Duns Scotus "underlines freedom as a fundamental quality of the will, introducing a voluntaristic tendency that developed in contrast to the so-called "Augustinian and Thomist intellectualism". For St Thomas Aquinas, who follows St Augustine, freedom cannot be considered an innate quality of the will, but, the fruit of the collaboration of the will and the mind. Indeed, an idea of innate and absolute freedom placed in the will that precedes the intellect, both in God and in man, risks leading to the idea of a God who would not even be bound to truth and good. The wish to save God's absolute transcendence and diversity with such a radical and impenetrable accentuation of his will does not take into account that the God who revealed himself in Christ is the God "Logos", who acted and acts full of love for us. Of course, as Duns Scotus affirms in line with Franciscan theology, love transcends knowledge and is capable of perceiving ever better than thought, but it is always the love of the God who is "Logos" (cf. Benedict XVI, Address at the University of Regensburg, 12 September 2006). In the human being too, the idea of absolute freedom, placed in the will, forgetting the connection with the truth, does not know that freedom itself must be liberated from the limits imposed on it by sin."Gerard Manley Hopkins, Walker Percy, and Walter Ong also see the self as something that is essentially unknowable and the center of the free person. I wonder if one could say that freedom is a potential of the will which can only be actualized in a confrontation of the mind with the true. What do you think?
Thursday, July 15, 2010
A Question on Duns Scotus, Freedom, etc
Benedict XVI recently spoke on Duns Scotus, noting certain valuable points but also the following criticism:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I think Scotus was Right! (with a capital R). ...But that's probably just because:
a. Hans Urs Von Balthasar emphasizes the freedom and arbitrariness of God's choice to love, and that it is beyond reason.
b. I've found Thomas' explanation that we act based on knowledge/intellect to be great theoretically, but wrong practically. St. Paul in Romans 7 seems to show the dichotemy between the mind and the will, 'I know that the law is spiritual, BUT' type of thing. (although the Augustinian or Thomist will just say that this is the corruption of the intellect).
c. It makes no logical sense for God to love us, and so the will must be the centre of freedom rather than the intellect.
I dunno. I just am finding Scotism to be more pragmatically/existentially satisfying than Thomism. Although there's always Augustinianism...
In the passage quoted, B16 very deftly points out that Duns Scotus rightly appeals to a love that transcends knowledge: "Of course, as Duns Scotus affirms in line with Franciscan theology, love transcends knowledge and is capable of perceiving ever better than thought, but it is always the love of the God who is 'Logos'" In this I'm reminded a bit of CS Lewis's reference to an ancient law beyond the law of punishment (The Lion, the Witch, etc). So, too there is a reasonableness to God's love for us which is beyond our own reason....
Pope Benedict is somewhat incorrect in his exposition of Scotus (and, I would add, Scotus is closer to Augustine than Thomas is but nevermind that for now). Scotus holds that both intellect and will cooperating in causing the volitional act. I've posted the relevant text on my blog.
http://lyfaber.blogspot.com/2010/07/response-to-benedict-xvi-audience-on.html
Duns Scotus has been called the 'Doctor Subtilis' for a good reason, and reading your blog confirms it. I should say also that Walter Ong notes that in Scotus's own writings, the speculative formulation never occurs but only in the notes compiled by students.
Post a Comment