"Tot miraculis, quot articulis"

[tree_and_leaf]

Incidentally, today is the commemoration of Thomas Aquinas, probably my favourite theologian ever, partly because he's just straightforwardly brilliant*, and was never afraid to engage with secular learning and use it in the pursuit of truth, even when it looked like a challenge to faith, but also because, as a good Dominican, his theology is always connected to the preaching of the Gospel and the service of others, and to prayer - his last prayer, on his deathbed, was "I receive Thee, ransom of my soul. For love of Thee have I studied and kept vigil, toiled, preached and taught..."

As well as being patron saint of theologians, academics, philosophers, book sellers, and pencil makers(!) he is, for some reason, invoked against lightening.

(Blessed Thomas, pray for us).


* "Tot miraculis, quot articulis" - there are as many miracles as there are articles - replied a Dominican at Thomas' canonisation trial to the Devil's Advocate's objection that Thomas had worked no miracles. While I don't agree with every conclusion Thomas came to, he is a superb reasoner and always worth engaging with.

Comments

[sophia_gratia]

... Someday I really will read Aquinas. Once I figure out how. For now, I shall simply remain in love with Mary Carruthers' account of the capacity of his memory, in the introduction to The Book of Memory. The image of him dictating three texts at once will always inspire. Tot miraculis, indeed.

[tree_and_leaf]

I have always been amused by the bit in the Summa when Thomas is discussing Eucharistic change, and considers the possibility that that it happens gradually throughout the prayer of consecration, but says that this would mean that there were bits that were bread, and bits that were Jesus, and bits that perhaps weren't there at all, "quod inconveniens est". I can just see the deadpan expression...

The Summa is actually fairly easy to read, once you grasp that the meat of each article is the central section. Of course, the trouble is, there's tonnes of it, but (most of it - even Homer nods) is very elegantly argued. The articles on analogy are certainly worth reading, though.

[quinfirefrorefiddle]

I love Aquinas! I discovered him in tenth grade when I was doing a speech, and he got me interested enough in philosophy for it to be one of my majors in college. I think part of the attraction is that fabulously organized method of argument of his, it's delightful.

[17catherines]

I really must read him.

At present, all I know about him is this...

[cahn]

I'm another one who needs to read him -- I've wanted to ever since reading the Divine Comedy, and I love Chesterton's biography, but never knew where to start either. Perhaps I shall look at the Summa after all, someday when I have time again...