Chapter II St. Thomas Aquinas’s Concept of Ipsum Esse ...

Chapter II

St. Thomas Aquinas's Metaphysical Concept of Ipsum Esse Subsistens

Chapter II

St. Thomas Aquinas's Concept of Ipsum Esse Subsistens

Dei igitur essentia est suum esse.

St. Thomas Aquinas1

Delving into St. Thomas's centre of thinking, i.e., his metaphysical concept of God as Ipsum Esse Subsistens,2 the present chapter is simply divided into three parts. Part I functions as a short introduction. Afterwards, part II deals succinctly with the definitive meaning, characteristic and development of St. Thomas's theocentric concept of being. Finally, part III focuses on the ultimate meaning and reality, as well as the current challenge as regards such a scholastic concept of God by the Common Doctor.

1. Introduction

This chapter attempts to investigate briefly St. Thomas's metaphysical concept of God as IES, in the particular sense that there is no real distinction between being (i.e., esse, existence, or act of existing) and essence in God. 3 In the words of Stefan Swiezawski, "God is the only being [ens] in which the union of potential and realization, the composition of essence and existence, disappears. This composition is not needed here because God is existence [esse] itself."4 Here, we are at the very heart of St. Thomas's metaphysical thinking. As we shall see, IES, i.e., Subsistent Being Itself, Self-Subsistent Existence,5 or Subsistent Act of Existing or Existence Itself,6 may be

1 St. Thomas Aquinas, De Veritate Catholicae Fidei Contra Gentiles [Summa Contra Gentiles], in: Opera Omnia, Tomus V (Parmae: Typis Petri Fiaccadori, 1855), Lib.I, Cap.XXII. 2 Cf. Ralph McInery, Aquinas (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2004), pp. 89-92. 3 Cf. ?tienne Gilson, Thomism: The philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. A translation of the sixth and final edition of Gilson's chef d'oeuvre by Laurence K. Shook and Armand A. Maurer (Ontario, Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2002 [1919, 1922, 1927, 1942, 1944, 1965 in French]), p. 94. 4 Cf. Stefan Swiezawski, St. Thomas Revisited, trans. Theresa Sandok, OSM (New York and Paris: Peter Lang, 1995), pp. 46-47. It appears that "potential" in this statement made by Swiezawski here means "potency" and, at the same time, "realization" connotes "act." Cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, Quaestiones Disputatae De Potentia Dei, q.7, a.2, ad.1: "Ergo esse Dei est ejus substantia." To avoid confusion, the Latin equivalents of `being' [ens] and `existence' [esse] in this important quotation are bracketed. 5 St. Thomas Aquinas also says: "Deus sit ipsum esse subsistens." St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Pt.I, q.4. a.2; cf. Ibid., 1, q.3, a. 4; Stefan Swiezawski, St. Thomas Revisited, pp. 44-46.

22

Chapter II

St. Thomas Aquinas's Metaphysical Concept of Ipsum Esse Subsistens

looked upon as the very key which can lead us through the whole of St. Thomas's onto-theological philosophy7 or theology8.

Referring to St. Thomas's concept of Ipsum Esse Subsistens, Jacques Maritain (1882-1973) succinctly commented, "in saying `Subsistent Being itself,' namely that `in Him there is no real distinction between essence and existence [esse],' the metaphysician designates, without seeing it, the sacred abyss which makes the angels tremble with love and awe."9 Indeed, this equation that God's Essence equates to His Esse (Existence or Act of Existing), or God's Esse being the same as His Essence, is, metaphorically speaking, "like a formula in chemistry which would set off an immense explosion."10 On the other hand, for those who do not seem to understand ---- in concept and experience ---- this scholastic expression of IES as regards His Esse and Essence, even the most sympathetic treatment of it cannot wholly justify such a mediaeval articulation.11 Such a lack of understanding may explain why so many people today, including even a vast number of Christians, are no longer taking Subsistent Being Itself seriously.

Nevertheless, should the Thomistic concept of IES possess such a profound URAM and incredible consequence for us as noted by Maritain, it becomes imperative that, for the benefits of many today and tomorrow, this metaphysical concept and consequence are to be duly explored. As it is, that is precisely what this chapter is aiming to explore, at least as an initial endeavour. We will, therefore, first attempt to handle tersely the very meaning, characteristics and philosophical development of Thomistic metaphysics in light of some historical background. Afterwards, we will deal with the URAM and the immense challenge for us today with respect to such a metaphysical concept of the

6 Cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, On Being and Essence, p. 50. 7 Vincent Shen () succinctly states that the metaphysics of St. Thomas is a superb model of ontotheology. Cf. 158 8 Thomistic philosophy or theology may be viewed as a Christian philosophy in the Gilsonian sense. Cf. footnote 114 in Chapter I. 9 Jacques Maritain, Distinguish to Unite, or The Degrees of Knowledge. Newly translated from the fourth French edition under the supervision of Gerald B. Phelan (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1959), p. 230. Following Maritain, the author will use Him for Subsistent Being Itself or God henceforth. 10 Fergus Kerr, O.P., After Aquinas: Versions of Thomism (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2002), p. 73. 11 Cf. Ibid.

23

Chapter II

Angelic Doctor.

St. Thomas Aquinas's Metaphysical Concept of Ipsum Esse Subsistens

2. Meaning, Characteristics and Development of the Thomistic Metaphysics

Philosophy, literally, is "the love of wisdom."12 This love of wisdom may also be understood as the continuous pursuit of the knowledge of human reason with respect to the URAM of (a) what really exists in the totality of reality, and (b) the existence and purpose of the human being in the world. 13 Philosophy, therefore, is inextricably metaphysical. At the core of Western philosophy,14 metaphysics may be divided into (a) general metaphysics and (b) special metaphysics.

On the one hand, as in the case of general metaphysics, metaphysics may be defined as ontology. Such a general study focuses on the general, universal study of the esse (act of existence) of beings (entia, plural of ens), as well as their attributes and principles in general.15 On the other hand, as in the case of special metaphysics, metaphysics may be defined as the special study of the esse of beings (as well as their attributes and principles of beings) according to three main classifications, i.e., cosmology, psychology (i.e., philosophical anthropology) and theodicy (i.e., natural theology).16

In fact, Western philosophy is viewed by Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) as essentially metaphysical.17 If what really exists is symbolized by the existence of `the Uncreated Being' and `created beings' in the totality of reality, traditional metaphysics as

12 Johannes B. Lotz, "Philosophy," in: Philosophical Dictionary, in: Walter Brugger (editor of the original German edition), Philosophical Dictionary. Translated and edited by Kenneth Baker (Spokane, Washington: Gonzaga University Press, 1974), p. 307; cf. 409 13 According to Lotz, "Philosophy means literally the love of wisdom. The name itself indicates that man can never perfectly possess a comprehensive understanding of all that is meant by wisdom but continually and ardently strives for it. With regards to what it does, philosophy is that knowledge of human reason which penetrates to the ultimate foundations of things; and it is concerned with all reality, but especially with the existence and purpose of man." Ibid. 14 Cf. 13 15 Cf. Ibid., p. 25. 16 Cf. Ibid., p. 21. 17 Cf. Thomas Langan, The Meaning of Heidegger. A critical study of an existentialist phenomenology (New York and London: Columbia University Press, 1966 [1959]), pp. 8-9.

24

Chapter II

St. Thomas Aquinas's Metaphysical Concept of Ipsum Esse Subsistens

a whole has been seeking after the URAM as regards the esse of the Uncreated Being and created beings. On the one hand, the Uncreated Being may be identified as the Divine Being,18 the Supreme Being, the Eternal One, or the URAM of URAMs pertaining to all created beings. Thus, IES, the Christian God of St. Thomas, may also be identified as the Uncreated Being Itself, existing, to begin with, in the eternal, uncreated or transcendent realm. On the other hand, "created beings" may be viewed as a plural term or symbol representing all created things (or existents) existing in the temporal, created and immanent realm.19 By all appearances, the Uncreated Being and created beings are inseparable in the traditional pursuit of metaphysical knowledge.

On reflection, the history of Western philosophy can be divided into three general

periods, i.e., the Ancient Greek Period, the Mediaeval Christian Period, and the ModernPostmodern Period.20 At the same time, the whole of Western philosophy may be

summarily characterized in terms of the Uncreated Being and created beings. In such a

frame of mind, the Ancient Greek Period would seem to be rather explorative. It may be

represented by Thales (c.636-c.546 B.C.), Anaximander (c.611-c.547 B.C.), Anaximenes

(c.586-c.525 B.C.), Pythagoras (c.582-c.507 B.C.), Xenophanes (c.560?c.478 B.C.),

Parmenides (b. c.515 B.C.), Empedocles (c.495-c.435 B.C.), Socrates (469-399 B.C.),

Plato (c.427-347 B.C.) and Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), etc. By and large, this ancient period

seems to be seeking for a metaphysics of the Uncreated Being and created beings without

a definitive, consistent knowledge or supernatural faith in the ultimate, eternal Uncreated

18 One may compare, for example, the Uncreated Divine Being with the first division of nature in the totality of reality according to Joannes Scotus Eriugena. "The first is the division into what creates and is not created; the second into what is created and creates; the third, into what is created and does not create; the fourth, into what neither creates nor is created." Johannes Scotus Eriugena (John the Scot), Periphyseon: On the division of nature (Indianapolis, Indiana: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1976), p. 2. 19 Further, one may compare the created beings to the third division of Eriugena. Cf. ibid. The second and the fourth are not applicable here. At least, they do not interfere with our twofold division of what really exists in the totality of reality. 20 This threefold division is based on the author's observation of the varying threefold divisions worked out or followed by several quotable authors, with respect to the history of Western philosophy. For example, Bertrand Russell's threefold division in his work History of Western Philosophy is depicted in terms of the Ancient Philosophy, the Catholic Philosophy, and the Modern Philosophy. Cf. Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1967 [1946]), pp. 1ff. But this book does not include what has happened in the 20th century and so on. Furthermore, Richard Tarnas in his work The Passion of the Western Mind describes the history of Western philosophy in terms of the Greek world view, the Christian world view, and the Modern world view. Cf. Richard Tarnas, The Passion of the Western Mind (New York: Ballantine Books, 1993[1991]), pp.1ff.

25

Chapter II

Divine Being.

St. Thomas Aquinas's Metaphysical Concept of Ipsum Esse Subsistens

Simultaneously, the Mediaeval Christian Period may be viewed as quite affirmative. This age is represented possibly by St. Gregory of Nyssa (c.335-394), St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430 A.D.), Boethius (c.475-525), Johannes Scotus Eriugena (c.800-c.877 A.D.), St. Anselm of Canterbury (c.1033-1109), Peter Abelard (1079-c.1142), St. Thomas Aquinas (c.1225-1274), Meister Eckhart (c.1260-1328), St. Gregory Palamas (c.12961359), St. Bonaventura (c.1217-1274), John Wycliffe (1320-1384), etc. In general, this period covering the Middle Ages seems to seek after a metaphysics of the Uncreated Being and created beings grounded upon the sure foundation of faith in the Supreme Being as revealed in the Christian Bible. Fundamentally, such a way of thinking tends to be theocentric, i.e., focused on God the Uncreated Divine Being or the Subsistent Being Itself. Although the Mediaeval Age has been viewed by many today as the so-called Dark Ages, it might have to be reconceived as the Glorious Ages insofar as its brilliant achievements in philosophy, theology, religion, spirituality, arts and literature, etc., are concerned.21

Finally, the Modern-Postmodern Period appears to be looking for an increasingly pluralistic metaphysics based on its knowledge of created beings alone. This period is represented more or less by Ren? Descartes (1596-1650), Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), David Hume (1711-1716), Georg W. F. Hegel (1770-1831), Karl Marx (1818-1883), Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), Edmund Husserl (1859-1938), John Dewey (1859-1952), Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951), Bertrand Russell (1872-1970), Martin Heidegger (1889-1976), Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980), Michel Foucault (1926-1984), Jacques Derrida (1930-2004), J?rgen Habermas (1929- ), etc.

21 According to the perceptive insights of Thom? H. Fang () , dark ages () ( ) 3

26

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download