledge eomes for him a souce of sdnesbecause ou of every created reality can arise a menace to salva on.12 But Thomas also knows that the same Christ ho fouded the New Cretion s simultaneously the eteal archetype of the rt cretion.1 In his Coenty on t o' Epstle4 St homas remarks that we can nd n Sacred Scrip ure three dierent menings for the term the orld": rst the world" as the creation of God nd second, as the creation perfected i Christ; last as the material peeion of the order of creatio o the world" n this lastnamed sense, and to this world only, may one apply the sayng of St ohn: The world is seated n wickedne" 1 ohn 5 19 It is precisel the claim of St. Thomas that the rs meaning of world" (as creation) may not b iden ed nor nterchanged with the thid(world" as material peersion of the order of creation; te orld as creation is not seated wickedness sge comn enoatr ueres a tese theses o f and accept the reality of creato al its provinces is the response betting uite artcuarly the Christian hs is the key to understandng his thess on the uity of the substantal orm man This is kewise the foudation o oma teachg on the true lace f natral e 3
n Tho n
o d phloophy wh regard to upeatura at d theology. From the andpo of h af rmaton of the wholene of creato, one may, perhap, alo underand te eae wh whch, he S eooc he recomend bathng and leepn a remede agan melancholy of the oul.15 One of the mot penerang remark n Cheer o book on St. hom he followg: If, con formable to Carmele cuo, a tng epthet uch Jon of the Cro" or hre of the Chld Jeu" were ought for hoa Aqa, the one mo approprae would be homa of te Crea or," os etoe Oy when we have truly recognzed ta he n eto of St. o alway drected toward God the Creator and H creaton are we competen to evaluae Aoelan" Artotle for St hoa ( he eaue which he foo� m othg more nor e han a clear ror of th atal realty of creaton, a great and rc mnd whch the odo of the natural unvr wa crbed16 hoa confronted he work of Artol with greaer reedo ad ndependence han ormaly the cae n the atttude of a chool toward e work of t maerthe omtc" cool o cped
n hom in
It also ot correct to speak of a Hellenizg" of Crsa dctre te eacg of St Thmas When the Refrmers of e sxteenh centuy at temped t purge" Crsan theolgy f te sup sedy Heenzng scasic eement, became quickly event (and n e prperly refrmed" thelogy f Kar Bar, for exampe, t s stl e dent oday) that tey were riskg te error f remog from the Cstan cnscusness he reay of creaion sef ( is an unsorca legend at uter bued e eoloc along wth the papal bull i te marketplace at Wtenberg. The true story of at incdent, however, makes ore ellng pint A reenly ucovered repr o that autodf ess a here was he nent of bn te S along wth the papal douent, but o one coud be foud who was wling o part wh hs cpy!) Far from beng or signfying a secularzaio of enune Chrisian teaching, the rmaton of the ealty of creaton the theology of S. Thomas ues r he ery eps Csan tu, amely, fro reerence fr te reaty of e nr aton f God. ccordng to St omas, te Eaest Jon had deberately sad the Wrd w ade e n rder to exclude th Mcaea cpl that the body ev.17 33
n To in
t is this altogether relgious and theoogca oo ich dierentiates St. Thomas's openness o th orld from the truy seculariing concepts of his econd and more dangerous opponentLat Ave osm named after verroes ( 6- 1198, one o the great Arabian commentators on Aristotle. are not conceed here ith the individual poits of teaching the numerical uity of the intellect i ll men th eteity of te orld the denial of free ill). he decisive point s that Averrois adically severed the connection between fait an eon between theology and philosophy. It mai tained the complete independence of philosophica hng from faith and thelogy. Moreover t ovevalued excessively thi� separated philosophica hig 18 inasmuch as it expected to nd n it th e and nal isdom ie an answer hich ou atisfy the human spit inuirng into the meaning of the world and human e. To this Thomas says: The Chrisian can neiher see nor nd a wisdo outside Christ.19 A single divine grace exceeds ts existentia vaue the hoe of th atural erse.20 One notices that by this decisive secarizatio of ought Lan verroism s fundamenally th oreer of the enaissance and therefore o ode philosophy and science n general. Ths famly leness extends to another arey 3
On To Aquin
oced chraterist. In La Averros ere, for the rst tie, the purely hisori aroh to the nterprettion of hilosoythe oion tht the true objet of hilosohy is its o history For Siger of Brbnt, the eaer of the Averroists t te Unversity of Pris, te study of hosohy signies the exlorton of te historia ystems of hiosohy, iresetive of hether they ere true or flse21 Here for the rst tie apea tht moe tye of hilosopher ho, nste o disussing his true subjet, relity, isusses soethng quite dierent, the hosohies A mgncent an nvigortng retort given by Thoms t Siger of Brbnt shoud prefe ll trslatons an nterrettons of Thom, n order to ut sho from the very strt ny attempt to tke the Unversl Tecer" of the Churh hiself a merey hstorial" phenomenon: The sudy of hilosohy does not men to e hat others have ought but to e t s the truth of thngs" n spite o ts unequivol opposition and te of the enorous dierenes beteen Thom and Averrosm, t s aprenty Thoms's destiny o be onfue ith his seurized oponen hree yers ater the deth of St Tho, for aple several msinterpreted roosiions fro r re condene b the Bsho of 35
n Tho in
and enumerated on the same list wth the errors o Averrosm Snce that tme, not only has homas een can onzed by the Church; he s also the rst man, a Mart Grabmann says, to e canonzed q the ologan and teacher Moreover, homas has een solely declared a Doctor of the Churchand deed, the Unversl Doctor of the Church" Pus X says o h that the Church testes n every way that she has made teachg her own28 Yet the censure that hs teachng s tanted wt vrtualy agan worldliness has erssted snce the day when Wam of St mour wrote agast Ae and hs great ul hey arrogate dvne wsdom to themselves, although they are more fa wt worldly wsdom" o whc homa anwered: he onon of those who say wth re gard to the truth of fath that t s a matter of co lete nderence what one thnks aout creaton, provdd one has intrpion of God notorously flse or an error about creation s reected n a alse onon aout God"24 censure s likely to take the followng fo the condence whch St homas uts n naal reason goes beyond the Chrstian no; hlosohy and thology are much too rational, n deed too rationlistic;5 they have a tendency to of er facle allnclusie soluons" to all uesons; 36
n Tho
te ar dayght of s syogsms derve e an srit of the dark glow of the mysteres of our fath the eement of mystery n sueatura ruth almost totay supresse in favor of t supposey demonstrable ratonalty . . and o on It s nsputably true that a great nue f neoscholastic" or Thomstc" presntatons, accordig to the teachng of St Thoms" provde e cause and seemng justcaon for such objectons Thoma hmse, however, goes so far the recogtion of mystery, both n creaton and n God, that for us moe Chrstans, who seldo hear about the ncomrehensbity of God, comes as a cause of alarm when we nd ou goance so ntrey an clearly onte out n the S eolo c For n ths summary" of h teachng on God, Thoms beg by sayg: Because e are not capabe of knowng what God oy wa He is not, we cannot conteplate o God but oy ho He i not"26 Evdently, om not wis to witol ts bsic tougt of negave" teoo een fro te begne d the Qesoe Dspe even sad Ho es l coon ne de Deo o s e De esce ts the ate an knowlege of God: to kno tha e do o o H"27 37
n To in
here a syig frequetly her ao hosts whih expresses a sigiat ft Thos fered logi s litle s he fere ystery e who fers the bold light of log wil ever enetrte to the regio of rel mysteries he who does ot use his reson will ever gt to tht boudry beyod whih reso rely fils. I the work of St Thos l wys of reurely owing hve bee folowed to the very edto the boundary of mystery Ad the ore nsely we pursue these wys of knowledge, he more eveled to usof the dkness but lso of th elty of mystery.
HE N I ILENC he w S. is bu slee d i is o deh whih kes the pe out of had. His togue s stilled by the super abundae of life the mystery of God. He silet not beuse he hs nohg fuhe to sy; he silent beause he hs been alowed a glipse to the inexprssible depths of tht mysery whh ot reaed by ay u thougt or speeh he ats of the aiato proess eord O 3
On To in
the feas o S. Niclas, he year Tmas ed back is wk ae Hly Mass, he as sngely aleed. He eained seady s en; e did n wie; e dicaed nig. e ld sde e Su eoloic n wic e ad been rkig. Abruply, i e middle f e eise n he Sacmen f Penance, e spped iig. Regild, is fiend, asks i, ubled: "Fae, ca yu an sp suc a gea k? Tmas answes nly, "I cn wie n me. Reg ald f Pipe seiusly believed a is maser nd fiend g ave becme menaly ill ug hs oveweling buden of w. er ng ile, he asks and uges nce agai. hmas gives e aswe: "Regiald, I ca wie n me. ha I ave hihe wien seems me nig u saw. Regiald s sunned y is reply. Sme e lae, as he had fen dne bere, Thma isis is yunge sise, e Cuness f San Seve r, near Sale. I is e same siser a de Thms i his escape fm he ase f Sn Gvn, ney y yes ag. y e his arvl, his sise o his avellg m ann, Reginald, wi a saled quesn: a has happened e bhe? He is lie ne sk ub ad has sarcely spken a rd her. Reg l nce me appels hmas: Woud he el h he has ceased wig and ha s ha 39
n Tos n
oud have disturbed hi so deeply? For a ong e Thoas reins silent. Then he repeats hat I have written sees to e nothing bu stra opared to what I have seen and what h� een revealed to e." Ths slene sted throughout a whole wter The great teaher of the West had beoe du Whatever ay have bued h with a deep happi ness with an kling of the beginning of eteal fe ust have aroused in the en in his opany he disturbing feeling aused by the unanny At the end of this e spent opletey h own depths Thoas egan the oey o the General Counl at Lyons. His attention ontinued o e dieted inward. The ats of the anonizaton report a onversaton whih took pae on h oey between Thos and Regald. It sees to have arisen out of a long silene and to have reeded ediately to a ong silene. This rief ex ll vals o a r two friends already ve in two dierent worlds. Regnald enouragingly Now you are on your ay o he Col and here any good things appen; for he whole Chur for or order a or te Kngdo of Sily." nd Thoas "Y, God grant that good hings ay happen there! " Te prayer of St To that fe sou o
n Tho qun
utlast hs teachng caee as anseed n h ay to Lyons he et hs end he nd of the dyng an found ts voce once oe n an exlanaton of the Cantcle of Cantcles o the onks of Fossanova he last teachng o St hoas conces therefore that ystcal book of nutal love for God o hch the Fathes of the Chuch say: the eanng o ts guatve seech s that God exceeds a ou caabtes of ossessng H, that a our knoledge can only be the cause f ne questions and eve ndng n the ta f a ne seach
II GA V L M N N LSY THMAS QUNAS
Tht nme whic cn be prnnced nt he Etel Nme.-LAO
ERCEIVIG THE EXPRESSED hat s seevdent s not dscussed It s taken o ranted; t goes wthout sayng. C v ns d ne ony has o ask wha eacy s that s ak or granted and so may remain unepressed In this seemngy nnocen suaon, hch ts s argey taken or granted, there es the most ortant an the ecuar dcuty o a textua teretations nmey, that a assage to e ucdated ceran noons reman unexressed ecause they ere seevdent to the author, wher they are in no way sefevdent to the man ho s terreng the te. Consequenty, he does o automatcay ncude them n erceton. d ths means that the emhass o a he ds erceve s changed In the nteretaon o a ext, eseca ne from a cviaton or eoch remote from ou w hat s any decsve and yet o mean y s ths o gras hose as assumtos hch eman unexressed, eveheess ermeat at s actuay stated; o dscove, so to seak, h dde keynote hat domnaes aever h e xcty sad 5
Th Ngatv Emnt
It could be poiivey aintained that th docne of a thinke peiey ds Sen Un este the unexpeed in wat i expeed" Thi ow Heidegge begin hi own ntepetaon o Patoni text1 The pae i no doubt deibeately stained but it i ea tat an intepetation whc doe nt eah te unpoken auption undelyng the atua txt ut eain in eence a iin tepetaon even f in othe epet the lette of the text be coented upon wit conideabl leang; thi atte fat ay indeed mke matts oe I thee a way to gt on to the tac of such undelyng and theefoe unfouated umption? I thin thee exit evea uch decpheing eys One which I have feuenty veied, s cetainly thi t occaionay happen that wat uneeed how tef, a though though hole though a gap" in the patten n cetain jum t vont o te tot, in o coneuence in the aguent (Th at least ho t pea to s who ntepet nd tat out t othe umption wh e ut a picit an eha neve once expiity foulate) Wh matte i that wheneve one of tee eeing il ogicatie encounteed, we voi paing ove caeley Tee wil be ate n oppotuty t ea of one concete intance of t 6
HE IDDEN EY REATION the philosophy of t. homas qna, here fdamental dea by which amost all he bac concepts of his vision of the wod ae detemned: the idea o ceaton, o moe pecsly, he oto a nothing exists whch is ot cet, excep e eaor imsef an addition, tha h createdness detemines entiey and apevsvely e ne sruce of te ceatue. egards the "istotelianism of t. ho qua (istotelianism s a highly dubo erm, o be applied with cauon), we shall copletely iss he signicance of is tg to r ote, unless we consir it fom the pot of view f this fundamental ida, woked ou o its logical conseqencs: namely, tha al things are cet ot eey oul and spiit, but aso he visible old t ay apear natual enogh, scacely wrt icussion, and any case not at a suisig, that the concpual thinking f a heoogian of the ddle ges should be dominated by the noton of eation, even i his phiosophica exlanation of eality What might cause wond is the exten t whic is he a qustion of an nepessed uo oiion ot exlicitly forulate, 7
T Ngatv Emnt
ha h, as i were, o be read beeen he lines. Did o Thomas develop fully and explicitly a doctrie of creation? That naturally is rue and quite wel own None the less it equally rue, though no so well own, that the notion of creaion determines and characerizes the interior structure of the basic concepts in St. Thomas's philosphy of Being And this fact is n evident; it scarcely ever put forard elcitly; it belongs o he unexpressed in St. Thoas's octrine of Being. This elemen has remane so unnoticed a he etbook inerpretaons of St. Thomas harly once mention i. need this customary interpretation of S. Thomas has been conserably determined by Raionalis hough,2 which is shon no leas by he silenc on his particular oint ha has ineviably led o misunerstanings ith grave consequences. For instance the meaning of proposiions such as "al that eists is goo r "al ha eis s nertoo a n m opon geneal signicance of he scalled "rascendenal concepts (in he traiional sense unless it b ealed he concets and heses n qustion d ot efe o neutral Being ha siply ss no o an indetermnat old f "o ects, bu foally Being as . Tha hings are ood precisely because hey xst, and a oess ientical e ein
Th Ngat Emn
hings and s no mere propey aached o hem ha furher, he erm "rue is a synonym for "exing,3 and herefore ha wha eiss is ue viue of s esence, and does no rs of al xis and hen, a seconary sense, become also uehese ide, which elong no doub o he asis of he csical onological docrine of he Wes and have been formuated wih rare genus S. Thomas, mst- we fail o consider realiy and objes formally as creaesimply lose her full saor They become shalow, serile and auol ogousas h acually been for his very reason he desny of l hese proposions, so ha Kan a elebraed passage in he Ctqe of Pe Reso as ·o some exen jused in enaing hem rom he philosophical vocabulary.4 We come now o o basc heme: S Thomass ocrine of ruth can be grasped in is proper and profoundes meanng only we bring no pla his noon of creaon. And when we exane, as we shall do here, he nerrelaion of he concep of uh h e "negae elemen of unnow abiliy and mysery, we discover ha nerrela ion does no become mfes excep hrough he fundamenal houh ha eeryhin which can be made he objec of human nowedge eiher et or Creaor This may perhaps suges ha S. Thomass 9
Th Ngv Emn
theoy of tuth is not stictly "pe philosopy but something philosophicotheological. he qestion can hee emain open its answe wll epen pon one's intepetation of the iea "ceation t philosophical o theological?
o BE RE EANS TO B REATIVELY HOUGHT s of cose possible to expoun hee the hol of t. homass octine of tuth i all its amications. t is not, howee, necessa to o o in oe to ene the pupose of the pesent sty. u stuy ill be conne in the main to the notion of the tuth of things in the wol, of the vet em his s commonly unestoo as "ontoogca t an g om "oca truth, the tuth of knowlege. et it s not quit coect to issociate too much these two concept of truth n t. homass mn hey are intatel linke. o example, with the common moe b ecton, as t has been epeately fomulate fo Bacon to Kant, that tuth can be pecate no o at eay exists but in te stct an pop ens, on of what is tougt, t homas ol s
Th Ngav En
a lage exen agree He wuld el ha s quite to he oin Only wha hough can e calle in he stric see "rue, u real higs e somehng though! essenal he naure (he would continue), ha hey are hough The are real recisely becse hey are hough To u more exlicitly, hey are real ecause he e hough cetely ha , hey have een fhioned y hough The essence of hings ha he are creaively hough This to e taken lierally d ot i a gurative sense Further ecause hings are hemselves houghts an have he "character of a wor (as Guardi says),5 hey ma e cale a uie recise an legiae usage of he er "true, he same way one orary calls true houghts what hough w, it seems, S Thom's view ha he otion ha thngs have an essence cano e searae from he oher noon that is eenal character is he frui of a formgiving hough ha lans devise and creae is nteeaton is oreign to moe ationa sm Why i woul argue, c we not thnk of the "aure of lants an he "nature of men wih u neeng also o consier tha hese "naures are cale nto be y thought? Moe hnki habits can ake nothing of the suggeson ha he ould e no such "nature unless it were hus crea
Th Ngatv Emn
tvely thought. Curiously enough, this thess o t. Thomas has received unexpected and emphatic suppo i the principles o mode, ideed e might term it postmode, Existentialism. From artre radical negaion of the idea of creation (he declares, or example, that Existenalism is othing more than an atempt to dra a the conclusions rom a consistently atheisc posiion,"6 it s suddenly made evident ho and to hat extent the doctrine of creation is the concealed but basic oundaion of classcal este metaphysics. If oe ere to compare the thought of arre and t. Thomas and reduce both to syogisc form, one ould realze that both start ith the same major premise," namely from this principle things have n essenial nature ony in so far s they are fashoed by thought. Since man exists ad has a costruciv itellect, hich ca ivent and has n act vented, for nstace a letter opener, therefre, a r r res, we ca sa e nature" of a letter opener. Then, arre contiues, because there exists no creaive itelgence hich could have designed man and all natural thgs nd could have pt a ier sgcace to them therefore there is no ature" in thngs that re not manufactured and arcial Her are his acua ords Tere s no suc tng as human nature ecause there exss no od to t it creave. 5
Th Ng Emn
p de te me pq'l ' a p de De po l cocevo) 7 S Thomas, he conrary, declares Becase and in so far as God has creaively hugh hngs, us so and o ha xen have hey a naure "This very fac ha a creaue has is secial and nie subsance sho ha i comes from a rincile8his is a senenc from he Smm Teooc Wha is comon o Sae and S Thomas, i is now eviden, is he asspion ha we can speak of he naure higs only when hey are expressly considered as etz The fac ha hngs ar creaivly hough by he reaorhis is exacly wha S. Thomas means hen he refers o he ru ha dwells i everig ha real.
HINGS AN BE NON BECAUSE HEY RE REATED he basic priciple in S Thomass doce o ru f hngs can be found in he Qetoe D ptte de V ette9 I as follows e tl te o tellect cottt et) a ara ing is placed beween wo knowing subecs, ly as h eplas beween e tellect
Th Ngav Emn
dv and te tellects ms betwee t Dive nd te umn minds. In tis lotion" of existing tigs betwee te bsoutey retive nowedge of God ad te onretive, reltyonormed nowledge of fond te struure of l reity s system wi te retyes nd te oies re bot embred St Toms ere introdues, in o tittive sense, te od nd resumbly Pytgore onet o mesure," te mes s sometg on te one nd given nd on te oter reeived Te retive nowedge of God gives mesure but reeives none mess o mestm) t relity is t one mesured nd itse mesur g mestm et mess) But umn know edge is mesed nd does not give mesure me tm o mess) ; t lest it is not wt ives mesure wit reset to nturl tigs, toug it does so wit regrd to es tcles i s (s e o o om te distion between reted nd rilly on sued tgs omes into berng) Corresonng wit tis double referene tngstis is e furer develoment of St. Toms's idestere must be doube onet of t trut of tigs." Te rst denotes te retive sionng of tgs by o; e seon tei ti owbilty for te umn mid. Th 5
Th Ngat Emn
esson "hings are rue mea in he rs a h hey are creaively hough by Go; in he econ, ha hey can be approache an graspe i human knolege Beeen hese o conceps o uh here exiss a relaion of pot te a onological preceence This preceence has a ofol sicance n he rs place, e canno see he core of his oion he "ruh of hings; in fac, e miss i enirely unless e make explici ha hese hn ae et ha hey have been brough ino bei by he creaive knolege of Go, an ha hey pocee from he very "eye of Go (as he ancien Egypian onology expresse his same iea) There is, hoever, secon meaning o h rioriy s he creaive fashionng of hings by Go hich mke t posbe for hem o be non by men These o references are herefore con nece ih one anoher, no, as ere, like a oer an younger broher, bu lie faher an son The former brings foh he laer Wha oes hi siy? I signes ha hngs cn be kno by u because has creaiely hough hem; creaely hough by Go, hings hae no only hei ow naure (for hemseles alone) ; bu creaively hough by Go, hings hae also a realy "or us Things hae hei inelligibiliy, heir er clari an luci an he oer o reea 55
Th gaiv Emn
temsev, because God has ceatvely thought them Ths s why th ae ssntally intlligible Th bighess and adiance is infused into things o te ceative mind of God, togethe with thei essential bing (o ath, as the vey essence of that being!) It this adance, and this alone, tha ak eisting things ecetible to huan knowl edge I a scitue commentay10 St Thomas e aks The measue of the eality o a thing is the easue of ts ligh In a late wok, h commn tay o e Lbe de Css thee s a fundamental sentece hat fomulates this same idea in an almost ystical hase Ips ctt e est qoddm me pss the ality of things s itself thei ght, the ealiy of things undestood s ceated being! It this lght that makes things ecetible to o eyes To ut it succctly, things ae know able because they have been ceated At this oint something analogous to Sate's ob econ aganst t tat of t natur of tngs eghteenthcntuy hiosoh2 may be sai bout the foundaton of knowledge Do ot thin tat t s ossibe to do both, to ague away te dea tat things have ben ceatively thought by Go the go on to undesta how thngs can e ow by te human md!
NGS RE NFATHOMALE BECASE HEY RE REATED In he udgmen of S. homas, e ca, heefoe in he ealm of ceaed naual ealiy spea of "uh in o deen senses. Fisly, he uh of ts can be plied, an his means pimaily ha hese hings, as et coespond ih he acheypal ceaive hough of od; i is his coespondence hich fomaly co siues he uh of hngs Secondly, e can spea of uh ih efeence o kowlede (of ma) hich again is ue in so fa as i "eceives is measue fom and coesponds o he objecive ealiy of hings I is in hs second coespondence in u, ha he uh of human noledge co siss. hese o conceps of uh ae fomulae in he same aicle of he Smm Teolo an ae hee conased ih one anohe: "When hings ae he om and measue of h inelec, u consiss e euaon of e elec o hese hngs . . . bu hen he nelec is he o1 and measue of hings, hen u consiss in he uaion of ings o he inellec. hese snences expess, fom ye anohe poin of vie e sucue of al ceaed Being-essenially si ae beeen he ceaive noledge of o 57
Th Ngatv Elmn
ans imitative knowledge: ide we c eve uly exhaust. Between these two reationships that of mind reality and, on the other hand, of reaity to mind c both, as correspondences dequtoe signify in dierent ways truth, there is only one undamental distinction: one can be the object of uman knowedge, the other can not one relatio ship, but not the other, can be known by man. M is ceainy in position not only to kow hings, but also to understand the relationship be ween things and his concept of them. n other words, over and above his spontaneous perceptio of things, he can have knowedge by means of judg ments and reections. o put it in another y uman knowledge may not nly be rue, it can als be kowedge of the truth.14 t is very dierent, however, when we m to te reationship between things and the cretive d of o, n wc te ut of tns may an propery consists, an wich in its turn rst reners uma knowedge possible. Coto est qud vetts eectus this again is revolutionary sen ence of t. homas, of the kind tha stands ou more norma formuae on the heas: Knowedge is a cetan eect of tuth, . . indee of te uth of thgs! 15 hs elation on which the truth o things fundamentay basedthe relaton be s
Th Nga Em
ween natual reaty and the archetypal crea hought of -cnnot nsst be know fo y by s We can of course know things we canno formally know their tt We know the opy but not the relation of the copy to the arche pe the orresponence between what ha bee designed and its rst esign. To repeat we hae n power of perceiving this correspondence by whic he foal truth of thing is constitute. ere we an oie how truth an unknowabity beong o gether Thi thought now cas for a more exact tatement The term "unknowable s literaly capable of eeral or at let of two meanings It can inicate omething that "in itse is capable of being known but which a parcular knowing facuty unable to grasp because it lacks a sucient power of penetraion. In his sense we refer to objects whic "cannot be observed by the naked eye. It is a qe on rather of a deciency of vision than of an pecial property of the obj ect. Stars that we are unabe to erceive are in temseves quite capabe of obseation. In tis context "unknowabe denote that the pa�cuar facuty is not powerful enoug to eae and make actua the possibiity of beig know which certainly exists. But this term "unowable can have another sicance ta o uc possibiity of bein known i 5
Th Ngaiv Emn
ha here is nohing to be known; ha no only on he side of a particlar sbject is here a defec of apprehension an penetraion b ha on the side of the object here is no possibiity o be known. nknowabiliy in the latter sense namely ha something real shold in itsef be nknowable wold be for t homas simply preposteros Be ase Being is created ha is o say creatiely hogh by od it is herefore in itsef ligh radian and self reeag pecsel becse t s cordingly for . homas the nknowable can never denoe something in itse dark and ipene rable b only something tha has so mch ligh ha a pariclar nie facly of knowledge can no absorb al is oo rich o be assiaed com pletely; eldes the eor o comprehend . is n his laer meaning ha we are now con sdering he erm unoable. nd nsis ha belongs immediaely o he idea of he ruh of ngs. at want to empase s e foowg ordng o e docne of . homas is par o he very nare o ngs ha he knowabiy anno be wholy exhasted by any nte ineec ese hese hngs are creatures which means tha e er elemen wich makes the capable of be ng own s necessaiy be a he same e he eo why hings are unfahomable is as fo alss -
Th gav Emn
The statement tngs are true ncates mar, as we saw, that tgs are cratve thought God. Ths sentence, as I have prevous sa wod e tota msundrstood t were taken mere as a statemnt about God about a dvne ac tvt drected toward tgs. No, sometng s sa aout th stcture of ts It s another wa of expressng te vew of St. Augustne, 16 tat thngs exst ecause God sees tem (whereas we see thgs ecause te exst). hs means tat the reat and caracter of tngs cosst ter beng creatve thougt b te Crator. rue, as I have sad e fore, s an ontoogca name, a snonm for rea. Es et vem covett t s the same weter I sa somethng ra or wheter I sa some thng creatvey thought God. he essence of a tngs (as creatures) s that the are forme after arcetypa atte wc dwes n the asoute creatve md of God. Cet Deo est cetx esset the creature s n God creatve essence. Ths s how St. homas speaks commentar on St John.17 e Smm Theoloc contas a smar assage: Ever exstg thng ossesses the trut of ts nature to the degree hch t tates the knowedge of God. we have sad, St. homas, hs stud of the tth of thngs, whch means the te of thngs, as obvous be to gnore or eave out ths 61
Th Ngatv Emn
orreonence beteen tig an teir ivin xemar Ti i eveae for eame ere e a it into tet in ic our min can icover o trace of it Te fooing eame i an intance of tat "tenenc to jum tat "unevene i te eveoment of an agument in ic as oug troug a rft in te teture te untated an uneree i reveae n te econ artice o te rt Qesto de Vette St. Tomas ets ort ceary is noton of te trut o ting "Wat i rea i cae ue in o far a it reaze tat toar ic it is oraine b te min of Go to rae it erent an eiting tng i true to etent tat it rerouce te attern of ivine knoege. Ti i cear brougt out sct ptet) continue St Toma b a famou eon of Avicenna Yet in ti enton o mns ou etect notng of te n Wat ten oe is enition of Avicenna a? t became amot caica uring te e Age "e tru of very iniviua tng i te ecia caracter of its Being tat a been given to it a it abing oseion.9 St. Toma ea into th tt a conrmation of i on tei ta te trut of tng conit in ter being creativey tougt by Go. t wou never ave occurre to to notce any cnnection beteen te to tatement. Ti vi ent "ap ine of argument can ony e
T Ngav En
a . om was unabe o seaae he iea a hngs hae an essencea "what fom he othe iea ha ths essence of thngs is he fut of a e signng an ceate nowege. et me now tu bac o ou oe obem. We can nee oey gas ths coesonence eween the ogna ate in o an he ceae coy in which fomay an imaiy he tuh of hings consiss. t is quie imossibe fo us a secaos so o sea o contemae he eme gence of thngs fom "the eye of o. nce his is so ou ques f nowege when i s iece owa he essences of thngs een of he owes an simes oe mus moe aong a ahway o whic hee is in ncie no en. he reo or hs ha hings ae cetue hat he inner uciity of Beng h its utimae an exema souce in he bouness aiance of iine Kow ege. hs coition is incue i he conce o e ut of Being as fomuae by t. homa is rea ofunity owee s oy eaize we we nestan its inteeation with e co e of ceation a ineeation whic . om aes fo gane. n his once of uh unesoo a ave line i he negatie eemen of "nowai y s poe ace an ogn. We are ocee hee ony with he J
Th Ngatv Emnt
etv of St. Thoma athough he has also laid down the principle of a teolo etv It s rue that this latter fact ao is not prominent i the traditiona preentatios of Thomiic doctrine ofe enough it i omited atogether Mention s arey made of the fact that the teaching about od n the Su eoloc begin wth thi sentence: "We are not capabe of knowing what od i but e can kno what e i ot 20 I know of no tetbook of Thomiic thought which contain the notion epreed by St. Thoma in hi ommentary on the De tte of Boethius;21 namey that there are three degree n ou knowdge of od: the loet the knoledge of od He i active in creaon; he econd the recogntion o o mirrored in piritual beig; the third and oftiet the recogniion of God a the Ukow qu otu Or conider thi entence from h Questoes Dsputte: "Thi what i ultimate n the human knoedge of Go to kno hat we do not kow God quod oo) c se De esce 22 w t to the "negative eement St Thoma' plosop we come acro the paage bout thinker whoe quet for knowedge h not suceeded in nding the eence of inge y Ths page occurs an amot popar epoto
Th Ngav Emn
of the osts Crd yt it stnds tte ltion wth man otr smilar sntncs. Som o ths sntncs r astonsng nga tiv." Fo xampl: T ssntal grous of things r unknown to us pcp essetl e st obs ot 24 Tis ormula is in o wa so untypical or xcptionl as t t rst glanc ppars t woul b as to st alongsd t oz slr passgs (rom t S eoloc, te S Cot Getles, t De Vette, an the otr Qestoes Dsputte) Foe sbsttles pe se ps st ot/ w do not know substantal orms as t r tmslvs. Deete essetles sut obs ote/6 ssnal drncs r not ow to us. Al tse sntncs inicat tt we o ror mans o nowing th stnctive elm things and ths mns t ssnc o tngs. his the ason, St. Tomas gs, w we canot g tm nam convng t tru Bing, n to ttac nmes to tm rom casual circumstacs ts con, S. mas qu mas s o te bs tymologs crnt ties: e.g., lps (stone) from edee pede, w uts t oot whn t stumbs gst it.)7 Not on od Hmsl ut lso tings e eteal ne" tat an s unle to utte
Th Ngaiv Emn
nt prcsl a t pcall" d n ts pnt raal sm t Wst agrs wt qta rm t wc I tc at bgg ts s Wat s t prc ras aks St Tmas n n pasag w mpssbl r s t knw d prcl trg cran? Hs pl as tw pas ad s sc tat s t mr ntrsg T rst manans tat cran can rprsnt Gd nl an mprct mann T scnd as tat r mns ar t cr an bts becl ts tellectus ost) ra n tgs vn tat nfrman cncng wc t rall cn ta8 T unrstan t rc ts prssn w st rmmbr tat n pnn f St Tmas t spcal mar n wc t Dvn rctin s mtat wat cnsts t spcal ssece f a tng vr rar a n rr ss o sece) accrg c t partcpats sm a n t lknss t Dvn Essc Trr as kws Hs Essnc a s mab sc a crar ut sc tble tl cetu) H knws t a parla ml a a of tat cratr"29 Ts tgt pnts t wa t nw a cmp prblm vrlss t as s rlatn t r prsnt tm Wat t stats s •
Th Ngav En
us his: he uliae reali things s soeh hich we can never naly penetrate, because we can never ully grasp these lkenesses he Die deas precisely as ikenesses his wld repy has a deniely dialeci sctre reects he strctre created reali which, by detin, has ts rigin r Gd an ls r thing Fr S Thas nt ny insist ha the reality things the light he als says: Cu s b quu s x lo creaed higs re darkess i s ar as hey prcee r tg." This sentence ces r edegger b r the Qusos Dspu S Thas30 The reply t he ery why we can kw Gd lly r creain has he sae risly dialectic strctre. Wha des ac sse declares he llg hings hrugh the essence express G ly an iperec anner d why Becase hings re creares and the created can whlly express he reatr Neveheless, he anser iues e ess gt eve n peec expessi surpasses r per cpreensin. Again why Becase an is hisel creare, bu sill re r he reasn ha hings i their reality reer bck a divie design. And his eans once gai because gs are creaures
PE A THE TRUCTURE F REATURELY KOLEGE e ve efeed to the negtive eleent" in the phosophy of St. Thoas Aqins A fol of this ind cn be easily isndestood nd eqes oe pecise stteent, nd pehps even soe coection This negtive" chrcte is not to be undestood in the sense tht the Being of things cnnot be t ted hn nowledge. tellectus . . . pee tt usque d e esset the nd es its wy to the essence of thigs,"31ts eins vlid poposition fo St. Thos, spite of his sseion tht the intellectl eorts of the philosophers hve neve ben ble to gasp the essence of single y. These o sentences belog togethe Tht the id does in to things is poven pecisely the act tat t ente to te atoma gt cse nd to the extent tht it does ttin to the elity of things, it discoves tht they cnnot be fthoed. ichols of Cs sid in his expln tion of the Socrtic leaed ignornce":32 Only when n coes ito visl contct with lgt does he ele tht the sn's brighess ltogethe tnscends powe of vision. it St Thos thee cn be no estion of g
Th Ngatv En
noscism, d Neo-Scholasc s perfecy right i ssig up hs. B is o possbe, y opiio, to bg out cely he ue reso for thi fct, who foraly bgg io py the co cep of creo, e., the srucue of hgs precisey s cretues. I oher wods, hgs so fr s hey e crevely though by God possess these o propees: o he oe hd heir ooogic crity d sef-revelao ad, he oher hd, their i exhustbeess; her koaby s well thei uowby." Ules we go bck o this bsic poso, we cao, I sb, sho how the neg ve eeet" he hogh of S. hos is sfe rded fro goscsm. yoe who edevor to ps this by rus he ievible dager of ier preg S. hos s Ros, d therefore of misudersadg h eve ore, s i usrte the exmpe of some Neo-Schoc uhor who tred to redce hs echig o se. It seems to e h S. homas's docre e tht e i he codo of a's exisece wg ubjec, coo ht by is very ture co be xed: it s eher comprehesio d possesso or smpy o-possesso, bu o epossess." The kwg sbjec is vsued trveer, vto s someoe o the wy" hs es, fro oe po of view tht the ep e ke ve sgicce, ht they re not o
Th Ngatv Emn
thr in vain, and that thy brng him narr o hi oal. Y th thoght has to b complmntd by anothr: as long as man as sting bing" is on th way," jst so lng is t way" o his knowing uncompltd. Ts cndton o hop in vry phiosophzng sarch ar th natr o things, may it b said onc mor, is basd pon h crtdnss" o th world and h knwng man hmsl. Bcas hop is mch csr to armaton than to dnia, th ngav mn" in th philosophy o t. Thomas, wich w s ot to ormlat, mst b nvisagd agan th backgrond o mbracing armaon. Ta sncs o hngs ar unknowabl is pa o th noton o th rh o Bg. B so littl dos is dno objctv inacssibiy, th imposibity o ognition, or darknss on th pa o hngs that thr is, on h ontrary, this strking parad: In th last rso, hings ar inaccssbl to hman knowldg prs cas t ar a to knoa. Thr is a wlknwn sntnc o risto hich says: s th ys o bas ar �azzd by ngh, o it is wh hman ignc whn ac o ac with what is by natr most obvious."3 n his ommntary on ths snnc, Thomas horoghl accpts s wol sgncanc, bt gos on to ndrl its posiv aspc in this magnint ormlton: Sole ets o vde ocs
Th a En
coc vde me m oc 8 oug the es of the at o t ava to eo te su t see te ee of the eage
TH MSS THMSM
t rst sight the thee o ths stu es seevnt n stat wthout bgut1 An et thi presion s sowht eceptve Wht ctull the sense o the tes "telness n "Thos? The nswer to this quer b o ens sple, not to ention tht we e ro n coplee unnit on the pont The rst step, then, obvous Wht o e uerstn b both tes? W T? henever t gue tht cert octrne tel n o spec relevnce to our n ge n whnever ths qualt considere n postve, atve sense, the logical prse s that ns mn s essentall condtone b e n histo For n tht posesses the whole o tut sultneousl, s tot et su possesso to eplo the clssic phrase o Boethiusor a knog subject o tetanscendg ualt, or Go, tereore nd erhps or the ure ntellect, there 75
Th Timinss of Tho
can be nothing "tely, for the reon that evey thing is timely nd whenever the human mind is conceived as potentialy capabe of grasping at any gven moment the full content of truth, and conse quently man's essential nature as conditioned by te · and history is dened, the noton of "timel ness agai cannot be serously thought etaphysi cal ationalsm which prscins from history can not use the te "timely in a positive sense; "timely here bcomes practcaly a synonym for "false or "heretical hat is "of the momnt is suspect, has no true being, deserves no attention t was from tis premise that, during the thteenth century, those who claimed to possess the "entire content of truth censured lbet the reat and homas quin as "the great moerns he temporal coniton of the human mind, owever, seems to have an additional implication, namely, that man, in his history, whether it be in dvidua or coectve, does not advace trough a continuous process of development like a plant, from a state of iferior to one of greater and more comprehensive understanding ather, the actual istorical development of the human intellect ap pears as a progress i the form of serton and counterassertion he asserton does not see uon he totality of truth n one gradual, uninterrupted pocess, bu, expressing one aspect of uth, neces
Th Tmss of Tho
s conces nother The secon sect s brougt out in te countersserion, wic interrus te seron unti i it is interrute one sect of te rie nd mnysided trut become ore evident, noter pect in recees from iew. d when this oter sect forces w bc from oblivion into consciousness te erier aspect tends to fde from te min. Te lw erying tis proce is concele from ; it cnnot be on in vnce or once nd for l The fct tt eve ositive chnce involves t the same e dnger sows in te clerest ossible mnner t te humn mind cn enjo no tot et s possesso Indee no ositive cnce cn be te witout cceing te ris inerent in it. Conseuently it becomes eient tt te humn mn essenti te, teconditioned, n istorcl But re we not engged in discussng te concet f timelines? Actull, we re trying to bring into cus te mbigt of tis concet. If te historc crcter of nowledge imlies tt in rticur epoc cern eemens te tru emerge no romnence more detely tn in oter es tt herefore ce roblems nd ts hve greter genc, tt for te same reon oter elemens of e rut recede nd re in danger of being forgottenow are we to deeine wt is relevnt" el" in tis picur age?
Th Timinss o Thomi
To egin wit, eeryting s biusly tiely d releant wic encrges and cns a epc its special alues, attitdes and pbles, wic psitiely and iediately crrespnds wit te line f its ajr ert Bt ere e sld nt frget tat suc an epasis te priaily discussed cnces f an epc ust intensify te lid spts f tat epc is sggests a frter ntn f "tieliness: tiely is nt nly wat a epc "wants, but als wat an epc "needs; a crrectie atttude t te present is tiely, te reusal t accept it is ely, r, rater, te refsal o te dangers necessarily inerent in its cances. Cnsequently, t te "tiely ad te "un ely, in te iediate sense f tese ters, ay e releant t an epc Wen Nietzsce gae his callenging essay, Of te se d Dsdvte o Hsto o Lfe te title, Untiely Meditatins, e knew, and rigtly, tat tey wee f te greatest eance t s tie n te fact tat te "utiely ay be experienced spreely "tiely, that ans iited cnditin can be grasped litatin, we nd, weer, ater prf f eting new and dierent: tat te uan ind, spite f its strict istrical bundaries, is nt te risner f a specic erid rater, tat it is trul sirit, cpx uves riented tward te we o trt, and terefre capable f dtaced considera 78
Th Tmln of To
o eve f ts w tmecndtned xte Frm te start, ten, te ntn f ees c tas a te f ptmi, f cndence t te cnence tat eac "ctemprar empass upn me special featre f trt need t mpl enal f te ttalt of t (as eer sade o atnalim tends arrgantly t assme) ; tat, o te ctrary, t empas mgt brng wt t te cace fr a new perceptn f trt is cance s we ae een i by ts natre lnked wt ts erent danger We may terefre reac te c cln tat te ntn f tmelines nludes a elemen f gant cndence n wat appens at e mment t be "mde From wat as gne befre t becmes edet w presmptu te deakng t prpe anwer t te quet: "Wt releant ad el r preent day and age Een spps g tat te preent age prded a nfrm patte, w uld be n a pst t say at te age wants ad wat t "need; ter wrds w c s wt s te n reeant an as wat reeant tg untel? n ew f wat appenng tda in te wrld, w cld aceve te rigt ble f critical detacment and ed ate dentt w s tme For t resn, am anx from te ta, t state te tans f wat fllws eno 79
Th Tmln o Tho
ere t cnider te rbem rm t ticuar e
WHAT HMM T te Tim a ean et ei an what we d undertand b t , rt al, nt cnceed wh that ver pecia Tmm which, n the eachin n upernatura race, cnraed with Mni Nr dea wih Thmi a i i enera ditinuihed rm Suaezianim Tee ae, rict pea, vaiu mde nerpreain St Thma. celebraed dicuin between Marin raba and Franz Pee at the Ineaina Thmiic Cne in Rme n 1925 made evdn a m an crine, a e real diincin between ence and exience, had r St. Ta hie nly a ubrdinae value, and tha hi eaie pupi thuht i pible and leiiae nerpre i· n seveal way. Whaever the crrect luin hi cmlicaed uein may be, bh inerreatin, the "Suarezian a wel a he ne whch call e "Thmic, rece expicl the autht of
Th Tmn of Thom
t Thmas. Undubtdly th dvnc btw hm s lss scan an amnt. Hw thn a w t undsand Tmsm hs dscussn f s tmlnss? W wl ak h tm s bad cn usa as t dsnatn f all fms f Tmsc dscplsp, and pacu laly f t wd vw labad t wks f t. Thmas. Tmsm ths sns mans nth m n lss tan tacn f t. Thmas. But lt m bsv mmdaly hat ths s a qusnabl and pblmac tm, justd thu w may b us t, vw f th sh cmns f uman vcabulay. Hwv vauly h tm Tmsm may appld n nal usa, t cns undudl sm lmns f ptan whc may asly lad t an nus da f t tacn f t. Thmas L Ts as sad a t plsy f a Tsyan wuld vtaly b cmplly f n t hs wn lsphy. I wuld nt vnt t sust ta . Tmas mt av mad a smla statmn abu a Tms. Y n can ady s w susc dsnan "Tmsm bcms. Wy s s napppat? Bcaus t lads us t tnk amst aumacaly f a spcc scl f thu labad plmcal ss and cunss, and paculay f a adnally pp at tachn systm f psns.
. Th Timlin of o
But it would s t quit impossibl to co rss t doctrin o St. Toas into t ra wor o a scool" sst o propositions less oe leves o soe of fdel po ce T astic laboration o tougt anistd in St Toas's wor is ar too ric or such trant and also ar too ibl. T ricns consists not alon t act tat t tological wdo o t arlist Cristian cnturis is intrwovn wit t pilosopical ritag o t r wold; and tis is not connd to Aristotl onl thr ar trads ro Plato also and vn ro te NoPlatonists (an autor alost as otn quot b St. Toas as rstotl is tat strious Sria discipl o Plotinus wo ad grat prstg in t Wst ud t na o Dionsius t ropait) It is I sa not tis abundanc o contnt lon wic constituts t cnss o St Toas' worit rsts also on t act tat tis procss o asatn vops on t grnd a sprtulit wic is altogtr pattd on t tacing o Scriptur and t sarantal an liturgical l o t Curc T nd rsult is a structur o t higst intllctual ordr but not in an wa losd sst o scool propositions Accordngl St. Toas as tis in coo with otr tru grat tacrs tat h canot s b appropriatd as t ad o spc 8
Th Tm1ss of Thom
hl of thought, as the paon of an "im. h " ae wont to be eclusie, and in contoesy they ae a "pecise and "distct a posible he tuly geat masts, on the othe hand ecause of thi dpe appeiation of what i unfathomable in tuth, much pfe to emphasize what s ommon to dieg positions than what is peulia to eah hy have no love fo ontoesy he pefence is fo the moe ile and natal idom and not fo a ed and cial temiology o eample, a the "isms that attah hemselve to t homa gad "ugusanism the ommon advsay. But what is the attud f t homas himslf? t is tue that he nowhee paks of an identty of outlook with t. ugustin oweve, whn he dals with the poblm of diie ilumination human knowlegeone of he attes most hotly debated btween homists an ugustinianshe stats that the divegence betwen ugustine and himself is of no geat signiane o ultu efet 2 t is vey unlikely that an uo o e ns s w "nivualty ould be eadly ompessed witin a sholast ystem without losg what is essential to his thught. Who, fo instance, would vente t fomulate astact popositions all that lat tates the Sposu about th nate of love? he omp with lato is not as fafethed a
T mnss f m
t ght appear. I y opio, t beogs to th essece of St. hoass teachg tat the schoastc culus has retae, a ot erey extea or, the character of a gee coversato or aogue, that s, the caracter of reectve etatio, wch akes o ca to possessg a etive foruate aswer. aayss of that re arkabe a aost exhaustibe rst artce of th Quaesioes Dspuae de Veiae eostrates that o pat, uequvoca, textbook repy s gve to the query What s truth?" Rather, St. hoa rst eveops hs ow igeous terpretato, a the, wth rare esty, works t ito the gara of tratoa etos of truth a web of recproca uatio a coratio. Not oe of the tratoa foruae s rejecte etrey or accepte as excusvey va. hough the are no way fuy cocorat, he ca apprecate the prta vaty of each. What actuay s happeg re haes at S. oa , c, acg hsef wth the strea of tratoa truth nourshe by the past wthout cag to gve a souto, he eaves the wa ope for futue uet a scovery as that strea ows owar towar the yet ukow. Ths s exacty etho of the Patoc daogues. A sar cocuson s reache recet stude o the theory o owege St. hoas. The prov h 84
Th Tlss of Tho
omas qute edetly delberately refraed fro doma deo of kowedge ts soud make suetly ler wy t sems to me hgy quesoble to tret te teah of St Thoms as a sm" ad why we sould se te term Thomsm" oy wt portt eseraos It mgt well be sad tat by ts ery strutue e teg of St Tomas s relent to ou tme, te sese bot of tmeess ad uteless It mt be sad tat te meess of St Tomas rests to a lare extet o te fat tat tere a be o su t as Tomsm" Ts remark, I rele, eques elaorato But before tempt ts, we e to osder brey te tual stuto of mode losopal tout.
RO IEREGAARD O ARRE: ISTRUST F YSEAIC HILOSOPHY e ter tt edtey allees s ere Exstesm," tou tere re some ot domt teds cotemorary touht (as, fo eae, symbol lo) Exstelsm, as eeryod ows, as beome so mu fasobe s
Th Timinss of Tho
that ts sbsanc appas a bt dd; t ay man pacically anythin t ybdy ith th slt that it mans nthin pci and dnt t anyn Y ha t admit that nd th am f Exisntialis th m tal and n hilphical thikin is bin caid n tday F tha it hs a cmn and alid c n a ts fs This cmmn c cnsis ab all th ctin and dis f h ainalisic syss of philsphy This nis Sa Macl idgg wh h ancs hy ha in cmn S Kikgaad hs ppiin aainst l a asd pcisly n h fllwn pmis It is t thin mans scp achi ihi a clsd syst of ppsiins a flly scin ctin f h ssnia aly f h ld; philsphy cant as l claid f i chan is pp tit hich sinis "h lin qs f wsdm t actal knwld; i is bynd hma capaciy to fam incnssncy w nc th hiddn cnsisncy and t fmla t atinally cnscd "synthsis f sinc h adn f Kikaad th ptc ssay and th pilphica jal ha bcm th pfd dia f xpsin f al fms of sntialism th sn f his is h cnc a an astac gnalizd thsis cannt ach t 86
Th Tmlnss o Tho
the dph of raliy an a, conrary o is a osoical roosiion can aquay xprs th "ru bg of ngs. In mo Exisiasm is bsic convicion ass vr from arrow circl of rofssiona krs io gnra maiy of our rsn g. I ns xrssion in iy irn aius angng from a blivng rvrc bfor u nowab o compl agnosicism an nay o ism. I is imoran o oic a v n i exrm ormuaion n asic iism f Sarr ("Tr is o suc ig as uma aur ' ps de e mie" 3 is m ca fun. arr siss a on canno sak of ur of man sa auoiaiv manr ic one sks of aur of som cc srum sign of ic is kon o s, has w o no know sign of man
HOMAS QUINAS EGATIVE HILOSOPHY
I n of oino a minss of S omas's ocrn rss o fac a oo exsias. can owvr, b mosra
Th Tmnss of Thom
that this cmmn cnc all the xisentiism nds S. hmss teachn bh a pe c espndence and a specic crrece. Let me speak rs the pie crrespndence Medeal schlsics n eneral and S. hmas paricular tend t be rpreened as tuh th were te rst tnkers t chee te deal a clse hlsphical sytem. he Su s taken as example f the clam f human intellience nt nl t cnstruc enclsed sysem knwlede, but what s much mre, t brin een the truths f reelatin int a lucid and clsely nerrelate stucture by means ranal prs. he hstr cal rwth this false and misleadn pictur s nt easy t llw. N dubt many actrs c perate t prduce it, and thee actrs hae acte an eacted n ne anther. Oppnent as well as wers hae cnributed t the miscnceptin nt nly the mistrust f naural reasn characterstc uutnnm n e erma perid, but als the es NeSchlascism to presere its master, Tmas, frm ee taint chare anscim are respnsible. Curiusly enuh, it is rarely nticed that the Su eoloc is unnhed. he nrmal ex planatin ered is that its auhr died s early death. "Snatched away by death he had t lea his wrk cmplete, h r smilar ntes ppea 88
Th Tmnss f Thm
iios of Su acual fac, Tomas rs o coc work bcas of is own ir rics I ca wri oig mor: a a I av iro wi sms o oig b sraw Tis sry iica a is fragm ary caracr bogs o oa imicaio of Su eoloc f o os no cosir is oi a rars om som k o for rur of sysaic ikrs o m Ra ioaism Crisia Wol iosor of Ga Aufklu i fac caim Toas as is rcssor a i cosr commion wi m a wi is ow imma acr Libn) , wi com as a igy srrisi xric o in . Tomas a sc sc as foowig: Pcp essetl eu sut obs ot ssia rincis of gs ar kow o s.4 c a roosiio is o oy far rmov from na w-ro rcio of a raioalsic sysm aso arars a oio of iosoy formaly excludes ia of a cos sysm. c isgs mark o a osoca qsio s a i s a qry to os vr pcp essetl o "sscs of gs or wi s roos r a sigcac, is sc of . Tomas o oy sanc of s kin) maks s san a a osoc quson cao b swd 8
Th Tmn of To
fully sucen frm. I ca be answere e same sense n wc was asked We nw reale wy S mas n s cmmenary ad nng ppse e passae frm Arses epsics wc decaes a e prblem f Ousa r eay, e prblem f e essences f ngs, s ne a "n e pas, day and aways, was, s, an ll cnnue be asked and debaed,5 whc eans a here s a prbem a wll never be nally and rrevcably slved And ne undesands a mas can say w Arsle: e nwlede wc pursued n e plspca crne f Ben, a s, e nwlede abu he essence f ns, s n ven man hs pssessn bu nly as a knd f "lan, p essi sed ic liqid mm6 Hw, we as urselves, can such wlede, wch s held as a "lan, be expresse cncreely? In he frm f cnj ecure and allusn? Meaphr c esssc as f a, dubless, n e frm f a scsc sysem wc by s very a ture as e caracer f a permanen pssess raer an a f a lan I seems ardly necesary pn u ere nce aa wa exen a fdamenal psuae f cnemprary pspcal u nds s cr respndence and cnrman n e wr f e "Uversal Dcr f Crsendm; wa e 90
Th Timinss f Thm
tet ts loo et of St Toma s tmel tmel te sese of eg a ostve co relate To mae ts evet s ot a qesto of exaltg St omas We are ot egage s e fese s s o matter of aologetcs Wat mat ters s te tato of a frtfl aloge etee te Zetet" a te tratoal som of te Occeta aloge c sterle cotroverses at to are amog te late folloers of sms mgt e ssolve a ot of c mgt gro te reaess to accet te egatve coterform of tmeless St Tomas's correctve o a desse to o me
TE N REATE HINGS
AN RTIACTS Te aros forms of xstetalsm are te cea a aar ret o ow ea A ts te are refoce b St Toma e wol c ma toa leas s or ay e s becomg more a more a ue tec ologcal oe e gs wt c e s co eed ae cal; te are artfacts o creao 91
T Timin of Tomi
The danger ieret in tis situation s tat ma migt erroneosly come to rgar· te wor as a whoe an te create tings wit it-above a man himsef-in te same manner in wich e re gars correcty his own artiacts beonging to the tecnoogica spere; in oter wors man is begn nng to consier the whoe of creation as com petey athomabe fully accessibe to ratioa com prehension and above a as something which it is pemissibe to change transo or eve d soy. Enges a msconcusio which s wengh cassica ners from te proctiblity o articia things the possibiity of exastive owedge o a natra reality (practca experence e ex erimenta research a inustry have broght abot te most crushg retation of the phio ophca alacy which denies the ossibiity o exastive kowege o the word)7-a mis cncion wic fo oo asos as n o aly accepted into the ocia octine o Bose sm8 In opposition contemporary Existentiais or nstance Sarre stesses forcefly te irence be ween aricia and natra tgs new emass appears here whch seems to me postmoe hie the propery moe thinking arly per ev and etainy does not sess thi erence.
Th Tmnss o Thoms
opel mode tnkng ncnes to wt it e ·leves to e specc estc" view ie c does not empsze te derence etwee immedte et nd manmde tngs, ut ten to see foest, rive, eds nd ousing development, dge, fcto s one nd te same ety, s t wod ound o word. St. Tos, on te contra, kewse ds guses cer nd unequvoc etween te e i nd te e icii, fo reson not unke tt of te stentsts. Te e ici eceved ts mesue" om man, ut not so te e i St. Toms woud gee wt Se hs g of cntempor mn gnst t dnge of pure tecnoogc envronment Do not tnk tt ou cn spek n te sme mnner out te ntue" of man s ou m out te ntue of etter opener, te desgn of wc s come out o ou own ed. Se, oweve spos te foce nd vldit of ts wng wen e dds tt tee is no suc tng s desgn" for mn, nd tereore, no umn ntue." Te inescpbe conclu sion s tt ou can mke wt ou ke of ourself n of mn t is t tis point tt te negtive elevnce o St Toms tecing, ts unte eess e 3
NEXHAUSILE IH What is the easn why St hmas states that the tue Being f natal hins is unfahmable, that the phlspical uestin cann, n the las es, e answeed? Why des he say ha it s impssibe epess the essenial eaty f he wld fully and ehaustvey? In he s insance, hs easn can tl be famed in cmplee accd wh Eistenial sm: We cannt whlly asp he design, the achetypal pae, f natual hings Fm this fulatin aise a numbe f cndeatins In the s place, bth St mas and Sae bing "design and "essence in the clsest cntact whee thee is n desi, thee can be n essence hins have an essence nly in s fa as they have been fashined by a fmceating, knw g mnd In this sntnce, , ee is a meeing of pemde and pstmde thught In cit cing the phlsphical atheism f the eighteenh centuy Sae shws tat he is full ageement ih the ld dce f Being It beays, he de claes, a sad lack f cea and lgical inking, whe the cncept f ceain s aandned but nt the abt f talkng abut the nae f hings, ug o ha int nthing had changed It
Th Tmnss of Thomi
uerca ureasonae an evn asur to tn tat tee s a "nae of tgs anteor to exstence unless one olds at te same tme tt tngs are cetes We touc now upon a second pot. Te verc of St. Tomas at te desg and essence of natura tngs cannot e wolly gaspe y te uma mn does not mply tat tese tngs re n no ense knowable. Te essence of tngs nssts St Tomas cannot e comletely grased ut t s not unknowable. Mans tellectual powe enables to penetate to te essence of tgs; tee can e terefoe sgs and assetons conenng te ature of tgs wc toug not eaustve r neveteless true. true answe can e gven to t queston: wat s te eepest sgcance of Beg It at ts pot tat te fudamenta tes o Exstentalsm repudated. It s not owever refutaton te mere fact of negaton tat t eless of St. Tomass teacng as corctv conssts. So muc s clear negaton by tself s not sucent. corectve mples tat ter xst genue and specc correlaton t te confronted tougt. In wat ten conssts ts (negtve relevnce? Precsely s a for St Tomas one and te same facto explans bot w ngs cot be entely gaspe a 5
Th Timlinss of hosm
an be known. St. Thoas shows that the insctailit of thins is alost th se as the knowbilit. This coon oot, to expess it as bie as osible, is the ceedess of thins, i.e., the tth that the desins, the achetypal pattens of thins, dwel ithin the Diine Loos Becase thns come foth o the ee of God, they patake whol of the ate of the Loos, that is, the ae uci an pid to the e depths. It s the oin n the oos whih makes the knowable to men But bease of ths e oin in the oos, the io e ht and an theefoe not be wholl oehended. It is not dakness o haos whch akes the nfatoable. If a an, theefoe, is hilosophical nqi, opes afte the essence o thins, e nds hiself b the e ct of aoachin his object, in an unfathoable abss, bu t is an abss of l Askn the question of the essc ts, e aso sks t quston o t esin and achetpe, and with this he sets out on ncipiall endless wa. If I estic mself to nqi nto the checal copostion of a sheet o ape o the stcte of an ato, I eain with the connes of an essentall answeabe obem, n the sphee of denie soltons. It the sphee t which the sciences popel estict themsee t a soon as I ance, fo exape, at my en, an
Th Tiin o Thoi
begi to k Wha his o j ec?-n i he ses f expecg an answer suc a: i a l, r, gld, u raer: "a is is prn f maeral realy is ru and essence? -as s ak is e rue pilspical sense, immed aely and frmay deal i e naale and scruale; and is bcs is in e aure f my quesin apprac e rs f ins, ha is, advance e surce f Being, e diensin venn and frmivin design, er wrds te dimensin f creaedness. Wa en s e ren wy he plpca qesi ca receive n adeuae anwer Why are real ins, real ings, capale f eing nally graped? (Fr rap, cpreend hg means kw cpleely a is sel knwale; rf wa is nwale ins, w msn wasever, in acual kw edge, s a nin reains whic is n piively c is r a cpreensive answer f is s tha the phlspical quesin naray seek) y a ne pri uale acqure, e la rer, sc a cpreensive wlede The answer : bcs kwb f Bg wc g sf kw dg csss s bg cv g C.
Hence ou man knwlede is cnfre 7
h mnss of ho
by barrir of arss; ratr tr xists o sarply raw frotr to wic our mi ca at ai a for tis raso o clos systm of plosopy is possibl ut by tis rpuatio o clos systmatc formulato am ot suggstg at t wolss of plosopy is to b lost i caos of cofus qustioig T vry lgt wic bcaus it caot b xaust ivaliats t xclusiv clams of ay clos piosopical sys m itslf mas possbl a igly cort struc tur o tougt T fact tat it rivs from a timatly ixaustibl vi Sourc spurs us o t prformac of t pilosopica c o a hop tat strivs towar t t wat t cosists postvly a gativly t tmlss of St Tomas's tacg? T a swr: asmuc as w ma our ow th fua ta truts wich it cotais w ar abl o rcogiz mor ply th cac of trut i co o oso o m ts cac is mor ply grasp a raso by stabls w ar aba tis is mor portatto show tat t irt agrs o otmporary pilosopy ar capab of big ovcom sta of avig to b rjct as sply ative Tis o catio caot of co xaust imlss of St Tomas's teachig W ight 98
Th Timin of Tho
amine many another thesis wich oh rom osiive and the negative viewpoin wod e a mely as is eacing ha e pilosopica qes t conditioned by ope Te noon o bo co or instance as St Thomas derstands it appears to me o immediae poliica elevance in a world which is becoming increasingly a oaitarian world o labor Te same s re and or slar reasons o he doctrine o N Lw Or since the attenon o modern philosophy s eng paiclarly atacted by osoc ooo t wold repay atenion o noe he act hat te most volminos secion o te S Tooc the second part constrcted a a stdy o man and o man's tre image B a is can e toced pon here only in passin
HE END F "RE HILOSOPH Le again consider he opion o S Tom conce he inner sctre o philosophy I a een made evden at a dialoge between Toma and conemporary xistenalists is possible only wen e eological ondaions o pilosopca inn are broght into play Here I elieve
T Tmlnss o To
ye anher rean r h ieine S Thas: He acce n uh hin a a "ure hihy a nn ha i euay rejeced y cnerry thuh Tha has, cure, ceary diin uihed eween nwede and aih, eween hilhy and hey T have eahed and ainained hi diinin i cidered hi re achieveen Neverhee, here i n "hi hy S Thas ha can e eened ee deachen r hi hey The hlhica uein ai a he yery o he rd; i i cneed wih wha hin undaenay are ha hen de h erm "un daenay ean? Tha' anwer (hi we have tried t deve i ha "undaenay ean "in he L hen Pani are eakin o he "dea Frm, hen Thas eain, a he hi se decares, he sae ene, he Divine L Thas exac wrd rin hi u re exic 11 " e e e (loco harum d) e have ne ny: he Sn and rd Gd2 n heir reeive inerreain he wrd, he ae "ae ha i uied in Pa ni y he dcrine he arhee hin and he u, i aen in ee Chriian n y he dcrine he L, y he dcrine he creaiv " d "enrihed wh a rieva vn que he endid ormua o
Th Tmns of To
ugusn.3 How, uner contons such hes ould phlosophcal reecton be kept "pe and aected by theology On he other h, what s characterst and mulang an ruly "ely n Exstentals thougt from erkega to eegger, Marce and Sarre, s precsely ths, that the ultmate posons are explctly brought to vew altough here s often enough no queston of "heology he proper sense Nevertheless, when Se, for xample, mantas that there are no "essenes o atural thngs, d above all no "essence of man bcs there exsts no creatve Go wo could have desgned them/ t s evdent that h s estabshng hs fuament thess of hs phlosophy o an "arle of belef. And t s clear that rue plosoy can come nto beng only when t refers o a rue theology. oever, we c observe from he ormal srucue of ontemorary Exstenals ha a "pe hosophy carefuly separated fro theology fs to satsfy men at te presen me Wen e onsder he orgn and archetypes of Weste hlosophcal seculaon, coneved by Plato, ho foud the perfeton o phlosophy a g to myth an the ancents; conceved by Asotle, who name the hlosophc docn of Beng "theology; conceve by Augusne for who ue losophcal act bes w a 10
T Tmnss of Tom
ih-whe we cier hee eil r he ee ue r kwlee we reize h hey ih chieve ieie ce rive a crrecive i he crie S Th Aui he re ei h hi echi i heir er hly ee eciively iyi rezi y he rucure his dcrie were reee re clerly cvic ly ere he i cerry !
HOMM AN UDE
n cieri he echi S. Th we shul n uer i erely he eri u sce eicily rue e crie. Much rrely e e reeer h he u sce ce h i rii i very eci ue . u we eecu n ly i he ee hi iue clr he wrk wih i ricur ehi u l i he see h wihu hi ecil hu iue wh a ee wrie ih ever hve ee wrien a. Shu we erere cier hi aiue i eer ihuh Tha hie ever xpresy rule i r rce he OZ
Th Tmnss of To
s h o15 h Unvral Dcr hrsnh l nrpdy hch pll an nal h yun ncan rr a h Un vrsy Par "rcnz h ruh he lan rl vw, rnra a an s senal par n h nllcual hra he hran , unaun y h ppn he nrs ranal crn. n hul e n n h prnal "yl h l rcn n ruh an ray lkw an ln "ln, n h n an xplry au? Th hch l l h cnra n f h aral uanc h xpcly a carly prvs l naua n a hc cnfrns an h hlly nw prls an brn h n cnac wh rals prvuly barly lps. n uch a h s pra v call n h ua hch ae Th ha h : h allncluv, arlss srnh h aran, h nrus accpance h hl raly, h ruul anany f h huh. w n ccan, al, r r: Th al an hrcal jucan fr h au fun prcsly n Thass c rn f h nnly any ruh hns Truh cann xhau y any (huan knl; ran hrfr alays p o n fulan 10 3
Th Tmnss of Tho
n the other hnd, wht we l here the Thomst ttitude" would hve to include, n order to remin true to is mser, the resoluton not to relinquish single prtice of the heritge of truth; for it is the hllmrk of the moderty" of bert nd Thoms tht boh refused to disrupt nd bnon, for the ske of new ides, the relm of trdition; they reinquished neither the Bible nor ugustne nor, onsequenly, lto) for the ske of ristote which wits onquest tody The new o, ore exctly, which is conquered redy but ot yet ppropried nd put to use by philosophl speultionis of virtully immesurble sope Some of ts provines my be sigled out, however rstly, there re the new relms opened up by hysis nd bioogy Secondly, the new diension of the psyhe brought ino view by the ndings of depth psyhology Thrdly, the wisdom of the Est, o n n n wn o soon no th intelleul srucure o hrisin hilosophil terretton nd the hrisin wy of lieor t my lso be tt it is we who nee enrihnt hrough tis wisom, in quite priculr mnner n this whole contex, Thoms quins mght ttin to new timeliness, boh ive nd coretive 0
RUT AND IMELINESS " It is o as a ndividua great thnker, ot as
a of geus, that Thomas i apportioed that remarkable auhorty the extent and cla of ch s ofen surprsng. Thomas Aquinas has soethig of the staus of an "insttution. We nd h cted, i on of the great clasical legal compenda, th Codx Js Coc as a standard of orthodoy encyclical of a recnt Pope sates that th hurch accepts hs teachng as her o. Th sa cyclica, hoever, w us expctly against th dagers of sterle taton and sos o itnon to perpetuae hat as teconditioned hoas's ork. But t expresss beyond doubt that in hi teachngas dsnct from te ork of other satl Chritia teachersthe body of hua trational sdom, n sort, truh, as found xpresion an entrely venerable and iently eplary anner n wat, precisey, ths exepary anr consits, is not as asy deonstrable. For thos h s the uniqu postion of St. Thoas or tha th accdeta eect of the forces of adition, or tha discplary ct of ecclesiastica politcs t "ntelcual uormityy n thsv face aai and aan h te uo: hat OS
Th Tmlns of Tho
cisy casd S mas bcm t Dc Communis? W may a asid, as ian, skpica qsin in w a an a nganisd in cny can b imy ins B an g aiss, wi ignd masis: dcsi mn in is n is iminss b is Wa n is s is nda t sc sancn iminss , w in nd sc sancin? answ is sin as sa acs It is idn a imnss, in is, is n ciin f B i is ay idn a nss and mnss a sikingy ad bgin wi, ny can b ty imy Ony can cspnd cancs and dangs any in pccspnd as b aman and cc On and nss can n b gaspd by a na and ndin md, b ny by a mind sng answ a sis and gn xisna pbm is gncy can ny b sd by an mmdiay xpincd, a sian, indiida and cmmniy Tis mans a w b m pndy nwn s , m igsy s tmelness es g; i as mans a a man xpeenc I6
Th Tmnss of Thom
ng is own time wi a ricer nensiy of e an fuller spiriul awareness as a beer cance of e eriencing e lluminaing force of tru To geer wi is timelness, by wic e responsive ower of r is focused on e immediae pres en, e el valdiy of ru wic, incom arbly compeling, rnscends e woe of e, would become manifes.6 mkes clear e twofold, neverending as of e true eacer o reec e oy of tru nd, n a consanly niring mediaion, o dis cover and poin ou weren les e relevance o u to s own te
TSCRP
The secnd and hird essay f he presen bk prvid a cnriuin a discussin ne migh alms say, a deae. This has e e heir p is n be missed. discussin implies, amng her hings, ha ha he speakers are agreed upn recedes he ackgrud. Cmplee ageemen ules u dis cussin. Bu "plyphny presuppses ha each parner mainains hrughu his n p f Ve. Wha has een expressed here is ha ne i divdua has hugh rh nriug. This des py a he d n al p w hs ierlcurs r even ih his ppnens. Ye h cnsiders i valual and even necessary add his paricular vice e cmmn chir. T e mre explici: "uman knwledge a th same ime rue and n fuly sucien (inade quae. The accepance f his senence, fr sance, prvids a cn grud fr he auh hese "essays ad a arge umer f his pp x
Th Timinss of Thomi
ens debae Ts senence as s el o s coony quoed n phosophca manuals and exbooks he prope conex Bu he cmae of pio suc pulcaons is condoned priarly by e rs posve cause of e rahe conradcory ess Ths s undersandabe and ceran degree nevable Texbooks are coneed i ransg eacngs and soluons; a s e carace and funcon Bu dspensable ough hese exbooks of phiosopy are ey resen he same me and qe naaly so he ge o of denyng bu of velng e adeuacy of o owledge For hs reason e epass e presen essays as been placed o e negaive clause of e senence queson Te nadequacy of uman oledge aces creasng sgncance he more e leave e el of scenc nquy ener e el f losopy Ths soud o be erpreed o mea a n e ream of phosopy no posive esus and ansers capabe of beng organed o body of eachng can be reaced; y can b reaced Hoever he ansers o a properly psopica ich means meaphyscal nuiry canno have he same naly as a scenc soluon T nquy no he fundamena naure of oledge fr nsance canno be answered s
Th Tmn of Tho
luive maer a e uei wih i h germ a ei ieae Furer e awer a ca e reae i e re iial i uiry are uie ui u a mee "y e. ma a ai i i Coenty o te Metpyscs of Astote ly a me r i a odc reu, a e gaere i e iia iuiry cee wi e rie Beigug i me ri i a greaer weig a waever ele may e di cvere y e iee i wi i i mi a i e ree emhai ha ee ae mu e i ive aaime ilial ug u rae a le imra reu amely a ma, i hi iial iuiry, i ae aga a aga wi e exeriee a realiy i amale a Beig i myerya exeriee, i i rue, wih urge im mu mmiai iee. Bu i wu e e iee f e igai a i le eair wu e he ee eveee
HRONOLOGI L I I I I 4 I 22 I I 2 24
( ? irt of St Albeus Magnu t of te Emperor Frederic eat of St omc Foundng of te Uveity o aple by Fre eric 1 2 24 ( I 2 2 5 ? ) t of St Tom Auina at castle of Roccascca near Naples 2 2 6 eat of St Franc of ssis I 2 2 6 Coronation of St ous (X , n o Fran I 2 Tom at Monte sno 2 Tomas arrives at te Uvesty o Nape I 24 Tom enters te omncan Order I 2445 s imprsonment in Castel San Giovan 245 Counc o yons eposton of Frederic 25 Tomas comes to as egng of te eac ng actvty of St Albertu Magnus I 248 Tomas goes wt Albert to Cologne an o e coetone for Cologne Catedra 1 2 5 0 eat of Fredeck ca 1 2 50 Completon of te catedra of Nore at aris (west faade) I 2 5 2 Tom es to aris accalau Es
Chronolocal e
sce nd Exisence ( I 2 54-56) Cenry he Senences of Peer Lod ( I 2 54-56) 2 54-7 3 nterregnm in Gean 256 Thomas receives fom the chancelor of otre ame peission to begn an independent an pen teaching corse fl profesor o the ame a as St Bonaventre De Verie (I256 5) Cenry sis (1256-5) Comenry on Boehiuss De rinie (I257-58) 2 5 Thomas goes to tal Su Cona Geniles (I25-<4) 2664 Thomas sees teacher in the colege the papal co nder Urban V Oce for he feas f Corpus Chris ( I 264) 24 eath o Uban V Thomas goes t Roe De Poenia De (I26567) Su heoloic (126673) 265 Birh of ante 27- Thom at the cort f Clemen V at V terbo On he Govence of Prince an the Cenry on Jrei (16769) 28 Beheading f Koadn, the ast Hohentaen t aples 26-7 Thomas again a the Univeit of Pis De o (after 169) On he Virtue (I269-72) Coenis on Arisole nd he Gospel of S John (169-7) Cory on he Puline Episles (1269-73) Copendiu of hel (I2]73) 7 eath f King Lois f rance
I
Chronolocal Table Table
7 om o m goe goe to ape 7 Election of the th e Emperor Emperor Rudo o Hapbur 7 4 D eat of St om qu oan oan (Marc7) o Death Deat h of St. lbe lberu ru Magnu Magnu r D eat of Dant Dantee annization annization of S Toma qun 67 ma made Doco o te t e uc
TE I toug it i not te point of t eay to be ito ca, it goe witout ayg tat t etc of St Toma claim to be verable on itorical evidence not oly on quetio of detail but alo concerng te tota appreciation t would eem inconou, owever, to burden ti o troductory preenta tion wit a wealt of citation and reference n foed reade wil eaily notice ow eavily te autor i ebted, particularly in te realm of itori cal fact, to te reearc of Denie, re, Grabmann, Mandonnet, Seppet, and oter ould add ta itorian vary in teir iterpretation of ceain bio grapica grapica detail detail ( a, fi f i , te exact exact date of St Toma' ojo in ologne) reer for thi to the wor of ge gelu lu Walz, O O I E Kantorowicz, Ksr Frdrch ol (Ber n, 1 927) , pp z Ti refal of St Toma, wic ome may conider ctomary among tat generation of mendicant, wa in no way cuomary but rater reted on an entirely peronal deciion We now tha lbert Magnu became Bio of
Not
Regebg I 2 6 0. d d oe oe of St. St. Thoma Thom a ofe, who hd tght with hm t Pi, ete of Tetie, Tetie, w de cdil ad ltimtely pope ocet ). 0. Tlle, es Posies de Rldo dAquio. el ue de Hellogiq gique phio iolo oph it No So cit N oires de la Soc Mm Mmoires singfor s, vol V ( 1 9 1 7 ) , pp. I 7 4- 3 0 3 .
4 have diced thi eltio oe thooghly my boo, oride d Teperce Pntheon Boo Boo, , New Yo Yo,, I 9 5 5 ) , pp. 62 6 2 . Coe ti i Jo cp. I3, lect. 2. 5 Coet 6 Coetri i Metphsic Arisoeis, b , lect. 7 Coe Co eri ri i Diosi (PseudoAreo (Pseudo Areop pi iae ae)) De Diviis Noiius cap. 4, lect. 4· pologe. 8 Su Theoloic, , 2 pologe. De duous precepis cris e dece leis precepis " ntl owledge be fom ene. Hece o tl owledge c go a f a t n n be b e led by eib eible le thi thigg Su Theoloic, , 2, I 2. thogh thogh Reveltio we can become cpbe of owig thg which we otheie wold ot ow, we do not no hem in y othe wy th thogh the ee. Ceti i liru oethii De Triite 6, 3· "t cle tht m ot jt ol, bt ome hig copoed of body ad ol Sua heoloic , 75 7 5 , 4 4 Su Theooic , , 4·
ot " creature are noting but te e epreio nd reproduction f te type contained in te concept of te divie Word or wic eaon al ting are aid to ave bee made by H t wa tting, terefore, tat te Word oud be ited to a creature, namely uman nature Su Cntr Gnties I 42 4 ap I , lect I II 3 5 I 6 Qustiones Dispute de Vrit 2, 2 17 Contra in Evliu S nis cap ect 7 8 mog te erro of verroim condemned by te Biop of P in te year I277 were te following: "Tere i o iger way of ife tan o eep oneelf free (vcr fo poopy t eem to be a direct reply wen Toma write te Su Contr Gntils (III 30} : "Te ige pefection of uman ife i a man' mind be occpied (vct wit God oti in pistol S Puli Aposoli Colssss cap 2 ect I 20 Su holoc , II 3 ad 2 Siger de Brabantia, Qustions e ni intellectiv 7 ontra n Asos D l e ud , 22 3 So te Encycca Studio Dece of une 2, 123 We quote: "May te tction of anon Law be eld acred by a rofeo e
No
4 25
6 7
obliged to fom their phiosphical and theolg cal suis an the teaching these sujects ac ording to the method, the teaching and he bsi rinciples o the Dcr Angecus; and fher they e revere the same' Each ne shol osee th law n such a way that he is ale t a St. Thmas hi mter" Can anytg ex press mre cealy the high opinn o the Chrc for ths Doctor than the act that the idenn Fahers detemned that ding a f the ses sins ony two oks shud e reverently place eore them on the atar, nely, he Holy Scriptues and the Su heoloc th other hand the Encyccal ws agnst a pedan tic and unifl canain St. Thm, whch wud e cntradicty t hs wn spirit: Individuas sha nt reqre more from ah other han the Chrch, the eachng Mtress a Mother of a requires from al. n such qestion, hich amng esteemed Cathc tho ferent opinons cnron each ther wit eq right, no ne sha be hindered rm fog the iew which sems t hm to contan oe uth Su Con Geniles , · mpae the concept of reon presened J. Peper, Forue epernce p 5 7 I prol Quesones spue e oa e 7 5 .
ot
II his essay cntains the evised tet an aice whic iinay appeaed in the eview, Diu Vivt (: Pais, I 9 5 ) with the tite, D t gtif ds a philosophi d Sit hos dAqui It was pb shed in a cndensed f the peidica H ochl (Mnich, I 9 5 3 ) . Te sht qtatin at the eiin f this essay taken fm te !o Chig f La-tse (pat hapte I ) . Matin Heidee, Pltos Lhr vo dr Wah hit (Bee, I 97 ) , p 5. is ceay ht t Ka Eschweiler b Di zwi Wg dr ur holo (As, 926), pp. 8, 283, 296. Other theses which he ppses ae me pen t deate C. Jse Piepe, Wrhit dr Dig d editi (Mnic, I 9 I ) . 4 he paaaph qestin is n I 2, which dis csss te famus scastic snence o st uuvruou 5 Rman Gadini, Wlt ud Prso (Wzbg I90), P· I I 6 JeanPa Sate, Lxistntili st u huma i (Pais, I96), p 7 Ste, p cit, p 22. 8 u Thooca , , 6. Quastios Disputata d Vitt imthy, i,
Noe 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
20
22 2 2 25 26 27 28 29 p
ommentary on the iber de Caus, I 6. Lexstentame, pp. 20 pp. 3. Su Teologca, I 2 2 Summ Teologic, I 6 2 Quaestones Disputtae de Veritte, I 1 Conesons, XII 38 Cf also De Tnitate, , ommentary in oannem, I 2 Summ Teologic, I, 1 2 ad 3 · homs qote this sentence for tnce Summ Teoogic, 6 Summa Contr Gees, 6o; Quesones Disputte de Veritate, I 2. Quia de Deo scire on posmus quid sit, sed quid no st, non possus consderare de Deo quomod sit, sed potius quomodo non sit. (Summa Teoogic, I 3 prooge.) I 2 ad Quesio Disputt de Potenta Dei, 5 a d n the st chpte. Commentay in Aristotelem, De anim, I 5. Questio Disutt de Spirualibus Creturi, a 3 Qusiones Disputte de Vertte, a d 8. bid Quaestiones Dispute de Veritate, 5 2 a Summ Teoogca, I 5 2 Quaestiones Disputte de Veritte, 8 2 ad 5 Su Teologic, I 3 5 Aolo octe iornae, z z 1 19
Note
Metaphysics, II, I, (993b) ommentary in Metaphysicam ristotes, no 286 II T essay s a sighty atered version o a ec eivered by the athor n the teneo at Madrid an Barceona. appeed nder the tite of Actualidad de Tomismo the coection "0 rece o Mere, a series edted by Forento Perez Embid (Madrd I9). I The sbj ec w ths formated by the organ ers of the ectre seres which ths conerence was originally given. 2 Quaesones Disputatae de Spiriualibus Ceai, I ad 8. existentiale, p. 22 ommenty in Aristoteem de nima, I o I. 5 Metaphycs, VII I, (Io28b) 6 ommentary in Metaphysic Aritotelis, I o. 6. 7 riedrich Enges, udwig Feuerbach und de Augang der laichen deutchen Philooph (Bern, I 96), pp. I 7 . 8 Ths sentence from Enges is qoted, or nsace n the ocia histo of the ommnis arty he Soviet Union Gechichte de Kouni 120
Not
9
2
4 5
h ar r Swjtun (Bein, 1 946 ) 6., he secion on diaecica and soca aeiasm ahoed by San. Accod o M. Bochens on SovieRssian diaecca ma eiasm, in Dr sowjsssh dalksh aralius (Bee and Mnich, 1950) . 95 h hiosohca nsie of he Sovie Academy of Sciences devoed a f aaah o ne oosiion, which s qoed also by Lenn. This efeence occs he nsies 98 edion o he r for an Extnsv Cus l and Hsorcal Matriali "L'hmm s t; l 's pas out f d'rd, s fa chsssan s mral L'xsnal, . 8 L'xstntalsm . 2. ommenay on he Epsl to h Clssas , 4· Ths same expession "in ac of he deas s sed in anohe passage o denoe he posiio o S. Agsine. "Agsine, foowing ao, so far as hs ws compaibe wih ahoic beief, did no accep selfsbsisen ona p aes of hings: n hei pace (loo aum) he assmed ha he ona ae of hin ed God. f Qae. Dis. de S. ea. o ad 8 Tnate vi, r o. Lxistntali, . 2 2 an 366 seco 2, of he Cd r Can, mae h eching of S. Thoma b
