Are the five ways given official recognition?

[CrossofChrist]

In the Encyclical Studiorum Ducem Aquinas’ five ways are given a major boost:

*The arguments adduced by St. Thomas to prove the existence of God and that God alone is subsisting Being Itself are still to-day, as they were in the Middle Ages, the most cogent of all arguments… The metaphysical philosophy of St. Thomas, although exposed to this day to the bitter onslaughts of prejudiced critics, yet still retains, like gold which no acid can dissolve, its full force and splendor unimpaired. * (SD 16)

My thoughts:
It doesn’t say that the five ways are right, but the way around that would have to say that what is the most convincing is only so on the surface. And elsewhere it is said the Church adopted Aquinas’ philosophy (And–I think in Veritatis Splendor–Pope John Paul II clarifies that the Church has no official philosophy), so that would have to be taken to affirm realism to an extent, not necessarily Aristotelian-Thomism.

Discuss if you want.

 

[mdgspencer]

The five ways were never given official approval by the teaching authority of the Church, though there is much recognition about the five ways in Catholic philosophers and theologians, some of whom though do not entirely agree with them though as proofs for the existence of God. Though I consider them quite valid if you understand them.

 

[animalis]

The Decree on Priestly Training distinguishes philosophical disciplines (n. 15) with theological disciplines (n. 16)

“The history of philosophy should be so taught that the students, while reaching the ultimate principles of the various systems, will hold on to what is proven to be true therein and will be able to detect the roots of errors and to refute them.” (Optatam totius, 15)

“in order that they may illumine the mysteries of salvation as completely as possible, the students should learn to penetrate them more deeply with the help of speculation, under the guidance of St. Thomas, and to perceive their** interconnections**.” (Optatam totius, 16)

Note the insistence the Second Vatican Council exhibits with St. Thomas Aquinas in regard to theology. This is not the first insistence regarding the Angelic Doctor. There are numerous mentions of him, and some point to his utter sublimity (cf. John XXII). You are speaking of Philosophy. But to those who are unaware, you cannot properly utilize Theology without the proper utilization of Philosophy. Hans Urs von Balthasar, acclaimed by Pope Benedict XVI, expressed this correct opinion. St. Bonaventure, in scripture exegesis, called these sciences gold and silver.

Not only does the SVC give official recognition, recognition is also codified in the current Canon Law. Not so particularly to the five ways in a material sense, but in a formal sense by taking in the whole you discover the recognition is implied.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church gives a reference note to the Summa Theologica, Parts 1,2,3 which include the five proofs. It does not comment on their validity; even so, that notation is also a kind of official recognition along with the references given by other posters above.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c1.htm#33

Scroll to footnote # 10 at the bottom of the page.

 

[CrossofChrist]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church gives a reference note to the Summa Theologica, Parts 1,2,3 which include the five proofs. It does not comment on their validity; even so, that notation is also a kind of official recognition along with the references given by other posters above.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c1.htm#33

Scroll to footnote # 10 at the bottom of the page.

They certainly are given a place of honor–as in “these are ways we can come to know God”–the Church hasn’t outright said they are correct but they have been used as an example of how our human reason (maybe not in its highest form since the Church hasn’t commented on that…there are other ways of looking at reality with reason e.g Suarezianism) can recognize God…