Cover of American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly
>> Go to Current Issue

American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly

Volume 93, Issue 2, Spring 2019
Baroque Scholasticism

Table of Contents

Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:

Displaying: 1-9 of 9 documents

1. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: Volume > 93 > Issue: 2
Petr Dvořák, Jacob Schmutz Introduction: Special Issue on Baroque Scholasticism
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
2. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: Volume > 93 > Issue: 2
Igor Agostini The Knowledge of God’s Quid Sit in Dominican Theology: From Saint Thomas to Ferrariensis
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In this article I argue that although the prevailing interpretation within the Thomistic contemporary critical literature, claiming the inaccessibility of God’s quid sit, is faithful both to Saint Thomas and to John Capreolus’s account of Aquinas’s doctrine, it is far from being uncontroversial in the first steps of the history of Thomism. A central step in this history is marked by the Parisian Condemnation of 1277, which is at the origin of relevant debate within the Dominican Order on the question of the knowledge of God’s quid sit. Aquinas’s contemporaries, indeed, interpreted the condemnation of Proposition 214 as a measure taken against Saint Thomas’s negative theology, as confirmed by John Capreolus’s testimony. Capreolus defends Aquinas, claiming that Saint Thomas’s doctrine is not a radical negative theology; in spite of this, he maintains that we cannot know God’s quiddity. In the following history of the debate, however, two influential representatives of the Dominican Order, Tommaso de Vio (Cajetanus) and Francesco Silvestri (Ferrariensis) will affirm the accessibility of God’s quid sit, restoring an old doctrine by Durand of Saint Pourçain and Hervé of Nédellec.
3. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: Volume > 93 > Issue: 2
Tomáš Machula Theology as Wisdom: Renaissance and Modern Scholastic Commentaries on Aquinas
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
One of the frequently commented-upon texts of Aquinas was and still is the first question of Summa theologiae. It is usually the question of whether theology is scientific knowledge that attracts the attention of readers or commentators. This study, however, deals with the question from the sixth article, regarding whether theology is wisdom. It investigates the commentaries of famous authors of Second Scholasticism (especially Bañez and Gonet), who comment on and explain this text of Aquinas. Although this question does not appear to be very controversial, some interesting developments and commentaries can be found even in this topic. The most interesting theme is the question of how theology can be both wisdom and science, i.e., two intellectual virtues. Moreover, there is a need for the interpretation of the texts of Aristotle and Aquinas holding that wisdom is a compound of scientific knowledge and intellectual intuition.
4. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: Volume > 93 > Issue: 2
Sydney Penner Early Modern Scotists and Eudaimonism: The Affection for Advantage and the Affection for Justice
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Scotus’s account of the two affections of the will (the affection for advantage and the affection for justice) has received extensive attention from recent scholars, in part because this is often seen as one of Scotus’s key departures from Aquinas and from the eudaimonist tradition more generally. Curiously, however, the early modern followers of Scotus seem largely to ignore the two affections doctrine. This paper surveys the reception of the doctrine in Francisco Lychetus, Francisco Macedo, Juan de Rada, Sebastian Dupasquier, and Claude Frassen.
5. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: Volume > 93 > Issue: 2
Petr Dvořák Vásquez’s Anselmian Response to Wycliffian Deterministic Arguments
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Gabriel Vásquez (1549–1604) discusses two deterministic arguments ascribed to John Wyclif. He appeals to the Anselmian solution based on the distinction between two types of necessity: antecedent and subsequent necessity. Unlike the former, the latter necessity does not destroy future event’s contingency, which is required if it is to result from a free choice. The paper discusses the Aristotelian objection according to which a statement describing some contingent future event is either without truth-value, and thus antecedently contingent but not (broadly) subsequently necessary at present, or it has a truth-value, but then it is not merely (broadly) subsequently necessary but also antecedently necessary. The Anselmian temporal ontology is such that no absolute present parameter is to be included in the evaluation of modal tensed statements. This recognition disposes of modal notions tied to the absolute temporal qualification of statements and thus undercuts the objection.
6. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: Volume > 93 > Issue: 2
Lukáš Novák How Pure a Potency?: Prime Matter in Post-Mediæval Thomism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In their Philosophiae ad mentem Scoti cursus integer Bartolomeo Mastri and Bonaventura Belluto describe the great variety of Thomist views on the nature of the “pure potentiality” of matter. This paper confronts Mastri and Belluto’s report with actual Thomist texts, to find that the variety is much greater than the Scotists’ report suggests and their classification of many authors unreliable. The detailed survey of the various versions of Thomism is set against an attempt to analyse the general nature of the Thomist-Scotist dispute over the pure potentiality of prime matter.
7. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: Volume > 93 > Issue: 2
Jean-Pascal Anfray A Jesuit Debate about the Modes of Union: Francisco Suárez vs. Pedro Hurtado de Mendoza
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In this paper, I examine a neglected debate between Francisco Suárez and Pedro Hurtado de Mendoza about the unity of composite substances (i.e., hylomorphic compounds of matter and form). There was a consensus among the Jesuits on the fact that the per se unity of composite substances requires something in addition to matter and form. Like most Jesuits, Suárez and Hurtado further agree on the fact that this additional ingredient is not a full-blown thing, but a “mode of union.” However, while Suárez claims that the union is achieved through a single mode, Hurtado maintains that it is necessary to postulate two distinct modes of union, one modifying form and another modifying matter. I argue that this disagreement actually reflects an important ontological debate about the nature of the items that serve as the cement of things and that it eventually leads later Jesuits like Rodrigo de Arriaga to conceive of union as a polyadic or “straddling” mode.
8. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: Volume > 93 > Issue: 2
Rudolf Schuessler Scholastic Social Epistemology in the Baroque Era
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Social epistemology existed in the scholastic tradition in the shape of doctrines on the legitimate use of probable opinions. Medieval scholasticism had developed sophisticated approaches in this respect, but the apogee of scholastic theoretical reflection on social epistemology occurred in the Baroque era and its Catholic moral theology (late sixteenth to eighteenth centuries). The huge debate on probable opinions at that time produced the most far-reaching and deepest investigations into the moral and epistemological foundations and limitations of opinion-based, reasonable discourse prior to the late twentieth century. It is time to recover the arguments and claims of Baroque scholastic social epistemology, not only to fill a lacuna in intellectual history but also to see whether some of its challenges are still with us today.
9. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: Volume > 93 > Issue: 2
Tomáš Nejeschleba Metaphysica Valeriani Magni: The Doctrine on God and the World for Those Who Love God
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The paper deals with the metaphysics of Valerian Magni, a seventeenth-century Capuchin thinker and Church politician. It follows Stanislav Sousedik’s and Paul Richard Blum’s interpretations of Magni’s thought and aims to systematize Magni’s metaphysical notions and present their gradual development. The paper first focuses on Magni’s critique of Aristotelianism, which the Capuchin regards as an atheistic philosophy due to incorrect conceptions of God and the world. Then, Magni’s attempt to create a metaphysical system in his late work Opus philosophicum in particular is presented. The influence of the Augustinian-Bonaventurian tradition and the subjectivist tendencies in Magni’s thought are taken into account.