Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 14.djvu/654

 THEOLOGY

594

THEOLOGY

movement was Banez (d. 1604), the first and greatest opponent of the Jesuit Molina (d. 1600). He wrote a valuable commentary on the theological ''Summa" of St. Thomas, which, combined with a similar work by Bartholomew Medina (d. 1581), forms a har- monious whole. Under the leadership of Baiiez a group of scholarly Dominicans took up the defence of the Thomistic doctrine on grace: Alvarez (d. 1635), de Lemos (d. 1629), Ledesma (d. 1616), Massouli^ (d. 1706), Reginaldus (d. 1676), Nazarius (d. 1646), John a St. Thoma (d. 1644), Xantes Mariales (d. 1660), Gonet (d. 1681), Goudin (d. 1695), Contenson (d. 1674), and others. However, the most scholarly, profound, and comprehensive work of the Thomistic school did not come from the Dominicans, but from the Carmelites of Salamanca; it is the invaluable "Cursus Salman ticensis" (Sala- manca, 1631-1712) in 15 folios, a magnificent com- mentary on the "Summa" of St. Thomas. The names of the authors of this immortal work have unfortimately not been handed down to posterity. Outside the Dominican Order, also, Thomisni had manv zealous and learned friends: the Benedictine AIphon.sus Curiel (d. 1609), Francis Zumel (d. 1607), John Puteanus (d. 1623), and the Irishman Augustine Gibbon (d. 1676), who laboured in Spain and at Erfurt in Germany. The Catholic universities were active in the interest of Thomism. At Lou vain William Estius (d. 1613) WTote an excellent commen- tary on the "Liber Sententiarum " of Peter the Lom- bard, which was permeated with the spirit of St. Thomas, while his colleagues Wiggers and Francis Sylvius (d. 1649) explained the theological "Summa" of the master himself. In the Sorbonne Thomism was worthilv represented by men like Gammache (d. 1625), Andrew Duval (d. 1637), and especially by the ingenious Nicholas Ysambert (d. 1624). The University of Salzburg also furnished an able work in the "Theologia scholastica" of Augustine Reding, who held the chair of theolog>- in that imiversity from 1645 to 165S, and dieil as Abbot of Einsiedeln in 1692.

The Franciscans of this epoch in no wise abandoned their doctrinal opposition to the school of St. Thomas, but steadily continued publi.shing commentaries on Peter the Lombard, which throughout breathe the genuine spirit of Scotism. It was especially Irish Franciscans who promoted the theological activity of their order, as Mauritius Hibernicus (d. 1603), Anthony Hickay (Hiqua'us, d. 1641), Hugh Cavellus, and John Ponce (Pontius, d. 1660). The following Itahans and Belgians also deserve to be mentioned: Francis de Herrera (about 1590), Angelus Vulpes (d. 1647), Philip Fabri (d. 16.30), Bosco (d. 1684), and Cardinal Brancatus de Laurea (d. 1693). Scotis- tic manuals for use in schools were published about 1.580 by Cardinal Sarnanus and by William Herincx, this latter acting under the direction of the Francis- cans. The Capuchins, on the other hand, adhered to St. Bonaventure, as, e. g., Peter Trigos (d. 1593), Joseph Zamora (d. 1649), Gaudentius of Brescia (d. 1672), Marcus a Baudunio (d. 1673), and others.

But there can be no question that Scholastic theol- ogy owes most of its classical works to the Society of Jesus, which substantially adhered to the "Summa" of St. Thomas, yet at the same time made use of a certain eclectic freedom which seemed to be warranted by the circumstances of the times. Molina (d. 1600) was the first Jesuit to vrrWo a conmientary on the theological "Summa" of St. Thomas. He was followed by Cardinal Toletus (d. 1596) and by Gregory of Valencia (d. 1603), mentioned above as a distinguished controversialist. A brilliant group in the Society of Jesus are the Spaniards Francis Suarez, Gabriel Vasquez, and Didacus Ruiz. Suarez (d. 1617), the most prominent among them, is also the foremost theologian that the Society of Jesus

has produced. His renown is due not only to the fertility and the wealth of his literary productions, but also to his "clearness, moderation, depth, and circumspection" (Scheeben). He truly deserves the title of "Doctor eximius" which Benedict XIV gave him. In his colleague Gabriel Vasquez (d. 1604) Suarez found a critic both subtle and severe, who combined positive knowledge with depth of speculation. Didacus Ruiz (d. 1632) WTote masterly works on God and the Trinity, subjects which were also thoroughlv treated by Christopher Gilles (d. 1608). Harruabal (d. 1608), Ferdinand Bastida (d. about 1609), Valentine Herice, and others are names which will forever be linked with the history of Molinism. During the succeeding period James Granado (d. 1632), John Pra-positus (d. 1634), Caspar Hurtado (d. 1646), and Anthony Perez (d. 1694) won fame by their commentaries on St. Thomas. But, while devoting themselves to scientific research, the Jesuits never forgot the need of instruction. Excellent, often voluminous, manuals were wTitten by Arriaga (d. 1667), Martin Esparza (d. 1670), Francis Amicus (d. 1651), Martin Becanus (d. 1625), Adam Tanner (d. 1632), and finally by Sylvester Maurus (d. 1687), who is not only remark- able for clearness, but also distinguished as a philosopher. Hand in hand with this more general and comprehensive literature went im- portant monographs, embodying special studies on certain dogmatic questions. Entering the fists against Baius and his followers, Martinez de Ripalda (d. 1648) wrote the best work on the supernatural order. To Leonard Lessius (d. 1623) we owe somebeau- tiful treati.ses on God and His attributes. jEgidius Coninck (d. 16.33) made the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the sacraments the subject of special studies. Cardinal John de Lugo (d. 1660), noted for his men- tal acumen and highly esteemed as a moralist, WTote on the virtue of faith and the Sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist. Claude Tiphanus (d. 1641) is the author of a classical monograph on the notions of personality and hypostasis. Cardinal Pallavicini (d. 1667), known as the historiogiapher of the Council of Trent, won repute as a dogmatic theologian by several of his WTitings.

(c) Third Epoch: Further Activity and Gradual Decline of Scholasticism (1660-1760).— While the creative and constructive work of the previous epoch still continued, though with languishing vitality, and ushered in a .second spring of dogmatic literature, other currents of thouglit set in which gradually prepared the way for the decline of Catholic theology. Cartesianism in philosophy, Gallicanism, and Jansen- ism were sapping the strength of the sacred science. There was scarcely a country or nation that was not infected with the false .spirit of the age. Italy alone remained immune and preserved its ancient purity and orthodoxy in matters theological.

One might have expected that, if anywhere at all, theology wovdd be securely sheltered within the schools of the old religious orders. Vet even some of these succumbed to the evil influences of the times, losing fit tie by little their pristine firmness and vigour. Nevertheless, it is to them that almost all the theological literature of this period and the revival of Scholasticism are due. A product of the Thomistic school, widely used and well adapted to the needs of the time, was the standard work of the Dominican Billuart (d. 1757), which with exceptional skill and taste explains and defends the Thomistic system in scholastic form. The dogmatic theology of Cardinal Gotti, however, rivals, if it does not sur- pass, Billuart's work, both as regards the substance and the .soundness of its contents. Other Thomists produced valuable monographs: Drouin _on_ the sacraments and Bernard de Rubeis (d. 1775) on original sin. More eclectic in their adherence to