Notes
INTRODUCTION
. IaIIae, q. 66.5; see also q. 57.2, and q. 68.7. Following Aristotle (Nicomachean Ethics 6.7), Thomas identifies three speculative habits: understanding (intellectus), the habit that deals with principles; science (scientia), the habit that deals with conclusions; and wisdom (sapientia), the habit that deals with both principles and conclusions and therefore orders and judges the others.
. See Ia, q. 43.5, ad 2; and IIaIIae, q. 45.2.
. SCG II. 46. Thomas also notes the role of the Incarnation as essential to the circular movement of going forth and returning; see In III Sent., prol., and Comp. theol. 201.
. On wisdom in Aquinas, Jacques Maritain, Science and Wisdom (New York: Scribner, 1940), pt. 1; Etienne Gilson, Wisdom and Love in Saint Thomas Aquinas (Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 1951); and Kieran Conley, A Theology of Wisdom. A Study in St. Thomas (Dubuque, IA: Priory Press, 1963).
CHAPTER 1 The World That Made Thomas Aquinas
. Bernard J. F. Lonergan, “The Future of Thomism,” in A Second Collection, William Ryan and Bernard Tyrrell, eds. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1974), 44.
. On the development, Stephen C. Ferruolo, The Origins of the University: The Schools at Paris and Their Critics, 1100–1215 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1985).
. For a sketch of the three basic varieties of medieval theology—monastic, scholastic, and vernacular—Bernard McGinn, “Regina quondam … ,” Speculum 83 (2008): 817–39.
. The foundational study remains Martin Grabmann, Die Geschichte der scholastischen Methode, 2 vols. (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1909–11).
. Beryl Smalley’s The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (Oxford: Blackwell, 1940) was the first to draw attention to this.
. Fernand Van Steenberghen, Aristotle in the West: Origins of Latin Aristotelianism (Louvain: Nauwelaerts, 1955).
. On Dominic and the early Dominicans, Simon Tugwell, Early Dominicans. Selected Writings (New York: Paulist Press, 1982).
. Humbert of Romans, Treatise on the Formation of Preachers I.82, in Tugwell, Early Dominicans, 205.
CHAPTER 2 The Making of the Summa theologiae
. James A. Weisheipl, Friar Thomas d’Aquino. His Life, Thought, and Work (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1974); and Jean-Pierre Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas. Vol. 1, The Person and His Work (Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 1996). See also Simon Tugwell, “Thomas Aquinas: Introduction,” in Albert and Thomas. Selected Writings (New York: Paulist Press, 1988), 201–351.
. Not long after the accession to the papacy of John XXII (1316) the Naples Province of the Dominicans began the process that culminated in Thomas’s canonization on July 18, 1323. Three lives of Thomas were written by Dominicans. The oldest was that of William of Tocco, edited by Claire le Brun-Gouanvic, Ystoria sancti Thome de Aquino de Guillaume de Tocco (1323) (Toronto: PIMS, 1996). We also have the records of the two canonization inquiries (Naples 1319 and Fossanova 1321). Some of these materials are available in The Life of St. Thomas Aquinas. Biographical Documents, by Kenelm Foster (London: Longmans, Green, 1959).
. This story appears in almost all the sources and, according to the hagiographers, was accompanied by a dream vision guaranteeing Thomas’s lifelong chastity.
. Tocco, Ystoria, Chap. 13 (ed., 117–18).
. Ibid., chap. 15 (ed., 122).
. Thomas’s inception lecture, “Rigans montes de superioribus suis,” is translated in Tugwell, Albert and Thomas, 355–60.
. Thomas’s most important defense of the mendicants is his 1256 treatise Against Those Attacking the Worship of God and Religion.
. On the Perfection of the Spiritual Life, chap. 26.
. De ver. consists of qq. 1–20 dealing with truth and knowledge, and qq. 21–29 treating the good and appetite. For an English translation: St. Thomas, On Truth, 3 vols. (Chicago: Regnery, 1952–54).
. Thomas’s hagiographers testify to the effectiveness of his preaching; see Tocco, Ystoria, chap. 48 (ed., 182–84).
. For a recent interpretation of the importance of unicity of form in Thomas’s thought, Denys Turner, Thomas Aquinas (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013), 62–69.
. Like most medieval people, Thomas had a strong faith in relics and is said to have worn around his neck a relic of St. Agnes, which he once used to cure Brother Reginald of a dangerous fever. In honor of this miracle he ordered that the brothers be given a good meal on the anniversary of the event.
. See the account in the First Canonization Inquiry, no. 78, as translated by Foster, Life of St. Thomas Aquinas, 108–9.
. First Canonization Inquiry, no. 77 (Foster, Life of St. Thomas Aquinas, 107).
. First Canonization Inquiry, no. 79 (Foster, Life of St. Thomas Aquinas, 109).
. Weisheipl, Friar Thomas D’Aquino, 321–23; Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, 1:289–95.
. This story is part of the testimony of Bartholomew of Capua in the First Canonization Inquiry, no. 77 (Foster, Life of St. Thomas Aquinas, 108).
. The lives of Thomas and the two canonization investigations are filled with miracle stories, though perhaps not as many as those recorded of many other medieval saints. Pope John XXII, when questioned if there were enough miracles for Thomas’s canonization, is alleged to have responded, “He performed as many miracles as articles he wrote” (tot fecerat miracula quot scripserat articulos).
. The story about Thomas dictating different works at the same time is found in Tocco, Ystoria, chap. 18 (ed., 134–35). According to the testimony of one of his scribes, Evan Garnit, Thomas was able to continue dictating even while asleep!
. The most recent survey of Thomas’s writings is by Gilles Emery in Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, 1:330–61.
. First Canonization Inquiry, no. 83 (Foster, Life of St. Thomas Aquinas, 114).
. For a good introduction, Jean-Pierre Torrell, Aquinas’s Summa. Background, Structure, & Reception (Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 2005).
. In the early twelfth century summa signified a collection of materials, but by the thirteenth century it had come to mean an ordered presentation. Many thirteenth-century scholastics wrote summae; e.g., William of Auxerre, Alexander of Hales, Roland of Cremona, John of Trevisa, Albert the Great, and, after Thomas, Ulrich of Strassburg and Henry of Ghent.
. This calculation is given in Torrell, Aquinas’s Summa, 14.
. Given its length, it is not surprising that the almost six hundred manuscripts of the STh indicate that the three parts often circulated independently, as shown by Leonard E. Boyle, The Setting of the “Summa Theologiae” of Saint Thomas (Toronto: PIMS, 1982). The Secunda Pars was the most popular.
. On the Dominican program of education, M. Michèle Mulchahey, “First the Bow Is Bent in Study.” Dominican Education before 1350 (Toronto: PIMS, 1998), especially 278–306 on Thomas’s Santa Sabina years.
. The case for Santa Sabina being an unusual studium personale was first made by Boyle, Setting of the “Summa Theologiae.”
. Parts of this alia lectura exist in an Oxford manuscript edited by Leonard E. Boyle and John F. Boyle, Lectura romana in primum Sententiarum Petri Lombardi (Toronto: PIMS, 2006).
. Thomas cites the Pseudo-Dionysius 1,702 times in his works, 562 times in the Summa, according to Torrell, Aquinas’s Summa, 78. See Fran O’Rourke, Pseudo-Dionysius and the Metaphysics of Aquinas (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005).
. Mulchahey, “First the Bow Is Bent,” 278–306, affirms he did; Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, 1:145–47, thinks it likely. Thomas’s teaching of the Summa is denied by James Weisheipl, “The Meaning of Sacra Doctrina in Summa Theologiae I, q. 1,” Thomist 38 (1974): 49–80; and Mark D. Jordan, “The Summa’s Reform of Moral Teaching—and Its Failures,” in Contemplating Aquinas. On the Varieties of Interpretation, Fergus Kerr, ed. (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2003), 41–54, especially 44–46, 52–54.
. On the two levels of Aristotelian scientia, John J. Jenkins, Knowledge and Faith in Thomas Aquinas (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 46–49; on Thomas’s intended audience as advanced students, see chap. 3, and 215–19.
. See, for example, Boyle, Setting of the “Summa Theologiae”; Mulchahey, “First the Bow Is Bent”; and Jordan, “Summa’s Reform of Moral Teaching.”
. For understanding sacra doctrina, Gerald Van Ackeren, Sacra Doctrina. The Subject of the First Question of the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas (Rome: Catholic Book Agency, 1952); Weisheipl, “Meaning of Sacra Doctrina”; and Mark F. Johnson, “The Sapiential Character of the First Article of the Summa theologiae,” in Philosophy and the God of Abraham. Essays in Memory of James A. Weisheipl, R. James Long, ed. (Toronto: PIMS, 1991), 85–98.
. De Trinitate, q. 5.4 corp. For more on natural theologia (= metaphysica/divina scientia), see q. 5.1.
. E.g., Ia, q. 1.7, sed contra. See also the discussion in IIaIIae, q. 1.5, where he uses theologia in ad 2.
. See the discussion of the three senses of scientia in Thomas’s commentary on Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics: In I. Post. Anal., c. 28, lect. 41.
. The structure is set out by Weisheipl, “Meaning of Sacra Doctrina,” 64–89.
. Thomas does not introduce the technical term supernaturalis in q. 1.1, but this is obviously what he is talking about. The evolution of the distinction between what pertains to nature (naturalis) and what goes beyond it in terms of contact with God’s own life (supernaturalis) was an important aspect of the scholastic effort of the late twelfth though mid-thirteenth centuries. Thomas uses supernaturalis and its equivalents about 314 times across his works (115 uses in the Summa).
. Etienne Gilson, The Philosopher and Theology (New York: Random House, 1962), 98.
. In his study of the necessity of sacra doctrina for salvation, Bruce D. Marshall notes a text from Thomas’s Sermons on the Apostles’ Creed in which he says that none of the ancient philosophers before Christ knew as much “as one old woman [vetula] knows by faith after Christ’s coming.” See Marshall, “Quid scit Una Uetula. Aquinas on the Nature of Theology,” in The Theology of Thomas Aquinas, Rik Van Nieuwenhove and Joseph Wawrykow, eds. (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005), 1–35.
. On sacra doctrina and sanctification, Fáinche Ryan, Formation in Holiness. Thomas Aquinas on “Sacra doctrina” (Leuven: Peeters, 2007).
. Two of the major difficulties were the following: (1) How can a discipline that deals with contingent historical facts become universal abstract knowledge? and (2) If science demands both evidence and certitude, where is the evidence in the case of faith? On the scientific nature of theology in the thirteenth century, M.-D. Chenu, La théologie comme science au XIIIe siècle, 3rd ed. (Paris: Vrin, 1957); Ulrich Köpf, Die Anfänge der theologischen Wissenschaftstheorie im 13. Jahrhundert (Tübingen: Siebeck, 1974); and the essays in What Is “Theology” in the Middle Ages?, Mikolaj Olszewski, ed. (Münster: Aschendorff, 2007. Archa Verbi. Subsidia 1).
. On Thomas’s dependence on Aristotle’s notion of scientia from the Posterior Analytics, Jenkins, Knowledge and Faith in Thomas Aquinas, especially pt. 1.
. Aristotle considers metaphysics as wisdom in Metaphyics 1.1–2 (981b–983a), and he discusses the difference between practical and philosophical wisdom in Nicomachean Ethics 6.3–8 (1139b–1142a).
. B. Montagnes, “Les deux fonctions de la sagesse: ordonner et juger,” Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 53 (1969): 675–86.
. Conley, Theology of Wisdom, 38–47, 81–89, and 121–30.
. See, e.g., IaIIae, q. 66.5; IIIa, q. 59.2 and 4.
. On sapientia as ordering to the proper end, see IaIIae, q. 102.1, and IIaIIae, q. 19.7.
. Thomas’s views on sapientia appear throughout the STh and his other works—theological wisdom, which is both infused and acquired, is discussed in Ia, q. 1.6, and IIaIIae, q. 19.7; see also SCG I.1–2, II.4 and 24, and III.77. Philosophical sapientia is treated in the Sententia super Metaphysicam I.1.31–35, and in IaIIae, q. 57.2. Sapientia as the gift of the Holy Spirit is discussed in In III Sent., d. 34, q. 1.2, and d. 35, q. 2.1, as well as in his In Isaiam, cap. 11. It appears in several places in the Summa: in the general treatment of the gifts (IaIIae, q. 68.4), and specifically in the treatment of the gift of sapientia in IIaIIae, q. 45.1–6 (see also q. 8.6). Also important for Thomas’s understanding of sapientia are In I Sent., prol., and passages in his Pauline commentaries, such as In I Cor. 1:17–31, lect. 3–4; In I Cor. 2:1–16, lect. 1–3; and In Col. 2:2–3, lect. 1.
. All three forms of wisdom are primarily intellectual virtues, though they have an intimate relation to the will and affectivity not found in pure scientia; see Conley, Theology of Wisdom, 45–46, 86–88, 113–21, and 130–32.
. Weisheipl, “Meaning of Sacra Doctrina,” 75, summarizes, “[T]he definition of sacra doctrina is simply wisdom (art. 6), about God (art. 7) in faith, derived from divine revelation (art. 1).” Wisdom is the goal of all Thomas’s writings, as we can see from texts like SCG I.2 (“Quae sit hoc opera auctoris intentio”), which begins, “Among all human pursuits the pursuit of wisdom is more perfect, more sublime, more useful, and more pleasing.” The basis for the position of wisdom is summarized in Thomas’s In I Cor. 1:17–25, lect. 3: “Wisdom is the knowledge of divine things and so belongs to contemplation.”
. Thomas reflected on the role of reason and rational argument in sacred teaching in a number of other places: e.g., Ia, q. 32.1; Ia, q. 46.2; SCG I.2–3, 8–9; De Trinitate, q. 2.3; and Quod. IV, q. 9.3.
. De Trinitate, q. 2.3, ad 5.
. Thomas’s role as a scriptural interpreter is studied in Wilhelmus G. B. M. Valkenberg, Words of the Living God. Place and Function of Holy Scripture in the Theology of Thomas Aquinas (Leuven: Peeters, 2000); and Thomas Prügl, “Thomas Aquinas as Interpreter of Scripture,” in Theology of Thomas Aquinas, 386–415.
. On the apophatic nature of both sapiential theology and the gift of wisdom, Conley, Theology of Wisdom, 104, 132–37, and 142–43.
. Thomas has further reflections on the relation between reading the Bible and the construction of sacra doctrina in IIaIIae, q. 1.9. Other explorations of Thomas’s hermeneutical theory include De pot. q. 4.1, and Quod. VII, q. 6.1–3.
. Ghislain Lafont, Structures et méthode dans la Somme Théologique de Saint Thomas d’Aquin (Paris: Desclée, 1961), 34, says, “[T]he problem of the plan of the Summa, apparently so clear, is in reality complex.” For a recent survey, Brian V. Johnstone, “The Debate on the Structure of the Summa theologiae of St. Thomas Aquinas: From Chenu (1939) to Metz (1998),” in Aquinas as Authority, Paul van Geest, Harm Goris, and Carlo Leget, eds. (Leuven: Peeters, 2002), 187–200.
. Thomas F. O’Meara, Thomas Aquinas. Theologian (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997), 53–68.
. The structure of the Summa is both linear, or diachronic, as well as synchronic in the sense that Thomas always keeps the meaning of the whole in mind. As Liam G. Walsh observes, “[Thomas] does not pass from one thing to another. He is looking at everything all of the time, but in a perspective that moves gradually from the more abstract and universal to the more particular.” Walsh, “Sacraments,” in Theology of Thomas Aquinas, 327.
. Lonergan, “Future of Thomism,” 46.
. M.-D. Chenu, “Le plan de la Somme théologique de saint Thomas,” Revue thomiste 47 (1939): 93–107, later incorporated in his Toward Understanding St. Thomas (Chicago: Regnery, 1964), 310–18.
. Thomas refers to the exitus-reditus paradigm in In I Sent., d. 2, div. textus; and d. 14, q. 2.2, sol.; as well as in In II. Sent., prol.
. Among the alternative suggestions, see André Hayen, St. Thomas et la vie de l’église (Louvain: Publications Universitaires, 1952), especially 77–100; Albert Patfoort, La Somme de Saint Thomas et la logique du dessein de Dieu (Saint-Maur: Éditions Parole et Silence, 1998); and Rudi Te Velde, Aquinas on God. The “Divine Science” of the Summa Theologiae (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2006), chap. 1.
. In I Sent., d. 14, q. 2.2, sol.
. Thomas discusses both the immanent circulus of the Trinitarian processions and the external “processio in exteriorem naturam” in De pot. q. 9.9, corp.
. E.g., SCG I.9; II.1; III.1; and IV.1; as well as the argument advanced in Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, 1:107–16.
. The triple pattern is part of the structure of the work and appears in such texts as De divinis nominibus 1.5. For Thomas’s comment on this passage, see his In Librum De divinis nominibus (Turin: Marietti, 1950), cap. I, lect. 3, ## 79–95 (pp. 27–29).
. Max Secklar, Das Heil in der Geschichte. Geschichtstheologisches Denken bei Thomas von Aquin (Munich: Kösel Verlag, 1964), 46, puts it as follows: “It [the schema of the Summa] signifies nothing else but a total and self-consistent structure of events, or, as we might say now, Aquinas’s theological design is based on a formula open to history and therefore enabling statements about history as meaningful. As a plan of the perspective, it is as much a source of historical understanding as an ordering of theological understanding: it defines the ordo disciplinae, because it had already defined the ordo rerum.” See also Yves Congar, “Le moment ‘économique’ et le moment ‘ontologique’ dans la Sacra Doctrina (Révélation, Théologie, Somme Théologique),” in Mélanges offerts à M.-D. Chenu (Paris: Bibliothéque Thomiste, 1967), 135–87.
. On the argument from fittingness, Gilbert Narcisse, Les raisons de Dieu: Argument de convenience et esthétique théologique selon saint Thomas d’Aquin et Hans Urs von Balthasar (Fribourg: Éditions universitaires, 1997).
. The reference to our resurrection in this passage led Johnstone, “Debate on the Structure of the Summa,” 195–98, to emphasize how Christ’s Resurrection (e.g., IIIa, qq. 53–56) functions as a paradigm for Thomas’s structuring of sacred history in the Summa.
CHAPTER 3 A Tour of the Summa theologiae
. For an analysis of qq. 1–26, Te Velde, Aquinas on God.
. Contrasting evaluations of the five ways can be found in Edward Sillem, Ways of Thinking about God. Thomas Aquinas and the Modern Mind (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1961), who defends a reworked version of the five ways, and Anthony Kenny, The Five Ways. St. Thomas Aquinas’s Proofs for God’s Existence (New York: Shocken Books, 1969), who subjects the ways to a strong critique.
. In SCG I.13 Thomas gives a longer and somewhat different version of the five ways more directly based on Aristotle.
. Jean-Luc Marion, “Thomas Aquinas and Onto-theo-logy,” in Mystics. Presence and Aporia, Michael Kessler and Christian Sheppard, eds. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003), 38–74.
. Etienne Gilson, Being and Some Philosophers, 2nd ed. (Toronto: PIMS, 1949).
. For a succinct presentation, John F. Wipple, “Being,” in The Oxford Handbook of Aquinas, Brian Davies and Eleonore Stump, eds. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 77–84.
. David Burrell, Aquinas. God & Action (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1979).
. Te Velde, Aquinas on God, 77–85.
. David Burrell, Analogy and Philosophical Language (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973), puts Aquinas’s teaching in historical context.
. Gilles Emery, Trinity in Aquinas (Ann Arbor, MI: Sapientia Press, 2003).
. See David Burrell, Freedom and Creation in Three Traditions (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1993).
. My understanding of Thomas’s teaching on creation and the role of Aristotelian and Platonic elements in it owes much to Joseph de Finance, Être et Agir dans la Philosophie de Saint Thomas, 2nd ed. (Rome: Librarie Éditrice de l’Université Grégorienne, 1960).
. On humanity as made in the image of the Trinitarian God, D. Juvenal Merriel, To the Image of the Trinity. A Study in the Development of Aquinas’ Teaching (Toronto: PIMS, 1990).
. The question of the so-called natural desire for God, often misunderstood in later Thomist tradition, was clarified by Henri de Lubac, The Mystery of the Supernatural (New York: Herder and Herder, 1967); see also William R. O’Connor, The Natural Desire for God (Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 1948).
. Anton C. Pegis, At the Origins of the Thomistic Notion of Man (New York: Macmillan, 1963), pts. 2 and 4.
. There is a multiauthor introduction to Thomas’s moral theology in The Ethics of Aquinas, Stephen J. Pope, ed. (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2002). See also Oxford Handbook of Aquinas, pt. 4.
. An analysis of the IaIIae can found in Brian Davies, The Thought of Thomas Aquinas (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), chaps. 12 and 13 (pp. 207–73).
. Bernard Lonergan, Grace and Freedom. Operative Grace in the Thought of St. Thomas Aquinas (New York: Herder & Herder, 1971).
. For an overview, Joseph Wawrykow, “The Theological Virtues,” in Oxford Handbook of Aquinas, 287–307.
. On the importance of friendship in Aquinas, Turner, Thomas Aquinas, chap. 5 (145–68); and Jean-Pierre Torrell, Christ and Spirituality in St. Thomas Aquinas (Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 2011), chap. 3.
. For a Thomistically inspired account, Josef Pieper, The Four Cardinal Virtues: Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, and Temperance (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1966).
. For Thomas’s Christology and its context, Corey L. Barnes, Christ’s Two Wills in Scholastic Thought. The Christology of Aquinas in Its Historical Context (Toronto: PIMS, 2012), as well as Joseph Wawrykow, “Hypostatic Union,” in Theology of Thomas Aquinas, 222–51.
. On the structure of Thomas’s Christology, John F. Boyle, “The Twofold Division of St. Thomas’s Christology in the Tertia Pars,” Thomist 60 (2010): 439–47.
. For an introduction, Walsh, “Sacraments,” 326–64.
. Here Thomas does not use his succinct formulation of sacramental causality found in De ver. q. 27.4, ad 13; and q. 28.2, ad 12: “sacraments cause by signifying” (sacramenta significando causant).
. Walsh, “Sacraments,” 335.
CHAPTER 4 The Tides of Thomism, 1275–1850
. On the notion of creative misreadings, Pierre Hadot, Philosophy as a Way of Life (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995), chap. 2.
. The last attempt at a general history was Karl Werner, Der heilige Thomas von Aquin. Vol. III. Geschichte des Thomismus (Regensburg: Manz, 1859). Many brief surveys exist, e.g., J. A. Weisheipl, “Thomism,” in The New Catholic Encyclopedia (New York: Macmillan, 2003), 14:40–52.
. For an introduction, Martin Grabmann, “History of the Theological Summa. Its Commentators,” in Introduction to the Theological Summa of St. Thomas (St. Louis: B. Herder, 1930), 43–59.
. Lawrence A. Kennedy, A Catalogue of Thomists, 1270–1900 (Houston: Center for Thomistic Studies, 1987).
. For this distinction, Romanus Cessario, A Short History of Thomism (Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 2005); a more flexible view is found in Torrell, Aquinas’s Summa, “The Summa through History” and “The Summa in the Twentieth Century.”
. These two ways of reading Thomas on the relation of theology and philosophy are analyzed in Géry Prouvost, Thomas d’Aquin et les thomismes (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 2007), chap. 1.
. Henri de Lubac, At the Service of the Church (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1993), 144.
. Gerald Vann, St. Thomas Aquinas (New York: Benzinger Brothers, 1947), 71.
. The Roman Provincial Chapter of Perugia in 1308 forbade the friars substituting the Summa for the Lombard’s Sentences (Mulchahey, “First the Bow Is Bent,” 155–56, 161). The Dominican Order did legislate that the Sentences be taught along with certain “articles” of the teaching of Thomas, mostly taken from the Summa.
. The Paris Condemnation is document 473 in H. Denifle and A. Chatelain, Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, vol. 1 (Paris, 1889), 543–58. The Oxford Condemnation follows as document 474 (558–60).
. Etienne Gilson, History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages (New York: Random House, 1955), 408.
. Alain de Libera, Penser du moyen âge (Paris: Seuil, 1993).
. Luca Bianchi, “1277: A Turning Point in Medieval Philosophy?,” in Was ist Philosophie im Mittelalter?, Jan A. Aertsen and Andreas Speer, eds. (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1998), 90–110.
. For an introduction, John F. Wippel, “The Condemnations of 1270 and 1277 at Paris,” Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies 7 (1977): 169–201. More detail can be found in Roland Hissette, Enquète sur les 219 articles condemnés à Paris le 7 mars 1277 (Louvain: Université Louvain, 1977); and the papers in Nach der Verurteilung von 1277. Philosophie und Theologie an der Universität Paris im letzten Viertel des 13. Jahrhunderts, Jan A. Aertsen, Kent Emery, Jr., and Andreas Speer, eds. (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2001).
. The Dominicans mustered their forces to prevent a formal condemnation of Thomas. A story that seems worthy of credence is that the aged Albert the Great came to Paris in 1276 or 1277 to defend his former student.
. The Dominican legislation is found in Maur Burbach, “Early Dominican and Franciscan Legislation Regarding St. Thomas,” Mediaeval Studies 4 (1942): 139–58.
. The respondents to William de la Mare, as well as other early followers of Thomas, such as the English Dominican Thomas Sutton, the French Bernard of Trilia, and the Belgian Giles of Lessines, are studied by Frederick J. Roensch, Early Thomistic School (Dubuque, IA: Priory Press, 1964). See also J.-P. Torrell, “Le savoir théologique chez les premiers Thomistes,” in his Recherches Thomasiennes. Études revues et augmentées (Paris: Vrin, 2000), 158–76.
. The five correctoria defending Thomas include the Correctorium corruptorii Quare, probably written by Richard Knapwell ca. 1280–83; the Correctorium Sciendum, an English work of ca. 1283, possibly by Robert Orford; the Correctorium Circa by John Quidort of Paris, written about 1283–84; the Correctorium Quaestione, most likely the work of the Englishman William of Macclesfield in 1284; and the Apologeticum veritatis by the Italian Rambert di’Primadizza, written at Paris ca. 1286–88.
. Mark D. Jordan, “The Controversy of the Correctoria and the Limits of Metaphysics,” Speculum 57 (1982): 292–314; and Maarten J. F. M. Hoenen, “Being and Thinking in the ‘Correctorium fratris Thomae’ and the ‘Correctorium corruptorii Quare,’” in Nach der Verurteilung von 1277, 413–35.
. On John of Freiburg’s Summa Confessorum (ca. 1298), L. E. Boyle, “The Summa Confessorum of John of Freiburg and the Popularization of the Moral Teaching of St. Thomas and Some of His Contemporaries,” in St. Thomas Aquinas, 1274–1294. Commemorative Studies, 2 vols. (Toronto: PIMS, 1974), 2:245–68.
. J. N. Hillgarth, “Who Read Thomas Aquinas?”, in The Gilson Lectures on Thomas Aquinas, James P. Reilly, ed. (Toronto: PIMS, 2002), 46–72.
. For an introduction, Richard Cross, Duns Scotus (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999). Because of Scotus’s early death, his major writings are versions of his commentaries on the Lombard’s Sentences given at Oxford and Paris. The Oxford Lectura seems to date from 1298–99, while the longer Ordinatio and Reportatio Parisiensia reflect his teaching in Paris (1301–4).
. See Cross, Duns Scotus, chap. 1; Stephen F. Brown, “Scotus’s Method in Theology,” in Via Scoti. Methodologica ad mentem Joannis Duns Scoti, Leonardo Sileo, ed. (Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1995), 229–43; and Oleg Bychkov, “The Nature of Theology in Duns Scotus and His Franciscan Predecessors,” Franciscan Studies 66 (2008): 5–62.
. This Prologue takes up the first volume of the critical edition, Iohannis Duns Scoti Opera Omnia (Rome: Vatican Press, 1950–).
. Reportatio Parisiensia, Liber Tertius, d. 24, can be found in Joannis Duns Scoti Opera Omnia (Paris: L. Vivès, 1894), 13:446–59.
. Ordinatio, Prol., Pars 1, q. unica, n. 79, cites and rebuts STh Ia, q. 1.1, ad 2. See also Pars 5, qq. 1–2, n. 313.
. See Bychkov, “Nature of Theology in Duns Scotus,” 44–62.
. The surviving parts of the Opus Tripartitum are in Meister Eckhart. Die deutschen und lateinischen Werke (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1936–), Die lateinischen Werke, vols. 1–3. I count 122 explicit references to Thomas in these volumes, while the indices list no fewer than 516 direct or indirect uses of the Prima Pars, 202 of the IaIIa, 75 of the IIaIIae, and 38 of the IIIa.
. For an introduction, Alain de Libera, La mystique rhénane. D’Albert le Grand à Maître Eckhart (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1994). The texts of these Dominicans are being edited in the Corpus Philosophorum Teutonicorum Medii Aevi.
. For aspects of the relation of Thomas and Eckhart, Bernard McGinn, The Mystical Thought of Meister Eckhart (New York: Crossroad, 2001), which also contains references to further literature.
. On the contrast between Eckhart’s ethical thought and that of Thomas, John M. Connolly, Living Without Why: Meister Eckhart’s Critique of the Medieval Concept of Will (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).
. For an overview, Thomas Tyn, “Prochoris und Demetrios Kydones. Der Byzantinische Thomismus des 14. Jahrhunderts,” in Thomas von Aquino. Interpretation und Rezeption, Willehad Paul Eckert, ed. (Mainz: Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag, 1974), 837–912.
. John Monfasani, Bessarion Scholasticus. A Study of Cardinal Bessarion’s Latin Library (Turnhout: Brepols, 2011), “The Thomism of Cardinal Bessarion” (61–81).
. For a sketch of medieval Jewish uses of Thomas, Giuseppe Sermonetta, “Per una storia del Tomismo Ebraico,” in Tommaso d’Aquino nella storia del pensiero. Vol. II. Dal Medioevo al Oggi (Naples: Edizioni Domeniche Italiane, 1974), 354–59.
. Lonergan, “Future of Thomism,” 53.
. Paul J. Griffiths, Religious Reading (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 77–97.
. Johannis Capreoli Defensiones Theologiae Divi Thomae Aquinatis, Ceslaus Paban and Thomas Pègues, eds., 7 vols. (repr., Frankfurt am Main: Minerva, 1967), 1:1.
. Defensiones Q. 1, a. 1, 5th conclusion (1:4).
. On this development, Yves Congar, A History of Theology (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968), 154–62.
. Harm Goris, “Thomism in Fifteenth-Century Germany,” in Aquinas as Authority, 1–24; as well as Erich Höhn, “Köln als der Ort der ersten Kommentare zur ‘Summa theologiae’ des Thomas von Aquin,” in Thomas von Aquino. Interpretation und Rezeption, 641–55.
. The best account is Paul Oskar Kristeller, Le Thomisme et la pensée Italienne de la Renaissance (Montreal: Institut d’Études Médiévales-Vrin, 1967).
. John O’Malley, “Some Renaissance Panegyrics of Aquinas,” Renaissance Quarterly 27 (1974): 174–92.
. Edward P. Mahoney, “St. Thomas and the School of Padua at the End of the Fifteenth Century,” Thomas and Bonaventure. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Society 48 (1974): 277–85.
. On Ficino and Thomas, Kristeller, Thomisme et la pensée Italienne, 93–101. For more detail, Ardis B. Collins, The Sacred Is Secular: Platonism and Thomism in Marsilio Ficino’s Platonic Theology (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1974).
. On the famous nondisputation, S. A. Farmer, Syncretism in the West: Pico’s 900 Theses (1486). The Evolution of Traditional Religious and Philosophical Systems (Tempe, AZ: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1998), where the Thomist theses can be found on 218–31 (see also 47–49, 422, on Pico’s anti-Thomism).
. The commentaries of this period are briefly discussed in the histories of Thomism by Cessario, Torrell, et al.; see also Philippe Lécrivain, “La Somme théologique de Thomas d’Aquin aux XVIe–XVIIIe siècles,” Recherches de science religieuse 91 (2003): 397–427.
. On Cajetan, Jared Wicks, “Thomism between Renaissance and Reformation: The Case of Cajetan,” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 68 (1977): 9–32; and Martin Grabmann, “Die Stellung des Kardinal Cajetan in der Geschichte des Thomismus und der Thomistenschule,” in Mittelalterliches Geistesleben, Martin Grabmann, ed., 3 vols. (repr., Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1984), 2:602–13.
. Henri De Lubac, Augustinianism and Modern Theology (New York: Crossroad, 2000), chap. 5.
. Leonard Kennedy, “Thomism at the University of Salamanca in the Sixteenth Century: The Doctrine of Existence,” in Tommaso d’Aquino nella storia del pensiero, 2:254–58.
. D. Martin Luthers Werke (Weimar: Böhlaus, 1899), 15:184 (32–33).
. Denis R. Janz, “Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, and the Origins of the Protestant Reformation,” in Philosophy and the God of Abraham, 71–83; and David C. Steinmetz, “Luther among the Anti-Thomists,” in Luther in Context (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986), chap. 5.
. D. Martin Luthers Werke (Weimar: Böhlaus, 1888), 6:508 (11–12).
. Karl-Heinz zur Mühlen, “On the Critical Reception of the Thought of Thomas Aquinas in the Theology of Martin Luther,” in Aquinas as Authority, 65–86.
. Pesch has written extensively on Thomas and Luther in German. In English, see Otto H. Pesch, “Existential and Sapiential Theology—The Theological Confrontation between Luther and Thomas Aquinas,” in Catholic Scholars Dialogue with Luther, Jared Wicks, ed. (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1970), 59–81; and The God Question in Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972).
. Pesch, “Existential and Sapiential Theology,” 76.
. For knowledge of Thomas and the Summa in Protestant England, John K. Ryan, The Reputation of St. Thomas Aquinas among English Protestant Thinkers of the Seventeenth Century (Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 1948).
. On Trent and its significance, John O’Malley, Trent. What Happened at the Council (Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 2013).
. On these discussions, Hubert Jedin, A History of the Council of Trent (St. Louis: B. Herder, 1961), 2:286–96, and 387–88.
. A single example must suffice. In the early debates over original sin directed against Luther, the Thomist party introduced Thomas’s distinction (IaIIae, q. 82.3) that baptism forgives the formal element of the sin, but that the material element called “concupiscence” remains. This language was approved in the draft, but not included in the final decree.
. Bañez’s Scholastica commentaria in primam partem Angelici Doctoris was first published in Salamanca in 1584.
. Matthias Lu, “La diffusione delle Opere di Tommaso d’Aquino in Cina,” in Tommaso d’Aquino nella storia del pensiero, 2:367–74.
. Suarez’s metaphysics is set forth in his Disputationes Metaphysicae of 1597, which were widely read and constituted the major link between medieval philosophy and the new philosophy of the seventeenth century. On Suarez’s metaphysics and its difference from Thomas, Gilson, Being and Some Philosophers, 96–107; and John P. Doyle, Collected Studies on Francisco Suarez, S. J. (1548–1617) (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2010).
. Molina’s teaching on “middle knowledge” is available in English, Luis de Molina. On Divine Foreknowledge. Part IV of the “Concordia,” trans. Alfred J. Freddoso (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1988).
. For an English translation, The Gifts of the Holy Spirit by John of St. Thomas (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1951).
. The original edition of the Collegii Salmanticensis … Cursus Theologicus Summam theologicam Angelici Doctoris D. Thomae complectens was published in ten volumes. The most accessible edition is the twenty-volume Paris edition of 1870–83.
. Among the foremost of these commentators are John Gonet (d. 1681), who issued a number of commentaries and defenses of Thomas late in the seventeenth century, and the Dominican Charles René Billuart (d. 1757), who published an eighteen-volume commentary on the Summa between 1746 and 1751.
. The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, Charles Stephen Dessain, ed. (London: Nelson, 1961), 11:279. See also the comments on “the prevalent depreciation of St. Thomas” found in another letter in the same volume (pp. 303–5).
CHAPTER 5 The Rise and Fall of Neothomism
. James Hennesey, “Leo XIII’s Thomistic Revival: A Political and Philosophical Event,” in Celebrating the Medieval Heritage. A Colloquy on the Thought of Aquinas and Bonaventure, David Tracy, ed., Journal of Religion suppl. 58 [1978]: S185–97.
. On nineteenth-century Catholic theology, Mark Schoof, A Survey of Catholic Theology 1800–1970 (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2008); and especially Gerald A. McCool, Nineteenth-Century Scholasticism. The Search for a Unitary Method (New York: Fordham University Press, 1989).
. Many of the documents, such as the papal encyclical Aeterni Patris of 1879, speak of the renewal of “scholastic philosophy” (philosophia scholastica); hence the term “Neoscholasticism” is often used to describe this movement in modern Catholic thought. In practice, however, Thomas Aquinas was seen as the Neoscholastic author. All other scholastics, including such distinctive thinkers as Bonaventure, were reduced to agreeing with Thomas. Hence, the terms “Neoscholasticism” and “Neothomism” can be used interchangeably.
. Along with McCool’s book, see James A. Weisheipl, “The Revival of Thomism as a Christian Philosophy,” in New Themes in Christian Philosophy, Ralph McInerny, ed. (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1968), 164–85; and Leonard E. Boyle, “A Remembrance of Pope Leo XIII: The Encyclical Aeterni Patris,” in One Hundred Years of Thomism. Aeterni Patris and Afterwards, Victor B. Brezik, ed. (Houston: Center for Thomistic Studies, 1981), 7–22.
. On the relation of Dei Filius to Neoscholasticism, McCool, Nineteenth-Century Scholasticism, 216–26.
. Hennesy, “Leo XIII’s Thomistic Revival,” S190.
. Ibid., S192, quoting the historian of nineteenth-century theology Edgar Hocedez.
. On Liberatore and Kleutgen, McCool, Nineteenth-Century Scholasticism, chaps. 7–9.
. Mark Jordan, Rewritten Theology. Aquinas after His Readers (Oxford: Blackwell, 2006), chap. 1, especially 5–12.
. For reflections on the reasons for the academic success (and limitations) of Neothomism, Marcia L. Colish, “St. Thomas Aquinas in Historical Perspective: The Modern Period,” Church History 44 (1975): 13–16.
. Robert F. McNamara, The American College in Rome, 1855–1955 (Rochester, NY: Christopher Press, 1956), 243.
. Josiah Royce, “Pope Leo’s Philosophical Movement: Its Relation to Modern Thought,” Tablet 102 (August 15, 1903), 260–62.
. An account of the editions of Thomas’s Opera omnia, including the beginnings of the Leonine edition, can be found in Louis-Jacques Bataillon, “Le Edizioni di Opera Omnia degli Scolastici e l’Edizione Leonina,” in Gli studi di Filosofia medievale fra Ottocento e Novecento, Ruedi Imbach and Alfonso Maierù, eds. (Rome: Edizioni di Storia et Letteratura, 1991), 141–54.
. On the Leonine Commission, see also James P. Reilly, Jr., “The Leonine Commission and the Seventh Centenary of St. Thomas Aquinas,” in Thomas and Bonaventure. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 48 (1974): 286–94.
. Bataillon, “Le Edizioni di Opera Omnia,” 154.
. For historical surveys, Alec Vidler, A Variety of Catholic Modernists (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970); and Marvin R. O’Connell, Critics on Trial. An Introduction to the Catholic Modernist Crisis (Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 1994). On the relation of Modernism to Neothomism, Thomas J. A. Hartley, Thomistic Revival and the Modernist Era (Toronto: St. Michael’s College, 1971).
. Late in the encyclical Pius summarizes his view: “[T]here is no surer sign that a man is tending to Modernism than when he begins to show his dislike for the scholastic method.” See Pascendi Dominici Gregis, as translated in The Program of Modernism. A Reply to the Encyclical of Pius X (New York: G.P. Putnam, 1908), 222.
. The Italian original, Il Programma dei Modernisti, was published in 1907; the English version, translated by Tyrrell, appeared in 1908. The quotation is from Program of Modernism, 6.
. The decree can be found in Heinrich Denzinger. Compendium of Creeds, Definitions, and Declarations on Matters of Faith and Morals, Peter Hünermann, ed., bilingual 43rd ed. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2012), nos. 3601–24. The major author of the twenty-four theses was the Jesuit Guido Mattuissi (1852–1925), a student of Cardinal Billot and an opponent of the Suarezians.
. These quotations from Humani Generis are taken from the English translation, False Trends in Modern Teaching (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1957), secs. 18 and 31.
. Torrell, Aquinas’s Summa, 110–11.
. Among the surveys of modern Thomism I have found helpful are O’Meara, Thomas Aquinas, 167–200; Helen James John, The Thomist Spectrum (New York: Fordham University Press, 1966); Gerald McCool, From Unity to Pluralism. The Internal Evolution of Thomism (New York: Fordham University Press, 1989); and Fergus Kerr, After Aquinas. Versions of Thomism (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002). More briefly, Gerald A. McCool, “Twentieth-Century Scholasticism,” in Celebrating the Medieval Heritage, S198–221; Brian J. Shanley, “Twentieth-Century Thomisms,” in The Thomist Tradition (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2002), 1–20; and J.-P. Torrell, “Situation actuelle des études thomistes,” in Nouvelles recherches thomasiennes (Paris: Vrin, 2008), 177–202.
. Richard Peddicord, The Sacred Monster of Thomism. An Introduction to the Life and Legacy of Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. (South Bend, IN: St. Augustine’s Press, 2005) is a helpful, but perhaps too favorable, presentation.
. Garrigou-Lagrange at times carried his Thomism to ridiculous lengths, as when he argued on Thomist grounds during World War II that it was a mortal sin for French Catholics to support the Free French Movement of Charles de Gaulle against the Fascist Vichy government! On his political views, Peddicord, Sacred Monster of Thomism, 96–100.
. Chenu, Toward Understanding St. Thomas, 68–69.
. There is an account of the conflict between Garrigou-Lagrange and Chenu in Peddicord, Sacred Monster of Thomism, 100–113.
. There is an English translation of the second edition, The Mystery of the Supernatural (New York: Herder and Herder, 1967).
. John F. Wippel, Metaphysical Themes in Thomas Aquinas (Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 1984); and The Metaphysical Thought of Thomas Aquinas. From Finite Being to Uncreated Being (Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 2000).
. A short work originally given as a series of lectures at the Angelicum in Rome in 1931 and later appearing in English in 1940 as Science and Wisdom provides a sense of Maritain’s view of the integrative role of Thomas’s wisdom.
. Gilson wrote an illuminating intellectual autobiography late in life, Philosopher and Theology.
. Ibid., 91.
. Gilson’s view of Christian philosophy and the difficulties involved in extracting a philosophy from Thomas’s mostly theological writings are surveyed by John F. Wippel, “Thomas Aquinas and the Problem of Christian Philosophy,” in Metaphysical Themes in Thomas Aquinas, 1–33.
. Gilson, Philosopher and Theology, 211.
. Finance, Être et Agir dans la Philosophie de Saint Thomas, x. The work has not been translated into English.
. These contributions to Thomist metaphysics are surveyed in John, Thomist Spectrum, chaps. 6–7.
. Gilson’s rejection of what became Transcendental Thomism is evident in his critical remarks about Joseph Maréchal in Thomist Realism and the Critique of Knowledge (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986; French original 1939), chaps. 5–6.
. A brief survey can be found in W. J. Hill, “Thomism, Transcendental,” New Catholic Encyclopedia, 14: 52–57. More detailed treatments are in John, Thomist Spectrum, pt. 3; and McCool, From Unity to Pluralism, chaps. 2–4.
. For an English translation, The Intellectualism of Saint Thomas (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1935).
. Ibid., 2.
. Joseph Maréchal, “A propos du sentiment de presence chez les profanes et chez les mystiques,” Revue des questions scientifiques 64–65 (1908–9), later included in vol. 1 of his Études sur la Psychologie des Mystiques (Bruges: Beyaert-Alcan, 1924), 69–179. This was translated as Studies in the Psychology of the Mystics (London: Burns & Oates, 1927), 55–145.
. These quotations are from Maréchal, Studies in the Psychology of the Mystics, 61 and 101.
. Ibid., 135.
. McCool, From Unity to Pluralism, 110.
. Lonergan, Grace and Freedom.
. The “Verbum” articles appeared in Theological Studies between 1946 and 1949 and were published in book form as Verbum. Word and Idea in Aquinas (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1967).
. Karl Rahner, “The Importance of Thomas Aquinas,” in Faith in a Wintry Season. Conversations and Interviews with Karl Rahner in the Last Years of His Life (New York: Crossroad, 1990), 47.
. Ibid., 43.
. Hans Urs von Balthasar, Thomas und die Charismatik. Kommentar zu Thomas von Aquin, Summa theologica Quaestiones II II 171–182 (Einsiedeln: Johannes Verlag, 1954).
. Hans Urs von Balthasar, Theo-Drama. Theological Dramatic Theory. V: The Last Act (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1998), 14.
. Hans Urs von Balthasar, The Glory of the Lord. A Theological Aesthetics. IV: The Realm of Metaphysics in Antiquity (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1989), 405.
. On Vatican II, John O’Malley, What Happened at Vatican II (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008).
. The largest of the collections published for Thomas’s centenary was the nine volumes of the Atti del Congresso Internazionale Tommaso d’Aquino produced by the Dominicans of Naples and containing 459 articles.
EPILOGUE
. Fergus Kerr, After Aquinas, 207. Along with this survey of recent trends in Thomist studies, Kerr also edited the collection, Contemplating Aquinas.
. Encyclical Letter “Fides et Ratio” of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II (Washington, DC: U.S. Catholic Conference, 1998), sec. 76 (p. 110).
. Ibid., especially secs. 43–44 (pp. 65–68) titled “The Enduring Originality of the Thought of Thomas Aquinas,” and secs. 57–63 (pp. 87–94) on “The Church’s Interest in Philosophy.”
. Jean-Pierre Torrell titled the second volume of his summary work on Aquinas Saint Thomas Aquinas. Spiritual Master (1996; English version 2003).
. “Analytical Thomism” was pioneered by Peter Geach and John Haldane, and has been carried forward by scholars like Anthony Kenny, the late Norman Kretzmann, and Eleonore Stump.
. Among the projections about the future direction of Thomism that merit pondering: W. Norris Clarke, “The Future of Thomism,” in New Themes in Christian Philosophy, 187–207; Lonergan, “Future of Thomism,” 43–53; and Benedict M. Ashley, “Thomism and the Transition from the Classical World-View to Historical-Mindedness,” in The Future of Thomism (Notre Dame: American Maritain Society, 1992), 109–21.