New Article — Are the Reformed philosophically Thomist?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Charles Johnson

Puritan Board Junior
Hi brothers,
I have a new article out on my blog that might be of interest of you, arguing that it is not accurate to categorize the Reformed as philosophically Thomist.
I am interested in hearing your thoughts on it.
 
I largely agree that they weren't Thomists full stop. However, while I have to read Vermigli's full text on predestination, according to Lynch, he sees predestination as a species of providence, which could move him closer to Thomists on some issues.
 
I largely agree that they weren't Thomists full stop. However, while I have to read Vermigli's full text on predestination, according to Lynch, he sees predestination as a species of providence, which could move him closer to Thomists on some issues.
On matters of predestination they were definitely closer to Thomas than other Scholastics. But that's mostly because Thomas was more Augustinian. They were actually closer to Augustine than to Thomas, especially on the matter of providence, where Thomas, reflecting Aristotle and Avicenna, said that God's providence doesn't really govern animals and lesser creatures individually.
"Whence, although God knows the total number of individuals, the number of oxen, flies and such like, is not preordained by God per se; but divine providence produces just so many as are sufficient for the preservation of the species." (ST 1.23.7)
 
This is more or less what Richard Muller suggested at the end of volume one of PRRD. I like reading Thomas. I think flippant dismissals of him on classical theism usually end disastrously. And even though I have read ST and half of SCG, I do not even remember enough of his finer nuances in order for me to label myself a Thomist. Same with Scotus. My understanding of Scotus is filtered through several Reformed polemics on free choice, so I probably should not call myself a Scotist, either.

Not even Catholics today are really Thomists. Thomas was a monarchist, after all. Today's Catholics vote for Biden. And then there are the Pelagian Jesuits, enemies of the Dominicans.

I do think we should drop the "Reformed Thomist" moniker. Its advocates do not have enough agreement with Thomas for it to be accurate, and most (not all) of its critics do not really know enough about Thomas for it to be meaningful.
 
This is more or less what Richard Muller suggested at the end of volume one of PRRD. I like reading Thomas. I think flippant dismissals of him on classical theism usually end disastrously. And even though I have read ST and half of SCG, I do not even remember enough of his finer nuances in order for me to label myself a Thomist. Same with Scotus. My understanding of Scotus is filtered through several Reformed polemics on free choice, so I probably should not call myself a Scotist, either.

Not even Catholics today are really Thomists. Thomas was a monarchist, after all. Today's Catholics vote for Biden. And then there are the Pelagian Jesuits, enemies of the Dominicans.

I do think we should drop the "Reformed Thomist" moniker. Its advocates do not have enough agreement with Thomas for it to be accurate, and most (not all) of its critics do not really know enough about Thomas for it to be meaningful.
Name change incoming? :think:
 
I'm getting a lot of good possibilities from the rhyming dictionary here. For example, Ramist was a logician.
And what rhymes with logician? Why, vomiturition, of course!
Just a few of the possibilities:
LogicianVomiturition
LogicianNeoplatonician
LogicianUndernutrition
LogicianPolarExpedition
LogicianBodyDecomposition
 
"Hey, ChatGPT, alternative usernames to RamistThomist"
  1. ThomistRamist
  2. RationalRam
  3. LogosLover
  4. TheologicalThinker
  5. ReasoningRambler
  6. IntellectIntersect
  7. FaithfulPhilosopher
  8. DoctrineDefender
  9. ScholarlySoul
  10. AnalyticApologist
 
i do think we should drop the "Reformed Thomist" moniker. Its advocates do not have enough agreement with Thomas for it to be accurate, and most (not all) of its critics do not really know enough about Thomas for it to be meaningful.
Right. And I think “Thomist” has become a pejorative boundary marker for presups. Classical theism vs theistic personalism; ESS vs Nicene orthodoxy; Latin trinitarianism vs social trinitarianism are the core issues from my understanding. “Catholic man bad,” and framing a real disagreement as sola scriptura vs prima philosophia pagana detracts from this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top