On the Study of the Doctrine of St. Thomas

To n. 700 bis. ON THE STUDY OF THE DOCTRINE OF ST. THOMAS

"...Since it had been said by Us that chiefly the philosophy of Aquinas was to be followed, not uniquely, some persuaded themselves that they obeyed Our will, or at least did not resist it, if they held promiscuously as things to be followed whatever any one of the scholastic Doctors had handed down in philosophy, even though these were repugnant to the principles of St. Thomas. But their mind greatly deceived them. It is plain that when We gave Thomas as the principal guide of scholastic philosophy to our people, We wished this to be understood especially of his principles, on which, as on foundations, it rests. For just as that opinion of certain ancients is to be rejected, that it makes no difference to the truth of the Faith what each one thinks concerning created things, provided that he thinks rightly concerning God, since error concerning the nature of things brings forth false knowledge of God; so the principles of philosophy posited by Aquinas are to be preserved holy and inviolate, by which both such knowledge of created things is obtained as most fittingly agrees with Faith (Contra Gentiles, book 2, c. 3 and 2), and all the errors of all ages are refuted; and it is permitted to recognize with certainty those things which belong to God alone and are to be attributed to no one besides Him (Ib. c. 3 and 1, q. 12, a. 4; and q. 54, a. 1); and wonderfully is illustrated both the diversity and the analogy which exists between God and His works. This diversity and analogy indeed the Fourth Lateran Council had expressed thus: 'between Creator and creature there cannot be noted so great a likeness that a greater unlikeness is not to be noted between them' (Decretal II, Damnamus ergo, etc. Cf. S. Thom., Quaest. Disp. De scientia Dei, art. 11). - Moreover, if we speak of these principles of Thomas generally and universally, they contain nothing other than what the noblest of the philosophers and the chief Doctors of the Church had found by meditating and arguing concerning the proper reasons of human knowledge, concerning the nature of God and other things, concerning the moral order and the ultimate end of life to be attained. But so splendid a store of wisdom as this, which he received from the elders and by his almost angelic faculty of mind polished and increased and applied to sacred doctrine for preparing, illustrating, and defending it in human minds (In librum Boethii De Trinitate, quaest. 2, art. 3), sound reason does not wish to be neglected, nor does Religion permit it to be diminished in any part. All the more because, if Catholic truth should once be destitute of this powerful defense, in vain would one seek for support to defend it from that philosophy whose principles are either common with Materialism, Monism, Pantheism, Socialism, and the various errors of Modernism, or certainly are not opposed to them. For those things which are chief points in the philosophy of St. Thomas ought not to be held in the genus of opinions, concerning which it is permitted to dispute on either side, but as foundations on which all knowledge of natural and divine things consists; and if these are removed or in any way depraved, this also necessarily follows, that the students of the sacred disciplines do not even perceive the very meaning of the words by which divinely revealed dogmas are proposed by the magisterium of the Church.

Therefore We have already wished all who devote labor to handing down philosophy and sacred theology to be admonished of this: if they departed from Aquinas by even any trace, especially in metaphysics, it would not be without great detriment. But now We further declare this: that those do not merely not follow Thomas, but wander very far from the holy Doctor, who perversely interpret or altogether contemn those things which in his philosophy are principles and greater pronouncements. But if the doctrine of some author or saint has ever been approved by Us or by Our Predecessors with singular praises, and also in such a way that persuasion and command were added to the praises for spreading and defending it, it is easily understood to have been approved insofar as it cohered with the principles of Aquinas or in no way was opposed to them.

We have judged it of the Apostolic office to declare and prescribe these things, so that in a matter of the greatest importance, all who are from both clergy, secular and regular, may have Our mind and will thoroughly understood, and may effect them with that alacrity and diligence which is fitting. But the teachers of Christian philosophy and sacred theology will fulfill this with a certain special zeal, who indeed ought well to remember that the power of teaching was not therefore made for them so that they may communicate their own preferred opinions to the students of their discipline, but so that they may impart to them the most approved doctrines of the Church.

Now, as regards sacred theology properly, We will that the study of this discipline always be illustrated by the light of that philosophy of which We have spoken; but in common seminaries of clerics, provided suitable teachers are present, it is lawful to use the books of those authors who set forth in summary form the doctrines derived from the fountain of Aquinas; books of this kind are available, and highly approved.

But for cultivating this discipline more deeply, just as it ought to be cultivated in Universities of studies and great Athenaea, and also in all those Seminaries and Institutes to which the power has been given of conferring academic degrees, it is altogether necessary, with the ancient custom recalled, which never ought to have fallen away, that classes be held on the Summa Theologica itself; also for this reason, that by commenting on this book it will be easier to understand and illustrate the solemn decrees and acts of the teaching Church, which have been published thereafter. For after the blessed death of the holy Doctor, no Council has been held by the Church in which he himself was not present with the riches of his doctrine....

Therefore "that the genuine and entire doctrine of St. Thomas may flourish in the schools, which is especially dear to Us," and that "that manner of teaching, which rests on the authority and judgment of individual teachers," may now be removed, and on account of that "has a changeable foundation, from which diverse opinions, often fighting among themselves, arise ... not without great detriment to Christian knowledge" (Leo XIII, Epist. Qui te, dated the day 19 June 1886), We will, command, and prescribe that those who hold the teaching office of sacred theology in Universities, great Lyceums, Colleges, Seminaries, and Institutes which have from apostolic indult the power of conferring academic degrees and the laurea in the same discipline, have the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas as the text of their lectures, and explain it in the Latin tongue; and place diligent labor in this, that their hearers may be excellently affected toward it. This has already laudably been customary in several Institutes; this very thing the most wise Founders of Religious Orders wished to be done in their houses of studies, with Our Predecessors indeed greatly approving; nor did holy men who were after the times of Aquinas have any other supreme teacher of doctrine for themselves except Thomas. But thus, and not otherwise, it will come about that not only will theology be recalled to its former dignity, but also to all sacred disciplines their own order and their own weight will be restored, and whatever is held by intelligence and reason will in some way grow green again.

Wherefore in the future there will be granted to no Institute any power of conferring academic degrees in sacred theology, unless that which has here been prescribed by Us is observed holily among it. But Institutes or Faculties, also of Orders and Regular Congregations, which already legitimately have power of this sort to confer academic degrees in theology, or similar documents, even only within domestic limits, will be deprived and are to be regarded as deprived of the same, if after three years, for any cause whatever, even one by no means voluntary, they have not religiously obeyed this prescription of Ours.

And these things We establish, notwithstanding anything to the contrary." Pius X, M. P. Doctoris Angelici, 29 June 1914. For Italy and the adjacent islands. A. A. S. v. 6, p. 336 ff.