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

TWO QUODLIBETS ON ESSENCE/EXISTENCE ASPUTE OF long standing during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and one which flowed over into most of the later middle ages was that concerning the distinction between essence and existence in finite beings. Aquinas had spoken of a real distinction between essence and existence which he regarded not as two different things but as two principles of being. Giles of Rome and Henry of Ghent had each in his own way interpreted Aquinas's doctrine. Thomas of Sutton (rn50-1315) in the eighth question of his third Quodlibet took up the question and came down on the side of Aquinas against both Giles of Rome and Henry of Ghent. There is some question about how well Sutton understood the Thomistic position. His language does at times seem to indicate that he regards essence and existence almost as two things rather than two principles. But he also consistently speaks of them as related as potency is to act. Gilson seems to be correct when he states that there is no real reason to suppose that Sutton misunderstood the authentic position of Aquinas, even though his language at times resembles that of Giles of Rome.1 F. Ehrle also is convinced that Sutton was a bona fide Thomist whose doctrine was consistently in accord with that of Aquinas.2 Sometime later William of Ockham (c. 1300-1350) discussed the matter in the seventh question of his second Quodlibet. Ockham also attacked Henry of Ghent, but when he himself came to solve the question, he firmly denied any real distinction between essence and existence. He saw them merely as 1 Gilson, E. History of Christian Philos

pdf

Share