Source: https://medievalchurch.org.uk/p_thomas.php
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 01:03:22+00:00

Document:
II. Theology. - In certain respects, Thomas of Aquino marks the culminating point of scholasticism. He sought to establish for the science of theology a position of superior dignity and importance over the science of philosophy, and, on the other hand, the harmony of the two sciences, by distinguishing in revelation the religious truths which can be excogitated by the use of reason from those which are only known by revelation. The doctrinal creed of the church, Thomas treats as absolute truth; but it is a remarkable fact, that he uses the arguments of the church-teachers only as of probable authority (Summa theol., i. qu. 1, art. 8). He refers more frequently to biblical texts than the other scholastics; but this practice does not purify his theology, but helps to confirm the church-doctrines. his exegetical principles were good; and he expressly commended the literal interpretation of the Scriptures, omnes sensus scripturæ fundantur super unum sensum literalem ex quo solo potest trahi argumentum, etc. (Summa, 1. qu. 1, art. 10), but could not free himself from ecclesiastical authority. Thomas did not grant the ontological argument of Anselm for the existence of God. He gives several forms of the cosmological and teleological arguments, but says, that, while reason can prove that God exists, it cannot discover what his nature is. His fundamental conception of God is that of spiritual and active being. God is intelligence and will (intellectus et voluntas), the first cause. Thinking and willing are inseparable from his being. He is consequently forever returning to the idea of the absolute identity and simplicity of God. He employs all his speculative talent to explain the doctrine of the Trinity; and yet he declares that it is beyond the sphere of reason to discover the distinction of persons in the Godhead, and affirms that he who tries to prove the doctrine of the Trinity by the unaided reason derogates from faith: qui probare nilitur Trinitatem personarum naturali ratione, fidei derogat (Summa, i. qu. 32, art. 1). Although Thomas did not, like his teacher Albertus Magnus, regard the world as an emanation from God, he refers its origin to God's active will, which is nothing more than his active intelligence, which, in turn, is only the essence of God working as the first cause. He is again and again forced to regard the world as a necessary product of the Divine Being, and inclines to the thesis of its eternal existence; so that he contents himself with saying, "It is credible that the world had a beginning, but neither demonstrable nor knowable: mundum incepisse credibile est, sed non demonstrabile et scibile (Summa, i. qu. 46, art. 2). The doctrines of election and reprobation he considers in connection with the doctrine of providence. Every thing occurs under the Divine Providence, and serves a single and final end. Both reprobation and election are matters of divine decree; and the exact number of the reprobate, as well as of the elect, is determined in advance. Reprobation, however, consists not in a positive action on Gods part, but in a letting-alone. God is not the cause of sin. He simply withholds his grace, and man falls by his own will. In opposition to the Arabic philosophers, Thomas insists upon the efficiency of second causes (Summa, i. qu. 105, art. 5), through which God works. He lays emphasis on the ability of the will to choose between two tendencies in the interest of the doctrines of guilt and merit.
Passing over to the creatures of God, Thomas dwells at length upon the subject of the angels, which he discusses with minute care and speculative skill. He teaches, with Augustine, that the original righteousness of Adam was a superadded gift. He spent special pains upon the elaboration of the doctrine of Christs person and work. He affirms the meeting in Christ of the two absolutely opposite principles of human ignorance and imperfection, and divine omniscience and perfection. He departs in some details from the Anselmic doetrine of Christs work, as when he denies the absolute necessity of the incarnation, and affirms that God might have redeemed man in some other way than by his Son. A human judge cannot release from punishment without expiation of guilt; but God, as the Supreme Being, can forgive without expiation, if he so chooses (Summa, iii. qu. 46, arts. 1, 2). The satisfaction of Christ removes all orignal guilt; and, by the application of his merit, the sinner secures freedom from and forgiveness of sin. Mans nature is corrupt, and grace alone enables him to reach eternal life. Thomas passes directly from the consideration of the work of Christ to the sacraments. The number of the sacraments had already been fixed at seven, but his treatment had a shaping influence upon the discussion of the subject in after-time. He proved the necessity of seven sacraments, and the immanence in them of a supernatural element of grace. His treatment of the Eucharist, penance, and ordination, is characteristic. He held to the change of the elements to the body and blood of Christ, justified the withholding of the cup from the laity with casuistical arguments, and spoke of the sacrifice of the mass, now as a "symbolical picture of the passion" (image representativa passionis), now as a real sacrifice. It is noticeable, that, in his doctrine of the mass, he does not emphasize, as do his successors, the idea of sacrifice to the detriment of the sacramental idea. The subject of indulgences, Thomas handled at length; teaching that the efficacy of an indulgence does not depend upon the faith of the recipient, but upon the will and authority of the church, and extends to the dead as well as to the living (Summa, iii. qu. 71, art. 10). The discussion of eschatology follows the discussion of the sacraments. Thomas teaches the doctrines of purgatory and the intercession of saints, he treats the doctrines of the resurrection and future. blessedness at length, and teaches that the body of the resurrection will in form be identical with the present body, even to the hair and the nails.
Thomas was not less great as a teacher of ethics than as a theologian. Neander has said, that, next to that of Aristotle, his is the most important name in the history of ethics (Wissensch. Abhandlungen, ed. Jacobi, p. 46). But both as a moralist and a theologian he was a true son of the church. His system is, as Baur says, only an echo of the doctrinal teaching of the church. In the spirit of the day he discussed many idle and useless questions with casuistical minuteness and far.fetched argumentation. But he was in this respect more moderate than his coritemporaries. On the other hand, he discussed many important subjects with a depth and clearness of insight which make his views permanently interesting and valuable.
After the death of Aquinas, a conflict went on over his theology; Duns Scotus being the leader of the other school. The Dominicans were ranged on the side of Aquinas, whose followers were called Thomists; and the Franciscans on the side of Duns Scotus, whose followers were known as Scotists. The difference between the teachers was not in the doctrines they taught, but in their treatment of these doctrines. With Scotus, theology was a practical science; with Aquinas, a speculative science. The controversy lasted down to the eighteenth century; and the Franciscan De Rada mentions in his work, Controversiæ inter Thomam et Scotum (Cologne, 1620), no less than eighty-six points of difference between the two schools. The most important points of controversy were the Cognoscibility of God, the distinction between the divine attributes, original sin, the merits of Christ, etc. On the subject of the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, the two teachers held divergent views; Thomas denying it, Scotus asserting it. The Jesuits opposed Thomisin, as Bellarmins example proves; but it prevailed at the Spanish universities of Salainanca, Coimbra, and Alcala. The Roman-Catholic Church cannot forget the most profound and penetrating defender of its doctrines until it reiiounces them; and the Protestant Church will not fail to share in the admiration of Thomas Aquinas so long as it continues to admire literary greatness.
Landerer, "Thomas of Aquino," Philip Schaff, ed., A Religious Encyclopaedia or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology, 3rd edn, Vol. 4. Toronto, New York & London: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1894. pp.2353-2355.
Prudence Allen, "Two Medieval Views on Woman's Identity: Hildegard of Bingen and Thomas Aquinas," Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 16.1 (1987): 21-36.
Klaus Baumann, "Freedom and the Unconscious in Thomas Aquinas," Melita Theologica 51.2 (2000): 99-116.
Christopher Beiting, "The Idea of Limbo in Thomas Aquinas," Thomist 62.2 (1998): 217-244.
Stephen J. Casselli, "The Threefold Division Of The Law In The Thought Of Aquinas," Westminster Theological Journal 61.2 (1999): 175-207.
M.D. Chenu, Toward Understanding St. Thomas. Chicago, 1964.
Richard W. Cross, "Aquinas on Psychology," Journal of Psychology & Christianity 17.4 (1998): 306-320.
Michael A. Dauphinais, "Loving the Lord Your God: The Imago Dei in Saint Thomas Aquinas," Thomist 63.2 (1999): 242-267.
Martin J. De Nys, "Aquinas and Kierkegaard on the Relation between God and Creatures," American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 75.3 (2001): 389-407.
Lawrence Dewan, "The Individual as a Mode of Being According to Thomas Aquinas," Thomist 63.3 (1999): 403-424.
Gregory Doolan, "The Relation of Culture and Ignorance to Culpability in Thomas Aquinas," Thomist 63.1 (1999): 105-124.
Gilles Emery, "Essentialism or Personalism in the Treatise on God in Saint Thomas Aquinas," Thomist 64.4 (2000): 521-563.
Kenelm Foster, OP. The Life of Saint Thomas Aquinas: Biographical Documents. London / Baltimore: Longmans, Green and Co. / Helicon Press, 1959. pp. xii + 172.
Wayne J. Hankey, "Why Philosophy Abides for Aquinas," Heythrop Journal 42.3 (2001): 329-348.
Charles R. Hess, "Aquinas' Organic Synthesis of Plato and Aristotle," Angelicum 58.3 (1981): 339-350.
Michael A. Hoonout, "Grounding Providence in the Theology of the Creator: The Exemplarity of Thomas Aquinas," Heythrop Journal 43.1 (2002): 1-19.
John Jones, "Aquinas on Human Well-Being and the Necessities of Life," Thomist 66.1 (2002): 61-100.
Christopher Kaczor, "Thomas Aquinas on the Development of Doctrine," Theological Studies 62.2 (2001): 283-302.
John F.X. Kanasas, "Contra Spinoza: Aquinas on God's Free Will," American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 76.3 (2002): 417-429.
Steven Long, "St. Thomas Aquinas through the Analytic Looking-Glass," Thomist 65.2 (2001): 259-300.
J.J. MacIntosh, "Aquinas on Necessity," American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 72.3 (1998): 371-403.
Jim Manaris, "The Role of Reason in Aquinas and Calvin," ARC: Journal of Faculty Religious Studies of McGill University 27 (1999): 37-65.
Jürgen Moltmann, "Christian Hope: Messianic Or Transcendent? A Theological Discussion With Joachim Of Fiore And Thomas Aquinas," Horizons 12.2 (1985): 328-348.
John P. O'Callaghan, "Aquinas, Cognitive theory, and Analogy: A Propos of Robert Pasnau's Theories of Cognition in the Later Middle Ages," American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 76.3 (2002): 451-482.
Thomas F. O'Meara, "Virtues in the Theology of Thomas Aquinas," Theological Studies 58.2 (1997): 254-285.
Thomas O'Meara, "Thomas Aquinas and Today's Theology," Theology Today 53.1 (1998): 46-58.
Simon Oliver, "Motion according to Aquinas and Newton," Modern Theology 17.2 (2001): 163-199.
Russell Pannier, "Aquinas on the Ultimate End of Human Experience," LOGOS: A Journal of Catholic Thought & Culture 3.4 (2000): 169-194.
Russell Pannier & Thomas Sullivan, "Getting a Grip on the Philosophies of Thomas Aquinas: A Defense of Systematic Reconstruction," Faith and Philosophy 18.1 (2001): 50-60.
John Peterson, "Judgment and Existence in Aquinas," American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 72.4 (1998): 529-538.
Catherine Pickstock, "Thomas Aquinas and the Quest for the Eucharist," Modern Theology 15.2 (1999): 159-180.
Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, St. Thomas Aquinas: 1274-1974. Commemorative Studies, 2 Vols. Toronto: Toronto : Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1974.
Stephen J. Pope, "Aquinas on Almsgiving, Justice and Charity: An Interpretation and Reassessment," Heythrop Journal 32.2 (1991): 167-191.
Michael Potts, "Aquinas, Hell, and the Resurrection of the Damned," Faith and Philosophy 15.3 (1998): 341-351.
Robert L. Reymond, "Dr. John H. Gerstner on Thomas Aquinas as a Protestant," Westminster Theological Journal 59.1 (1997): 113-121.
P.L. Reynolds, "Properties, Causality and Epistemological Optimism in Thomas Aquinas," Recherches de Theologie et Philosophie Medievales 68.2 (2001): 270-309.
Eugene F. Rogers, "How the Virtues of an Interpreter Presuppose and Perfect Hermeneutics: The Case of Thomas Aquinas," Journal of Religion 76.1 (1996): 64-81.
Nicholas Sagovsky, "Thomas Aquinas, Ratio Dei, and the University," Theology 101 (803) (1998): 353-358.
Brian J. Shanley, "Eternity and Duration in Aquinas," Thomist 61.4 (1997): 525-548.
Brian J. Shanley, "Divine Causation and Human Freedom in Aquinas," American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 72.1 (1998): 99-122.
Brian Shanley, "Aquinas on Pagan Virtue," Thomist 63.4 (1999): 553-578.
Daniel A. Tappeiner, "Sacramental Causality in Aquinas and Rahner: Some Critical Thoughts," Scottish Journal of Theology 28 (1975): 243-257.
Michael Torre, "Aquinas and the Credibility of God," LOGOS: A Journal of Catholic Thought & Culture 3.2 (2000): 107-117.

References: art. 8
 art. 10
 art. 1
 art. 2
 art. 5
 art. 10