Kleutgen Liberatore Zigliara

Neo-Scholasticism

Neo-Scholasticism is the development of the Scholasticism of the Middle Ages

during the latter half of the nineteenth century. It is not merely the resuscitation

of a philosophy long since defunct, but rather a restatement in our own day of the

philosophia perennis which, elaborated by the Greeks and brought to perfection

by the great medieval teachers, has never ceased to exist even in modern times.

It has some times been called neo-Thomism partly because St. Thomas Aquinas

in the thirteenth century gave to Scholasticism among the Latins its final form,

partly because the idea has gained ground that only Thomism can infuse vitality

into twentieth century scholasticism. But Thomism is too narrow a term; the

system itself is too large and comprehensive to be expressed by the name of

any single exponent. This article will deal with the elements which

neo-Scholasticism takes over from the past; the modifications which adapt it to

the present; the welcome accorded it by contemporary thought and the outlook

for its future; its leading representatives and centres.

I. TRADITIONAL ELEMENTS

Neo-Scholasticism seeks to restore the fundamental organic doctrines embodied

in the Scholasticism of the thirteenth century. It claims that philosophy does not

vary with each passing phase of history; that the truth of seven hundred years

ago is still true today, and that if the great medieval thinkers -- Aquinas,

Bonaventure, and Duns Scotus -succeeded in constructing a sound philosophical

system on the data supplied by the Greeks, especially by Aristotle, it must be

possible, in our own day, to gather from the speculation of the Middle Ages the

soul of truth which it contains. These essential conceptions may be summarized

as follows:

(1) God, pure actuality and absolute perfection, is substantially distinct from

every finite thing: he alone can create and preserve all beings other than Himself.

His infinite knowledge includes all that has been, is, or shall be, and likewise all

that is possible.

(2) As to our knowledge of the material world: whatever exists is itself, an

incommunicable, individual substance. To the core of self-sustaining reality, in

the oak-tree for instance, other realities (accidents) are added -- size, form,

roughness, and so on. All oak-trees are alike, indeed are identical in respect of

certain constituent elements. Considering this likeness and even identity, our

human intelligence groups them into one species and again, in view of their

common characteristics, it ranges various species under one genus. Such is the

Aristotelean solution of the problem of universals (q.v.). Each substance is in its

nature fixed and determined; and nothing is farther from the spirit of

Scholasticism than a theory of evolution which would regard even the essences

of things as products of change.

But this statism requires as its complement a moderate dynamism, and this is

supplied by the central concepts of act and potency. Whatsoever changes is,

just for that reason, limited. The oak-tree passes through a process of growth, of

becoming: whatever is actually in it now was potentially in it from the beginning.

Its vital functions go on unceasingly (accidental change); but the tree itself will

die, and out of its decayed trunk other substances will come forth (substantial

change). The theory of matter and form is simply an interpretation of the

substantial changes which bodies undergo. The union of matter and form

constitutes the essence of concrete being, and this essence is endowed with

existence. Throughout all change and becoming there runs a rhythm of finality;

the activities of the countless substances of the universe converge towards an

end which is known to God; finality, in a word, involves optimism.

(3) Man, a compound of body (matter) and of soul (form), puts forth activities of a

higher order -- knowledge and volition. Through his senses he perceives concrete

objects, e.g. this oak; through his intellect he knows the abstract and universal

(the oak). All our intellectual activity rests on sensory function; but through the

active intellect (intellectus agens) an abstract representation of the sensible

object is provided for the intellectus possibilis. Hence the characteristic of the

idea, its non-materiality, and on this is based the principal argument for the

spirituality and immortality of the soul. Here, too, is the foundation of logic and of

the theory of knowledge, the justification of our judgments and syllogisms.

Upon knowledge follows the appetitive process, sensory or intellectual according

to the sort of knowledge. The will (appetitus intellectualis) in certain conditions is

free, and thanks to this liberty man is the master of his destiny. Like all other

beings, we have an end to attain and we are morally obliged, though not

compelled, to attain it.

Natural happiness would result from the full development of our powers of

knowing and loving. We should find and possess God in this world since the

corporeal world is the proper object of our intelligence. But above nature is the

order of grace and our supernatural happiness will consist in the direct intuition of

God, the beatific vision. Here philosophy ends and theology begins.

II. Adaptation to Modern Needs

The neo-Scholastic programme includes, in the next place, the adaptation of

medieval principles and doctrines to our present intellectual needs. Complete

immobility is no less incompatible with progress than out-and-out relativism. Vita

in motu. To make Scholasticism rigid and stationary would be fatal to it. The

doctrines revived by the new movement are like an inherited fortune; to refuse it

would be folly, but to manage it without regard to actual conditions would be

worse. With Dr. Ehrhard one may say: "Aquinas should be our beacon, not our

boundary" ("Der Katholicismus und das zwanzigste Jahrh. im Lichte der

Kirchlichen Entwicklung der Neuzeit", Stuttgart, 1902, 252). We have now to

pass in review the various factors in the situation and to see in what respect the

new Scholasticism differs from the old and how far it adapts itself to our age.

(1) Elimination of False or Useless Notions

Neo-Scholasticism rejects the theories of physics, celestial and terrestrial, which

the Middle Ages grafted on the principles, otherwise sound enough, of

cosmology and metaphysics; e.g. the perfection and superiority of astral

substance, the "incorruptibility" of the heavenly bodies, their external connexion

with "motor spirits", the influence of the stars on the generation of earthly beings,

the four "simple" bodies, etc. It further rejects those philosophical theories which

are disproved by the results of investigation; e.g. the diffusion of sensible

"species" throughout a medium and their introduction into the organs of sense.

Even the Scholastic ideas that have been retained are not all of equal

importance; criticism and personal conviction may retrench or modify them

considerably, without injury to fundamental principles.

(2) Study of the History of Philosophy

The medieval scholars cultivated the history of philosophy solely with a view to its

utility, i.e. as a means of gathering the deposit of truth contained in the writings

of the ancients and, especially, for the purpose of refuting error and thus

emphasizing the value of their own doctrine. Modern students, on the contrary,

regard every human fact and achievement as in itself significant, and accordingly

they treat the history of philosophy in a spirit that is more disinterested. With this

new attitude, neo-Scholasticism is in full sympathy; it does its share in the work

of historical reconstruction by employing critical methods; it does not attempt to

condense the opinions of others into a syllogism and refute them with a phrase,

nor does it commend the practice of putting whole systems into a paragraph or

two in order to annihilate them with epithet or invective. Neo-Scholasticism,

however, does not confine its interest to ancient and medieval philosophy; its

chief concern is with present-day systems. It takes issue with them and offsets

their theories of the world by a synthesis of its own. It is only by keeping in touch

with actual living thought that it can claim a place in the twentieth century and

command the attention of its opponents. And it has everything to gain from a

discussion in which it encounters Positivism, Kantism, and other forms or

tendencies of modern speculation.

(3) Cultivation of the Sciences

The need of a philosophy based on science is recognized today by every school.

Neo-Scholasticism simply follows the example of the Aristotelean and medieval

philosophy in taking the data of research as the groundwork of its speculation.

That there are profound differences between the Middle Ages and modern times

from the scientific point of view, is obvious. One has only to consider the

multiplication of the sciences in special lines, the autonomy which science as a

whole has acquired, and the clear demarcation established between popular

views of nature and their scientific interpretation. But it is equally plain that

neo-Scholasticism must follow up each avenue of investigation, since it

undertakes, as Aristotle and Aquinas did, to provide a synthetic explanation of

phenomena by referring them to their ultimate causes and determining their place

in the universal order of things; and this undertaking, if the synthesis is to be

deep and comprehensive, presupposes a knowledge of the details furnished by

each science. It is not possible to explain the world of phenomena while

neglecting the phenomena that make up the world. "All that exists, as

contemplated by the human mind, forms one large system or complex fact. . . .

Like a short-sighted reader, its eye pores closely, and travels slowly, over the

awful volume which lies open for its inspection. . . . These various partial views or

abstractions . . . are called sciences . . . they proceed on the principle of a

division of labour. . . . And further the comprehension of the bearings of one

science on another, and the use of each to each, and the location of them all,

with one another, this belongs, I conceive, to a sort of science distinct from all of

them, and in some sense, a science of sciences, which is my own conception of

what is meant by philosophy" (Newman, "Idea of a University", Discourse III, iii,

iv, 44 sqq.).

There is, of course, the pedagogical problem; how shall philosophy maintain its

control over the ever-widening field of the various sciences? In reply, we may cite

the words of Cardinal Mercier, a prominent leader in the neo-Scholastic

movement: "As a matter of fact", he declares, "the difficulty is a serious one, and

one may say in general terms, that it is not going to be solved by any one man.

As the domain of fact and observation grows larger and larger, individual effort

becomes less competent to survey and master it all: hence the necessity of

co-operative effort to supply what is lacking in the work of isolated investigators;

hence too the need of union between the synthetic mind and the analytic, in

order to secure, by daily contact and joint action, the harmonious development of

philosophy and science". ("La philosophie néo-scholastique" in "Revue

néo-scholastique", 1894, 17).

(4) Innovations in Doctrinal Matters

Once it turned its attention to modern fashions of thought, neo-Scholasticism

found itself face to face with problems of which medieval philosophy had not the

slightest suspicion or at any rate did not furnish a solution. It had to bear the

brunt of conflict between its own principles and those of the systems in vogue,

especially of Positivism and Criticism. And it had to take up, from its own point of

view, the questions which are favourite topics of discussion in the schools of our

time. How far then, one may ask, has neo-Scholasticism been affected by

modern thought? First of all, as to metaphysics: in the Middle Ages its claim to

validity met with no challenge, whereas, in the twentieth century, its very

possibility is at stake and, to defend it against the concerted attack of Hume and

Kant and Comte, the true significance of such concepts as being, substance,

absolute, cause, potency, and act must be explained and upheld. It is further

needful to show that, in a very real sense, God is not unknowable; to rebut the

charges preferred by Herbert Spencer against the traditional proofs of God's

existence; to deal with the materials furnished by ethnography and the history of

religions; and to study the various forms which monism and immanentism

nowadays assume.

Cosmology can well afford to insist on the traditional theory of matter and form,

provided it pay due attention to the findings of physics, chemistry,

crystallography, and mineralogy, and meet the objections of atomism and

dynamism, theories which, in the opinion of scientific authority, are less

satisfactory as explanations of natural phenomena than the hylomorphism (q.v.)

of the Scholastics. The theory also of qualities, once the subject of ridicule, is

nowadays endorsed by some of the most prominent scientists. In psychology

especially the progressive spirit of neo-Scholasticism makes itself felt. The

theory of the substantial union of body and soul, as an interpretation of biological,

psychical, and psycho-physiological facts, is far more serviceable than the

extreme spiritualism of Descartes on the one hand and the Positivism of modern

thinkers on the other. As Wundt admits, the results of investigation in

physiological psychology do not square either with materialism or with dualism

whether of the Platonic or of the Cartesian type; it is only Aristotelean animism,

which brings psychology into connexion with biology, that can offer a satisfactory

metaphysical interpretation of experimental psychology. So vigorous indeed has

been the growth of psychology that each of its offshoots is developing in its own

way: such is the case with criteriology, aesthetics, didactics, pedagogy, and the

numerous ramifications of applied psychology. Along these various lines,

unknown to medieval philosophy, neo-Scholasticism is working energetically and

successfully. Its criteriology is altogether new: the older Scholasticism handled

the problem of certitude from the deductive point of view; God could not have

misshaped the faculties with which He endowed the mind in order that it might

attain to knowledge. Neo-Scholasticism, on the other hand, proceeds by

analysis and introspection it states the problem in the terms which, since Kant's

day, are the only admissible terms, but as against the Kantian criticism it finds

the solution in a rational dogmatism. Its aesthetics holds a middle course

between the extreme subjectivism of many modern thinkers who would reduce

the beautiful to a mere impression, and the no less extreme objectivism which

the Greeks of old maintained. It is equally at home in thc field of experimental

psychology which investigates the correlation between conscious phenomena

and their physiological accompaniments; in fact, its theory of the substantial

union of body and soul implies as its corollary a "bodily resonance"

corresponding to each psychical process.

The laws and principles which the modern science of education has drawn from

experience find their adequate explanation in neo-Scholastic doctrine; thus, the

intuitive method, so largely accepted at present as an essential element in

education, is based on the Scholastic theory that nothing enters the intellect

save through the avenue of sense. In the study of ethical problems,

neo-Scholasticism holds fast to the vital teachings that prevailed in the thirteenth

century, but at the same time it takes into account the historical and sociological

data which explain the varying application of principles in successive ages. In

view of contemporary systems which, on a purely experimental basis, attempt to

set aside all moral imperatives and ideas of value, it is necessary to insist on the

older concepts of good and evil, of finality and obligation -- a need which is easily

supplied by neo-Scholastic ethics. As to logic, the most perfect part of Aristotle's

great constructive work and therefore that which has been least modified in the

course of time. Its positions still call for defence against the objections of writers

like Mill, who regard the syllogism as a "solemn farce". Accordingly, with due

consideration for modern modes of thinking, neo-Scholasticism adapts the

teaching of the Middle Ages to actual conditions. Even as regards the relations

between philosophy and religion, there are important changes to note. For the

medieval mind in the Western world, philosophy and theology were identical until

about the twelfth century. In the thirteenth the line of demarcation was clearly

drawn, but philosophy was still treated as the preliminary training for theology.

This is no longer the case; neo-Scholasticism assigns to philosophy a value of

its own as a rational explanation of the world, on a par in this respect with

Positivism and other systems; and it welcomes all who are bent on honest

research, whether their aim be purely philosophical or apologetic.

Parallel with these modifications are those which affect the pedagogical phase of

the movement. The methods of teaching philosophy in the thirteenth century

were too closely dependent on the culture of that age; hence they have been

replaced by modern procedures, curricula, and means of propagation. It would be

ill-advised to wrap neo-Scholastic doctrine in medieval envelopes, e.g. to write

books on the plan of the theological "Summae" or the "Quodlibetal Questions"

that were current in the thirteenth century. Without at all lessening its force,

syllogistic demonstration gains in attractiveness when its essential

characteristics are retained and clothed about with modern forms of presentation.

In this connexion, the use of living languages as a means of exposition has

obvious advantages and finds favour with many of those who are best qualified to

judge.

III. APPRECIATION

By interesting itself in modern questions, interpreting the results of scientific

research and setting forth its principles for thorough discussion,

neo-Scholasticism has compelled attention: it has to be reckoned with. Among

non-Catholics, many leaders of thought have frankly acknowledged that its

methods and doctrines deserve to be examined anew. Men like Boutroux admit

that Aristotle's system may well serve as an offset to Kantism and evolution

(Aristote, Etudes d'histoire et de philosophie, Paris, 1901, 202). Paulsen ("Kant

der Philosoph des Protestantismus" in "Kantstudien", 1899) and Eucken

("Thomas von Aquino u. Kant, Ein Kampf zweier Welten", loc. cit., 1901) declare

that neo-Thomism is the rival of Kantism and that the conflict between them is

the "clash of two worlds". Harnack ("Lehrbuch d. Dogmengesch.", III, 3rd. ed.,

327), Seeberg ("Realencyklopädie f. Prot. Theol." 5. v. "Scholastik") and others

protest against those who underrate the value of scholastic doctrine.

Among Catholics, neo-Scholasticism gains ground day by day. It is doing away

with Ontologism, Traditionalism, the Dualism of Gunther, and the exaggerated

Spiritualism of Descartes. It is free from the weaknesses of Pragmatism and

Voluntarism, systems in which some thinkers have vainly sought the

reconciliation of their philosophy and their faith. Neo-Scholasticism has a

character of permanence as truth itself has; but it is destined in its development

to keep up with scientific progress. Like everything that lives, it must advance;

arrested growth would mean decay.

IV. THE LEADERS AND THEIR WORK

The neo-Scholastic movement was inaugurated by such writers as Sanseverino

(1811-65) and Cornoldi (1822-92) in Italy; Gonzalez (1831-92) in Spain; Kleutgen

(1811-83) and Stöckl (1823-95) in Germany; de San (1832-1904), Dupont, and

Lepidi in Belgium; Farges and Dormet de Vorges (1910) in France, who with

other scholars carried on the work of restoration before the Holy See gave it

solemn approval and encouragement. Pius IX, it is true, in various letters,

recognized its importance; but it was the encyclical "AEterni Patris" of Leo XIII (4

Aug., 1879) that imparted to neo-Scholasticism its definitive character and

quickened its development. This document sets forth the principles by which the

movement is to be guided in a progressive spirit, and by which the medieval

doctrine is to take on new life in its modern environment. "If," says the pope,

"there be anything that the Scholastic doctors treated with excessive subtlety or

with insufficient consideration, or that is at variance with well founded teachings

of later date, or is otherwise improbable, we by no means intend that it shall be

proposed to our age for imitation. . . . We certainly do not blame those learned

and energetic men who turn to the profit of philosophy their own assiduous

labours and erudition as well as the results of modern investigation; for we are

fully aware that all this goes to the advancement of knowledge."

In Italy, the movement was vigorous from the start. The Accademia di San

Tommaso, founded in 1874, published, up to 1891, a review entitled "La Scienza

Italiana". Numerous works were produced by Zigliara (1833-93), Satolli

(1839-1909), Liberatore (1810-92), Barberis (1847-96), Schiffini (1841-1906), de

Maria, Talamo, Lorenzelli, Ballerini, Matussi, and others. The Italian writers at

first laid special emphasis on the metaphysical features of Scholasticism,

without paying sufficient attention to the sciences or to the history of philosophy.

Recently, however, this situation has undergone a change which promises

excellent results.

From Italy the movement spread into the other European countries and found

supporters in Germany such as Kleutgen, Stöckl, the authors of the "Philosophia

Lacensis", published at Maria Laach by the Jesuits (Pesch, Hontheim, Cathrein),

Gutberlet, Commer, Willmann, Kaufmann, Glossner, Grabmann, and Schneid.

These scholars have made valuable contributions to the history of philosophy,

especially that of the Middle Ages. Stöckl led the way with his "Geschichte d.

Philosophie des Mittelalters" (Mainz, 1864-66). Ehrle and Denifle (q.v.) founded in

1885 the "Archiv für Literatur u. Kirchengesch. d. Mittelalters", and the latter

edited the monumental "Chartularium" of the University of Paris. In 1891, Von

Hertling and Bäumker began the publication of their "Beiträge zur Gesch. d. Phil.

des Mittelalters".

Belgium has been particularly favoured. Leo XIII established (1891) at Louvain the

"Institut de philosophie" for the special purpose of teaching the doctrine of St.

Thomas together with history and the natural sciences. The Institute was placed

in charge of Mgr (now Cardinal) Mercier whose "Cours de philosophie" has been

translated into the principal languages of Europe.

In France, besides those already mentioned, Vallet, Gardair, Fonsegrive, and

Piat have taken a prominent part in the movement; in Holland (Amsterdam) de

Groot; in Switzerland (Freiburg), Mandonnet; in Spain, Orti y Lara, Urráburu,

Gómez Izquierdo; in Mexico, Garcia; in Brazil, Santroul; in Hungary, Kiss and

Pecsi; in England, Clarke, Maher, John Rickaby, Joseph Rickaby, Boedder

(Stonyhurst Series); in the United States, Coppens, Poland, Brother

Chrysostom, and the professors at the Catholic University (Shanahan, Turner,

and Pace).

Neo-Scholasticism has been endorsed by four Catholic Congresses: Paris

(1891); Brussels (1895); Freiburg (1897); Munich (1900). A considerable number

of reviews have served as its exponents: "Divus Thomas" (1879- 1903); "Rivista

Italiana di filosofia neo-scolastica" (Florence, since 1909); "Annales de

Philosophie Chrétienne" (Paris, since 1830); "Revue néo-scolastique de

Philosophie" (Louvain, since 1894); "Revue de Philosophie" (Paris, since 1900);"

Revue des Sciences philosophiques et théologiques" (Kain, Belgium, since

1907); "Revue Thomiste" (Paris, since 1893); "Philosophisches Jahrbuch für

Philosophie und spekulative Theologie" (Paderborn, since 1887); "St. Thomas

Blätter" (Ratisbon, since 1888); Bölcseleti-Folyóirat (Budapest, since 1886);"

Revista Lulliana" (Barcelona, since 1901); "Cienza Tomista" (Madrid, since

1910). In addition to these, various periodical publications not specially devoted

to philosophy have given neo-Scholasticism their cordial support.

Maurice De Wulf

Transcribed by Kevin Cawley

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume X

Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor

Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York

The Catholic Encyclopedia: NewAdvent.org

Josef Wilhelm Karl Kleutgen

German theologian and philosopher, b. at Dortmund, Westphalia, 9 April, 1811;

d. at St. Anton near Kaltern, Tyrol, 13 Jan., 1883. He began his studies with the

intention of becoming a priest, but owing to the Protestant atmosphere of the

school which he attended, his zeal for religion gradually cooled. From 28 April,

1830, to 8 Jan., 1831, he studied philology at the University of Munich. He was

intensely interested in Plato's philosophy and the Greek tragic poets. Though he

clung to the Faith, it censed to be the ruling principle of his life, and he fell into a

deep melancholy. In this state he was about to enter upon a secular career,

when he suddenly received what he always regarded as a special illumination

from heaven. Still he was not at rest. During the preceding years he had imbibed

certain ideas from Lessing's and Herder's writings, which he could not reconcile

with the Christian Faith. After several weeks of internal conflict he betook himself

to prayer, and to his astonishment many of his difficulties vanished at once; the

remainder disappeared gradually. At Easter, 1832 he entered the theological

academy of Munster, and after two terms went to the seminary at Paderborn,

where he was ordained subdeacon on 22 Feb., 1834. On 28 April he entered the

Society of Jesus at Brig, Switzerland, and, to avold any trouble with the German

Government in the matter of military service, he became a naturalized citizen in

one of the Swiss cantons, and changed his name to "Peters". After his ordination

to the priesthood in1837 he was professor of ethics in Fribourg, Switzerland, for

two years; he then taught rhetoric in Brig from 1840 till 1843. In 1843 he was

appointed professor of sacred eloquence in the German College, Rome.

During his residence in Rome and the vicinity (1843-74), besides pastoral work

and the composition of his principal writings, he was substitute to the secretary

of the general of the Jesuits (1843-56), secretary (1856-62), consultor of the

Congregation of the Index, and collaborator in the preparation of the Constitution

"De fide Catholica" of the Vatican Council. He composed the first draft of the

Encyclical "Æterni Patris" of Pope Leo XIII on Scholasticism (1879). He played a

leading part in the revival of Scholastic philosophy arid theology, and so thorough

was his mastery of the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas that he was called

Thomas redivivus (Thomas returned to life). With the object of combating the

doctrines of Hermes, Hirscher, and Gunther, he composed his "Theologie der

Vorzeit" and "Philosophie der Verzeit", works which upon their appearance were

pronounced in many quarters to be epoch-making. When he died, Leo XIII said of

him: "Erat princeps philosophorum" (he was the prince of philosophers). Some

years before the Vatican Council Kleutgen was confessor extraordinary to the

Benedictine Convent of St. Ambrose in Rome. The nuns of this convent honoured

as a saint one of their sisters who had died fifty years before. This was reported

to the Holy Office and everyone concerned was severely punished; Kleutgen and

the ordinary confessor (both men of exceptionally holy lives) were suspended,

because of lack of prudence in directing the nuns, for awhile even from saying

Mass.

Kleutgen consequently left Rome and went to the secluded shrine of Our Lady in

Galoro, where he wrote the greater part of his "Theologie der Vorzeit" and

"Philosophie der Vorzeit". After the opening of the council, at the urgent request

of several bishops, especially Archbishop Stein, Apostolic Vicar of Calcutta, his

superior general recalled him to Rome to place his talents and learning at the

disposal of the council, and Pius IX removed all ecclesiastical censures as soon

as he became acquainted with the work which Kleutgen had written. In 1879

some Old Catholics spread the report that Kleutgen had been condemned by the

Roman Inquisition to an imprisonment of six years on account of complicity in

the poisoning of a Princess von Hohenlohe; but, on 7 March, Juvenal Pelami,

Notary of the Inquisition, testified that Kleutgen had never been summoned before

the Inquisition upon such a charge, and consequently had not been punished by

it. Possessed of high gifts and vast erudition, and, in consequence, very much in

the public eye, Kleutgen was also a model religious and a man of austerely

simple life. He was very fond of the poor, and they in turn almost worshipped him.

When he preached, his plain, straightforward, simple language had an appeal

even for the intelligence of the most illiterate; and when in conversation with the

learned, who often came to consult him, his flow of speech was as free, copious,

and unembarrassed as though he were reading from a book.

Kleutgen's principal works are: "Die alten und die neuen Schulen" (Mainz, 1846,

Münster, 1869); "Ueber den Glauben an das Wunderbare" (Münster, 1846); "Ars

dicendi" (Rome, 1847; Turin, 1903); "Die Theologie der Vorzeit" (3 vols., Münster,

1853-60, 5 vols., 1867-74), "Leben frommer Diener und Dienerinnen Gottes"

(Münster, 1869); "Die Philosophie der Vorzeit" (2 vols., Münster, 1860-3;

Innsbruck, 1878), translated into French and Italian; "Die Verurteilung des

Ontologismus" (Münster, 1868); transIated into French and Italian; "Zu meiner

Rechtfertigung" (Münster, 1868); "Vom intellectus agens und den angeborenen

Ideen"; "Zur Lehre vom Glauben" (Münster, 1875); "Die Ideale und ihre wahre

Verwirklichung" (Frankfurt, 1868); "Ueber die Wunsche, Befurehtungen und

Hoffnungen in Betreff der bevorstehenden Kirehenversammlung" (Münster, 1869);

"Briefe aus Rom" (Münster, 1869), "Predigten" (Regenbburg, 1872; 2 vols.,

1880-5); "Die oberste Lehrgewalt des römischen Bischofs" (Trier, 1870), "De ipso

Deo" (Ratisbon, 1881); "Das evangelium des heiligen Matthäus" (Freiburg, 1882).

LANGHORST in Stimmen aus Maria-Laach (1883); LIESEN in Der Katholik, I (1883);

GRANDERATH, Gesch. des vatikantschen Konzils, II (Freiburg, 1903); DUHR, Jesuiten-Fabeln

(Freiburg, 1891); SACHS in Buchberger's Kirchliches Handlex, (Munich, 1908), s. v.;

SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la C. de at (Paris, 1803).

John J. Toohey

Transcribed by Joseph P. Thomas

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VIII

Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor

Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York

The Catholic Encyclopedia: NewAdvent.org

Matteo Liberatore

A philosopher, theologian, and writer, born at Salerno, Italy, 14 August, 1810;

died at Rome, 18 October, 1892. He studied at the College of the Jesuits at

Naples in 1825, and a year later applied for admission into the Society of Jesus,

His remarkable innocence, brilliant talents, and strength of character made him a

most acceptable candidate, and he entered the novitiate on 9 October, 1826. The

long course of studies was completed by him with unusual success, and

resulted in his teaching philosophy for the space of eleven years, from 1837 until

the Revolution of 1848 drove him to Malta. On returning to Italy he was appointed

to teach theology, but gave up his professorship to found and assume charge in

1850 of the "Civiltà Cattolica", a periodical founded by the Jesuits to defend the

cause of the Church and the papacy, and to spread the knowledge of the

doctrine of St. Thomas Aquinas. Indeed it is Liberatore's chief glory to have

brought about the revival of the Scholastic philosophy of St. Thomas. This

movement he inaugurated by publishing his course of philosophy in 1840, at a

time when the prevailing methods of teaching that science, even among certain

Catholics, were, to say the least, little calculated to provide solid foundation for

Catholic doctrine. This movement he supported to his dying day by his teaching

in the class-room, by textbooks on philosophy, by able articles in the "Civiltà

Cattolica" and other periodicals, by larger and more extensive works, and also by

his work as member of the Accademia Romana by appointment of Leo XIII.

For more than half a century he was the tireless champion of truth in the fields of

philosophy and theology, and of the rights of the Church. His pen was constantly

at work, analysing the vexed problems of Christian life both theoretical and

practical, marking out the relations between Church and State, and the moral

and social aspects of life. His watchfulness over the foundations of the faith is

attested by his successful struggles with Rationalism, Ontologism, and

Rosminianism. His literary activity may be estimated from the fact that

Sommervogel records more than forty of his published works, and gives the titles

of more than nine hundred of his articles (including reviews) which appeared in

the "Civiltà" alone. The most prominent characteristics of his writings are

keenness of judgement, strength of argument, breadth of learning, logical

sequence of thought, close observation of facts, knowledge of men and of the

world, and simplicity and elegance of style. He has been regarded by many as

the greatest philosopher of his day. It is a tribute to his holiness of life and deep

religious spirit that his brethren of the Society of Jesus were Less impressed by

his varied talents and immense learning than by the many virtues displayed

during his long and fruitful life as scholar, professor, writer, academician, director

of souls, and rector. His name will long be in blessed memory among all those

who love the Church. The following are the best known, perhaps, of his works:

"Institutiones Philosophicæ"; "Instructiones Ethicæ"; various compendiums of

logic, metaphysics, ethics, and natural law; "Della Conoscenza intellettuale";

"Del Composto umano"; "Dell' Anima umana"; "Degli Universali"; "Chiesa e

Stato"; "Dialoghi filosofici"; "Il Matrimomo"; "Roma e il mondo"; "Il Matrimonio e

lo Stato"; "Le Commedie filosofiche"; and "Spicilegio".

Civiltà Cattolica, series XV, t. IV, 352-380; American Ecclesiastical Review (December, 1892);

SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la C. de J., t. IV, c. 1774.

J. H. Fisher

Transcribed by Douglas J. Potter

Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IX

Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, Censor

Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York

The Catholic Encyclopedia: NewAdvent.org

Tommaso Maria Zigliara

(Baptismal name, FRANCESCO)

Cardinal, theologian, and philosopher, b. at Bonifacio, a seaport town of Corsica,

toward the end of October, 1833; d. in Rome, 11 May, 1893. His early Classical

studies were made in his native town under the Jesuit teacher, Father Aloysius

Piras. At the age of eighteen he was received into the Dominican Order at Rome,

and in 1852 he made his religious profession. From the beginning Zigliara was a

student of uncommon brilliancy. He studied philosophy in Rome and theology at

Perugia, where, 17 May, 1856, he was ordained by Cardinal Joachim Pecci, then

Archbishop of Perugia. Soon afterwards the young priest was appointed to teach

philosophy, first in Rome, then at Corbara in his native Corsica, and later in the

diocesan seminary, at Viterbo, being at the same time master of novices in the

neighbouring convent at Gradi.

When his work at Viterbo was finished, he was called to Rome, again made

master of novices, and shortly appointed regent, or head professor, of the

Minerva college. Before assuming this latter duty, he was raised to the dignity of

master in sacred theology. When his community was forced by the Italian

Government in 1873 to give up the convent of the Minerva, Zigliara with other

professors and students took refuge with the Fathers of the Holy Ghost, who had

charge of the French College in Rome. Here the lectures were continued until a

house near the Minerva was secured. Zigliara's fame was now widespread in

Rome and elsewhere. French, Italian, German, English, and American bishops

were eager to put some of their most promising students and young professors

under his tuition. Between Cardinal Pecci, Archbishop of Perugia, and Zigliara

there had existed for many years the closest friendship, and when the former

became pope as Leo XIII, in his first consistory (1879) he created Zigliara a

cardinal. Zigliara was first numbered among the cardinal-deacons, then he

became a cardinal-priest, and in 1893 he was appointed Bishop of Frascati, one

of the seven suburban sees; but, owing to the sickness which ended in his

death, he never received episcopal consecration.

He was a member of seven Roman congregations, besides being prefect of the

Congregation of Studies and co-president of the Academy of St. Thomas

Aquinas. He was a man of deep piety and devotion, and a tireless student to the

end of his life. In addition to his many duties as cardinal, he was entrusted with

the superintendence of the Leonine edition of the works of St. Thomas, the first

volume of which contains his own commentary. He also found time to publish his

"Propaedeutica ad Sacram Theologiam" and to write an extensive work on the

sacraments, of which only the tracts on baptism and penance received final

revision before his death. The most important, however, of Zigliara's works is his

"Summa Philosophica", which enjoys a world-wide circulation. For many years

this has been the textbook in a great number of the seminaries and colleges of

Europe, Canada, and America; and not very long ago it was adopted as the

textbook for the philosophical examination in the National University of Ireland.

His other works are: Osservazioni su alcune interpretazioni di G.C. Ubaghs sull'

ideologia di San Tommaso d'Aquino" (Viterbo, 1870); "Della luce intellettuale e

dell' ontologismo secondo la dottrina di S. Bonaventura e Tommaso d'Aquino" (2

vols., Rome, 1874); "De mente Concilii Vienensis in definiendo dogmate unionis

animae humanae cum corpore" (1878); "Commentaria S. Thomae in Aristotelis

libros Perhermencias et Posteriorum analyticorum", in fol. vol. I new edit. "Opp.

S. Thomae": (Rome, 1882); "Saggio sui principi del tradizionalismo"; "Dimittatur

e la spiegazione datane dalla S. Congregazione dell' Indice".

By his teaching and through his writings, he was one of the chief instruments,

under Leo XIII, of reviving and propagating Thomistic philosophy throughout the

entire Church. In his own order and in some universities and seminaries, the

teaching of St. Thomas had never been interrupted, but it was reserved for

Zigliara to give a special impetus to the movement which has made Thomistic

philosophy and theology dominant in the Catholic world.

Acta capituli generalis ord. Praed. abulae celebrati (1895); WALSH in Rosary Magazine, VII (1895);

PERRIER, Revival of Scholastic Philosophy (New York, 1909), 164-5; TURNER, Hist. of Phil. (New

York, 1903), 643.

Charles J. Callan

Transcribed by Thomas M. Barrett

Dedicated to the memory of Cardinal Tommaso Maria Zigliara

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XV

Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor

Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York

The Catholic Encyclopedia: NewAdvent.org