MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134568342 · doi:10.1353/tho.2020.0024

Sanctified Thought and Affection in Aquinas's Teaching on Nature and Grace

2020· article· en· W3134568342 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Romanus Cessario

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Philosophy and Theology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffectionVirtuePhilosophyHabitusMetaphysicsOrder (exchange)TheologyObligationEpistemologySociologyLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sanctified Thought and Affection in Aquinas's Teaching on Nature and Grace Romanus Cessario O.P. THE WORK OF Fr. Servais-Théodore Pinckaers occupies a signal place within the Thomist commentatorial tradition.1 Consider, for instance, one well-known feature of Fr. Pinckaers's work, namely, his signature 1960 article that reminded the theological world that virtue is not a habit, at least in the modern sense of the term. This essay finds its pedigree within the Thomist commentatorial tradition.2 Vernon J. Bourke [End Page 467] (d. 1998), a North American Thomist, illustrates a proximate link in the chain of interpreters who correctly taught about Aquinas's use of habitus. Bourke's 1938 doctoral dissertation from the University of Toronto, Habitus as a Perfectant of Potency in the Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas, just underwent a new printing in 2017.3 One of course may cite other ligaments to the commentatorial tradition, especially from among French–speaking Thomists.4 Father Pinckaers's highly regarded disdain for moral casuistry led him to eschew the discussion and adjudication of individual moral cases. On one of the few occasions that I heard him speak about a particular moral problem, I frankly found myself taken aback. A young Dominican at the Albertinum required an exam in order to obtain his faculties for hearing confessions. Father Pinckaers and I were among the assigned examiners. The question of what moral obligation governs one's paying government taxes arose. As an American with an eye on the assiduousness of the Internal Revenue Service, I was in the process of pointing out the grave moral responsibility that obliges one to respect tax assessments. Legal justice, I insisted, requires payment down to the last penny. Father Pinckaers interrupted my instruction to the candidate with this presumably Gift-of-the-Holy-Spirit correction. "No, you don't have to pay every Franc demanded," he told the young priest; "Everyone knows governments over-charge!" I thought to myself, could this view ever qualify as a Probabiliorist opinion about tax paying? In any case, I recall this personal experience with Father Pinckaers to explain why I begin this communication with a very concrete moral case, one that has bedeviled Catholic moral theologians and priest confessors for a long time. [End Page 468] I. Sanctified Affection Catholic teaching on masturbation affords one of the few instances in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) where remnants of post-Tridentine casuistry appear explicitly. CCC 2252 includes a list of factors that may attenuate the masturbator's moral culpability. At the same time, the text upholds the harm that autoeroticism brings to a person. One eminent twentieth-century Christian theologian explains this delicate matter in the following words. For me the real evil of masturbation would be that it takes an appetite which, in lawful use, leads the individual out of himself to complete (and correct) his own personality in that of another (and finally in children and grandchildren) and turns it back; sends the man into the prison of himself, there to keep a harem of imaginary brides. This harem, once admitted, works against his ever getting out and really uniting with a real woman. For the harem is always accessible, always subservient, calls for no sacrifices or adjustments, and can be endowed with erotic and psychological attractions which no woman can rival. Finally, among these fantasies the man is always adored, always the perfect lover; no demand is made on his unselfishness, no mortification ever imposed on his vanity. In the end, they become merely the medium through which he increasingly adores himself.5 These words come from the pen of the English novelist and Christian apologist Clive Staples Lewis (1898-1963). In this brief excerpt from a letter sent in 1956 to a certain Keith Masson, Lewis draws attention to the place that the sense passions of the soul hold in the Christian life. Because the topic of the passiones animae requires considerable explanation for a contemporary audience, I follow the practice of Eric D'Arcy who, in a simplified manner, translates the phrase as "emotions."6 Of course, the complexity [End Page 469] of Aquinas's psychological...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly ReviewSame topicMedieval Philosophy and TheologyFrench-language works237,207