Aristotlian-Thomism Philosophy and Catholicism

[depthcharge623]

Hey Everyone!

First post on this forum so I hope you will have patience with me. I am a Christian who was baptized in the Roman Catholic church but do not any longer consider myself a Roman Catholic (would the Church still consider me a Catholic? Or would I have had to go through Confirmation and other Catholic sacraments?). I am not hostile to the RCC though, and despite what they may think of me, I think pretty highly of the church and the thinkers in the church.

I have recently been reading a lot about Thomism philosophy by Edward Feser (edwardfeser.blogspot.com) and am fascinated by it. I plan on buying Feser’s book on Aquinas when I finish the stack of books I already own but have not read.

I’m still pretty ignorant of Aristotlian-Thomistic philosophy so my question is this: is Thomistic philosophy uniquely Catholic? I understand that Aquinas was a Catholic, but is his approach to philosophy so strongly tied to Catholic doctrines that it is incompatible with non-Catholic Christian doctrines?

 

[Aelred_Minor]

I suppose a non-Catholic could extract individual statements made by Aquinas that he or she agrees with, but much of his work would have to be rejected, since he comes to Catholic conclusions in his reasoning.

 

[JDaniel]

Hey Everyone!

First post on this forum so I hope you will have patience with me. I am a Christian who was baptized in the Roman Catholic church but do not any longer consider myself a Roman Catholic (would the Church still consider me a Catholic? Or would I have had to go through Confirmation and other Catholic sacraments?). I am not hostile to the RCC though, and despite what they may think of me, I think pretty highly of the church and the thinkers in the church.

DC:

Have you already been Confirmed, or received First Communion or first Penance? Were you Baptized into the Catholic Church?

I have recently been reading a lot about Thomism philosophy by Edward Feser (edwardfeser.blogspot.com) and am fascinated by it. I plan on buying Feser’s book on Aquinas when I finish the stack of books I already own but have not read.

I’m still pretty ignorant of Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophy so my question is this: is Thomistic philosophy uniquely Catholic? I understand that Aquinas was a Catholic, but is his approach to philosophy so strongly tied to Catholic doctrines that it is incompatible with non-Catholic Christian doctrines?

I think most Christians highly regard Aquinas. One rarely hears or reads anything antithetical to his theologies and philosophies from non-Catholics. At least that’s been my experience. Virtually all of what I hear and read that is, is from non-Theists. But, as the prior poster said, he was completely “Catholic.”

The Protestant revolution did not come to be for another 400 - 500 years. So it must be remembered that, except for the occasional heretic, everyone was Catholic, in his time. Today his Five Ways are infused into much of Christian-Protestant design theory.

Also, obviously Aristotle was about a century and a half earlier than him, so Aristoteleanism is considerably older than Protestantism and Thomism. However, Aquinas rarely departs from that earlier thinker. Also, Aquinas found much truth in a number of the early Islamic thinkers, Averroes, Algazel, and Avicenna, for example.

God bless, Welcome to CAF
jd

 

[belorg]

The Protestant revolution did not come to be for another 400 - 500 years. So it must be remembered that, except for the occasional heretic, everyone was Catholic, in his time. Today his Five Ways are infused into much of Christian-Protestant design theory.

Also, obviously Aristotle was about a century and a half earlier than him, so Aristoteleanism is considerably older than Protestantism and Thomism. However, Aquinas rarely departs from that earlier thinker. Also, Aquinas found much truth in a number of the early Islamic thinkers, Averroes, Algazel, and Avicenna, for example.

God bless, Welcome to CAF
jd

A century and a half? A millenium and a half would be a bit more accurate I would think.

 

[depthcharge623]

DC:

Have you already been Confirmed, or received First Communion or first Penance? Were you Baptized into the Catholic Church?

I think most Christians highly regard Aquinas. One rarely hears or reads anything antithetical to his theologies and philosophies from non-Catholics. At least that’s been my experience. Virtually all of what I hear and read that is, is from non-Theists. But, as the prior poster said, he was completely “Catholic.”

The Protestant revolution did not come to be for another 400 - 500 years. So it must be remembered that, except for the occasional heretic, everyone was Catholic, in his time. Today his Five Ways are infused into much of Christian-Protestant design theory.

Also, obviously Aristotle was about a century and a half earlier than him, so Aristoteleanism is considerably older than Protestantism and Thomism. However, Aquinas rarely departs from that earlier thinker. Also, Aquinas found much truth in a number of the early Islamic thinkers, Averroes, Algazel, and Avicenna, for example.

God bless, Welcome to CAF
jd

Hi JDaniel,

I was baptized and received First Communion but I do not remember about first penance. Is “penance” the same as confession? That was really more of an aside though- I was just curious as to how the Catholic church would view someone like me. I haven’t been a regular attender or member of a catholic parish in over 15 years, but instead have been to various protestant churches (Episcopal until they started to get too liberal, then evangelical, and now Evangelical Presbyterian).

In regard to Aquinas, yes, one does tend to see protestants hold him in high regard. I think this is fitting as he really was a great thinker and did a lot to promote the First Cause. I will point out that Feser and many other Catholics hold Thomistic matter-form duality to be incompatible with the “Intelligent Design” theory that many protestants promote. On the other hand, because they hold him in high regard, the protestant thinkers tend to defend that it IS compatible with Thomistic philosophy. What I really respect about Aquinas is, like you mention, his search for truth wherever it may be. He truly believed that truth could be found anywhere, even if it was in the context of lies (the Muslim faith, the pagan Greeks, etc).

Anyways, thanks again for the response!

 

[JDaniel]

A century and a half? A millenium and a half would be a bit more accurate I would think.

Belorg:

You are absolutely correct. I knew something was wrong with my post!

Sorry, I didn’t re-read it thoroughly enough.

God bless,
jd

 

[JDaniel]

Hi JDaniel,

I was baptized and received First Communion but I do not remember about first penance. Is “penance” the same as confession? That was really more of an aside though- I was just curious as to how the Catholic church would view someone like me.

DC:

You are still Catholic. Albeit not one in good standing perhaps. But, that’s easy to remedy.

I haven’t been a regular attender or member of a catholic parish in over 15 years, but instead have been to various protestant churches (Episcopal until they started to get too liberal, then evangelical, and now Evangelical Presbyterian).

I left the Church for almost 30 years! Then, three years ago, I decided to return. The Parish Priest was happy for that. Actually, after about a week, so was I.

In regard to Aquinas, yes, one does tend to see protestants hold him in high regard. I think this is fitting as he really was a great thinker and did a lot to promote the First Cause. I will point out that Feser and many other Catholics hold Thomistic matter-form duality to be incompatible with the “Intelligent Design” theory that many protestants promote. On the other hand, because they hold him in high regard, the protestant thinkers tend to defend that it IS compatible with Thomistic philosophy. What I really respect about Aquinas is, like you mention, his search for truth wherever it may be. He truly believed that truth could be found anywhere, even if it was in the context of lies (the Muslim faith, the pagan Greeks, etc).

He was a man that I would have liked to have met. Not that I would have understood everything he said!

Anyways, thanks again for the response!

Best wishes in your journey. Please continue to converse with this forum as you move ahead.

God bless,
jd

 

[Aelred_Minor]

DC:

Have you already been Confirmed, or received First Communion or first Penance? Were you Baptized into the Catholic Church?

I think most Christians highly regard Aquinas. One rarely hears or reads anything antithetical to his theologies and philosophies from non-Catholics. At least that’s been my experience. Virtually all of what I hear and read that is, is from non-Theists. But, as the prior poster said, he was completely “Catholic.”

The Protestant revolution did not come to be for another 400 - 500 years. So it must be remembered that, except for the occasional heretic, everyone was Catholic, in his time. Today his Five Ways are infused into much of Christian-Protestant design theory.

Also, obviously Aristotle was about a century and a half earlier than him, so Aristoteleanism is considerably older than Protestantism and Thomism. However, Aquinas rarely departs from that earlier thinker. Also, Aquinas found much truth in a number of the early Islamic thinkers, Averroes, Algazel, and Avicenna, for example.

God bless, Welcome to CAF
jd

There were also various kinds of non-Catholic Eastern Christians whom he wrote against, as well as Waldensians (essentially proto-Protestants), a declining number of Cathars (basically think something in between Gnosticism and Protestantism), a growing number of Epicureans (essentially the ancient/Medieval equivalent of modern materialistic atheists), etc. There were also the Christian Averoeists, who attempted to bring in more from that Muslim thinker than was really compatible with Catholicism. Not to mention all the non-Christian Jews and Muslims, and the occult remnants of the old European pagan religions. Then of course there were those who professed Catholicism with their lips but lived like the worst kinds of Pagans.

Medieval Europe, including Medieval Italy, was by no means 100% Catholic, and Aquinas was very much concerned with intellectually combating the rampant errors of his days.

 

[JDaniel]

There were also various kinds of non-Catholic Eastern Christians whom he wrote against, as well as Waldensians (essentially proto-Protestants), a declining number of Cathars (basically think something in between Gnosticism and Protestantism), a growing number of Epicureans (essentially the ancient/Medieval equivalent of modern materialistic atheists), etc. There were also the Christian Averoeists, who attempted to bring in more from that Muslim thinker than was really compatible with Catholicism. Not to mention all the non-Christian Jews and Muslims, and the occult remnants of the old European pagan religions. Then of course there were those who professed Catholicism with their lips but lived like the worst kinds of Pagans.

Medieval Europe, including Medieval Italy, was by no means 100% Catholic, and Aquinas was very much concerned with intellectually combating the rampant errors of his days.

Aelred:

Very true. It could be said that the Church had been beset on all sides almost from day one. People don’t realize how close we came to becoming Albigensian-Catholics. But, I felt that the OP was limiting his query to a question concerning “non-Catholic Christians,” so that’s how I thought he should be answered. Now you’ve gone and done it. It’s on your head!

God bless,
jd

 

[Patty23]

Aquinas’ approach to philosophy was through philosophy. He didn’t base his postulates or axioms using the scriptures so in a sense his arrival at truth is through honesty and humility.

He even quoted arabian,pagan,muslim philosophers as long as they were true. For Aquinas’ truth cannot contradict itself so we don’t throw the baby together with the bathwater.

TO answer your question, I think his metaphysics don’t contradict protestantism. Metaphysics is always the core of one’s philosophy unless one denies its possibility.

 

[Contarini]

I suppose a non-Catholic could extract individual statements made by Aquinas that he or she agrees with, but much of his work would have to be rejected, since he comes to Catholic conclusions in his reasoning.

A number of Protestants, such as Norman Geisler, have “claimed” Aquinas, arguing both that Protestants can build on his work (which is fairly non-controversial–after all, Aquinas built on Aristotle and Aristotle was a pagan!) and that in fact Aquinas didn’t hold to “Rome’s” doctrines on most of the points where “Rome” differs from evangelicals.

This last claim is, in my opinion, nonsense, and I’m sure that most folks on this forum will agree with me. But it’s interesting that some fairly well-known folks in the evangelical world try to make it!

Edwin

 

[Moontown_Rabbit]

is Thomistic philosophy uniquely Catholic?

St. Thomas fought against a number of heresies, one of them being Averroism. The Averroist (in particular the modern ones) sees a clash between faith and reason, or religion and science. An Averroist might say that one can show that “x” is true using science and “y” is true according to religion, even though x and y are in some way contradictory. St. Thomas aggressively disagreed with this kind of thinking, claiming that reason and faith are never in contradiction. Although he himself was Catholic (he was a Dominican friar) I doubt that he would approve of his philosophy being labeled as uniquely Catholic. For St. Thomas, there is one truth, and faith and reason are always in harmony. We should ask not whether his philosophy is uniquely Catholic, but whether it is true.

 

[Koopa]

Hey Everyone!

First post on this forum so I hope you will have patience with me. I am a Christian who was baptized in the Roman Catholic church but do not any longer consider myself a Roman Catholic (would the Church still consider me a Catholic? Or would I have had to go through Confirmation and other Catholic sacraments?). I am not hostile to the RCC though, and despite what they may think of me, I think pretty highly of the church and the thinkers in the church.

I have recently been reading a lot about Thomism philosophy by Edward Feser (edwardfeser.blogspot.com) and am fascinated by it. I plan on buying Feser’s book on Aquinas when I finish the stack of books I already own but have not read.

I’m still pretty ignorant of Aristotlian-Thomistic philosophy so my question is this: is Thomistic philosophy uniquely Catholic? I understand that Aquinas was a Catholic, but is his approach to philosophy so strongly tied to Catholic doctrines that it is incompatible with non-Catholic Christian doctrines?

Hello

I am also very new to Thomism but from what I have learned I am in love. That St. Thomas could integrate the thought of a pagan philosopher like Aristotle so intricately into his own in order to demonstrate the truths of the faith by nothing more than human reason, that he could draw from the fruits of a very ancient search for knowledge and show the fulfillment of that search in the Catholic faith–that is very, very exciting. I don’t pretend to understand half of what he says, but when a person comes to grasp even just a blurry image of the big ideas that Aquinas unearthed, I think it has a profound impact on his thinking.

As mentioned in the other replies, St. Thomas’ philosophy does not draw from a deposit of faith in order to validate its conclusions. Veritatem meditabitur guttur meum, et labia mea detestabuntur impium–from Proverbs 8:7, St. Thomas took as his mantra–“My mouth shall meditate truth, and my lips shall hate wickedness.” He saw his mission as a Dominican friar as illuminating the truth for human vision and dispelling the error that darkens the mind. He would search for the truth wherever it could be found. That’s why he was willing to search the philosophy of pagans, Muslims, and others, because he believed that the truths that they came to by the universal human faculty of reason could not fail to ring in rich harmony with the truths that came to him through the Catholic Church. God’s book of nature would not contradict his book of Scripture, or the word of His Church. The accomplishments of St. Thomas’ mission can be seen in his works.

Because of this commitment to truth wherever it can be found, his philosophy is uniquely reasonable, and is not derived from a deposit of faith. (Of course, Aquinas did loads of theology, as well, where that deposit of faith is a proper object of study.) As for non-Catholic Christian doctrines, there will be much to support common Christian understandings of God and so forth, but as Aquinas himself believed that he couldn’t have reached any truths that would contradict Catholic doctrine, I think you will be hard-pressed to find anything decidedly un-Catholic. I do believe, however, that there is a wealth of philosophical knowledge contained in the work of St. Thomas that would be valuable to Christians of any faith.

On another note, your reception into the Church would be pretty simple, administratively speaking. They might place you into an RCIA program so that you can brush up on the faith, or if your knowledge is beyond that level, the preparation might be even less. The sacramental preparation would include Confession and Confirmation. Please know that the Church eagerly awaits the embrace of all her children and know that you are in my prayers on your journey with Christ!

God bless,
Koopa