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

BOOK REVIEWS 389 The Thomism of Etienne Gilson. A Critical Study. By JoHN M. QUINN, 0. S. A. Villanova, Pa.: Villanova University Press, 1971. Pp. ~04. As the long and brilliant career of Etienne Gilson draws to a close (he will be 89 on June 13, 1973), it is inevitable that scholars in increasing numbers will attempt a critical assessment of his life's work. Gilson himself would be the first to welcome their evaluation of his thought and correction of any mistakes he may have made. Fr. Quinn is the first, to my knowledge, to publish an extended critical study of the part of Gilson's work that is most dear to his heart-his Thomism. Chapter 1 examines Gilson's notion of Christian philosophy, Chapter ~ his conception of metaphysics in its relation to philosophy, Chapter 3 his doctrine of knowledge and existence, and Chapter 4 his interpretation of the first three ways to God. His judgment of Gilson is severe. He questions " the validity of the claim that the Gilsonian Christian philosopher, the wholly metaphysical thinker, and the existentialist represent the authentic Aquinas." (p. xvi) Because of the difficulty and complexity of these issues this review can do little more than comment briefly on author's interpretation of Gilson's positions and the validity of some of his criticisms. Like others before him, the author contends that Gilson's notion of Christian philosophy is self-contradictory, for it claims that this philosophy is both strictly rational and philosophical and also " rooted in Scripture and tradition." (p. 4) While not denying the validity of Christian philosophy in the general sense of an influence of Christianity on the philosopher (e. g., in raising fresh philosophical problems), he questions the Gilsonian way of understanding Christian philosophy. What troubles him most is Gilson's contention that Aquinas, in his role of theologian, developed a philosophy that he made a part of his theology. This philosophy, which according to Gilson is "the philosophical demonstration of the part of revelation that deals with truth accessible to natural reason, " (p. 7) is established on purely rational grounds. Fr. Quinn cannot see how such a philosophical element can be part and parcel of a theology. But this is because he either misunderstands or does not accept St. Thomas's notion of theology. If the Summa Theologiae is truly a compendium of theology, everything in it is theological-even rationally demonstrated truths. Gilson was looking for a term to designate the rationally demonstrable part of Thomistic theology and all the philosophical notions that Aquinas elaborated in his theology for theological purposes. To these he gave the name " the Christian philosophy of St. Thomas. " More generally he considers every philosophy Christian which, " although keeping the two orders [of reason and faith] formally distinct, nevertheless considers the Christian revelation as an indispensable auxiliary to reason " (The Spirit of Mediaeval Philosophy, p. 37). To my knowledge he never suggested that this gives rise to a hybrid theology on the model of 390 BOOK REVIEWS mathematical physics, as the author claims. (p. 9) The analogy is his own, not Gilson's. Moreover, the author misinterprets Gilson's statement that " Philosophically speaking, the way a philosopher arrives at truth is irrelevant to it " to mean that the method of proof is irrelevant. (p. 5) In the context Gilson means that a truth may be suggested to a philosopher in many different ways, e. g., by his faith, but this truth must be rationally demonstrated if it is to have philosophical merit. Nor does Gilson endow St. Thomas, the commentator on Aristotle, "with the narrow textual method and withdrawn posture of a modern scholar. " (p. 11) In Gilson's own words, St. Thomas's commenting on Aristotle was for him " a study of philosophy in depth and in its manifold disciplines, " in order " to co-operate with the work of redemption" (The Philosopher and Theology, p. 193). According to Gilson, however, many of St. Thomas's most profound and original philosophical notions are contained, not in his commentaries, but in his theological works. Chapter Q, entitled "Metaphysics and Philosophy, " adds to the author's misinterpretations of Gilson. He is said to depute " philosophy...

pdf

Share