NamMcduffie6361: creating bio

2025-12-23T20:30:05Z

creating bio

New page

{{Short description|Revival of scholasticism}}
{{Thomism}}
{{Catholic philosophy}}
'''Neo-scholasticism''' (also known as '''neo-scholastic [[Thomism]]'''<ref name=":0">{{cite web |author=Feser |first=Edward |author-link=Edward Feser |date=15 October 2009 |title=The Thomistic tradition, Part I |url=http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2009/10/thomistic-tradition-part-i.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101129133527/http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2009/10/thomistic-tradition-part-i.html |archive-date=29 November 2010 |access-date=30 October 2025 |df=dmy-all}}</ref> or '''neo-Thomism''' because of the great influence of the writings of [[Thomas Aquinas]] on the movement) is a revival and development of medieval [[scholasticism]] in [[Catholic]] [[theology]] and [[scholastic philosophy|philosophy]] which began in the second half of the 19th century.

==Origins==
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{{who?|date=October 2021}} as rigid and formalistic. "Scholastic philosophy did not, however, completely disappear. An important movement of [[Second scholasticism|Scholastic revival]] took place during the 16th and 17th centuries and enriched Scholastic literature with many eminent contributions, in addition to adapting scholastic thought to modern problems and synthesising the currents of thought of various authors of medieval scholasticism, such as Thomism, Scotism or nominalism. [[Francisco de Vitoria]] (1483–1546), [[Thomas Cajetan|Thomas de Vio Cajetan]] (1469–1534), [[Gabriel Vásquez]] (1551–1604), [[Francisco de Toledo (Jesuit)|Francisco de Toledo]] (1532–1596), [[Pedro da Fonseca (philosopher)|Pedro da Fonseca]] (1528–1599), and especially [[Francisco Suárez]] (1548–1617) were profound thinkers, worthy of the great masters whose principles they had adopted."<ref>Joseph Louis Perrier, ''The Revival of Scholastic Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century'', "Chapter VIII: "Chapter VIII: Forerunners of the Neo-Scholastic Revival," Accessed 30 October 2025.</ref> Moreover, as J. A. Weisheipl emphasises, 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."<ref>{{cite web |title=The Dominican Friars of the Province of St. Albert the Great » "The Revival of Thomism: An Historical Survey" (James Weisheipl) |url=http://domcentral.org/blog/the-revival-of-thomism-an-historical-survey-weisheipl/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130927202339/http://domcentral.org/blog/the-revival-of-thomism-an-historical-survey-weisheipl/ |archive-date=27 September 2013 |access-date=30 October 2025}} "The Revival of Thomism: An Historical Survey", James Weisheipl, 1962.</ref> 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-19th century, interest in scholastic thought began once again to flourish, in large part in reaction against the [[Modernism in the Catholic Church|Modernist]] current inspired by thinkers such as [[René Descartes]], [[Immanuel Kant]] and [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Georg Hegel]], whose principles were perceived to conflict with Christian dogma.<ref>Fergus Kerr, ''Twentieth-Century Catholic Theologians'', (Blackwell, 2007), p. 1.</ref> Theological Modernism never coalesced into an authoritative doctrine; perhaps it was most clearly [[Pascendi Dominici gregis|defined by Pius X in 1907]], when he condemned it as ‘the sum of all heresies’. However, the most consistent threads of Modernist thought include: (1) the belief that revelation continues up to the present day and did not stop after the apostles; (2) the belief that dogmas are not immutable, and their formulas could change both in interpretation and content; (3) the use of the historical-critical method in biblical exegesis.<ref>See Jürgen Mettepenningen, ''Nouvelle Théologie – New Theology: Inheritor of Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II'', (London: T&T Clark, 2010), p. 20.</ref>

For many thinkers, the dangers of Modernism could only be overcome by a complete restoration of scholastic theology which culminated in Aquinas. His writings were increasingly viewed as the ultimate expression of orthodox philosophy and theology, to which all Catholic thought must remain faithful.<ref>This way of approaching Thomas was itself scholastic in inspiration. The scholastics used a book by a renowned scholar, called [[Author|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.</ref>

This was particularly vigorous at first in Italy. "The direct initiator of the neo-Scholastic movement in Italy was [[Gaetano Sanseverino]] (1811–1865), a canon at Naples."<ref>Joseph Louis Perrier, ''The Revival of Scholastic Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century'', "Chapter IX: The Neo-Scholastic Revival in Italy", {{cite web |title=Jacques Maritain Center: Revival 9 |url=http://www3.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/perrier9.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151009074833/http://www3.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/perrier9.html |archive-date=9 October 2015 |access-date=30 October 2025}}</ref> The influential German Jesuit [[Joseph Kleutgen]] (1811–83), who taught at Rome, argued that post-Cartesian philosophy undermined Catholic theology, and that its remedy was the Aristotelian scientific method of Aquinas.<ref>Fergus Kerr, ‘Thomism’, in ''The Cambridge Dictionary of Christian Theology'' (Cambridge, 2011), p. 507.</ref> From 1874 to 1891, the Accademia di San Tommaso published the review ''La Scienza Italiana''. Numerous works were produced by [[Giovanni Maria Cornoldi]] (1822–92), [[Giuseppe Pecci]], [[Tommaso Maria Zigliara]] (1833–93), Satolli (1839–1909), [[Matteo Liberatore]] (1810–92), Barberis (1847–96), Schiffini (1841–1906), de Maria, Talamo, Lorenzelli, Ballerini, Mattiussi and others. The Italian writers at first laid special emphasis on the metaphysics of Scholasticism, and less on the empirical sciences or the history of philosophy.

Papal support for such trends began under Pope [[Pius IX]], who praised the movement in various letters. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception (1854), the ''[[Syllabus of Errors]]'' (1864) and the proclamation of papal infallibility (1870) all heralded a move away from Modernist ideas.<ref>Jürgen Mettepenningen, ''Nouvelle Théologie – New Theology: Inheritor of Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II'', (London: T&T Clark, 2010), p. 19.</ref>

The most decisive impetus was Pope [[Leo XIII]]'s [[encyclical]] ''[[Aeterni Patris]]'' of 4 August 1879, which set out and strongly endorsed the principles of neo-scholasticism, calling for "Christian philosophy to be restored according to the spirit of St Thomas".

==Key principles==
[[File:Gentile da Fabriano 052.jpg|thumb|[[Thomas Aquinas]]]]{{Original research|date=February 2023}}
"Neo-Scholasticism is characterized by systematic investigation, analytical rigor, clear terminology, and argumentation that proceeds from first principles, chief among them that objective truth is both real and knowable."<ref>[https://www.newoxfordreview.org/documents/can-neo-scholasticism-make-a-comeback/# Iovino, James. "Can Neo-Scholasticism Make a Comeback?", ''New Oxford Review'', January-February 2018]</ref> Neo-scholasticism sought to restore the fundamental doctrines embodied in the scholasticism of the 13th century, which may be summarised as follows:

1. [[God]] is [[Actus purus|pure actuality]] and absolute perfection, substantially distinct from every finite thing. He alone can create and preserve all beings other than Himself. His infinite knowledge includes all that was, is, or shall be, and 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 added—size, form, roughness, and so on. All oak-trees 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 Scholasticism excludes a theory of [[evolution]] which would regard even the essences of things as products of change.

But this static conception requires as its complement a moderate dynamism, supplied by the central concepts of [[Entelechy|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 and [[syllogism]]s.

Upon knowledge follows the appetitive process, sensory or intellectual according to the sort of knowledge. The [[Will (philosophy)|will]] (''appetitus intellectualis'') in certain conditions [[Free will|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==
In the period from the publication of ''[[Aeterni Patris]]'' in 1879 until the 1920s, neo-scholasticism gradually established itself as exclusive and all-pervading.<ref>Jürgen Mettepenningen, ''Nouvelle Théologie – New Theology: Inheritor of Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II'', (London: T&T Clark, 2010), p. 20.</ref>

On October 15, 1879, Leo XIII created the [[Pontifical Academy of St. Thomas Aquinas]], and ordered the publication of the critical "Leonine Edition", of Aquinas' complete works.<ref>Previous critical editions of Thomas’s 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|Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas, ''Angelicum'']]), superseded both of these.</ref> The pope expanded Thomist studies in the ''Collegium Divi Thomae de Urbe'' (the future [[Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas|Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas, ''Angelicum'']]), founding its Faculty of [[Philosophy]] in 1882 and its Faculty of [[Canon law (Catholic Church)|Canon Law]] in 1896.

The thought of Thomas Aquinas gained papal ascendency over all other ‘modern’ systems of thought. In particular, the Aristotelianism of Thomas preferred to the thought of [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]].<ref>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, [[Friedrich Paulsen|Paulsen]], ‘Kant der Philosoph des Protestantismus’, ''Kantstudien'', (1899) and [[Rudolf Christoph Eucken|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 von Harnack]], ''Lehrbuch d. Dogmengesch'', III, 3rd. ed., 327, [[Seeberg]], ''Realencyklopädie f. Prot. Theol. '' 5. v. "Scholastik" and others argued against underrating the value of scholastic doctrine.</ref> Other ‘modern’ forms of thought, including [[ontologism]], [[Traditionalist School (perennialism)|traditionalism]], the [[Dualistic cosmology#In Christianity|dualism]] of [[Anton Günther]], and the thought of [[Descartes]], were also seen as flawed in comparison to Thomism.

The movement spread outside Italy, finding supporters in Germany,<ref>Such as [[Joseph Kleutgen|Kleutgen]] (1811–83) and [[Albert Stöckl|Stöckl]] (1823–95), 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.</ref> Spain,<ref>Such as Gonzalez (1831–92), Orti y Lara, Urráburu, and Gómez Izquierdo</ref> the Netherlands,<ref>Such as de Groot</ref> Belgium,<ref>Such as de San (1832–1904), Dupont and Lepidi</ref> England,<ref>Clarke, Maher, John Rickaby, [[Joseph Rickaby]], Boedder (Stonyhurst Series)</ref> Switzerland,<ref>Such as [[Mandonnet]] at Freiburg</ref> France,<ref>Such as Farges, Dormet de Vorges (1910), Vallet, Gardair, Fonsegrive and Piat</ref> Hungary,<ref>Kiss and Pécsi.</ref> the United States,<ref>Such as Coppens, Poland, Brother Chrysostom, and the professors at the Catholic University (Shanahan, Turner, and Pace).</ref> Argentina,<ref>[[Julio Meinvielle]] and [[Nimio de Anquín]]</ref> Mexico,<ref>Garcia</ref> Brazil<ref>Santroul</ref> and Australia.<ref>{{Cite web |date=16 July 2018 |title=Toongabbie's Thomist philosopher |url=https://catholicoutlook.org/toongabbies-thomist-philosopher-parra |access-date=30 October 2025 |website=Catholic Outlook |language=en-AU}}</ref> At [[Leuven|Louvain]] in Belgium (then still a francophone university), Leo XIII in 1891 established the ''Institut de philosophie'' to teach the doctrine of Aquinas together with history and the natural sciences.<ref>The Institute was placed in charge of [[Désiré-Joseph Mercier]] whose "Cours de philosophie" was translated into many major European languages.</ref> It was endorsed by four [[Catholic lay organisations|Catholic Congress]]es: Paris (1891), Brussels (1895), Freiburg (1897), and Munich (1900).

==Early-20th-century development==
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|Pascendi Dominici Gregis]]'', in which he unequivocally condemned the agnosticism, immanentism, and relativism of Modernism as the 'synthesis of all heresies'.<ref name="Hans Boersma 2009 p18">[[Hans Boersma]], ''Nouvelle Theologie and Sacramental Ontology: A Return to Mystery'', (Oxford: OUP, 2009), p. 18.</ref> The anti-Modernist oath of 1910 was very important; this remained in force until 1966.<ref name="Hans Boersma 2009 p18" /> In 1914, Pius X issued a list of 24 philosophical propositions summarising the central tenets of neo-scholasticism to be taught in all colleges as fundamental elements of philosophy; and in 1916, these 24 propositions were confirmed as normative. In 1917, the Church's new [[1917 Code of Canon Law|Code of Canon Law]] (''Codex Iuris Canonici'') insisted that the doctrine, methods, and principles of Thomas should be used in teaching philosophy and theology.<ref>Jürgen Mettepenningen, ''Nouvelle Théologie – New Theology: Inheritor of Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II'', (London: T&T Clark, 2010), p. 25.</ref> Thomist thought therefore became the basis of the manuals and textbooks in Catholic colleges and seminaries before [[Vatican II]], and was promoted also to the laity.<ref>{{cite news |author=Ryan |first=Patrick Joseph |author-link=Ryan |date=17 May 1934 |title=The Fundamental Tenets of Scholasticism: Old and New |url=https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/104375893 |access-date=30 October 2025 |work=Catholic Press |location=Sydney}}</ref>

==Variation within the tradition==
Writers such as [[Edouard Hugon]], [[Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange]], and [[Henri Grenier]] maintained the tradition of the manuals. Others varied in their interpretation, including [[Martin Grabmann]] (1875–1949), Amato Masnovo (1880–1955), Francesco Olgiati (1886–1962), and [[Antonin-Dalmace Sertillanges]] (1863–1948).<ref>Battista Mondin's Metafisica di san Tommaso d'Aquino e i suoi interpreti (2002).</ref> Authors such as [[Étienne Gilson]], [[Jacques Maritain]], and [[Joseph Maréchal]] 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.

Historical investigation into Thomas's thought led some to believe that neo-Thomism did not always reflect the thought of Thomas Aquinas himself, as argued by writers such as [[Étienne Gilson]], [[Marie-Dominique Chenu]], and [[Henri de Lubac]]. At [[Vatican II]], traditional neo-Thomist thought was opposed by exponents of this ''[[nouvelle théologie]]''.

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 (1900–1984), Sofia Vanni Rovighi (1908–1990), [[Cornelio Fabro]] (1911–1995), Carlo Giacon (1900–1984),<ref>{{cite web |title=GIACON, Carlo in "Dizionario Biografico" |url=http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/carlo-giacon_(Dizionario-Biografico)/ |access-date=30 October 2025 |website=www.treccani.it}}</ref> [[Tomáš Týn]] (1950–1990), Abelardo Lobato (1925–2012), Leo Elders (1926–2019), and Enrico Berti (1935–2022), among others. Due to its suspicion of attempts to harmonise Aquinas with non-Thomistic categories and assumptions, neo-scholastic Thomism has sometimes been called '''strict observance Thomism'''.<ref name=:0/>

Anglophone theologians such as [[Edward Feser]], [[Ralph McInerny]], [[Brian Davies (philosopher)|Brian Davies]] have defended a contemporary revival of traditional neo-scholastic Thomistic metaphysics in response to modern philosophy.<ref>{{cite web |last=Feser |first=Edward |date=30 November 2008 |title=A Neo-Scholastic revival? |url=http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2008/11/neo-scholastic-revival.html}}</ref><ref name="Feser">{{cite web |author=Feser, Edward |date=15 October 2009 |title=The Thomistic tradition (Part 1) |url=http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2009/10/thomistic-tradition-part-i.html |access-date=30 October 2025}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Mortimer J. Adler]]
* [[Anthony Kenny]]
* [[Analytical Thomism|Analytical thomism]]

==References==
{{Reflist}}
* {{Catholic|wstitle=Neo-Scholasticism}}

==Further reading==
* [[Hans Boersma|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, Jürgen, ''Nouvelle Théologie – New Theology: Inheritor of Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II'', (London: T&T Clark, 2010).
* Aveling, F. [https://archive.org/stream/americancatholi00prengoog#page/n34/mode/2up ''"The Neo-Scholastic Movement,"''] The American Catholic Quarterly Review, Vol. XXXI, 1906.
* {{CathEncy|title=Neo-Scholasticism|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10746a.htm}}
* Many philosophical and theological journals focus on neo-Scholasticism: ''Divus Thomas'' (since 1879); ''[[:it:Rivista di Filosofia Neo-Scolastica|Rivista di Filosofia Neo-Scolastica]]'' (Milan, since 1909); ''[[Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne]]'' (Paris, 1830-1913); ''Revue néo-scolastique de Philosophie'' (Louvain, since 1894); ''Revue de Philosophie'' (Paris, since 1900); ''Revue des Sciences philosophiques et théologiques'' (Kain, Belgium, since 1907); ''[[Revue thomiste]]'' (Paris, since 1893); ''Philosophisches Jahrbuch für Philosophie und spekulative Theologie'' (Paderborn, since 1887); ''St. Thomas Blätter'' (Ratisbon, since 1888); Bölcseleti–Folyóirat (Budapest, since 1886); ''Revista Lulliana'' (Barcelona, since 1901); ''Ciencia 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. [[Studia Neoaristotelica|Studia Neo-Aristotelica]]

==External links==
*[http://scholasticon.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/index_fr.php Scholasticon by Jacob Schmutz]. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090129075242/http://scholasticon.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/index_fr.php |date=2009-01-29 }}. Resources for the study of early-modern scholasticism (1500–1800): authors, sources, institutions {{in lang|fr}}.

{{Thomas Aquinas|state=collapsed}}
{{Catholic philosophy footer}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Christian theological movements]]
[[Category:Thomism]]
[[Category:Philosophical schools and traditions]]
[[Category:Christian democracy]]

Neo-scholasticism - Revision history

NamMcduffie6361: creating bio