Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:57:47.181Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Aquinas in Dialogue: Thomas for the Twenty‐First Century edited by Jim Fodor and Frederick Christian Bauerschmidt, Blackwell Publishing, Malden (USA), Victoria (Australia) and Oxford, 2004, Pp. ix + 185, £19.99 pbk.

Review products

Aquinas in Dialogue: Thomas for the Twenty‐First Century edited by Jim Fodor and Frederick Christian Bauerschmidt, Blackwell Publishing, Malden (USA), Victoria (Australia) and Oxford, 2004, Pp. ix + 185, £19.99 pbk.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Book Reviews
Copyright
Copyright © The Dominican Council/Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2005

This is a new volume in the series Directions in Modern Theology. It comprises eight essays by different authors, Catholics and others. Each essay discusses a particular ‘world‐view’, ranging from Eastern Orthodoxy to modern nihilism, and compares some aspect of the world‐view with some part of the thought of St Thomas Aquinas.

The first essay, written from a Lutheran perspective, considers St Thomas's notion of ‘merit.’ Michael Root notes that that the greatest stumbling block a Lutheran finds in Catholicism is the doctrine defined by Trent that the justified man merits eternal life. He praises St Thomas for discussing merit in the context of God's ordaining all creatures to their proper end. He also notes that Lutheran theologians are willing to consider eternal life a reward in the sense of a compensation for sufferings. Despite this promising start, Root concludes by suggesting that the term ‘merit’ causes more problems than it solves.

An essay on Eastern Orthodoxy considers the allegation that the economy of salvation would be no different, for St Thomas, if God were not the Holy Trinity. Bruce Marshall, writing from a Methodist university, argues on the contrary that Aquinas's notion of created grace does not exclude a ‘Trinitarian’ account of man's sanctification. He also suggests that St Thomas's account of the relation between the processions and missions of the divine persons is more satisfactory than that of contemporary Orthodox theologians.

‘Thomas Aquinas and Judaism’ is an attempt by two Dutch Catholic theologians to recruit the Angelic Doctor for the fashionable view that the Mosaic covenant is still in force. They point out that St Thomas attributed a greater efficacy to circumcision than did Robert Kilwardby, but ignore the explicit statement in the Summa Theologiæ about the cessation of the ceremonial precepts (Ia2æ Q.103). Their suggestion that the co‐existence of the divine and human natures in our Lord might be a good analogy for the co‐existence of the Church and Judaism seems to this reviewer quite fantastic.

‘Thomas Aquinas and Islam’, by Fr David Burrell CSC is not really about Islam, but about the Liber de Causis. He argues that Proclus's work, as recast by an anonymous Muslim writer, gave St Thomas a conception of causality not available in Aristotle, and which was needed in order to speak accurately about God as Creator. He considers that one can thus describe St Thomas's synthesis as ‘an interfaith achievement’(p. 83). Astonishingly for a Catholic religious, Fr Burrell apparently considers the Koran to have been divinely revealed (p. 76).

Paul Williams's essay, ‘Aquinas meets the Buddhists’, is surely the most valuable in the book. Williams examines the central doctrinal texts of Mahayana Buddhism and shows that they are not, as is sometimes claimed, consonant with apophatic theology, but purely and simply atheistic. He argues that the Buddhist search for meaning is incomplete, since it fails to pose the question, ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?’ From this it also follows that the Christian‐Buddhist disagreement over salvation is ‘radical to the core’(p. 116). However Williams's suggestion that the Christian can only engage in dialogue with Buddhists by acknowledging that he may be wrong about the existence of God would make such dialogue incompatible with Vatican I.

Fr Fergus Kerr examines the interaction between Thomism and modern analytic philosophy. He highlights the importance of Franz Brentano, a ‘zealous Thomist’ whose work on intentionality had a crucial effect on twentieth‐century Anglo‐American philosophy. Elizabeth Anscombe and Philippa Foot are also discussed as mediating an Aristotelian‐Thomist moral tradition to the otherwise largely consequentialist world of Oxford moral philosophy. However, Fr Kerr also indicates that not all students of St Thomas are convinced by the use that more ‘mainstream’ philosophers make of his writings.

Denys Turner's article on atheism and idolatry argues that St Thomas's description of God as ipsum esse subsistens allows him to avoid both these extremes. He also shows convincingly that the ‘Five Ways’ are intended to be rigorous proofs of God's existence. However his exposition of St Thomas's discussion of idolatry seems mistaken: St Thomas does not say that the Catholic and the idolater are using the word ‘God’ analogously, but that the Catholic is when he uses this word to refer both to the true God and to an idol.

A final article on Flannery O’Connor aims to show the Thomist, or, at any rate, Catholic, inspiration of her stories. Frederick Bauerschmidt argues that the shocking nature of her writings was intended not to encourage nihilism, but to make her readers feel the inadequacy of a life without divine grace.

This eclectic volume will not really serve as an introduction to St Thomas, but will no doubt be of interest to those who are already interested in the various subjects discussed.