The Summa Halensis最新文献_第3页

Reading Aristotle with Avicenna 用阿维森纳读亚里士多德

The Summa Halensis Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI: 10.1515/9783110685022-010

引用次数: 0

Evil in Dionysius the Areopagite, Alexander of Hales and Thomas Aquinas 恶在狄奥尼修斯、黑尔斯的亚历山大和托马斯·阿奎那

The Summa Halensis Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI: 10.1515/9783110685022-006

T. Aquinas

{"title":"Evil in Dionysius the Areopagite, Alexander of Hales and Thomas Aquinas","authors":"T. Aquinas","doi":"10.1515/9783110685022-006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110685022-006","url":null,"abstract":": This paper examines Alexander of Hales ’ use and reconciliation of appa-rently dissonant quotations from Dionysius on two related questions, the knowability of God and the origin of evil. Noting that Alexander, as a junior colleague of Robert Grosseteste, was one of the first to make extensive use of Dionysius, it shows that he normally cites him in conjunction with Augustine and other Latin writers rather than according an independent authority to him. It is also argued that, although Alexander in some respects anticipates the conclusions of Aquinas, which are also reinforced by appeals to Dionysius, he is more inclined to admit the substantiality of evil. Theology is distinguished from philosophy, not only by its loftier subject-matter, but by its principled subordination of reason to tradition in the investigation of that sub-ject-matter. No professing Christian before the 18 th century called the inerrancy of the Scriptures into question, and any church that purported to be catholic held fast to the decrees of at least four oecumenical councils, while according presumptive authority also to certain individuals whom it esteemed as fathers, doctors or apologists for the true faith. For the scholastics Augustine was the cynosure of a Latin constel-lation whose lesser stars were Hilary, Ambrose, Jerome, Gregory the Great, Isidore of Seville and (by about 1200) as recent a saint as Anselm; they too, if less often quoted, were not to be contradicted, and the same was true of the easterners John Chrysos-tom and John Damascene, who were now and then co-opted (through Latin versions) to give the stamp of universality to the same truths.We should not infer that all orig-inality was precluded: authority might determine what the church was to believe, but not what means of proving it might be employed by a given exponent, while there were numerous corollaries and implications of these normative tenets on which it was possible for good Christians to differ. To be original meant not so much to estab-lish new beliefs as to show,","PeriodicalId":153743,"journal":{"name":"The Summa Halensis","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132586935","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Praepositinus of Cremona and William of Auxerre on Suppositio

The Summa Halensis Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI: 10.1515/9783110685022-016

Stephen F. Brown

{"title":"Praepositinus of Cremona and William of Auxerre on Suppositio","authors":"Stephen F. Brown","doi":"10.1515/9783110685022-016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110685022-016","url":null,"abstract":": Early medieval discussions of supposition begin with reflections on an early passage of the first chapter of St Augustine ’ s De Trinitate. Here Augustine is criticizing Sabellius and his followers who claimed that the Father had begotten himself, i.e. God begets deity, which gave rise to a kind of modalism. These words of Augustine show up in Peter Lombard ’ s Sentences , Book I, Distinction 4, and gave rise to a larger debate about the words that can properly apply to God which engaged the minds not least of Abelard and Alberic of Reims, culminating in Gilbert of Poitiers. Praepositinus (1135 – 1210) and William of Auxerre (1140 – 1231) are the sources of a new trajectory in interpreting the supposition of the name ‘ God ’ , which directly influ-ences the Summa Halensis. This paper examines the nature of that influence and provides a translation of brief texts from Prepositinus and William that form its back-ground. Early medieval discussions of supposition begin with reflections on an early passage St Augustine Here Augustine is criticizing Sabellius and his followers who claimed that the Father had begotten Himself. These words of Augustine show up in Peter Lombard ’ s Sentences , Book 1, Distinction 4, which opens with the question: Utrum Deus genuit Deum? ( ‘ Whether it is to be granted that God generated Himself? Peter Lombard into any historical detail, we examine the Theologia or Scholarium Abelard understanding, would hold on to their own opinion, which","PeriodicalId":153743,"journal":{"name":"The Summa Halensis","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132705845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The Influence of Anselm of Canterbury on the Summa Halensis’ Theology of the Divine Substance 坎特伯雷的安塞伦对《halma Summa》神圣物质神学的影响

The Summa Halensis Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI: 10.1515/9783110685022-012

Aaron Canty

{"title":"The Influence of Anselm of Canterbury on the Summa Halensis’ Theology of the Divine Substance","authors":"Aaron Canty","doi":"10.1515/9783110685022-012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110685022-012","url":null,"abstract":"The influence of Anselm of Canterbury can be found in all four parts of the Summa Halensis. It is true that among the hundreds of quotations of Anselm, the majority occur in the third part, on Christology, but the Franciscan authors of the Summa also found Anselm to be very useful in the first part, as well. The authors of the Summa drew especially from Anselm’s Monologion and Proslogion when discussing God as the divine substance. After examining how infrequently scholastic theologians in the generation before the Summa appropriated Anselm in their discussions of God’s existence and attributes, the essay demonstrates that the authors of the Summa engaged Anselm on a much more sustained level and drew from a much wider variety of Anselmian sources than did their predecessors. The theology of Anselm of Canterbury, after an uneven reception in the 12 century, exerted considerable influence on early Franciscan theologians in the first half of the 13 century.1 Anselm’s prayerful reflections on God’s attributes and existence in the Proslogion, the Trinitarian Persons in the Monologion, and his Christology and soteriology in the Cur Deus Homo resonated with such authors as Alexander of Hales, John of La Rochelle, Odo Rigaldus, William of Melitona, and Bonaventure of Bagnoregio, some, or all, of whom contributed either directly or indirectly to the compilation of the Summa Halensis.2 Scholars have noted the role Anselm’s thought has played in the areas of early Franciscan arguments for God’s existence,3 Trinitarian theology,4  See Enzo Marigliano, Anselmo d’Aosta: La vicenda umana di un grande monaco del Medioevo (Milano: Ancora, 2003), 229.  See Victorin Doucet, ‘Prolegomena in librum III necnon in libros I et II “Summa Fratris Alexandri”,’ in Doctoris irrefragabilis Alexandri de Hales Ordinis minorum Summa theologica, vol. 4 (Quaracchi: Collegium S. Bonaventurae, 1948), cxxxiv-ccxlvii.  See Scott Matthews, ‘Arguments, Texts, and Contexts: Anselm’s Argument and the Friars,’ Medieval Philosophy and Theology 8 (1999): 83– 104 and Scott Matthews, Reason, Community and Religious Tradition: Anselm’s argument and the Friars (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001), 35–9, 50–73, 111–43; and Rega Wood, ‘Richard Rufus’s Response to Anselm,’ in Anselm and Abelard: Investigations and Juxtapositions, ed. G.E.M. Gasper and H. Kohlenberger (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2004), 87– 102.  See Matthew Levering, ‘Speaking the Trinity: Anselm and His 13-Century Interlocutors on Divine Intelligere and Dicere,’ in Saint Anselm—His Origins and Influence, ed. John R. Fortin (Lewiston, NY: The Edward Mellen Press, 2001), 131–43. OpenAccess. © 2020 Lydia Schumacher, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110685022-012 soteriology,5 and Christology.6 Focusing on the theology of Alexander of Hales, Aleksander Horowski has noted that, in his Gloss on Pet","PeriodicalId":153743,"journal":{"name":"The Summa Halensis","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114683322","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Frontmatter

The Summa Halensis Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI: 10.1515/9783110685022-fm

引用次数: 0

Creation, Light, and Redemption 创造、光与救赎

The Summa Halensis Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI: 10.1515/9783110685022-020

引用次数: 0

The Reception of John of Damascus in the Summa Halensis 《总典》中对大马士革约翰的接待

The Summa Halensis Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI: 10.1515/9783110685022-007

I. Brady, Spicilegium Bonaventurianum

{"title":"The Reception of John of Damascus in the Summa Halensis","authors":"I. Brady, Spicilegium Bonaventurianum","doi":"10.1515/9783110685022-007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110685022-007","url":null,"abstract":": John of Damascus was perhaps the most important Christian encyclopedist of late antiquity. His influence crops up in two distinct ways in the Summa. He is an authority to be cited in support of positions adopted in the Summa , and sometimes the inspiration of those teachings; and he is an authority whose apparently deviant positions need to be given acceptable interpretations. Of the times that John is mentioned, his name crops up in association with some very distinctive issues: on the positive side, the will and passions (and action theory more generally), and the accounts of providence, faith, and images; and on the negative side, divine simplicity and associated epistemic and semantic questions, the Trinity, and the prelapsarian human condition. This chapter, accordingly, divides the material up in two ways: first, examining cases in which John clearly influenced the authors of the Summa , albeit not always unproblematically; and, secondly, examining those problematic cases in which John presents a position apparently in conflict with that adopted by the authors of the Summa. which follow the nature in creatures, and do not signify the substance but a property of the substance: for they signify the divine nature as a quality or habit. Uncreated grace is in us and makes us pleasing ( gratos ) to God. What I call “ pleasing to God ” either posits in us some disposition by which we are pleasing to God, other than the uncreated disposition, or not. If it does not posit some disposition in us other than uncreated grace, then the graced ( gratus ) and the ungraced among us do not differ, because uncreated grace is in the ungraced soul by essence, presence, and power, and likewise in the graced soul, in so far as God is said to be everywhere by presence, power, and essence.¹ ⁰ ¹","PeriodicalId":153743,"journal":{"name":"The Summa Halensis","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117159829","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Alexander’s Commentary on the Rule in Relation to the Summa Halensis 亚历山大对《总典》规则的评注

The Summa Halensis Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI: 10.1515/9783110685022-017

引用次数: 0

The De anima Tradition in Early Franciscan Thought 早期方济各会思想中的deanima传统

The Summa Halensis Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI: 10.1515/9783110685022-011

L. Schumacher

{"title":"The De anima Tradition in Early Franciscan Thought","authors":"L. Schumacher","doi":"10.1515/9783110685022-011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110685022-011","url":null,"abstract":"In the 12 and early 13 centuries, we witness a steady rise in the level of sophistication with which scholars analysed the nature of the rational soul. This increase was undoubtedly attributable to the translation movement of the period, which made many Greek and Arabic philosophical texts available in Latin for the first time. This paper will show how the introduction of Avicenna’s De anima in particular mediated readings of Aristotle as well as Augustine in the period of the Summa’s authorship, specifically, as regards the account of the soul, its relationship to the body, and its cognitive operations. In this way, I will illuminate the extent to which the reading of Avicenna shaped fundamentally the ways in which the Franciscan tradition came to construe human nature. Throughout history, the soul has remained a topic of perennial interest and debate. In the 12 and early 13 centuries, we witness a steady rise in the level of sophistication with which scholars analysed the nature of the rational soul. This increase was undoubtedly attributable to the translation movement of the period, which made many Greek and Arabic philosophical texts available in Latin for the first time. The most significant of these texts were the works of Aristotle and the Islamic philosopher Avicenna, who dominated the reception of Aristotle until nearly the mid 13 century. At this point, better translations of Aristotle were produced which enabled the study of his thought in its own right. The reasons for the focus on Avicenna over or with Aristotle until this time are many, but among them, there is the fact that the translations of Aristotle that were produced in the mid-to-late 12 century were in some cases only partial and in most cases, riddled with inaccuracies. For this reason, Latin thinkers were more inclined to rely on the superior and more complete translations of Avicenna, who was in fact a very different thinker to Aristotle with a system and views all his own. Although Avicenna was clearly the main resource for reading Aristotle before, say, the 1250s and 60s, his own reception was mediated and mitigated by numerous other figures, such as Dominicus Gundissalinus, the translator of Avicenna, as well as the Spanish Jew Avicebron and the Syrian Christian Costa Ben Luca, whose works were translated by Gundissalinus and John of Spain, respectively. Furthermore, the reception of Aristotle was complicated by the wide circulation of works like the Neo-Platonic Liber de causis which was believed before 1268 to offer a genuine representation of Aristotle’s theological views; and by the so-called De spiOpenAccess. © 2020 Lydia Schumacher, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110685022-011 ritu et anima, a 12-century work that was attributed to Augustine despite evidence to the contrary. These works generated widespread confusion about what Aristotle an","PeriodicalId":153743,"journal":{"name":"The Summa Halensis","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127083350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The Summa Halensis and Augustine 哈勒斯总结和奥古斯丁

The Summa Halensis Pub Date : 2020-05-05 DOI: 10.1515/9783110685022-005

L. Schumacher

引用次数: 0