Customer Reviews

Thomas Aquinas: Spiritual Master (Crossroad Spiritual Legacy Series)

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

The great achievement of Robert Barron's little book on the Angelic Doctor is that he points the reader to the spiritual quest that lies at the heart of Aquinas' seemingly arid intellectual inquiry.

For too long, the scholastics in general and Aquinas in particular have been accused of overintellectualizing about the mysteries of faith. An overemphasis on reason is presented as squelching our embrace of the mysteries of faith. On the contrary, as Barron argues, the scholastic effort to find theological precision was an effort to clear away the stumbling blocks to faith that our false notions of God can present. Whether we mean to or not, we do have concrete ideas about the mystery of God. To the extent that our ideas are mistaken, our faith can never lead us to the heart of the True Mystery we seek. Aquinas' project was to clear away the dead-ends our unexamined reason produces for us, so that we can find our way to the abyss of God.

Barron has the great gift of making Aquinas' theology come alive for the lay reader. For anyone seeking the great adventure of coming to know God better both through reason and faith, I recommend this book most highly.

In this helpful little book, Barron saves Thomas from the dry treatments his theology often receives in the secondary literature. To be sure, Barron is less interested in interpreting Thomas as a historical figure, and more concerned to show the relevance of Thomas for Christians today. In fact, Barron may often go too far in taking Thomas out of his medieval context. For example, Barron emphasizes the centrality of Christ for Thomas's theology (something rarely argued). While this is in a sense true, more textual argument is required to establish this point for scholars who are accustomed to seeing Thomas as more interested in philosophy than Christian theology. Barron may too quickly make Thomas a dialogue-partner with 20th century theology. All this said, the book remains a joy to read and a helpful introduction to Thomas for those teaching undergraduates or seminary students. After all, Thomas's dry writing is meant to do nothing less than lead the reader into the wonder at the center of the Christian life, which is most profoundly revealed in Christ. I must personally thank Barron for helping me remember this as I wade through Thomas's often less-than-exciting texts.

Others have given good reviews on this book but I wanted to approach it from a slightly different angle. St. Thomas gets a bad rap, particularly from Protestants, Eastern Catholics, and Orthodox as being too intellectual about the faith and relying too much on Western Philosophy. What many of them fail to realize is that much of his work was an attempt to synthesize eastern mysticism with western thought and spirituality of the time. His works, when properly understood, can show us a way to bridge the gap between east and west in our understanding of the faith and of God. As usual, Fr. Barron discusses his topic with enthusiasm and intelligence. Anyone looking to get a good intro to Aquinas, particularly in light of today's world, could do far worse. Another book worth looking into, particularly for anyone who is interested in the East-West synthesis I spoke of earlier, should check out The Aquinas Prescription: St. Thomas's Path to a Discerning Heart, a Sane Society, and a Holy Church.

Peace,

I don't know much about St. Thomas, so I don't know if Robert Barron has adequately summarized him. But I like what he has to say. It's good stuff, and very worthwhile reading. It puts the (allegedly) dry theology of St. Thomas in a very practical and helpful light. (Again, if it's all true. Fr. Barron doesn't cite St. Thomas enough to give me confidence that his interpretation is accurate.)

If Fr. Barron's perspective on St. Thomas is correct, this volume could serve to ameliorate the concerns of many Protestants about Catholicism, since the vision of God and man that this doctor of the church (St. Thomas, not Barron) sets forth seems to smooth the thorny path to reconciliation.

Having said that, I have one major criticism. Fr. Barron has fallen into the unfortunate modern idea of alternating between masculine and feminine pronouns -- even in reference to God. Reading this volume is not unlike having a sharp stick leap out of the page and poke you in the eye every other paragraph or so. It's horribly annoying, completely unneccessary, and mars and otherwise interesting and useful book.

Shame on you, Fr. Barron.

I am going to review this book on the basis of Padre Barron's video posted on his entertainment site "Word on Fire" for the feast of Thomas Aquinas. You know, Catholic polemicists like Barron love to portray that faith as not at odds with right-thinking modernity. But in fact if you listen carefully, and know what you are listening for as well, you in short otherwise learn otherwise. Padre Barron opines that the view Aquinas bequeathed to the RC Church is one in which "allows Revelation to discipline the sciences." Well, the word "discipline" says it all. Now I don't care how else anyone explains anything, if that is your approach to science you in fact hate everything science could ever mean. Period, end of discussion. Barron's kind a of love of appreciation or love for the sciences which he claims for Catholicism, is more like some Dominatrix clad in black leather. If science makes a false move... then "Bad Boy!" and physics gets a kiss of Dominatrix Barron's whip. Pretty sleazy, except for those odd types who are into it. No matter how high-minded he tries to make it sound, in the end this is all is. Of course he tries to smooth over what he is doing by saying, a la Augustine, that one can interpret scripture more symbolically. But there always seems to be a huge lag for this ancient institution in doing so. They get around to it in each generation, and yet never enough to be truly respectful of other human beings. They are just sleazy thinkers when it comes to so-called "discipline", and more than a bit creepy in my estimation, especially because they mix blithe obliviousness to their own contradiction with breezy and zany sureties.