Among the four texts that we've been assigned for the forthcoming month's classes-the Philosophy section-is St. Thomas Aquinas' Treatise on Human Nature, part of the Summa Theologica. What we are reading is an English translation of Thomas' work, but it is nonetheless couched in what we believe to be a philosophical and theological language which the few educated people around in St. Thomas' day would have understood, but which is over our heads. To give you an idea of how over us this seems, those of you who know me well know that my degree is in Political Science-but my minor concentration was history, and I concentrated on the Europe of the Middle Ages through the Renaissance- the high point of the Middle Ages roughly fell during Thomas' time. Brother Thomas has me confounded.
Don't get me wrong here, none of us have given up on Thomas, we are all searching for and finding resources which explain him and the glories of his work for the Lord to us in ways that we can understand it. One of my Brother Aspirants discovered Peter Kreeft's A Shorter Summa and has gone to the trouble of sharing parts of it with some of the rest of us. Still others have discovered something called Aquinas 101, and some of us have wondered why these were not assigned as texts since we can actually understand them, and they help us understand what Thomas is saying.
The texts we use for our lessons, however, are up to each instructor, so we are hoping that perhaps Father Bede will translate Thomas for us.
St. Thomas Aquinas, pray for us!
Bon chance! I tried to penetrate the Summa from about 2003 to 2004, and never made it past Question 14. I had exactly the same experience as you - the terminology and language is alien - but familiar enough to confuse you. The philosophical meaning of "accident" for example, and the concept of univocality, clearly mean different things to Thomas than to me. I wondered whether it might be better to study Latin and then attempt St. Thomas in the original, since at least in that case one was learning a new language at one fell swoop, rather than attempting to learn "English Alternate Version II".
ReplyDeleteBy the way, David, there's another thing you & I have in common besides the years in Dayton - I also have a minor in history (albeit with a concentration on science & technology) and was one class away from my philosophy minor. And neither of those things help with the Summa.
Keep pressing on! I await your victories...
Kreeft's book is good. I might make a recommendation if it has not already been made. Try reading it this way. First, read the question. Second, read his summary response, skipping his list of comments by others and his responses. Then go back and take each of the points and his responses one at a time.
ReplyDeleteIt makes more sense that way. Good luck with your studies!