DOCSLIB.ORG

Thesis Pursues Their Primary Thrust Into Defining the Trinitarian Nature of God

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Thesis Pursues Their Primary Thrust Into Defining the Trinitarian Nature of God ABSTRACT The Aristotelian Development of Trinitarian Metaphysics Through the Thought of Boethius and Aquinas Andrew Bernard Eberlein Director: Junius Johnson, Ph.D. God was declared Trinitarian at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. The divine nature is shared amongst all three persons, who are coeternal. This belief was made dogma and thus is held as the universal belief of the Church. This decision instigated a further theological pursuit to clarify this definition of God as Trinity. Boethius engaged in this endeavor in his De Trinitate. First, he determines his own interpretation of Aristotelian metaphysics, next how to express God metaphysically as a substance, and then how to define each person metaphysically as a relation. In his Summa Theologica, Aquinas continues and invokes Boethius work. He further classifies God, according to his processions and relations, and then he discusses how to assert personhood of God and the plurality of persons in the divine nature. He finishes by detailing what are appropriate terms for referring to plurality of persons and unity in God. This Thesis pursues their primary thrust into defining the Trinitarian nature of God. APPROVED BY DIRECTOR OF HONORS THESIS: ________________________________________________________________________ Dr. Junius Johnson, Great Texts APPROVED BY THE HONORS PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________ Dr. Andrew Wisely, Director DATE: _________________________________ THE ARISTOTELIAN DEVELOPMENT OF TRINITARIAN METAPHYSICS THROUGH THE THOUGHT OF BOETHIUS AND AQUINAS A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Baylor University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Honors Program By Andrew Bernard Eberlein Waco, Texas May, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . 1 Chapter One: Boethius on the Metaphysics of the Trinity . 3 Chapter Two: Aquinas on the Divine Processions . 19 Chapter Three: Aquinas on the Divine Relations . 32 Chapter Four: Aquinas on the Divine Persons . 45 Conclusion . 71 Bibliography . 73 ii INTRODUCTION At the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, the Church defined God as Trinity. The Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit were declared one substance, and each person was declared equal and coeternal. God's Trinitarian nature was made dogma, and thus was considered the universal belief of the Church. This decision leads to further theological endeavors to further clarify this definition of God as Trinity. In his De Trinitate, Boethius joins this line of argumentation. He begins by establishing his interpretation of Aristotelian metaphysics and then proceeds to define and clarify the Trinitarian nature of God using Aristotle's metaphysics. Next, he discusses how to express God metaphysically as a substance and then how to define each person metaphysically as a relation. Aquinas continues, invoking Boethius' work in his Summa Theologica. He defines each of God's processions by likening them unto the spiritual processions in man, the intellect and the will. Continuing, he explains how each person is his relation. The Father is fatherhood, the Son is sonship, and the Holy Spirit is procession. Next, he clarifies what he means by the term person. He then discusses the plurality of persons in the one divine nature, and how this is possible and what makes them distinct from one another. He concludes by clarifying what are appropriate terms for referring to the plurality of persons and unity in God. This thesis is a summation of their primary thrust into defining the Trinitarian nature of God. Their writings align to form a continuous narrative of what is a fitting metaphysical analysis of the dogma decided at the Council of Nicaea. 1 They write using the metaphysical language of Aristotle and are thus limited to it, but they define and redefine terms in order to bring the Church into a fuller understanding of the Trinitarian God they have chosen to worship. 2 CHAPTER ONE Boethius on the Metaphysics of Trinity The Christian God is Trinitarian. This means that God does not have a single person but three persons. '"The Father," they say, "is God; The Son is God; The Holy Ghost is God." Therefore Father, Son and Holy Ghost are one, not three Gods.'"1 There are three persons in one divine nature. There are three Beings to correspond to one substance. The possibility of such a dynamic and statement has been excavated and explored by many Christian theologians and bishops, often to preserve the orthodox faith from heresy. Boethius attempts to give a closer definition of the Trinity. His objective is to argue that unity holds together the Trinity, while relation creates number within it. He takes the Hellenistic approach of employing Aristotelian metaphysics. However, it is important to know Boethius' understanding of Aristotelian metaphysics because it is how Boethius defines things. It is especially important when considering how he is trying to define the metaphysical reality of God and his persons. Therefore, an endeavor to grasp his understanding of Aristotelian metaphysics must be undertaken before any attempt to understand his Aristotelian development of the Trinity is tried. The following explanation of metaphysics is written according to Boethius' interpretation of Aristotle. 1 Boethius, De Trinitate, I 3 The Four Causes Aristotle's Four Causes must first be examined because it is according to them that all substances are created.2 God is unique in this regard because he is the first cause of all things and thus not subject to these causes. However, it is helpful to understand Aristotle's causes and how God is somewhat likened to them and yet not subject to them. This all will be explained in further detail, once the metaphysics in general have been defined by Boethius, but their definition will aid comprehension in general regarding his understanding of Aristotelian metaphysics. The reason for explaining Aristotle's Four Causes is that everything is subject to these causes, except for God, who is the uncaused cause. It is mentioned here in order to distinguish God from all other things, and to gather a general framework for how other things are categorized. Boethius knows Aristotle's Four Causes and they are present in his reasoning concerning the metaphysics of the Trinity amongst other things. Socrates will be used as a particular example for the purpose of clarifying what is signified by certain terms and explanations. The first cause is the material cause, that is, the stuff that makes up things. Socrates' material cause is his matter: his humanness, cells, bones, organs, fluids, hair, and skin. The second cause, the formal cause, has a two-fold understanding for Aristotle. First, it is the formal cause that gives shape to a thing. Socrates form is the 2 Aristotle, Metaphysics, Vol. II 4 shaping of his body. The second understanding is that form gives being to the nature of a thing. In this understanding, Socrates' formal cause is his soul or form because it gives being to his body, making him this person. When Socrates is dead and his body is separated from his soul. His body is no longer referred to as Socrates, but is simply a corpse. According to Aristotle, Socrates' body is no longer a person and simply a pile of matter shaped as a body, so it is no longer considered Socrates. However, it still has the form, in the shape-giving sense, of Socrates' body. The corpse could be described as once being Socrates' body, but it could only be associated with Socrates in that temporal sense for Aristotle. The third cause is the efficient cause, that is the agent of a thing's making. Socrates' efficient cause was that his parents conceived him. The fourth cause is the final cause that is the end, intent, or goal of the thing. Socrates’ final cause is the purpose for which he is. As a Greek Philosopher it was for the sake of arriving at and seeking out the truth. Socrates' final cause is for the purpose that he is, as a Greek philosopher it was for the sake of arriving and seeking out the truth. In a Christian context, it was whatever fate or end God's providence has planned for him. The causes following accordingly: the stuff that makes up a thing, the conferred shape and given being of a thing, the creator or agency of a thing, and the purpose or end of a thing. 5 The Category of Substance Now every corporeal or bodily thing is a substance that has both form and matter. Form gives structure and being to a substance. Matter is the stuff that is shaped by form and gives the form physical reality. Without form, matter has no substantial reality: it is simply stuff and thus it needs form to give it shape and being. Substances are thus form and matter composites or hylomorphic compounds.3 According to Aristotelian metaphysics, a primary substance is the most real thing, which is a specific instance of a hylomorphic compound. Socrates is a primary substance. His soul is his form that gives being to his body, which is the matter of this compound. In this regard, the form also gives description to what a substance is, for without the form, the matter is simply stuff. The matter of Socrates, independent of his soul, would be an indiscriminate pile of humanness. It is easier to use a statue of a bronze leopard to imagine the descriptive element of form. In the statue the form is leopard. Without the form, there is simply bronze.4 However, in man the unique case of the soul after death must also be examined because it is a form with an inherent reality, that is to say, it is a form that can survive separate from its matter. Thus if the soul of Socrates, which gives being to his essence (power or character that determines his substance), were separated from his body, then he would be less real than his body soul composite, his 3 hylo=matter, morph=form 4 Boethius, De Trinitate, II 6 hylomorphic compound.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bishop Robert Barron Recommended Books
    BISHOP ROBERT BARRON’S Recommended Books 5 FAVORITE BOOKS of ALL TIME SUMMA THEOLOGIAE Thomas Aquinas THE DIVINE COMEDY Dante Alighieri THE SEVEN STOREY MOUNTAIN Thomas Merton MOBY DICK Herman Melville MACBETH William Shakespeare FAVORITE Systematic Theology BOOKS CLASSICAL: • Summa Theologiae St. Thomas • On the Trinity (De trinitate) St. Augustine • On First Principles (De principiis) Origen • Against the Heresies (Adversus haereses) Irenaeus • On the Development of Christian Doctrine John Henry Newman MODERN/CONTEMPORARY: • The Spirit of Catholicism Karl Adam • Catholicism Henri de Lubac • Glory of the Lord, Theodrama, Theologic Hans Urs von Balthasar • Hearers of the Word Karl Rahner • Insight Bernard Lonergan • Introduction to Christianity Joseph Ratzinger • God Matters Herbert McCabe FAVORITE Moral Theology BOOKS CLASSICAL: • Secunda pars of the Summa theologiae Thomas Aquinas • City of God St. Augustine • Rule of St. Benedict • Philokalia Maximus the Confessor et alia MODERN/CONTEMPORARY: • The Sources of Christian Ethics Servais Pinckaers • Ethics Dietrich von Hilldebrand • The Four Cardinal Virtues and Faith, Hope, and Love Josef Pieper • The Cost of Discipleship Dietrich Bonhoeffer • Sanctify Them in the Truth: Holiness Exemplified Stanley Hauerwas FAVORITE Biblical Theology BOOKS CLASSICAL: • Sermons Origen • Sermons and Commentary on Genesis and Ennarationes on the Psalms Augustine • Commentary on John, Catena Aurea, Commentary on Job, Commentary on Romans Thomas Aquinas • Commentary on the Song of Songs Bernard of Clairvaux • Parochial and Plain Sermons John Henry Newman MODERN/CONTEMPORARY: • Jesus and the Victory of God and The Resurrection of the Son of God N.T. Wright • The Joy of Being Wrong James Alison • The Theology of the Old Testament Walter Brueggemann • The Theology of Paul the Apostle James D.G.
    [Show full text]
  • Alexander of Hales'stheology in His Authentic Texts (Commentary On
    chapter 13 Alexander of Hales’s Theology in His Authentic Texts (Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard, Various Disputed Questions) Hubert Philipp Weber As the first teacher at the University of Paris to become a Franciscan friar, Alexander of Hales has an honoured place in the history of the order. The greater part of his theological work was already completed while he was a secular master. It is therefore more correct to call him an important theolo- gian who influenced Franciscan theology. However, it is not easy to distinguish what makes him a ‘Franciscan theologian’. I will begin by offering some his- torical remarks on his life and his authentic writings, most of which were discovered in the twentieth century. Then I will continue by giving an impres- sion of his thought with a few examples from his writings. The final sec- tion contains a very short outline of the Summa Universae Theologiae (also known as the Summa fratris Alexandri or Summa Halensis) connected with his name. 1 Historical Remarks: Alexander’s Life and Work We do not know very much about Alexander’s early life.1 His surname indicates his origin, Hales in Shropshire, England, where he was born around 1185. He stayed in contact with England all his life. In the first years of the thirteenth century he arrived at the University of Paris, where he studied and taught artes liberales. From about 1220 he lectured at the theological faculty. During the conflict between the university and the bishop of Paris in 1229/31 he went into exile.
    [Show full text]
  • HNRS 2030 — Humanities Colloquium: Aristotle and Aquinas on Nature and Justice
    “It has been well said of Aristotle, ‘Solet Aristoteles quaerere pugnam’; ‘Aristotle has a habit of seeking a fight.’ He is seeking a fight not because he loves fight and enmity but because he loves peace and friendship; but true peace and friendship can only be found in the truth.” Leo Strauss1 “It will not be possible to conceal much longer from anybody the fact that St. Thomas Aquinas was one of the great liberators of the human intellect…. Thomas was a very great man who reconciled religion with reason, who expanded it towards experimental science, who insisted that the senses were the windows of the soul and that the reason had a divine right to feed upon facts, and that it was the business of the Faith to digest the strong meat of the toughest and most practical of pagan philosophies” G.K. Chesterton2 HONORS 2030: Humanities Colloquium Aristotle and Aquinas: On Nature and Justice Spring 2019 Through study of the writings of Aristotle and Aquinas, we will seek to understand what nature is and how it can be known, and then to consider the implications for understanding human nature and the question of how to live a good life, individually and in community with others. Attending to the influence of modern science as well as to the rise of modern society, we will ask what is living and true in the philosophy of Aristotle and Aquinas, respectively, and what has been superseded by modern discoveries. Instructor: James Stoner Stubbs 214 (tel: 578-2538); e-mail: [email protected] Office Hours: M, 2:00-3:00, W, 1:30–3:30, and by appointment Books available for purchase: • Anthony Rizzi, The Science Before Science (Institute for Advanced Physics/AuthorHouse) [ISbN 9781418465049] • Richard McKeon, ed., Basic Works of Aristotle (Modern Library) [ISbN 9780375757990] • Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics (tr, Robert Bartlett & Susan Collins) (Chicago) [ISbN 9780226026756] • Thomas Aquinas, Summa of the Summa [ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories and Images of Creation in Northern Europe in the Twelfth Century
    Art History ISSN 0141-6790 Vol. 22 No. 1 March 1999 pp. 3-55 In the Beginning: Theories and images of creation in Northern Europe in the twelfth century Conrad Rudolph 'Logic has made me hated by the world!' So Peter Abelard thought and wrote to his former lover, the brilliant Heloise, in probably his last letter to her before his death in 1142, after having been virtually driven from Paris by Bernard of Clairvaux, the austere Cistercian mystic and perhaps the most powerful ecclesiastical politician of Western Europe.1 Characteristically for Abelard in matters of self-conception, he was exaggerating. Logic had made him hated not by the world but by only a portion of it. While this was certainly an influential portion and one that had almost succeeded in destroying him, it could never do so entirely. In fact, logic had made Abelard 'the Socrates of the Gauls, the great Plato of the West, our Aristotle ... the prince of scholars'2- and this, this great fame and the almost unprecedented influence that accompanied it, was as much the problem as logic was. In a word, Abelard had been caught up in the politics of theology. The time was one of great theological inquiry, challenging, as it did, the very authority of divine revelation on the most fundamental level, and at a moment when both interest in secular learning and the number of students were dramatically increasing - all factors that can hardly be over-emphasized. But for certain elements within the Church, more still was at stake. And this was nothing less than a perceived assault on one of the basic underpinnings of the complex relationship between religion, theology, society and political power.
    [Show full text]
  • “It Has Been Well Said of Aristotle, 'Solet Aristoteles Quaerere Pugnam
    “It has been well said of Aristotle, ‘Solet Aristoteles quaerere pugnam’; ‘Aristotle has a habit of seeking a fight.’ He is seeking a fight not because he loves fight and enmity but because he loves peace and friendship; but true peace and friendship can only be found in the truth.” Leo Strauss1 “It will not be possible to conceal much longer from anybody the fact that St. Thomas Aquinas was one of the great liberators of the human intellect…. Thomas was a very great man who reconciled religion with reason, who expanded it towards experimental science, who insisted that the senses were the windows of the soul and that the reason had a divine right to feed upon facts, and that it was the business of the Faith to digest the strong meat of the toughest and most practical of pagan philosophies” G.K. Chesterton2 HONORS 3030: Humanities Colloquium Aristotle and Aquinas Spring 2013 Instructor: James Stoner Stubbs 240 (tel: 578-2538; e-mail: [email protected]) Office Hours: Mondays, 1:30-3:00 p.m., Wednesdays and Fridays, 9:00-10:00 a.m., and by appointment (call 578-2142) Course requirements: • Attendance at every class and participation in class discussion [15%] • Four 400-word essays on the reading, two on Aristotle, two on Aquinas [20%] • Two take-home exams, one each on Aristotle & Aquinas (Mar. 8 & Apr. 19) [30%] • Topic for final paper (due March 27) • Class presentation on final paper (during April) [5%] • Ten-page paper on modern-day Aristotelianism and/or Thomism, due Wednesday, May 8, 9:30 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • MID-TWENTIETH CENTURY NEO-THOMIST APPROACHES to MODERN PSYCHOLOGY Dissertation Submitted to the College of Arts and Sciences Of
    MID-TWENTIETH CENTURY NEO-THOMIST APPROACHES TO MODERN PSYCHOLOGY Dissertation Submitted to The College of Arts and Sciences of the UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology By Matthew Glen Minix UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON Dayton, Ohio December 2016 MID-TWENTIETH CENTURY NEO-THOMIST APPROACHES TO MODERN PSYCHOLOGY Name: Minix, Matthew G. APPROVED BY: _____________________________________ Sandra A. Yocum, Ph.D. Dissertation Director _____________________________________ William L. Portier, Ph.D. Dissertation Reader. _____________________________________ Anthony Burke Smith, Ph.D. Dissertation Reader _____________________________________ John A. Inglis, Ph.D. Dissertation Reader _____________________________________ Jack J. Bauer, Ph.D. _____________________________________ Daniel Speed Thompson, Ph.D. Chair, Department of Religious Studies ii © Copyright by Matthew Glen Minix All rights reserved 2016 iii ABSTRACT MID-TWENTIETH CENTURY NEO-THOMIST APPROACHES TO MODERN PSYCHOLOGY Name: Minix, Matthew Glen University of Dayton Advisor: Dr. Sandra A. Yocum This dissertation considers a spectrum of five distinct approaches that mid-twentieth century neo-Thomist Catholic thinkers utilized when engaging with the tradition of modern scientific psychology: a critical approach, a reformulation approach, a synthetic approach, a particular [Jungian] approach, and a personalist approach. This work argues that mid-twentieth century neo-Thomists were essentially united in their concerns about the metaphysical principles of many modern psychologists as well as in their worries that these same modern psychologists had a tendency to overlook the transcendent dimension of human existence. This work shows that the first four neo-Thomist thinkers failed to bring the traditions of neo-Thomism and modern psychology together to the extent that they suggested purely theoretical ways of reconciling them.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Reason in the Summa Contra Gentiles
    Natural Reason in the Summa contra Gentiles RUDI A. TE VELDE A distinctive feature of Aquinas's Summa contra Gentiles is the central role the author assigns to natural reason in his project of manifesting the truth of Christian faith. Reason is supposed to give a rational account of the truth of what faith professes about God, to arrive at a veritas demonstrative!,) which will be shown to accord with the Christian religion. It is mainly because of this emphatic and what seems to be a rather presumptuous role of natural reason that the work has occasioned so much discussion and, consequently, diversity of opinion among the interpreters of Aquinas's thought. Is the Contra Gentiles, insofar as reason is the leading principle of the investigation, to be regarded as a kind of 'philosophical' summa) as it was sometimes labeled in the past? The objection immediately arises that the fourth book explicitly deals with those truths of faith which are above reason. And further, on account of its declared subject-matter—the truth of the Catholic faith—it seems unmistakably a theological work or, more exactly, a work in which the truth of Christian faith is expounded and defended. Those who stress the theological character of the work, a work written from the point of view of faith, usually refer to what seems to be the original title: "On the Truth of the Catholic Faith against the Errors of the Infidels."1 1. In early manuscripts of the work the title used is "Liber de veritate catholicae fΐdei contra errores inήdelium." See the Leonine edition of the Contra Gentiles in 42 NATURAL REASON IN THE CONTRA GENTILES 43 The riddle of the Contra Gentiles goes deeper than the question of whether it is intended primarily as a theological or as a philosophical work, based on reason as a common human faculty for truth.
    [Show full text]
  • St.-Thomas-Aquinas-The-Summa-Contra-Gentiles.Pdf
    The Catholic Primer’s Reference Series: OF GOD AND HIS CREATURES An Annotated Translation (With some Abridgement) of the SUMMA CONTRA GENTILES Of ST. THOMAS AQUINAS By JOSEPH RICKABY, S.J., Caution regarding printing: This document is over 721 pages in length, depending upon individual printer settings. The Catholic Primer Copyright Notice The contents of Of God and His Creatures: An Annotated Translation of The Summa Contra Gentiles of St Thomas Aquinas is in the public domain. However, this electronic version is copyrighted. © The Catholic Primer, 2005. All Rights Reserved. This electronic version may be distributed free of charge provided that the contents are not altered and this copyright notice is included with the distributed copy, provided that the following conditions are adhered to. This electronic document may not be offered in connection with any other document, product, promotion or other item that is sold, exchange for compensation of any type or manner, or used as a gift for contributions, including charitable contributions without the express consent of The Catholic Primer. Notwithstanding the preceding, if this product is transferred on CD-ROM, DVD, or other similar storage media, the transferor may charge for the cost of the media, reasonable shipping expenses, and may request, but not demand, an additional donation not to exceed US$25. Questions concerning this limited license should be directed to [email protected] . This document may not be distributed in print form without the prior consent of The Catholic Primer. Adobe®, Acrobat®, and Acrobat® Reader® are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Summa Theologiae and the Reformed Traditions Christoph Schwöbel 1. Luther and Thomas Aquinas
    The Summa Theologiae and the Reformed Traditions Christoph Schwöbel 1. Luther and Thomas Aquinas: A Conflict over Authority? On 10 December 1520 at the Elster Gate of Wittenberg, Martin Luther burned his copy of the papal bull Exsurge domine, issued by pope Leo X on 15 June of that year, demanding of Luther to retract 41 errors from his writings. The time for Luther to react obediently within 60 days had expired on that date. The book burning was a response to the burning of Luther’s works which his adversary Johannes Eck had staged in a number of cities. Johann Agricola, Luther’s student and president of the Paedagogium of the University, who had organized the event at the Elster Gate, also got hold of a copy of the books of canon law which was similarly committed to the flames. Following contemporary testimonies it is probable that Agricola had also tried to collect copies of works of scholastic theology for the burning, most notably the Summa Theologiae. However, the search proved unsuccessful and the Summa was not burned alongside the papal bull since the Wittenberg theologians – Martin Luther arguably among them – did not want to relinquish their copies.1 The event seems paradigmatic of the attitude of the early Protestant Reformers to the Summa and its author. In Luther’s writings we find relatively frequent references to Thomas Aquinas, although not exact quotations.2 With regard to the person of Thomas Luther could gleefully report on the girth of Thomas Aquinas, including the much-repeated story that he could eat a whole goose in one go and that a hole had to be cut into his table to allow him to sit at the table at all.3 At the same time Luther could also relate several times and in different contexts in his table talks how Thomas at the time of his death experienced such grave spiritual temptations that he could not hold out against the devil until he confounded him by embracing his Bible, saying: “I believe what is written in this book.”4 At least on some occasions Luther 1 Cf.
    [Show full text]
  • Summa Theologica
    Summa Theologica Because the doctor of Catholic truth ought not only to teach the proficient, but also to instruct beginners (according to the Apostle: As unto little ones in Christ, I gave you milk to drink, not meat -- 1 Corinthians 3:1-2), we purpose in this book to treat of whatever belongs to the Christian religion, in such a way as may tend to the instruction of beginners. We have considered that students in this doctrine have not seldom been hampered by what they have found written by other authors, partly on account of the multiplication of useless questions, articles, and arguments, partly also because those things that are needful for them to know are not taught according to the order of the subject matter, but according as the plan of the book might require, or the occasion of the argument offer, partly, too, because frequent repetition brought weariness and confusion to the minds of readers. Endeavouring to avoid these and other like faults, we shall try, by God's help, to set forth whatever is included in this sacred doctrine as briefly and clearly as the matter itself may allow. PRIMA PARS. Sacred Doctrine. The One God. The Blessed Trinity. Creation. The Angels. The Six Days. Man. The Government of Creatures. PRIMA SECUNDÆ PARTIS. Man's Last End. Human Acts. Passions. Habits. Vice and Sin. Law. Grace. SECUNDA SECUNDÆ PARTIS. Faith. Hope. Charity. Prudence. Justice. Fortitude Temperance. Acts Which Pertain to Certain Men. TERTIA PARS. The Incarnation. The Life of Christ. Sacraments. Baptism. Confirmation. The Holy Eucharist. Penance.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Will, Evil, and Saint Anselm
    Free Will, Evil, and Saint Anselm Siobhan Nash-Marshall Manhattanville College In this lecture I concentrate on one of the questions that an adequate definition of freedom must address. The question is one with which many contemporary thinkers are currently concerned: need one have alternate possible courses of action in order to be free? This question admits of many formulations. The specific formulation which I address in this lecture is: must I genuinely be ready to take either one of two possible courses of action—to perform or not to perform a given act— in order for my taking either one of these courses of action to be free? This question is admittedly just a small part of the problem of defining freedom. Nevertheless it is a crucial part of the problem of defining freedom. It is also a part of the problem of freedom about which Saint Anselm had a great deal to say. I do not think that all who choose wrong roads perish; but their rescue consists in being put back on the right road. A sum can be put right: but only by going back till you find the error and working it afresh from that point, never simply by going on.1 Saint Anselm has suffered a strange fate in the contemporary world. He is not just the only thinker, to my knowledge, who is known by three different names in three different parts of the world: Anselm of Canterbury, Anselm of Bec, and Anselm of Aosta. This is certainly strange enough in its own right.
    [Show full text]
  • The Glossa in Iv Libros Sententiarum by Alexander of Hales
    THE GLOSSA IN IV LIBROS SENTENTIARUM BY ALEXANDER OF HALES Hubert Philipp Weber Alexander of Hales, an Englishman, master of theology at the Univer- sity in Paris, who at the height of his career entered the Franciscan order, is an important but little known fi gure of the thirteenth century. His commentary on the Sentences is an early example of this genre and an early expression of his theology. Its form and method are still fl uid. Aft er a short history of the scholarship and some historical remarks I will characterize Alexander’s commentary formally by describing the known manuscripts and attempting to establish its date. Th en I will discuss Alexander’s method and his approach to the Sentences, which he was the fi rst master to use for his ordinary lectures. Finally, a few texts on various theological questions will provide an insight into Alexander’s theology.1 History of Scholarship For seven centuries the search for Alexander of Hales’s commentary on the Sentences was unsuccessful. Nevertheless, there is an early tes- timony in the writings of Roger Bacon, who claimed that Alexander was the fi rst to give lectures on Peter Lombard’s textbook.2 Surely Alexander was not the fi rst to use theSentences with his students, but he gave the work a new importance in that he employed it as the one 1 In would like to thank Sandra Lang, who helped me with the English text of this chapter.—Alexander of Hales, Glossa in IV libros sententiarum Petri Lombardi, 4 vols., Bibliotheca Franciscana Scholastica Medii Aevi 12–15 (Quaracchi, 1951–1957), is cited as Glossa; idem, Summa theologica [seu ab origine dicta Summa fratris Alexandri], 4 vols.
    [Show full text]