Neo-Scholasticism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by add

citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2007)
Part of a series on

St. Thomas Aquinas

Thomism[show]
Works[show]
People[show]
Related topics[show]

Catholicism portal
Philosophy portal

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 andphilosophy which began in the second half of
the 19th century.
Contents
[hide]

1 Origins

2 Key principles

3 Late-nineteenth century spread

4 Early twentieth century development

5 Variation and Tradition

6 Further reading

7 References

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 fifteenth and sixteenth
centuries after which time it came to be viewed by some as rigid, formalistic. "Scholastic philosophy did
not, however, completely disappear. An important movement of Thomistic revival took place during the
sixteenth century and enriched Scholastic literature with many eminent contributions. Thomas de Vio
Cajetan(14691534), Vasquez (15511604), Toletus (15321596), Fonseca (15281599), and
especially Suarez (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 mid-nineteenth 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 nineteenth and early twentieth century, 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 thirteenth 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 (1811
83), 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 byGiovanni 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 order
knowledge 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 andsyllogisms.
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-nineteenth 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 ofAnton 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 twentieth century development[edit]

In the early twentieth 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 Irius Conanini) 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 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 byMartin Grabmann (18751949), Amato Masnovo (1880
1955), 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]

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.

"Neo-Scholasticism". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.

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.

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 201101-02.

This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Herbermann, Charles, ed.
(1913). "Neo-Scholasticism". Catholic Encyclopedia. Robert Appleton Company.

External links[edit]

Scholasticon by Jacob Schmutz Online Resources for the study of early-modern scholasticism
(15001800): authors, sources, institutions
Scholasticism Lives Discussion Forum on modern Scholasticism, Aristotelianism, and Thomism.