The Epistemology of St. Thomas Aquinas
Below is a paper that I wrote last semester for the class History of the Middle Ages about a part of St. Thomas Aquinas’s epistemology. Dr. Hayner has suggested that I submit it for publication, so I’m mailing it to the South Carolina Historical Association tomorrow morning. I also just joined that association. (Please don’t be too terribly impressed. Membership is open to anyone, and anyone is allowed to submit papers.)
“The Interrelationship of Reason, Faith, and Revelation in St. Thomas Aquinas”
Posted 6 Dec. 2005 at 9:54 am | Permalink
No one has yet commented on this fine paper? Actually, Lincoln, I’m glad you posted this, because when I reorganized my computer files this summer, I seem to have either misplaced or deleted my folder of other people’s papers. I hope it’s around somewhere. But now I’ve recovered yours.
Very good, very clear, seems to address the most important issues well.
Coupla thoughts, though not all that occurred to me (aren’t you thankful?).
1. By faith we understand that reason is reasonable. Reason would not be reasonable without faith in an authority that validates our reason, the only possible, viable authority being the self-existent, triune God who became incarnate in Jesus Christ and spoke through the prophets.
2. The Bible never separates faith and reason. It separates the seen and the unseen. By faith we accept God’s authoritative word about the unseen. All of experience has seen and unseen elements. Behind all that we see is the unseen: the *essence* of the thing (which is what God intends it to be) and the inter-relations of that thing and all the other things out there. Thus our sense experience addresses what we see, but for all of it, we must have faith about what put it there. This may be short in propositional form, “That tree is there because God wants it there, and God defines what a tree is…” etc., or it could be fleshed out more, but however much we put it into words, those words are very, very, weighty. Indispensible, even.
3. The idea that some men who take the time to reason through the arguments to the existence of God, while others need faith because they can’t climb the logical ladder, is contra Romans 1. All acts of thankless living are regarded as flying in the face of general revelation open and clear to all. Whether or not they make themselves self-conscious of their thanklessness is irrelevant. God regards it as certain.
OK, soap box stowed, and I’m off to have my predestined devotions. :) We’ll have to talk epistemology some time.
mpo
Posted 11 Mar. 2006 at 10:20 pm | Permalink
[...] There were three sessions of paper presentations. During the first session, Kellen and I heard papers about religion’s role in South Carolina. Particularly interesting were papers about the relationship between mill churches, mill owners, organized labor and about the efforts of the National Temperance Society after the Civil War. Dr. Hayner, more experienced at such meetings than we, went to watch a film. In the second session, a professer from USC presented a very condensed version of his soon-to-be-published book about Latvia during World War II; his presentation was perhaps the most interesting of the day. After him, I presented my paper about St. Thomas Aquinas’s epistemology. After me, another professor from USC presented a paper about discussion among British intellectuals and politicians during World War I about national self-determination. [...]