M
mcteague
Guest
Many if the posts here would seem to seem to suggest that no distinction is made. If there is one, what is it?
- Status
G
Glorthac
Guest
St. Thomas Aquinas, one of the most authoritative of Catholic theologians, covers this topic at the very beginning of Summa Theologica:
ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/summa.FP_Q1_A1.html
The answer is, yes, philosophy is distinct from theology. The difference is, philosophy is something learned by human reason alone, while theology is something taught by God to man.
But this doesn’t mean theology is subjective. It has the same objectivity and importance as philosophy, as St. Thomas proves later in his Summa.
ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/summa.FP_Q1_A1.html
The answer is, yes, philosophy is distinct from theology. The difference is, philosophy is something learned by human reason alone, while theology is something taught by God to man.
But this doesn’t mean theology is subjective. It has the same objectivity and importance as philosophy, as St. Thomas proves later in his Summa.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
It is important to state, however, that Catholic theology is built on philosophy and integrated with it.
Those who have not learned philosophy well will sometimes, maybe even often, have difficulty understanding the foundations for Catholic theology, and even greater difficulty explaining that theology to others.
Those who have not learned philosophy well will sometimes, maybe even often, have difficulty understanding the foundations for Catholic theology, and even greater difficulty explaining that theology to others.
M
mcteague
Guest
I think I should explain what prompted the question. Many times I will see a post or question here that I believe can be, and should be, addressed without reference to theology. For example: Is existentialism completely incompatable with Catholicism? To me a perfectly legitimate question for the philosophy forum that can be addressed accademically.
I expect to see replies that discuss some of the following:
Kierkegard
Some criticisms of other existential philosphers including Nietzche (who is not really one)
Some modern Christian thinkers like Paul Tillich. Who have written about existentialism.
Perhaps some obscure medieval scholastics, that I have never heard of, who may have addressed similar questions.
And other stuff like that.
Instead I will see replies like:
God is the creator and great.
Jesus is the Lord
Read the Bible
Modern society is doomed. We all going to burn in the pit of hell
Perhaps someone will even post the “Hail Mary”.
And a whole bunch of amazing things
My first reaction is astonishment that people in straight jackets can actually type.
But then I backup for a moment and consider that my definition of philosophy may be differerent than seriously practicing Catholics. Perhaps I should not be so quick to judge.
After all my education is largely secular. And philosophy as taught in many institutions relagates Catholic and scholastic thought pretty much to the area of theology. My frame of reference may be different.
Perhaps when making references to “revealed knowledge” people are engaging in legitimate intellectual discourse. It is just not discourse I am comfortable because it violates catagories I take for granted in a serious conversation. However, perhaps my definition of philosophy as being predominantly independent of religious belief excludes legitamate discourse including some Catholic thought.
And so I was moved to ask the question of how two are distingushed within Catholicism
I expect to see replies that discuss some of the following:
Kierkegard
Some criticisms of other existential philosphers including Nietzche (who is not really one)
Some modern Christian thinkers like Paul Tillich. Who have written about existentialism.
Perhaps some obscure medieval scholastics, that I have never heard of, who may have addressed similar questions.
And other stuff like that.
Instead I will see replies like:
God is the creator and great.
Jesus is the Lord
Read the Bible
Modern society is doomed. We all going to burn in the pit of hell
Perhaps someone will even post the “Hail Mary”.
And a whole bunch of amazing things
My first reaction is astonishment that people in straight jackets can actually type.
But then I backup for a moment and consider that my definition of philosophy may be differerent than seriously practicing Catholics. Perhaps I should not be so quick to judge.
After all my education is largely secular. And philosophy as taught in many institutions relagates Catholic and scholastic thought pretty much to the area of theology. My frame of reference may be different.
Perhaps when making references to “revealed knowledge” people are engaging in legitimate intellectual discourse. It is just not discourse I am comfortable because it violates catagories I take for granted in a serious conversation. However, perhaps my definition of philosophy as being predominantly independent of religious belief excludes legitamate discourse including some Catholic thought.
And so I was moved to ask the question of how two are distingushed within Catholicism
J
Jesus_123
Guest
+Christianity . . . as taught by our Holy Mother Church . . . is by no means a “religion” of human reason alone . . . at the beginning of Fides et ratio . . .
IOANNES PAULUS PP. II
FIDES ET RATIO
To the Bishops
of the Catholic Church
on the relationship
between Faith and Reason
1998.09.14
:compcoff: Link: vatican.va/edocs/ENG0216/_INDEX.HTM
is recorded a blessing from our highly esteemed Holy Father . . . Pope John Paul the Great . . . which brings into focus . . . **human reason ** . . . and its significance in . . . participating with . . . God . . . in the salvific nature of the Holy Gift of Christian Faith . . .
“Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of TRUTH; and God has placed in the human 
heart a desire to know the TRUTH—in a word, to know HIMSELF—so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves (cf. Ex 33:18; Ps 27:8-9; 63:2-3; Jn 14:8; 1 Jn 3:2).”
heart a desire to know the TRUTH—in a word, to know HIMSELF—so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves (cf. Ex 33:18; Ps 27:8-9; 63:2-3; Jn 14:8; 1 Jn 3:2).”
Continuing on in Fides et ratio, Chapter 1, Section #9 . . .
"…Based upon God’s testimony and enjoying the supernatural assistance of grace,
- FAITH is of an order
other than - PHILOSOPHICAL knowledge which depends upon sense perception and experience and which advances by the light of the intellect alone. **
- **PHILOSOPHY****and the sciences function within the order of natural reason;
- FAITH, enlightened and guided by the Spirit, recognizes in the message of salvation the “fullness of grace and truth” (cf. Jn 1:14) which God has willed to reveal in history and definitively through his Son, Jesus Christ (cf. 1 Jn 5:9; Jn 5:31-32)."
:bible1:
"For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways,
saith the Lord."Isaiah 55:8
. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+
. . . thank You Holy Mother Church+
. . . thank you blessed Pope John Paul II+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+
. . . thank You Holy Mother Church+
. . . thank you blessed Pope John Paul II+
G
grannymh
Guest
I recently heard a philosophy department chair (in a Catholic university) say that philosophy is secular. Does that fit in with what you are saying?
Back in student days, there was a distinction between theology and philosophy. In philosophy, we studied the works of philosophers and in theology we studied God and His works. Today, it seems to be a middle ground where philosophy and theology somehow overlap. This may be due to “secular” theology which seems to blend all religious beliefs into some kind of a faith tradition which changes to meet the demands of current culture. I am not sure that “secular” is the right description.
Blessings,
granny
The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.
P
Planty_Pall
Guest
Hi mcteague.
The Church says that “philosophy is the handmaiden of theology”. If philosophical formulae can be an aid to understanding of revelation, then philosophical formulae are useful. For instance, the doctrine of the Eucharist known as Transubstantiation requires a minimal familiarity with the meanings of substance and accident according to the way Aristotle understood it. But the doctrine of Christ’s literal Eucharistic presence preceded that formula for over a thousand years. The Trinitarian and Christological controversies forced Catholics to use more precise language than that provided in Scripture in order to articulate in a more nuanced way exactly what the Church believed in the Councils of Nicea and Chalcedon. Many find philosophical language to be an aid in clarifying our positions.
Nowadays, a lot of people, even Catholics, are impatient or even mocking of Aristotle. I am not qualified to defend the accuracy of his philosophy. I believe there is important truth in it, or else the Church wouldn’t have used it. But I suggest with inquirers to the faith that when philosophy is an aid to helping someone understand our theology, use it. If it doesn’t help, try something else. In my opinion, It won’t do any good to try to insist to a trained and convinced student of the philosophy of Wittgenstein to accept an Aristotelian vocabulary.
To understand the proper relationship of philosophy to Catholic theology, one must understand that philosophy is only as good as its utility in explaining what we believe. What we believe necessarily precedes and determines the philosophical garb with which a theological truth is presented.
Planty Pall
P
Pieman333272
Guest
I do, maybe not others.
Theology is the study of God. Philosophy encompasses theology but in the broadest sense is knowledge and study of truth and reason. It encompasses things theology doesn’t such as politics (political philosophy), science (philosophy of science and arguably science itself), etc.
P
Pieman333272
Guest
I don’t see much of that at all, unless you post in the prayer intentions or spirituality forums. Also the fact that you ask for very specific philosophers referenced sort of implies bias. What’s wrong with Aquinas, Pascal, Augustine, and the other classic Christian/Catholic thinkers?
M
mcteague
Guest
There is nothing wrong with them. That was just an example. And probably not a very good one as there clearly are theologic or religious aspects to my example question.
Perhaps you don’t see it. But from my perspective, I see a lot of people throwing themselves into the holy water when addressing questions on subjects that do not appear suited to personal declarations of faith
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
We are quite happy to cover any of the intellectual disciplines, but we are aware that they are nothing more than castles in the air. A cloud of inductions that a person trained in the Western tradition can only see as bedrock principle. We recognize that only G-d whose substance is existence, is the bedrock from which all valid reasoning must flow. It is not a matter of faith alone. It is the sure logic of being, a metaphysical fact no different in substance than facts discovered by mathematicians, physicists, engineers, or polar explorers.
The flaw is in the way Western society educates students. They are only taught the rudiments of critical thinking, a basic overview of philosophy. They never get out of the kiddy pool. then they show up here thinking to find people who understand the world in the same way they do, when we really have a fundamental difference.
L
levinas12
Guest
We had some philosophical discussions on this forum … e.g. phenomenology (intentionality, disclosure) in dialogue with neuroscience …
Why not start a strictly philosophical thread … for instance, what did Parmenides mean when he said that thinking and being are one … or was Nietzsche really the last metaphysician …
B
Betterave
Guest
Good question - a question that is itself an important and difficult philosophical and theological question.
To throw out an answer: Yes and no. Yes we do distinguish, but we are many and diverse and have a long and rich intellectual history and we haven’t made/don’t make just one distinction.
Out of curiosity, how do you distinguish the two?
M
mcteague
Guest
As you say this is not an easy question. As it pertains to discussion here, which was my principle interest in posting, I would suggest the following:
An argument or discussion that has as an implied or explicit premise that Gods existence is an indisputable fact should be considered theological.
An argument or discussion that has an implied or explicit premise that Gods existence is an indisputable falsehood should be considered theology
An argument or discussion that has an implied or explicit premise that Gods existence, or non-existence, is not an indisputable fact should be considered philosophical.
An argument or discussion that does not have an implied or explicit premise regarding Gods existence should be considered philosophical
An argument or discussion that occurs within a particular Christian intellectual paradigm should be considered both theological and philosophical.
An argument or discussion that is in the “if then” form should be considered philosophical.
We are of course presuming that the discussions could be called philosophical or theological at all. You can also replace “Gods existence” with “Catholic Doctrine”, and “indisputable fact” with “indisputable truth” to a similar affect.
B
Betterave
Guest
“An argument or discussion that has an implied or explicit premise that Gods existence, or non-existence, is not an indisputable fact should be considered philosophical.” This would be unacceptable to Catholics, or to anyone who thinks you could prove God’s existence one way or the other: why should the resolution of the question about God’s existence imply that any subsequent discussion, based on that resolution, should be regarded as theological, rather than philosophical? Surely such arguments or discussions can take the “if-then” form (and thus, according to you, should be considered philosophical)?
J
Joel_PF
Guest
Yes, there is.
Philosophy is the use of our reason to understand reality without anything derived from faith.
Theology is also the use of our reason to understand reality, but it starts from pieces of knowledge derived from faith and sees everything in the light of that faith.
Both are important in their own right. But of course, when a Catholic wishes to convince a non-Catholic of something, he will have to speak from reason alone.
- Status