Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 14.djvu/764

 THOMAS

698

THOMISM

in fol., Paris, 1680-89), likewise re-edited several times (the treatise on the Incarnation is regarded as Thomassin's masterpiece); a series of "Traites historiques et dogmatiques" on ecclesiastical fasts, feasts, the Divine Office, the unity of the Church, truth and lying, alms, business and usury (1680-97), a series of methods of studying and teach- ing the humanities, philosophy, grammar, history (1681-92); the "Glossarium universale hebraicum" (in fol., Paris, 1697); "Traite dogmatique et histo- rique des edits et d'autres moyens. . . .dont on s'est servi. . . .pour etablir et maintenir I'unite de I'eghse" (3 vols, in 4°, Paris, 1705). The last-named two pos- thumous works were published by P. Hordes, who wrote a Ufe of Thomassin at the beginning of the "Glossarium". Thomassin was one of the most learned men of his time, "V'ir stupendEe plane eru- ditionis", as Hurter says, in his ' Nomenclator", II (Innsbruck, 189.3), 410.

Ingold, Essai de bibliographie oratorienne (Paris, 1880), 170-76; Mtmoires de Batterel, III, 477-515.

A. Ingold.

Thomas Woodhouse, Blessed, martyr, suffered at Tyburn 19 (not 13) June, 1573, being disembowelled alive. Ordained in Mary's reign, he was a Lincoln- shire rector for under a year, and in 1560 acted as a private tutor in Wales. On 14 May, 1561, he was committed to the Fleet, London, having been ar- rested while saying Mass. For the rest of liis Ufe he remained in custody, uncompromising in his opposi- tion to heresy, saying Mass in secret daily, reciting his Office regularly, and thirsting for martjTdom; but treated with considerable leniency tiU on 19 Nov., 1572, he sent the prison washerwoman to Lord Burgh- ley's house with his famous letter. In it he begs him to seek reconciliation with the pope and earnestly to "persuade the Lady Elizabeth, who for her own great disobedience is most justly deposed, to submit herself unto her spiritual prince and father". Some days later in a personal interview he used equally definite language. Confined then by himself he ^\Tote "divers papers, persuading men to the true faith and obedience", which he signed, tied to stones, and flung into the street. He was repeatedly ex- amined both publicly and privately. Once, when he had denied the queen's title, someone said, "If you saw her Majesty, you would not say so, for her Majesty is great". "But the Majesty of God is greater, " he answered. After being sentenced at the Guildhall either in April or on 16 June, he was taken to Newgate. He was admitted to the Society of Jesus in pri.son, though the Decree of the Cong, of Rites, 4 Dec, 1886, de-scribes him as a secular priest. He is not to be confused with Thomas Wood (q. v.).

Keogh and Pollen in Lives of the Ejiglish Martyrs, ed. C.\mm, II (London, 1905), xx, 186-203; Carlyle in Did. Nat. Biog., s. V. Woodhouse, Thomas; Hume, Calendar State Papers: ST>anish, lSeS-79 (London, 1894), 471; Lewis, Sander's Anglican 'Schism (London, 1877), 317.

John B. Wainewhight.

Thomism. — I. The Doctrine in General. — In a broad sense, Thomism is the name given to the sys- tem which follows the teaching of St. Thomas Aqui- nas in philosophical and theological questions. In a restricted sense the term is appUed to a group of opinions held by a school called Thomistic, composed principally, but not exclusively, of members of the Order of St. Dominic, these same opinions being at- tacked by other philosophers or theologians, many of whom profess to be followers of St. Thomiis. To Thomism in the first sense are opposed, e. g. the Scotists, who deny that satisfaction is a part of the proximate matter (.materia proximo) of the Sacrament of Penance. Anti-Thomists, in this sense of the word, reject opinions admittedly taught by St. Thomas. To Thomism in the second .sense are oppose<l, e. g. the Molinists, as well as all who defend the moral in-

strumental causality of the sacraments in producing grace against the system of physical instrumental causality, the latter being a doctrine of the Thomistic School. Anti-Thomism in such ca.ses does not neces- sarily imply opposition to St. Thomas: It means op- position to tenets of the Thomistic School. Cardinal BiUot, for instance, would not admit that he opposed St. Thomas by rejecting the Thomistic theory on the causality of the sacraments. In the Thomistic School, also, we do not always find absolute unanim- ity. Banez and BiUuart do not always agree with Cajetan, though all belong to the Thomistic School. It does not come within the scope of this article to de- termine who have the best right to be considered the true exponents of St. Thomas.

The subject may be treated under the following headings: A. Thomism in general, from the thirteenth century down to the nineteenth; B. The Thomistic School; C. Neo-Thomism and the revival of Scholas- ticism.

A. Thomism in General. — (1) Early opposition 1 overcome. — Although St. Thomas (d. 1274) was I highly esteemed by all classes, his opinions did not at I once gain the ascendancy and influence which they ac- quired during the first half of the fourteenth century and which they have since maintained. Strange as it may appear, the first serious opposition came from Paris, of which he was such an ornament, and from .some of his own monastic brethren. In the year 1277 Stephen Tempier, Bishop of Paris, censured certain ])hilosophical propo.sitions, embodying doctrines taught by St. Thomas, relating especially to the prin- ciple of individuation and to the possibility of creat- ing several angels of the same species. In the same year Robert Kjlwardby, a Dominican, Archbishop of Canterbury, in conjunction with some doctors of Ox- ford, condemned those same propositions and more- over attacked St. Thomas's doctrine of the unity of the substantial form in man. Kilwardby and his a.sso- 1 ciates pretended to see in the condemned propositions | something of Averroistic Aristoteleanism, whilst the :, secular doctors of Paris had not fully forgiven one who had triumphed over them in the controversy as to the rights of the mendicant friars. The storm excited by these condemnations was of short dura- tion. Blessed Albertus Magnus, in his old age, has- tened to Paris to defend his beloved disciple. The Dominican Order, assembled in general chapter at Milan in 1278 and at Paris in 1279, adopted severe measures against the members who had spoken in- juriously of the venerable Brother Thomas. When William de la Mare, O.S.F., wTote a "Correptorium fratris Thoma^", an English Dominican, Richard Clapwell (or Clapole), replied in a treatise "Contra corruptorium fratris Thoma>". About the same time there appeared a work, which was afterwards printed at Venice (1516) under the title, "Correctorium cor- ruptorii S. Thoma;", attributed by some to ^Egidius Romanus, by others to Clapwell, by others to Father John of Paris. St. Thomas was solemnly vindicated when the Council of Vienna (1311-i2) defined, against Peter John Olivi, that the rational soul is the substantial form of the human body (on this definition see Zigliara, "De mente Cone. Vienn.", Rome, 1S78).

The canonization of St. Thomas by John XXII, in 1323, was a death-blow to his detractors. In 1324 Stephen de Bourret, Bishop of Paris, revoked the cen- sure pronoimced by his predecessor, declaring that "that bles.sed confessor and excellent doctor, Thomas Aq\iinas, had never believed, taught, or written any- thing contrary to the Faith or good morals". It is doubtful whether Tempier and his associates acted in the name of the l^niversity of Paris, which had always been loyal to St. Thomas. When this university, in 1378, wrote a letter condemning the errors of John de Montesono, it was explicitly declared that the con- demnation was not aimed at St. Thomas: "We have