This slender volume is a polemical work on two fronts. First and foremost, it is an attempt to distinguish sharply the aim of Aquinas from that of post-Cartesian rationalism with respect to the role of philosophical argumentation in establishing the existence of God. Cartesian rationalism holds that it is possible to articulate presuppositionless, universal, compelling, and purely philosophical reasons to justify a foundational belief in God. Velecky criticizes this view on Wittgensteinian grounds and holds that there are significant affinities between (...) Aquinas and Wittgenstein on the relationship between religious belief and philosophical justification. What counts as a good philosophical case for the existence of God is always relative to the existential situation of the inquirer. So-called proofs for the existence of God are really attempts to formulate corroborating intellectual grounds for a belief that one has already come to on the basis of God's self-revelation, faith, and personal encounter. Belief in the proposition "that God exists" is not a statement reporting the existence of an item encounterable in our normal experience or the conclusion of an argument, but rather expresses the adoption of an entirely distinct perspective on the whole of reality. So when Aquinas describes arguments for the existence of God as preambula fidei, he does not mean that they are prior to faith as epistemologically necessary conditions for belief, but rather that they are logically required by faith in a different sense. It must be possible to locate or refer to the object of religious belief within a universe of philosophical discourse; or, to put it another way, it must be possible to give some content to the notion of divinity. The function of Aquinas's arguments is thus to make the proposition Deum esse intelligible within the universe of broadly Aristotelian discourse. This is especially important if believers want to have any kind of conversation with nonbelievers. Velecky writes: "At the conclusion of the Five Arguments nothing more--and nothing less--has been achieved than that a reasonable philosophical case has been made for a topic of conversation between Christians and others about the basic characterization of something which is thought to be the transcendent cause of all beings and which has left some traces of its transcendence in the world we can experience". Velecky's Wittgensteinian reading of Aquinas is a welcome antidote to the more usual Cartesian reading. But while Velecky is careful to distinguish Aquinas from Wittgensteinian fideism, nevertheless his overall strategy comes dangerously close to pushing Aquinas too far in that direction; Aquinas is neither Cartesian nor Wittgensteinian. (shrink)

Clarke acknowledges in his collected essays that he is a "Thomistically inspired" metaphysician rather than simply "Thomistic," because his principal aim is the creative retrieval and completion of Aquinas's metaphysics in the light of contemporary thought. Self-styled Thomists will inevitably and justifiably contest some of Clarke's creative completions of Aquinas, preferring the original to the interpretation, yet they can learn from his efforts at retrieval. While Clarke claims that his main interest is not historical exposition, two early essays show him (...) eminently capable of such writing. One is a classic exposition of how Aquinas transformed the Aristotelian act-potency theory to do the work of explaining the metaphysical composition of esse and essentia within a Neoplatonically inspired participation schema wherein act is considered to be intrinsically unlimited. The second is a general account of participation in Aquinas which displays Clarke's early assimilation of this central theme and his deep grounding in the European scholarship that transformed the landscape of Thomism at the midpoint of this century. (shrink)

This book is the first installment in a projected three volume critical analysis and creative appropriation of Aquinas’s natural theology in Summa contra gentiles I–III. The target audience seems to be contemporary Anglo-American philosophers of religion. Kretzmann wants to promote a greater integration of philosophy and theology through the pursuit of a metaphysics of theism. He claims that theology and philosophy both offer versions of a “Grandest Unified Theory” and what he proposes in this volume is a theology from the (...) bottom up that will establish what can be known of God through reason alone, in order subsequently to pursue a metaphysics from the top down that will begin with God and show the relationship of everything else to God. (shrink)