In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • Thomas Aquinas and His Predecessors: Philosophers and the Church Fathers in His Works by Leo Elders
  • Jude P. Dougherty
ELDERS, Leo. Thomas Aquinas and His Predecessors: Philosophers and the Church Fathers in His Works. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2018. xv + 381 pp. Cloth, $75.00

This is a valuable survey of the sources that Thomas Aquinas consulted in the development of his philosophy and theology. It is not merely a textual survey of those sources, but an account of how Thomas related to or assessed the authors he consulted. In writing the book, Professor Leo Elders has not only drawn on his knowledge of the works of Thomas Aquinas, but also has utilized the work of scores of secondary sources as he develops his exposition.

The philosophers Thomas drew upon were many, as one may expect: notably, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Seneca, Boethius, Pseudo Dionysius, Augustine, Anselm, Avicenna, Averroes, and Maimonides; and this list is not complete. Among the Church Fathers, he favors Jerome, John Chrysostom, Gregory the Great, and John Damascene. Leo Elders provides this insight: "During the time of the Fathers the dominant thought was a mixture of Platonism and Stoicism with some influence of Gnosticism. Clement of Alexandria and Origin were close Plato, and the Cappadocian Fathers, Gregory of Nazianzus and Basil, who had been educated in Athens, still worked in a Platonic climate but began to use the categories of thought elaborated by Aristotle."

Although Thomas is a thoroughgoing Aristotelian, he will both accept and reject Aristotelian doctrines in the light of his own perspective, a perspective colored by Plato and Augustine. Plato's influence is far from negligible. In his use of Basil and Augustine, Thomas recognizes that they follow the opinions of Plato only to the extent that their faith will allow. Elders observes: "Despite his appreciation of Plato's greatness and the value of certain of his theories, Thomas was convinced that Aristotle offers a greater clarity, stays within limits of available evidence, and demonstrates with greater certitude the existence of immaterial beings." Thomas cites both Aristotle and Plato for their acknowledgment of divine providence.

When commenting on the De Anima, Thomas approves of Aristotle's rejection of Plato's postulate of the existence of intelligible forms separate from the material world. Plato, he thinks, did not understand how the intellect abstracts forms from nature. Aristotle, he thinks, rightly faults Plato's rejection of Heraclitus's doctrine of continuous flux, where he accuses Plato, in his doctrine of the "universal," for ignoring what the senses tell us. Thomas admires Plato when he speaks of "the good" and of God, and when he engages in a quest for the universal cause of being. Thomas finds support for his own position in Plato's doctrine of [End Page 378] participation and in his affirmation of the immortality of the soul and its destiny beyond life on earth. Thomas takes over Plato's four cardinal virtues. He believes that Plato and his school have exercised enormous influence for the good, and have contributed significantly to the development of Christian theology.

A brief review can only hint at the richness of this multilayered volume. There is an important chapter on the state of philosophy in the thirteenth century, wherein Elders describes the intellectual divide between the Faculty of Liberal Arts and the Faculty of Theology at the University of Paris. In the Faculty of Arts, studies were organized around the works of Aristotle. In the Faculty of Theology, students pursued subjects oriented to their careers, notably in the Church.

Subsequent chapters are devoted to the thought of Avicenna and Averroes. Thomas made use of the commentaries of both when interpreting difficult passages in Aristotle, but he did not hesitate to correct both when he encountered dubious interpretations. In the words of the distinguished medievalist Georges Anawati: "Thomas saved Aristotle from Averroes, but he also saved the positive contributions of Averroes." Elders finds that there are 340 references to the thought of Averroes in the writings of Aquinas. He cites a saying that apparently circulated among academics in thirteenth-century Paris: "Aristotle was an interpreter of nature; Averroes an interpreter of Aristotle...

pdf

Share