Title | : | Saint Thomas Aquinas |
Author | : | |
Rating | : | |
ISBN | : | 0385090021 |
ISBN-10 | : | 9780385090025 |
Language | : | English |
Format Type | : | Paperback |
Number of Pages | : | 167 |
Publication | : | First published January 1, 1933 |
Chesterton's Aquinas is a man of mystery. Born into a noble Neapolitan family, Thomas chose the life of a mendicant friar. Lumbering and shy -- his classmates dubbed him "the Dumb Ox" -- he led a revolution in Christian thought. Possessed of the rarest brilliance, he found the highest truth in the humblest object. Having spent his life amid the vast intricacies of reason, he asked on his deathbed to have read aloud the Song of Songs, the most passionate book in the Bible.
As Albert the Great, Thomas's teacher, predicted, the Dumb Ox has bellowed down the ages to our own day. Chesterton's book will enlighten those who would consign Thomas to the obscurity of medieval times. It will confound those who would use Thomas to bolster arid schemes of Christian rationalism. Rather, it will introduce the wondrous mystery of the man who, after a life of unparalleled genius, was seized by a vision of the Unknown and said, "I can write no more. I have seen things which make all my writings like straw."
Saint Thomas Aquinas Reviews
-
This is my second complete read of G.K.Chesterton’s classic treatment of the “Angelic Doctor” – as St. Thomas is sometimes referred to – and I do not plan on it being the last. In fact, I suspect subsequent reads to be even more fruitful than this one which was a significant improvement on my introduction to the work back in the 1990’s.
As St. Thomas is considered one of the greatest minds to have ever lived and his biographer, Chesterton, not a slacker himself when he puts pen to paper, the reader can expect to work for everything gleaned from this excellent biography—however much the author downplays the difficulty in all Thomistic writings and emphasizes the inadequacy of his own treatment. Even so, the book is a pleasure to read from start to finish, chock full of interesting tidbits on the saint, philosophy, religion, science, and a myriad of other subjects which Chesterton brings to bear on the reality of reason and fidelity of faithfulness.
Étienne Gilson, the leading Thomistic scholar of the twentieth century (and someone I am struggling to even to begin to understand!) called it ‘as being without possible comparison the best book ever written on St. Thomas’.
To that I can only add, it is also the most enjoyable to read and/or listen to. My husband and I were listening to the Blackstone Audio version of it and chuckling at the subtle (and sometimes not-so subtle) Chestertonian witticisms which are packed into the text like an overripe fruitcake.
Pure delight!
‘Trace even the Puritan mother back through history and she represents a rebellion against the Cavalier laxity of the English Church, which was at first a rebel against the Catholic civilisation, which had been a rebel against the Pagan civilisation. Nobody but a lunatic could pretend that these things were a progress; for they obviously go first one way and then the other. But whichever is right, one thing is certainly wrong; and that is the modern habit of looking at them only from the modern end. For that is only to see the end of the tale; they rebel against they know not what, because it arose they know not when; intent only on its ending, they are ignorant of its beginning; and therefore of its very being.’ -
Chesterton has only a few things to say about Aquinas, really, but that’s the way it is with all his books: the ostensible subject is most of the time fondly neglected for the atmosphere surrounding it. And while from most writers behavior of this sort would be intolerable, from Chesterton, somehow, it’s better than tolerable; because almost no one else is this fun to read.
Chesterton’s Aquinas is no vague hypothesizer of miniature angels traipsing about in Nana’s sewing kit, but the champion of common sense philosophy, out to rescue medieval Christendom from the slow creep of Platonism, and to return it – with some help from Aristotle – to an affirmation of the reality and value of the material order, and a reasonable sense of our place within it.
My grasp on medieval philosophy is perhaps a little rusty, but I recall enough to know that Chesterton is simplifying things. I also know that the compellingly baited hooks of our own “age of uncommon nonsense” (Chesterton’s phrase) are sometimes difficult not to swallow. Nonetheless, this is a bright, bracing book and it’s got me excited to pick up some of Chesterton’s other titles again. -
E quando eu achava que ninguém conseguiria narrar a vida de Tomás de Aquino em forma de uma aventura divertida e emocionante, eis que encontro este livrinho de Chesterton.
A sua escrita divertida, mordaz e reverente tem a capacidade de nos ter ali, atentos e felizes, até ao fim.
À primeira vista, poderia parecer difícil descortinar o que resta do tomismo no mundo do pensamento de hoje; contudo, há muito a aprender com Tomás de Aquino, sobretudo no que toca ao escrutínio da Razão.
Tomás de Aquino ganhou o epíteto de "boi mudo da Sicília" pela sua lentidão e silêncio, mas produziu uma obra cheia de rigor. A sua vida monástica (preferiu os Dominicanos ao Beneditinos) começou com muitas turbulências familiares, mas a sua escolha foi triunfante. Este doutor da igreja tem uma vasta obra e uma vida feita de disputas intelectuais e posições firmes (da luta contra o pensamento averroísta à restauração daquela que seria a verdadeira filosofia aristotélica).
Chesterton vai traçando um paralelismo interessante com a filosofia de Agostinho de Hipona (um claro seguidor da filosofia platónica).
Um livro muito interessante que restaura este grande filósofo da era escolástica. Muito, muito bom!
--
"Uma senhora minha conhecida encontrou um livro com excertos comentados de São Tomás, e começou esperançosamente a ler um passo com o inocente título de "A simplicidade de Deus". Daí a pouco pôs o livro de lado, com um suspiro, e disse:
- Ah! se a simplicidade de Deus é assim, que será a sua Complexidade!?..." -
I am a huge Chesterton fan, and I've been wanting to read more about the men and women of faith who have come before us. This seemed the perfect book to fit the bill. I WISH, however, that I was far more well-read than I am, and that I had actually read St. Thomas Aquinas' work first. I own a copy of Summa Theologica, but it's rather daunting, and I have to admit that I've never taken the time to delve into it. Chesterton assumes you already know the work - this book, although it claims to be a biography, is more of an analysis of the man as revealed through his work. It doesn't delve deep into his philosophy or theology, but it does paint a picture of him assuming that the reader already KNOWS his philosophy and theology. And also knows alot of other things - like the writings of Aristotle, Plato, and Pliny, to name just a few. Chesterton writes for the "every man" of his day, who, I'm finding, was much more well-educated in the classics than the "every man (or woman)" of today. That said, I DO plan on going back and reading Aquinas' work. His central premise was logic and reason applied to faith, something I feel is often missing in today's Christianity.
-
This isn't a biography; it is an adventure story!
Of course, Chesterton would have scoffed at calling this small book a biography in any case. But what it severely lacks in biographical data (which, of course, was not the author's aim) it makes up for in immense creative use of certain significant events in the great saint's life. Between dinner with St. Louis and his arguments against the Augustinians, to choosing the life of a poor Dominican monk instead of following the rich life of an abbot supplied by his father; G.K. Chesterton gives no short supply of wonderful and exasperating examples of who this large man (who was no doubt much larger on the inside than he was on the outside) chose to be against every outside influence. In the face of the Manichees, of Plato, of all culture and irrationality and misused tradition; yes, even in the shadow of the great accidental determinist St. Augustine himself, Thomas Aquinas boldly (but always humbly, so humbly as to hardly be matched) proclaims the universality of reason, the love of God, the beauty of the cosmos, and the gorgeous but deadly free will of man. Before much time passes at all we realize that it is no longer Aquinas who stands in the shadow of Augustine, but Augustine and the whole Church who stand in the valley below the feet of the great giant, the feet of the 'Angelic' Doctor who hardly spoke of his angels, who saw something (or Someone) which made all his writings as straw.
We meet a man in these pages who raised the long-dead champion of rationale, Aristotle himself, from the grave, and proceeded to baptize him into the faith. We meet a man who would stop at no boundary in his quest for truth, who would passionately defend against insane and unimaginable errors. We meet a man who contrasts so with all the saints, all the history of the Church herself, that he fills all history with his hugeness. We are introduced, as if at a quiet dinner party (perhaps, we think, the very same party with St. Louis and his French friends), to a man who could touch the stars and the moons with his very mind, and who would treat you as if you were Christ Himself, who would wash your very feet if only you would allow it.
In this book, this small and inconceivable book, G.K. Chesterton reveals all this. And what he has opened is a floodgate, momentarily blockaded by a post-it nailed to a door, but unleashed again with all the fury and calm and strength of the Genesis Flood. -
I listened to the audiobook. This was my first Chesterton, and I surely am going to read as many of his other books as i can. Such a natural gift for writing in a spontaneous colloquial tone and a cheerful, clever wit that never switches off.
The book is a brief outline of St. Thomas Aquinas' life, a bit of a high-level comparison with St. Francis, and, in the last few chapters, a broad but passionate look at St Thomas' theology, its sublety, its power, and an attack on Martin Luther, who, among other things, burned the Summa Theologia. In the author's words, on the map of Thomas' intellect, Luther's map is so small you would struggle to see it. -
I'm reading this for an upcoming
podcast episode. I've read a good deal of Chesterton since way back in 2013 (review below) when I first cracked the cover on this one, thanks to my book club. I'm looking forward to rereading this one.
=================
Read this for our July book club. It did a great job of forcing me to read Chesterton's nonfiction, which has always eluded me when I've tried it before. Until the very end, when he was summing up Aquinas's philosophy I enjoyed the book a great deal. I am sure the end was praiseworthy as well, I was just not mentally prepared enough.
It seems to me that Chesterton assumes a level of knowledge of Aquinas's life and work which is just not a standard in these modern times. For my own part, I know a little, but I felt it was a very little as I occasionally had to hang on for dear life, pulling meaning from context rather than facts.
That is not to say that the book wasn't good, but it did mean that I will be reading another book to actually get a more linear biography of Aquinas's life.
I foresee many pleasurable rereadings of this book, which I am sure will reward me increasingly each time.
Also, I really appreciate this book for forcing me to come to grips with Chesterton's nonfiction, as I mentioned above. In particular, I am looking forward to reading his commentary and biographical writing about another "new" classic favorite of mine ... Charles Dickens. -
Chesterton has spoiled me with this enchanting story of the remarkable personality of St. Thomas Aquinas.
-
ENGLISH: Chesterton's biography of St.Thomas Aquinas is not a typical biography, but it is typical Chesterton. Rather than telling us about the life of his "hero," starting at his birth and ending at his death, Chesterton uses him to attack several current mistakes, such as considering the philosophy of Aquinas outdated because modern philosophers say outraging things about the world.
The only defect in the book I could find is the fact that Chesterton should have made it longer. It is scarcely outdated. Just a couple of mentions about Mussolini and Hitler, plus the references to the economic crisis, which curiously could also be applied now (although we know he was speaking about the 1929 crisis).
ESPAÑOL: La biografía de Santo Tomás de Aquino por Chesterton no es una biografía típica, aunque sí es una típica obra de Chesterton. En lugar de contarnos la vida de su "héroe", desde su nacimiento hasta su muerte, Chesterton se dedica a atacar varios errores actuales, como considerar que la filosofía de Tomás de Aquino está obsoleta porque los filósofos modernos dicen cosas absurdas sobre el mundo.
El único defecto que pude encontrar es mi sensación de que Chesterton debería haberlo alargado más. Apenas ha perdido actualidad. Sólo un par de menciones a Mussolini y Hitler, más las referencias a la crisis económica, que curiosamente también podrían aplicarse ahora (aunque sabemos que hablaba de la crisis de 1929). -
Chesterton’s willful misunderstanding of Calvin aside… this is a wonderful tribute by one of the greatest minds of the 20th century to one of the greatest minds of any century. Reading this together with Summa of the Summa is one of the smartest moves I’ve ever accidentally made.
-
Entrega o que promete
Etienne Gilson, talvez o maior tomista do século 20, recebeu com assombro o despretensioso livro de um certo polêmico jornalista inglês. Conta-se que Gilson, depois de o ler, não conseguiu conter palavras para expressar sua admiração:
Considero-o, sem a menor possibilidade de comparação, o melhor livro jamais escrito sobre Santo Tomás… Chesterton foi um dos pensadores mais profundos de todos os tempos…
Pois li o dito livro de Chesterton sobre São Tomás. Na verdade, li duas vezes em sequência e meu livro ficou cheio de post its com anotações e linhas marcadas. Não há como não entrar no universo de São Tomás e se deixar impregnar com todo aquele universo da idade média, e tudo isso em menos de 200 páginas. Só os grandes conseguem tal feito, ainda mais quando o retratado é uma figura tão complexa e que produziu tanto como Aquino. Chesterton conseguiu deixar o pensamento do doutor angélico ao alcance de quem quiser entendê-lo.
Sao Tomás não estava anos luz a frente de sua época; ele está anos luz à frente de qualquer época que já existiu. Na verdade ele previu com assombroso acerto a cilada intelectual que nós cairíamos e se penitenciou por isso. Sua filosofia não só estava certa, mas é a única que pode ser chamada de certa. Os grandes filósofos que vieram depois se perderam em coisas pueris, em abstrações desconectas da realidade, pois se afastaram da única coisa que jamais poderiam duvidar _ não sem contradizer a si próprios _ se afastaram da saudável sabedoria do homem comum, daquela que diz que o que é, é.
De forma não linear, Chesterton nos conduz por episódios decisivos da vida de São Tomás, faz uma inusitada comparação com São Francisco de Assis, mostra seu combate com os maniqueus, como compreendermos mal o casamento dele com Aristóteles, o nominalismo, sua filosofia, enfim, uma introdução ao essencial da obra desse monstro que foi São Tomás de Aquino.
Existem obras que nos impactam profundamente. Essa é uma delas. A forma de olhar o mundo é diferente após a experiência de ler esse livro. É impossível olhar as coisas da mesma maneira depois que se começa a penetrar na mente de Tomás de Aquino, uma mente que nunca caiu nas armadilhas do intelecto pelo simples motivo de que foi fiel ao que lhe dava sanidade, segurando como uma rocha o fato triunfante que o mundo é real e estamos nele. Tudo se resume nisso e quando a realidade é colocada de lado, mesmo que por um segundo, a tragédia acontece e nós nos perdemos.
Chesterton foi tão certeiro ao chegar na essência de um pensador tão complexo e profundo que o seu maior estudioso, um acadêmico, só pode se espantar e dizer que daria um braço para ter escrito esse livro. Ele conseguiu mostrar que o complicado na verdade era simples, depois que você consegue a chave para compreender as coisas simples. E a chave era manter-se fiel à realidade.
© MARCOS JUNIOR 2013 -
I started reading "Aquinas: A Beginner's Guide" by Edward Feser around the same time as this. Though I haven't finished Feser's book yet (I'm a little more than halfway through), I like his book much better than Chesterton's. It seems like Chesterton spends too much time talking about stuff that isn't very important to Aquinas or his philosophy or his theology. Had he spent less time going after Luther (just one of his many "rabbit trails"), he could have spent more time explaining the philosophy of Aquinas.
Maybe so many people have given this book five stars because they haven't compared it with what a good introduction to a person's thought should look like. Comparing Chesterton's book to Feser's puts Chesterton's work in its proper light: as a sub-par introduction to the man's thought.
But surely someone will find this criticism unjustified. After all, Chesterton is writing with a broader scope than simply the *thought* of Aquinas. Granted, Chesterton focuses much more on the person of Aquinas and his surrondings. Chesterton is writing more of a biography and Feser more of an introduction to his philosophy.
So how can I still fault Chesterton? Because of a quote by C. F. J. Martin that Edward Feser notes in his book: "If we want to study Aquinas we should pay him the compliment of treating as important what he thought of as important. To study Aquinas as Aquinas is a poor piece of flatter, since Aquinas cared very little for Aquinas, while he did care for God and science." Martin is correct and for this reason Chesterton's biography feels lacking and subpar. Understanding Aquinas requires understanding more than simply the fantastical tales of his loins being girded by angels or of the time he levitated or what a humble and quiet man he was. If this is most of what you know about Aquinas, you don't really know much about Aquinas, at least not anything important.
I doubt anyone will finish reading Chesterton's book and have a good grasp of Aquinas's worldview (unless of course they already had that understanding prior to reading Chesterton). What they will have is a lot of stories about how Aquinas was larger than life and how much Chesterton can't stand Protestants. Mostly a poor flattery. -
Chesterton is always a roller coaster ride to read. I read somewhere that he dictated all of his writing to a secretary with no revising. While this does prove what an amazing genius Chesterton is, it also helps to understand why you feel as though you are racing around inside his head, plucking one idea out of another.
His turns of phrases are fantastical and are so well stated, sometimes hard to understand, but mostly proverbs that leave you thinking, "Yes! That is very true and I never thought about it that way."
While this is a life of Saint Thomas, an actual chronology of the saint's life is quite minimal. What the bulk of substance is about is a critical analysis of St. Thomas' theology compared and contrasted with St. Augustine's and also later Martin Luther's. Mostly, though, it is like all of Chesterton's literary essays, which are a comparative and contrast to the Spirit of the Age, which dares to call itself rational and enlightened.
Chesterton is a Catholic, through and through, and while I don't hold that against him, I must confess I am more in Augustine and Luther's camp than Aquinas'. I would not mind reading another biography or at least a book about Aquinas' doctrines to get a better idea of how well supported his theses are. -
Chesterton at his most anti-pomo. The last two or three chapters alone worth the price of admission. Devastating, absolutely devastating. They are also the chapters that do the bulk of explaining Thomistic philosophy; beyond that most of it is autobiography, but for that reason, might even be good for the high school student.
That said, Chesterton gives some amazingly good descriptions of Luther the Augustinian monk; that's my guy. Of course, he's wrong, quite wrong, that Luther was against the use of the reason or will, but a bit closer to home when he says it was a matter of emphasis in many ways. Some stereotyping and fanciful historical broadstrokes, but you need those every once in a while to be able to go beyond facts to the invisible logic that joins those facts together; it's called 'history'. -
This is, hands down, the best biography of Thomas Aquinas ever written. I recommend that all students of Saint Thomas Aquinas read this bio by Chesterton!
-
Chesterton’s biography of Aquinas is a triumph. One of my top two favorite Roman Catholics writing about my other favorite Roman Catholic.
I cannot bring myself even to complain about those parts where he takes cheap shots at Calvinism or dumps on Luther at the end. He’s wrong, but he’s wrong in that customary, edifying Chestertonian way. He’s wrong about Luther, we might say, in a Lutheran way—which is to say, cheeky, hilarious, and brilliant.
I am sure the two of them can laugh about it now. They are, after all, probably both Calvinists now anyway 😎
But I am certain that Chesterton, if he is one in a Calvinist in glory, is still a Chestertonian way
My recommendation: read Chesterton’s biography of Aquinas, then read Chesterton‘s book orthodoxy (be sure to read the canon press edition so you get N.D. Wilson’s intro/defense of Chestertonian Calvinism) -
Chesterton je vynikajúci rozprávať a jeho rozprávanie o Tomášovi Akvinskom je bravúrne. K tomu, aby som si prečítal túto útlu knižku ma inšpiroval Josepf Pieper, ktorý povedal, že ide o najlepší úvod k Tomášovi Akvinskému. A ja by som chcel Tomáša a jeho myslenie trochu viac spoznať. Čím viac si o ňom totiž čítam, tým viac sa ukazuje, že mýtus o tom, že v podstate len pokresťančil Aristotela som už dávno mal zahodiť do koša, no strednú školu nezmeníš (myslím tým tú, ktorú som vychodil ja). Kniha však nie je len o Tomášovi, je aj trochu o svätom Františkovi z Assisi (ako akýsi epilóg k predošlému životopisu z pera Chestertona o tomto svätcovi), pričom Chesterton porovnáva týchto dvoch velikánov. Zároveň je trochu o dobe, v ktorej Tomáš žil a hlavne je o krásnom kresťanstve, ktoré ako filozofiu života výrazne formoval práve Tomáš Akvinský, za čo mu musíme byť veľmi vďačný. Vypísal som si z knihy pár myšlienok, o ktoré by som sa chcel podeliť. Sú trošku chaotické a neupravené, ale snáď v budúcnosti sa k ním dostanem a upravím ich.
Podľa Chestertona schizma šestnásteho storočia je v skutočnosti len oneskorenou vzburou pesimizmu storočia trinásteho. Bola to nová reakcia starého augustinovského puritanizmus proti aristotelovskej voľnosti.
Význačným ryskom svätého Tomáša bolo, že miloval knihy. Dával prednosť stovke kníh o Aristotelovi a jeho filozofii pred každým iným bohatstvom, ktoré mu mohol svet dať. Keď sa ho pýtali, za čo je Bohu najvďačnejší, povedal, že tomu, že “rozumel každej stránke, ktorú kedy prečítal.”
Sv. Tomáš vyšiel zo sveta, v ktorom sa mohol oddať pohodlnému pokoju a zostal navždy jedným z tých ľudí, ktorých práca má v sebe akýsi pokoj nenúteného pohodlia. Bol húžavnatý pracovník, no nikto si ho nemohol spliesť s dríčom.
Sv. František je podľa Chestertona jedným stredovekým katolíkom, ktorý sa v Anglicku stal populárnym len pre svoje prednosti.
Dôležitý fakt je, že 12. storočia sa upína k tomistickej rozumovej teológii, pretože zanedbalo rozum. Do sveta, ktorý bol príliš nedotknutý , sa kresťanstvo vrátilo v podobe tuláka, do sveta, ktorý sa stal príliš neviazaným, sa kresťanstvo vrátilo v podobe učiteľa logiky. (Sv. František a sv. Tomáš)
Chesterton popisuje 20. storočie týmto paradoxom: Ak sa pokladalo 18. storočie za vek rozumu, 19. storočie za vek zdravého zmyslu, tak sa 20. storočie môže pokladať za vek nezdravého nezmyslu. V takomto stave potrebuje svet svätca, no v prvom rade filozofa.
Chesterton hovorí, že sv. Tomáš a sv. František robili rovnakú vec, aj keď sa líšili takmer vo všetkom. Jeden z nich to konal vo svete ducha, druhý vo svete svetskosti. Bolo to však to isté veľké stredoveké hnutie, stále ešte málo pochopené. Podľa Chestertona bolo dôležitejšie, než Reformácia a zdôrazňuje dve veci:
(a) bolo to hnutie, ktoré znamenalo rozšírenie hraníc a ktoré smerovalo k väčšiemu svetlu, i slobode.
(b) bolo to hnutie pravoverného teologického nadšenia, ktoré sa rozvíjali zvnútra. Nebol to kompromis so svetom ani kapitulácia.
Chesterton toto hnutie v jednoduchosti popisuje ako obdobie rozvoja náuky, pričom rozvoj znamená rozšírenie všetkých možností a dôsledkov náuky. Tomáš a František podľa Chestertona vnášali do kresťanstva kresťanstvo, pričom na to pužívali prírodu a Aristotela. Svätý František nás zachránil, že sme sa nestali budhistami pri všetkej svojej láske k zvieratám, a sv. Tomáš zas pred platonizmom. Obaja vydali nové svedectvo vtelenia, privádzajúc Boha opäť na zem.
Tomášova (Chestertonova) reakcia na augustínovské hnutie: …ja sa nehanbím povedať, že môj rozum je živený zmyslami a že značnú časť toho, čo myslím, myslím len vďaka tomu, čo vidím, cítim, ochutnávam a hmatám a pokiaľ ide o rozum, cítim sa zaviazaný pokladať túto celú realitu za reálnu.
Aj u sv. Tomáša podobne ako pri sv. Františkovi nachádzame prebežný praktický prvok, ktorý je skôr morálny - akús dobrú a priamu pokoru a ochotu dívať sa i na seba v istom zmysle ako na živočícha - ako svtäy Fr. prirovnáva svoje telo k oslovi.
Vo filozofii sv. Tomáša bolo mnoho iných ideí okrem tejto prvotnej o zdravom rozume, živenom piatimi zmyslami. Tomáš bol osloboditeľom ľudského intelektu, bol človek, ktorý zmieril náboženstvo s rozumom, ktorý ho priblížil experimentálnym vedám, ktorý tvdril, že zmysly sú okná do duše a že rozum má božské právo sýtiť sa faktami a že je vecou Viery, aby strávila silný pokrm najtužšej a najpraktickejšej pohanskej filozofie.
Tomizmus vs reformácia - Oni sa držali znovu téze o slovnej dostačiteľnosti heb. Písma, Tomáš hovoril od Duchu, ktorý udeľuje milosť pohan. filozofom. Hlásal spoločenskú povinnosť skutkov, oni hlásali len duchovnú povinnosť viery. Životnou silou tomizmu je, že rozumu je možné dôverovať, no luterstvo zas hovorí, že rozum je absolútne nespoľahlivý.
Bolo by falošné tvrdiť, že Akvinský našiel prvotnú inšpiráciu v Aristotelovi. Celé naučenie jeho života, hlavne jeho života v mladých rokoch, celý príbeh jeho detstva a jeho voľby životnej dráhy ukazujú, že bol zvrchovane a úprimne zbožný a že bol vášnivo oddaný katolíckemu náboženstvu dávno pred tým, než si uvedomil, že zaň musí bojovať. (31)
Chesterton hovorú o tom, že toto hnutie ukazuje k Novému Zákonu a ukazuje k realizmu Summy svätého TOmáša Akvinského. Kritizuje predstavu, že zľudštenie božského je pohanské, veď zľudštenie božského je základná dogma kresťanstva. Preto boli títo svätci pre Chestertona humanisti, pretože zdôrazňovali nesmiernu dôležitosť ľudského bytia v teologickom pláne vecí. (32)
Dôležitou Tomášovou myšlienkou bolo, že človek má byť skúmaný v celom svojom ľudstve, že človek nie je človek bez svojho tela, no ani bez duše. Mŕtvola nie je človek, ale ani strašidlo. (33)
Akvinský hájil fakt, že telo človeka je jeho telom, jeho duch je jeho duchom, a že človek sám môže byť len rovnováhou a jednotou týchto dvoch. (34)
…že duše všetkých obyčajne pracujúcic a prostomyseľných ľudí sú rovnako dôležité ako duše mysliteľov a bádateľov, a pýta sa, ako majú títo ľudia nájsť čas pre to množstvo uvažovania, ktoré je potrebné k dosiahnutiu pravdy. Ľudia musia prijímať najvyššie mravné pravdy zázračným spôsobom, inak by sa k nim väčšina ľudí nedostala. Jeho dôvody sú rozumové a prirodzené, avšak jeho dedukcia vyznieva úplne pre nadprirodzené. (35)
Slobodná vôľa - sv. Tomáš bol veľkým autonomistom. Hájil nezávislosť závislých vecí. Tvrdil, že takáto vec môže mať vlastné práve vo svojej oblasti. Chcel odlíšiť človeka od Boha. (36)
Stavia sa taiež na stranu Rozmanitosti ako veci, ktorá je rovnako reálna ako Jednota. (37)
Je pevne presvedčený, že rozdiel medzi sírou a syrom alebo prasaťom a pelikánom nie je len ilúziou alebo oslnením našej zmätenej mysle, ale že je to také, ako to vnímame.(37)
Kresťan znamená človeka, ktorý verí, že božstvo či svätosť sa spojili s hmotou alebo vošli do sveta zmyslov. Je to kresťanstvo, ale tiež aristotelizmus. (39)
Dominikáni boli bratstvom filozofou, zatiaľ čo františkáni bratstvom básnikov. (40)
Opát - utečenec
Tomáš veľa cestoval, nebol známy len v Paríži a na nemeckých univerzitách, ale zrejme navštívil aj Anglicko, Oxford a Londýn. Študoval spisy odporcov kresťanov. Snažil sa pochopiť arabských filozofov a napísal pojednávanie o zachádzaní so židmi. Snažil sa na všetko pozerať zvnútra.
Narodil sa v roku 1226, od detstva mal nechuť k pomysleniu, že by sa mal stať dravým orlom, alebo že by ho mal zaujímať lov so sokolmi a turnaje a podobné šľachtické zábavky. Bol vysoký, silný a tichý, až mlčanlivý, ktorý sotva kedy otvoril ústa. Prehlásil, že chce byť žobravým bratom a celá rodina sa na neho vrhla ako divoká zver - jeho bratia ho naháňali po verejných cestách, chceli z neho strhnúť kutňu mnícha a nakoniec ho zavreli vo veži ako šialenca. Práve kvôli týmto problémom poslal generál dominikánov Tomáša do Paríža preč z Itálie. Útek z veže mu umožnili jeho sestry a v Paríži prijal hodnosť doktora.
Chesterton popisuje, ako mu do veže jeho bratia doviedli kurtizánu a ako to Tomáša nahnevalo a ako ju odtiaľ vyhodil horúcim klátikom z pece.
Aristotelovská revolúcia
Dôležitou postavou v života Tomáša je Albert Veľký, ktorý bol všestranným mysliteľm a učencom. Bol astronómom, chemik, a nie astrológ a alychmista. Jeho vedomosti o materiálnych veciach a faktoch boli na jeho dobu úchvatné.
Akvinský bol nazvaný Nemým Volom, nielen ako výsmech, ale aj ako sústrasť. Bol zasnený, no nechýbal mu zdravý rozum a vo chvíli, keď mal byť nielen poučovaný, ale poučovaný zle, niečo sa v ňom ozvalo a povedal si dosť.
Dôležité bolo tiež priateľstvo Tomáša a Bonaventuru, v ktorom možno videť otca všetkých mystikov. Kládol zážitok na koniec zatiaľ čo Tomáš na začiatok.
Obrana žobravých mníchov - útok od Viliama de St. Amour. Bonaventura a Tomáš idú do Ríma. (77)
Historická katolícka cirkev bola na začiatku platónska až príliš. (81)
Kresťanstvo bolo ďalej než aristotelizmus či platonizmus. Existovali tu totiž dve pochybné tézy - že hviezdy sú osobné bytosti, vládnuce naším životom a že ľudia majú dohromady jednu myseľ - názor, ktorý zrejme popieral nesmrteľnosť a individuálnosť. (82)
Chesterton si myslí, že pokiaľ niekedy nastala v dejinách filozofie thrlina, nebolo to pred svätým Tomášom a už vôbec nie na začiatku stredovekých dejín. Bolo to po svätom Tomášovi a na začiatku moderných dejín. Veľká intelektuálna tradícia, ktorá začína Pythagorom a Platónom, nebola nikdy prerušená alebo zatratená takými maličkosťami, akými bolo vyplenenie Ríma, Attilovo víťazstvo alebo všetky barbarské vpády. Bola zatratená až po zavedení knihtlače, objavením Ameriky a založením Kráľovskej Spoločnosti a skrze všetku osvietenosť Renesancie a moderného sveta. (83)
Kritikom alebo prílišným obdivovateľom Aristotela bol napríklad Štefan Tempier, Siger z Brabantu (vplyv Arabov), stúpenci Augustínovho vnímania náboženstva. (90)
Vo veci inšpiráciu Písma Tomáš prvý zdôraznil zrejmú skutočnosť, že zmysel Písma zďaleka nie je zrejmý a že ho musíme často vykladať vo svetle iných právd. (92) Tomášou Aristotelizmus znamenal, že skúmanie najskromnejších právd povedie ku skúmaniu najvyššej pravdy.
Siger Brabantský - Cirkev musí mať pravdu teologociky, no vedecky sa môže mýliť. Sú dve pravdy, pravda sveta nadprirodzeného a pravda sveta prirodzeného, ktorá odporuje svetu nadprirdozenému. (97)
Úvava o Manichejcoch
Chesterton sa domnieva, že jednou z hlavných úloh, ktoré si Tomáš zaumienil splniť, je poraziť Manichejcov.
Askéza - boj s náruživosťou je sama náružitosťou. Nebude nikdy odstránená z mocných žiadostí človeka. Môže však bYť udržovaná v rozumných medziach a pod katolíckou autoritou je pestovaná omnoho zdravšie než v pohanskej alebo puritánskej anarchii. Pri tom však celý tento ideál je síce podstatnou časťou kresťanského idealizmu dobre pochopeného, ale v istom zmysle je vecou celkou vedľajšou. Nie je to základný princíp katolíckej filozofie, je to len čiastočný dôsledok katolíckej etiky. Základnou zložikou katolíckej viery je totiž chvála života, bytia, Boha ako Stvoriteľa Sveta. Katolícky duch sa však pohybuje v dvoch rovinách - v rovine Stvorenia a Pádu. Každý extrém katolíckej aksézy je múdrym alebo nemúdrym opatrením proti zlu Pádu - nikdy to však nie je pochybnosť o dobre Stvorenia. A v tejto veci sa kresťanská askéza naozaj líši nielen od trochu prehnanej výstrednosti pána, ktorý sa vešia na háky, ale i od celej kozmickej teórie, ktoré je hákom na ktorej visí. Askéza je tu pesimizmus, čo však nemôže byť. Snaha vzoprieť sa prirodzenosti. Je to dogma popretia života. Je to tvrdenie, že prirdozenosť je zlá - a to je manicheizmus. (112-113) Katolícka viera však učí, že neexistujú zlé veci, len zlé užívanie vecí. Neexistujú zlé veci, len zlé myšlienky. (115)
Platón mohol pohrdnúť telom, Boh to však nespravil. (128)
Pravý život sv. Tomáša
Jediná vec, ktorá oddeľuje svätca od obyčajných ľudí je jeho ochota byť zajedno s obyčajnými ľuďmi. Svätec už dávno netúži po vyniknutí, je to jediný typ lepšieho človeka, ktorý netrpí povýšenosťou.
Mal rád polemiky a Chesterton hovorí, jednou zo skutočných nevýhod tohto ohromného a skvelého športu je jeho neúmerná dĺžka. Ak bojujete poctivo, máte pocit, že sa námet nedokáže vyčerpať. Tak to robil Tomáš a bol si vedomý, že nie všetci to tak majú, preto sa domnieval, že väčšina ľudí potrebuje zjavené náboženstvo, pretože nemajú čas na diskusiu resp. na poriadnu diskusiu.
Chesterton sa domnieva, že u neho došlo k sublimácii sexuálnej túžby v prospech poznania.(145)
Úvod do Tomizmu
Pre sv. Tomáša je nemožné, aby kontradikcie existovali vedľa seba. Nejaká vec musí najprv byť, aby mohla byť poznaná. Tomáš je presvedčený, že veci sú vecami. (162) Človek buď musí odpovedať kladne na to, že existuje realita, alebo nedokáže vôbec na nič odpovedať. (163) Rozum podľa neho nadobúda istotu vo vonkajších predmetoch. (165)
Dôraz kládol na formu a každý umelec predsa vie, že forma nie je niečo povrchné, ale niečo základné. že forma je základom. (176)
Philosophia perennis
Tomáš Akvinský je pre Chestertona veľkým antropológom. Všetko, čo je v intelekte, bolo v zmysloch. Človek je osvetlený piatimi oknami, piatimi zmyslami. (179)
Človek nie je balónom stúpajúcim k nebu ani krtkom, ryjúcim v zemi, ale niečím ako strom, ktorého korene živí zem, zatiaľ čo jeho najvyššie vetvy akoby sa dvíhali takmer až ku hviezdam. (183)
Sv. Tomáš hovorí, že človek (dieťa) si uvedomuje Ens - bytie. Vie, že niečo je. (85) Vec nemôže aj byť aj nebyť. Nehovorí však, že vidíme úplné bytie. Vidíme ho čiastočne, nie v plnosti. Plnosť bytia je to, čím bytie môže byť. -
Chesterton era un polemista de época. A los intelectuales ingleses de aquel momento les gustaba pelear en diarios, novelas, ensayos, hasta en poesías. Chesterton es agradable de leer porque usaba muchos recursos retóricos. Era un maestro de la paradoja. Por eso le gustaba a Borges. Sin embargo, también es molesto leer a Chesterton. Siempre escribe contra alguien. O contra algo. Siempre contra. Por eso usa figuras retóricas como armas de guerra. Hasta el punto de perderse en el sabor del recurso. Dicho de manera chestertoniana, era un retórico que se convenció a sí mismo queriendo convencer a otros. Por eso es un autor de culto entre los neotomistas. De Tomás dice lo que todos dicen. La diferencia en este ensayo quizás esté en el estilo chestertoniano. Aunque no siempre resulta feliz. La insistencia en la lógica aristotélica y el sentido común llevan una ingenuidad incompatible no sólo con el siglo XXI, sino también con el mundo que le tocó vivir a Chesterton. Casi todo lo que dice sobre el silogismo es erróneo. Se sabía que lo era cuando escribió este libro. Aunque también es cierto que Santo Tomás no usó el silogismo como recurso cerrado. Inclusive las Sumas argumentan. Un argumento no es lo mismo que un silogismo aristotélico. En esa plenitud del recurso tomista tiene razón Chesterton. Pero empeora las cosas cuando apela con vehemencia al sentido común. La miopía epistemológica del alter ego del Padre Brown en este tema es difícil de entender. Es de una torpeza notable. El sentido común de Chesterton en 1930 no tiene nada que ver con el sentido común de cualquier otra persona en cualquier otra época. Es una construcción cultural. Si la filosofía perenne tiene razón, nadie lo puede saber, y no se puede tratar por la vía del sentido común. La filosofía es cuestión de creencia, no de filosofía. Este Gilbert es contagioso. El cierre del libro es un tiro en el pie. Cuenta que Lutero quemó los libros de Tomás con la intención de mostrar a Lutero como un fascista. Así lo dice, fascista hitleriano. Dice que Tomás era liberal moderado, y que era un realista moderado. Porque los liberales extremos se vuelven tiránicos y los realistas extremos se vuelven platónico-agustinianos. No se ve ni por dónde empezar. Habría que resucitar a Bernard Shaw para que le propine algún ensayito al maestro de la paradoja. Al buey mudo -The Dumb Ox- habría que buscarlo por otro lado. A Chesterton acá se le ha enredado el bigote en la pluma. Se habrá distraído entre el queso y el vino, lo cual sí es simpático.
-
This is certainly not a biography but more of a love letter to a revival of Thomism against modernism. Chesterton's biting sarcasm can grow tiresome, but one clearly picks up on his affection for Aquinas. The latter sections of he book are helpful for grasping the basics of Aquinas's ontology. Good introductory reading for Aquinas before digging into a monster like the Summa.
-
Don't bother with this one.
-
After spending most of their lives studying and writing about St. Thomas Aquinas, his philosophy and theology, Etienne Gilson, Anton Pegis (who provides the appreciation in the book) and Jacques Maritain all concluded that this was likely the best book written on the Saint. I can only imagine the despair and humility from those three emminent professors.
If there has been a better book on Aquinas written since, I have yet to find it.
This was likely my fourth or fifth reread of the book, I've lost count, but it remains a classic worth revisiting. Chesterton provides an interesting hagiography, one like no other. The man and saint leaps from the page, or rather lumbers from it. St. Thomas is simultaneously as light as the angels and as heavy as the millstone. His philosophy is introduced in a way that makes it seem like the nature outgrowth of the man, the common man and of course common sense.
The reason Chesterton is so successful at introducing the pinnacle of scholastic philosophy is simple, Chesterton, an untrained philosopher, is not weighed down but centuries of jargon. Though Aquinas' writing may be difficult to approach, the ideas are common sense: that things are things and that we know them through the senses. Chesterton alledged wrote the book after skimming through a couple books on Aquinas (he mentions
Thomas Aquinas). Chesterton's entry to Aquinas is well adapted to both the trained and untrained philosopher, the neophyte and the veteran.
If it is short of specific details, it provides the spirit of St. Thomas' thought. It provides the spirit so fluently because Chesterton and Aquinas breath the same air and live in the same universe, our universe, not the Platonic prison of the mind or the Averroist nominalist atomism. -
A friend of mine recommended this book and, as I am already a fan of Chesterton’s writing, I decided to give it a read—even finding a free copy of this copyright expired supposed biography of St. Thomas Aquinas online. Indeed, I am a great lover of the good, the noble, the true, and the free! 😊 Chesterton is a master of paradox and the first paradox that I discovered about this book is that it is not a biography by any stretch of the imagination; it reads more as if it were a sketch book of Thomistic thought contrasted with modern ideology, which was unexpected to say the least. I enjoyed the author’s contrasting the Franciscan and Dominican paradigms, his emphasis on down-to-earth Aristotelian philosophy, and the juxtaposition of Martin Luther’s willful personality and Aquinas’s rule of reason at the book’s conclusion. While I am glad to have read the book, my knowledge of Aquinas’ life, sadly, remains unaltered.
-
G. K. Chesterton’s biography of Thomas Aquinas is so defensive and sarcastic in tone that it does not seem realistic. Chesterton’s arguments repeatedly take the form that St. Thomas was neither this extreme (Platonic, mystic, Buddhist, Hegelian) nor that extreme (Aristotelian. Manichean, Muslim, pragmatic), where the extremes range all over the board, including many never known by St. Thomas. The saint always occupies the middle ground of common sense and the essence of Christianity, according to Chesterton. The defensiveness is not Aquinas’s, but seems to be the result of trying to show his relevance to modern concerns.
I was interested in knowing how Aquinas was influenced by the Jewish Maimonides and the Muslim Averroes, but we are only told that the saint was so good as to listen to them. The fleshing out of Thomas’s personality was enlightening to me. Characterized as the “Dumb Ox” by his classmates, Thomas came alive as a particular philosophical type, the stalwart, tenacious arguer, not unlike Socrates, but with less irony. Also there is a surprising resemblance to Martin Luther. The discussion of Dominicans and Franciscans was useful in providing a context for St. Thomas’s life. With regard to his philosophical positions, I would be more interested in learning about Aquinas on his own terms, when he is not battling 20th century preconceptions. -
Having just finished reading (and very much enjoyed) The Consolation of Philosophy by Boethius, I felt ready to dig into medieval thought a little bit. G.K. Chesterton's slim biographical sketch of Thomas Aquinas, it turns out, was not quite what I was looking for. What I hoped for from this book was a succinct sketch of the saint's life and a summary of his philosophy. What Chesterton gave me was a hundred pages of unfocused wandering where Chesterton seemed to talk about whatever he wanted to while occasionally making reference to Thomas Aquinas.
-
I did not know much about Aquinas before I read this book. I should not have started with this one.
One reviewer stated this is not a typical biography. I agree. Maybe because of that and not knowing much about Aquinas, I could not really get engaged with the book. I am not going to rate it because GK Chesterton is a Catholic icon. However, if I did, I would give it 2 stars... Just OK. -
This is one of the most "accessible" treatments of the Great Catholic theologian ever written, and Chesterton's insights into his character and his impact on the development of Christianity and Western culture are invaluable. Read this before reading anything else about Aquinas.
-
This is more of a personal appreciation of the theologian than an objective biography or an exposition of his philosophical or theological thought.
-
Aziz Thomas Aquinas, neoplatonculara karşı Aristoteles felsefesindeki hayata ve doğaya verilen önemi tekrar canlandırmış bir filozof... İbn Rüşd'ün Aristoteles yorumundan etkilendiği biliniyor. Zaman içinde felsefenin batıda dinle barışmasının ve bilim felsefesinin gelişmesinin temellerini bu ortaçağ filozofunda bulabiliriz. Günümüzde de dinlerde izleri gözlenen dünyayı eşit etkinlikte yöneten iyi ve kötü güçlere inanan Maniheistler'in her yerde kötülük gören doğaya karşıt fikirlerine karşı, doğayı ve insanın duyularıyla algılamasını öne çıkarışıyla modern çağdaki bilime açılan yolu açan en önemli düşünürlerden olduğunu öğreniyoruz.
Aquinas zihnin etkin özelliğinin "gerçekliğin tuhaf güçlü etini yiyen", gerçeklik ve gerçekliğin tanınmasının bileşiminden köken aldığını savunarak, beş duyuya ağırlık veren, sağduyuya dayalı bir gerçeklik görüşünü öne çıkarmış. Aquinas'ın karşı çıktığı Augustinci'ler ise "insanın Tanrı önünde iktidarsızlığı fikrini, Tanrı'nın insanın kaderi hakkında herşeyi bildiği fikrini, kutsal korkuya duyulan ihtiyaç ve entelektüel gururun aşağılanması fikrini, bunlara zıt düşen ve karşılık gelen özgür irade veya insan onuru veya iyi işler yapma gerçeklerinden daha fazla vurgula(mış)lar".
Ayrıca, Aquinas'ın uzun süreli ticaretle ilgili olarak "insanların sadece satmak için ürettikleri şeylerin, tüketmek için ürettikleri şeylerden muhtemelen daha kötü olacağı" görüşü, neden çağlar ötesi bir düşünür olduğunun anlaşılmasına yardımcı olabilir...
Kitabın çevirisinde yer yer katlanılması güç hatalar var. Örneğin sayfa 43'te "Barbarossa I. Frederik", "Barbaros Hayrettin Paşa" olarak çevrilmiş. 13. yüzyılda yaşamış bir kişinin büyük amcasının Hızır Hayrettin Paşa olamayacağı farkedilmemiş.
Bazı sayfalarda gözden geçirilmediği anlaşılan özensiz bir dile maruz kalıyorsunuz.
"Ancak, Aziz Paul'u bir vizyonda gördüğüne dair bir soru sorulduğunda, tartışılması gerekecek diye bir korku acısı içindeydi ve sonuç olarak hikaye biraz belirsiz kalmıştır." (Sayfa 114).
"Burada, bu ufak taslak konusuna değecekse, taslağın tüm felsefe kütüphaneleri ve hatta teolojinin, sadece bir kitapçık yığını olduğu o muazzam kesinlikte bir şey ortaya koymalıdır. Bu şey, tartışma haline gelmeye başlamadan çok önce, bir kanaat olarak ilk andan itibaren onda olduğu kesindir." (Sayfa 116).
"Örneğin, bu tür aristokrat ailenin tipik bir örneği olarak ebeveynleri, dilencilere ve serserilere bir şeyler dağıtmasına, hafif bir şekilde itiraz edermiş gibi görünüyor; ancak üst hizmetçiler tarafından pek beğenilmiyordu." (sayfa 116)
"Çocukluğu, evden otoyola doğru, erkekliğini ilk adımının ipuçlarını ve kendisinin de bir Dilenci olacağına dair ilanını içerebilir." (Sayfa 117)
Bu cümlelerin böyle olmamaları gerekiyor. Bu bölümler için kitabı aslından okumaktan başka çare yok.
G.K. Chesterton polisiye Peder Brown kitaplarıyla tanıdığım, Zizek'in de alıntılarına sık yer verdiği bir yazar... Dünya görüşünü paylaşmasam da düşüncelerini savunma tarzını etkileyici buluyorum... -
This was a bit rambling, with Chesterton’s characteristic digs at Calvinism (also he doesn’t think much of Luther). But it made me want to dig into Aquinas’ theology and philosophy more, and one passage in particular connected to Charlotte Mason’s philosophy - which isn’t surprising given her admiration of the fresco depicting the triumph of Aquinas and the “Great Recognition” that “every fruitful idea, every original conception, whether in Euclid, or grammar, or music, was a direct inspiration from the Holy Spirit, without any thought at all as to whether the person so inspired named himself by the name of God, or recognised whence his inspiration came” (Parents and Children, pg 271).