and were translated from Greek and Arabic into Latin. This created a new interest in
the natural sciences and infused new life into the question of the Christian revelation’s
relationship to Greek philosophy. Aristotle could obviously no longer be ignored in
matters of science, but when should one attend to Aristotle the philosopher, and when
should one stick to the Bible? Do you see?”
Sophie nodded, and the monk went on:
“The greatest and most significant philosopher of this period was St. Thomas
Aquinas, who lived from 1225 to 1274. He came from the little town of Aquino, be-
tween Rome and Naples, but he also worked as a teacher at the University of Paris. I
call him a philosopher but he was just as much a theologian. There was no great
difference between philosophy and theology at that time. Briefly, we can say that
Aquinas christianized Aristotle in the same way that St. Augustine christianized Plato
in early medieval times.”
“Wasn’t it rather an odd thing to do, christianizing philosophers who had lived
several hundred years before Christ?”
“You could say so. But by ‘christianizing’ these two great Greek philosophers,
we only mean that they were interpreted and explained in such a way that they were
no longer considered a threat to Christian dogma. Aquinas was among those who tried
to make Aristotle’s philosophy compatible with Christianity. We say that he created
the great synthesis between faith and knowledge. He did this by entering the
philosophy of Aristotle and taking him at his word.”
“I’m sorry, but I had hardly any sleep last night. I’m afraid you’ll have to
explain it more clearly.”
“Aquinas believed that there need be no conflict between what philosophy or
reason teaches us and what the Christian Revelation or faith teaches us. Christendom
and philosophy often say the same thing. So we can frequently reason ourselves to the
same truths that we can read in the Bible.”
“How come? Can reason tell us that God created the world in six days or that
Jesus was the Son of God?”
“No, those so-called verities of faith are only accessible through belief and the
Christian Revelation. But Aquinas believed in the existence of a number of ‘natural
theological truths.’ By that he meant truths that could be reached both through
Christian faith and through our innate or natural reason. For example, the truth that
there is a God. Aquinas believed that there are two paths to God. One path goes
through faith and the Christian Revelation, and the other goes through reason and the
senses. Of these two, the path of faith and revelation is certainly the surest, because it
is easy to lose one’s way by trusting to reason alone. But Aquinas’s point was that
there need not be any conflict between a philosopher like Aristotle and the Christian
doctrine.”
“So we can take our choice between believing Aristotle and believing the
Bible?”
“Not at all. Aristotle goes only part of the way because he didn’t know of the
Christian revelation. But going only part of the way is not the same as going the
wrong way. For example, it is not wrong to say that Athens is in Europe. But neither
is it particularly precise. If a book only tells you that Athens is a city in Europe, it
would be wise to look it up in a geography book as well. There you would find the
whole truth that Athens is the capital of Greece, a small country in southeastern
Europe. If you are lucky you might be told a little about the Acropolis as well. Not to
mention Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.”
“But the first bit of information about Athens was true.”