Aristotelianism of Thomas Aquinas substantiation of the principles of Christian theology. The main provisions of the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas

What phenomena was associated with an acute "crisis of faith" in medieval Western Europe? Who and how, opposing this, tried to combine logic and faith? What are the works of Thomas Aquinas about? What evidence does he give for the existence of God? By Viktor Petrovich Lega.

Traditionally, scholasticism is associated with the name of Thomas Aquinas, who lived in the 13th century, one of the most famous representatives of this trend.

But in order to understand his philosophy and the reasons that led him to his own philosophical method, you need to go back several centuries and at least briefly consider Arabic philosophy.

From West to East and back to West

So, let's go back to the 5th-6th century - the time when philosophical schools were closed one after another. First, according to the edict of Emperor Zeno, the Aristotelian school is closed, then Emperor Justinian closes Plato's school - the Academy. The reason is quite understandable: the fight against heresies, the fight against Origenism, which could well be fueled by these philosophical schools. Many philosophers, fearing persecution, move with their libraries to the East - to Damascus and Baghdad, where the so-called "House of Wisdom" appears, in which these books will be stored.

The works of Plato, Aristotle, Hippocrates, Galen, Ptolemy... And in many respects the reason for the so-called "Arab Renaissance" - the emergence of Arabic philosophy, mathematics, medicine, astronomy - is precisely in the fact that the Arabs turned out to be very good students and successors of the great Greek and Byzantine learning. They translate a lot into Arabic. Even such a funny thing: we say that Ptolemy wrote a work called "Almagest"; but the real name of the work of the great Greek astronomer is “The Great Building”, The word “great” in Greek sounds like “megiste” and with the Arabic article “al” it entered our lexicon. But confusion also arose: the works of Plotinus also got into the Arab world, but no one knew whose works they were, and they decided that this was also Aristotle - so the works of Plotinus were called "Theology of Aristotle".

It is on this foundation that subsequently arises - in the 9th-11th centuries - a wonderful Arab philosophy, which is represented by such names as al-Farabi (872-950) and Ibn Sina (980-1037), best known in Europe under the name of Avicenna. These two thinkers made up a philosophical and religious system, where they explained the main provisions of Islam - a monotheistic religion, based on the ideas of Aristotle and, without noticing it, on the ideas of Plotinus.

But at the end of the 11th - beginning of the 12th century, the famous Muslim theologian al-Ghazali (1058-1111) attacked them with strong criticism. Al-Ghazali began to argue that philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, al-Farabi and Ibn Sina are the most dangerous for Islam, because they preach the most radical atheism under the guise of religion, because their teaching says nothing about the posthumous fate of people , about the Personal God, Who worries about the fate of each person, there is no doctrine of the creation of the world, because they write that the world is eternal and God is only its prime mover.

Ibn Rushd (1126-1198), better known in Europe under the name of Averroes, made an attempt to defend philosophy from the criticism of al-Ghazali. It should be noted that Ibn Rushd lived in Spain, which at that time was conquered by the Arabs. And along with the conquerors, of course, scientists and philosophers came, so Spain turned out to be very developed scientifically, culturally and philosophically. The books of Aristotle were also included.

Ibn Rushd began to argue with al-Ghazali, showing that philosophy does not contradict Islam - on the contrary, it proves the same thing - only in a different language. And if there are contradictions, they arise because the Qur'an, taken literally, actually leads us to an incorrect teaching about God, to an understanding of God as a kind of person who can be angry and rejoice. But after all, there are no changes in God, He is eternal, exists outside of time, therefore the doctrine about Him can only be philosophical. And the Quran with its simple words, examples and images was written for an ordinary person who does not understand philosophy, he must be frightened with eternal torment or, conversely, promised him eternal bliss, because this is the only way to establish morality in society.

However, the time was already different, Islam was gaining strength, the teachings of Ibn Rushd in Islam were not supported. The decline of philosophical and scientific thought in general is coming in the Islamic world. And due to the fact that between Spain and medieval Catholic Europe there were close trade ties, the books of Aristotle and other ancient philosophers with comments by Arab philosophers will already fall into the Western European Catholic world. The consequence of this will be a most serious crisis, which will be called the "Averroist crisis" - after the name of the Arab philosopher Averroes (that is, Ibn Rushd).

Aristotle's attack

So what is the essence of this crisis? As we have already noted in our previous conversations, Western Europe, culturally and intellectually, was very much inferior to Byzantium and, as we see, to the Arab world. The philosophical heritage of antiquity was practically unknown to the Western world. The retellings of Augustine or Cicero, some translations of the logical treatises of Aristotle and Plato's Timaeus - that is, perhaps, all that the scholastics had. And, of course, they dreamed of reading the works of Plato and Aristotle, which were inaccessible to them. It was thought that Aristotle, who created the science of thinking, set out the absolute truth about nature and man. And so, through the Arab world, the works of Aristotle get to the West - and what? It turns out that this Greek philosopher proves something completely different than what we read in Holy Scripture and the Church Fathers. It turns out that Aristotle convincingly, logically proves that the world is eternal, and not created by God; proves that the human soul is actually threefold, that the plant and animal souls die together with the body, while the rational one merges with God. However, there is no personal immortality. It turns out that God knows only Himself, He does not know individual things and phenomena, including a person, therefore He does not hear our prayers. And there is no Divine Providence.

It turns out that Aristotle convincingly, logically refutes Christianity. The reaction of the Catholic Church was immediate: to ban Aristotle. The reaction of Western intellectuals is also obvious: if Aristotle was banned, then it is urgent to translate it into Latin in order to know what was banned. Forbidden fruit is known to be sweet. Thus, supporters of Aristotle appear. Since the treatises of Aristotle are rather difficult to understand, and Averroes interpreted them quite popularly and from the standpoint of monotheism, this movement was called Latin Averroism.

Seeger of Brabant understood: both Christianity is the truth, and the philosophy of Aristotle is the truth. How to be?

One of the main representatives of this trend was Siger of Brabant (1240–1280), dean of the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Paris. He can be called a rather dramatic figure: as a Christian, Seager understood perfectly well that Christianity is the truth; as a philosopher, he could not refute Aristotle - he understood that the works of Aristotle contained the truth. Then Seeger proposed a concept that was called the "concept of two truths." There are two truths: the truth of reason and the truth of faith. They contradict each other. They cannot be connected. But, apparently, such is the nature of man, changed by sin.

The Church realized that it was not so easy to solve the "problem of Aristotle" by prohibitions alone. A commission was created that worked for more than a dozen years, solving the problem: how to connect Christianity with Aristotle, but its work did not lead to any result.

And only two people were able to develop acceptable concepts: Albert the Great (or Albert von Bolstedt; 1206-1280) and his student - the famous and even greater because of his fame, Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). Albert the Great will be glorified by the Catholic Church, although rather late - in 1931, he will be declared the patron of scientists and sciences. Albert was engaged in all sciences, his legacy is huge - about 40 volumes. He was interested in everything: physics, medicine, philosophy, theology ... And he trusted Aristotle, although he could not explain how to combine Aristotle and Christianity. However, he wrote: “When there is no agreement between them [philosophy and Revelation], then as regards faith and morality, Augustine should be believed more than philosophers. But if we were talking about medicine, I would have believed Hippocrates and Galen more; and when it comes to physics, then I believe Aristotle - after all, he knew nature better than anyone. Albert boldly declared: Aristotle's physics is the most correct, real.

This confidence of Albert in the correctness of the Greek philosophers and scientists will be transferred to Thomas Aquinas.

To Paris, to Paris!

Thomas was born in southern Italy, in the Kingdom of Naples, near the city of Aquino, into a noble family of knights. His father, a wealthy feudal lord, sent the boy to study at a school at a Benedictine monastery, after which Thomas entered the University of Naples. While still a student of the monastery school, Thomas showed such remarkable success that the abbot of the monastery decided that it was Thomas who would become his successor. Thomas's father did not object to such a career for his son, but Thomas said that he had already become a monk, but ... only of the Dominican order. Because the Dominican order sets itself the task of protecting the truth of the Catholic Church from all sorts of heresies. Thomas already felt a taste for serious theology, and the Benedictines were an ordinary monastic order, not deeply involved in the sciences.

The father was angry, locked Thomas on the top floor of his castle, saying: you will leave here only when you give your consent to life in a Benedictine monastery (the abbot of the monastery even received the consent of the Pope of Rome for a Dominican monk to become the abbot of the monastery - all for the sake of a unique Thomas!). Thomas was under house arrest for almost two years. But either the father saw the stubbornness of his son and had mercy, or the sister of Thomas brought him a rope ladder, along which he was able to escape from his imprisonment, but the young man ended up in Paris. He became a student at the University of Paris, where he began to study with Albert the Great, who inspired him with confidence in the truth of both Christianity and Aristotle. Albert considered Foma his best student, and therefore, when he moved to Cologne, he took him with him.

In Cologne, Albert created his own center for the study of theology. For some time, Thomas worked and studied in Cologne with Albert, then returned to Paris - already as a venerable theologian. He taught at the University of Paris; after some time he was called to Rome, where he lived and taught for ten years, but then returned to Paris again.

Take the challenge

The fact that Thomas was summoned to Paris on purpose was due to the increased popularity of the works of Seeger of Brabant: he had too many students and supporters. Averroism was a scientific challenge to Christianity: can the Church withstand this blow?

The thirteenth century was a century of serious testing of Christianity in Western Europe. This situation was to some extent similar to the one in which the modern Christian world found itself, constantly hearing reproaches from science: "Science has proven that there is no God." In the XIII century, this phrase could sound something like this: “Aristotle - that is, science - proved that God is different. He is not the Creator, He is not the Savior, He is not the Provider. He is eternal, passionless mind. And man is a mortal animal."

In the 20th century, after many centuries of oblivion, interest in the teachings of Thomas Aquinas increased unusually. Even a whole trend, very authoritative, arises in Catholicism - neo-Thomism (from the Latin pronunciation of the name of Thomas - Thomas). The reason for this interest is quite understandable: once again a conflict arises between science and Christianity. Of course, the nature of this conflict is different from the situation of the 13th century, but the method proposed by Thomas - that there is only one truth and that therefore there can be no contradiction in principle between true science and Christianity - can be applied in the modern world.

We have only the mind in common, and the tool for operating with the mind is philosophy

Living and teaching in Paris, Thomas argues with the Averroists, with Siger of Brabant, writes his main works, among which stand out the “Sum of Theology”, which Thomas will write for many years, but will not finish this huge multi-volume work, and the work that will become known under the heading "The Sum of Philosophy", although its true name is "The Sum of the Truths of the Catholic Faith Against the Pagans". Why did it begin to be called "The Sum of Philosophy"? The reason is simple. Foma develops a dispute methodology. In order to debate, one must rely on something in common, with which both disputants agree. If we are discussing with a heretic, then the Holy Scripture is common to us, we both agree on its truth. If we are discussing with another monotheist, a Muslim or a Jew, we share our understanding of God. And how to discuss with an atheist or with a pagan? We have only the mind in common, and the tool for operating with the mind is philosophy.

“The Sum of Philosophy”, of course, is a more philosophical work, and “The Sum of Theology”, as its name implies, is devoted to theological issues, but Thomas solves theological issues, relying largely on philosophy. It is no coincidence that the famous saying is erroneously attributed to him: “Philosophy is the servant of theology,” although this idea was expressed already in the 3rd century by Clement of Alexandria. But the method used by Thomas shows that he is in complete agreement with this statement.

Thomas died early enough, having lived for about 50 years, on the way to the Lyon Cathedral, where an attempt was made to unite Catholics and Orthodox.

See from two sides

Let us now turn to Thomas' work, The Summa Theologia. It was written, of course, in Latin - the language in which scientists and theologians of that time wrote and communicated. By the way, a remarkable invention is a common language, it allows you to unite theologians of all European countries.

Foma notes that not all questions can be solved by philosophy. There are questions that exceed our reason - they do not contradict reason, but exceed it: these are questions about the incarnation of God, about the Holy Trinity, about salvation. But although these are purely theological questions, philosophy can help to resolve them, for example, to provide evidence for the existence of God, His singularity, His eternity, and so on. And although many, including Averroists, say that there is no unity between faith and reason, and one cannot use reason to approach what is knowable only by faith, at the very beginning of the Summa Theology, Thomas refutes this point of view, proving that it is not only possible, but also correctly approach the questions of knowledge of God, relying on both faith and reason. He explains this with very simple examples. There are two kinds of sciences, for example, geometry and perspective theory. The artist will not prove the theorem, he will believe the geometer, who will prove it, based on the axioms of his science. So there are primary sciences, like geometry, for example, and there are secondary ones, like perspective theory, which is based on the belief in the truth of geometric positions. And in the knowledge of God there are primary and secondary sciences. Of course, God Himself knows best about God, and we receive revelation from Him and believe this revelation, while receiving the fullness of truth.

Besides, Foma explains, one and the same object can be approached from different angles. Here, for example, the Earth. The Earth can be considered as a planet - from the point of view of astronomy, and can be considered as an object of physics. This will not be a contradiction, it will be a consideration of the same object from different points of view. Therefore, why shouldn't we also talk about God using two different sciences: Divine revelation received from God Himself, this fullness of truth, and philosophy, which comprehends God by reason. There can be no contradiction here, because the object is the same - God. A contradiction will arise only if a mistake is made somewhere. And where? Of course, God cannot err in His revelation. Only a philosopher can make a mistake. So if a contradiction arises between philosophy and theology, then it is obvious that the philosopher was mistaken.

Bullish pressure

Such a case is known. Once Thomas, who was nicknamed the Mute Bull ... I will digress about this nickname. Why "mute" is understandable: Thomas was all the time immersed in his thoughts and avoided all sorts of conversations, society. From the outside it looked like he was dumb. Why "bull"? Various explanations are possible. Thomas was obese by nature, and this is such a childish “teaser”, but most likely he was nicknamed the Bull because he went ahead like a bull, not paying attention to anything. Here is one example. Aristotle for the Catholics of that time was clearly a non-Christian philosopher. Thomas said: “You don’t understand anything. Truth is one. There cannot be two truths. And Aristotle teaches about nature correctly, without contradicting Christianity. Even to the remarks of the Bishop of Paris, who included some of the theses of Thomas Aquinas, along with those of Siger of Brabant, among heretical provisions, Thomas did not react in any way. I decided that Vladyka did not understand the problem.

Thomas slammed his huge fist on the table: “This is what will bring the Manichaeans to reason!”

But back to the case I wanted to talk about. Thomas was invited to dinner with the king. He sat at the table, immersed, as usual, in his thoughts. The society was busy with some kind of conversation - when suddenly there was a roar. Thomas, a fairly obese man, slammed his huge fist on the table and said: “This is what will bring the Manichaeans to reason!” Yes, Thomas argued not only with Averroism, but also with the most ancient enemy of Christianity - Manichaeism, the fallacy of which was shown even by Blessed Augustine.

As for Averroism, the apparent contradiction between Christianity and Aristotle among the Latin Averroists, according to Thomas, arose because of too much confidence in Averroes. For some reason, everyone thought that Averroes understood Aristotle absolutely exactly. The Arabs even had a saying that, they say, Aristotle explained nature, and Averroes explained Aristotle. Averroes was so sensitive to Aristotle's logic that he refused to interpret a book called Aristotle's Theology! (This Arab scholar did not know that these were the works of Plotinus, but he felt that they were not Aristotle.)

It was believed that Averroes understood the spirit of Aristotle as accurately as possible. Much better than Ibn Sina and other interpreters. But Thomas began to assert that Averroes did not understand Aristotle and therefore it is necessary to turn directly to Aristotle himself, bypassing any interpreters. The approach was this: we will defeat the Averroists by removing Averroes. Although Thomas Aquinas has many more quotes not from Aristotle, but from Dionysius the Areopagite. And it is no coincidence that the honorary nickname given to the great scholastics in those days sounded like an angelic doctor to Thomas Aquinas. Perhaps it is connected with the teachings of Dionysius the Areopagite about the nine angelic ranks.

Thomas system

A few words about how the "Summa Theology" is built - this is the main work of Thomas Aquinas. This work is divided into treatises; each treatise consists of a series of paragraphs, which Thomas calls questions. Each question consists of a number of sections, and each section follows the same pattern. Everything is very clear and methodical, which gave rise to some historians of science to believe that the science of the New Age begins precisely with Thomas.

The structure of each section is as follows. First, Thomas lists all the possible wrong opinions on some issue, among which there are Averroists. Then he quotes either Holy Scripture, or one of the Fathers of the Church, whose opinion we take on faith and it does not coincide with what is said in the above heretical provisions. Thomas then proceeds to his own presentation. He writes: "I answer" - and, relying on philosophy, primarily on the philosophy of Aristotle, he explains by arguments of reason why we should agree with the apostle or the father of the Church. At the end of the section, starting from the philosophical proposition just proved, Thomas answers each of the original heretical propositions. Thus the question is exhausted, and Thomas moves on to the next one, which is exhausted in the same way.

The way to God is through movement

So, Thomas Aquinas teaches that there are two ways to know God: by faith and reason, and in principle there are no contradictions in this knowledge, for there is only one truth. And if there are contradictions, then they arise as a result of the mistakes of philosophers, and the Church must show the philosophers that they are mistaken. It would be even better if philosophers looked for these errors themselves. What Thomas does is looking for errors in the works of Siger of Brabant, Jean Janden, Boethius of Dacia and other Averroists - Western followers of Ibn Rushd.

Having justified at the very beginning of the "Sum of theology" the possibility of using both reason and faith, Thomas proceeds to the following questions - he considers them in the part called "Treatise on the One God."

The first question of this treatise is formulated as follows: "On God: Does God exist?". And here Thomas gives evidence of the existence of God - his famous five proofs. But first, of course, he considers those provisions that he considers erroneous. Among them, he lists the positions of Augustine and Anselm of Canterbury, without naming them. On the one hand, Thomas writes, it seems to some that God exists because there is truth - this is the position of Augustine; and on the other hand, some argue - and here Thomas means Anselm of Canterbury - that the existence of God is obvious, because we have the concept of "God". Thomas does not agree with Augustine for this reason: no one will argue with the fact that there are true positions, but the fact that there is truth and it exists just like God is rather doubtful. It is easier to “understand” Anselm Thomas: all people think about God in different ways, not everyone will consider that God is something that cannot be thought of; pagans generally think of gods as material.

Therefore, writes Thomas, it is necessary to prove the existence of God from the obvious, from what no one will argue with. Such is sensory perception. Not a single person, even who does not know philosophy, will argue with some properties of the sensible material world. With the fact that there is movement in the world, that everything in it is connected by a cause-and-effect relationship, and so on. This is the basis of the famous five proofs of the existence of God, which Thomas Aquinas calls five ways - not proofs, realizing that strict proofs can only be in geometry. These are some paths, reflections that can direct a person to God, and then you have to go the way of faith.

The first way – the first proof – is from movement. The most famous and probably the simplest. Obviously, a body cannot move by itself; it is always set in motion by another body. That it cannot move itself, Thomas also proves. After all, if a body moves itself, then it turns out that it moves, because it moves itself, and does not move, since it needs to be moved. But the body cannot move or not move. We get a logical contradiction, therefore, the body cannot move itself, it must be moved by another body. And that body must move by the third body, etc., but we cannot extend this chain to infinity. If we come to infinity, then we do not answer the question about the cause of the movement, we practically leave the question. Therefore, it is necessary to assume the existence of some immovable prime mover, which everyone usually calls God. With this phrase, Thomas ends his reasoning. He does not say that there is a God, but - "usually everyone calls", as if referring to the widespread understanding of God.

So, God is the immovable prime mover. We already know the proof, which goes back to Aristotle.

And more evidence

The second proof is from an efficient cause. It is also obvious to everyone that everything in the world is connected with each other by a cause-and-effect relationship. A thing cannot be the cause of itself, because in this case the thing or phenomenon will precede itself, Foma notes. But the cause always precedes the effect. If something is a cause and effect at the same time, then it turns out that it exists both before itself and not before itself, which leads to a paradox. Therefore, any body, any phenomenon always has another reason, and that one has a third reason, and so on. Thus we ascend to the root cause, which everyone calls God.

Asking the question, "What is the cause of God?" is like asking, "What is the cause of the cause?" is logical nonsense

Very often, modern atheists say to this argument: if everything has a reason, then God must have a reason. Like, here Foma is not logical, not consistent. However, this is not so: God, according to Thomas, is the first cause, but to say: “What is the cause of God?” is like saying, "What is the cause of the cause?" – and this is logical nonsense. God is not a thing, it is the cause of all causes.

The third proof of Thomas Aquinas is called "from necessity and chance". Any body in our world does not exist as absolutely necessary. It may or may not exist. Its existence does not follow from the essence of an object. For its appearance, there must be many external causes that might not be connected in some way. But if our world exists from such things that may or may not exist, then our world as a whole may either exist or not exist. It turns out that at some point it can cease to exist, just like any thing in this world can cease to exist. And if the world ceased to exist, then it could not arise again, because nothing can arise from nothing without a cause. But our world exists. And if the world exists, and the existence of this world, as we see, cannot be the cause of this world itself, because our world itself does not have such an essence, then the cause of our world must be such an entity that cannot but exist, the existence of which defined by its essence. Such an entity is commonly referred to as God.

The fourth proof is from degrees of perfection. Everything in the world has different degrees. Let's say that among people we note more intelligent and less intelligent, more kind and less kind. That is, we compare with some kind of absolute knowledge, with absolute holiness, with absolute goodness, with absolute beauty, etc. Therefore, it is necessary to assume the existence of God, whom everyone usually calls the truth, the good in an absolute degree.

And the last, fifth proof is “from the goal”. Everything in the world is amazingly beautiful, simple and perfect. But the world itself does not have a reasonable beginning. Perfection, simplicity are the properties of a certain Mind, which can arrange everything more simply, expediently. Thomas gives the following example: if we see that the arrow hit exactly in the middle of the target, then we understand that the arrow was shot by a skilled archer; so if in our world we see beauty, order and harmony, then we must assume that this world also has a Creator who created everything in such a beautiful and harmonious way.

On two fronts

In the later parts of his Summa Theology, Thomas raises many other questions and problems. He proves that God is one. Proves that God is not a body. Proves that God is being. Since God is eternal, He is immovable; since there is no passive potentiality in God, God is pure actuality, pure action, hence God never passes away, He is incorruptible. Since God is simple and one, He has no complexity, therefore He is not a body. Since God is simple and has his own essence, He cannot be defined. Thus, Thomas Aquinas provides a logical foundation for a negative, apophatic theology.

It is significant how Thomas argues with the Averroists about whether the world was created by God or whether it exists forever. Averroists say: "The world is eternal." This was stated by Aristotle, because he believed that it was illogical to assume the beginning of the world. You can always ask: what was before the beginning of the world? There cannot be a moment in time that has only a future, but no past. Moreover, matter, as one of the four reasons proposed by Aristotle, does not depend on the formal reason and therefore it is eternal - co-eternal with God. Thomas' answer is as follows. Thomas reminds us what matter is. After all, matter is a possibility, according to Aristotle. And how can one say that matter exists forever if matter is a possibility? It's like saying: "The possibility of the existence of the world exists forever." Yes, the possibility exists forever, but for there to be reality, form must be added to matter. Reality has a formal cause, and the form, as that same universal, exists only in God, and therefore the eternity of the world is easily refuted by a simple understanding of matter as a possibility.

In the doctrine of man, Thomas acts as a debater on two fronts: with the Averroists and even with Augustine. Averroists said, following Aristotle, that a person has three souls: the plant and animal souls are mortal, and the rational soul unites with God. Thomas in this dispute follows, as it seems, the Monk John of Damascus. John of Damascus was an ardent supporter of the philosophy of Aristotle; by that time he had already been glorified as a saint; and Foma, having become acquainted with his works, realized that the Eastern Church had already practically solved the burning questions for his time, only in the West they do not know this.

So, Thomas notices that in fact Aristotle did not write anything like that .... Even so! Thomas slightly distorts the teachings of Aristotle, but does it so subtly that many do not notice it. (Although, perhaps, they deliberately didn’t notice, because they want this unity of physics and theology.) So, Thomas writes that Aristotle does not have a doctrine of three souls, but there is a doctrine of one soul, which has three powers, three abilities. Plant, animal, rational are not three souls, but three abilities, and plant and animal abilities are manifested when a person has a body. The soul is one, and therefore it is substantial. Thomas agrees with Augustine that the soul can exist outside the body - and by this he refutes the Averroists. But he does not agree with Augustine, a supporter of Plato, that the existence of a soul without a body is complete. Thomas Aquinas says: “It is not so. If this were so, then it is not clear why the resurrection from the dead is necessary.

The Platonic understanding of the soul excludes the resurrection from the dead. Aristotelian, on the contrary, helps to understand this dogma

The Platonic understanding of the soul is dangerous, it excludes the resurrection from the dead. The Aristotelian, on the contrary, helps us understand this Christian thesis, because the existence of the soul without a body is, although substantial - the soul can exist without a body - but incomplete: the plant and animal forces of the soul turn out to be unused, the soul cannot do anything without the body, it can only know, because the rational part of the soul does not need a body. So, the soul knows, but cannot do anything, therefore, of course, until the resurrection from the dead, the soul is only in a state of rest, and not active. Naturally, such a soul can only wait until it has a body again, with the help of which it will again be a full-fledged personality, a full-fledged person, will act and manifest itself in its entirety.

virtue and knowledge

One of the treatises "The sums of theology" is devoted to the problems of morality. Thomas, largely relying on Aristotelian ethics, talks about two types of virtue. Recall that Aristotle wrote about moral or ethical virtue and dianoetic, rational virtue. Concerning ethical virtue, Thomas examines various human passions in great detail, classifying them according to causes and ends. This is what is represented in the modern Catholic Church by a developed moral theology, where any passion, every act can be disassembled into its component parts. As for the dianoetic virtue, here Thomas disagrees with Aristotle in many respects. So, for example, he asks the question: is the study of sciences a virtue? For Aristotle, this was the main virtue, because the main property of a person, his essence is thinking, and if a person thinks, then he corresponds to his own essence and therefore achieves happiness. No, thinking, says Thomas, is one of the forces of our soul, therefore it cannot contain the fullness of the essence of man. Therefore, the occupation of sciences, although useful, does not lead to true bliss. The essence of man is that he is the image of God. And therefore "the final and perfect happiness cannot consist in anything other than the contemplation of the divine essence."

Scholasticism - "school philosophy". The scholastics sought to rationally substantiate and systematize the Christian doctrine. Historically, scholasticism is divided into 3 periods:

early - XI-XII centuries. (Neoplatonism),

classical - XII-XIII centuries. ("Christian Aristotelianism"),

late - 13-14 centuries. (against Thomism).

From the middle of the XII century. Aristotle's writings translated into Latin. The teachings of Aristotle are recognized as the philosophical basis of Christianity. From now on, scholastic teachers turn into interpreters and systematizers of Aristotle: they dogmatically assimilate outdated parts of Aristotle's worldview, reject all searches for something new in science. Among such systematizers: Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas and John Duns Scotus.

The founder of Catholic theology and the systematizer of scholasticism is considered Thomas Aquinas(1225-1274). His main works: "The Sum of Theology", "The Sum of Philosophy", "The Sum Against the Pagans". In them, he relies on the works of Aristotle, which he met on a crusade in the East. In the ontology of Thomas Aquinas, being is considered both as possible and as real. Being is the existence of individual things, which is the substance. Thomas Aquinas introduces categories: possibility and reality, matter and form. At the same time, matter is considered as a possibility, and form as a reality.

He argued that personality is "the noblest thing in all rational nature" phenomenon. It is characterized by intellect, feelings and will. The intellect is superior to the will. However, he puts the knowledge of God lower than love for him, i.e. feelings can transcend reason if they refer not to ordinary things, but to God.

Theocentric concept of Thomas Aquinas: God is an absolute being, and man, as his creation, is an exceptional being, who is given, using the means of reason, to infinitely approach this being, to penetrate into the "first cause", into the very essence of things...

The philosophy of Thomas Aquinas became from the XIV century. the banner of the Dominican scholastics, and from the 16th century. was intensively planted by the Jesuits, whose ideologists comment on and modernize the philosophical system of Thomas Aquinas. From the second half of the XIX century. his teaching becomes the basis of neo-Thomism, which is one of the most powerful currents in modern philosophical thought

End of work -

This topic belongs to:

Origin of philosophy

The origin of philosophy philosophy is a form of social consciousness that develops a system of knowledge about the fundamental principles of being and the place of man .. philosophy as an attempt to acquire a rational and integral worldview ..

If you need additional material on this topic, or you did not find what you were looking for, we recommend using the search in our database of works:

What will we do with the received material:

If this material turned out to be useful for you, you can save it to your page on social networks:

1. Justification of the basic principles of Christian theology using the logic of Aristotle. Thomas borrows the categories of the pagan philosopher for his metaphysics. This manifests itself in terms essences(essence, being) and existence(existence).

In ancient philosophers, being was understood as a single entity. In theological philosophy (with Thomas) it is divided. The difference between God and the world is in the division of essence and existence. In God they are united, identical, in the world they are torn apart.

God is a simple being, a being, a pure actuality, a prime cause and a prototype.

Created things are a complex being, which consists of essence and existence:

In understanding entities And existence Thomas uses Aristotle's categories "form" and "matter". Every thing is a unity of form and matter. The union of matter with form is the transition from potency (possibility) to actuality (reality).

Theology for Thomas is the highest sacred science and wisdom, it is speculative and does not depend on scientific knowledge. However, he recognized that science could look for natural causes, which he called secondary or instrumental. Through them, God influences the world and people.

2. The problem was harmony of faith and reason, expressed in the doctrine of "dual truth". Thomas denies the duality of truth.

Reason and faith comprehend one truth - God, but they do it in different ways: reason relies on science and philosophy, faith - on theology.

Thus, philosophy and theology are two independent disciplines. At the same time, theology uses the principles of philosophy in order to substantiate the truths of Revelation and make them closer to the human soul. "Philosophy is the servant of theology."

The provisions of the dogma need rational justification only as an additional strengthening of faith. These provisions include the question of the existence of God, the immortality of the human soul.

At the same time, other points of theology cannot be proved in a rational way. These are: the unity of God in three persons; creation from nothing; the doctrine of the fall. According to Thomas, these propositions are unprovable, but they are neither reasonable nor rational, they superintelligent.

In the contradictions of faith and reason, the priority belongs to faith. The sciences must harmonize their positions with theology as the highest wisdom. Thomas Aquinas made theology philosophical. This manifested itself in the logical proofs of the existence of God.

3. The justification for the existence of God is given in the "Summary of Theology". Thomas gives five logical proofs that are interconnected with each other.

1. Everything that moves is moved by something else. This series is not endless. The first mover is needed, which is God.

2. There are a number of active causes in the world. There must be a primary producing cause, which is God.

3. The third proof follows from the relationship between the accidental and the necessary. The first necessity is God.

4. There must be the highest degree of perfection. God is the pinnacle of perfection, the source of all perfection.

5. Teleological proof. Everything is directed towards a goal, has meaning, utility. God as the ultimate goal, harmonizing all expedient processes.

4. In ethical views, Thomas Aquinas recognizes free will, otherwise a person is relieved of responsibility for actions. Free will is manifested in the choice between good and evil. Evil is understood as a lack of good. Will is subject to reason. The mind guides a person to virtuous deeds.

The ultimate goal of activity is the attainment of bliss. Bliss is in the activity of the theoretical mind, in the knowledge of the absolute truth - God.

In political views, Thomas is a supporter of the monarchy. State power is from God. The Church should play the first role in civil society. Christ is in heaven, the Pope is on earth.

8). Scholasticism- philosophy of the X-XIV centuries. In the era of the Middle Ages, scholasticism is the main way of philosophizing, which is characterized by a rationalistic substantiation of religious dogmas.

The scholastics divided knowledge into two types: the supernatural, given in revelation, and the natural, revealed by reason. More often, the subject of dispute was not the idea of ​​God, but the correctness and clarity of concepts, formulations, i.e. external formal-logical side of religious teaching.

The founder of scholasticism is Anselm of Canterbury, the development of scholasticism is Roscelin, Pierre Abelard, Thomas Aquinas, the completion is John Duns Scott, William of Ockham.

Scholasticism differs from classical philosophy in that its conclusions are limited in advance. It is not about finding the truth, which is already given in revelation, but about expounding it and proving it by means of reason, i.e. philosophically. That is why philosophy has been called “the handmaiden of theology.”

– With the help of reason to penetrate the truths of faith

– Make it systematic

– Exclude criticism of holy truths

In the XIII century. the scholastic movement reached its highest peak. Its patron saint among the ancients is Aristotle, whose influence is gradually replacing that of Plato. In its method, scholasticism seeks to master the systemic approach of Aristotle, applying logical proof, and at the same time relying very little on facts.

Scholastic philosophical thinking focuses on two problems:

– Evidence for the Existence of God

– Dispute about universals

Four mnemonic rules, five proofs that God exists, the problems of theology, the superiority of spoken language over writing, the reasons why the activities of the Dominicans make sense and other important discoveries, as well as facts about the biography of the Sicilian Bull

Prepared by Svetlana Yatsyk

Saint Thomas Aquinas. Fresco by Fra Bartolomeo. Around 1510-1511 Museo di San Marco dell "Angelico, Florence, Italy / Bridgeman Images

1. On the origin and disadvantageous relationship

Thomas Aquinas (or Aquinas; 1225-1274) was the son of Count Landolfo d'Aquino and the nephew of Count Tommaso d'Acerra, Grand Justiciar of the Kingdom of Sicily (that is, the first of the royal advisers in charge of court and finance), and second cousin of Frederick II Staufen . Kinship with the emperor, who, seeking to subjugate all of Italy, constantly fought with the popes of Rome, could not but do a disservice to the young theologian - despite the open and even demonstrative conflict of Aquinas with his family and the fact that he joined the Dominican order loyal to the papacy . In 1277, part of Thomas's theses was condemned by the Bishop of Paris and the Church, apparently mainly for political reasons. Subsequently, these theses became generally accepted.

2. About the school nickname

Thomas Aquinas was distinguished by his tall stature, heaviness and sluggishness. It is also believed that he was characterized by meekness, excessive even for monastic humility. During the discussions led by his mentor, the theologian and Dominican Albertus Magnus, Thomas rarely spoke, and other students laughed at him, calling him the Sicilian Bull (although he was from Naples, not from Sicily). Albert the Great is credited with a prophetic remark, allegedly uttered to pacify the students teasing Thomas: “Do you call him a bull? I tell you, this bull will roar so loudly that its roar will deafen the world.”

Posthumously, Aquinas was awarded many other, more flattering nicknames: he is called the “angelic mentor”, the “universal mentor” and the “prince of philosophers”.

3. About mnemonic devices

Early biographers of Thomas Aquinas claim that he had an amazing memory. Even in his school years, he memorized everything that the teacher said, and later, in Cologne, he developed his memory under the guidance of the same Albert the Great. The collection of sayings of the Fathers of the Church on the four Gospels, which he prepared for Pope Urban, was compiled from what he memorized by looking through, but not transcribing manuscripts in various monasteries. His memory, according to contemporaries, possessed such strength and tenacity that everything that he happened to read was preserved in it.

Memory for Thomas Aquinas, as for Albertus Magnus, was part of the virtue of prudence, which had to be nurtured and developed. To do this, Thomas formulated a number of mnemonic rules, which he described in a commentary on Aristotle's treatise "On Memory and Remembrance" and in "The Sum of Theology":

- The ability to remember is located in the "sensitive" part of the soul and is associated with the body. Therefore, "sensible things are more accessible to human knowledge." Knowledge that is not associated "with any bodily likeness" is easily forgotten. Therefore, one should look for “symbols inherent in those things that need to be remembered. They should not be too famous, because we are more interested in unusual things, they are more deeply and clearly imprinted in the soul.<…>Following this, it is necessary to come up with similarities and images. Summa Theologiae, II, II, quaestio XLVIII, De partibus Prudentiae..

“Memory is under the control of the mind, so the second mnemonic principle of Thomas is “to arrange things [in memory] in a certain order so that, remembering one feature, you can easily move on to the next.”

- Memory is associated with attention, so you need to "feel attached to what you need to remember, because what is strongly imprinted in the soul does not slip out of it so easily."

- And finally, the last rule is to regularly reflect on what needs to be remembered.

4. On the relationship between theology and philosophy

Aquinas distinguished three types of wisdom, each of which is endowed with its own "light of truth": the wisdom of Grace, theological wisdom (the wisdom of revelation, using the mind) and metaphysical wisdom (the wisdom of the mind, comprehending the essence of being). Proceeding from this, he believed that the subject of science is the "truths of reason", and the subject of theology is the "truths of revelation."

Philosophy, using its rational methods of cognition, is able to study the properties of the surrounding world. The dogmas of faith, proved with the help of rationalized philosophical arguments (for example, the dogma of the existence of God), become more understandable to a person and thereby strengthen him in faith. And in this sense, scientific and philosophical knowledge is a serious support in substantiating the Christian doctrine and refuting criticism of faith.

But many dogmas (for example, the idea of ​​the createdness of the world, the concept of original sin, the incarnation of Christ, the resurrection from the dead, the inevitability of the Last Judgment, etc.) are not amenable to rational justification, since they reflect the supernatural, miraculous qualities of God. The human mind is not able to comprehend the divine plan in full, therefore, true, higher knowledge is not subject to science. God is the lot of supramental knowledge and, therefore, the subject of theology.

However, for Thomas there is no contradiction between philosophy and theology (just as there is no contradiction between the “truths of reason” and the “truths of revelation”), since philosophy and knowledge of the world lead a person to the truths of faith. Therefore, in the view of Thomas Aquinas, studying things and phenomena of nature, a true scientist is right only when he reveals the dependence of nature on God, when he shows how the divine plan is embodied in nature.

Saint Thomas Aquinas. Fresco by Fra Bartolomeo. 1512 Museo di San Marco dell"Angelico

5. About Aristotle

Albert the Great, the teacher of Thomas Aquinas, was the author of the first commentary written in Western Europe on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics. It was he who introduced the writings of Aristotle into use in Catholic theology, until then known in the West mainly in the exposition of the Arab philosopher Averroes. Albert showed the absence of contradictions between the teachings of Aristotle and Christianity.

Thanks to this, Thomas Aquinas got the opportunity to Christianize ancient philosophy, primarily the works of Aristotle: striving for a synthesis of faith and knowledge, he supplemented the doctrinal dogmas and religious and philosophical speculations of Christianity with socio-theoretical and scientific reflection based on the logic and metaphysics of Aristotle.

Thomas was not the only theologian who tried to appeal to the writings of Aristotle. The same was done, for example, by his contemporary Seeger of Brabant. However, Seeger's Aristotelianism was considered "Averroist", retaining some of the ideas introduced into the writings of Aristotle by his Arabic and Jewish translators and interpreters. The "Christian Aristotelianism" of Thomas, based on the "pure" teachings of the ancient Greek philosopher, which did not contradict Christianity, won - and Siger of Brabant was put on trial by the Inquisition for his convictions and killed.

6. About the conversational genre

Answering the question why Christ preached, but did not write down the postulates of his teaching, Thomas Aquinas noted: "Christ, addressing hearts, put the word above the scripture" Summa Theologiae, III, quaestio XXXII, articulus 4.. This principle was generally popular in the 13th century: even the system of scholastic university teaching was based on quaestio disputata, a discussion on a given problem. Aquinas wrote most of his works in the genre of "sum" - a dialogue consisting of questions and answers, which seemed to him the most accessible for students of theology. The Summa Theologia, for example, a treatise he wrote in Rome, Paris, and Naples between 1265 and 1273, consists of chapters, articles, in the title of which is a controversial issue. Thomas gives several arguments to each, giving different, sometimes opposite answers, and at the end he gives counterarguments and the correct, from his point of view, decision.

7. Evidence for the existence of God

In the first part of The Sum of Theology, Aquinas substantiates the need for theology as a science with its own purpose, subject and method of research. He considers the root cause and the ultimate goal of all that exists, that is, God, to be its subject. That is why the treatise begins with five proofs of the existence of God. It is thanks to them that the Summa Theology is primarily known, despite the fact that out of the 3,500 pages that this treatise occupies, only one and a half are devoted to the existence of God.

First proof the existence of God relies on the Aristotelian understanding of motion. Thomas states that "everything that moves must be moved by something else" Here and below: Summa Theologiae, I, quaestio II, De Deo, an Deus sit.. An attempt to imagine a series of objects, each of which makes the previous one move, but at the same time is set in motion by the next one, leads to infinity. An attempt to imagine this must inevitably lead us to the understanding that there was a certain prime mover, "who is not driven by anything, and by him everyone understands God."

Second proof slightly reminiscent of the first and also relies on Aristotle, this time on his doctrine of four causes. According to Aristotle, everything that exists must have an active (or generative) reason, that from which the existence of a thing begins. Since nothing can produce itself, there must be some first cause, the beginning of all beginnings. This is God.

Third proof the existence of God is a proof "from necessity and chance." Thomas explains that among entities there are those that may or may not be, that is, their existence is accidental. There are also necessary entities. “But everything necessary either has a reason for its necessity in something else, or it does not. However, it is impossible that [a series of] necessary [existing] having a reason for their necessity [in something else] goes to infinity. Therefore, there is a certain essence, necessary in itself. This necessary entity can only be God.

Fourth proof“comes from the degrees [of perfections] found in things. Among things, more and less good, true, noble, and so on are found. However, the degree of goodness, truth and nobility can only be judged in comparison with something "the most true, best and noblest." God has these properties.

In the fifth proof Aquinas again relies on Aristotle's doctrine of causes. Based on the Aristotelian definition of expediency, Thomas states that all objects of being are directed in their existence towards some goal. At the same time, "they achieve the goal not by chance, but intentionally." Since the objects themselves are "devoid of understanding", therefore, "there is something thinking, by which all natural things are directed towards [their] goal. And this is what we call God.

8. About the social system

Following Aristotle, who developed these questions in Politics, Thomas Aquinas reflected on the nature and character of the sole power of the ruler. He compared royal power with other forms of government and, in accordance with the traditions of Christian political thought, spoke unambiguously in favor of the monarchy. From his point of view, the monarchy is the most just form of government, certainly superior to the aristocracy (the power of the best) and polity (the power of the majority in the interests of the common good).

Thomas considered the most reliable type of monarchy to be elective, not hereditary, since electivity can prevent the ruler from turning into a tyrant. The theologian believed that a certain set of people (he probably meant bishops and part of the secular nobility participating in the election of secular sovereigns, primarily the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire and the pope) should have the legal opportunity not only to give the king power over themselves, but and deprive him of this power if it begins to acquire the features of tyranny. From the point of view of Thomas Aquinas, this "multiple" should have the right to deprive the ruler of power, even if they "previously submitted themselves to him forever", because the bad ruler "transcends" his office, thereby violating the terms of the original contract. This idea of ​​Thomas Aquinas subsequently formed the basis of the concept of "social contract", which is very significant in modern times.

Another way to combat tyranny, which was proposed by Aquinas, makes it possible to understand on which side he was in the conflict between the empire and the papacy: against the excesses of a tyrant, he believed, the intervention of someone standing above this ruler could help - which could easily be interpreted contemporaries as an endorsement of the intervention of the pope in the affairs of "bad" secular rulers.

9. About indulgences

Thomas Aquinas resolved a number of doubts related to the practice of granting (and buying) indulgences. He shared the concept of the "treasury of the church" - a kind of "surplus" stock of virtues replenished by Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary and the saints, from which other Christians can draw. This "treasury" can be disposed of by the Pope of Rome, issuing special, legal in nature acts - indulgences. Indulgences only work because the holiness of some members of the Christian community outweighs the sinfulness of others.

10. About the Dominican mission and preaching

Although the Dominican order was founded by Saint Dominic in 1214, even before the birth of Aquinas, it was Thomas who formulated the principles that became the rationale for their activities. In The Sum Against the Gentiles, the theologian wrote that the path to salvation is open to everyone, and the missionary's role is to give a particular person the knowledge necessary for his salvation. Even a wild pagan (whose soul strives for good) can be saved if the missionary manages to convey to him the saving divine truth.

Thomas Aquinas (Aquinas) - one of the outstanding thinkers of medieval Europe, philosopher and theologian, Dominican monk, systematizer of medieval scholasticism and the teachings of Aristotle. Born in late 1225 or early 1226 in the castle of Roccasecca, a family castle near Aquino, in the Kingdom of Naples.

Thomas received an excellent education. First, in the Benedictine monastery at Monte Cassino, he takes a course in the classical school, which gave him an excellent knowledge of the Latin language. Then he goes to Naples, where he studies at the university under the guidance of mentors Martin and Peter of Ireland.

In 1244, Aquinas decides to join the Dominican order, refusing the post of abbot of Monte Cassino, which caused a strong protest from the family. Having taken the monastic vows, he went to study at the University of Paris, where he listened to the lectures of Albert Bolstedt, nicknamed Albert the Great, who had a great influence on him. Following Albert, Foma attends lectures at the University of Cologne for four years. During classes, he did not show much activity, rarely took part in disputes, for which his colleagues nicknamed him the Dumb Bull.

Upon his return to the University of Paris, Thomas consistently goes through all the steps necessary to obtain a master's degree in theology and a licentiate, after which he teaches theology in Paris until 1259. The most fruitful period in his life began. He publishes a number of theological works, commentaries on the Holy Scriptures and begins work on the Sum of Philosophy.

In 1259, Pope Urban IV summoned him to Rome, since the Holy See saw in him a person who had to fulfill an important mission for the church, namely, to give an interpretation of "Aristotelianism" in the spirit of Catholicism. Here Thomas completes the Sum of Philosophy, writes other scientific works and begins writing the main work of his life, Sum of Theology.

During this period, he leads a polemic against conservative Catholic theologians, fiercely defending the foundations of the Christian Catholic faith, the defense of which became the main meaning of Aquinas' life.

During a trip to participate in the cathedral convened by Pope Gregory X, which was held in Lyon, he fell seriously ill and died on March 7, 1274 in the Bernardine monastery in Fossanuov.

In 1323, during the pontificate of Pope John XXII, Thomas was canonized. In 1567, he was recognized as the fifth "Doctor of the Church", and in 1879, by a special encyclical of the Pope, the teachings of Thomas Aquinas were declared "the only true philosophy of Catholicism."

Major works

1. "The sum of philosophy" (1259-1269).

2. "The Sum of Theology" (1273).

3. "On the reign of sovereigns."

Key Ideas

The ideas of Thomas Aquinas had a huge impact not only on the development of philosophy and theological science, but also on many other areas of scientific thought. In his works, he combined the philosophy of Aristotle and the dogmas of the Catholic Church into a single whole, gave an interpretation of the forms of government, proposed to provide secular authorities with significant autonomy, while maintaining the dominant position of the Church, drew a clear line between faith and knowledge, created a hierarchy of laws, the highest of which is the divine law.

The basis of the legal theory of Thomas Aquinas is the moral essence of man. It is the moral principle that serves as the source of law. Law, according to Thomas, is the action of justice in the divine order of human community. Aquinas characterizes justice as an unchanging and constant will to give to each his own.

Law is defined by him as a general right for the attainment of an end, a rule by which someone is induced to act or to abstain from it. Taking from Aristotle the division of laws into natural (they are self-evident) and positive (written), Thomas Aquinas supplemented it with a division into human laws (determine the order of social life) and divine (indicate the way to achieve "heavenly bliss").

Human law is a positive law, provided with a compulsory sanction against its violations. Perfect and virtuous people can do without human law, natural law is enough for them, but in order to neutralize vicious people who are not amenable to convictions and instructions, fear of punishment and coercion are necessary. Human (positive) law is only those human institutions that correspond to the natural law (the dictates of the physical and moral nature of man), otherwise these institutions are not law, but only a distortion of the law and deviation from it. This explains the difference between a just human (positive) law and an unjust one.

Positive divine law is the law given to people in divine revelation (in the Old and New Testaments). The Bible teaches what kind of life God considers right for people.

In the treatise "On the Rule of Sovereigns" Thomas Aquinas raises another very important topic: the relationship between church and secular authorities. According to Thomas Aquinas, the highest goal of human society is eternal bliss, but the efforts of the ruler are not enough to achieve it. The concern for this supreme goal rests with the priests, and especially with the vicar of Christ on earth - the pope, to whom all earthly rulers must obey, as to Christ himself. In solving the problem of the relationship between church and secular authorities, Thomas Aquinas departs from the concept of direct theocracy, subordinating the secular authorities to the church, but distinguishing their spheres of influence and providing secular authorities with significant autonomy.

He is the first to draw a clear line between faith and knowledge. Reason, in his opinion, only provides a justification for the consistency of revelation, faith; objections to them are considered only as probable, not damaging their authority. Reason must be subordinated to faith.

The ideas of Thomas Aquinas about the state are the first attempt to develop the Christian doctrine of the state on the basis of the Aristotelian "Politics".

From Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas adopted the idea that man by nature is a "social and political animal." The desire to unite and live in the state is inherent in people, because the individual alone cannot satisfy his needs. For this natural reason, a political community (the state) arises. The procedure for creating a state is similar to the process of creating the world by God, and the activity of the monarch is similar to the activity of God.

The goal of statehood is the "common good", the provision of conditions for a decent life. According to Thomas Aquinas, the realization of this goal presupposes the preservation of the feudal-class hierarchy, the privileged position of those in power, the exclusion of artisans, farmers, soldiers and merchants from the sphere of politics, the observance by all of the duty prescribed by God to obey the upper class. In this division, Aquinas also follows Aristotle and argues that these different categories of workers are necessary for the state by virtue of its nature, which, in his theological interpretation, turns out to be, in the final analysis, the realization of the laws of Providence.

The protection of the interests of the papacy and the foundations of feudalism by the methods of Thomas Aquinas gave rise to certain difficulties. For example, the logical interpretation of the apostolic thesis "all power is from God" allowed for the possibility of the absolute right of secular feudal lords (kings, princes and others) to govern the state, that is, it allowed this thesis to be turned against the political ambitions of the Roman Catholic Church. In an effort to lay the foundation for the intervention of the clergy in the affairs of the state and to prove the superiority of spiritual power over secular, Thomas Aquinas introduced and substantiated three elements of state power:

1) essence;

2) form (origin);

3) use.

The essence of power is the order of relations of domination and subordination, in which the will of those at the top of the human hierarchy moves the lower strata of the population. This order is set by God. Thus, in its primordial essence, power is a divine institution. Therefore, it is always something good, good. Concrete ways of its origin (more precisely, taking possession of it), certain forms of its organization can sometimes be bad, unfair. Thomas Aquinas does not exclude situations in which the use of state power degenerates into abuse of it: “So, if a multitude of free people is directed by the ruler to the common good of this multitude, this rule is direct and just, which befits free people. If the government is directed not to the common good of the multitude, but to the personal good of the ruler, this government is unjust and perverse. Consequently, the second and third elements of power in the state sometimes turn out to be devoid of the seal of divinity. This happens when a ruler either comes to the helm of power through unrighteous means or rules unjustly. Both are the result of the violation of the commandments of God, the dictates of the Roman Catholic Church as the only authority on earth representing the will of Christ.

As far as the actions of the ruler deviate from the will of God, as far as they contradict the interests of the church, so subjects have the right, from the point of view of Thomas Aquinas, to resist these actions. A ruler who rules contrary to the laws of God and the principles of morality, who exceeds his competence, intruding, for example, into the area of ​​​​the spiritual life of people or imposing excessively heavy taxes on them, turns into a tyrant. Since the tyrant cares only about his own benefit and does not want to know the common good, tramples on laws and justice, the people can rise up and overthrow him. However, the final decision on the admissibility of extreme methods of combating tyranny belongs, as a general rule, to the church, the papacy.

Thomas Aquinas considered the Republic a state paving the way to tyranny, a state torn apart by the struggle of parties and groups.

He distinguished tyranny from monarchy, which he regarded as the best form of government. He preferred the monarchy for two reasons. First, because of its similarity with the universe in general, arranged and led by one god, and also because of its similarity to the human body, the various parts of which are united and directed by one mind. “So one governs better than many, because they are only getting closer to becoming one. Moreover, what exists by nature is arranged in the best way, because nature in each individual case acts in the best way, and the general government in nature is carried out by one. After all, the bees have one king, and in the whole universe there is one God, the creator of everything and the ruler. And this is reasonable. Verily, every multitude comes from one.” Secondly, as a result of historical experience, which demonstrates (as the theologian was convinced) the stability and prosperity of those states where one, and not many, ruled.

Trying to solve the problem of delimiting the competence of secular and church authorities, which was relevant for that time, Thomas Aquinas substantiated the theory of the autonomy of authorities. The secular power should control only the external actions of people, and the church power - their souls. Thomas envisaged ways of interaction between these two powers. In particular, the state should help the church in the fight against heresy.