My Conversations with Teilhard de Chardin on the Primacy of Christ by Gabriel M. Allegra, O. F. M. (review)

BOOK REVIEWS 708 unity thesis and Avicebron (ibn Gebirol) for the pluralist theory," Gundissalinus being the immediate channel through which the same problem reached the schools." (ibid., 136) The whole issue was confused by schoolmen who refused to consider the "soul " identical with " substantial form." They held that there were at least four substantial forms in man, including the forma corporeitatis, but only one soul; others said that there were three substantial forms in man, the vegetative, sensible, and rational, constituting three separate souls. Blund is unequivocal in his discussion of the problem, insisting with Avicenna that man has only one soul and one substantial form. (35-45) Fr. Callus found in John Blund "the earliest, clear and unmistakable account" of the controversy in which John sided with Avicenna in defending the unity theory. Clarification of the issue came only when Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas taught that the human soul is the substantial form of man and that the substantial form is the first, immediate, and total actualization of first matter, which is a pure potentiality. But even then, pluralists, such as John Pecham, considered the unity teaching to be heretical. The second aspect which Fr. Callus found to be most significant was John Blund's acquaintance with the whole of the Aristotelian corpus (except, of course, for the Ethics). In the Index Auctorum of the present edition, Dr. Hunt shows us at a glance the extent to which Blund was familiar with the works of Aristotle; he quoted Aristotle twice as often as Avicenna. For the most part it is from the vulgate translation of James of Venice that he quotes. John Blund is but one witness to the extent that Aristotle and Avicenna penetrated the faculty of arts at the turn of the 13th century. From an otherwise impeccable edition there is only one typographical error on p. 103, line 9, where the reading given is " con contingit" when it should read "non contingit." This edition may well stand as a model of how medieval texts should be published. There is only one problem: the cost of the book. Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies Toronto, Canada JAMES A. WEISHEIPL, 0. P. My Conversations with Teilhard de Chardin on the Primacy of Christ. By GABRIEL M. ALLEGRA, 0. F. M. Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1971. Pp. 126. $3.75. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, the priest-paleontologist whose writings have so greatly influenced contemporary Christian thought, wrote his spiritual manifesto, The Divine Milieu, in 1927. Since its publication after Teilhard's 704 BOOK REVIEWS death in 1955, The Divine Milieu has come to be recognized as a classic of spiritual theology, a magnificent presentation of Catholic spirituality, and a work of unquestionable orthodoxy. Although it seems unbelievable today, Teilhard was, despite heroic efforts, unable to get the book past ecclesiastical censors. And so, in 1942, fifteen years after completing the mansucript, Teilhard was still trying to get a nihil obstat for The Divine Milieu. The apostolic delegate to China appointed Father Allegra to censor the manuscript. Father Allegra found things that appeared to him to be " shocking," " daring," and " even wrong." He disapproved the work on the gounds that it was ambiguous, confused the natural and supernatural orders, and was inadequate in its treatment of sin, the Cross, and redemption. The apostolic delegate instructed Father Allegra to tell his findings to Teilhard, and so began a series of weekly conversations between the author of this book and Teilhard de Chardin. These conversations are more or less reco;Jstructed and presented here in the form of a dialogue between Teilhard and the author. This work, then, is not a scholarly study but a memoir of some conversations, written decades later in the form of a dialogue. The general topic of the dialogue is John Duns Scotus's doctrine of the primacy of Christ; the book is, in fact, simply a popular explanation of the Scotist doctrine. There is little of substance of Teilhard de Chardin's thought; Teilhard serves merely as a foil, somewhat in the manner of Anselm of Canterbury's Bozo, for Allegra's explanation of the Scotist teaching on Christ's primacy. It is really just as...