Contrary to the claims of the Modernists,
St Thomas is not held universally to have rejected the Immaculate
Conception. In fact, the principles of St Thomas provided the
basis for the definition of the dogma, when it finally came.
It is indescribably frustrating when otherwise-pious Catholics
point to St Thomas's supposed error on this point as a way of
reducing his credibility. No doubt they are unaware of his absolutely
unique position as a theologian and Doctor of the Universal Church.
No doubt they are unaware that Canon Law prescribes that all
professors of theology are to hold and teach the "arguments,
doctrine, and principles" of St. Thomas. Canon 1366, Section
2 : "The study of philosophy and theology and the teaching
of these sciences to their students must be accurately carried
out by Professors (in seminaries etc.) according to the arguments,
doctrine, and principles of St. Thomas which they are inviolately
to hold." Canon 589 prescribes that religious are to do
likewise. No other doctor holds this place in Catholic theology.
But ignorance of these facts does not
explain the astonishing ease with which many today will throw
out the one-liner; "Oh, St Thomas was wrong on the Immaculate
Conception." Really? And I suppose they've studied the
question well enough to have an opinion? Possibly the briefest
way to deal with such nonsense is to ask the armchair expert if
they could kindly explain what St Thomas DID teach on this doctrine.
Embarrassing silence is the usual response. This short note
is intended to answer that question, albeit not in great detail,
but at least by presenting the scholarly views of those learned
enough to hold an opinion on the matter.
Catholic Encyclopedia: "St. Thomas
at first pronounced in favour of the doctrine in his treatise
on the "Sentences" (inI. Sent. c. 44, q. I ad 3), yet
in his "Summa Theologica" he concluded against it.
Much discussion has arisen as to whether St. Thomas did or did
not deny that the Blessed Virgin was immaculate at the instant
of her animation, and learned books have been written to vindicate
him from having actually drawn the negative conclusion. For this
controversy see: Cornoldi, "Sententia S. Thomae etc.",
(2nd ed., Naples, 1870); Ronard de Card, "L'ordre des Freres-precheurs
et l'immaculee Conception" (Brussels, 1864), Pesch, "Prael.
dogm." III (Freiburg, 1895), 170; Heinrich-Gutberlet, "Dogmat.
Theol.", VII (Mainz, 1896), 436; Tobbe, "Die Stellung
des hl. Thomas zu der unbefl. Empfangnis" (Munster, 1892);
C. M. Schneider, "Die unbefl. Empfangnis und die Erbsunde"
(Ratisbon, 1892); Pohle, "Lehrbuch d. Dogmatik", II
(Paderborn, 1903), 254. Yet it is hard to say that St. Thomas
did not require an instant at least, after the animation of Mary,
before her sanctification. His great difficulty appears to have
arisen from the doubt as to how she could have been redeemed if
she had not sinned. This difficulty he raised in no fewer than
ten passages in his writings (see, e.g., "Summa Theol.",
III, Q. xxvii, a. 2, ad Sum). But while St. Thomas thus held
back from the essential point of the doctrine, he himself laid
down the principles which, after they had been drawn together
and worked out, enabled other minds to furnish the true solution
of this difficulty from his own premises."
In other words, the author of this article thinks that St. Thomas decided against the Immaculate Conception, at least early in his career, but admits that many others have held that St. Thomas did no such thing. The key isue to grasp is that St. Thomas was very concerned to ensure that a dogma was not denied by those seeking to emphasise Mary's sinlessness - and that dogma was the Redemption. Our Lord redeemed all men, without exception. St. Thomas's emphasis that Mary too was redeemed is what has led to the controversy.
Further proof that it is not a "given" that St Thomas Aquinas denied the Immaculate Conception, is found in the following survey of the opinions of theologians on this question, from Volume VI, "Mariology", of Pohle-Preuss, Dogmatic Theology (12 volumes) Herder 1953, page 67:
"5. The Teaching of St Thomas
--- Theologians are divided in their opinion as to what was the
mind of St Thomas in regard to the Immaculate Conception. Some
frankly admit that he opposed what in his day was not yet a defined
dogma, but insist that he virtually admitted what he formally
denied. Others claim that the Angelic Doctor expressly defended
the Immaculate Conception and that the (about fifteen) adverse
passages quoted from his writings must be regarded as later interpolations.
Between these two extremes stand two other groups of theologians,
one of which holds that St Thomas was undecided in his attitude
towards the Immaculate Conception, while the other merely maintains
the impossibility of proving that he opposed it."
Pohle gives examples of each type of
theologian - about four or five names for each group. So, we
see from this that the 'worst case' we can assert is that St Thomas
proved the Immaculate Conception with his principles, and yet
failed to clearly formulate the conclusion, which of course later
theologians did. Indeed the definition of 1854 was based entirely
on his principles.
Any layman then, who says blankly that
"St Thomas denied the Immaculate Conception," is not
only rash, but demonstrates his ignorance of the opinions of theologians,
the majority of whom cannot assert this but indeed at a minimum
say that he was uncommitted.
Personally I'd like to see all of the
arguments of those who insist that he defended it, for my love
of St Thomas is such that I would easily fall in with these "extremists"
and look forward in the hope of his gratitude in Heaven! One
such argument is this : St Thomas cannot have denied that which
was not yet formulated. What he denied was that the Blessed Virgin
was not redeemed, which assertion is indeed a heresy which he
was right to oppose.
An example of his teaching is the following
: "Purity is constituted by a recession from impurity, and
therefore it is possible to find some creature purer than all
the rest, namely one not contaminated by any taint of sin; such
was the purity of the Blessed Virgin, who was immune from original
and actual sin, yet under God, inasmuch as there was in her the
potentiality of sin." From the Commentary on the Book
I submit that the average layman, if
presented with this, would assert that it was a perfect summation
of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. If nothing else
it proves that we should hold our unfounded opinions in check,
knowing that far greater men have puzzled over this question and
not succeeded it solving it. The very fact that theologians debate
what the mind of St Thomas was on this question shows as well
as anything his unique position in theology.
August 2nd, 1998
Feast of St. Alphonsus Liguori