  St Thomas as modern as he is medieval?, 2008-12-17
Chesterton had converted to Catholicism in 1922 and in 1923 had published a book on St Francis of Assisi. He is clearly a partisan for Catholicism against Protestantism and the modern world; for the `living' Middle Ages against the Renaissance `which was a resurrection of old things discovered in a dead thing'; and for the Aristotelian view against the Platonic, neo-Platonic, and what he calls the neo-neo-Platonic view of the Renaissance. And he lays about himself lustily against thinkers with whom he disagrees: Francis Bacon, for example was `third-rate' and Hegel was `mad'. Soberly abstract though St Thomas often is, his abstractions, according to Chesterton, are never cloudy nonsense and are always rooted in Common Sense.
The brilliant opening chapter of the book is built around a comparison between St Francis and St Thomas - very different in character, appearance and in the aspects of Christianity which they developed; but Chesterton stresses that, though they were both accused by their detractors of corrupting Christianity by importing into it a pagan goddess (Nature) or a pagan sage (Aristotle), both actually expanded the possibilities and implications of Christian doctrine from within, "depending on external things only as every living and growing thing depends on them; that is, it digests and transforms them, but continues in its own image and not in theirs", so that "St Thomas did not reconcile Christ to Aristotle; he reconciled Aristotle to Christ."
The book is sometimes quite difficult: it assumes some familiarity with philosophy and theology (though it delights in showing that those who think they are familiar with them often labour under vulgar misconceptions). Actually it even assumes that the reader is familiar with St Thomas' ideas; for this is no way a text-book that gives a clear or methodical account of what St Thomas actually wrote. It occasionally makes comparisons with modern times with which a reader of the 1930s was perhaps more familiar than a reader of today. Many pages are a bit windy. But Chesterton's style is a delight to read: it is mixture of Carlyle and of a more modern version of Gibbon in that it delights in apparent paradoxes and in witty confrontations of opposite verbal phrases. His admiration for St Thomas is unbounded; but even those who do not share the faith of St Thomas (or that of Chesterton) will still find some formulations throughout this book which are as wonderfully happy as they are wise, insightful and thought-provoking.
A delightful book!, 2005-08-17
I first read this book 5 years ago when taking an undergraduate course in mediaeval philosophy. At that time I was only passingly familiar with Chesterton and, despite faithful attendence in class, only noddingly familiar with Aquinas. Since that time I have come to understand both men in more depth, and since that time this little book has grown and shimmered until, much to my surprise, it has became one of my favourite books of all.All of the usual caveats about Chesterton's writing apply here: he cannot resist a digression, he cannot resist an alliterative allusion, he cannot resist a pun. He is so full of life that he is constantly threatening to spin out of control. He is not a scholar, he is not writing a sober appraisal, he is probably not sure of most of the biographical details of his subject (and he candidly admits to this dearth of dates and details). In spite of these defects, the book is a triumph. Toast it with your best wine. Chesterton, for me, is the embodiment of "A Man in Full"; he is the polar opposite of C.S. Lewis' "Men without Chests". He is so full of good sense, penetrating insight, sound moral judgement, and the joy of life that it is all spilling out in every direction. This is criticism in an old key; it is appreciative criticism; it is an encounter with a writer by an entire man, and not just by a theory. It is wonderfully refreshing. I don't know of anyone writing today in a similar vein. He brings all of his larger-than-life presence to bear on this account of the life (sort of) and thought of one of history's great minds. And on just what aspect of Thomas' thought does he focus? In one diabolically politically incorrect section near the end of the book he bellows out that "on a map like the mind of Aquinas the mind of Luther was barely a speck", and I'm sure that he would hasten to add that his little book suffers the same ignoble comparison. There is a great deal to Thomas that he, of necessity, leaves out. But what he does include is very astutely chosen, for he understands the basic structure of Thomas' thought and emphasizes the essentials. Thus there is a chapter on Thomas' argument with the Manicheans and his affirmation of the goodness of the world. He treats with great aplomb Thomas' notion of "being" and its relation to God. He does great honor to Thomas' mode of argumentation, to his sober balance and fair treatment of opponents. He is appreciative of the devotional side of Thomas, which does not come through explicitly in his philosophical writings but is important for an understanding of the man. I suppose it must be granted that the book is as much about Chesterton as it is about Aquinas. Those wanting a more straight-forward treatment should seek out one of Josef Pieper's books on Aquinas. But if you have any adventurous spirit, by all means read this book. It is written by a man who loves and understands his subject in his very bones, and who brings his subject to life in a way that is most uncanny. Five stars.
Ancient and modern: Chesterton on Aquinas, 2002-06-20
One of Chesterton's highly acclaimed short biographies, writing just before WWII he called this 'a popular sketch of a great historical character who ought to be more popular'. St Thomas Aquinas (1226-1274) was born into an aristocratic Italian family and forsook his privileged position, took a vow of poverty, and became a Dominican monk. A brilliant thinker, and revolutionary in his day, he proceeded to become one of the most influential philosophers and theologians that has lived. It explains how Aquinas' influenced thinkers in his day and how that thought is an influential strand in our modern worldview. Several experts on Aquinas have acclaimed this very enjoyable book as the finest introduction to the man and his works. It introduces the man himself and some of his philosophy, which is modern and scientific in tone. This is not to be surprised at when we consider that his university professor was Albertus Magnus, who paved the way for modern science by taking certain elements of Aristotle more seriously than anyone before. Aquinas' theology is not covered on grounds of space and complexity. Chesterton is writing at his best, and while he assumes a fair degree of knowledge on the part of the reader he covers a great deal of ground in a short space. His usual paradoxical sense of fun and wordplay is to the fore. Chapter seven, 'The Permanent Philosophy' is excellent, and at only twelve pages would serve as a good primer of philosophy, something to read before and alongside Bertrand Russell's 'The Problems of Philosophy' perhaps.
|
