The Salvation of Atheists and Catholic Dogmatic Theology by Stephen Bullivant, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2012, pp xi + 215, £65.00, hbk
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
From Ritual Poems (1971) to Stones and Stars (2013), Paul Murray OP has demonstrated that he is a poet as well as a theologian.The question is whether the same may be said of Thomas Aquinas.That he was a 'man of prayer', and a true 'Christian contemplative', Murray establishes in the first part of this book, not a contentious thesis one might have thought, except that he starts with some extremely negative 'revelations' about Thomas's inner life that we owe to Adrienne von Speyr, the mystic friend of Hans Urs von Balthasar.Murray examines in detail four prayers that seem to owe a good deal to Humbert of Romans, fifth Master OP (1254-63), which thus place Thomas in an emerging tradition of Dominican spirituality.In the second part of the book Murray presents Thomas the exegete, taking soundings particularly in the commentaries on Paul and in the late, incomplete commentary on the Psalms, long neglected though beginning to be regarded as one of his finest works.For years we have been reminded that Thomas was primarily engaged, both at the university in Paris and in Dominican houses, in expounding Scripture.Students of the Summa Theologiae have long been advised that, while it is no doubt his greatest work, he can never have intended it to be studied in isolation from Scripture.As Murray shows, Thomas's theology is deeply Pauline (however much indebted at key points to Aristotle).The psalms, recited every day, contain the whole of the Gospel, or so Thomas believed.Finally, in the third section, we turn to the texts that Thomas composed for the Office and Mass of Corpus Christi, going on to consider the 'Adoro te devote', 'the finest prayer of Aquinas'.This is Thomas the 'poet of the Eucharist', as Murray puts it.There is a problem.While Murray thanks Adriano Oliva OP of the Leonine Commission for help with texts as yet unpublished, including the Corpus Christi Lessons, he makes no reference to Oliva's aside (in an article on quite unrelated matters), to the effect that 'the Leonine Commission does not regard "Adoro [te] devote" to be an authentic work of St Thomas' (see The Thomist July 2012: p. 398).That sounds pretty definitive.One problem has always been that it apparently took fifty years after his death before Thomas's authorship was mentioned.Then, doctrinally, the line 'Seeing, touching, tasting are in thee deceived (fallitur)' has seemed incompatible with Thomas's repeated insistence that there is no deceptio in this sacrament (e.g.ST IIIa q.75 art.5 ad 2m).As regards the delay, Claire Le Brun-Gouanvic, in her edition of William of Tocco's Ystoria sancti Thome de Aquino (Toronto 1996), surely demonstrates that this text, by a much younger friar who actually knew Thomas in his last days at Naples, includes, in its fourth and final version (1323), the 'Adoro te', attributing it to him.Then, as regards the doctrine, it is sight, touch and taste that are 'deceived', precisely in contrast to hearing (the words of consecration), which is not a thought that Thomas would have self-evidently rejected.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».