.jpg)
§6. Il y a en un sens une philosophie de l’Eglise.
Le Christianisme est une vie plus particulièrement vécue par ceux dont l’âme est plus pure et plus détachée du monde ; mais la racine de la vivante volonté qui se porte vers le bien est l’intelligence qui connaît et juge ce bien ; pour être une vie, le Christianisme doit être une doctrine. Cette doctrine est plus explicitement connue par ceux dont l’esprit est plus pénétrant et plus cultivé. Exprimée d’abord en termes de sens commun, elle s’explicite, se précise peu à peu en des formules dogmatiques qui montrent plus clairement les rapports des dogmes entre eux et avec les grandes vérités de l’ordre naturel. Par là se constitue ce qu’on peut appeler en un sens la philosophie de l’Eglise, ou la philosophie chrétienne ; élaboration du sens commun dans la lumière de la foi, cette philosophie n’est pas un système proprement dit, elle n’en a pas moins sa solution sur les principaux problèmes philosophiques, sur la connaissance sensible et intellectuelle, sur Dieu, sur l’âme humaine, sur la substance corporelle. - Pour l’Eglise, la connaissance sensible a une valeur objective : les accidents eucharistiques sont réels et existent même lorsqu’ils ne sont pas objets actuels de sensation dans un tabernacle fermé ; négation du esse est percipi (111). La connaissance intellectuelle qui seule atteint directement la substance au delà des données des sens est aussi objective, la substance existe réellement distincte des accidents sensibles, celle du pain a été convertie en celle du corps du Christ. - Cette connaissance intellectuelle naturelle nous permet d’affirmer avec certitude l’existence de Dieu (Conc. Vatic.). - Ce Dieu est essentiellement distinct du monde, absolument simple, immuable, éternel, infiniment parfait, omniscient, souverainement bon, absolument libre, provident, juste et miséricordieux. Il a créé librement de rien, dans le temps (112), des substances spirituelles, des substances corporelles et l’homme composé d’esprit et de corps. Il peut agir en dehors de l’ordre des lois naturelles qu’Il a établies. – Dans l’homme l’âme raisonnable est aussi principe de vie sensitive et végétative. Cette âme est spécialement créée par Dieu, et non pas engendrée par les parents. Elle est immortelle, elle reprendra son corps après avoir été séparée de lui. Elle sera éternellement récompensée ou punie. Elle est libre, la liberté nécessaire, pour mériter n’est pas seulement spontanéité (Denz., 1904). Il y a une personnalité ontologique racine de la conscience de soi et de la liberté. - Telles sont les principales assertions de la philosophie chrétienne, elles proviennent en grande partie de la précision du donné révélé.Le dogme, en évoluant, condamne des systèmes. Faut-il se plaindre que l’erreur soit jugée ce qu’elle est et que le domaine éclairé par la lumière divine grandisse ? Mgr Duchesne a très bien exprimé cette vérité en comparant le développement du dogme catholique au voyage d’un navire parti sur lest et qui se charge peu à peu de marchandises. « La ligne de flottaison s’élève le long de la coque ; autrement dit, il s’enfonce dans la mer. Telle déchirure qui d’abord n’eût pas atteint les œuvres vives les atteindrait maintenant que le niveau s’est élevé, et le navire serait mis en danger par une avarie qui au commencement du voyage eût été sans conséquence… Dans son long voyage, le vaisseau de la tradition a pris une possession plus ample de l’océan ; la surface immergée est devenue plus large qu’à l’origine, bien que ce soit toujours la même doctrine, le même navire. Au second, au troisième siècle on pouvait impunément l’atteindre à certains endroits qui maintenant sont sous les eaux et doivent être respectés sous peine de tout compromettre (113)» C’est pourquoi nous ne devons pas nous étonner de lire dans l’Encyclique Pascendi, après la condamnation de l’agnosticisme, de l’immanentisme et de l’évolutionnisme : « Magistros autem monemus ut rite hoc teneant, Aquinatem deserere, praesertim in re metaphysica, non sine magno detrimento esse. » De même qu’il y a « une métaphysique naturelle de l’intelligence humaine (114)», il y a, au sens où nous l’avons dit, une philosophie de l’Eglise.
Notes:
111. Cf. chez les théologiens, par exemple BILLUART, t. IX, p. 79, la réfutation de l’opinion cartésienne d’après laquelle les accidents eucharistiques ne sont que des impressions subjectives produites par Dieu dans nos sens.
112. Cf. DENZINGER, n° 501-503, la condamnation des propositions d’Eckard où est affirmée la création ab aeterno. Voir aussi n° 391, 428, 1783.
113. Mgr DUCHESNE, Les Témoins anténicéens du dogme de la Trinité (Revue des sciences eccl., V°série, t. VI, déc. 1882).
1 comment:
Cf. Pope Pius XII, who, in his encyclical "Humani Generis" defends the philosophy of the Church, which he calls "Our philosophy":
"29. It is well known how highly the Church regards human reason, for it falls to reason to demonstrate with certainty the existence of God, personal and one; to prove beyond doubt from divine signs the very foundations of the Christian faith; to express properly the law which the Creator has imprinted in the hearts of men; and finally to attain to some notion, indeed a very fruitful notion, of mysteries.[7] But reason can perform these functions safely and well only when properly trained, that is, when imbued with that sound philosophy which has long been, as it were, a patrimony handed down by earlier Christian ages, and which moreover possesses an authority of an even higher order, since the Teaching Authority of the Church, in the light of divine revelation itself, has weighed its fundamental tenets, which have been elaborated and defined little by little by men of great genius. For this philosophy, acknowledged and accepted by the Church, safeguards the genuine validity of human knowledge, the unshakable metaphysical principles of sufficient reason, causality, and finality, and finally the mind's ability to attain certain and unchangeable truth.
30. Of course this philosophy deals with much that neither directly nor indirectly touches faith or morals, and which consequently the Church leaves to the free discussion of experts. But this does not hold for many other things, especially those principles and fundamental tenets to which We have just referred. However, even in these fundamental questions, we may clothe our philosophy in a more convenient and richer dress, make it more vigorous with a more effective terminology, divest it of certain scholastic aids found less useful, prudently enrich it with the fruits of progress of the human mind. But never may we overthrow it, or contaminate it with false principles, or regard it as a great, but obsolete, relic. For truth and its philosophic expression cannot change from day to day, least of all where there is question of self-evident principles of the human mind or of those propositions which are supported by the wisdom of the ages and by divine revelation. Whatever new truth the sincere human mind is able to find, certainly cannot be opposed to truth already acquired, since God, the highest Truth, has created and guides the human intellect, not that it may daily oppose new truths to rightly established ones, but rather that, having eliminated errors which may have crept in, it may build truth upon truth in the same order and structure that exist in reality, the source of truth. Let no Christian therefore, whether philosopher or theologian, embrace eagerly and lightly whatever novelty happens to be thought up from day to day, but rather let him weigh it with painstaking care and a balanced judgment, lest he lose or corrupt the truth he already has, with grave danger and damage to his faith.
31. If one considers all this well, he will easily see why the Church demands that future priests be instructed in philosophy "according to the method, doctrine, and principles of the Angelic Doctor,"[8] since, as we well know from the experience of centuries, the method of Aquinas is singularly preeminent both of teaching students and for bringing truth to light; his doctrine is in harmony with Divine Revelation, and is most effective both for safeguarding the foundation of the faith and for reaping, safely and usefully, the fruits of sound progress.[9]
32. How deplorable it is then that this philosophy, received and honored by the Church, is scorned by some, who shamelessly call it outmoded in form and rationalistic, as they say, in its method of thought. They say that this philosophy upholds the erroneous notion that there can be a metaphysic that is absolutely true; whereas in fact, they say, reality, especially transcendent reality, cannot better be expressed than by disparate teachings, which mutually complete each other, although they are in a way mutually opposed. Our traditional philosophy, then, with its clear exposition and solution of questions, its accurate definition of terms, its clear-cut distinctions, can be, they concede, useful as a preparation for scholastic theology, a preparation quite in accord with medieval mentality; but this philosophy hardly offers a method of philosophizing suited to the needs of our modern culture. They allege, finally, that our perennial philosophy is only a philosophy of immutable essences, while the contemporary mind must look to the existence of things and to life, which is ever in flux. While scorning our philosophy, they extol other philosophies of all kinds, ancient and modern, oriental and occidental, by which they seem to imply that any kind of philosophy or theory, with a few additions and corrections if need be, can be reconciled with Catholic dogma. No Catholic can doubt how false this is, especially where there is question of those fictitious theories they call immanentism, or idealism or materialism, whether historic or dialectic, or even existentialism, whether atheistic or simply the type that denies the validity of the reason in the field of metaphysics.
33. Finally, they reproach this philosophy taught in our schools for regarding only the intellect in the process of cognition, while neglecting the function of the will and the emotions. This is simply not true. Never has Christian philosophy denied the usefulness and efficacy of good dispositions of soul for perceiving and embracing moral and religious truths. In fact, it has always taught that the lack of these dispositions of good will can be the reason why the intellect, influenced by the passions and evil inclinations, can be so obscured that it cannot see clearly. Indeed St. Thomas holds that the intellect can in some way perceive higher goods of the moral order, whether natural or supernatural, inasmuch as it experiences a certain "connaturality" with these goods, whether this "connaturality" be purely natural, or the result of grace;[10] and it is clear how much even this somewhat obscure perception can help the reason in its investigations. However it is one thing to admit the power of the dispositions of the will in helping reason to gain a more certain and firm knowledge of moral truths; it is quite another thing to say, as these innovators do, indiscriminately mingling cognition and act of will, that the appetitive and affective faculties have a certain power of understanding, and that man, since he cannot by using his reason decide with certainty what is true and is to be accepted, turns to his will, by which he freely chooses among opposite opinions.
34. It is not surprising that these new opinions endanger the two philosophical sciences which by their very nature are closely connected with the doctrine of faith, that is, theodicy and ethics; they hold that the function of these two sciences is not to prove with certitude anything about God or any other transcendental being, but rather to show that the truths which faith teaches about a personal God and about His precepts, are perfectly consistent with the necessities of life and are therefore to be accepted by all, in order to avoid despair and to attain eternal salvation. All these opinions and affirmations are openly contrary to the documents of Our Predecessors Leo XIII and Pius X, and cannot be reconciled with the decrees of the Vatican Council. It would indeed be unnecessary to deplore these aberrations from the truth, if all, even in the field of philosophy, directed their attention with the proper reverence to the Teaching Authority of the Church, which by divine institution has the mission not only to guard and interpret the deposit of divinely revealed truth, but also to keep watch over the philosophical sciences themselves, in order that Catholic dogmas may suffer no harm because of erroneous opinions."
Post a Comment