DOCSLIB.ORG

Providence and Causality in the Summa Halensis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Providence and Causality in the Summa Halensis CoreyL.Barnes Providenceand Causality in the Summa Halensis Abstract: William of Auvergne’streatment of providenceinhis De universo (1230s) selectively employed Avicenna, Aristotle, and the category of efficient causality to mark adistinctionbetween divine foreknowledge and providence.William’sfocus on efficiency and affirmation that natural agents work in the mode of servants fol- lows Neoplatonicimpulses to instrumentalize nature and thereby risks eviscerating anymeaningful secondary causality.Considerations of providence at Paris in the 1230s and 1240s engagewith or react to William, with the Summa Halensis providing an interesting example. The Summa Halensis counters this risk by framing provi- dence within the largerscope of divine knowledge and will, using reinterpreted ver- sions of Aristotelianformal and final causality.The Summists avoid the danger of re- ducingprovidence to predictive knowledge or to atemporal awareness of temporal events by stressing the causality of the divine intellect and will. Further,the Sum- mists counter the danger of magnifyingthe causal efficacy of providenceuntil God remains the sole agent of every effect by framing the causality of the divine intellect and will in terms of formal and final causality.Bythis approach, the Summa Halensis harmonizes providential causality with the integrity of secondary causality. The Summa Halensis begins its consideration of providence with aclear recognition that the observable world is full of confusion and disorder and with aclear affirma- tion that everythingnot wellordered in itself ‘is nevertheless well-ordered with re- spect to divine providence, which always orders for the good’.¹ That this is so appears beyond doubtfor the Summists; how it is so requires careful consideration. How does providenceorder for the good what is disordered in itself?How does divine provi- dence order the disorder of secondary and contingent causes?Toanswer these and related questions, the Summa Halensis invokes Aristotle’sexplanatory categories of efficient,formal, and final causality.Without neglectingefficient causality,the Summists place special emphasis on formal and, to alesser extent,final causality.² To frame better the importance of this emphasis, abrief analysis of William of Au- vergne’sdiscussion of providence in his De universo will proveuseful. William em- Alexander of Hales, Doctoris irrefragabilis Alexandri de Hales Ordinis minorum Summa theologica (SH), 4vols (Quaracchi: Collegium S. Bonaventurae, 1924–48), VolI,P1, In1, Tr5, S2,Q3, Ti1, C1 (n. 195),p.282. Auseful brief discussion of the Summa Halensis on providence can be found in Hester Gelber, ‘Providence,’ in TheCambridgeHistoryofMedieval Philosophy,vol. 2, ed. Robert Pasnau(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2009), 761– 72. OpenAccess. ©2020 Lydia Schumacher,published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative CommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110685008-008 90 Corey L. Barnes ployed an Avicennan-inflected Aristotelianism thatrisked undermining the causal integrity of nature and lapsinginto necessitarianism through his focus on efficient causality.Evenwhen William treatsfinal causality as related to providence,he frames finality in terms of efficiency. The Summa Halensis counters with balanced at- tention to formal and final causality in asubtlypowerful correction to William of Au- vergne as well as to Avicenna and with astrident affirmation of human freedom. William of Auvergne (c.1180/1190 –1249) served as Bishop of Paris from 1228 until his death.³ This was during atime of changeinParis generallyand within the UniversityofParis specifically. Though criticized by the papacyfor his handling of university related matters (or crises), William exercized aclear influenceontheo- logical reflections in the 1230s and 1240s. During this period, he composed his sprawling Magisterium divinale et sapientiale,aseven-part opus covering atremen- dous rangeoftopics.William’s De universo,written in the 1230s and itself far from slim, is merelyone the Magisterium’sseven parts.Within the De universo William em- beds atreatment of providenceindebted to Aristotle and Avicenna as much as to Au- gustine and Boethius and intended, among other things, to counter dualistic argu- ments associated with the Cathars.⁴ The De universo begins with arguments for aunifiedfirst principle and proceeds thereafter with arguments for the universe as aunified whole. The anti-Cathar force of the arguments is obviousand shapes the remainder of the lengthywork. William stresses from the beginning that contrariety does not divide unity.⁵ God creates solely for the sake of the divinebeauty,and divine beauty causesthe unified whole of the universe as well as the diverse participations in or reflections of divine beauty that constitutethe diversity of creatures.⁶ William fills out this initial framing with a long series of chapters aiming to specify and refute errors of the philosophers, in- cludingAristotle, followed by an accounting of creation following Genesis. This basic disposition in the secundaprimae’streatment of governance, which discusses time and eternity,argues against an eternal world, supports the perdurance of souls, and concludes with arguments supporting the resurrection and,whereappropriate, glorification of bodies. Next comes providence, and it is worth pausing,evenifjust for amoment,toreflectonthe stakes for providence in light of William’ssketch of creation and redemption. Formoreinformation on William, see Noël Valois, Guillame d’Auvergne, évêque de Paris,1228– 1249: sa vie et ses ouvrages (Paris:Libraire d’AlphonsePicard, 1880) and Amato Masnovo, Da Gugliel- mo d’Auvergne aSan Tomaso d’Aquino,vol. 1, Guglielmod’Auvergne el’Asecesa verso Dio (Milan: So- cietà editrice ‘vita epensiero’,1930). See Roland Teske, ‘William of Auvergne and the Manichees,’ Traditio 48 (1993): 63 – 75. William of Auvergne, De universo I-I, c. 11, in Guilielmi AlverniOperaomnia,vol.1(Paris:Apud An- dream Pralard, 1674;repr.Frankfurt am Main: Minerva, 1963), 605. William of Auvergne, De universo I-I, cc.16and 18, 611– 2. See also Henri Pouillon, ‘La beauté,pro- priététranscendentale,chez les scolastiques (1220 –1270),’ Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge 21 (1942):263 – 328. Pouillon also provides ahelpful, brief discussion of John of La Ro- chelle and the Summa Halensis. Providenceand Causality in the Summa Halensis 91 Medieval theologians knew the contours of classicaldebates regarding provi- dence from Augustine and Boethius, but the context changed significantlyand re- flected different concerns in the decades prior to William’s De universo. Peter Lom- bard offered arather terse presentation of providence in the midst of defining and distinguishing aseries of related terms. Foreknowledge (praescientia)concerns fu- ture things, whether good or evil. Predestination (praedestinatio)concerns human salvation. Providence(providentia)pertains to the governance of thingsand thus re- lates to arrangement (dispositio)—aterm for making or doing—though Peter notes providenceissometimesaccepted for foreknowledge.⁷ By the time William of Aux- erre wrotehis Summa aurea,the topic of providence remained amediating point be- tween divine knowledge and power.The Summa aurea raises the central concern of whether divine foreknowledge imposes necessity upon thingsand proposes astrat- egy later adopted by Thomas Aquinas in his own treatment of providence.⁸ William distinguishesthree basic qualifications: infallibly, necessarily, and contingently. God foreknows everything infallibly, and, crucially, foreknows everythingaseither com- ing to pass necessarilyorcontingently. Infalliblydesignates God’sforeknowledge while necessity and contingency pertain to secondary causes and effects. Before moving on to divine power,William examines the relationship of providence to good and evil. Considered in their universality,all thingsare ‘whollygood and are in themselvesdelectable’.⁹ Within that universal order,some individuals fall short due to human weakness or mingling with devilish works.¹⁰ The main point to stress here is thatWilliam of Auxerre follows and develops Peter Lombardbyrecognizing providenceasapoint of contact between divine knowledge and divine power,yet William moves beyond Peter in recognizing the pull and danger of adivinelyim- posed necessity conditioning every created reality. Despite William of Auxerre’sknowledge of Aristotle, his considerations of fore- knowledge,necessity, providence,and power do not utilize the Stagirite’sscheme of four causesorexplanatory modes. William of Auvergne, by contrast,regularlyem- ploys Aristotelian causal categories to elucidate providence.¹¹ Within that framework of Aristotle’sfour causes,William concentrates on efficient causality and, though to a Peter Lombard, Sententiae in IV libris distinctae I, d. 35,cc. 1–6, vol. 1, ed. Ignatius C. Brady, Spic- ilegium Bonaventurianum, 4(Grottaferrata: Editiones Collegii S. Bonaventurae, 1971), 254–5. See, e.g., Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 22, in Thomae Aquinatis Operaomnia iussu im- pensaque Leonis XIIP.M.edita,vol. 4(Rome: Ex Typographia Polyglotta,1888), 263–9. William of Auxerre, Summa aurea I, tr.10, vol. 1, ed. Jean Ribaillier,Spicilegium Bonaventurianum, 16 (Paris:Editions du CentreNational de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS); Grottaferrata: Editiones Collegii S. Bonaventurae, 1980), 199. William of Auxerre, Summa aurea I, tr.10(Ribaillier,199). Bertolacciclarifies
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Theories of Truth. Bibliography on Primary Medieval Authors
    Theories of Truth. Bibliography on Primary Medieval Authors https://www.ontology.co/biblio/truth-medieval-authors.htm Theory and History of Ontology by Raul Corazzon | e-mail: [email protected] History of Truth. Selected Bibliography on Medieval Primary Authors The Authors to which I will devote an entire page are marked with an asterisk (*). Hilary of Poitiers Augustine of Hippo (*) Boethius (*) Isidore of Seville John Scottus Eriugena (*) Isaac Israeli Avicenna (*) Anselm of Canterbury (*) Peter Abelard (*) Philip the Chancellor Robert Grosseteste William of Auvergne Albert the Great Bonaventure Thomas Aquinas (*) Henry of Ghent Siger of Brabant John Duns Scotus (*) Hervaeus Natalis Giles of Rome Durandus of St. Pourçain Peter Auriol Walter Burley William of Ockham (*) Robert Holkot John Buridan (*) 1 di 14 22/09/2016 09:25 Theories of Truth. Bibliography on Primary Medieval Authors https://www.ontology.co/biblio/truth-medieval-authors.htm Gregory of Rimini William of Heytesbury Peter of Mantua Paul of Venice Hilary of Poitiers (ca. 300 - 368) Texts 1. Meijering, E.P. 1982. Hilary of Poitiers on the Trinity. De Trinitate 1, 1-19, 2, 3. Leiden: Brill. In close cooperation with J. C. M: van Winden. On truth see I, 1-14. Studies Augustine of Hippo ( 354 - 430) Texts Studies 1. Boyer, Charles. 1921. L'idée De Vérité Dans La Philosophie De Saint Augustin. Paris: Gabriel Beauchesne. 2. Kuntz, Paul G. 1982. "St. Augustine's Quest for Truth: The Adequacy of a Christian Philosophy." Augustinian Studies no. 13:1-21. 3. Vilalobos, José. 1982. Ser Y Verdad En Agustín De Hipona. Sevilla: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Sevilla.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 210 H-France Review Vol. 8 (March 2008), No. 52 Roland J
    H-France Review Volume 8 (2008) Page 210 H-France Review Vol. 8 (March 2008), No. 52 Roland J. Teske, Studies in the Philosophy of William of Auvergne, Bishop of Paris (1228-1249). Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 2006. 274 pp. Table, introduction, notes, bibliography, and indexes. $30.00 U.S. (pb). ISBN 0-87462-674-9. Review by Steven P. Marrone, Tufts University. William of Auvergne, master of theology at the University of Paris and bishop of that city from 1228 until his death in 1249, was one of the most prominent Latin theologians of his day, recognized for his intellectual import throughout much of the rest of the thirteenth century. Yet the modern historiography of scholastic thought has paid him relatively little attention. The only book devoted to the entirety of his thinking, a three-volume study by Amato Masnovo, appeared well over half a century ago.[1] With the new work under review here, gathering together thirteen essays on aspects of William’s philosophy originally published between 1990 and 2003, Roland Teske goes a long way towards redressing the balance. In the name of full disclosure, I should admit that as an author of two books in which William’s speculative achievements play a major role, I cannot be considered an impartial witness to Teske’s effort.[2] All the same, I believe that anyone who reads Teske’s book will come away convinced that William deserves just the sort of probing and sustained examination Teske has given him. For the sake of our accurate appreciation of the historical trajectory of thirteenth-century scholasticism, I hope the book has many readers.
    [Show full text]
  • Why God Became Man; on Grace; on Faith
    00-front 09/02/2011 4:23 PM Page i Introduction | i william of auvergne Selected Spiritual Writings: Why God Became Man; On Grace; On Faith This volume contains translations of three of William of Auvergne’s shorter more spiritual works: Cur Deus homo (Why God Became Man), De gratia (On Grace), and De fide (On Faith). Each work touches upon the understanding of the relation between nature and grace, the moral and theological virtues, and of the need for our redemption by Christ and its character. The introduction situates the treatises within William’s many works and within the thought of the early thirteenth century. In the first treatise William sets forth the reasons for the incarnation of the Word. In it he is deeply influenced by Anselm of Canterbury’s emphasis on the need for satisfaction to be made to God for human sin, a satisfaction that could only adequately be made by someone both divine and human. While Anselm claimed to provide necessary reason of the incarnation, William admits that God could have redeemed the world in another way. In the second William argues for the need of grace in order for human beings to return to God and aims to refute the position of the Pelagian heretics as he understood it. In the third treatise, William defines faith and establishes belief in God as the foundation of faith – something, he argues, that cannot be grasped by the human intellect alone. roland j. teske, sj, has an MA in classical languages and ecclesiastical degrees in philosophy and theology from Saint Louis University, as well as a PhD in philosophy from the University of Toronto.
    [Show full text]
  • Logic and the Condemnations of 1277
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CiteSeerX Logic and the condemnations of 1277 Sara L. Uckelman† †Institute for Logic, Language, and Computation Plantage Muidergracht 24 1018TV Amsterdam, The Netherlands +31 20 525 5361 (phone) +31 20 525 5206 (fax) [email protected] November 13, 2008 Abstract The struggle to delineate the relationship between theology and logic flourished in the thirteenth century and culminated in two condemnations in early 1277, one in Paris and the other in Oxford. To see how much and what kind of affect ecclessiastical actions such as condemnations and prohibitions to teach had on the development of logic in the Middle Ages, we investigate the events leading up to the 1277 actions, the condemned propositions, and the parts of these condemnations connected to modal and temporal logic specifically. We show that because of the specific mo- tivations late 13th-century and 14th-century logicians had when working in modal and temporal logic, the effect of the 1277 condemnations on the development of those branches was much smaller than might have been supposed. Keywords: modal logic, temporal logic, Oxford condemnation, Paris condemnation, Robert Kilwardby, Stephen Tempier 1 Preliminary remarks A 21st-century logician who is interested in the societal factors which affect the development of various branches of logic cannot help but notice that one of the biggest differences between logic as it is currently practiced and logic as it was practiced in the Middle Ages is the role of the Church. Problems in theology have very little influence on modern logic, whereas medieval logicians were often trained theologians and those who were not were still connected to the Church via the Church’s role in everyday life and its connections to the university and academic life.
    [Show full text]
  • Book Reviews
    BOOK REVIEWS THE NEW TESTAMENT OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST: RE­ VISED STANDARD VERSION—CATHOLIC EDITION. Prepared by the Catholic Biblical Association of Great Britain. Collegeville, Minn.: St. John's Abbey, 1965. Pp. 250. $3.50. With the publication of the NT in the Catholic edition of the Protestant Revised Standard Version (RSV), and the preparation of the OT in the same edition, English-speaking Catholics throughout the world will finally have a whole Bible translated from the original languages. Most of them will not realize at first what this means and it will take them some time to get used to it. But the boon that this publication represents is beyond estimate. The RSV is justly famed as the latest revision of the English translation of the Bible first published in England in 1611. That "Authorized Version" (AV), commonly called in this country the King James Version (KJV), was first modernized in the "Revised Version" (RV) of 1881 (the NT) and 1885 (the OT). This revision strove to introduce as few alterations as possible into the text of the KJV, and sought to be faithful to the original and con­ sistent with current English usage. Yet, the revisers did introduce the prin­ ciple of using, as far as possible, the same English word or phrase for the same Greek or Hebrew. The RV was widely criticized for years, despite the care with which it was produced. Then in 1901 some American scholars who had co-operated in the RV brought out an amended edition called the "American Standard Version" (ASV).
    [Show full text]
  • What the Middle Ages Knew IV
    Late Medieval Philosophy Piero Scaruffi Copyright 2018 http://www.scaruffi.com/know 1 What the Middle Ages knew • Before the Scholastics – The Bible is infallible, therefore there is no need for scientific investigation or for the laws of logic – Conflict between science and religion due to the Christian dogma that the Bible is the truth – 1.Dangerous to claim otherwise – 2.Pointless to search for additional truths – Tertullian (3rd c AD): curiosity no longer necessary because we know the meaning of the world and what is going to happen next ("Liber de Praescriptione Haereticorum") 2 What the Middle Ages knew • Before the Scholastics – Decline of scientific knowledge • Lactantius (4th c AD) ridicules the notion that the Earth could be a sphere ("Divinae Institutiones III De Falsa Sapientia Philosophorum") • Cosmas Indicopleustes' "Topographia Cristiana" (6th c AD): the Earth is a disc 3 What the Middle Ages knew • Before the Scholastics – Plato's creation by the demiurge in the Timaeus very similar to the biblical "Genesis" – Christian thinkers are raised by neoplatonists • Origen was a pupil of Ammonius Sacca (Plotinus' teacher) • Augustine studied Plotinus 4 What the Middle Ages knew • Preservation of classical knowledge – Boethius (6th c AD) translates part of Aristotle's "Organon" and his "Arithmetica" preserves knowledge of Greek mathematics – Cassiodorus (6th c AD) popularizes scientific studies among monks and formalizes education ("De Institutione Divinarum" and "De artibus ac disciplinis liberalium litterarum") with the division of disciplines into arts (grammar, rhetoric, dialectic) – and disiplines (arithmeitc,geometry, music, astronomy) – Isidore of Sevilla (7th c AD) preserves Graeco- Roman knowledge in "De Natura Rerum" and "Origines" 5 What the Middle Ages knew • Preservation of classical knowledge – Bede (8th c AD) compiles an encyclopedia, "De Natura Rerum" – St Peter's at Canterbury under Benedict Biscop (7th c AD) becomes a center of learning – Episcopal school of York: arithmetic, geometry, natural history, astronomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of Cognition in the Later Middle Ages
    Theories of cognition in the later Middle Ages ROBERT PASNAU St. Joseph's University q;.::.~ CAMBRIDGE - ::: UNIVERSITY PRESS PUBLISHED BY THE PRESS SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1RP, United Kingdom CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, United Kingdom 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA 10 Samford Road, Oakleigh, Melbourne 3166, Australia © Robert Pasnau 1997 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 1997 Typeset in Palatino Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Pasnau, Robert. Theories of cognition in the later Middle Ages / Robert Pasnau. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-521-58368-3 1. Knowledge, Theory of - History. 2. Cognition - History. 3. Philosophy, Medieval. 4. Thomas, Aquinas, Saint, 1225?-1274. 5. Olivi, Pierre Jean, 1248 or 9-1298. 6. William, of Ockham, ca. 1285-ca. 1349. 1. Title. B161.P37 1997 128'.2'0902 - dC20 96-36249 C1P A catalog record for this book is available from the British Library Transferred to digital printing 2003 Contents Preface page vii List of abbreviations x Introduction 1 1 The philosophical-historical context 4 2 Thomas Aquinas and the theory of species 11 3 Challenges to the theory 18 PART r: FUNDAMENTALS 1 Immateriality and intentionality 31 1 Cognition
    [Show full text]
  • The Theology of the Res Et Sacramentum with Particular Emphasis on Its Application to Penance
    THE THEOLOGY OF THE RES ET SACRAMENTUM WITH PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON ITS APPLICATION TO PENANCE SALVATION THROUGH THE COMMUNITY Basic to Jewish-Christian tradition is the belief that man is saved in and through the community. The ancient Hebrew "could not make his unique answer to God as an isolated individual." 1 If he was to live at all, he had to be one with the community, one with the people of God. To be separated from the community was death. To be restored to the community was life. Similarly, the early Christian did not believe that he could have access to God apart from the community. But for him the community was the new people of God, the body of Christ which is the Church. "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body" (1 Cor. 12:13). Separa- tion from this body was death. Reconciliation to the body was life. For outside the body there is no salvation. Thus, in the early third century Origen has the sinner ask three questions, but they are really one: "How can I who have fallen be saved? . How can I have access to God? How can I return to the Church?" 2 This idea of corporate salvation, of salvation in and through the Church, has always been foreign to Protestantism. More recently salvation has come to be regarded by many as the result of a per- sonal encounter with God, an encounter which found its highest expression in the soul of Jesus, an encounter which is the exemplar and earnest of what can happen to all of us.
    [Show full text]
  • The Double‐Edged Sword of Interdict: Some More Warnings from History
    THE DOUBLE‐EDGED SWORD OF INTERDICT: SOME MORE WARNINGS FROM HISTORY Marshall Crossnoe I would like to begin with a claim that I have heard or read in one form or another for almost thirty years. The claim is this: “Church history teaches that whenever Christian thinkers baptize philosophy, they compromise the Christian faith.” That claim is the church historian’s version of St. Paul’s warning, “see to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy.” It is the church historian’s answer to Tertullian’s famous rhetorical question, “What does Jerusalem have to do with Athens?” It is a “history of doctrine take” on the perennial conflict between faith and reason, a take that Adolph Harnack exploited to great and lasting effect in History of Doctrine, and the one that Etienne Gilson challenged in his famous little book entitled Faith and Reason. The claim reminds me of interdict. Interdict is the censure that bishops of Rome have been using since the ninth century.1 By means of interdict, popes interrupt participation in holy things. It typically takes the form of denying someone or some group access to the Divine Liturgy, the sacraments, Christian burial, or other means of grace. The claim regarding what church history teaches is a call to interdict philosophy. If church history teaches that whenever Christian thinkers baptize philosophy, they compromise the Christian faith, then we should have nothing to do with philosophy. We should withhold baptism from it. I do not believe that is a good idea. T he interdiction of philosophy is a double-edged sword.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematic Theology 1 Systematic Theology: Task and Methods
    Systematic Theology 1 Systematic Theology: Task and Methods Francis Schüssler Fiorenza Fragility of Theology 3 Christian Scriptures: Testimony and Theological Reflection 5 Three Classic Paradigms of Theology 6 Augustine: Christian Doctrine as Wisdom 7 Beginning of Systematic Theology in the Greek Church 7 Augustine’s Scientific Conception: Knowledge and Wisdom 8 Augustine’s Hermeneutical Rules 9 Augustine’s influence on the West 11 Aquinas: Scholastic Method and Thomas’s Sacra Doctrina 13 Background to Scholastic Method and Theology 14 Thomas’s Understanding of Sacra Doctrina 15 Basis and Subject Matter of Sacra Doctrina 17 Neo-Scholasticism: Its Distinctive Characteristics 20 From Scholasticism to Post-Tridentine Catholicism 20 Baroque Scholasticism 21 Neo-Scholastic Theology 22 Crisis of Neo-Scholastic Theology 25 Summary 26 Five Contemporary Approaches to Theology 26 Transcendental Theology 26 The Turn to the Subject in Modern Theology 27 Karl Rahner’s Transcendental Phenomenology 28 1 Systematic Theology 30 2 Comparison between Aquinas and Rahner Beyond Transcendental Theology 31 Hermeneutical Theology 32 Experience and Language 33 Classics: The Authority of a Tradition 33 Beyond Hermeneutics 34 Analytical Approaches to Theology 35 Metatheory: Method in Theology 36 Models and Category Analysis 38 Beyond Metatheory 41 The Method of Correlation 41 Background 41 Correlation in Contemporary Roman Catholic Theology 42 Beyond Correlation 47 Liberation Theologies 47 Starting Point 48 Critique of Ideology 48 Subjugated Knowledge 49 Praxis
    [Show full text]
  • Idolaters, Philosophers and an Elusive
    John Marenbon Idolaters, Philosophersand an ElusiveJew The Problem of Paganism in the Summa Halensis Abstract: This chapter examines the Summa’streatment of the philosophers, by which it means, in the main, the ancient pagan philosophers, although some later Jewishand Islamic figures are alsoincluded. It shows how the authorsbalanced the obvious virtue and wisdom of the philosophers against their moralshortcomings, inevitable since they lacked God’sgrace, and the severe limitation to theirunder- standing entailedbytheirlimited understanding of the Trinityand theirlack of ex- plicit knowledge of the Incarnation. With regard to salvation, the authors seem not to have had ageneral theory about the fate of the philosophers, but they suggest that some might have been savedbyspecial inspiration. The chapter also considers a more anthropological approach to the pagans in the Old Testament found in Summa Book 2, and it argues that thereisnoevidence of direct knowledge of Mai- monides’s Guide of the Perplexed in the Summa Halensis. The large group of people often described as ‘pagans’—all thosewho werenot Chris- tians, Jews or Muslims—posed aproblem for Christian thinkers in the Middle Ages. These pagans included the philosophers, poets and heroes from antiquity whose wis- dom and virtuesmanymedievalwriters so admired. How could pagans, giventheir ignorance of Christian truth, be the sources of scientific knowledge that the ancient philosophers were taken to be? Could pagans be trulyvirtuous, and, if not,why did so manyfamous figures of antiquity
    [Show full text]
  • Providence in the Summa Halensis an Innovative Reworking of Past Masters
    Simon Maria Kopf Providenceinthe Summa Halensis: Between Authority and Innovation Abstract: The doctrine of divine providence features prominentlyinthe 13th-century earlyFranciscan Summa Halensis. This chapter argues that the account of providence presented in the Summa is an innovative reworking of past authorities and maythus be counted among the examples of earlyFranciscan innovations.For instance,while John of Damascus claimed thatprovidence is part of God’swill and Peter Lombard took providence to be aspecific form of divine knowledge,the Summa Halensis ap- plies the Boethian notion of the ratio of providence to harmonize the two authorities, termingthe corresponding executio ‘government’.Thus the distinction between prov- identia and gubernatio,socentral to Thomas Aquinas’ doctrine of providence,isto be found initiallyinthe Summa Halensis. Introduction In his historical studyofAlbert the Great’streatise on providenceand fate, which shows the dependence of Albert’streatise in the Summa theologiae sive de mirabili scientia Dei on the Summa Halensis,¹ JosefGeorgenargues thatthe rise to promi- nence of the topic of divine providence in the 13th century,inparticular,atthe Uni- versityofParis, is, apart from its intrinsic importance and value for theologygener- ally, largely afunctionofthe theological and philosophical circumstances of the mid-13th century.Inparticular, Georgen suggests that the Parisian controversy be- tween Christian and Averroistic Aristotelians goes along waytowards explaining the increased interest in the doctrine of providence,not least because it was at- tacked, in various forms, by Latin Averroists,such as SigerofBrabant,and conse- quentlyalso dealt with in some of the articles of the condemnations of 1270 and 1277.² Pierre Mandonnet,Antonin Sertillanges, and Martin Grabmann, to name just On the question of the dependnceofAlbert the Great on the Summa Halensis,see also Parthenius Minges, ‘Abhängigkeitsverhältnis zwischen Alexander vonHales und Albert dem Grossen,’ Franziska- nische Studien 2(1915), pp.
    [Show full text]