DOCSLIB.ORG

BODILY IDENTITY in SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY Antonia Fitzpatrick

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BODILY IDENTITY in SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY Antonia Fitzpatrick BODILY IDENTITY IN SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY Antonia Fitzpatrick UCL Submitted for the degree of PhD in History 2013 1 I, Antonia Fitzpatrick, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 2 BODILY IDENTITY IN SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY ABSTRACT At the core of this thesis is an examination of how Aquinas's materialistic understanding of resurrection shaped his thinking on human nature, individuality and bodily identity. Resurrection implied two things with respect to the individual body. First: the union between soul and matter was intimate and essential. Aquinas held that the soul is the only substantial, or nature-determining, form in a human being. Second: the material part in a human was relatively independent from the soul. Aquinas grounded the relative independence of body from soul on the accidental form 'dimensive quantity', which gave to the body its organic structure, individualised its matter, and supported its material continuity. Chapters 1 and 2 discuss Aquinas's Aristotelian and Averroan sources. For Aristotle, although individuality had its basis in matter, all matter was exchangeable without prejudice to identity. Problematically for the theologian working on resurrection, Aristotle offered no account of postmortem bodily continuity. Averroes, crucially, imported Aristotle's geometrical notion of 'body' as a three-dimensional kind of quantity into his discussions of bodily identity. Averroes thought that matter had a bodily structure of its own, supporting its continuing identity across radical change. Chapters 3 and 4 discuss Aquinas's thinking on the individual body and bodily identity. Reflection on resurrection, it seems, pushed Aquinas towards adopting a position on the nature of matter similar to Averroes'. In the 1270s, critics (mostly Franciscan) of Aquinas's theory of human nature turned it on its head, argued that it threatened the body (with heretical consequences for the identity of Christ's corpse), and set off the late-thirteenth century's defining debate on human nature. Chapter 5 discusses the divergent ways in which the Dominicans Thomas of Sutton, Robert of Orford, and Richard Knapwell defended Aquinas's theory of human nature and its consequences for postmortem bodily continuity at Oxford during 1277-86. It culminates in an examination of Knapwell's advanced work on the nature of matter, which built upon Averroes' and Aquinas's. The thesis contends, furthermore, that these three Dominicans can still be grouped under the banner of the 'early Thomistic school' if the ground they share is understood to be primarily political, rather than primarily doctrinal. 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to gratefully acknowledge the support of the following institutions: The Arts and Humanities Research Council University College London St. John's College, Oxford. I am particularly grateful for the support, encouragment and advice of my supervisor David d’Avray. I am also grateful to others who have read parts of this thesis or have discussed its arguments with me, and have offered helpful criticism: Sophie Page, Alain Boureau, Sylvain Piron, and John Sabapathy. 4 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 8 CHAPTER 1. ARISTOTELIAN BACKGROUND (I): INDIVIDUALITY AND THE INDIVIDUAL BODY Introduction 40 1. The Basics (I): Body and Soul as 'Proper Matter' and 'Proper Form' 42 1.1. Substance and Accident 44 2. The Basics (II): Human Generation, the Material Principle, and Necessity in Causation 45 2.1. The Generation of the Individual Body 55 3. The Individual Body and its Intellect in De anima 59 4. Essence and Individuality in the Metaphysica 60 Conclusions 66 CHAPTER 2. ARISTOTELIAN BACKGROUND (II): BODILY IDENTITY Introduction 68 1. Body as a Kind of Quantity 71 2. The Identity of the Mortal Body: Growth and Material Exchange 74 3. The Identity of the Corpse 79 4. Substantial Change and Material Continuity 81 4.1. Aristotle on Substantial Change 85 4.2. Averroes on Substantial Change and Corporeal Structure 88 4.2.1. Corporeal Structure as Incorruptible 89 4.2.2. Corporeal Structure as Divisible 93 4.2.3. Corporeal Structure and Material Identity 96 4.2.4. 'Indeterminate Dimensions': an Accidental Form sui generis 99 Conclusions 100 CHAPTER 3. THOMAS AQUINAS (I): INDIVIDUALITY AND THE INDIVIDUAL BODY Introduction 102 1. The Basics (I): Substantial Form and Matter in Human Nature 105 1.1. Essence and Esse 105 5 1.2. The Composite Human Essence 108 1.3. Commensuratio between Individual Soul and Individual Body 116 2. The Basics (II): Dimensive Quantity as the Body's Accidental Corporeal Form 118 2.1. Dimensive Quantity and Organic Structure 119 2.2. The Human Body as 'optime dispositus' 123 3. Human Generation and the Shaping of Individuals 127 3.1. Material Developments in Human Generation 128 3.2. The Individual Body 135 4. Individual Matter 140 Conclusions 150 CHAPTER 4. THOMAS AQUINAS (II): BODILY IDENTITY Introduction 152 1. Material Continuity and the Identity of the Mortal Body 156 1.1. The Identity of Dimensive Quantity across Growth 164 2. Formal Continuity and Bodily Identity at the Resurrection 167 2.1. The Body's Uninterrupted Esse 169 2.2. The Soul and the Body's Formal Identity 169 2.3. The Soul as the Body's Efficient Cause 172 2.4. The Soul as One of Two Essential Principles 174 3. Postmortem Bodily and Material Continuity 176 3.1. The Continuity of the Matter Particular to Individual Bodies 179 3.2. Christ's Dead Body and Saints' Relics 187 Conclusions 193 CHAPTER 5. POSTMORTEM BODILY CONTINUITY IN DOMINICAN THOUGHT (1277-1286): THOMAS OF SUTTON, ROBERT OF ORFORD, AND RICHARD KNAPWELL Introduction 195 1. Thomas of Sutton: De pluralitate formarum (1278) 219 2. Robert of Orford's Sciendum (1282-3) and the anonymous De natura materiae 232 3. Richard Knapwell: Quare (1278) and the Quaestio disputata de unitate formae (1285) 242 Conclusions 263 6 EPILOGUE 270 APPENDIX I: ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE SOUL AND THE 280 BODY'S ACCIDENTAL FORMS APPENDIX II: ON HUMAN NATURE AFTER DEATH 282 APPENDIX III: ON CORPOREITY AS THE 'FIRST FORM IN MATTER' 284 BIBLIOGRAPHY 286 7 INTRODUCTION In the thirteenth century, scholastic theologians' interpretation of the doctrine of the general resurrection was literal and materialistic. It did not make sense to use the word resurrectio, Thomas Aquinas pointed out, unless the very same body that died would be that which rose again.1 Longstanding theological reasoning supported this interpretation of the general resurrection, as did the decrees of the great reforming Church councils of the thirteenth century: each individual would be justly judged or rewarded only in their sinning flesh; the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Second Council of Lyons (1274), in the face of the threat of dualist heretics who taught that matter was evil, reaffirmed that every woman and man would rise again with their own body, a body that was identical to their mortal body.2 But in virtue of what would any person's risen body be the same as their mortal body? Which flesh formerly belonging to them would need to rise, and how much of it? And how, in any case, did an individual body's remains persist and remain the same after its death and decomposition? Answering questions like these led theologians to develop complex analyses of bodily identity. They discussed the development of the individual body in utero, the material transmission of characteristics across generations, and the physiology of growth and nutrition. Questioning how the material particular to an individual body might survive across the body's decay, 1 'Non enim resurrectio dici potest, nisi anima ad idem corpus redeat: quia resurrectio est iterata surrectio; ejusdem autem est surgere et cadere'. Thomas Aquinas, In quattuor libros sententiarum (hereafter In Sent.) IV, d. 44, q. 1, a. 1, qc.1, response, Opera omnia (ed.) R. Busa, 7 vols. (Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog, 1980), vol. 1, p. 635. 2 Lateran IV: 'omnes cum suis propriis resurgent corporibus, quae nunc gestant, ut recipiant secundum opera sua, sive bona fuerint sive mala, illi cum diabolo poenam perpetuam, et isti cum Christo gloriam sempiternam'; Lyons II: 'in die iudicii omnes homines ante tribunal Christi cum suis corporibus comparebunt, reddituri de propriis factis rationem'. H. Denzinger (ed.), Enchiridion Symbolorum. Definitionum et Declarationum de Rebus Fidei et Morum (Freiburg: Herder, 1963), 429, 464 pp. 200, 216. On the early development of the doctrine see C. Setzer, Resurrection of the Body in Early Judaism and Christianity. Doctrine, Community and Self-Definition (Boston: Brill, 2004) and H. Chadwick, 'Origen, Celsus and the Resurrection of the Body', Harvard Theological Review, 41 (1948), pp. 83-102. On the equivocal evidence in scripture for the materialistic interpretation of resurrection see R. M. Grant, 'The Resurrection of the Body', Journal of Religion, 28 (1948), pp. 120-30. For a survey of the varying Christian interpretations of the resurrection from the Fathers through to the fourteenth century see C. W. Bynum, The Resurrection of the Body in Western Christianity 200-1336 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995). 8 decomposition, and even being eaten by other humans, they analysed the nature of matter itself. The question of personal identity remains provocative and fertile in modern philosophical debate, of course. In order to try to isolate the criteria for personal survival, modern analytical philosophers have devised thought experiments
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Defense of Intellectualism: Will, Intellect, and Control in Late Thirteenth-Century Philosophy
    A Defense of Intellectualism: Will, Intellect, and Control in Late Thirteenth-century Philosophy by Michael Szlachta A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy University of Toronto © Copyright by Michael Szlachta 2019 A Defense of Intellectualism: Will, Intellect, and Control in Late Thirteenth-century Philosophy Michael Szlachta Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy University of Toronto 2019 Abstract The question of whether our volitions are caused by the activity of our cognitive powers was the subject of tremendous controversy for medieval philosophers. By answering in the affirmative, Thomas Aquinas, Thomas of Sutton and Godfrey of Fontaines, the so-called intellectualists, face what I call the Problem of Control. If my wanting some object is caused by my apprehending it as good through some cognitive act, then it seems that I am not able to will otherwise than I do. For to will otherwise than I do, it would be necessary that I apprehend some other object as good. If, however, I am not able to will otherwise than I do, then I do not seem to have control over my actions. But if I do not have control over my actions, then I do not act freely, since having control over one’s actions is necessary for acting freely. My dissertation addresses the Problem of Control. I first argue that Thomas Aquinas’s notion of “perfect cognition of the end” gives the intellectualists the resources to explain how a human being has control over her actions. Second, I argue that Aquinas does not adequately explain a central feature of his intellectualism, namely, how the will “moves itself” to the exercise of its act, and discuss how the “self-motion” of the will is addressed by Thomas of Sutton and Godfrey of Fontaines.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas and Scholasticism to 1870
    Thomas and Scholasticism to 1870 Oxford Handbooks Online Thomas and Scholasticism to 1870 John T. Slotemaker and Ueli Zahnd The Oxford Handbook of Catholic Theology Edited by Lewis Ayres and Medi-Ann Volpe Subject: Religion, Roman Catholic Christianity Online Publication Date: Dec DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199566273.013.43 2015 Abstract and Keywords The present article treats the life and works of Thomas Aquinas and his reception within the scholastic traditions up to 1879 (Aeterni patris). The first two sections introduce the life and works of Thomas Aquinas, with a particular focus on the Scriptum and the Summa theologiae. The third section treats Thomas’s reception up through 1500, looking at the initial period of condemnation in the late thirteenth century. This is followed by his canonization and acceptance as a theological authority in the fourteenth century and the gradual development of the Thomist schools of the fifteenth century. The fourth and fifth sections examine the reception of Thomas’s thought in the era of Church reform and the baroque period (1500–1650), and from 1650 until Aeterni Patris (1879) respectively. Keywords: Thomas Aquinas, scholasticism, medieval theology, Summa theologiae, philosophy, Thomism Life and Works of Aquinas Thomas Aquinas was born in 1224/25 in Roccasecca, a small town lnear Aquino, midway between Naples and Rome. His father Lundulf was the count of the Aquino commune. When Thomas was five years old he was sent to the Benedictine monastery at Monte Casino, the ancient abbey founded by Benedict of Nursia in 529. For the next ten years Thomas was educated by the Benedictines and introduced to the rhythms of monastic life.
    [Show full text]
  • Individuals and Institutions in Medieval Scholasticism
    Individuals and Institutions in Medieval Scholasticism EDITED BY ANTONIA FITZPATRICK AND JOHN SABAPATHY Individuals and Institutions in Medieval Scholasticism New Historical Perspectives is a book series for early career scholars within the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Books in the series are overseen by an expert editorial board to ensure the highest standards of peer-reviewed scholarship. Commissioning and editing is undertaken by the Royal Historical Society, and the series is published under the imprint of the Institute of Historical Research by the University of London Press. The series is supported by the Economic History Society and the Past and Present Society. Series co-editors: Heather Shore (Manchester Metropolitan University) and Jane Winters (School of Advanced Study, University of London) Founding co-editors: Simon Newman (University of Glasgow) and Penny Summerfield (University of Manchester) New Historical Perspectives Editorial Board Charlotte Alston, Northumbria University David Andress, University of Portsmouth Philip Carter, Institute of Historical Research, University of London Ian Forrest, University of Oxford Leigh Gardner, London School of Economics Tim Harper, University of Cambridge Guy Rowlands, University of St Andrews Alec Ryrie, Durham University Richard Toye, University of Exeter Natalie Zacek, University of Manchester Individuals and Institutions in Medieval Scholasticism Edited by Antonia Fitzpatrick and John Sabapathy LONDON ROYAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY INSTITUTE OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY OF LONDON PRESS Published in 2020 by UNIVERSITY OF LONDON PRESS SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDY INSTITUTE OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH Senate House, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HU © Chapter authors, 2020 The authors have asserted their rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the authors of this work.
    [Show full text]
  • The Eucharist in Early Franciscan Tradition 307
    MarciaL.Colish The Eucharist in Early FranciscanTradition Abstract: This paper considers threequestions on the Eucharist treated by Alexander of Hales in his Quaestiones disputatae antequam esset frater and Glossa on the Sen- tences of Peter Lombard, and then by William of Melitona in his Quaestiones de sac- ramentis and,asthe acknowledgedauthor or complier of Book 4ofthe Summa Ha- lensis,inthat text in its Cologne, 1622 edition: 1. Transubstantiation as the full substantial changeofbread and wine on the altar into the bodyand blood of Christ as opposed to the remanescenceand annihilation theories, the other two orthodox alternatives; 2. How two bodies can occupy the same spaceatthe sametime, al- though one of them, the glorified bodyofthe resurrected Christ,isnot held to be sub- ject to the laws of physics governing natural bodies; and 3. How the accidents of bread and wine can survive in the consecrated elements, since they are no longer subtended by the substance of bread and wine. Along with standard authorities, Alexander and William draw on some distinctive sources. Theseinclude Peter Lom- bard’s Collectanea,not always distinguished from the biblical Glossa ordinaria by Alexander’sand William’seditors;the semantic theory of Prepositinus of Cremona; and Innocent III’streatise on the Mass, which defends the Real Presenceastransub- stantiation in awork otherwise devoted to the liturgy of the Mass. The paper empha- sizes the shifting analyses givenbyAlexander across his twotreatments of these questions, as well as thosealtered by William—moving from semantic to physical to mathematical argumentation—in support of positions on the Eucharist which they shared, but which the Summa Halensis does not adopt.
    [Show full text]
  • Keeping the Command: Karl Barth's Moral Theology in Dialogue With
    Keeping the Command: Karl Barth’s Moral Theology in Dialogue with Late Medieval Scholasticism by James Andrew Edwards A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Wycliffe College and the Theology Department of the Toronto School of Theology In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael’s College © Copyright by James Andrew Edwards 2016 Keeping the Command: Karl Barth’s Moral Theology in Dialogue with Late Medieval Scholasticism James Andrew Edwards Doctor of Philosophy in Theology University of St. Michael’s College 2016 Abstract Due to its dogged persistence in using the language of “divine command,” Karl Barth’s moral theology has, until recent years, been accused of being overly “voluntarist.” Recent scholars of Barth’s work, however, have attempted to exonerate his work, often by way of positive comparisons with the moral theology of Thomas Aquinas. Both perspectives, however, are inaccurate. Defenders and critics of Barth’s moral theology ignore the historical particularities of the voluntarist tradition of moral enquiry and thereby miss the positive contribution that it makes. Scholars interested in upholding Barth’s honor, therefore, need not presume that “voluntarism” is an a priori condemnation. The present thesis examines the voluntarist tradition of moral enquiry both in its late medieval scholastic and Barthian articulations. A shared “grammar” of divine command both “from above” and “from below” is demonstrated to exist in the moral theologies of John Duns Scotus, William of Ockham, and Karl Barth. Theological voluntarism “from above” is explored vis-à-vis the dialectic of divine omnipotence, in which God’s absolute power and possibility is consistently balanced with an equally absolute divine constancy.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxford Handbooks Online
    Medieval Trinitarian Theology from the Late Thirteenth to the Fifteenth Centuries Oxford Handbooks Online Medieval Trinitarian Theology from the Late Thirteenth to the Fifteenth Centuries Russell L. Friedman The Oxford Handbook of the Trinity Edited by Gilles Emery and Matthew Levering Print Publication Date: Oct Subject: Religion, Theology and Philosophy of Religion, 2011 Christianity, History of Religion Online Publication Date: Jan DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199557813.003.0015 2012 Abstract and Keywords This article examines Trinitarian theology during the period from around 1250 until around 1500. It outlines some of the major positions and identifies their most important adherents. It describes two distinct ways of talking about the constitution of the divine persons, one based on relations and the other on emanations. It discusses the contributions of John Duns Scotus and highlights two important fourteenth-century developments: the denial that the Trinitarian mystery can be explained in any significant sense and innovations in Trinitarian logic. Keywords: Trinitarian theology, divine persons, relations, emanations, John Duns Scotus, Trinitarian mystery, Trinitarian logic IN the present chapter my purpose is to give an overview of aspects of the Trinitarian discussion from around 1250 until around 1500, outlining some of the major positions and identifying their most important adherents, and indicating how the discussion changed over time. In the process, I hope to give an impression of the richness of later- medieval Trinitarian
    [Show full text]