THOMISM

As a theological and philosophical movement from the 13th century to the 20th, Thomism may be defined as a systematic attempt to understand and develop the basic principles and conclusions of St. thomas aquinas in order to relate them to the problems and needs of each generation. As a doctrinal synthesis of characteristic tenets of philosophy and theology, it is more difficult to define because of the variety of interpretations, applications, and concerns of different generations and individual Thomists. The Aristotelian-Christian synthesis of St. Thomas originated in opposition to 13th-century Augustinianism and Latin averroism. Thomism likewise developed, floundered, and revived in the midst of opposing currents of thought. Thus Thomists, in developing and defending the basic insights of their master, could not help but be affected by problems and polemics of their day. Consequently the term "Thomism" applies to a wide variety of interpretations of St. Thomas by those who have professed loyalty to his thought and spirit.

Notion. Since the 13th century Thomism has come to represent one of the most significant movements in Western thought, particularly in the Catholic Church. Revived in the 16th century, it was espoused by leading theologians and philosophers of various religious orders in defense of Catholic teaching. Its revival in the 19th century as Neothomism, sometimes identified with neoscholasticism, was enthusiastically encouraged by Pope leo xiii and his successors as offering the soundest means of combating modern errors and solving modern problems, particularly in the social order. Far from advocating a safe, closed system, the pontiffs have encouraged rigorous philosophical analysis and the confronting of contemporary problems with the wisdom of St. Thomas.

In a wide sense Thomism is the philosophy or theology professed by anyone who claims to follow the spirit, basic insights, and often the letter of St. Thomas. In this sense, medieval Augustinianism, scotism, protestantism, nominalism, idealism, and materialism are not Thomistic, whereas suarezianism is. In the strict sense Thomism is a philosophy and theology that, eschewing eclecticism, embraces all the sound principles and conclusions of St. Thomas and is consistent with the main tradition of Thomistic thinkers. In this sense Suarezianism, molinism, casuistry, and other forms of eclecticism are not Thomistic. Because of professed eclecticism, Francisco Suárez, Luis Molina, Gabriel Vázquez, and others are not considered Thomists in the strict sense. On the other hand, Tommaso de Vio Cajetan, Domingo Báñez, Jacques Maritain, and others are considered Thomists despite divergent interpretations of particular points and occasional defense of views rejected by the Thomistic tradition. Clearly Thomism is an analogical term embracing various interpretations and developments more or less faithful to the mind and spirit of St. Thomas.

Basic Doctrines. The basic doctrines of Thomism can best be appreciated in the historical context of concrete concerns of an age or polemic. Both in philosophy and in theology, however, certain principles are commonly recognized as characteristic. These characteristics are discussed briefly before the historical development of Thomism is examined.

St. Thomas clearly distinguished between the realm of nature and the realm of supernature: the first is the domain of reason and philosophy, the second is that of faith and theology. Although Thomas Aquinas wrote strictly philosophical works, such as commentaries on Aristotle and short treatises, his most original contributions were made in the course of theological speculation wherein a personalized Aristotelian philosophy served as the handmaid to his theology. Thomists, recognizing the importance of philosophy, consider certain principles of Thomistic philosophy as indispensable for Thomistic theology.

Thomistic Philosophy. In the Thomistic order of teaching the first science to be studied after the liberal arts is natural philosophy, then moral philosophy, and finally metaphysics. No attempt is made here to indicate all the basic principles of these sciences, but the more important are noted briefly.

1. All physical bodies are composed of a purely passive principle called primary matter and an active principle of nature called substantial form in such a way that the first actualization of pure potentiality is the unique substantial form and nature of a body (see forms, unicity and plurality of; matter and form).
2. Each physical body is rendered numerically unique solely by determined matter (materia signata ), and not by form, haecceitas, or any collection of accidents (see individuation).
3. Since primary matter is the principle of individuation, of quantity, and of corruptibility, there can be no "spiritual matter" in separated substances and no multiplication of individuals within their species. In Thomistic doctrine each separated substance, or angel, is unique in its species, necessarily existent by nature, but contingent by creation and preservation.
4. In all created substances there is a real distinction between activities, powers or faculties, and essential nature; this is also true of faculties of the soul, both sentient and intellective (see accident; distinction, kinds of; substance).
5. The unique substantial form of man is his rational soul, which has three spiritual powers, a thinking intellect, an agent intellect, and a will that freely determines itself. The activities of these faculties and powers of the soul demonstrate the spirituality and immortality of the soul (see soul, human; immortality).
6. By nature man has the right to cooperate with other men in society in the pursuit of personal happiness in the common good; this pursuit of happiness is guided by conscience, laws both natural and positive, and virtues both private and public (see ethics).
7. Rejecting both idealism and positivism, a realist metaphysics recognizes universal ideas as existing only in the mind of creatures and God; individuals possessing similar characteristics in nature, however, proffer a legitimate foundation for universal knowledge (see universals). This epistemological position presupposes the psychological principle that nothing exists in the intellect that was not first in sense knowledge (see epistemology; knowledge).
8. From the visible things of the universe the human mind can know the existence of God as the first efficient, supreme exemplar, and ultimate final cause of all creation (see god in philosophy, 2; god, proofs for the existence of).
9. God has no nature other than the subsistent fullness of pure actual being (esse ), having no potentiality or limitation of any kind. Every creature, on the other hand, is characterized by a disturbing distinction between his inner nature and his actuality of borrowed existence (esse ). (see essence and existence; potency and act.)
10. The metaphysical concept of being (ens ) is analogically, and not univocally, said of God, substances, and accidents, such that each is recognized to be radically (simpliciter ) different, and only relatively similar in some respect (see analogy).

Thomistic Theology. While recognizing the unique position of the Bible in Christian theology, Thomistic theology, like other scholastic theologies, is an attempt to systematize revealed truths in a human manner so as to make revelation better appreciated by the orderly, logical, scientific mind. In matters of divine faith there is no difference between Thomistic theology and any other Catholic theology, but in the matter of undefined dogmatics there are certain conspicuous characteristics of Thomism that may be briefly listed.

1. Beyond the order of nature there is a higher, supernatural order of reality, including truths of revelation, grace, merit, predestination, and glory, that man could never know unless God revealed its existence (see revelation, theology of; super-natural).
2. This supernatural order of divine reality is not simply modally (i.e., quoad modum ) beyond the powers of nature, but substantially (i.e., quoad substantiam ) in such a way that pure nature can neither strive toward nor attain it (see grace and nature).
3. Notwithstanding the essential transcendence of faith and grace, there is a harmony between faith and reason and between grace and nature, for there is only one author of both. Thus there can be no contradiction between faith and reason, and grace perfects nature (see faith and reason).
4. Although reason can, objectively speaking, demonstrate the existence of God, providence, the immortality of the human soul, and other praeambula fidei, it can in no way demonstrate the saving truths of revelation, such as the incarnation, predesti-nation, life everlasting, and the Trinity. On the other hand, reason can in no way disprove them (see apologetics).
5. Man is not only a true secondary cause, but he is a free agent. Nevertheless whatever good man accomplishes is due to the grace of God, while whatever sin man commits is due to himself. God's universal causality in no way deprives man of his freedom, for God moves all things according to their natures, and man's nature is to act freely (see premotion, physical).
6. Predestination of certain persons to grace and glory is a free gift of God's mercy. Divine foreknowledge of the predestined is not through scientia media or through a foreknowledge of how man will react to grace, but simply through God's free choice (see predeterm1nation).
7. The primary motive of the Incarnation of the Word is the Redemption of fallen mankind so that if Adam had not sinned, God would not have become man. (see redemption [theology of].)
8. The sacraments as an encounter with the Passion and death of Christ are not only symbols of faith, but also instrumental causes of grace in the soul and in the Church. Since Christ is the true minister of all Sacraments, they effect what they signify ex opere operato (see instrumental causality).
9. The Church as the Mystical Body of Christ is the sole custodian of faith and the Sacraments. Sent to preach the Word to the world, the true Church of Christ must preserve unblemished the purity of divine revelation and the integrity of the Sacraments. This guardianship is in no way contrary to the development of doctrine under the Holy Spirit (see doctrine, development of).
10. Eternal life consists essentially in seeing God face to face, from which vision flows the fullness of happiness. Thus the essence of beatitude consists in the intellectual vision. In order to receive this beatific vision, however, the created intellect must be elevated by the light of glory (lumen gloriae ).

One characteristic of Dominican Thomism, long since abandoned, was its opposition to the doctrine of the immaculate conception. Bound by an oath of loyalty to the basic teachings of St. Thomas, the majority of Dominican theologians and preachers believed that St. Thomas had denied the doctrine defended by John dunsscotus and popularized by the laity. Whatever may have been the true mind of St. Thomas, faced as he was with the special circumstances of the 13th century, it is historically certain that Dominican opposition in later centuries was unfortunate and unfaithful to his spirit. The doctrine that developed in later centuries was more orthodox than that opposed by St. bernard of clairvaux, St. albert the great, St. bonaventure, and St. Thomas himself.

Since the many variations of philosophy and theology that may be labeled Thomistic can be understood only in their historical context, most of the remainder of this article is devoted to a general historical survey of Thomism from the death of St. Thomas to the end of the 18th century. The renewal of Thomism in the 19th and 20th centuries is treated mainly elsewhere (see neoscholasticism and neothomism).

General Survey

Apart from the Thomistic revival in the 19th century, the two major phases of Thomism may be designated as "early Thomism," which extends from the death of St. Thomas to the beginning of the Protestant Reformation, and "second Thomism," which extends from the Reformation to the 19th-century renewal.

Early Thomism. The death of St. Thomas on March 7, 1274, was deeply mourned by the city of Naples, the vicinity of Fossanova, the Roman province of the Dominican order, and the schools of Paris. Miracles connected with his death and burial initiated a cult centered largely in Naples. Lamentations, panegyrics, and letters extolling his learning and sanctity expressed profound grief at his passing (Birkenmajer, 1–35). Shocked by news of his death, the faculty of arts at Paris (including siger of brabant and peter of auvergne) addressed a moving letter on May 3 to the general chapter of the order meeting in Lyons. They requested that the body of so great a master be given permanent resting place in the city that "nourished, fostered, and educated" him; they further requested that certain philosophical writings begun but not completed at Paris and other works promised by Thomas be sent without delay (ibid. 4).

St. Thomas, however, left no immediate disciples worthy of his genius. His first successor at Paris, hannib aldus de hannibaldis, followed Thomas faithfully in his commentary on the Sentences (1258–60), but he was created cardinal in 1262 and died in 1272. Thomas's second successor was romano of rome (d. 1273), who was more Augustinian than Aristotelian or Thomistic (Grabmann, Geschichte, 61). reginald of piperno, Thomas's constant companion and confessor, for whom he wrote a number of less profound treatises, gave posterity no indication of his grasp of Thomas's teaching. Peter of Auvergne and other masters in the faculty of arts who eagerly read Thomas's philosophical commentaries could not have attended lectures in the theological faculty, where he was teaching. Even the earliest Thomists who may have known him personally, such as william of macclesfield, giles of lessines, bernard of trille, and Rambert dei Primadizzi, were never enrolled under Thomas as their master. Consequently there was little, if any, academic continuity between Thomas and those who later defended his teaching.

The "innovations" of Thomas Aquinas were strongly opposed during his lifetime, particularly by Franciscans, secular masters in theology, and Dominicans trained in the older Augustinian tradition. This tradition, influenced by the Fons vitae of Avicebron, claimed: (1) the identification of matter with potentiality and form with actuality, thus positing a forma universalis and a materia universalis in all creatures; (2) a certain actuality, however slight, in primary matter; and (3) that substantial form confers only one determinate perfection. From this followed the famosissimum binarium Augustinianum, namely, the hylomorphic composition of all created being, both spiritual and corporeal, and the plurality of substantial forms in one and the same individual. Thomas, on the other hand, maintained: (1) that matter and form are principles only of corporeal substances; (2) that primary matter is a purely passive, potential principle, having no actuality whatever; and (3) that in a single composite there can be only one substantial form conferring all perfections proper to it. Since these "innovations" were inspired by the "new Aristotelian learning" and supported by the growing menace of Latin Averroism, it was natural for the old school to associate Thomas with Averroists in the faculty of arts, even though he had explicitly attacked the fundamental errors of Latin Aver-roism.

More than any other Thomistic innovation, denial of universal hylomorphism and of plurality of forms aroused strongest opposition from the old school. For john peckham, Franciscan regent master from 1269 to 1271, both denials led to heresy. Denial of universal hylomorphism apparently eliminated the distinction between God and creatures; denial of plurality led to denial of the numerical identity of Christ's body on the cross and in the tomb. In a famous disputation with Thomas in 1270 over plurality of forms, Peckham was apparently unable to convince the masters of Paris, and possibly Bp. Étienne tempier, of the heretical implications of Thomas's view. Nevertheless Peckham persisted in his conviction.

Condemnation of Thomistic Teachings. At the height of the first Averroist controversy in 1270, Thomas's systematic use of Aristotle could not be ignored; it was not ignored by the Franciscans, particularly not by Bonaventure. After Thomas's death Averroists disregarded the condemnation of 1270 and even the prohibition of 1272 against discussing theological matters in the faculty of arts. By 1276 Albert the Great was apprised of the growing tendency to associate Averroism with all who used Aristotle in theology. To avert rash condemnation of his own efforts and those of Thomas, Albert journeyed from Cologne to Paris in the winter of 1276–77. This arduous journey was of no avail. Word had reached Rome of dissensions in Paris, and john xxi ordered Bishop Tempier to conduct an investigation. On March 7, 1277, acting on his own authority, Tempier proscribed 219 propositions, excommunicating all who dared to teach any of them (Chartularium universitatis Parisiensis, ed. H. Denifle and E. Chatelain, 4 v. [Paris 1889–97] 1:543–555). Although no person was mentioned in the decree, it was clear to all that the condemnation was directed principally against Siger of Brabant, boethius of sweden, and Thomas Aquinas. Of the 16 propositions generally considered to be Thomistic, the only serious issue, mentioned four times, is the denial of universal hylomorphism and its ramifications. The Paris condemnation made no mention of the unicity of substantial form. Because of this deliberate omission, robert kilward by, Dominican archbishop of Canterbury, issued a condemnation of 30 theses on March 18, 1277, in a special convocation of masters in Oxford (ibid. 1:558–559). Of the 16 propositions in natural philosophy, five bear directly on the unicity of substantial form and six logically presuppose or follow from it. Whoever deliberately defended the propositions condemned was to lose his position in the university.

Reaction to the Condemnation. On April 28 John XXI endorsed the decree of Tempier and implemented its measures. Kilwardby's action, however, was quickly resented by the Dominican order. On receiving news of this action Peter of Conflans, Dominican archbishop of Corinth, disapproved strongly, protesting the inclusion of theses that were not heretical. In reply Kilwardby insisted that he wanted only to prevent the theses from being taught in the schools "because some are manifestly false, others deviate philosophically from the truth, others are close to intolerable errors, and others are patently iniquitous, being repugnant to the Catholic faith" (ibid. 1:560). The last phrase clearly referred to the doctrine of unicity of substantial form. Kilwardby's arguments against the doctrine were answered in 1278 by Giles of Lessines in his De unitate formae. On April 4, 1278, nicholas iii created Kilwardby cardinal bishop of Porto with residence in Rome.

The Dominican general chapter meeting in Milan on June 5, 1278, appointed two visitators, Raymond of Meuillon and John Vigoroux, to investigate and to take action against the English Dominicans "who have brought scandal to the Order by disparaging the writings of the venerated Friar Thomas Aquinas" (Monumenta Ordinis Fratrum Praedicatorum historica, ed. B. M. Reichert [Rome-Stuttgart-Paris 1896– ] 3:199). With the appointment of John Peckham to the See of Canterbury on Jan. 28, 1279, the doctrinal estrangement of the two orders became inevitable. On May 21 of that year the Dominican general chapter meeting in Paris strictly forbade all irreverent or unbecoming talk against Thomas or his writings, no matter what the personal opinion of individuals might be. Thus reverence for the person and writings of Thomas Aquinas was imposed on the whole Dominican order.

Franciscan Opposition. As early as 1272 Franciscans, emphasizing the Augustinian orthodoxy of Bonaventure, compiled lists of doctrines "in which Bonaventure and Thomas disagree." Toward the end of 1279, william de la mare, successor to Peckham in the is, completed a Correctorium fratris Thomae in which 117 passages of Thomas Aquinas were "corrected" according to Scripture, Augustine, and Bonaventure. This work was officially adopted by the general chapter of the Franciscans held at Strassburg on May 17, 1282, when it forbade diffusion of the Summa theologiae of Thomas except among notably intelligent lectors, and then only with the corrections of William in a separate volume reserved for private circulation (Archivum Franciscanum historicum 26:139).

Two years after the Franciscan capitular decision at Strassburg, Archbishop Peckham renewed Kilwardby's prohibition at Oxford on Oct. 29, 1284. In a letter to the masters of Oxford, November 10, he insisted that it was not Thomas who had originated the dangerous doctrine of unicity but the Averroists. In private letters to the chancellor of Oxford, Dec. 7, 1284, and to the bishop of Lincoln, June 1, 1285, Peckham reiterated his personal objections to the unicity of form in man.

In the schools of Paris and Oxford Thomist doctrines, particularly of unicity and individuation, were attacked as heretical and "condemned" by the Franciscans roger marston, richard of middleton, peter john olivi, matthew of aquasparta, and walter of bruges. It was against this background that the early Thomist school developed.

Dominican Legislation. From 1286 until the canonization of St. Thomas (1323), the Dominican order did everything possible to promote the study and defense of Thomistic teaching among its members. The Paris chapter of June 11, 1286, strictly commanded every friar to study, promote, and defend the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas; those who acted contrary were to be deprived of whatever office they held and penalized. The chapter of Saragossa, May 18, 1309, determined that all lectors were to teach from the works of Thomas and resolve questions according to his doctrine. Disregard of this legislation by durandus of saint-pourÇain and james of metz prompted the chapter of Metz, June 3, 1313, to forbid any friar openly to lecture, resolve questions, or answer objections contrary to what was commonly held as the opinion of the venerable doctor. The chapters of London (1314) and Bologna (1315) reiterated the regulation of Metz, adding that superiors should be particularly vigilant that nothing be taught or written contrary to the teaching of Aquinas. By such legislation the order established Thomism as its official teaching.

Early English School. One of the earliest defenders of Thomas in England, though more in an administrative than academic capacity, was william de hothum, who incepted at Paris in 1280 and was elected provincial of the English Dominicans in 1282. He is said to have written a treatise De unitate formarum, but he is best known for his defense of richard knapwell, who incepted at Oxford in 1284. By his own admission Knapwell became convinced of Thomistic doctrine only gradually. At the time of his inception, over which Hothum presided, Knapwell had become a convinced Thomist. He vigorously defended the doctrine of unicity of form in the schools of Oxford in opposition to Roger Marston, notwithstanding the prohibition of Peckham. Denounced to the archbishop for publicly determining a quaestio in favor of unicity, Knapwell was summoned to present himself in London on April 18, 1286. On the advice of Hothum he did not answer the summons, presumably on grounds of exemption from jurisdiction. Having written Correctorium corruptorii "Quare" (1282–83), he was convinced that there was nothing heretical in the teaching of Thomas Aquinas. On April 30, 1286, Peckham convoked a solemn assembly, condemned eight theses of Knapwell as heretical, and excommunicated him and all who aided or counseled him. Hothum, who was present, protested on grounds of privilege of exemption and lodged an appeal to the pope. Knapwell went to Rome personally to plead his case, but the Holy See happened to be vacant until the election of nicholas iv, a Franciscan. When the appeal was finally entertained in 1288, the Franciscan pope imposed perpetual silence on Knapwell, who is reported to have died in Bologna a broken man (see correctoria).

At Oxford the defense was continued by robert of orford, who wrote his Correctorium "Sciendum" before becoming a master about 1287. In his Quodlibeta (1289–93) he refuted the attacks of giles of rome and henry of ghent against the teaching of Thomas Aquinas. thomas of sutton wrote Contra pluralitatem formarum before becoming a Dominican in 1282. Being trained in philosophy outside the order, he maintained a predilection for the pure Aristotle and an independence of interpretation. Nevertheless a number of his writings were thought to be so Thomistic as to circulate as authentic works of Thomas Aquinas (Roensch, 46–51). He even completed Thomas's unfinished commentary on the Perihermeneias and De generatione. As a Dominican master in theology (after 1293) he confronted the new attacks of Duns Scotus, robert cowton, and Henry of Ghent and took part in the controversy between Franciscans and Dominicans on whether evangelical poverty belongs to the essence of Christian perfection or is only a means to it. Many historians consider Sutton to have been the most eminent of early English Thomists, even though his later writings were restricted by the exigencies of controversy.

Sutton's contemporary was the eminent controversialist William of Macclesfield, who incepted under Sutton at Oxford c. 1299. Before 1284 he composed Correctorium corruptorii "Quaestione" against William de la Mare and a defense of the unicity of form. During his academic career he defended the teaching of Thomas Aquinas against Henry of Ghent and godfrey of fontaines.

Thomistic teachings were also defended by nicholas trevet in his Quodlibeta and Quaestiones disputatae as well as by thomas waleys. After 1320 the influence of william of ockham was strongly felt in England even among Dominicans, notably by robert holcot. A conspicuous exception was thomas of claxton, who in his commentary on the Sentences (c. 1400) strongly defended the real distinction of essence and existence (esse ) in creatures and the analogy of being.

Early French School. After Peter of Auvergne, Bernard of Trille, and Giles of Lessines, the most prominent and versatile French Thomist was john (quidort) of paris. He not only defended the teaching of Thomas in his Correctorium "Circa" (before 1284), two treatises on the unicity of form, and vigorous replies to Henry of Ghent, but he developed the Thomistic doctrine of separation of Church and State in his celebrated De potestate regia et papali (c. 1302). He fully appreciated the Thomistic doctrine of essence and existence, but he was less Thomistic in his views concerning the Eucharist; these were twice censured and twice defended without satisfactory results. A popular preacher called Predicator monoculus, he was well aware of contemporary trends and abuses of justice and warned of the proximity of anti-Christ.

Among the more vigorous opponents of Henry of Ghent and Godfrey of Fontaines was the Dominican bernard of auvergne, who acutely understood and ardently defended Thomas, his "master."

The most prolific French Dominican was harvey nedellec, a polemicist who later became master general. Having studied Aristotle outside the order, he never appreciated the Thomistic distinction between essence and esse in creatures. As a theologian he wrote a valuable Defensio doctrinae fr. Thomae (1303–12) and remained a polemicist throughout his life, attacking the doctrines of Henry of Ghent, peter aureoli, and his own confreres James of Metz and Durandus of Saint-Pourçain for departing from the teaching of Thomas Aquinas. Apart from his Aristotelian rejection of the real distinction of essence and esse, he had a profound and subtle understanding of Thomas. He lived to see the canonization of St. Thomas, which he helped to bring about. He was known by the scholastic title of Doctor rarus.

One of the best representatives of the French Thomistic school was william of peter of godin, whose Lectura Thomasina (1292–98), a commentary on the Sentences, manifested a calm and profound understanding of all traditional Thomistic doctrines (Grabmann, Mittelalt. Geist. 2:572–575). The principal controversy in his career involved the Franciscan view of the absolute poverty of Christ. A younger contemporary, Armand de Belvézer, wrote an influential commentary on Thomas's De ente et essentia (1326–28) and firmly opposed the view of john xxii concerning the beatific vision, as had all Thomists. peter of la palu was an enthusiastic promoter of Thomas whose knowledge of Thomism left something to be desired. A nobleman by birth, Peter was deeply involved in legal and moral questions of the day, notably papal and regal power, privileges of mendicants, Franciscan poverty, and the trial of Peter John Olivi.

Carmelites. Early Carmelite theologians, though favorably disposed to defend Thomas, were more eclectic than Dominicans and some seculars. The Quodlibeta and Summa of Gerard of Bologna (d. 1317) manifest the influence of Thomas, Henry of Ghent, and Godfrey of Fontaines. The most outstanding early Carmelite master at Paris was Guy Terrena of Perpignan (d. 1342), who was more influenced by Godfrey than by Thomas. More Thomistic, but still eclectic, was john baconthorp, lecturer at Oxford and Cambridge.

Early German School. German Dominicans of the 13th century were strongly influenced by St. Albert the Great. Albert's disciples preferred to develop the mystical and Neoplatonic elements of his thought. According to Grabmann the earliest representatives of Thomism in Germany were john of sterngassen, Gerard of Sterngasse, and nicholas of strassburg, all of whom depend heavily on Thomas for their commentaries on the Sentences and for their Quaestiones disputatae (Grabmann, ibid. 1:393–404). john of lichtenberg, master in theology at Paris, 1311–12, borrowed many passages from the Summa theologiae for his commentary on the Sentences. Henry of Lübeck (d. 1336), writing after the canonization of St. Thomas, was less hesitant to cite "venerabilis doctor beatus Thomas de Aquino, qui omnibus allis cautius et melius scripsit." Even at Paris Henry openly taught the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas on the principle of individuation, the real distinction, and the interpretation of Augustine "secundum doctorem Thomam" (Grabmann, ibid. 1:421–424).

Early Italian School. After Hannibaldus de Hannibaldis, the most faithful defender of Thomas was Rambert dei Primadizzi of Bologna (c. 1250–1308), possibly a disciple, who replied to the Correctorium in his Apologeticum veritatis of 1286–87. The foremost promoter of the cause in Italy was the octogenarian bartholomew of lucca, who studied under Thomas in Rome, accompanied him to Naples in 1272, and there received word of his death. Initiative for the canonization of Thomas came with the establishment of a separate province for Naples and Sicily in 1294. Bartholomew supplied much biographical information to William of Tocco (c. 1250–1323), promoter of the cause, and to bernard gui, procurator general, when the cause was first introduced at Avignon in 1318. Bartholomew was a historian and a political theorist rather than a speculative theologian; he played no small role, however, in vindicating Thomas. In 1316 the Dominican john of naples defended the thesis in Paris that the doctrine of Friar Thomas "could be taught at Paris with respect to all its conclusions" (Xenia Thomistica 3:23–104). remigio de' girolami is considered by Grabmann to have been a disciple of Thomas and the teacher of dante alighieri, at least by way of public lectures in Florence. The theology of the Divina Commedia is mainly Thomistic, although the cosmology is more Albertinian and Neoplatonic.

The practical theology of Thomas Aquinas was disseminated in Italy through the De officio sacerdotis of Albert of Brescia (d. 1314), the Compendium philosophiae moralis of bartholomew of san concordio, and the alphabetical handbook Pantheologia of Raynerius of Pisa (d. 1351). Italians, having no sympathy for the condemnations of 1277, did everything possible to popularize St. Thomas and his teaching.

Canonization and Vindication. Thomas Aquinas was canonized with exceptional solemnity by John XXII at Avignon on July 18, 1323. In a general congregation of all Parisian masters specially convoked on Feb. 14, 1325, Stephen Bourret, bishop of Paris, formally revoked his predecessor's condemnation so far as it "touched or seemed to touch the teaching of blessed Thomas" (Chartularium universitatis Parisiensis, 2:280). With this vindication of St. Thomas, his followers turned to the diffusion of his doctrine in opposition to other schools, particularly Scotism and nominalism. About 1330 a certain Durandellus, probably a disciple of John of Naples, composed an Evidentia Durandelli contra Durandum. Later durandus of aurillac forcefully promulgated the teachings of Thomas Aquinas. This diffusion, however, was temporarily halted by the black plague, the Western Schism (1378–1417), and the general decline of learning and religious life in the second half of the 14th century.

Diffusion of Thomism. The establishment of new universities in Italy, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Bohemia, Vienna, Cracow, and Louvain, the religious reform of the Dominican order under Bl. raymond of capua (c. 1330–99), and the multiplication of manuscripts of St. Thomas contributed to the diffusion of Thomism. In the 14th century the Summa theologiae was translated into Armenian, Greek, and Middle High German. By the 15th century Thomism occupied a respected place in theological thought. St. antoninus of Florence, self-taught in Thomistic theology, faced new moral problems in his Summa theologiae moralis. The Dominican general chapter of 1405 renewed norms for teaching in the order. At the Council of Constance (1414–18) the Dominican general, Leonardo Dati (d. 1425), developed and defended the supremacy of pope over council. Opposition to John wyclif and John hus, occasioning the Council of basel (1431–38), stimulated John Nider (c. 1380–1438), John Stojkovic of Ragusa (c. 1390–1442), and John Torquemada (1388–1468) to develop a notable ecclesiology that helped to overcome the conciliarist movement. At the University of Cologne secular masters, such as henry of gorkum and the Belgian John Tinctor (fl. 1434–69), began lecturing on the Summa of St. Thomas. Henry of Gorkum wrote an introduction to the Summa (Quaestiones in partes S. Thomae ) and a number of original Thomistic treatises, De praedestinatione, De iusto bello, etc.

The most remarkable of early 15th-century Thomists was John Capreolus, who incorporated a profound knowledge of St. Thomas into his Defensiones theologiae Divi Thomae, a commentary on the Sentences, in which he ably refuted the doctrines of Duns Scotus, Durandus of Saint-Pourçain, gregory of rimini, and Peter Aureoli. The brilliance of this work merited for him the title of Princeps Thomistarum.

During the second half of the 15th century many Dominican and secular professors in German universities lectured on the Summa of St. Thomas, e.g., Kaspar Grunwald in Freiburg, Cornelius Sneek and John Stoppe in Rostock, and Leonard of Brixental (d. 1478) in Vienna. At Cologne the most outstanding defenders of Thomism against Albertists were Gerard of Heerenberg (de Monte, d. 1480), Lambert of Heerenberg (de Monte, d. 1499), and John Versor (fl.1475–85). One of the most noteworthy Dominican lecturers on the Summa at Cologne in this period was Gerhard of Elten (fl. 1475–84). Toward the end of the 15th century the Hungarian Dominican Nicholas de Mirabilibus wrote the treatise De praedestinatione, which presented the traditional teaching of the Thomistic school.

In this period a remarkable commentary on the Summa was written by a prolific Belgian of Roermond, denis the carthusian, known as Doctor exstaticus; he manifested a profound grasp of Thomistic, patristic, and biblical teaching.

The invention of printing helped to spread not only the text of St. Thomas's major works, but also numerous Thomistic commentaries, expositions, manuals, and defenses. In Italy significant contributions were made by peter of bergamo, regent at Bologna, whose Tabula aurea (1473) is the only complete index to the works of St. Thomas; he also wrote one of the last concordances of Thomistic doctrine (Concordantia conclusionum ). Among his disciples were dominic of flanders, whose Summa divinae philosophiae was the best-known commentary prior to that of Conrad Köllin; Tommaso de Vio Cajetan; and Girolamo savonarola, whose Triumphus crucis was an adaptation of the Summa contra gentiles and an early Thomist manual of apologetics.

peter nigri (schwarz), rector of the University of Budapest in 1481, wrote a large Clypeus Thomistarum, which is a strong defense rather than an exposition of Thomistic teaching, and numerous polemical works against the Jews.

Among notable editors of St. Thomas's works were Paul Soncinas (d. 1494), who also published a compendium of Capreolus, and the Venetian Antonio Pizzamano.

Despite the strength of the Thomistic school, it had to compete with Scotism and the growing popularity of nominalism. The Protestant reformation brought Thomism to an end in countries lost to Rome, but it gave impetus to "second Thomism" in countries that remained Catholic.

Second Thomism. With the Reformation Thomism received new vitality in Spain and Italy. Doctrinal problems raised by reformers forced theologians to reexamine basic questions in terms of Sacred Scripture, apostolic tradition, and systematic theology. The outstanding characteristic of this phase was the gradual replacement of the Sentences by the Summa theologiae of St. Thomas. Begun in Germany in the 15th century, it spread to Paris, then to Spain and Italy. The Council of trent (1545–63) not only introduced needed reforms, but it also reenforced the teaching of theology and philosophy in Catholic universities and seminaries. New religious orders founded during the counter reformation frequently claimed St. Thomas as their official teacher; and even older orders, reformed in the spirit of Trent, made serious efforts to teach Thomistic doctrine. Diocesan seminaries as well, fulfilling the spirit of Trent and of Roman pontiffs such as pius v, introduced manuals of philosophy and theology that were in some way "ad mentem S. Thomae Aquinatis." The outstanding characteristic of Thomism after the Council of Trent was the multiplication of manuals that claimed to be more or less Thomistic.

The initial harmony of reform and revival met serious obstacles both from within and from without (see scholasticism, 2). The first internal obstacle was the controversy between Dominicans and Jesuits concerning grace in the Congregatio de auxiliis (1598–1607). The deadlock that ensued produced centuries of mutual mistrust in philosophy and theology. The second internal obstacle was the rise of a new moral theology in the 17th century known as casuistry. This divided theologians into probabilists, probabiliorists, and Jansenists; it also diverted attention from fundamental principles to particular cases, quantitative distinctions, and legalism that led to an academic moral theology in following centuries. At the center of this development stood St. alphonsus liguori, whose Theologia moralis (1753–55) influenced all later moralists and disputants. The third internal obstacle for Thomism was the writing of textbooks in philosophy that would be relevant to modern philosophers and scientists. After Trent textbooks of Thomistic philosophy were written for seminaries; these were largely summaries of Aristotle or adaptations of the Summa theologiae. With the birth of modern science and philosophy in the 17th century one of two courses was generally followed: ignoring modern science or abandoning ancient philosophy. After I. Newton and C. wolff modern science and philosophy won the day in Catholic seminaries and universities. By the middle of the 18th century the Thomistic school was dead; the name of Thomas was rarely seen in seminary textbooks of philosophy, and even the name "Thomists" had to be defined as "those who follow blessed Thomas" (Phil. Lugdunensis: Metaph. [Lyons 1788] 308).

Before Trent. Prior to the reorganization of the University of Paris under Louis XI, an innovation was made by the Belgian Dominican Peter crockaert. Originally a secular professing ockhamism, Crockaert became a Dominican at Paris in 1503 and finally became a Thomist who was sympathetic to humanism. In 1509 he began lecturing on the Summa of St. Thomas instead of the Sentences of Peter Lombard. Among his illustrious disciples was Francisco de vitoria, with whom he edited the Summa theologiae 1a2ae. At Cologne Conrad kÖllin, the most prominent Thomist of his day and first opponent of Martin Luther's doctrine on marriage, followed the German practice of lecturing on the Summa and in 1512 published a substantial commentary on the 1a2ae in Cologne, the influence of which extended far beyond Germany.

In Italy Tommaso de Vio cajetan lectured on the Summa at the University of Pavia (1497–99) at the invitation of Duke Sforza. His published commentary, however, was written between 1507 and 1520, when he was general of the Dominican order and cardinal priest of St. Sixtus. This commentary not only revived Thomistic studies in Italy but influenced the interpretation of many Thomistic doctrines. In other writings Cajetan denied that reason could demonstrate the immortality of the human soul. Consequently many of his contemporaries and successors disagreed with his views, notably the Dominicans Ambrogio Catarino (1487–1553), Bartolomé Spina (c. 1480–1546), Giovanni Crisostomo javelli, Bartolomé de medina, Melchior cano, Domingo bÁÑez, and "many theologians" of the Sorbonne in 1533 and 1544. Cajetan's influence on Thomism increased when Pius V ordered the publication of his commentary with the complete works of Thomas Aquinas in 1570 and Leo XIII ordered it to be published in the critical edition of St. Thomas (v. 3–12; Rome 1888–1906). The Italian revival of Thomism was augmented by ferrariensis (Francesco Silvestri of Ferrara), also general of the Dominican order, who is best known for his commentary on the Summa contra gentiles, which is also included in the Leonine edition of St. Thomas (v. 13–15; Rome 1918–30). A penetrating commentary on the Summa theologiae 1a was written by Javelli; into this he inserted a Quaestio de Dei praedestinatione et reprobatione, in which he departed from traditional Thomistic teaching in his efforts to pacify Luther. Moreover, Javelli wrote one of the first manuals of philosophy "ad mentem S. Thomae" in three volumes, later entitled Totius rationalis, divinae ac moralis philosophiae compendium; this was printed many times in Venice and Lyons between 1536 and 1580.

Spain was the principal center of second Thomism. Having taught at Paris, Francisco de Vitoria returned to Spain, bringing with him Peter Crockaert's method of lecturing on the Summa theologiae. As professor in the principal chair of theology at Salamanca, succeeding the Thomist Diego de Deza (c. 1443–1523), he exerted considerable influence directly on the University of Salamanca and indirectly on the Universities of Valladolid, Seville, Evora, Alcalá, and Coimbra. The precision, lucidity, and humanist flavor of his lectures can be seen in his published commentary on the Summa theologiae 2a2ae (7 v.; Salamanca 1932–52). From 1526 to 1541 Vitoria conducted a series of conferences (Relectiones theologicae 12) on problems of current interest dealing with ecclesiastical and civil power, relation of pope to council, conditions in the New World, causes of just war, and the divorce of henry viii (3 v.; Madrid 1933–35). Spanish universities henceforth had three distinct chairs of theology: Thomist, Scotist, and nominalist. Among outstanding disciples who continued Vitoria's work were Domingo de soto, Cano, Pedro de Sotomayor (d. 1564), and Martin de Ledesma (d.1574). Domingo de Soto, constantly concerned with current problems, wrote exhaustively on law in De jure et justitia and Pelagianism in De natura et gratia, and defended Bartolomé de las casas in the controversy with Juan Ginés de Sepulveda concerning American Indians. Cano, an aggressive opponent of the Jesuits, was the first to give serious consideration to the sources of theological speculation in his De locis theologicis. Medina, disciple of Cano and father of probabilism, wrote a lengthy commentary on the whole Summa, only part of which has been published.

The Thomistic revival extended beyond the Dominican order to seculars, Augustinians, reformed Carmelites, and jesuits, whose society was approved in 1540.

Early Jesuit Legislation. In the early constitutions composed between 1547 and 1550 St. ignatius of loyola wrote, "In theology the Old and New Testaments and the scholastic doctrine of St. Thomas are to be read, and in philosophy Aristotle" (Const. 4.14.1). His own training at Alcalá, Salamanca, and Paris brought him into close contact with St. Thomas and Dominicans. The section De sacrae theologiae studiis specified that the Summa of St. Thomas was to be covered by two professors in a period of eight years, two years being devoted to the 2a2ae. Early professors, such as Claude le jay and Francisco de toledo, a disciple of Domingo de Soto, were Thomists in philosophy and theology. Ignatius, however, expressed hope for a new work "more accommodated to our times"; Gerónimo nadal, a companion, claiming to find prolixity in St. Thomas, hoped that some day a new theology would be written that would conciliate Thomist, Scotist, and nominalist factions. These desires inspired later Jesuits to seek greater freedom to depart from the teaching of St. Thomas (Beltrán de Heredia, 392–393). The Ratio Studiorum of 1586 under the fifth superior general, Claudius acquaviva, granted more liberty to depart from St. Thomas, particularly where he differed from current views, such as those respecting the Immaculate Conception and clandestine marriages. New legislation and problems of the Counter Reformation produced a radical departure in Concordia liberii arbitrii cum gratiae donis (Lisbon 1588) by Luis de molina. This departure was continued by Gabriel vÁzquez and by Francisco suÁrez, the most influential of all Jesuit writers. By a decree of 1593 Jesuits were ordered to return to the doctrine of St. Thomas; henceforth no one who was not truly zealous for the doctrine of St. Thomas was to teach theology (nullus ad docendum theologiam assumatur, qui non sit vere S. Thomae doctrinae studiosus ). A thoroughly Thomistic Summa philosophiae (5 v.; Ticino 1618–23) was compiled by the Italian Jesuit Cosmo alamanni. Belgian Jesuits, notably Robert bellarmine, applied Thomistic principles to problems of the day.

Trent and Thomism. The Council of Trent, convoked to define Catholic doctrine and to reform the Church, was guided inevitably by the mind and spirit of St. Thomas (Walz, 440). Contrary to legend, the Summa of St. Thomas was not enshrined on the altar with the Scriptures. Nevertheless, Tridentine decrees followed closely the wording and teaching of Thomas Aquinas, especially concerning justification, Sacraments in general, and the Eucharist in particular. Outstanding Thomist theologians at the council were Domingo de Soto, Cano, Bartolomé Spina, Ambrogio Catarino, Franscesco Romeo (d. 1552), Bartholomew of the Martyrs (1514–90), Pedro de soto, Francisco foreiro, Bartolomé de carranza, Giacomo nacchianti, Ambrose Perlargus, Jerome Oleaster, Thomas Stella, and Peter Bertano.

One far-reaching effect of the disciplinary decrees of Trent was the establishment of seminaries for better education of the clergy. After the first Catholic university was established in Dillingen (1549), others were established rapidly in Germany, Austria, France, Belgium, and the New World (Manila 1611). This created a demand for good teachers of philosophy and theology as well as for orthodox textbooks. In 1562 petition was made for a catechism that would give a clear explanation of Catholic doctrine. This work was entrusted to Cardinal Seripandus; three Dominicans, Leonardo Marini (1509–73), Egidio Foscarari (1512–64), and Foreiro; and Mutio Calini, bishop of Zara. After the death of Seripandus in 1563, direction was given to Cardinal Charles borromeo. This Catechismus Romanus was published by order of Pius V in 1566 and was the basis for all Catholic catechisms up to the 20th century.

In 1567 Pius V declared Thomas Aquinas a Doctor of the universal Church and ordered that his complete works be collected and published in Rome with the Tabula aurea of Peter of Bergamo (Rome 1570–71). This Piana, or first Roman edition of the Opera omnia, added greatly to the diffusion of Thomistic teaching.

Congregatio de Auxiliis. Molina's Concordia of 1588 was condemned by the Spanish Inquisition, banned in Spain, and vehemently attacked at Salamanca by Báñez and Pedro de ledesma. In 1594 the opposing positions concerning grace and free will were publicly debated in Valladolid by the Jesuit Antonio de Padilla and the Dominican Diego Nuño. Soon heated debates were held throughout Spain.

Two issues were prominent: efficacy of grace in the free will of man and God's foreknowledge of man's free actions. Molina, rejecting the teaching of St. Thomas, posited a middle knowledge (scientia media ) whereby God sees all possible reactions of individual men in various circumstances. Knowing how man will react, God gives grace accordingly. Insisting on man's free choice of grace, contrary to John calvin, Molina taught that God offers grace to all men. If man accepts grace, God concurs simultaneously (concursus simultaneous ) with man in meritorious actions. Báñez, and Dominicans generally, insisted on the primacy of God's universal causality and taught that free will cannot choose grace unless it is physically premoved by God to do so (praemotio physica ). God foreknows those who will be saved because He gives intrinsically efficacious grace to those whom He wills. To Dominicans the Jesuit position appeared to be Pelagian. To Jesuits the Dominican position appeared to be Calvinist.

Between 1594 and 1597, 12 reports were forwarded to Rome, where clement viii established a commission under the presidency of Cardinals Madrucci and Arrigone. On March 19, 1598, and again in November, the commission submitted its report condemning Molina's book. Fearing to make a hasty decision, Clement VIII requested the Dominican and Jesuit generals to appear with their theologians. On Feb. 22, 1599, began the long series of conferences called congregatio de auxiliis. From March 19, 1602, onward, the debates took place in the presence of the pope. Defenders of the Dominican position were Diego Álvarez and Tomás de lemos. The debates continued under paul v, who presided over the last session, in which ten cardinals voted for the condemnation of Molina and two voted against, namely, Bellarmine and Duperron. After 20 years of debate and 85 conferences before two popes no official verdict was given; but in a decree of Aug. 28, 1607, Paul V forbade each side from charging the other with heresy and from using inflammatory language. In 1611 the Holy Office required that all books concerning grace be examined in Rome before publication. In 1612 Aloysio Aliaga, confessor to the king of Spain, requested a decision on the controversy; but Paul V replied that "more circumspect deliberations are still needed." Numerous ponderous tomes were in fact published. The Belgian Dominican Jacques Hyacinthe Serry (1658–1738), disciple of Alexander Natalis, wrote a detailed account of the proceedings in his large Historia congregationum de auxiliis (Louvain 1700; definitive ed. Antwerp 1708) under the pseudonym A. Le Blanc. Serry continued the controversy in numerous writings, notably Schola Thomistica vindicata (Cologne 1706) against the Jesuit historian Gabriel Daniel.

17th-Century Commentaries and Textbooks. The tragic case of Galileo galilei and the new philosophy of René descartes isolated rather than challenged Thomist thinkers. Theologians, divorced from scientific movements of the day, produced extensive commentaries and summaries of St. Thomas, often repeating their predecessors. Philosophers, clinging to the orderly universe of Aristotle, used Thomistic theology to explain Aristotelian philosophy in isolation from contemporary issues. The Jesuits of Coimbra, known as Coimbricenses, composed a college text of Aristotelian philosophy (1592–1606). The reformed Carmelites of Alcalá, known as complutenses, cooperated in a Cursus artium (7 v.; 1624–28) that was used at Salamanca since 1627 and in many seminaries. The Carmelites of Salamanca, known as salmanticenses, began to write a cooperative commentary on the Summa in 1631 that was not completed until 1704, Cursus theologiae (20 v.; Paris 1870–83), and a Cursus theologiae moralis in seven volumes between 1665 and 1709.

The most outstanding Thomist of the early 17th century was john of st. thomas, who wrote a Cursus philosophicus thomisticus that expounded Aristotelian logic and natural philosophy; ethics and metaphysics were studied in theology. He also compiled an extensive commentary on the Summa called the Cursus theologicus. A contemporary of Cornelius Otto jansen, he was the last of the great line of Iberian commentators in second Thomism. Among his better-known contemporaries were Jerome de Medices (d. 1622), John Paul Nazarius (d. 1646), Francisco de Araujo (d. 1664), Mark Serra (1581–1645), John Ildephonse Baptista (d. c. 1648), Antonio de Sotomayor (c. 1558–1648), and a Belgian secular, Francis sylvius. In this period mystical theology was developed by Tomás de vallgornera in his Mystica theologia Divi Thomae (1662).

Probabilist Controversy. probabilism is the theory of moralists who admit as a legitimate rule of conduct an opinion that is only probable even when there is current an opinion that is recognized as more probable. It entered the Thomistic school in 1577 with the publication of Medina's commentary on the Summa theologiae 1a2ae. While admitting the strength of the traditional Thomist view that the safer opinion ought always to be followed, he declared that it is morally licit to follow any probable opinion even though the opposite is more probable (in Summa theologiae 1a2ae, 19.5–6). All Spanish and Portuguese Dominicans after Medina taught probabilism until 1656, when it was explicitly forbidden by the general chapter of Rome. The last Dominican probabilist was Pedro de Tapia (1582–1657).

Probabilism entered Jesuit theology with Gabriel Vázquez, who explicitly quoted Medina. Thereafter Jesuit theologians defended probabilism in the battle against Jansenist rigorism. The laxist view of probabilism quickly degenerated into casuistry, notably in the writings of the Jesuits Tomas sÁnchez, Antonio de Escobar y Mendoza, Juan caramuel lobkowitz, and the Sicilian Theatine Antonino diana. Jansenist opposition to probabilism and casuistry, which lasted for more than two centuries, was renewed by Pasquier Quesnel. Probabilism, first condemned by innocent xi in 1665, was frequently condemned by the Holy See and by later Thomists. St. Alphonsus Liguori, who considered himself a disciple of St. Thomas, reached a compromise in his Theologia moralis (1753–55) that allowed licit choice of contradictory moral opinions only when they are equally probable (equiprobabilism). A detailed history of probabilism and rigorism was written by the Italian Dominican Daniel concina.

Decline of Second Thomism. Even before the French Revolution and the Napoleonic occupation brought "second Thomism" to an end, there was little vitality among philosophers and theologians. In Spain the Thomist school was represented mainly by Discalced Carmelites and the Dominican cardinal Pedro de godoy. In France the tradition was carried on by Guillaume Vincent de contenson, Antonin Reginald, Jean Baptiste gonet, Antoine goudin, and Antonin massouliÉ. In Belgium the outstanding representative was Charles René billuart, whose principal work was a commentary on the Summa in 18 volumes. In Italy Thomism was best represented by the Jesuit philosopher Sylvester maurus and by the Dominican Vincenzo gotti (1644–1742), whose principal work was Theologia scholastico-dogmatica iuxta mentem D. Thomae (16 v.; Bologna 1727–35). In Germany the Benedictines of Salzburg fostered Thomistic studies, notably Ludwig Babenstuber (1660–1715), who wrote Philosophia thomistica (Salzburg 1706) and Cursus theologiae moralis (Augsburg 1718); Paul Mezger, who wrote Theologia thomistico-scholastica Salisburgensis (Augsburg 1695); Alfons Wenzel (1660–1743); Placidus Renz senior (d. 1730); and Placidus Renz junior (d. 1748). In Switzerland the Cistercians Raphael Köndig and Benedict Hüber published a Harmonia of theological philosophy and philosophical theology "consonant with the doctrine of St. Thomas and Thomists" (2 v.; Salem 1718).

By the second half of the 18th century the complete works of St. Thomas had been printed eight times, the last being the second Venice edition (1745–88), begun by Bernard M. de Rossi (1687–1775). By then there was little interest in reading the text of St. Thomas outside the Dominican Order.

(For the Thomistic revival in the 19th and 20th centuries, see scholasticism, 3.)

Bibliography: r. verardo, Enciclopedia filosofica, 4 v. (Venice-Rome 1957) 1:1709–13. Bulletin Thomiste (1924–). r. garrigou-lagrange, Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, ed. a. vacant et al., 15 v. (Paris 1903–50) 15.1:823–1023. h. hurter, Nomenclator literarius theologiae catholicae, 5 v. in 6 (3d ed. Innsbruck 1903–13) v. 2–4. j. quÉtif and j. Échard, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum, 5 v. (Paris 1719–23); continued by r. coulon (Paris 1909–); repr. 2 v. in 4 (New York 1959). p. wyser, Der Thomismus (Bibliog. Einführungen in das Studium der Philosophie 15–16; Bern 1951). m. grabmann, Die Geschichte der katholischen Theologie seit dem Ausgang der Väterzeit (Freiburg 1933); Mittelalterliches Geistesleben, 3 v. (Munich 1925–56). a. m. walz, Compendium historiae ordinis praedicatorum (2d ed. Rome 1948). k. werner, Geschichte des Thomismus, v. 3 of Der hl. Thomas von Aquino (Regensburg 1859); Die Scholastik des spáter Mittelalters, 5 v. (Vienna 1881). f. j. roensch, Early Thomistic School (Dubuque 1964). m. burbach, "Early Dominican and Franciscan Legislation Regarding St. Thomas" Mediaeval Studies 4 (1942) 139–158. v. beltrÁn de heredia, "La enseñanza de Santo Tomás en la Compañía de Jesús durante el primer siglo de su existencia," Ciencia tomista 11 (1915) 387–408. c. giacon, La seconda scolastica, 3 v. (Milan 1944–50); Le grandi tesi del tomismo (2d ed. Milan 1948). a. birkenmajer, Vermischte Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Mittelalterlichen Philosophie, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters (Münster 1891–) 20.5 (1922). d. a. callus, The Condemnation of St. Thomas at Oxford (2d ed. Oxford 1955). s. szabÓ, ed., Xenia thomistica, 3 v. (Rome 1925). g. m. manser, Das Wesen des Thomismus (Thomistische Studien 5; 3d ed. Fribourg 1949). n. del prado, De veritate fundamentali philosophiae christianae (Fribourg 1911). a.g. sertillanges, Les Grandes thèses de la philosophie thomiste (Paris 1928), Eng. Foundations of Thomistic Philosophy, tr. g. anstruther (St. Louis 1931), É. h. gilson, The Christian Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas, tr. l. k. shook (New York 1956); The Spirit of Thomism (New York 1964). b. davies, The Thought of Thomas Aquinas (Oxford 1992). r. ingardia, Thomas Aquinas: International Bibliography, 1977–1990 (Bowling Green, Ohio 1993). t. f. o'meara, Thomas Aquinas Theologian (South Bend, Ind. 1997). j.-p. torrell, Initiation a saint Thomas d'Aquin, v. 1, Sa personne et son oeuvre (Fribourg 1993), v. 2, Saint Thomas d'Aquin, maître spirituel (Fribourg 1996). r. cessario, Les thomisme et les thomistes (Paris 1999). j. f. wippel, The Metaphysical Thought of Thomas Aquinas: From Finite Being to Uncreated Being (Washington, D.C. 2000).

[j. a. weisheipl]