A FEW CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING NEO-THOMISM

No one nowadays can contest the fact that moving closer to the history of medieval philosophy implies much more than a purely historical interest. To emphasize: does medieval philosophy tell us something in general and Saint Thomas in particular? This problem covers several issues: the rebirth of the philosophy of Christian antiquity, especially Augustinianism, the rebirth of Thomism and Scotism. It is obviously that some want a reborn Thomism, while others would settle with a revitalized Augustinianism, other part claims to be from Scotus, and Suarez places aside its own followers. One thing seems to be extremely clear: the French Revolution did not bring any favors to Christianity in general and to the occidental one in particular, and Restoration does not end the religious crisis. The Revolution confuses the traditional ideas and philosophy brings into discussion the very fundaments of metaphysics and religion. Catholic thinking seems helpless in front of neutralizing the subversive action of these hostile trends. Then, after the Second World War, we witness a crisis in Christianity, temporary, but serious, a crisis which at least questions the traditional values. Thomism is not saved either, since Catholic intellectuals, priests or laics wonder whether the recognition and rebirth of Thomism (in the form of Neo-Thomism) is in fact an exceeded and outdated phenomenon, even of bad taste. The problem becomes: is it happy the selection of Thomas as master thinker? Does his doctrine still answer (manifest as it is as Neo-Thomism) the present needs of Church? This text tries an answer as it has been formulated by Fernand Van Steenberghen.