RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Kreeft did a good job, given his aims. Usually when people give an abridgment or a summary of a major thinker, they cut out all of the necessary passages and/or highlight the abridger's pet doctrines. Kreeft does a good job in avoiding that (though he is not entirely flawless as I will try to demonstrate).
Kreeft's method is to devote 75% of the page to essential passages from St Thomas. Kreeft's footnotes provide a running commentary.
Pros: Kreeft does a good and brief summary of medieval thought and gives a glossary of essential terms that must be mastered if one is to understand medieval philosophy. Many of Kreeft's footnotes are priceless.
Cons: Kreeft doesn't fully understand Calvinism. Yes, there are hyper-Calvinists to whom Kreeft's comments apply. Also, Kreeft did not interact with Henri Cardinal de Lubac on "Natural and the Supernatural." Given that this is a screaming debate in Thomist circles whose waves are still be felt (ala John Milbank), this omission is rather curious.
Kreeft's method is to devote 75% of the page to essential passages from St Thomas. Kreeft's footnotes provide a running commentary.
Pros: Kreeft does a good and brief summary of medieval thought and gives a glossary of essential terms that must be mastered if one is to understand medieval philosophy. Many of Kreeft's footnotes are priceless.
Cons: Kreeft doesn't fully understand Calvinism. Yes, there are hyper-Calvinists to whom Kreeft's comments apply. Also, Kreeft did not interact with Henri Cardinal de Lubac on "Natural and the Supernatural." Given that this is a screaming debate in Thomist circles whose waves are still be felt (ala John Milbank), this omission is rather curious.
