Lessons from Fr. Joseph Owens about Metaphysics for a Twenty-first Century Catholic Synthesis
by
Richard Geraghty, PhD
by
Richard Geraghty, PhD
Dr. Richard Geraghty is presently teaching philosophy at the House of Studies on the Eternal Word Television Network grounds in Birmingham, Alabama. He is also teaching in the Distance Learning program at Holy Apostles. He has an MA in English from Ohio State and an MA and PhD in philosophy from the University of Toronto. His thesis director was Father Joseph Owens of the Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies on the topic The Object of Moral Philosophy According to St. Thomas Aquinas that was later published under the same title. Dr. Geraghty’s other book is The Right Way to Live: A Study of Plato’s Republic for Catholic Students.
Note from Dr. Chervin: In the first sixty years of the twentieth century every Catholic university student had to take metaphysics. The result was a common vocabulary for such graduates, no matter how diverse their majors, when discoursing about such subjects as body and soul or proofs for the existence of God. When metaphysics became an elective, in short order, many Catholic university graduates simply thought that belief in the immortality of the soul or in the existence of God were simply matters of faith. By 2013 this view, augmented by the “cult of tolerance” has led to an inability of many educated Catholics to communicate such truths to sceptics or doubters. This leads to a kind of polarity in the Church between those whose faith is supported by reason and those who may tend to remain Catholics more on the basis of family tradition or blind faith. Dr. Geraghty, a professor of metaphysics for many years, sheds light on how important the study of metaphysics can be as a bridge between faith and reason.
Lessons From Fr. Joseph Owens
The purpose of this paper is to cast some light on the challenges confronting the academic program of a seminary and college like Holy Apostles by analyzing the Foreword written by Father Joseph Owens, CSSR. for his book intended for undergraduates entitled An Elementary Christian Metaphysics. That there are challenges, particularly in the last fifty years or so, is obvious. The answer of Holy Apostles and similar institutions has been and is now to implement a pre-theologian’s program devoted to two years of philosophy in preparation for four years of theology done according to the mind of St. Thomas Aquinas. This program quite naturally brings to my mind the following questions drawn from the Foreword of An Elementary Christian Metaphysics: 1) What is an elementary metaphysics? 2) What is a Christian metaphysics? 3) What is a metaphysics done according to the principles of St. Thomas Aquinas? It is my thesis that the answers Father Owens gives to these questions give us an appreciation of the program of Holy Apostles’ College and Seminary.
The purpose of this paper is to cast some light on the challenges confronting the academic program of a seminary and college like Holy Apostles by analyzing the Foreword written by Father Joseph Owens, CSSR. for his book intended for undergraduates entitled An Elementary Christian Metaphysics. That there are challenges, particularly in the last fifty years or so, is obvious. The answer of Holy Apostles and similar institutions has been and is now to implement a pre-theologian’s program devoted to two years of philosophy in preparation for four years of theology done according to the mind of St. Thomas Aquinas. This program quite naturally brings to my mind the following questions drawn from the Foreword of An Elementary Christian Metaphysics: 1) What is an elementary metaphysics? 2) What is a Christian metaphysics? 3) What is a metaphysics done according to the principles of St. Thomas Aquinas? It is my thesis that the answers Father Owens gives to these questions give us an appreciation of the program of Holy Apostles’ College and Seminary.
What Is an Elementary Metaphysics?
Owens says: “The following text is called an elementary metaphysics. Its aim is confined to arousing and developing in rudimentary form a habit of mind which will equip the undergraduate student to approach metaphysical subjects” (p. v). It is to form a rudimentary habit of mind beneficial to any educated man or woman. Thus the primary goal is not to train professional metaphysicians or philosophers. The argument is his argument. He speaks as one who already has a philosophical or metaphysical habit of mind acquired after many years of study in the history of philosophy. Therefore he marks off the steps of the argument and then connects them, thus providing the student with an example of what metaphysical reasoning is. It has starting points which are self-evident, middle steps which are connected rigorously, and a conclusion which follows necessarily. It is a demonstration from beginning to end.
Owens says: “The following text is called an elementary metaphysics. Its aim is confined to arousing and developing in rudimentary form a habit of mind which will equip the undergraduate student to approach metaphysical subjects” (p. v). It is to form a rudimentary habit of mind beneficial to any educated man or woman. Thus the primary goal is not to train professional metaphysicians or philosophers. The argument is his argument. He speaks as one who already has a philosophical or metaphysical habit of mind acquired after many years of study in the history of philosophy. Therefore he marks off the steps of the argument and then connects them, thus providing the student with an example of what metaphysical reasoning is. It has starting points which are self-evident, middle steps which are connected rigorously, and a conclusion which follows necessarily. It is a demonstration from beginning to end.
While some degree of memorizing terms is part of the process (of learning metaphysics) the emphasis is upon understanding the steps of the argument. A philosophical habit of mind is engendered by doing the actual reasoning; there is no substitute for this intellectual labor. The student of course will not catch it on the first bounce. He will have to read and reread the argument to understand it. In metaphysics constant repetition is the mother of insight. What makes reading Owens particularly interesting is his claim that man can by the use of reason alone demonstrate in the most rigorous fashion the propositions that God is a union of essence and existence, that the human soul is immortal, that metaphysics is the highest off all the human sciences. He proceeds to demonstrate what he claims. It is up to the students whether they can make the demonstrations for themselves. Obviously it will take them many years to do this. A six-months semester course will not be enough. But in following the argument they will already have the beginning of a philosophical habit of mind. They will know what they know. And especially they will know what they don’t know. Thus they will be seekers all their lives for an understanding of metaphysics as the highest of all the human sciences for the rest of their lives just as Owens was a seeker all his life. Philosophy is too large a subject for one lifetime, even that of a genius.
Because philosophy is the highest of the human sciences, Owens takes for granted that it has a place in any undergraduate or graduate program. No one today denies a place to the sciences of mathematics, astronomy, biology, physics and the rest. Why should metaphysics be an exception? It is a human achievement just as the other sciences are. Indeed it is the highest of strictly human intellectual achievements and should be part of any sound program in college education. Hence college students, especially those bound for the seminary, should study metaphysics. Both human reason and the directives of the bishops prescribe this. The philosophical habit of mind has been standard equipment for the educated human being since the time of the ancient Greeks. Lay students and seminarians should be heirs to that tradition. But they should be working heirs, so to speak. You can inherit money without working. But you can’t inherit a philosophical habit of mind without thinking things through.
Holy Apostles embodies this tradition, thus contributing to the intellectual welfare, not only of lay Catholics and seminarians but of the nation as a whole. The nation has been swamped in the atmosphere that suggests that the study of the modern sciences is the legitimate use of formal reason. As an institution Holy Apostles resists this atmosphere. The highest use of the human intellect is to grasp the truth, to be contemplative, not to change the world or to be practical. To be contemplative is to be truly and fully human.
Holy Apostles embodies this tradition, thus contributing to the intellectual welfare, not only of lay Catholics and seminarians but of the nation as a whole. The nation has been swamped in the atmosphere that suggests that the study of the modern sciences is the legitimate use of formal reason. As an institution Holy Apostles resists this atmosphere. The highest use of the human intellect is to grasp the truth, to be contemplative, not to change the world or to be practical. To be contemplative is to be truly and fully human.
Leo XIII What Is a Christian Metaphysics?
Owens then turns his attention to the notion of a Christian metaphysics. He is using the term “Christian” in the way Pope Leo XIII used it when he called for the reformation of Catholic philosophy. In that view the philosophies found in the theological works of figures like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas may be called Christian. Since there has been controversy about this matter, Owens proceeds to show that the term “Christian philosophy” is sanctioned by long tradition. But before detailing his argument, I will make one note on the difference between faith on the one hand and revealed theology and natural philosophy on the other. Faith comes from what God in the person of Christ has revealed to the Apostles from whom the pope and the bishops are descended.
Owens then turns his attention to the notion of a Christian metaphysics. He is using the term “Christian” in the way Pope Leo XIII used it when he called for the reformation of Catholic philosophy. In that view the philosophies found in the theological works of figures like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas may be called Christian. Since there has been controversy about this matter, Owens proceeds to show that the term “Christian philosophy” is sanctioned by long tradition. But before detailing his argument, I will make one note on the difference between faith on the one hand and revealed theology and natural philosophy on the other. Faith comes from what God in the person of Christ has revealed to the Apostles from whom the pope and the bishops are descended.
There is only one faith, one priesthood, one Church. That is not because St. Peter and his successors managed to take the truths revealed to them by Christ and then connect them into one coherent whole. Only in God is the message understood as a whole. When it was revealed in human language by Christ, it took the form of mysteries which the human mind cannot fit together in the way it can with the truths derived from its experience of the world. The mind of God in itself is beyond the mind of any man, even that of the Apostles. Thus in order to preserve the purity of this faith down through the ages, St. Peter and his successors have been granted the gift of infallibility when preaching officially about faith and morals. The standard given them by Christ is his teachings. They have but to recall what those teachings and their developments are to have the truth. They are not necessarily professional theologians. They have the higher authority to teach and rule because Christ has given it to them alone.
 Plato |  Augustine |  Aristotle |  Aquinas |
Nevertheless theologians have a role in passing on the faith. For example St. Augustine took the best philosophy available in his day, Neo-Platonism, considered it from the viewpoint of the Catholic faith, and created a theology. Likewise St. Thomas Aquinas took the best philosophy of his day, Aristotle’s, considered it from the viewpoint of faith, and created a theology. In doing so he took great care to harmonize his work with that of St. Augustine and other theologians. Since theologies are human works, there are many of them. There is only one faith revealed by Christ. But there are many theologies because there are many minds applying the one deposit of faith to the human condition.
A sample of Owen’s argument of how philosophy can be an aid the faith is the Church’s use of the term “transubstantiation” to describe the mystery of bread and wine becoming the Body and Blood of Christ. It is not on the authority of Aristotle that she does so. Nor is it on the authority of St. Thomas. It is by her own authority that she chooses to use this term as a great help in illustrating the mystery of the Eucharist. Here the mystery is not cleared up. It is just given a form that can be used to counter the subtleties found in false teachings.
Let me expand on this point by Owens. Consider the teaching of Aristotle and Aquinas that all material things are composed of 1) a form which makes a body the kind of thing it is, (for example a rock, a plant, an animal or a man) and 2) prime matter, the underlying bridge which explains the fact that earth can be taken up by plants which can be eaten by cows which in turn can be eaten by men who in turn die and go back into earth from which they push up daisies, thus starting the whole process of substantial changes all over again. These transformations are as much a fact now as they ever were. Aristotle and Aquinas proved that the teaching of hylomorphism is the only explanation that explains the fact that one substance can change into another.
Let me expand on this point by Owens. Consider the teaching of Aristotle and Aquinas that all material things are composed of 1) a form which makes a body the kind of thing it is, (for example a rock, a plant, an animal or a man) and 2) prime matter, the underlying bridge which explains the fact that earth can be taken up by plants which can be eaten by cows which in turn can be eaten by men who in turn die and go back into earth from which they push up daisies, thus starting the whole process of substantial changes all over again. These transformations are as much a fact now as they ever were. Aristotle and Aquinas proved that the teaching of hylomorphism is the only explanation that explains the fact that one substance can change into another.
Now the fashionable explanation today is that modern science has shown that all bodies are composed of atoms or various particles that by their movements account for all changes in bodies. In this view the teaching of hylomorphism has been outmoded, been put on the shelf along with other theories typical of a prescientific past. Consequently some modern theologians have trouble with the term “transubstantiation.” But they shouldn’t. The fact that bodies are composed of atoms does not displace the explanation that all bodies are composed of substantial form and prime matter. It does not explain how bodies of earth can change into plants, which change into animals, which change into men who finally die and turn into earth and plants. The philosophical theory of atomism does not explain the ordinary facts of experience that substances can change essentially no matter which the modern schools of thought say.
Now the Church as such does not get directly into this philosophical debate. Rather she takes literally the event when Christ took up bread, blessed it, and said it was his body. He then took up the chalice, blessed it, and said it was his blood. That is her own teaching based on the words of Christ. When she was looking for words to enshrine this teaching, she came upon Aquinas, who followed Aristotle in saying that bodies undergo their own substantial transformation every day of the week. Now there is a great difference between, for instance, the natural mystery of plants becoming animals through the process of digestion, and the supernatural mystery of bread and wine becoming the body and blood of Christ through the words of a priest. Nevertheless the Church herself has sanctioned the use of the term “transubstantiation” to ward off heretics who would play fast and loose with the teaching of Christ. Thus to hold to the term of transubstantiation is not only good theology. It is incidentally good philosophy as far as explaining the substantial changes still taking place today as they have taken place since the beginning of time.
A sound philosophy can serve the faith of the Church. The faith of the Church can preserve a sound philosophy in an incidental way. In insisting on the truth that bread and wine are turned into the body and blood of Christ, she gives shelter to the ordinary truth that earth and water do become plants which become animals which become men who then go back to earth and water again. A sound view of ordinary experience helps to maintain a sound view of supernatural experience. A sound view of supernatural experience helps to maintain a sound view of ordinary experience. Theology and philosophy go together like the two wings of a bird flying up to the fullness of truth.
Consider another use of the hylomorphic teaching in helping to understand the resurrection of the body on the Last Day. The only way we can know with certainty that human beings will get their bodies back again is that it has been revealed by God. There is no evidence this side of the grave that can support such a conclusion. But there is evidence from ordinary human experience that the human soul is immortal because it is a spirit. Plato saw that a spirit cannot be poisoned, crushed, cut up, or destroyed because it has no bodily parts. Once the soul is in existence, it will live forever even after the death of the body. Plato had no great difficulty in taking this position because of his view that the soul is one substance and the body is another, the soul being like a driver and the body like a chariot being driven. Aristotle had trouble with this view because he held that man is a single substance composed of a body and a soul, which is another way of saying that man is a single substance where an intellectual soul or form actualizes the potential found in prime matter. On this view man is a chariot which drives itself. Now in the case of brute animals there is no difficulty about the sensitive soul surviving death. It doesn’t. A sensitive soul needs the organs of the body to operate. Thus when an animal dies, its soul evaporates, so to speak. Aristotle also taught that the rational soul has an immaterial operation called reasoning. But in order to reason man needed the data drawn from the senses. For it was not the nature of man to be a pure spirit, as Plato held. Rather it was the nature of man to be a body informed by a rational form or soul. What would be the point of holding that the soul lived forever if it could not use its intelligence to know anything, even itself? Hence we do not see Aristotle emphasizing the eternal existence of the human soul as Plato.
How did Aquinas handle this difficulty? He sided with Aristotle in saying that man is a single substance of body and soul, matter and form. He also sided with Aristotle in saying that the soul of man is dependent upon the senses for its knowledge. Yet he concluded that the soul after death could still operate, was aware of itself and of other beings. What was his evidence for saying so? It could not be the evidence or ordinary human experience, which, of course, is the experience of life on this side of the grave, the same evidence that Aristotle had. Then from where did Aquinas draw his evidence? It was from his faith in the teaching of the Church that after death each and every soul was judged by Christ. By faith, then, he reached the conclusion that although the soul was not the pure spirit that an angel was, it still could be conscious of itself, its past activities, and its judge even though the soul did not animate a body as it did on earth. Aristotle could not have drawn this conclusion because he did not have the faith. Aquinas drew it because he did have faith in the teachings of Church.
It follows that between the time of the death of human being and the Last Day a human being is not fully a human being because it does not have a body. While this does not detract either from the joy of the saved or the agony of the damned, it does show the importance of the body on the Last Day. Only then will human beings become fully so. For it is of their very nature that they are not angels, pure spirits, but composites of body and soul. For the saved, the bodies will be glorified bodies.
This kind of analysis would be impossible without a knowledge of the philosophical demonstrations involved in the teaching of hylomorphism. Nor would it be possible without having faith in the teaching of the particular judgment after death and the general judgment at the end of the world. Again we see the power of faith, which is available to the unlearned. But it is also available to the learned who then can then do the kind of theology that looks for help from philosophy and the kind of Christian philosophy that can be of assistance to theology.
An accurate knowledge of metaphysics can be of great help in understanding as much as humanly possible such mysteries as the Holy Trinity and the Incarnation. The method to be used is to take the truth of the mysteries for granted and then consider the role that metaphysics has played in its elucidation of such concepts as nature, person, soul, or body by considering the data supplied by human experience of the world as it is.
How did Aquinas handle this difficulty? He sided with Aristotle in saying that man is a single substance of body and soul, matter and form. He also sided with Aristotle in saying that the soul of man is dependent upon the senses for its knowledge. Yet he concluded that the soul after death could still operate, was aware of itself and of other beings. What was his evidence for saying so? It could not be the evidence or ordinary human experience, which, of course, is the experience of life on this side of the grave, the same evidence that Aristotle had. Then from where did Aquinas draw his evidence? It was from his faith in the teaching of the Church that after death each and every soul was judged by Christ. By faith, then, he reached the conclusion that although the soul was not the pure spirit that an angel was, it still could be conscious of itself, its past activities, and its judge even though the soul did not animate a body as it did on earth. Aristotle could not have drawn this conclusion because he did not have the faith. Aquinas drew it because he did have faith in the teachings of Church.
It follows that between the time of the death of human being and the Last Day a human being is not fully a human being because it does not have a body. While this does not detract either from the joy of the saved or the agony of the damned, it does show the importance of the body on the Last Day. Only then will human beings become fully so. For it is of their very nature that they are not angels, pure spirits, but composites of body and soul. For the saved, the bodies will be glorified bodies.
This kind of analysis would be impossible without a knowledge of the philosophical demonstrations involved in the teaching of hylomorphism. Nor would it be possible without having faith in the teaching of the particular judgment after death and the general judgment at the end of the world. Again we see the power of faith, which is available to the unlearned. But it is also available to the learned who then can then do the kind of theology that looks for help from philosophy and the kind of Christian philosophy that can be of assistance to theology.
An accurate knowledge of metaphysics can be of great help in understanding as much as humanly possible such mysteries as the Holy Trinity and the Incarnation. The method to be used is to take the truth of the mysteries for granted and then consider the role that metaphysics has played in its elucidation of such concepts as nature, person, soul, or body by considering the data supplied by human experience of the world as it is.
In doing theology, philosophy is a great help in understanding as much as humanly possible about God’s revelation that he, the One and Only, created the world from nothing, that angels are pure spirits, or that man is a composite of body and soul. These truths taught to children in the catechism as preambles to faith can be sharpened by the study of Christian metaphysics. In doing this the educated adult not only has a stronger intellectual hold on these religious truths. He also has a hold upon how to rank the realities he sees on earth in terms of their ultimate causes. In knowing the relative importance of God, angels, humans, animals, plants, and minerals, the metaphysician has the ability to rank the various sciences dealing with these objects. He has the habit of mind which enables him to deal all the data of human experience, not just the data supplied by the modern sciences of physics, chemistry, biology, and the rest.
We are speaking of course of a Christian metaphysics. There are also atheistic, agnostic, pagan, German or French metaphysics. They all can lay a claim to be philosophical because they all start with some kind of human experience of this world and then derive their consequences in the public and precise way of formal inference. But there is no rule that excludes Christians from looking at the world, deriving their first principle from it, and drawing conclusions that follow from first principles.
We are speaking of course of a Christian metaphysics. There are also atheistic, agnostic, pagan, German or French metaphysics. They all can lay a claim to be philosophical because they all start with some kind of human experience of this world and then derive their consequences in the public and precise way of formal inference. But there is no rule that excludes Christians from looking at the world, deriving their first principle from it, and drawing conclusions that follow from first principles.
The modern philosophers will of course try to push Catholics out of the circle of philosophers simply because they are Catholics with a Catholic’s interests and concerns that happen to be profoundly human concerns much deeper than those of physicists, biologists, or sociologists. Catholic philosophers refuse to be pushed out of the circle, not in a defensive or frightened way, but in the confident way of people of faith knowing that they have something to contribute to the Human City whether the powers-that-be approve or not. You can’t keep a good man (or woman) down who holds on to their humanity even when they are philosophizing. Their Catholic faith, which they hold in common with children, illiterates, and ordinary people, places them in the flock with the pope as the Vicar of Christ. Their faith enables them to hold onto their humanity. What greater guide do philosophers need in the arduous task of showing what the use of reason alone is capable of doing?
Etienne Gilson What Is a Metaphysics Done According to the Principles of St. Thomas Aquinas?
Owens says: “Though it [his book] derives its inspiration and its guidance overwhelmingly from the reading of St. Thomas Aquinas, it is nevertheless quite hesitant in making the claim to the title of a Thomistic metaphysics” (p. vii). He continues: “The interpretation of St. Thomas’ metaphysical principles are in fact so widely divergent today that any dogmatic claim to present faithfully the original Thomistic doctrine must be regarded as presumptuous, or at least premature” (p. vii). These statements were quite a surprise to me when I first read them over fifty years ago. I was educated under the impression you could take the Summa Theologica and extract the philosophical principles involved. But Owens, following his teacher Gilson, insists that the only purely metaphysical exposition that Aquinas ever wrote was the De Ente et Essentia. Consequently Owens refers to this work in his footnotes while he develops his argument in the body of his main text. The interpretation of the De Ente et Essentia is of course that of Joseph Owens, an interpretation about which other Thomists differ.
Since I side with Owens on this matter, I have been led to the conviction that the metaphysical tradition is not the same as the tradition of faith. In the faith there is absolutely one authoritative teaching, one pope, one priesthood, one set of sacraments. Should there be any disputes about any of these matters, they are to be settled by the Magisterium of the Church. Now the Church has not decided on the difference between Owens and his opponents. It is not her province. All that she has done is to make St. Thomas Aquinas the Common Doctor when introducing students to their theological and philosophical studies. After that professors and students are free to study others in the Catholic tradition. There is plenty of room for all when it comes to various theologies and philosophies.
Owens says: “Though it [his book] derives its inspiration and its guidance overwhelmingly from the reading of St. Thomas Aquinas, it is nevertheless quite hesitant in making the claim to the title of a Thomistic metaphysics” (p. vii). He continues: “The interpretation of St. Thomas’ metaphysical principles are in fact so widely divergent today that any dogmatic claim to present faithfully the original Thomistic doctrine must be regarded as presumptuous, or at least premature” (p. vii). These statements were quite a surprise to me when I first read them over fifty years ago. I was educated under the impression you could take the Summa Theologica and extract the philosophical principles involved. But Owens, following his teacher Gilson, insists that the only purely metaphysical exposition that Aquinas ever wrote was the De Ente et Essentia. Consequently Owens refers to this work in his footnotes while he develops his argument in the body of his main text. The interpretation of the De Ente et Essentia is of course that of Joseph Owens, an interpretation about which other Thomists differ.
Since I side with Owens on this matter, I have been led to the conviction that the metaphysical tradition is not the same as the tradition of faith. In the faith there is absolutely one authoritative teaching, one pope, one priesthood, one set of sacraments. Should there be any disputes about any of these matters, they are to be settled by the Magisterium of the Church. Now the Church has not decided on the difference between Owens and his opponents. It is not her province. All that she has done is to make St. Thomas Aquinas the Common Doctor when introducing students to their theological and philosophical studies. After that professors and students are free to study others in the Catholic tradition. There is plenty of room for all when it comes to various theologies and philosophies.
The main extrinsic standard to be used is faith in the teachings of the Church. But even here we have no absolutely clear standard which dispels all confusion. Mary wondered how she a virgin could become a mother. Joseph wondered how his betrothed could be with child when they had not yet come together. And while the angels sang at the birth of the Savior, the Holy Family had to flee into Egypt. It all worked out. God saw to that. But who would claim that the working out was a simple matter of having faith without worrying about where they were going. It then happened that Christ has a quiet life in a village for thirty years. When he finally entered his public life preaching that he was the Messiah, he was crucified for his effort by the powers-that-be. While faith gives the confidence to say Christ is winning even now while the devil seems to have overcome the world, it is a faith that follows the bumpy road amid the encircling gloom, as Newman says. Full clarity comes only with the sight of God face to face in the Beatific Vision. But you have to die first to get to that vision.
There is a kind of scandal to the followers of St. Thomas Aquinas in the fact that many of his basic principles are still matters of dispute. But that is simply the way that human beings have in trying to understand the human work of a human being though he be a genius. But there seems to be even more of a scandal in seeing faithful Catholics differing about the best way the pope should deal with the modern world. But neither of these disputes about the nature of philosophy or about the Church’s stance to the modern world are really scandals. They are simply the efforts of the faithful in taking one step at a time in discovering what the truth is. Only at the Last Judgment will the veil be completely lifted. In the meantime the faithful muddle through as best they can, certain of the goal they are seeking, but uncertain about the precise way to get there.
As an institution still existing in this modern world, a remarkable achievement, Holy Apostles College and Seminary embodies the tradition of faith and reason being the two wings by which mankind rises to the fullness of truth. But the line of flight is not the straight shot of a rocket thundering off into the sky. Rather it is the rather wobbly flight of wings moving up and down until the battered birds get to where they’re going.
The question naturally arises as to whether a knowledge of theology and philosophy is necessary to attain this sight. Of course not! Supernatural faith is given both to the educated and the non-educated. But let us recall that supernatural faith came to pagans who already had a natural knowledge of God. They had reason and therefore the ability to see the existence of the world as an effect of God’s power. Having reason, they had a conscience that distinguished between right and wrong actions. Thus even before the coming of revelation through the message of Abraham, the Prophets and Jesus Christ, men were able to be saved. But to enter the Gates of Paradise Christ would have to open those gates, which he did by his resurrection and descent into hell.
As an institution still existing in this modern world, a remarkable achievement, Holy Apostles College and Seminary embodies the tradition of faith and reason being the two wings by which mankind rises to the fullness of truth. But the line of flight is not the straight shot of a rocket thundering off into the sky. Rather it is the rather wobbly flight of wings moving up and down until the battered birds get to where they’re going.
The question naturally arises as to whether a knowledge of theology and philosophy is necessary to attain this sight. Of course not! Supernatural faith is given both to the educated and the non-educated. But let us recall that supernatural faith came to pagans who already had a natural knowledge of God. They had reason and therefore the ability to see the existence of the world as an effect of God’s power. Having reason, they had a conscience that distinguished between right and wrong actions. Thus even before the coming of revelation through the message of Abraham, the Prophets and Jesus Christ, men were able to be saved. But to enter the Gates of Paradise Christ would have to open those gates, which he did by his resurrection and descent into hell.
We may conclude, then, that even those who have never heard of Christ may also be saved if they follow their conscience. Now it is hard for us to judge whether individuals do so or not. Today many have been born and raised in a household of atheists or agnostics and so are not responsible for the beliefs they have inherited. How responsible they are for maintaining these beliefs is hard to say. There is the possibility that they have been inconsistent, adhering intellectually to atheistic or agnostics views that are against the natural law while at the same time being merciful and just in their personal relations to others. There are good people despite the evil of their general professions just as there are evil people despite the goodness of their general profession. For better or worse, people can be very inconsistent. Only God is qualified to judge the individual exactly as far as his or her eternal destiny is concerned. While the Church gives the divinely inspired signposts on the path to salvation, God is the final judge of the human being.
The upshot is that the formal study of metaphysics is beneficial to all those who have the opportunity for higher education. Did not Plato say that metaphysics was preparation for death, which was the gateway to an eternal afterlife? Did not Aristotle say that the contemplation of the gods was the highest activity of human beings in this life? To separate the study of metaphysics, the highest of the human sciences, from the study of the other sciences, which is the practice of the modern university, is a great crime against human reason. This separation will not reduce man to the status of a pagan but rather to the status far below the pagan, that of the totally inhuman that would make even the animals blush if they could. Animals cannot go against their nature. Human beings can, the banishment of metaphysics from the university being a prime example.
For Personal Reflection and Group Sharing:
• What was your understanding of the word “metaphysics” before reading Dr. Geraghty’s article?
• If you have studied metaphysics, what do you remember as most helpful?
• Do you think that Catholic university education is better with metaphysics being an elective rather than a required course?
RESPONSES TO THIS CHAPTER:
Response of Kathleen Brouillette:
A recent article on yahoo.com listed philosophy as one of the top five useless college majors, citing a high unemployment rate. Yet that same article reminded me that the consequences of the lack of such education may be not merely unemployment or a decline in the ability to think and reason, but also the eternal loss of souls.
In Fr. Legault’s Logic course (Fr. Legault is a senior professor of Thomistic philosophy at Holy Apostles College and Seminary) we learned Canadian children are required to take Logic from their earliest years. The vast difference in the way my fellow students interpreted words through life experience rather than their true meaning in Logic showed me how much easier it would be for people to think and to communicate if we all meant the same thing when we speak. Language is so critical! If everyone were required to take courses in Metaphysics early in elementary education, we would be using a similar thought process. While we might not be thinking exactly the same, or be even on the same page, we might be closer to being in the same book or, at least, in the same library, so to speak.
When Catholic schools became the only ones to require Metaphysics, there was a breach in the educational process between Catholic and public schools in the U.S. Now, with even Catholic schools no longer requiring Metaphysics and Logic, and so much reliance on technology, education is distancing itself from thinking.
My granddaughter attends a Franciscan college where she is not even required to take a Catholic religion class, let alone Christian Metaphysics or (other courses in) Christian Philosophy. Only one religion class is required and she can take Buddhism if she chooses!! It is a frightening thing to look at the lack of hope in current generations. It isn’t a far stretch to see that the lack of exposure to and understanding of Metaphysics is depriving our youth of belief in the existence God. I have Confirmation students who have dropped out of the Religious Education Program because they do not believe in God. Public schools and their methods are directly involved in such doubts, which lead to hopelessness. They may even contribute to the loss of heaven for some souls.
We cannot decry the lack of attendance at our Masses and in our Religious Education Programs if we fail to guide our people. Telling them there is a God and limiting their education to memorization of the Ten Commandments and the Seven Sacraments is not enough. Unless we help them use their powers of reason to obtain a conviction regarding the existence of God, the corresponding legitimacy of His power and authority, and the promise of eternal life for those who love Him, there will be no faith, no hope, no love, no peace, and a sparsely populated heaven.
Response of David Tate:
Before starting my education in philosophy, I did not know the word metaphysics. If I thought about it, I probably would have gotten it confused as being some kind of weird synonym for paranormal. Reese (Dictionary of Philosophy and Religion) defines the word as, “the study of ultimates”. Another source defines it as knowing, “what the real nature of things is.” (The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Paul Edwards) Joseph Owens, in his own book, defines it as, “the study of what comes after the physical.”
Many years ago, I was standing with someone, and we were looking through my telescope. After looking at a selection of objects, this person turned to me and asked, “What does it all mean?” This response for me typifies what most people seem to think about when they get the opportunity to see a baby born, or a blazing summer sunset, or fly above the earth in a jet at 35,000 feet. If I had been asked what metaphysics means twenty years ago, I would have liked to have been one of those that answered metaphysically, “It’s about what it all means.”
For all seminarians, I would have to agree with Pope John Paul II, when he stated that,” a solid philosophical formation… is a necessary propaedeutic for theological studies.” (SAPIENTIA CHRISTIANA, 1979, #72) I feel that metaphysics should continue to be a required course for all students; including the lay students.
Response of Tommie Kim:
The fact that the principle of human intellect and faith are inseparable enabled the Gospel propagation into the Western world. John Paul II also mentions the important relationship between reason and faith in the encyclical Fides et Ratio. Only when we know and love God, can a human comprehend the truth of the self. Faith is needed in order to realize that God exists in all events of our lives. Therefore, sound understanding of metaphysics will help build sound theology. The autonomy of philosophy is necessary for human reason to reach truth. Therefore, the Church needs to pay attention (to what is happening in the philosophical world) since a false philosophical approach leads into a denial of faith and often into atheism. For any school founded on Catholic faith, I believe that metaphysics needs to be a required course. Atheistic tendencies are leading many people to pursue only worldly happiness. This tendency develops further into scientism, with its agenda that with scientific development man can dominate the world.
RSS Feed