The Catholic Book Club discussion

1. Have you previously read any biographies of St. Thomas Aquinas? If so, what does Chesterton add to your understanding of the saint? If not, what are some key understandings you feel you've received from Chesterton about Aquinas?

Chesterton's biography of St.Thomas Aquinas is not a typical biography, but it is typical Chesterton. Rather than telling us about the life of his "hero," starting at his birth and ending at his death, Chesterton uses him to attack several current mistakes, such as considering the philosophy of Aquinas outdated because modern philosophers say outraging things about the world. The following long quotation from Chapter 6 expresses exactly what I mean:

(Chesterton writes):
"But I hope Father D’Arcy will forgive me if I take one example from his book, which exactly illustrates what I mean. He, being a trained philosopher, is naturally trained to put up with philosophers. Also, being a trained priest, he is naturally accustomed, not only to suffer fools gladly, but (what is sometimes even harder) to suffer clever people gladly. Above all, his wide reading in metaphysics has made him patient with clever people when they indulge in folly. The consequence is that he can write calmly and even blandly sentences like these.

(D'Arcy's book quotation):
"A certain likeness can be detected between the aim and method of St. Thomas and those of Hegel. There are, however, also remarkable differences. For St. Thomas it is impossible that contradictories should exist together, and again reality and intelligibility correspond, but a thing must first be, to be intelligible."

(Chesterton continues):
Let the man in the street be forgiven, if he adds that the “remarkable difference” seems to him to be that St. Thomas was sane and Hegel was mad. The moron refuses to admit that Hegel can both exist and not exist; or that it can be possible to understand Hegel, if there is no Hegel to understand. Yet Father D’Arcy mentions this Hegelian paradox as if it were all in the day’s work; and of course it is, if the work is reading all the modern philosophers as searchingly and sympathetically as he has done. And this is what I mean saying that all modern philosophy starts with a stumbling-block."

I totally agree with my friend Alfonseca Chesterton did not write the typical biography of Saint Thomas Aquinas. He wrote reflections, and comment with his wit talent, and his sense of humor. He understood more than the expert. It was recognized by an expert Etiene Gilson. It is interesting as Chesterton refferred to other Saint Thomas Aquinas as Maritain, or the own father D`Arcy. The father DÀrcy is a very remarkable clergyman, who participated in the conversion of some catholic English writer. Evelyn Waugh for example. Muriel Spark quoted in a novel "The girl of slenders means". The ather D`Arcy advised to the south african poet Roy Campbell, that he met with the Inklings.
We have to say one thing before to speak about this book Saint Thomas his figure is recovered by the belgian abbey Mercier, and the Pope Leo XIII, who defend his figure, because he was struggled by the protestants and Descartes. With the recovering of Saint Thomas Aquinas inderectly rescued the scholastic system. I thought in Saint Albert Magnus, Roger Bacon, and Saint Bonaventure. Overall this let the catholic church a rational system to defend against his opponent. The two saints that more influenced in the Chestertonian writtings are Saint Thomas Aquinas, and Saint Francis Assissi. And the same hapened with one of the favorite writers of my friend Alfonseca, Dante is influenced by the franciscan, and dominican.
Now i am going to speak about the book the interessting are not the biographical event of Saint Thomas Aquinas. The relevant are the comment of Chesterton aboutSaint Thomas Aquinas, and his observations about Frederic II and the Holy Roman German Empire, the things about the Saint Thomas family. The fight agains Tampier, and overall against Siger of Bravante, and overall as Chesterton replied the modern heresies. My friend Alfonseca quoted Hegel between others. If you want to read a good novel about Saint Thomas Aquinas i recomend this https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5...

I would like to break and spear in favor of the american phylosophy, nowadays you have several tomistic philosophers i think in the american critic and professor Mark van Doren. Recently you have the case of the proffessors Mortimer Adler, and the interesting Ralph McInerny (McInerny a part of his studies about Saint Thomas Aquinas McInerny crate the american version of the Father Brown. The priest detective Dowling, who becomes the Archbishop of Chicago, besides he got the conversion of Mortimer Adler to the catholic religion). A brazilian friend have said me something about Frederick D. Wilhemsen, other thomist, nowadays we have the case of the famous Peter Kreeft. I have sppoken with my friend Alfonseca about this writer, and the much interest that i have in reading it.
Certainly i have a big envy of the american writers where the thomism is very strong despite Benedict XVI leant bu the platonism Saint Bonaventure, and Saint Agustine of Hipo, the tomism is very rigid by him. In the other school for example C.S. Lewis is closer to the Medieval School of Chartres and Plato, and Thomas Merton is a platonic disciple. I am closer to the Saint Thomas Aquinas discipline, perhaps thanks to G.K. Chesteton, but i do not scorn to Agustine of Hipo. I try to choose the best of all. PD. The problem of Saint Agustine a lot of critics, Chesterton is close to fall in this trap consider the precursor of Luther, but it happens the same of Saint Paul. Luther caught and manipulate in his own benefit, and for this reason Saint Agustine has this unfair bad fame.

Manuel wrote: "And this is what I mean saying that all modern philosophy starts with a stumbling-block."

I noted the same long passage. In other words (words for us morons?): modern philosophy starts by laying down an assumption that cannot be, then progresses from that assumption and says this is how the world must work, but it only works because they have assumed the impossible to start. I am not an expert in modern philosophy, or in any philosophy for that matter, but from what little I know of it this observation is spot on. Not surprisingly, the political systems built on those philosophies have been on the whole soaked in blood.

This is my first biography of St. Thomas; on the whole he has a fearsome intellectual reputation and I approach him with some trembling. Chesterton has made St. Thomas approachable. He does this not in the modern sense of reducing the mighty by focusing on their foibles. Indeed, Chesterton makes clear that St. Thomas' achievements were even greater than I had previously understood. But more importantly, he makes clear that the towering intellect was teamed with a true humility and an unshakeable faith.