Human Rights Theory Rooted in the Writings of Thomas Aquinas Anthony J. Lisska: In opposition to this theological reductionism, McInerny has suggested that this position is what one might call “Continental Thomism,” with its principal interlocutors being Etienne Gilson, Henri de Lubac and Marie-Dominique Chenu. While respectful of Gilson, nonetheless McInerny argues that “Gilson ended by so confining Thomas's philosophy to a theological setting that it is difficult to see how philosophy so understood could be shared by nonbelievers.”[46] McInerny insists that Aquinas rejects what Gilson firmly adopted: “the guiding role of the text from Exodus (with) the consequent need to ground the analysis in scripture and faith.”[47] He further argues that according to Gilson, Aquinas's philosophy “is swallowed up by Theology” with the consequence that “Thomas's metaphysics is dependent on revelation and faith”[48]
In opposition to this theological reductionism, McInerny has suggested that this position is what one might call “Continental Thomism,” with its principal interlocutors being Etienne Gilson, Henri de Lubac and Marie-Dominique Chenu. While respectful of Gilson, nonetheless McInerny argues that “Gilson ended by so confining Thomas's philosophy to a theological setting that it is difficult to see how philosophy so understood could be shared by nonbelievers.”[46] McInerny insists that Aquinas rejects what Gilson firmly adopted: “the guiding role of the text from Exodus (with) the consequent need to ground the analysis in scripture and faith.”[47] He further argues that according to Gilson, Aquinas's philosophy “is swallowed up by Theology” with the consequence that “Thomas's metaphysics is dependent on revelation and faith”[48]
Comments