[< OU 1 60434 >M
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
fr: [< OU_1 60434 >m OSMANIA UNIVERSITY UBRARY Call No./<f JP Wf. Acffliiion No. ^ 6 3 / <f./lf JVis book should be returned on or before the date last marked below, LEADERS OF PHILOSOPHY THOMAS AQUINAS LEADERS OF PHILOSOPHY A Series of Monographs on the Philosophers who have mainly influenced Western thought. Edited by Professor J. L. STOCKS, M.A., of the Victoria University of Manchester. The initial Volumes are : LEIBNIZ. By Professor HERBERT WILDON CARR, of the University of London and the University of Southern California. SPINOZA. By Professor LEON ROTH, of the University of Jerusalem. THOMAS AQUINAS. By the Rev. M. C. D'ARCY, S.J., M.A. (Oxon.), Campion Hall, Oxford. KANT. By Professor A. W. LINDSAY, Master of Balliol College, Oxford. (In Preparation?) PLATO. By Professor A. S. FERGUSON, of the University of Aberdeen. (In Preparation.) ARISTOTLE. By G. R. G. MURE, Fellow and Senior Tutor of Merton College, Oxford. (In Preparation.] BERKELEY. By G. DAWES HICKS, F.B.A. (In Preparation.) JOHN STUART MILL. By Professor J. L. STOCKS, M.A., of the Victoria Uni- versity of Manchester. (In Preparation) DESCARTES. By S. V. KEELING, M.A., Lecturer in Philosophy at University College, London. (In Preparation.) (Other volumes are in course of arrangement.) THOMAS AQUINAS by REV. M. C. D'ARCY^-S.T.. M.A. (OxoN.) Campion Hall, Oxford ERNEST BENN LIMITED London : Bouverie House, ..4 FIRST PUBLISHED IN 1930 POINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION vii-ix PART I HAPTER I. i. HISTORY OF PERIOD .... 3 2. PHILOSOPHIC AND RELIGIOUS BACKGROUND 9 3. ARISTOTELIANISM ..... 18 4. SCHOLASTICISM ..... 24 II. i. LIFE OF ST. THOMAS 33 2. CHARACTER OF ST. THOMAS ... 49 III. MIND OF ST. THOMAS 55 PART II IV. THE FIRST PRINCIPLES OF KNOWLEDGE i. TRUTH 75 2. REALISM 79 3. CONCEPTS AND JUDGMENT ... 84 4. ACT OF KNOWING .... 88 V. THE NATURE OF REALITY i. BEING * . , . .... 99 2. ACT AND POTENCY .... 104 3. ANALOGY AND SUBSTANCE . .118 4. UNUM, VERUM, BONUM .... 134 5. CAUSALITY 143 6. ACCIDENTS AND INDIVIDUALITY . 147 7. RELATION 154 vi CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE VI. THE EXISTENCE AND NATURE OF GOD . 157 VII. GOD AND THE UNIVERSE .... 177 VIII. NATURE AND MAN i. THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE . 191 2. LIFE ....... 197 3. PSYCHOLOGY ..... 205 IX. ETHICS ....... 227 PART III X. i. LATER HISTORY OF THOMISM . .251 2. INFLUENCE OF ST. THOMAS . 258 3. MODERN THOMISM ..... 268 SUMMARY OF LIFE OF ST. THOMAS . 277 WORKS OF ST. THOMAS ..... 278 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 281 INDEX ....... 283 INTRODUCTION UNTIL within comparatively recent times the subject of this book, St. Thomas Aquinas, received little recognition in this country. His lot has indeed been a strange one. Admired by his fellow-religionists of the Catholic Church, and accepted by them as the pattern of philosophic wisdom, he has nevertheless suffered almost a complete neglect outside that Church. The reasons for this are not far to seek. The great change in Europe at the time of the Reformation brought with it a distaste for medieval thought, which was aggravated by religious prejudices. Unfortunately for the continued reputation of St. Thomas, his views were identified with religious dogma, and so it came to pass that no one, save a Catholic, thought of studying his system from the point of view of pure philosophy and truth. Now, however, the situation has changed, and with the wane of old feuds and passions, a new interest in medieval history has sprung up and acquaintance with St. Thomas has become general. All are ready to acknowledge his claims to be a philosopher worthy of attention, and some even concede to him a position amongst the greatest thinkers of the world. As, however, suspicions disappear slowly, it may be well to meet at the very beginning some of the objections that have been raised against his claims to greatness. The chief and most specious is that he was primarily a Christian apologist, and that consequently his attitude was incompatible with that of the true philosopher, whose sole concern is truth. A Catholic is bound to put faith before reason and accept unquestioned the content of his religious beliefs. The objection is, as I say, a specious one, but I do not think that it can bear examination. If it were true, then no believer could write philosophy vii viii INTRODUCTION without making himself an agnostic. Again, not only St. Thomas would be blackballed, but also such excellent philosophers and churchmen as Bishop Berkeley, Bishop Butler and Malebranche, and even Descartes, Leibniz all Christians in if and Hegel, who were professing ; fact, we think of it, many an Arabian and Indian philosopher as well. Besides, the objection rests on a false antithesis of faith and reason and there are many other answers. But the best and final one is the work itself of Aquinas. It is irrelevant to the issue whether the author was an agnostic or a believer. The sole consideration for the reader is the truth or falsehood of his assertions and arguments. If the beliefs of St. Thomas interfere with the rational evidence he puts forward, invalidating or garbling it by illicit assumptions, then he must be written down as no philosopher. Now this can be decided only by experiment, and I have no doubt that St. Thomas would have wished to abide by this test. He sets down the truth as he sees it, and for him truth is something holy, to be approached with pure motive and without distraction. It is not St. Thomas but the reader, alas ! who is sometimes without goodwill and without an open mind. A second objection is to the effect that St. Thomas is only a disciple and imitator of Aristotle, and therefore lacks originality. The answer to this will be found in the course of this book, and at the end the reader can judge for himself. To this charge I fancy St. Thomas would indifferent awtoritates have been very ; non numerentur sed ponderentur, talk not of the number of authorities but weigh their truth. Originality counted for him only in so far as it was implied in the discovery of truth. Other objections, such as his unbending intellectualism and his ignorance of science, will be dealt with in the text. Formerly, ignorance of the period, of sources, texts and University life was an obstacle* This has now fortunately disappeared thanks to the labours of a number of scholars. INTRODUCTION ix The sources have been brought to light by men like Denifle, Baeumke, Ehrle, Rashdall and others, while Mandonnet, de Wulf and Grabmann have lifted the mists which enveloped the thought of the period in which St. Thomas lived. For history I have relied on them and other workers in this field, and for the inter- pretation of the philosophy of St. Thomas I have had con- stant recourse to P. Sertillanges, P. de Bruyne, M. Gilson, M. Maritain, P. Olgiati, P. Marechal and P. Rousselot, and to studies by P. Roland-Gosselin and P. de Munnyck. Works on St. Thomas by Gilson, Grabmann and Olgiati have already been translated into English. The scope of the present volume will however be found, I think, to differ from them. I had hoped to be able to sketch the thought of St. Thomas historically, showing its development from one treatise to another. But the extent of his writings and the vastness of his system soon made me realise that the attempt was impossible within the compass of a moderately sized book. I have therefore tried to present his philosophy in its unity in the light of its fundamental principles. This has involved much condensation, but even so I have been unable to find room for his political thought. I fear, too, that this condensation and the metaphysical setting may make the following chapters difficult reading at times. My aim has been to present the thought of St. Thomas as sympathetically as I could a critical attitude would have the ; delayed march of the argument and expanded the size of this book beyond measure. On the other hand, when there are well-known difficulties and differences of interpretation, I have thought it right to mention them. It remains to thank the kind friends who have helped me in the production of this book, and especially Miss S. Bliss for her trouble in correcting and indexing my manuscript. M. C. D'ARCY. OXFORD, 1930. PART I CHAPTER I i. HISTORY OF PERIOD IN an Oxford manuscript of the Summa Theologica are to " be found the words : Here Thomas dies. O Death, how " thou art accursed ! The writers of the time were, no doubt, exuberant in their expressions of admiration and dislike II ei ; Frederick was stupor mundi immutator mimbilis, and Richard of England, Cceur de Lion. St. Thomas had his share of these praises and titles, and to estimate their worth we have to allow for the habit of the age. But when all allowances have been made, the impression remains that the medievalists loved and appreciated men of size, and ranked St. Thomas as the peer in philosophy of Hildebrand and Barbarossa in eccle- " " siastical and secular power. They liked mountainy men. The thirteenth century, in particular, was an age in which men tried to move mountains. The Papacy and the alike Empire dreamed of universal jurisdiction ; the universities, lately established, were packed with youth, anxious and determined to explore and master all the far continents of thought. In the perspective of history we can now see that the characteristic of the century was architectural or formative. In England and France common law and jurisprudence took shape, Magna Charta was signed, St.