Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T07:06:55.030Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Saint Thomas Aquinas and the Spirit of Ecumenism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Yves Congar O.P.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

I have chosen a strange subject to celebrate the centenary of Thomas Aquinas here, at Oxford. Is it not paradoxical, if not a little provocative, to speak of ‘St Thomas and the Spirit of Ecumenism’? For several reasons great caution is to be recommended.

First of all, there can only be ecumenism if one accepts the other as other, that he also has insights, that he has something to give. Now St Thomas lived in an epoch of a Christianity very sure of itself, and even, one can say, of a latin Catholicism loyal to the Pope as its head, absolutely assured of its legitimacy and its truth. England was certainly no exception. In these circumstances, what could possibly have been an ecumenical dialogue? Heretics were to be ‘exterminated’: that does not mean killed, but driven far away, chased from the land; though the process of ‘exclusion’ could culminate in physical destruction. One thinks of the cathars of Montségur. Listen to this account of an indicative incident. It happened at Cluny, at the beginning of the reign of St Louis, who recounted the episode to Joinville: ‘There was a great conference of clerics and Jews at the monastery of Cluny. There was a knight there . . . , who stood up and leaning on his crutch, asked that the greatest cleric and the greatest master of the Jews he brought to him. And so they were. . . . “Master”, said the knight, “I ask you if you believe that the Virgin Mary, who carried God in her womb and in her arms, gave birth while remaining a virgin and that she is the mother of God”. And the Jew replied that he did not believe a word of it. . . . “Truly”, said the knight, “You will pay for it”. And then he lifted up his crutch and struck the Jew near the ear and knocked him to the ground. And the Jews fled, carrying away their master, badly wounded, and thus ended the conference’.

Type
Research Article
Information
New Blackfriars , Volume 55 , Issue 648 , May 1974 , pp. 196 - 209
Copyright
Copyright © 1974 Provincial Council of the English Province of the Order of Preachers

References

1 Joinville, Histoire de saint Louis, Ch. X (Ed. N. de Wailly).

2 Praesumptuosum esset tantorum doctorum tam expressis auctoritatibus contraire‘: C. err. Grace., I, 10; ja q. 39, a. 5. ad 1. ’Quamvis contrarium non sit reputandum erroneum, praecipue propter sententiam Gregoril Nazianzeni cuius tanta est in doctrina christiana auctoritas, ut nullus unquam eius dictis calumniam inferre praesumpserit, sicut nec Athanasii documentis, ut Hieronymus dicit‘: Ia, q. 61, a. 4c. ‘Neutrum autem horum (Augustine and Gregory Nazianzus) aestimo esse sanae doctrinae contrarium: quia nimis praesumptiosum videretur asserere tantos Ecclesiae doctores a sana doctrina pietatis deviasse’: De natura angelorum c. 17.

3 The Deposition of Bartholomew of Capone at the process of canonization: Aota SS 7th March, c. 9, n. 78.

4 G. Miller, Gradualismus, Eine Vorstudie z. altdeutschn Literaturgeschichte, in Deutsche Vierteljahrschrift f. Literatur wissensch, u. Geltesgesch, 2(1924) 681–720.

5 See for example in the Summa. Ia IIae q. 94, 2; IIa IIae q. 2, a. 3; q. 58, a. 3 ad 2; q. 104, a.1, 4 and 5; etc. For the schema for the graduation of beings, cf. for example C.Gent. Iv, 11 Q.disp. de anima a. 6.

6 Thus Ia qq. 85–88; Ia IIae, q.2.

7 Such, at least, is the interesting interpretation of A. Patfoort, L'unité de la Ia Pars et le mouvement interne de la Somme théologique de S. Thomas d'Aquin, in Rev. Sc. Phil. théol. 47 (1963) 513–544.

8 cf. several rather all‐encompassing pages by M. MGorce on the subject in Rev. Sc. phil. théol. 19 (1930) 266–267; et cf. H. vorster, cited below, n. 19. Freedom, the condition of Man of the Christian: Ia IIae, q. 108, a. 4; IIa IIae, q. 183, a.1 and 4, and the doctrine of obedience q. 104, a. 5 and 6, to which John Huss refers.

9 See, For example, C. Gentiles, IV, 11; Ia q. 29, a. 3; Ia IIae prol. C. J. Geffré, Structure de la personne et rapports interpersonnels, in Rev. Thomiste 63 (1963) 672–692; J. B. Metz, Christliche Anthropozentrik, Munchen, 1962.

10 Dogmatik I, p. 78; quoted by K. Barth, Die protestantische Theologie des XIX. Jahrhunderts. Zurich, p. 571.

11 Without doubt Luther consulted rather than truly studied the Summa. He believes that, starting from scriptual texts, Thomas concludes with Aristotle and interprets Scripture with reference to him (Tisch Reden: W.1, no. 280; 8th June 1532). But he is particularly critical of the Contra Gentiles, which he finds ridiculous (ibid): it is no catechism. St. Thomas holds there the impious thesis that infused faith is compatible with mortal sin (ib. no. 438: the beginning of 1533). There is the view which compares and opposes Thomas and Bonaventure: ‘Hue mihi Bonaventuram numero, incomparabilem virum, in quo multum fuit spiritus prae omnibus, qui ex Academiis servati sunt. De quo numero et S. Thomas Aquinas, si tamen sanctus. est nam vehementer dubito, cum adeo nihil olfiat spiritus in eo…’ (Ad librum Ambrosii Catharini responsio, 1521; W.7, p. 774).

12 Fr. Clark, , The Eucharistic Sacrifice and the Reformation, London, 1960, p. 469–503Google Scholar and 572–592 treat of the historical question.

13 Cf. Ryan, J. K., The reputation of St Thomas Aqunias among the English protestant Thinkers of the Seventeenth Century, Washington, 1948Google Scholar.

14 Thus Ch. Gore on pneumatology (The Holy Ghost and the Church. London, 1924, p. 190–196)Google Scholar; Mascall, E. L., Existence and Analogy. London, 1949Google Scholar; 2nd ed, 1966; Christi, Corpus. Essays on the Church and the Eucharist. London, 1953, ch. VIGoogle Scholar.

15 Kirchlich Dogmatik 1/2, Zurich, p. 686.

16 Th. Bonhoffer, , Die Gotteslehre des Thomas von Aquin als Sprachproblem. Tubingen, 1961. p. 3Google Scholar.

17 Stephanus Pfurtner, Luther und Thomas in Gespräch. User Heil zwischen Gewissheit und Gefäahrdung. Heidelberg, 1961.

18 H. Kuhn, Via Caritatis. Theologie des Gesetzes bei Thomas von Aquin, Berlin, 1964. On this subject see the study of M. Froidure La théologie protestante de la Loi peut‐elle se réclamer de S. Thomas? in Rev. Sc. phil. theol. 51 (1967) 53–61.

19 H. Vorster, Das Freiheits‐verständnis bei Thomas von Aquin und Martin Luther (Kirche und Konfession 8). Gottingen‐Zurich, 1965.

20 O. Pesch, H., Theologic der Rechtfertigung bei Martin Luther und Thomas von Aquin. Mainz, 1967Google Scholar. Pesch has presented the works of Kuhn and Vorster in Catholica 18 (1964) 24–27 and 20 (1966) 54–78.

20 aH. Lyttkens, The Analogy between God and the World, An investigation of its Background and Interpretation of its Use by Thomas Aquinas. Upsalla, 1952. For Mascall, see above, n. 14.

21 Discours pour la translation du Chef de S. Thomas d'Aquin, Toulouse, 18 juillet 1852: péroraison.

22 See, for example, his commentaries in Iam q. 13, a. 4, n. IV; q. 54, a. l, n. XXI the end; q. 79, a. 9, n. III; Iam Iaae, q. 5, n. I; q. 18, a. 4, n. III;

23 In II Sent. d. 2, q. l, a. 3.

24 Very numerous examples. Thus Declaratio XLII quaestionum, prol. (2 April 1271: ed Vivès XXVII: 248: Ed. Parme XVI, 163); Quodl, XII, 8; la, q. 61, a. 4; q. 68, a. 4; q. 70, a. 3 c the end; Ia IIae, q. 4, a. 7, ad. 3.

25 Cf. Ia IIae, q. 102, a. 4, ad. 3.

26 Cf., among others, Come. In Hebr c. 3 lect. l; IIa IIae, q. 124, a. 5.

27 Cf. Guillou, M.J. Le. Théologie du Mystère. Le Christ et l'Eglise. Paris, 1963, p. 243fGoogle Scholar.

28 IIIa, q. 72, a. 11; Ia IIae, q. 102, a. 4 ad. 9.

30 Cf. Expos. in Symb., a. 9.

31 Cf. S. Lyonnet, St Paul, Liberty and Law (Paperback), Rome, 1962=Liberté Chrétienne et loi de l'Esprit selon S. Paul, in La vie selon l'Esprit, condition du chrétien (Unam Sanctam 55) Paris, 1965, p. 169–195.

32 Cf. IIIa, q. 63, a. 1 ad. 1 and a. 3; comp. C. errores Graec. II. 32. And cf. our study, ‘Ecclesia’ et ‘Populus (fidelis)’ dans l'ecelesiologie de S. Thomas, in ‘St Thomas Aquinas’, ed. by L'Institut medieval de Toronto, 1974.

33 Mitterer, A., Geheimnisvoller Leib Christi nach St Thomas von Aquin und nach Papst XII. Vienna, 1958Google Scholar.

34 Milner, Benjamin Charles Jr, Calvin's Doctrine of the Church, Leiden, 1970CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 Cf. IIa IIae, q. 10, a. 9, 10 and 12.

36 A formula of Ambrosiaster (PL 17,245), often quoted by St Thomas, and generally in the Middle Ages.

37 IIa IIae, q. 1, a. 2.

38 IIa, q. 64, a. 3 ad obj.

39 Comm. in Ep. ad Rom. c. 10, lect. 3.

40 Comm. in Metaph. lib. XII, lect. 9 end.

41 Albert the Great had started to comment on Aristotle in Paris, where his ‘Libri naturales’ had been banned in 1210, and several times subsequently; cf. M. D. Chenu, Introduction à l'étude de S. Thomas d'Aquin. Montréal‐Paris, 1950, p. 31 and 36f. The writings of Maimonides had been burnt in 1233!

42 I have treated of this subject in greater depth in, Valeur et portée oecuménique de quelques principes herméneutiques de saint Thomas d'Aquin, in Rev. Sc. phil. théol. 57 (1973), ps. 611–626.

43 Denys: De veritate q. 3, a. 1 ad. 6; Ia, q. 19, a. 4 ad. 1. Augustine: IIIa, q. 75, a.1 ad. 1; Anselm, De Veritate, q. 3, a. 1 ad. 10.

44 In order to show that the psychological Trinity of Augustine is not opposed to the identity of memoria and the intellectus: Ia, q. 79, a. 7.

45 Quodl. III, 17; IIa IIae, q. 184, a. 8 ad. 1.

46 Cf. The prologue of the Declaration XLII quaest, (Parme XVI, 163; VivèS XXVII, 248.)

47 S. Cyril: IIIa, q. 2, a. 6 ad. 4. S. Augustine: De Spiritualibus creaturis a. 10.

48 De potentia, q. 10, a. 1 ad. 8.

49 Villain, M., Introduction a l'Oecuménisme. 3rd ed. Casterman, 1964, p. 249fGoogle Scholar.; 4th ed. 196; p. 297f.

50 De potentia, q. 10, a. 5 c.

51 Denz. 691; Denz‐Schonm. 1300–1301.

52 C. Gentiles lib.I c.4 9 Tertium inconveniens.

53 Ch. 1, n. 4 9 7. For the important idea relating certain differences to the apostolicity itself, cf. also ch. 3, n. 14 9 3.