In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

CREATED RECEPTIVITY AND THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CONCRETE KENNETH L. SCHMITZ John Paul II Institute Washington, D.C. GABRIEL MARCEL gave his phenomenological enquiries the name "Philosophy of the Concrete,"1 and he made no bones about the distance between his philosophy and that of Thomism.2 Between these philosophies there can be no question of an approchement of tone, nor even ofmanner, but at most a convergence of truths shared differently. Moreover, there can be no doubt that the two philosophies differ in their relation to experience. Within the broad sense of "Christian experience," Thomas drew upon experientia (empiria) in the narrower sense in order to derive by way of conceptual abstraction the principles of his philosophy, including those of act and potency. Marcel's relation to experience was more immediate, more deliberate, and more explicit. Yet his philosophy has 1 Actually, he usually referred to "concrete philosophy," and preferred "approaches to the concreti>." See the "Author's Preface to the English Edition" of the Metaphysical Journal (Paris: Gallimard, 1927; London: Rockliff, 1952), viiif. 2 In his "Autobiography" (in The Philosophy ofGabriel Marcel, ed. A. Schilpp and L. E. Hahn [La Salle, Ill.: Open Court, 1984], 3-68) he writes: "the essentially Thomist dogmatism I found in Abott Altermann aroused my unalterable protest. At the time, I made several attempts to understand St. Thomas's thinking better and to read some of his contemporary disciples. But I am obliged to acknowledge that this effort was not crowned with success, and the most elementary fairness forces me to add that I did not carry it out with the requisite earnestness and tenacity. It was at this time that Charles Du Bos and I had weekly meetings with Jacques Maritain, who took great pains to help us understand Thomist thought better and to appreciate it more. All three of us showed good will, but the result was meager indeed" (30). Nonetheless, he showed a certain reservation in his criticism of St. Thomas without, however, much sympathy. 339 340 KENNETH L. SCHMITZ provided an articulate basis in contemporary experience for many of the ideas that underlie St. Thomas 's thought in a very different way. There may not have been a need in the society and culture of thirteenth-century Europe to make explicit in a methodical, descriptive manner the direct experiential underpinnings of such notions as mystery, fidelity, vocation, and community. They were in the cultural air and had taken institutional form as dogmas, vows, art and architecture, religious orders, and a sense of the transcendent in everyday life in and through the visible presence of the Church. These notions were accessible to lived experience and were given realistic expression in the public speech in a way that they are not in the more secularized contemporary society in which we live and think. With us they have, for the most part, taken refuge in the private sphere. I. INTRODUCING RECEPTIVITY Especially important in Marcel's approach to the concrete are the concepts of availability (disponibilite'), recognition (reconnaitre , reconnaissance) (cf. reconnoiter), and receptivity (recevoir) (cf. accueillir: to welcome). Originating from quite different considerations, receptivity has recently been brought into relation with the thought of St. Thomas, through further philosophical reflection upon his texts and through reflection upon the theology of the Trinity.3 In an article entitled "The First Principle of Personal Becoming,"4 I had sought to identify the mark of spirit in a thought-world that, for the most part, rejects the metaphysical understanding of the person as spirit. I had pointed to the capacity of the human spirit to "communicate without loss,'' as when we do not unlearn what we have known in teaching it to others. This was meant to indicate the traditional sphere of immanent 3 This is particularly true for David Schindler. See Norris Clarke, Person and Being (Milwaukee: Marquette, 1993); and David Schindler, "Norris Clarke on Person, Being and St. Thomas," Communio 20 (Fall 1993): 580ff. 4 Review ofMetaphysics 47 (June 1994): 757-74. CREATED RECEPTIVITY 341 activity as distinct from transitive (productive) physical action.5 The correlate of communication without loss is reception without (physical) mutation: receptivity. Both together point to a distinctive mode...

pdf

Share