Follow Aquinas: Put His Works to the Flame

Last updated on: February 18, 2020 at 4:02 pm by Henry Karlson

Follow Aquinas: Put His Works to the Flame 2020-02-18T16:02:13-05:00 Henry Karlson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Thomas on a Shelf: Photograph by Henry Karlson

Near the end of his life, St. Thomas Aquinas had a mystical experience. He had an encounter with God which literally left him speechless. It shook up to the core of his being. He felt that what he had written, in relation to what he learned from it, was meaningless, useless straw which was worthy of being put to flames. He didn’t want to write any more, and despite the pleas of friends and colleagues, he did not finish his greatest work, the Summa Theologica.

Indeed, though his theological work was left undone, it is in this state which he best presents the mystical experience he had. For in such action, he demonstrated another theological principle: no human system, no human construct which tries to establish the fullness of truth is capable of doing so. All such systems remains conventions serve us in our search for meaning, giving us some little understanding of truth, but they cannot in and of themselves, comprehend the truth. Any such attempt is doomed to failure. And St. Thomas, thanks be to God, was able to see such and embrace such failure by allowing his work to never be complete. It served, therefore, as his final lesson to his readers, warning them against taking too much stock in the words, in the construct which he created.

If he attempted, and indeed, seemed to present a complete system, its closed-ended nature would have made it more difficult for others to embrace it. Its failings would be more evident, and the nuances of his words, of his philosophical system would become more important than what he intended to teach. For when a closed system is presented, it encourages others to look about, knock it around, and find a way to dismantle it in order to present their own little system. But here, being open-ended, he gave his readers more flexibility and freedom to complement with their own theological intuitions instead of feeling trapped within the confines of a closed-ended system. Instead of feeling the need to look around and find where it falters, his readers are encouraged to look around and find what they can lift and use, and work together instead of in contradiction with the Angelic Doctor.

Now, we must not take Thomas’ own words literally, that is, we must not take his words so as to suggest he felt there was nothing good or accomplished by what he had written. Instead, his words indicate that he was concerned with the way his students, those who would come after him, would take his works, as if the letter of what he said, instead of the spirit of what he wrote, was most important, as Simon Tugwell properly explained:

The comment that all he had written seemed like straw should certainly not be taken as a belated realization that is life’s work had been a waste of time. He had always maintained that the object of theology is God, not talking about God; but in this life we cannot approach God except by using words. “Straw” is a conventional image for the literal sense of scripture, which is worth having, even if it is only a beginning. Words can lead us to reality. [1]

This goes back to the notion, found in Scripture itself, that we are to seek the spirit of the text, not the letter, because the letter leads to the dead end found in the confines of the words, while the spirit points beyond the words to what the words intend to mean:

Such is the confidence that we have through Christ toward God. Not that we are competent of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us; our competence is from God, who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not in a written code but in the Spirit; for the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life (2Cor. 3:4-6 RSV).

The Spirit gives life, not just to Scripture, but to theology itself. This is especially true for the works of St. Thomas Aquinas. So long as we are caught into the letter of a particular text, and focus on the narrow confines of the text instead of what the Thomas intended to teach, we will eventually find ourselves stuck in a theological dead end. There is, to be sure, value in exploring the letter, of what can come out of it, but it is the beginning, not the end of the task: if the letter fails to attain its goal, then the letter itself should be “put to flames” and we seek another, better way to address the meaning Thomas intended.

Sadly, after Pope Leo XIII promulgated the encyclical Aeterni Patris, where the philosophical works of St. Thomas Aquinas were promoted as an ideal, many would-be followers of Thomas went directly towards a study of the words, and the letter of the text, ignoring the spirit behind it. They got caught up in promoting the littlest of nuances which can be brought forth from St. Thomas’ system, trying to close it in on itself, instead of working with the spirit of the text and complementing it with the vitality the text needed to continue to be relevant to us today. The way St. Thomas was willing to explore and gain from anyone, even those he opposed (such as Muslims), is lost by many a would-be Neo-Thomist who would forbid anyone following his method because it leads to conclusions outside of the dead letter of his system. Pope Leo XIII was right to recommend Thomas as a great, central example of Christian Philosophy and Theology done right, but in doing so, so many misconstrued Thomas and tried to take out of the flames that which Thomas confined to them. Neo-Thomists should listen to Copleston, when he wrote:

To claim that Thomism is a balanced philosophy involves claiming that it is capable of doing justice to different aspects of reality without turning one aspect into the whole. But it does not involve the claim that the integration of philosophical truth was finally accomplished by Aquinas. And there is at least one sense in which the Thomist himself can say, ‘We cannot go back to the Middle Ages; we cannot go back to Aquinas’. If we are considering Aquinas’ philosophy from its purely historical view, the fact that he said this or that is obviously of prime importance. But if we are considering Thomism as a living and developing philosophy, it is the philosophical positions themselves which count, and the fact that Thomas Aquinas held them in the thirteenth century is not strictly relevant [2].

Thomas offers much to us. There is every reason for us to be interested in what he can teach us. He is one of the brightest, wisest of teachers. But we should seek what we can learn from Thomas, not just in and through the letter of his text, but in what lies behind it, the method which he used, which brings us to wisdom like it did for him. We should follow with his method and take in truth wherever we find it and adding it to our own theological and philosophical reasoning, instead of staying focused upon and continue to preach a particular text which is dead and worthy of being thrown into the flames. Sadly, I find many Thomists, instead of following Thomas in his method, find themselves more concerned with the straw than what Thomas wanted us to learn from him. This is why I am sad when I see so many quoting Thomas as if he answered all questions and his words stops all debates. He didn’t, and they don’t.

This is why I have said to others that I believe there are two different kinds of Thomists, one which I find dangerous, and the other I readily applaud and respect. The first is those who follow his words, and the second are those who follow him in his actions. The first, I find, idolize every word he wrote and try to gather life from the dead letter, while the other understand his wisdom and so like him burn the words to get the proper meaning out of them and have life. Let us never fall for the trap which the first group of Thomists have set upon themselves, and instead embrace Thomas with the constant pursuit of truth, recognizing, like him, that in the end, the best presentation of truth can be found in silence.

[1] Simon Tugwell, O.P., “Aquinas: Introduction” in Albert & Thomas. Selected Writings. trans., ed. and intr. Simon Tugwell, O.P. (Paulist Press: New York, 1988), 266.

[2] F.C. Copleston, Aquinas (Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1963), 254.

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook:

A Little Bit of Nothing

Previous Post

February 14, 2016

Marian Reflections I: Mary Our Mother

Next Post

February 18, 2016 After Aquinas, Palamas

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Abortion Abraham abuse Aesthetics AI Aliens Ambrose Ancestors and Everything Andrew Angels Animals Anne Anthony Antisemitism apologetics Apophatic Apostle John Aquinas Artificial Intelligence Asanga Ascension Asceticism Assumption Atheism Attachment Augustine Authority Avarice Balthasar Baptism Beauty Biden birthright citizenship Bishops Black History Books Buddhism Bulgakov Byzantine Calendar C.S. Lewis Calcidius Catholic Catholicism Catholicism Celibacy Charity Chastity children Chrismation Christ Christmas Christology Church Climate Change Common Good Communion Confession Confirmation Conscience Constantine conventions conversion councils Covid Creation Cross Dead Death Death Penalty Debate Deception Demagogues Demons Desert Monks Desert Mothers Desire destruction development Dialogue Dignity Dionsyius Dionysius Discipline Diversity Division Doctor Who doctrine dogma Dormition Dualism Easter Easter Series Ecumenical Councils Ecumenism Education Election Empathy Environment Error Eschatology eschaton Eternity Ethics Eucharist Evangelism Eve Evil evolution Faeries Faith Fear femininity Ficino Florence Florensky Folktale Fools Forgiveness Freedom Future gender Gentile Gentiles Glory Gnostic God gods Good Samaritan Goodness Gospel Government Grace Great Fast Guns Hate healing Health Heaven Hell Hellenism Heresy Hierarchy Hildegard Hinduism History Holiness Holy Spirit Holy Week Hope Horror Human rights humanity Humility hypocrisy ICE icon icons Identification Identity Idol II Nicea Immigration incarnation Individualism Informal Reflections Inklings Intention Inter-Religious Interfaith Internet Interpretation Intrinsic evil Irenaeus Islam Israel Jacob Jerome Jesus Jews John Chrysostom John of Damascus John the Baptist Joseph Judaism justice Justification kenosis Kindnesss Kingdom of God Kingdom of Heaven Law Law of Moses Lazarus Leaf by Niggle Lent Lenten Reflection Liberation Theology Lies Life Listen Literature Liturgy locutions Logic Logos Love Marriage Martyrs Mary Mass Maximos The Confessor Meanness Meditation Mercy Middle Path Migrants Mind Miracles Miriam Morals Moses Movies Music Muslims Myths Names Nationalism Native Americans New Year Nicea Nicholas Nothing Novatian Obedience Occam's Razor Ordination Origen Original Sin Orthodox orthopraxis Pagans Palamas Palm Sunday Paradise Paschaltide Paul Peace Pentecost person Peter piety PKD Plato pluralism Plurality Poem Poetry Poiltics Politics Poor Pope Pope Francis Pope Leo XIV Post Office Prayer Pride Pro-life Prodigal Son propaganda Prophecy Prophets Providence Putin Racism Reading Reason Reflection Refugees Relationships Religion Religion Series Religious Liberty Repent Republicans Rest Resurrection Rich Rites Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation Salvian Santa Science Scripture Self-Giving Sexuality Sibyl Sick Silence Sin Singlehood Social Justice Society Sodom Solovyov Speculations Spiritual Reflection St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Justin Martyr Suffering Sunday of the Paralytic Man Sunday of the Samaritan Woman Superhero Supreme Court Teaching Technology Thanksgiving The Father the Universe Theological Reflection Theology Theosis Theotokos Thomas Timaeus Time Tolerenace Tolkien Tradition Transfiguration Trinity Trump Truth Uncategorized Unity Universities USCCB Value Vatican II Vegetarian Vices Violence Virtue Vocations War Water Welcome Wisdom Womanhood Women Work World View Worship Writing Zacchaeus

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz