McGuckin and Cyril

I only just now got around to reading the review of McGuckin's Saint Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy in the August/September First Things. The review is favorable, and rightly so, because it's a good book. I highly recommend it to all of you who have an interest in Christology.

Aquinas and Sacred Doctrine as Stance

Some posts at Theologica (here and here) by David Wayne argue for a particular understanding of theology; in them he contrasts seeing theology as a study vs. seeing it as a stance (as well). He puts Aquinas on the study side, but I think it can easily be shown that Aquinas is actually on the stance side.

(First, it should be pointed out that Aquinas himself rarely uses the word 'theology'. He does use it occasionally, but when he does he usually reserves it for the participation of the saint in divine things -- i.e., for Aquinas 'theology' still has its old mystical overtones. Theology is to sacred doctrine as the virtuous man is to the ethicist.)

According to Aquinas, sacred doctrine is a science; it proceeds from principles recognized by the light of faith; it is subalternated to God's own knowledge; it is wisdom; and its subject is not ourselves (even ourselves as living unto God) but God Himself.

(1) It is a science. 'Science' in the scholastic sense indicates an intellectual virtue of drawing correct conclusions from principles; the word is used by metonymy to indicate the conclusions so drawn. Aquinas uses it both ways; sacred doctrine is a virtue of mind for concluding the right things about God, and, by extension the conclusions concluded by such a virtue of mind.

(2) It proceeds from principles recognized by the light of faith. Every science presupposes some understanding, intelligentia, of its principles or starting-points. The principles of sacred doctrine are the articles of faith; the understanding of these principles is a God-given gift, the light of faith, which supplements the light of reason, and makes us dwell in the articles of faith with luminous certainty.

(3) It is subalternated to divine knowledge. Some sciences presuppose other sciences; what is a principle for one science may be a conclusion for another. This is called subalternation. Sacred doctrine as a science is subalternated to the noblest and highest science of all, namely, God's own knowledge of Himself. It borrows its principles from God, who reveals truths and gives us the light of faith whereby to hold them as starting-points for thought. It is in this sense that Aquinas occasionally points out that sacred doctrine is nothing other than sacred scripture (i.e., sacred scripture not in the sense of dead words on the page, but as read by the light of faith that the Spirit gives the whole Church).

(4) It is wisdom. Wisdom, sapientia, is that intellectual virtue by means of which the wise set all things in order. Wisdom in this sense is knowledge of the most important and most fundamental things; and so wisdom in the purest sense is knowledge of divine things, whereby we can judge and arrange all things in the way they should be judged and arranged. Because of this, sacred doctrine sets all other knowledge in order.

(5) Its subject is not ourselves but God. The subject of a science is the object of science as a virtue. The easiest and most common mistake people make about sacred doctrine is that they try to make it about human beings. In their hands, sacred doctrine becomes the way to live well, the way to live according to God's will. Sacred doctrine does provide this, but this is not the point of sacred doctrine. The key thing we must understand about sacred doctrine is that God is worth knowing in Himself; and sacred doctrine is devoted primarily to this. In knowing God we begin to know all other things, including ourselves, in light of God. But God always must be first and foremost: seek God first and everything comes with Him. "In sacred science," Aquinas says, "all things are treated of under the aspect of God: either because they are God Himself or because they refer to God as their beginning and end" (ST 1.1.7).

A Poem Draft

Osiris

Osiris sleeps and dreams of death,
entombed in ebon halls of stone,
the death-blessed god on sacred throne,
and over gilded sands his breath
still seeks the signs of Isis' will.

And, in Egyptian starlight still
that shines in quiet on the sands,
it courses past the nomad-bands,
a honeyed wind that blows no ill,
pulsing with all hope's demands.

And Isis wanders through the lands
to seek the tombs and sacred throne,
to re-knit flesh to flesh and bone;
she takes the children in her hands
and makes them gods upon the flame.

The dead all have Osiris' name;
one soul goes up, one soul remains,
and on the Nile night-sent rains
will fall to heal the blind and lame
and raise the dead to grace.

Cinematic SF

Via The Little Professor, this is John Scalzi's list of the most influential science fiction movies ('The Canon' or in other words, 'the 50 science fiction films you have to see before you die'). I've bolded the ones I've seen.

The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension!
Akira
Alien
Aliens
Alphaville
Back to the Future
Blade Runner
Brazil
Bride of Frankenstein
Brother From Another Planet
A Clockwork Orange
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Contact
The Damned
Destination Moon
The Day The Earth Stood Still
Delicatessen
Escape From New York
ET: The Extraterrestrial
Flash Gordon: Space Soldiers (serial)
The Fly (1985 version) (I like the 1958 one better; but, then, I'm a fan of Vincent Price)
Forbidden Planet
Ghost in the Shell
Gojira/Godzilla
The Incredibles
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956 version)
Jurassic Park
Mad Max 2/The Road Warrior
The Matrix
Metropolis
On the Beach
Planet of the Apes (1968 version)
Robocop
Sleeper
Solaris (1972 version) (much better than the newer one; it requires immense patience to watch it, though)
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope
Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
The Stepford Wives (I'm presuming this is the original, although I've seen the new one, too; the original is much better)
Superman
Terminator 2: Judgement Day
The Thing From Another World
Things to Come
Tron
12 Monkeys
28 Days Later
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
2001: A Space Odyssey (The first time I watched this movie I fell asleep seven minutes into it. Much later I did manage to watch it again, though.)
La Voyage Dans la Lune
War of the Worlds (1953 version) (very awesome)

So that's it; only 26 out of 50.

There should also be a list of SF movies that almost no one ever watches but are very good anyway. It would be a very controversial list, I imagine, since so much of it would depend on individual taste. I would nominate Riddler's Moon, The Cold Equations, Colossus: The Forbin Project, and Dark City.

Mine and Thine

A poem by William Morris:

Two words about the world we see,
And nought but Mine and Thine they be.
Ah! might we drive them forth and wide
With us should rest and peace abide;
All free, nought owned of goods and gear,
By men and women though it were
Common to all all wheat and wine
Over the seas and up the Rhine.
No manslayer then the wide world o'er
When Mine and Thine are known no more.

Yea, God, well counselled for our health,
Gave all this fleeting earthly wealth
A common heritage to all,
That men might feed them therewithal,
And clothe their limbs and shoe their feet
And live a simple life and sweet.
But now so rageth greediness
That each desireth nothing less
Than all the world, and all his own,
And all for him and him alone.

Call for Papers

There's an interesting conference in the works:

We would like to take this opportunity to announce the 1st Annual On-line Philosophy Conference (OPC), which is tentatively to begin on Friday, April 7th (2006). The first installment of OPC will be hosted on the newly created On-line Philosophy Conference Blog and will include invited papers by some of today's top junior and senior philosophers, such as Stephen Stich, Jonathan Kvanvig, John Martin Fischer, Alfred Mele, Julia Driver, Terence Horgan, Graham Priest, R.A. Duff, Thomas Hurka, Susanna Siegel, Brian Weatherson, Uriah Kriegel, Manuel Vargas, Kit Wellman, Joshua Gert, Joshua Knobe, Brie Gertler, Jessica Wilson, Benj Hellie, Amie Thomasson, Elizabeth Harman, Noa Latham, Andy Egan, and Neil Levy (with a few more in the works).

Our goal is to give scholars a much wider audience for their working papers, while at the same time saving everyone (both individuals and departments) the cost of travel stipends, etc. Moreover, we humbly believe that hosting an on-line philosophy conference would be an excellent way of fostering philosophy's growing presence on the web. Originally, we wanted to include a number of contributed papers in addition to the invited papers, but the surprising level of interest that the conference has already generated convinced us to make the first OPC a mostly invited affair. We nevertheless decided that we should solicit contributed submissions from junior philosophers (i.e., philosophers who have yet to receive tenure) and graduate students. The deadline for contributed submissions is January 15th, 2006.

The topic is open, but the conference in general sounds rather analytic and problems-oriented rather than historical, so I'm not sure I'll be submitting anything. On the other hand, I might submit a paper on Hume just to see; I have to re-work an old one anyway. University of Toronto will be well-represented: Thomas Hurka, Jessica Wilson, and Benj Hellie are all giving invited papers. (HT: Certain Doubts)

Anscombe and Truman, Callahan and Hanson

I've been getting a number of hits from an interesting article by Gene Callahan, which is part of a debate with Victor Davis Hanson on whether Truman's use of the bomb was justifiable. He uses Anscombe's discussion in "Mr. Truman's Degree" (which I briefly discussed here, hence the link) as a starting point for thinking about the moral principles that are relevant to this discussion. I recommend the article; it's quite good, and develops Anscombe's good but somewhat brief arguments to great effect.

UPDATE: On a related note, see the interesting summary of an exchange in the Times Literary Supplement at The Leiter Reports.