Michael A. Conway

A Thomistic Turn? Maurice Blondel's Reading of St Thomas

Blondel began his intensive reading of St Thomas early in the first decade of the twentieth century. In the medieval theologian he discovered not only material that allowed him to penetrate more deeply into the matter of faith, but also an essential corrective to developments in contemporary philosophy whose roots in Descartes had led to an undesirable fragmentation of disciplines. His fascinating study of St Thomas was not, however, uncritical and would lead to his suggestion that what was now needed was a new synthesis of the Thomist and Cartesian spirit. This, in turn, was programmatic for Blondels later works and explains the many references to St. Thomas therein.

At the Limits of the Secular: Reflection on Faith and Public LifeAt the Limits of the Secular: Reflection on Faith and Public Life. Edited by BarbieriWilliam A.Jr. Foreword by TaylorCharles. Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans, 2014. Pp. xii + 375. Price

At times their arguments miscarry. Baden and Moss mistakenly label Mary’s pregnancy as the ‘immaculate conception’ (p. 161); the claim that Mary (in Luke 2) ‘cavorted around ancient Palestine’ shows both the wrong verb and an anachronistic geographical marker; their assertion that Mary, by identifying herself in Luke 1.38 as a ‘doulos’ ( ‘slave’) puts her in the role of Hagar and so as surrogate mother misses the fact that in the Bible only free people self-identify as ‘slaves’ even as it, as the authors admit, finds problems in locating the ‘wife’ for whom Mary serves as surrogate; the notice that in John 20 the mother of Jesus is ‘rendered childless by his death’ (p. 167) ignores the Gospel’s references to Jesus’ brothers (Jn 2.12; 7.3,5,10) and so the related, and relatedly difficult question, of children deserting their mother, or of a mother choosing one child over others. Finally, while the assertion that ‘infertility is not deficiency, punishment, or failure; it is a God-given state’ (p. 236) should provide comfort to those who equate their childlessness with sin, I fear the conclusions about sexless soteriology will create a different discomfort. To those who have lost a life-long partner, or a child, the claim that ‘the afterlife is a celebration of God, not a family reunion’ (p. 217) may well be heart-wrenching.

35.00 (pbk). ISBN 978-0-8028-6877-0.

This article sets disability discourse within the context of two foundational ideas. Our Western tradition has inherited these two ideas from the Christian understanding of the human condition, and they need to be taken together if we are to realize a wholesome humanism. The first is the incommensurable value of every individual human being, which, however, if taken on its own as a foundation, can lead to severe isolationism. It requires the corrective of the second; namely, the realization that humanity itself is a substantial unity. We cannot stand absolutely apart, and knowing this raises the crucial issue of our relationship to those who in certain circumstances are self-helpless.

‘As if my eye were still growing’: Living Disability

Maurice Blondels appreciation of scholastic philosophy was tempered from the beginning with a definite critique that reflected his own philosophical concerns. Although he drew indirectly on St. Thomas in his doctoral thesis, the young philosopher was highly critical of Thomism in the famous Letter on Apologetics. The ensuing debate pushed him to clarify his own philosophical position in the face of neo-Thomism. It was clear to Blondel that the renaissance in Thomist studies advocated by Aeterni Patris could only take place if scholastic philosophy would assimilate some important elements from the positive tradition. This realization would, in time, drive the French philosopher to a reappraisal of St. Thomas, and neo-Thomism to a confrontation with neglected aspects of its own tradition.