CentralNotice

Neo-Scholasticism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve
this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (September 2007) (Learn how and when to remove this
template message)

Part of a series on
Thomas Aquinas

Thomism
[show]
Works
[show]
People
[show]
Related topics
[show]
Catholicism portal
 Philosophy portal
vte

Part of a series on
Catholic philosophy

Aquinas, Scotus and Ockham.

Branches
Scholasticism Thomism Neo-Scholasticism Scotism Occamism Augustinian
Molinism
Philosophers
[show]
Catholicism portal
Philosophy portal
vte
Neo-Scholasticism (also known as neo-scholastic Thomism or neo-
Thomism because of the great influence of the writings of St. Thomas
Aquinas on the movement), is a revival and development of medieval
scholasticism in Roman Catholic theology and philosophy which began in the
second half of the 19th century.

Contents [hide]
1
Origins
2
Key principles
3
Late-19th-century spread
4
Early-20th-century development
5
Variation and tradition
6
References
7
Further reading
8
 External links
Origins[edit]
During the medieval period, scholasticism became the standard accepted
method of philosophy and theology. The Scholastic method declined with the
advent of humanism in the 15th and 16th centuries, after which time it came
to be viewed by some as rigid and formalistic. "Scholastic philosophy did not,
however, completely disappear. An important movement of Thomistic revival
took place during the 16th century and enriched Scholastic literature with
many eminent contributions. Thomas de Vio Cajetan (14691534), Gabriel
Vsquez (15511604), Toletus (15321596), Fonseca (15281599), and
especially Francisco Surez (15481617) were profound thinkers, worthy of
the great masters whose principles they had adopted."[1] Moreover, as J. A.
Weisheipl O.P. emphasizes, within the Dominican Order Thomistic
scholasticism has been continuous since the time of Aquinas: "Thomism was
always alive in the Dominican Order, small as it was after the ravages of the
Reformation, the French Revolution, and the Napoleonic occupation.
Repeated legislation of the General Chapters, beginning after the death of St.
Thomas, as well as the Constitutions of the Order, required all Dominicans to
teach the doctrine of St. Thomas both in philosophy and in theology."[2] A
further idea of the longstanding historic continuity of Dominican scholasticism
and neo-scholasticism may be derived from the list of people associated with
the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas.
In the mid19th century, interest in Roman Catholic circles in scholastic
methodology and thought began once again to flourish, in large part in
reaction against the modernism inspired by thinkers such as Descartes,
Kant, and Hegel, the use of which was perceived as inimical to Christian
doctrine.[3] The meaning and core beliefs of theological modernism were
never tightly defined; in large part, modernism simply represented that which
was attacked by Rome in 1907 as the sum of all heresies. Moreover, given
that modernism remained the perceived enemy of neo-Scholasticism
throughout the late 19th and early 20th centuries, there were certainly
changes over the decades in what was attacked. Certainly, however, common
threads of thought can be detected. These include (1) the belief that
revelation continued up to and including the present day and, therefore, did
not stop with the death of the last apostle; (2) the belief that dogmas were not
immutable and that ecclesial dogmatic formulas could change both in
interpretation and in content; (3) the use of the historical-critical method in
biblical exegesis.[4]
For many thinkers, the dangers of modernism could only be overcome by a
complete return to scholastic theology. In particular, Catholic interest came to
focus on the 13th-century theologian Thomas Aquinas, whose writings were
increasingly viewed as the ultimate expression of philosophy and theology, to
which all Catholic thought must remain faithful.[5]
This was particularly vigorous at first in Italy. "The direct initiator of the neo-
Scholastic movement in Italy was Gaetano Sanseverino, (18111865), a
canon at Naples."[6] The German Jesuit J Kleutgen (181183), who taught at
Rome, was a particularly influential figure in his defences of pre-modern
theology and philosophy, his argument that a theology based upon a post-
Cartesian philosophy undermined Catholic doctrine, and his recommendation
that the Aristotelian scientific method of Aquinas was the theology the Church
now needed.[7] The Accademia di San Tommaso, founded in 1874, published
until 1891 a review entitled La Scienza Italiana. Numerous works were
produced by Giovanni Maria Cornoldi (182292), Giuseppe Pecci, Tommaso
Maria Zigliara (183393), Satolli (18391909), Liberatore (181092), Barberis
(184796), Schiffini (18411906), de Maria, Talamo, Lorenzelli, Ballerini,
Matussi and others. The Italian writers at first laid special emphasis on the
metaphysical features of Scholasticism, and less to the empirical sciences or
to the history of philosophy.
Papal support for such trends had begun under Pope Pius IX, who had
recognized the importance of the movement in various letters. The dogma of
the Immaculate Conception (1854), the Syllabus errorum (1864) and the
proclamation of papal infallibility (1870) all heralded a move away from
modernist forms of theological thought.[8]
The most important moment for the spread of the movement occurred with
Pope Leo XIIIs encyclical "Aeterni Patris", issued on 4 August 1879. Aeterni
Patris set out what would come to be seen as the principles of neo-
Scholasticism, and provided the stimulus for the donation of increased
support to neo-Scholastic thought. It called for Christian philosophy to be
restored according to the spirit of St Thomas.
Key principles[edit]
Neo-Scholasticism sought to restore the fundamental doctrines embodied in
the scholasticism of the 13th century. The essential conceptions may be
summarized as follows:
1. God, pure actuality and absolute perfection, is substantially distinct from
every finite thing: He alone can create and preserve all beings other than
Himself. His infinite knowledge includes all that has been, is, or shall be, and
likewise all that is possible.
2. As to our knowledge of the material world: whatever exists is itself, an
incommunicable, individual substance. To the core of self-sustaining reality, in
the oak-tree for instance, other realities (accidents) are addedsize, form,
roughness, and so on. All oak-trees are alike, indeed are identical in respect
of certain constituent elements. Considering this likeness and even identity,
our human intelligence groups them into one species and again, in view of
their common characteristics, it ranges various species under one genus.
Such is the Aristotelean solution of the problem of universals. Each substance
is in its nature fixed and determined; and nothing is farther from the spirit of
Scholasticism than a theory of evolution which would regard even the
essences of things as products of change.
But this statism requires as its complement a moderate dynamism, and this is
supplied by the central concepts of act and potency. Whatsoever changes is,
just for that reason, limited. The oak-tree passes through a process of growth,
of becoming: whatever is actually in it now was potentially in it from the
beginning. Its vital functions go on unceasingly (accidental change); but the
tree itself will die, and out of its decayed trunk other substances will come
forth (substantial change). The theory of matter and form is simply an
interpretation of the substantial changes which bodies undergo. The union of
matter and form constitutes the essence of concrete being, and this essence
is endowed with existence. Throughout all change and becoming there runs a
rhythm of finality; the activities of the countless substances of the universe
converge towards an end which is known to God; finality involves optimism.
3. Man, a compound of body (matter) and of soul (form), puts forth activities
of a higher orderknowledge and volition. Through his senses he perceives
concrete objects, e.g. this oak; through his intellect he knows the abstract and
universal (the oak). All our intellectual activity rests on sensory function; but
through the active intellect (intellectus agens) an abstract representation of
the sensible object is provided for the intellectual possibility. Hence the
characteristic of the idea, its non-materiality, and on this is based the principal
argument for the spirituality and immortality of the soul. Here, too, is the
foundation of logic and of the theory of knowledge, the justification of our
judgments and syllogisms.
Upon knowledge follows the appetitive process, sensory or intellectual
according to the sort of knowledge. The will (appetitus intellectualis) in certain
conditions is free, and thanks to this liberty man is the master of his destiny.
Like all other beings, we have an end to attain and we are morally obliged,
though not compelled, to attain it.
Natural happiness would result from the full development of our powers of
knowing and loving. We should find and possess God in this world since the
corporeal world is the proper object of our intelligence. But above nature is
the order of grace and our supernatural happiness will consist in the direct
intuition of God, the beatific vision. Here philosophy ends and theology
begins.
Late-19th-century spread[edit]
In the period from the publication of Aeterni Patris in 1879 until the 1920s,
neo-scholasticism gradually established itself as exclusive and all-pervading.
[9]
On October 15, 1879, Leo XIII created the Pontifical Academy of St. Thomas
Aquinas, and ordered the publication of the critical edition, the so-called
"Leonine Edition", of the complete works of Thomas Aquinas.[10] Moreover,
Leo XIII increased Thomist studies in his support for the Collegium Divi
Thomae de Urbe (the future Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas,
Angelicum), by founding its Faculty of Philosophy in 1882 and its Faculty of
Canon Law in 1896.
Accordingly, the thought of Thomas Aquinas came to be assessed positively
in relation to all other modern systems of thought. In particular, the
Aristotelianism of Thomas was seen in contrast to the thought of Kant (itself
seen as representative of modern thought).[11] Other modern forms of
thought, including Ontologism, Traditionalism, the dualism of Anton Gnther,
and the thought of Descartes, were also seen as flawed in comparison to
Thomism.
The movement also spread into other countries. It found supporters in
Germany,[12] Spain,[13] the Netherlands,[14] Belgium,[15] England,[16] Switzerland,[17]
France,[18] Hungary,[19] the United States,[20] Argentina,[21] Mexico,[22] and Brazil.
[23] In Belgium, a particularly important moment was the establishment by Leo

XIII at Louvain (then still a francophone university) in 1891 of the "Institut de

philosophie" for the special purpose of teaching the doctrine of St. Thomas
together with history and the natural sciences.[24] It was endorsed by four
Catholic Congresses: Paris (1891); Brussels (1895); Freiburg (1897); Munich
(1900).
Early-20th-century development[edit]
In the early 20th century, neo-Thomism became official Catholic doctrine, and
became increasingly defined in opposition to modernism. In July 1907, Pope
Pius X issued the decree Lamentabili sane exitu, which condemned 65
Modernist propositions. Two months later, he issued the encyclical Pascendi
Dominici Gregis, in which he unequivocally condemned the agnosticism,
immanentism, and relativism of Modernism as the synthesis of all heresies.
[25] The anti-Modernist oath of 1910 was very important; this remained in force

until 1966. .[25] In 1914, Pope Pius X acted against modernism by ordering,
though the Sacred Congregation of Studies, the publication of a list of 24
philosophical propositions, propositions summarising the central tenets of
neo-Scholasticism to be taught in all colleges as fundamental elements of
philosophy, which was intended to promote a purer form of Thomism; in 1916,
these 24 propositions were confirmed as normative. In 1917, the Churchs
new Code of Canon Law (Codex Iuris Canonici) insisted that the doctrine,
methods, and principles of Thomas should be used in teaching philosophy
and theology.[26] Thomist thought therefore became reflected in the manuals
and textbooks widely in use in Roman Catholic colleges and seminaries
before Vatican II.
Variation and tradition[edit]
While writers such as Edouard Hugon, Rginald Garrigou-Lagrange, and
Henri Grenier were maintaining the tradition of the manuals this did not mean
that there was no variation or disagreement among thinkers about how best
to formulate Thomism, especially in response to contemporary trends.
Variation within the tradition of neo-scholastic Thomism is represented by
Martin Grabmann (18751949), Amato Masnovo (18801955), Francesco
Olgiati (18861962), and Antonin-Dalmace Sertillanges (18631948).[27]
Authors such as tienne Gilson, Jacques Maritain, and Joseph Marchal
investigated alternative interpretations of Aquinas from the 1920s until the
1950s. Gilson and Maritain in particular taught and lectured throughout
Europe and North America, influencing a generation of English-speaking
Catholic philosophers.
The growth in historical investigation into Thomass thought led some to
believe that neo-Thomism did not always reflect the thought of Thomas
Aquinas himself. This historically oriented theology was particularly carried
out by writers such as tienne Gilson, Marie-Dominique Chenu, and Henri de
Lubac. At Vatican II, traditional neo-Thomist thought was opposed by such
exponents of the nouvelle thologie.
Many Thomists however continue in the neo-scholastic tradition. Some
relatively recent proponents are treated in Battista Mondin's Metafisica di san
Tommaso d'Aquino e i suoi interpreti (2002), which treats Carlo Giacon
(19001984), Sofia Vanni Rovighi (19081990), Cornelio Fabro (19111995),
Carlo Giacon (19001984),[28] Tomas Tyn (19501990), Abelardo Lobato
(19252012), Leo Elders (1926), and Enrico Berti (1935), among others.
Due to its suspicion of attempts to harmonize Aquinas with non-Thomistic
categories and assumptions, neo-scholastic Thomism has sometimes been
called Strict Observance Thomism.
Also Edward Feser in discussing anglophone authors has indicated that
proponents of the more traditional Thomist perspective such as Ralph
McInerny foster the possibility of a contemporary revival of neo-scholastic
Thomism.[29] Feser could be included along with these thinkers and other such
as Brian Davies as engaging in a contemporary polemic in defense of the
traditional system of Thomistic metaphysics in response to modern
philosophy.[30]
References[edit]
1 Jump up
^ Joseph Louis Perrier, The Revival of Scholastic Philosophy in the
Nineteenth Century, "Chapter VIII: "Chapter VIII: Forerunners of the Neo-
Scholastic Revival," Accessed 1 August 2013
2 Jump up
^ http://domcentral.org/blog/the-revival-of-thomism-an-historical-survey-
 weisheipl/ The Revival of Thomism: An Historical Survey, James Weisheipl,
1962.
3 Jump up
^ Fergus Kerr, Twentieth-century Catholic theologians, (Blackwell, 2007), p1.
4 Jump up
^ See Jrgen Mettepenningen, Nouvelle Thologie - New Theology: Inheritor
of Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II, (London: T&T Clark, 2010), p20.
5 Jump up
^ This way of approaching Thomas was itself scholastic in inspiration. The
scholastics used a book by a renowned scholar, called auctor, as basic
course literature. By reading this book thoroughly and critically, the disciples
learned to appreciate the theories of the auctor and, thus, of the problems
studied in the whole discipline, in a critical and self-confident way. Scholastic
works therefore have a tendency to take the form of a long list of "footnotes"
to the works studied, not being able to take a stand as theories on their own.
6 Jump up
^ Joseph Louis Perrier, The Revival of Scholastic Philosophy in the
Nineteenth Century, "Chapter IX: The Neo-Scholastic Revival in Italy", http://
www3.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/perrier9.html Accessed 1 August
2013
7 Jump up
^ Fergus Kerr, Thomism, in The Cambridge Dictionary of Christian
Theology, (Cambridge, 2011), p507.
8 Jump up
^ Jrgen Mettepenningen, Nouvelle Thologie - New Theology: Inheritor of
Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II, (London: T&T Clark, 2010), p19.
9 Jump up
^ Jrgen Mettepenningen, Nouvelle Thologie - New Theology: Inheritor of
Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II, (London: T&T Clark, 2010), p20.
10 Jump up
^ Previous critical editions of Thomass work had been published before, at
Parma in 1852-73, and in Paris in 1871-80, but the Leonine edition, produced
under the guidance of Tommaso Maria Zigliara, professor of theology at the
Collegium Divi Thomae de Urbe (the future Pontifical University of Saint
Thomas Aquinas, Angelicum), superseded both of these.
11 Jump up
^ For example, Boutroux thought that Aristotle's system might well serve as
an offset to Kantism and evolution. Aristote, Etudes d'histoire et de
philosophie, (Paris, 1901, 202). Moreover, Paulsen, Kant der Philosoph des
Protestantismus, Kantstudien, (1899) and Eucken, Thomas von Aquino u.
Kant, Ein Kampf zweier Welten, loc. cit., 1901 declared neo-Thomism the
rival of Kantism, and the conflict between them the "clash of two worlds".
Adolf Harnack, Lehrbuch d. Dogmengesch, III, 3rd. ed., 327, Seeberg,
Realencyklopdie f. Prot. Theol. 5. v. "Scholastik" and others argued against
underrating the value of scholastic doctrine.
12 Jump up
^ Such as Kleutgen (181183) and Stckl (182395), and the authors of the
"Philosophia Lacensis" published at Maria Laach by the Jesuits (Pesch,
Hontheim, Cathrein), Gutberlet, Commer, Willmann, Kaufmann, Glossner,
Grabmann and Schneid.
13 Jump up
^ Such as Gonzalez (183192), Orti y Lara, Urrburu, and Gmez Izquierdo
14 Jump up
^ Such as de Groot
15 Jump up
^ Such as de San (18321904), Dupont and Lepidi
16 Jump up
^ Clarke, Maher, John Rickaby, Joseph Rickaby, Boedder (Stonyhurst Series)
17 Jump up
^ Such as Mandonnet at Freiburg.
18 Jump up
^ Such as Farges, Dormet de Vorges (1910), Vallet, Gardair, Fonsegrive and
Piat
19 Jump up
^ Kiss and Pcsi.
20 Jump up
^ Such as Coppens, Poland, Brother Chrysostom, and the professors at the
Catholic University (Shanahan, Turner, and Pace).
21 Jump up
^ Julio Meinvielle and Nimio de Anqun
22 Jump up
^ Garcia
23 Jump up
^ Santroul
24 Jump up
^ The Institute was placed in charge of Mgr (later Cardinal) Mercier whose
"Cours de philosophie" was translated into many major European languages.
25 ^ Jump up to:
a b Hans Boersma, Nouvelle Theologie and Sacramental Ontology: A Return

to Mystery, (Oxford: OUP, 2009), p18.

26 Jump up
^ Jrgen Mettepenningen, Nouvelle Thologie - New Theology: Inheritor of
Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II, (London: T&T Clark, 2010), p25.
27 Jump up
^ Battista Mondin's Metafisica di san Tommaso d'Aquino e i suoi interpreti
(2002)
28 Jump up
^ http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/carlo-giacon_(Dizionario-Biografico)/
Accessed 9 April 2013
 29 Jump up
^ http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2008/11/neo-scholastic-revival.html
30 Jump up
^ Feser, Edward (15 October 2009). "The Thomistic tradition (Part 1)".
Retrieved 2011-01-02.
This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public
domain:Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). "Neo-Scholasticism".
Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton.
Further reading[edit]
Boersma, Hans, Nouvelle Theologie and Sacramental Ontology: A
Return to Mystery, (Oxford: OUP, 2009)
Cessario, R, A Short History of Thomism, (2005)
Kerr, Fergus, After Aquinas: Versions of Thomism, (2002)
Kerr, Fergus, Twentieth-century Catholic theologians, (Blackwell, 2007),
Kerr, Fergus, Thomism, in The Cambridge Dictionary of Christian
Theology, (Cambridge, 2011)
Mettepenningen, Jrgen, Nouvelle Thologie - New Theology: Inheritor
of Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II, (London: T&T Clark, 2010)
Aveling, Rev. F. "The Neo-Scholastic Movement," The American
Catholic Quarterly Review, Vol. XXXI, 1906.
Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). "Neo-Scholasticism". Catholic
Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
Many philosophical and theological journals focus on neo-
Scholasticism: "Divus Thomas" (since 1879); "Rivista di Filosofia Neo-
Scolastica" (Milan, since 1909); "Annales de Philosophie
Chrtienne" (Paris, since 1830); "Revue no-scolastique de
Philosophie" (Louvain, since 1894); "Revue de Philosophie" (Paris,
since 1900);" Revue des Sciences philosophiques et
thologiques" (Kain, Belgium, since 1907); "Revue Thomiste" (Paris,
since 1893); "Philosophisches Jahrbuch fr Philosophie und spekulative
Theologie" (Paderborn, since 1887); "St. Thomas Bltter" (Ratisbon,
since 1888); Blcseleti-Folyirat (Budapest, since 1886);" Revista
Lulliana" (Barcelona, since 1901); "Cienza Tomista" (Madrid, since
1910). Angelicum, since 1924; The Modern Schoolman since 1925,
New Scholasticism since 1927 which became American Catholic
Philosophical Quarterly in 1989, The Thomist since 1939.
External links[edit]
Scholasticon by Jacob Schmutz Online Resources for the study of
early-modern scholasticism (15001800): authors, sources, institutions
(French)
NewPP limit report Parsed by mw1248 Cached time: 20170303020031
Cache expiry: 2592000 Dynamic content: false CPU time usage: 0.172
seconds Real time usage: 0.236 seconds Preprocessor visited node count:
1111/1000000 Preprocessor generated node count: 0/1500000 Postexpand
include size: 36113/2097152 bytes Template argument size: 427/2097152
bytes Highest expansion depth: 8/40 Expensive parser function count: 2/500
Lua time usage: 0.055/10.000 seconds Lua memory usage: 2.45 MB/50 MB
Transclusion expansion time report (%,ms,calls,template) 100.00% 177.726 1
-total 27.78% 49.381 1 Template:Reflist 26.48% 47.065 1
Template:Refimprove 18.04% 32.060 1 Template:Cite_web 17.93% 31.866 2
Template:Sidebar_with_collapsible_lists 16.83% 29.909 1 Template:Ambox
16.05% 28.525 1 Template:Thomism 8.33% 14.805 4 Template:Portal-inline
5.98% 10.623 2 Template:Cite_encyclopedia 5.70% 10.130 1
Template:Catholic Saved in parser cache with key enwiki:pcache:idhash:
6432760-0!*!0!!en!4!* and timestamp 20170303020030 and revision id
758202825 <img src="//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?
type=1x1" alt="" title="" width="1" height="1" style="border: none; position:
absolute;" />
Categories: ScholasticismThomismPhilosophical theories

Navigation menu
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Search

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
 Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages

Catal
Deutsch

Espaol
Galego


Nederlands

Polski

Slovenina
Svenska
Edit links
This page was last modified on 4 January 2017, at 01:53.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional
terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit
organization.
Privacy policy

About Wikipedia

Disclaimers

Contact Wikipedia

Developers

Cookie statement

Mobile view