Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 14.djvu/738

 THOMAS

674

THOMAS

diately preceding these words he explains why the teaching of St. Thomas would produce such most desirable results: St. Thomas is the great master to explain and defend the Faith, for his is "the solid doctrine of the Fathers and the Scholastics, who so clearly and forcibly demonstrate the firm foundations of the Faith, its Divine origin, its certain truth, the arguments that sustain it, the benefits it has conferred on the human race, and its perfect accord with reason, in a manner to satisfy completely minds open to persuasion, however unwilling and repugnant". The career of St. Thomas would in itself have justified Leo XIII in assuring men of the nineteenth century that the Catholic Church was not opposed to the right use of reason. The sociological aspects of St. Thomas are also pointed out: "The teachings of Thomas on the true meaning of liberty, which at this time is running into license, on the Divine origin of all authority, on laws and their force, on the paternal and just rule of princes, on obedience to the highest powers, on mutual charity one towards another — on all of these and kindred subjects, have very great and invincible force to overturn those principles of the new order which are well known to be dangerous to the peaceful order of things and to public safety" (ibid.). The evils affecting modern society had been pointed out by the pope in the Letter "Inscrutabili" of 21 April, 1878, and in the one on Sociahsm, Communism, and Nihilism ("The Great Encycheals of Leo XIII", pp. 9 sqq.; 22 sqq.). How the principles of the Angelic Doctor will furnish a remedy for these evils is ex- plained here in a general way, more particularly in the Letters on the Christian constitution of states, human liberty, the chief duties of Christians as citi- zens, and on the conditions of the working classes (ibid., pp. 107, 135, ISO, 208).

It is in relation to the sciences that some persons doubt the availability of St. Thomas's writings; and the doubters are thinking of the physical and experi- mental sciences, for in metaphysics the scholastics are admitted to be masters. Leo XIII calls attention to the following truths: (a) The Scholastics were not opposed to investigation. Holding as a principle in anthropology "that the human intelligence is only led to the knowledge of things without body and matter by things sensible, they well understood that nothing was of greater use to the philosopher than diUgently to search into the mysteries of nature, and to be earnest and constant in the study of physical things" (ibid., p. .55). This principle was reduced to practice: St. Thomas, Blessed Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon, and others "gave large attention to the knowledge of natural things" (ibid., p. 56). (b) Investigation alone is not sufficient for true science. "When facts have been estabhshed, it is necessary to rise and apply ourselves to the study of the nature of corporeal things, to inquire into the laws which govern them and the principles whence their order and varied unity and mutual attraction in diversity arise" (p. 55). Will the scientists of to-day pretend to be better reasoners than St. Thomas, or more powerful in syn- thesis? It is the method and the principles of St. Thomas that Leo XIII recommends: "If anything is taken up with too great subtlety by the scholastic doctors, or too carelessly stated; if there be anything that ill agrees with the discoveries of a later age or, in a word, is improbable in any way, it does not enter into our mind to propose that for imitation to our age" (p. 5C). Just as St. Thomas, in liis (l;iy, saw a movement towards Arislotlr and pliilosniihiial studies which could not be checked, but could be guided in the right direction and matle to serve tlie cause of truth, .so also, Leo XIII, seeing in the world of his time a spirit of study and investigation which might be productive of evil or of good, had no desire to check it, but resolved to propose a moderator and master who could guide it in the paths of truth.

No better guide could have been chosen than the clear-minded, analytic, synthetic, and sympathetic Thomas Aquinas. His extraordinary patience and fairness in dealing with erring philosophers, his appro- bation of all that was true in their writings, his gentle- ness in condemning what was false, his clear-sighted- ness in pointing out the direction to true knowledge in all its branches, his aptness and accuracy in express- ing the truth — these quaUties mark him as a great master not only for the thirteenth century, but for all times. If any persons are inclined to consider him too subtle, it is because they do not know how clear, concise, and simple are his definitions and divisions. His two summce are masterpieces of pcdagogj', and mark him as the greatest of human teachers. More- over, he dealt with errors similar to many which go under the name of philosophy or science in our days. The Rationalism of Abelard and others called forth St. Thomas's luminous and everlasting principles on the true relations of faith and reason. Ontologism was solidly refuted by St. Thomas nearly six centuries before the days of Malebranche, Gioberti, and LTjaghs (see "Sum. theol.", I, Q. Ixxxiv, a. 5). The true doctrine on first principles and on universals, given by him and by the other great Scholastics, is the best refutation of Kant's criticism of metaphj'sical ideas (see, e. g., "Post. Analyt.", I, lect. xix; "De ente et essentia", c. iv; "Sum. theol.", I, Q. xvii, a. 3, corp. and ad 2"™; Q. Ixxix, a. 3; Q. Ixxxiv, a. 5, a. 6, corp. and ad l"m, Q. Ixxxv, a. 2, ad 2um, a. 3, ad 1"™, ad 4™. Cf. index to "Summa": "Veritas", "Principium", "L^niversale"). Modern psychological Pantheism does not differ substantially from the theory of one soul for all men asserted by Averroes (see "De unit. intell." and "Sum. theol.", I, Q. lxx\-i, a. 2; Q. Ixxix, a. 5). The Modernistic error, which distinguishes the Christ of faith from the Christ of history, had as its forerunner the Averroi.stic principle that a thing might be true in philosophy and false in rehgion.

In the Encychcal " Provident is.simus Deus" (18 Nov., 1893) Leo XIII draws from St. Thomas's writ- ings the principles and wise rules which should govern scientific criticism of the Sacred Books. From the same source recent writers have drawn principles which are most helpful in the solution of questions pertaining to Spiritism and Hypnotism (see Cocon- nier, "L'ame humaine", Paris, 1890; "L'hypnotisme franc", Paris, 1898; Berthier, "Spiritisme et hypnotis- med'apresS. Thomas": appendix III to "L'Etude"). Are we to conclude, then, that St. Thomas's works, as he left them, furnish sufficient instruction for scien- tists, philosophers, and theologians of our times? By no means. Vetera novis augere et perficere — "To strengthen and complete the old by aid of the new" — is the motto of the restoration proposed by Leo XIII. Were St. Thomas living to-day he would gladly adopt and use all the facts made known by J recent scientific and historical investigations, but he would carefully weigh all evidence offered in favour of the facts (see "L'Avenir du Thomisme" in Sertil- langes, op. cit., p. 327). Positive theology is more necessary in our days than it was in the thirteenth century. Leo XIII calls attention to its necessity in his Encyclical, and his admonition is renewed by Pius X in his Letter on Modernism. But both pon- tiffs declare that positive theology must not be ex- tolled to the detriment of Scholastic theology. In the Encyclical "Pascendi", prescribing remedies against Modernism, Pius X, following in this his illustrious predecessor, gives the first place to "Scholastic philos- ophy, especially as it wast aught by Thomas .Vquinas". St. Thomas is still "The Angel of the Schools".

Specimen of Text of the Si'mma; I, Q. i, a. 1. With translation by English Dominican Fathers. Utrum sit necessarium prffter Whrthor, besides philosophy,

philosonhicas disciplinas any further doctrine is Te-

aliam doctrinam haoeri. quired?