Ecce Verbum
Aquinas on studying philosophy Of all human studies, the study of wisdom is the most complete, most sublime, most useful, and most joyful: Most complete because, inasmuch as man gives himself to the study of wisdom, so much does he have already some part…
ABC of Thomism
J.M. Bocheński
a short introduction 🧵
1.To identify Thomism only with St. Thomas is a misunderstanding
The name 'Thomism' comes from St Thomas Aquinas, who formulated its foundations and brilliantly elaborated many of its teachings; nevertheless, Thomism is not the same as the teachings of the historical St Thomas. Its sources are the works of Aristotle and St Augustine: centuries of Christian thought prepared its emergence; and even after St Thomas, its philosophy did not cease to be developed and deepened and applied to ever new issues. At the present time, Thomism is one of the most flourishing currents of human thought: it even has more thinkers, more numerous centres and scientific writings than any other philosophical school.
To identify Thomism only with St. Thomas is a misunderstanding that St. Thomas himself was the first to reject; moreover, he would probably have rejected the very name "Thomism" as misleading. St. Thomas is, in fact, a complete exception: he is the only genius of philosophy who did not want to create a personal system, but devoted all the energies of his mind to elaborating the achievements of all the pagan and Christian thought that had preceded him.
It is also untrue for Thomists to accept everything that St. Thomas taught simply because of his authority; St. Thomas teaches that an authority is worth as much as the argument he puts forward, and anyone who practises philosophy relying on any authority is not a Thomist
Thomism is not the equivalent of the Catholic Faith and no one is obliged, from the position of the Faith, to acknowledge Thomism.
Indeed, there are Catholics and even priests who are not Thomists and, on the other hand, non-Catholics who are. But the Catholic Church regards Thomism as the philosophy that best explains reality and the Faith. But it is not a dogma of the Faith and the recommendation is administrative. The Church wishes to ensure full freedom of human thought.
🔗 2. A needed separation between theology and philosophy
#philosophy
J.M. Bocheński
a short introduction 🧵
1.To identify Thomism only with St. Thomas is a misunderstanding
The name 'Thomism' comes from St Thomas Aquinas, who formulated its foundations and brilliantly elaborated many of its teachings; nevertheless, Thomism is not the same as the teachings of the historical St Thomas. Its sources are the works of Aristotle and St Augustine: centuries of Christian thought prepared its emergence; and even after St Thomas, its philosophy did not cease to be developed and deepened and applied to ever new issues. At the present time, Thomism is one of the most flourishing currents of human thought: it even has more thinkers, more numerous centres and scientific writings than any other philosophical school.
To identify Thomism only with St. Thomas is a misunderstanding that St. Thomas himself was the first to reject; moreover, he would probably have rejected the very name "Thomism" as misleading. St. Thomas is, in fact, a complete exception: he is the only genius of philosophy who did not want to create a personal system, but devoted all the energies of his mind to elaborating the achievements of all the pagan and Christian thought that had preceded him.
It is also untrue for Thomists to accept everything that St. Thomas taught simply because of his authority; St. Thomas teaches that an authority is worth as much as the argument he puts forward, and anyone who practises philosophy relying on any authority is not a Thomist
Thomism is not the equivalent of the Catholic Faith and no one is obliged, from the position of the Faith, to acknowledge Thomism.
Indeed, there are Catholics and even priests who are not Thomists and, on the other hand, non-Catholics who are. But the Catholic Church regards Thomism as the philosophy that best explains reality and the Faith. But it is not a dogma of the Faith and the recommendation is administrative. The Church wishes to ensure full freedom of human thought.
🔗 2. A needed separation between theology and philosophy
#philosophy
Telegram
Ecce Verbum chat
ABC of Thomism
J.M. Bocheński
a short introduction
2. A needed separation between theology and philosophy
Thomism is divided into 2 great parts: theology and Thomistic philosophy. Thomistic philosophy is a science based solely on experience and reasoning;…
J.M. Bocheński
a short introduction
2. A needed separation between theology and philosophy
Thomism is divided into 2 great parts: theology and Thomistic philosophy. Thomistic philosophy is a science based solely on experience and reasoning;…
Ecce Verbum
ABC of Thomism J.M. Bocheński a short introduction 🧵 1.To identify Thomism only with St. Thomas is a misunderstanding The name 'Thomism' comes from St Thomas Aquinas, who formulated its foundations and brilliantly elaborated many of its teachings; nevertheless…
ABC of Thomism
J.M. Bocheński
2.Thomistic personalism 🧵
1. Definition of a person,
Rejection of collectivism
Thomistic personalism teaches that society is an ensemble of human persons with a common goal, which is the common good of society; that society is therefore not a thing, not a substance,not a person in the ontological sense of the word; that the only substances, persons in society are the concrete, individual human persons of which society is composed.
Thomistic personalism teaches that society does not possess, nor can it possess, a soul or spirit in the strict sense of the word, and that it is not immortal. This personalism rejects the errors of Hegel, Marxists and other collectivists who attribute to society a greater fullness of being than to man and believe that society possesses a soul, a "spirit", or that it is a person in the ontological sense of the word. Personhood is granted on earth only to the human person.
Thomism defines the person as follows: " an individual spiritual substance". Thus, in order for an entity to be a person, it must be (1) a substance, i.e. a complete and indivisible entity (accidents such as culture, etc. are not persons; (2) fully individual (an arm or a leg is not a person), (3) spiritual (an animal is not a person. Society is not a person because it is not an individual substance, but a set of substances-people.
Thomism therefore rejects all theories that attribute to society a mode of being that is superior to that of an individual human . These theories tend to regard societies, as a substance, and to regard human beings simply as a part of that substance with no intrinsic being. The proponents of such theories consistently claim that society has a higher purpose than that of the individual human being, and view the human person as a simple instrument for serving this purpose. The moral consequence of this thesis is the stripping of man of his dignity as a person, and the political consequence is universal slavery. Thomism rejects these consequences, not only because they are false per se, but also because their ontological basis is false.
*It is important to emphasise that Thomistic philosophy is a consistent realism and that its theory of society is based on a theory of substance and accidentality 🔗, without which it is incomprehensible. A fundamental part of Thomistic philosophy is ontology (the science of being; that to which existence is due). It discusses the laws governing every being, Its principles are applied to all other branches of Thomistic philosophy.
🔗 2. Definition of society,
rejection of individualism and nominalism
🔗 3. Man is a social being because of his spiritual nature
🔗 4. Property, labour and the value of human work,
rejection of liberalism and socialism
🔗 5. Social and legal pluralism,
rejection of statism
🔗 6.The existence of a governing authority is based on natural law, no system is perfect or absolute
#philosophy
J.M. Bocheński
2.Thomistic personalism 🧵
1. Definition of a person,
Rejection of collectivism
Thomistic personalism teaches that society is an ensemble of human persons with a common goal, which is the common good of society; that society is therefore not a thing, not a substance,not a person in the ontological sense of the word; that the only substances, persons in society are the concrete, individual human persons of which society is composed.
Thomistic personalism teaches that society does not possess, nor can it possess, a soul or spirit in the strict sense of the word, and that it is not immortal. This personalism rejects the errors of Hegel, Marxists and other collectivists who attribute to society a greater fullness of being than to man and believe that society possesses a soul, a "spirit", or that it is a person in the ontological sense of the word. Personhood is granted on earth only to the human person.
Thomism defines the person as follows: " an individual spiritual substance". Thus, in order for an entity to be a person, it must be (1) a substance, i.e. a complete and indivisible entity (accidents such as culture, etc. are not persons; (2) fully individual (an arm or a leg is not a person), (3) spiritual (an animal is not a person. Society is not a person because it is not an individual substance, but a set of substances-people.
Thomism therefore rejects all theories that attribute to society a mode of being that is superior to that of an individual human . These theories tend to regard societies, as a substance, and to regard human beings simply as a part of that substance with no intrinsic being. The proponents of such theories consistently claim that society has a higher purpose than that of the individual human being, and view the human person as a simple instrument for serving this purpose. The moral consequence of this thesis is the stripping of man of his dignity as a person, and the political consequence is universal slavery. Thomism rejects these consequences, not only because they are false per se, but also because their ontological basis is false.
*It is important to emphasise that Thomistic philosophy is a consistent realism and that its theory of society is based on a theory of substance and accidentality 🔗, without which it is incomprehensible. A fundamental part of Thomistic philosophy is ontology (the science of being; that to which existence is due). It discusses the laws governing every being, Its principles are applied to all other branches of Thomistic philosophy.
🔗 2. Definition of society,
rejection of individualism and nominalism
🔗 3. Man is a social being because of his spiritual nature
🔗 4. Property, labour and the value of human work,
rejection of liberalism and socialism
🔗 5. Social and legal pluralism,
rejection of statism
🔗 6.The existence of a governing authority is based on natural law, no system is perfect or absolute
#philosophy
Ask a Philosopher
Aristotle’s substance and accident
Bader asks: I’m interested in Aristotle’s philosophy and I study his concepts of substance and accident. Aristotle says that an accident is that which exists through another or present …
Ecce Verbum
The Saints and the Successful "The cult of saints excludes the cult of success--the veneration of those people who have got on well in this world, the snobbish admiration of wealth and fame. This does not mean that a person who apparently has succeeded in…
Wealth without sin
*(Sirach 13:24 ) Wealth is good as long as it's free of sin; the ungodly speak of poverty as an evil in and of itself.
*In the words of Jesus, the rich man's road to heaven is particularly winding and difficult. It is full of dangers and certainly "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven" (Mt 19,24). Our Saviour repeatedly instructs us not to lay up for ourselves treasures on earth, but in heaven (Mt 6,19- -21), not to get gold or silver or copper for our purses (Mt 10,9), to get rid of our worries about what to eat and drink and what to wear (Mt 6,25). The fate of the possessors of riches is defined by Christ's "woe to you rich men, for you have already taken away your comfort" (Lk 6,24). "Woe" is also mentioned in the parable of the rich man and the beggar Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31). Through this parable, Jesus intends to explain to his listeners that they are mistaken in thinking that if someone is successful in this world, it means that God is favourable to him and, conversely, a lack of success means that God does not give him his blessing. The rich man did not get into hell because he was rich, but because he thought only of himself and did not help Lazarus even though he had the means to do so.
*For the people of Israel, wealth was a sign of God's blessing. God bestowed it as a reward on righteous men, such as Solomon (1 Kings 3:13; 5:1-8; 10:14-22) and Job (Job 1:1-3.9-10; 42:10-12). People believed that having wealth and health was a sign of God's blessing. Sickness and poverty, on the other hand, is a punishment for sins committed. In the book of Job in the Old Testament there is an attempt to break with this way of thinking. Job was a righteous man, yet experienced poverty, illness and other misfortunes. His friends moved away from him because they saw his fate as a punishment for his sins.
*Christ teaches that it is not what is external that makes a person unclean, but what comes from the heart (Mt 15:10-20). Man must not absolutise his property, make it into an idol and thereby aggravate the disorder of his soul.
*Scripture is not an economic treatise. God's revelation directs a moral message to us. Above all, man, whether rich or poor, must guard against the pride to which the misuse of earthly possessions can lead. Pride is a hypocrisy, as we all depend on the merciful God in everything. Such a pride leads to blindness. The Old Testament warns: "Do not rely on your riches, and do not say, 'I am self-sufficient'" (Sir 5:1). Putting one's hope in temporal goods withdraws one from spiritual matters (Wis 11:24; Lk 12:15; Rev 3:17).
*The Lord Jesus does not condemn the mere possession of wealth, nor does he condemn the rich or make an ideal out of poverty. The blessing of the poor concerns above all the sphere of humility - spiritual poverty (Mt 5:3). Our Saviour calls for conversion and the preservation of the primacy of the spiritual sphere in our hierarchy of values. Spiritual poverty consists in the conviction that one's life does not depend on one's possessions (Lk 12:15) “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions".
*According to Christ, the rich man is the one who thinks that his life depends on the goods he possesses and not on God, who has given him these goods for use. Such a person recognises money as his master, whom he serves. But Christ said: no one can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other; or he will hold with the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and Mammon (Mt 6:24)
*The Gospel shows how the rich can make good use of their endowment: The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want (Mk 14:7).The prudence of those who manage their wealth and gain friends through it is praised (Lk 16:1-12) Jesus praises the rich Zacchaeus, who shares his wealth with the needy and makes amends for the wrongs done (Lk 19,1-10).
#humility
*(Sirach 13:24 ) Wealth is good as long as it's free of sin; the ungodly speak of poverty as an evil in and of itself.
*In the words of Jesus, the rich man's road to heaven is particularly winding and difficult. It is full of dangers and certainly "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven" (Mt 19,24). Our Saviour repeatedly instructs us not to lay up for ourselves treasures on earth, but in heaven (Mt 6,19- -21), not to get gold or silver or copper for our purses (Mt 10,9), to get rid of our worries about what to eat and drink and what to wear (Mt 6,25). The fate of the possessors of riches is defined by Christ's "woe to you rich men, for you have already taken away your comfort" (Lk 6,24). "Woe" is also mentioned in the parable of the rich man and the beggar Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31). Through this parable, Jesus intends to explain to his listeners that they are mistaken in thinking that if someone is successful in this world, it means that God is favourable to him and, conversely, a lack of success means that God does not give him his blessing. The rich man did not get into hell because he was rich, but because he thought only of himself and did not help Lazarus even though he had the means to do so.
*For the people of Israel, wealth was a sign of God's blessing. God bestowed it as a reward on righteous men, such as Solomon (1 Kings 3:13; 5:1-8; 10:14-22) and Job (Job 1:1-3.9-10; 42:10-12). People believed that having wealth and health was a sign of God's blessing. Sickness and poverty, on the other hand, is a punishment for sins committed. In the book of Job in the Old Testament there is an attempt to break with this way of thinking. Job was a righteous man, yet experienced poverty, illness and other misfortunes. His friends moved away from him because they saw his fate as a punishment for his sins.
*Christ teaches that it is not what is external that makes a person unclean, but what comes from the heart (Mt 15:10-20). Man must not absolutise his property, make it into an idol and thereby aggravate the disorder of his soul.
*Scripture is not an economic treatise. God's revelation directs a moral message to us. Above all, man, whether rich or poor, must guard against the pride to which the misuse of earthly possessions can lead. Pride is a hypocrisy, as we all depend on the merciful God in everything. Such a pride leads to blindness. The Old Testament warns: "Do not rely on your riches, and do not say, 'I am self-sufficient'" (Sir 5:1). Putting one's hope in temporal goods withdraws one from spiritual matters (Wis 11:24; Lk 12:15; Rev 3:17).
*The Lord Jesus does not condemn the mere possession of wealth, nor does he condemn the rich or make an ideal out of poverty. The blessing of the poor concerns above all the sphere of humility - spiritual poverty (Mt 5:3). Our Saviour calls for conversion and the preservation of the primacy of the spiritual sphere in our hierarchy of values. Spiritual poverty consists in the conviction that one's life does not depend on one's possessions (Lk 12:15) “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions".
*According to Christ, the rich man is the one who thinks that his life depends on the goods he possesses and not on God, who has given him these goods for use. Such a person recognises money as his master, whom he serves. But Christ said: no one can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other; or he will hold with the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and Mammon (Mt 6:24)
*The Gospel shows how the rich can make good use of their endowment: The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want (Mk 14:7).The prudence of those who manage their wealth and gain friends through it is praised (Lk 16:1-12) Jesus praises the rich Zacchaeus, who shares his wealth with the needy and makes amends for the wrongs done (Lk 19,1-10).
#humility
Ecce Verbum
ABC of Thomism J.M. Bocheński 2.Thomistic personalism 🧵 1. Definition of a person, Rejection of collectivism Thomistic personalism teaches that society is an ensemble of human persons with a common goal, which is the common good of society; that society…
ABC of Thomism
J.M. Bocheński
3. Thomistic theism 🧵
1. Rejection of the views of the intuitionists, pseudo-mystics, ontologists and the errors of Descartes and St. Anselm
Thomistic theism teaches that man does not and cannot naturally possess an experience of God. Man cannot prove the existence of God by the mere dissection of concepts, by their analysis, without being based on a concrete, experiential reality. Arguments called 'moral' have no evidential value in this matter.
Thomistic theism rejects the views of intuitionists and pseudo-mystics who recognise the non-existent experience of God. It rejects the fallacies of ontologists who believe that God is an immediate object of the human mind. It rejects the 'ontological' argument of St Anselm and Descartes, who attempt to prove the existence of God by dissecting the very notion of an infinite Being.
Thomism teaches that in human experience we encounter only finite beings, but never an infinite Being, and that the object of our mind is indeed being as such, but by no means it is the Being of God. Thomism therefore denies that we have any natural direct access to God. If the existence of God can be known in a natural way, it is necessary to use reasoning. But much of the popular reasoning does not represent any value -especially the reasoning based on the need for an Infinite Judge- because this reasoning is not based on facts, but on human desires.
Similarly, the reasoning of St Anselm, who wished to deduce the existence of God from the concept of God, is erroneous. Thomism teaches that only other desires can be deduced from desires, and only other concepts can be deduced from concepts. The way to the real God must lead only through the real being (that which is).
*It is important to emphasise that Thomistic philosophy is a consistent realism and that its theory of society is based on a theory of substance and accidentality 🔗, without which it is incomprehensible. A fundamental part of Thomistic philosophy is ontology (the science of being; that to which existence is due). It discusses the laws governing every being, Its principles are applied to all other branches of Thomistic philosophy.
🔗 2.The order of existence points to God, He can be known through his creation
Rejection of the logic of atheism, fideism, pantheism
🔗 3. The difference between rational cognition and Revelation
Rejection of monism
🔗 4. In God there is no real difference between His Being and His attributes, God is pure Act
Rejection of the view of Hegel and his ilk
🔗 5. God's influence on His creation
Rejection of the logical errors of deists and Calvinists
🔗 6. It is impossible to arrive at revealed truths by means of reason
Errors of pseudo-rationalists and supernaturalists
🔗 7. Autonomy of Philosophy and Faith
🔗 8. Conclusions
J.M. Bocheński
3. Thomistic theism 🧵
1. Rejection of the views of the intuitionists, pseudo-mystics, ontologists and the errors of Descartes and St. Anselm
Thomistic theism teaches that man does not and cannot naturally possess an experience of God. Man cannot prove the existence of God by the mere dissection of concepts, by their analysis, without being based on a concrete, experiential reality. Arguments called 'moral' have no evidential value in this matter.
Thomistic theism rejects the views of intuitionists and pseudo-mystics who recognise the non-existent experience of God. It rejects the fallacies of ontologists who believe that God is an immediate object of the human mind. It rejects the 'ontological' argument of St Anselm and Descartes, who attempt to prove the existence of God by dissecting the very notion of an infinite Being.
Thomism teaches that in human experience we encounter only finite beings, but never an infinite Being, and that the object of our mind is indeed being as such, but by no means it is the Being of God. Thomism therefore denies that we have any natural direct access to God. If the existence of God can be known in a natural way, it is necessary to use reasoning. But much of the popular reasoning does not represent any value -especially the reasoning based on the need for an Infinite Judge- because this reasoning is not based on facts, but on human desires.
Similarly, the reasoning of St Anselm, who wished to deduce the existence of God from the concept of God, is erroneous. Thomism teaches that only other desires can be deduced from desires, and only other concepts can be deduced from concepts. The way to the real God must lead only through the real being (that which is).
*It is important to emphasise that Thomistic philosophy is a consistent realism and that its theory of society is based on a theory of substance and accidentality 🔗, without which it is incomprehensible. A fundamental part of Thomistic philosophy is ontology (the science of being; that to which existence is due). It discusses the laws governing every being, Its principles are applied to all other branches of Thomistic philosophy.
🔗 2.The order of existence points to God, He can be known through his creation
Rejection of the logic of atheism, fideism, pantheism
🔗 3. The difference between rational cognition and Revelation
Rejection of monism
🔗 4. In God there is no real difference between His Being and His attributes, God is pure Act
Rejection of the view of Hegel and his ilk
🔗 5. God's influence on His creation
Rejection of the logical errors of deists and Calvinists
🔗 6. It is impossible to arrive at revealed truths by means of reason
Errors of pseudo-rationalists and supernaturalists
🔗 7. Autonomy of Philosophy and Faith
🔗 8. Conclusions
Ask a Philosopher
Aristotle’s substance and accident
Bader asks: I’m interested in Aristotle’s philosophy and I study his concepts of substance and accident. Aristotle says that an accident is that which exists through another or present …
Ecce Verbum
St. Lawrence of Brindisi on the Sacraments "The excellence of Baptism is that it turns the darkness into light, the curse of eternal death into the glory of heaven, the status of slaves of the devil into that of being children of God! The excellence of Confirmation…
Dionysus the Areopagite on the Sacrament of Baptism
The one entering baptism must renounce his previous evil life and despise Satan.
pages 146-149
source 🔗 His Collection of Treatises
The one entering baptism must renounce his previous evil life and despise Satan.
pages 146-149
source 🔗 His Collection of Treatises
Ecce Verbum
2_M_Ribotta_Tough_Love_is_Not_the_Answer_Don_Boscos_Views_on_Punishment.pdf
An Exhortation to Educators
Don Bosco
Letter from St. John Bosco to his Salesians, from Rome, May 10, 1884 outlining the characteristics of a good superior, place of friendship, relationship and recreation in his ‘preventative’ approach to education.
Dear sons in Jesus Christ,
Near or far, I am always thinking of you. My only desire is to see you happy both in this world and the next. That is why I am writing this letter to you. My absence from you weighs heavily on me, and not being able to see and hear you hurts me more than you can imagine. Indeed, I wanted to write to you a week ago but was prevented from doing so by endless business. It will not be all that long now before I am back among you, nevertheless I want to anticipate my return by means of a letter since I am unable to come in person. I am speaking as one who loves you tenderly in Christ Jesus and who feels it his duty to speak to you with the freedom of a father. You’ll allow me that, won’t you? And you will listen to me carefully and do what I tell you.
As I said, you are the sole object of my thoughts. Well then, I went up to my room a few nights ago and began to say the prayers my good mother taught me, before getting into bed, and whether I was simply overcome by sleep or carried away by a distraction I don’t really know, but it seemed that two of the former pupils of the Oratory were standing there before me.
One of them came forward and greeted me affectionately, saying “Don Bosco! Do you know me?” “Of course, I do,” I replied.
“And do you remember me?” he went on.
“Yes, not only you, but the others too. You’re Valfre and you were at the Oratory before 1870.”
“Tell me,” he added, “would you like to see the boys who were at the Oratory in my time?”
“Oh, yes, let me see them.” I replied, “I would be delighted.”
Valfre then showed me the boys just as they were at that time, the same features, height and so on. It seemed to me that I was in recreation in the Oratory of those days. Everywhere I looked there was life, movement and joy; some were running, some jumping, some skipping. Some were playing leap-frog, some tag, some with a ball; in one corner was a huddle of boys hanging on the words of one of the priests as he told them a story; in another corner a cleric was playing with a group of lads. There were songs and laughter on all sides, Brothers and Priests everywhere and the joyful cries of the boys around them. It was perfectly clear that the greatest cordiality and confidence existed between the boys and their superiors. I was overjoyed by the sight and Valfre said to me:
“As you can see familiarity breeds affection and affection breeds confidence. This is what opens hearts; the boys can open up without fear to their teachers, assistants and superiors. They become frank both inside and outside the confessional and in general they show great docility to the commands of those of whose love they are sure.”
At that moment the other past pupil, who had a pure white beard, now came forward and said:
“Don Bosco, would you like now to know and see the boys who are at the Oratory today?” It was Joseph Buzzetti who spoke.
“Yes,” I replied, “For it is more than a month since I last saw them.”
So he showed me them. I saw the Oratory and everyone of you in recreation. But the cries of joy and the songs I no longer heard, nor was there the lively activity of the previous scene. Instead boredom, weariness and ill-humour could be seen in the actions and on the faces of many of the lads, together with a lack of trust which made me sore at heart. There were many, it is true, who were moving and running about in a spirit of carefree joy. But I saw others, and their number was anything but small, standing by themselves, leaning against the pillars where they were a prey to disturbing fantasies, or standing on the steps or in the corridors or on the garden terraces, trying to get away from the common recreation.
🔗 part 2
🔗 part 3
🔗 part 4
🔗 part 5
🔗 source
more:
🔗 Salesian system of education
#education
Don Bosco
Letter from St. John Bosco to his Salesians, from Rome, May 10, 1884 outlining the characteristics of a good superior, place of friendship, relationship and recreation in his ‘preventative’ approach to education.
Dear sons in Jesus Christ,
Near or far, I am always thinking of you. My only desire is to see you happy both in this world and the next. That is why I am writing this letter to you. My absence from you weighs heavily on me, and not being able to see and hear you hurts me more than you can imagine. Indeed, I wanted to write to you a week ago but was prevented from doing so by endless business. It will not be all that long now before I am back among you, nevertheless I want to anticipate my return by means of a letter since I am unable to come in person. I am speaking as one who loves you tenderly in Christ Jesus and who feels it his duty to speak to you with the freedom of a father. You’ll allow me that, won’t you? And you will listen to me carefully and do what I tell you.
As I said, you are the sole object of my thoughts. Well then, I went up to my room a few nights ago and began to say the prayers my good mother taught me, before getting into bed, and whether I was simply overcome by sleep or carried away by a distraction I don’t really know, but it seemed that two of the former pupils of the Oratory were standing there before me.
One of them came forward and greeted me affectionately, saying “Don Bosco! Do you know me?” “Of course, I do,” I replied.
“And do you remember me?” he went on.
“Yes, not only you, but the others too. You’re Valfre and you were at the Oratory before 1870.”
“Tell me,” he added, “would you like to see the boys who were at the Oratory in my time?”
“Oh, yes, let me see them.” I replied, “I would be delighted.”
Valfre then showed me the boys just as they were at that time, the same features, height and so on. It seemed to me that I was in recreation in the Oratory of those days. Everywhere I looked there was life, movement and joy; some were running, some jumping, some skipping. Some were playing leap-frog, some tag, some with a ball; in one corner was a huddle of boys hanging on the words of one of the priests as he told them a story; in another corner a cleric was playing with a group of lads. There were songs and laughter on all sides, Brothers and Priests everywhere and the joyful cries of the boys around them. It was perfectly clear that the greatest cordiality and confidence existed between the boys and their superiors. I was overjoyed by the sight and Valfre said to me:
“As you can see familiarity breeds affection and affection breeds confidence. This is what opens hearts; the boys can open up without fear to their teachers, assistants and superiors. They become frank both inside and outside the confessional and in general they show great docility to the commands of those of whose love they are sure.”
At that moment the other past pupil, who had a pure white beard, now came forward and said:
“Don Bosco, would you like now to know and see the boys who are at the Oratory today?” It was Joseph Buzzetti who spoke.
“Yes,” I replied, “For it is more than a month since I last saw them.”
So he showed me them. I saw the Oratory and everyone of you in recreation. But the cries of joy and the songs I no longer heard, nor was there the lively activity of the previous scene. Instead boredom, weariness and ill-humour could be seen in the actions and on the faces of many of the lads, together with a lack of trust which made me sore at heart. There were many, it is true, who were moving and running about in a spirit of carefree joy. But I saw others, and their number was anything but small, standing by themselves, leaning against the pillars where they were a prey to disturbing fantasies, or standing on the steps or in the corridors or on the garden terraces, trying to get away from the common recreation.
🔗 part 2
🔗 part 3
🔗 part 4
🔗 part 5
🔗 source
more:
🔗 Salesian system of education
#education
Telegram
Ecce Verbum chat
Some were strolling about in groups, talking in subdued voices and casting suspicious and furtive glances in every direction; they would smile from time to time but the glances that accompanied their smiles made it plain that St. Aloysius would have blushed…
Ecce Verbum
Beauty as orderliness of the soul "The need for beauty, which manifests itself in the child when it seeks light and in the wild man when he craves shine, can be developed and guided so that it becomes a lever in life. Such is the mission of literature and…
"On the love of the Homeland"
Jadwiga Zamoyska 🔗
*Zamoyska, in her short but succinct work 'On the love of the Homeland', gives a very tangible lecture on what patriotism should be.
"Love of the Fatherland does not consist in some mayhem about national rights, and in poeticizing them, it does not consist in manifestations, patriotic feasts, toasts, pompous speeches, or affectionate sentiments. Love of the Fatherland has nothing to do with national "pride" and vanity."
"Love of the Fatherland is a virtue: a virtue in the order of God's will, because it arises from the duty of the state; a civic virtue. And since it is a virtue, it is a force, and since it is love, like all love, it is creative."
The author mentions three necessary obligations:
1. respecting and maintaining what is good
2. correcting what is harmful
3. fighting for the country and accomplishing what is desirable
1. Respecting and maintaining what is good
*The first issue that Zamoyska believes needs to be addressed urgently and seriously is our mother tongue. We should care for the beauty of the language and try to pass it on to future generations. The attitude toward our language is one of the marks of patriotism.
"Our language is very beautiful! Let us stand by it, let us strive to perfect it, let us respect its richness, let us guard the purity of our language as our most precious treasure, let us not forget the old names and expressions, let us not replace them with foreign words, and let us not cripple our language with carelessness in the way we write and express ourselves. Let us learn, by all means, to speak and write correctly."
*Another value that we are to respect and maintain is our native land.
"Let us respect every bit of this land inherited from our fathers; let us not let it fall into foreign and hostile hands; let us save what is endangered! It is also important to cultivate customs, fine arts, national and regional dress, and traditional greetings. Everything that identifies us as a nation should be given urgent care and attention, even today. For here, as in the case of language, the fascination with what is foreign is far overshadowed by admiration for what is ours"
2. Correcting what is harmful
*Zamoyska condemns pride, vanity, indulging oneself, lack of restraint in eating and drinking, dressing, games, laziness, wasting time, and falling into debt. She sees national vices as deficiencies in upbringing—for both men and women.
"If women are not brought up to be good mothers who will be able to take proper care of future generations, and the upbringing of young boys is entrusted to men who are full of vices and not always proven tutors, then there is no hope for the good condition of society.."
"Whoever, having children, does not work on them by the sweat of his brow while they are young, will weep over them when they are grown up."
*The cure for all national vices is the acquisition and cultivation of virtues, both theological (faith, hope, and charity) and cardinal (prudence, temperance, and fortitude). This is a teaching that is still extremely relevant today, even though virtues are not popular; they have been reduced to symbols of an anachronistic social order (which, of course, they are not!). However, it is important to remember that they are permanent dispositions to do good. Virtue is more than just a mere habit. It is the strength of our will that directs us to do good. Virtues, though unpopular and ridiculed, are a real answer to social problems today.
🔗 3. Fighting for the country and accomplishing what is desirable
#patriotism
Jadwiga Zamoyska 🔗
*Zamoyska, in her short but succinct work 'On the love of the Homeland', gives a very tangible lecture on what patriotism should be.
"Love of the Fatherland does not consist in some mayhem about national rights, and in poeticizing them, it does not consist in manifestations, patriotic feasts, toasts, pompous speeches, or affectionate sentiments. Love of the Fatherland has nothing to do with national "pride" and vanity."
"Love of the Fatherland is a virtue: a virtue in the order of God's will, because it arises from the duty of the state; a civic virtue. And since it is a virtue, it is a force, and since it is love, like all love, it is creative."
The author mentions three necessary obligations:
1. respecting and maintaining what is good
2. correcting what is harmful
3. fighting for the country and accomplishing what is desirable
1. Respecting and maintaining what is good
*The first issue that Zamoyska believes needs to be addressed urgently and seriously is our mother tongue. We should care for the beauty of the language and try to pass it on to future generations. The attitude toward our language is one of the marks of patriotism.
"Our language is very beautiful! Let us stand by it, let us strive to perfect it, let us respect its richness, let us guard the purity of our language as our most precious treasure, let us not forget the old names and expressions, let us not replace them with foreign words, and let us not cripple our language with carelessness in the way we write and express ourselves. Let us learn, by all means, to speak and write correctly."
*Another value that we are to respect and maintain is our native land.
"Let us respect every bit of this land inherited from our fathers; let us not let it fall into foreign and hostile hands; let us save what is endangered! It is also important to cultivate customs, fine arts, national and regional dress, and traditional greetings. Everything that identifies us as a nation should be given urgent care and attention, even today. For here, as in the case of language, the fascination with what is foreign is far overshadowed by admiration for what is ours"
2. Correcting what is harmful
*Zamoyska condemns pride, vanity, indulging oneself, lack of restraint in eating and drinking, dressing, games, laziness, wasting time, and falling into debt. She sees national vices as deficiencies in upbringing—for both men and women.
"If women are not brought up to be good mothers who will be able to take proper care of future generations, and the upbringing of young boys is entrusted to men who are full of vices and not always proven tutors, then there is no hope for the good condition of society.."
"Whoever, having children, does not work on them by the sweat of his brow while they are young, will weep over them when they are grown up."
*The cure for all national vices is the acquisition and cultivation of virtues, both theological (faith, hope, and charity) and cardinal (prudence, temperance, and fortitude). This is a teaching that is still extremely relevant today, even though virtues are not popular; they have been reduced to symbols of an anachronistic social order (which, of course, they are not!). However, it is important to remember that they are permanent dispositions to do good. Virtue is more than just a mere habit. It is the strength of our will that directs us to do good. Virtues, though unpopular and ridiculed, are a real answer to social problems today.
🔗 3. Fighting for the country and accomplishing what is desirable
#patriotism
Telegram
Ecce Verbum chat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jadwiga_Sapie%C5%BCyna
Ecce Verbum
ABC of Thomism J.M. Bocheński 3. Thomistic theism 🧵 1. Rejection of the views of the intuitionists, pseudo-mystics, ontologists and the errors of Descartes and St. Anselm Thomistic theism teaches that man does not and cannot naturally possess an experience…
ABC of Thomism
J.M. Bocheński
4.Thomistic ethics 🧵
1. What does the moral value of human act depend on?
Rejection of subjectivists and utilitarians, criticism of Kant
According to Thomistic ethics, every human act has an object. This object is related to the deed in the same way as an act is related to potency. It gives it meaning and content. Thus, in the first instance, a human act is good or evil depending on the object (immediate intent) rather than the result of the deed or state of the person commiting the act.
Thomistic ethics rejects subjectivist fallacies, which hold that the value of an act is determined by subjective factors. It also rejects utilitarian viewpoints which place the moral value primarily on the outcomes of an action. While these numerous aspects may impact the judgment of an act, its value is determined by its object.
Thomistic ethics is a form of objectivist, object-oriented ethics. "The object" of an act is what Thomism refers to as a "direct purpose," which is closely tied to the act's content and without which the act is impossible. For example, the object of lying is to provide misleading information. This object might then be used as a means to another end, for example, a lie can be used to save lives, but the moral value of an act is determined primarily by the object (the direct end).
The statement "the ends justify the means" is therefore untrue. The end can only justify the neutral means, but it cannot make an immoral act (evil by virtue of its object) good. Thus, a good intention, a good further aim, cannot make lying morally acceptable, but it can make, for example, singing (which is morally neutral in and of itself) morally good or bad, depending on the further end. Therefore, it is the object (the direct purpose) rather than the further end (the pleasure or displeasure of the person acting, the benefit or damage that may arise from the act), that primarily determines the moral value of the act. Thomism does not exclude other factors, and, in a general moral evaluation, it also considers the secondary purpose and circumstances.
It should be noted that Thomism does not follow Kant in rejecting satisfaction, pleasure, etc., as allegedly detrimental to the morality of an act. Satisfaction, according to Thomistic ethics, is the natural result of a good act and cannot therefore be separated from it. But for an act to be good, it must not be performed for the sake of satisfaction but for the sake of the moral value of its object.
Thus, for example, one should eat not for the sake of pleasure but to nourish oneself. However, it does not mean that the pleasure of eating is morally wrong.
🔗 2.The end of all existence is God. Philosophy alone cannot prove that man can attain God.
Rejection of materialism
🔗 3. Grace acts through nature, requires human action. An act of faith is also an action (act of the will)
🔗 4. Reason must guide all human action
Rejection of sentimentalism and voluntarism
🔗 5. The role of education and virtue ethics in formation of conscience
Criticism of Stoics and Kantians
🔗 6. Well developed virtue is effortless
🔗 7. Development of moral qualities
🔗 8. The relation between eternal law, natural law, positive law, and human conscience.
Rejection of conventionalism, theological voluntarism and idealism
🔗 9. Conclusions
#philosophy #ethics
J.M. Bocheński
4.Thomistic ethics 🧵
1. What does the moral value of human act depend on?
Rejection of subjectivists and utilitarians, criticism of Kant
According to Thomistic ethics, every human act has an object. This object is related to the deed in the same way as an act is related to potency. It gives it meaning and content. Thus, in the first instance, a human act is good or evil depending on the object (immediate intent) rather than the result of the deed or state of the person commiting the act.
Thomistic ethics rejects subjectivist fallacies, which hold that the value of an act is determined by subjective factors. It also rejects utilitarian viewpoints which place the moral value primarily on the outcomes of an action. While these numerous aspects may impact the judgment of an act, its value is determined by its object.
Thomistic ethics is a form of objectivist, object-oriented ethics. "The object" of an act is what Thomism refers to as a "direct purpose," which is closely tied to the act's content and without which the act is impossible. For example, the object of lying is to provide misleading information. This object might then be used as a means to another end, for example, a lie can be used to save lives, but the moral value of an act is determined primarily by the object (the direct end).
The statement "the ends justify the means" is therefore untrue. The end can only justify the neutral means, but it cannot make an immoral act (evil by virtue of its object) good. Thus, a good intention, a good further aim, cannot make lying morally acceptable, but it can make, for example, singing (which is morally neutral in and of itself) morally good or bad, depending on the further end. Therefore, it is the object (the direct purpose) rather than the further end (the pleasure or displeasure of the person acting, the benefit or damage that may arise from the act), that primarily determines the moral value of the act. Thomism does not exclude other factors, and, in a general moral evaluation, it also considers the secondary purpose and circumstances.
It should be noted that Thomism does not follow Kant in rejecting satisfaction, pleasure, etc., as allegedly detrimental to the morality of an act. Satisfaction, according to Thomistic ethics, is the natural result of a good act and cannot therefore be separated from it. But for an act to be good, it must not be performed for the sake of satisfaction but for the sake of the moral value of its object.
Thus, for example, one should eat not for the sake of pleasure but to nourish oneself. However, it does not mean that the pleasure of eating is morally wrong.
🔗 2.The end of all existence is God. Philosophy alone cannot prove that man can attain God.
Rejection of materialism
🔗 3. Grace acts through nature, requires human action. An act of faith is also an action (act of the will)
🔗 4. Reason must guide all human action
Rejection of sentimentalism and voluntarism
🔗 5. The role of education and virtue ethics in formation of conscience
Criticism of Stoics and Kantians
🔗 6. Well developed virtue is effortless
🔗 7. Development of moral qualities
🔗 8. The relation between eternal law, natural law, positive law, and human conscience.
Rejection of conventionalism, theological voluntarism and idealism
🔗 9. Conclusions
#philosophy #ethics
Telegram
Ecce Verbum chat
ABC of Thomism
J.M. Bocheński
4.Thomistic ethics 🧵
2.The end of all existence is God. Philosophy alone cannot prove that man can attain God.
Rejection of materialism
According to Thomistic ethics, human existence as a whole, like every act, has an ultimate…
J.M. Bocheński
4.Thomistic ethics 🧵
2.The end of all existence is God. Philosophy alone cannot prove that man can attain God.
Rejection of materialism
According to Thomistic ethics, human existence as a whole, like every act, has an ultimate…