Abstract
Like Aquinas himself, J. Budziszewski intends his book especially for beginners: “But since St. Thomas famously wrote the Summa theologiae for ‘beginners,’ the sine qua non for the present book is that it be useful to beginners in the Summa” (xxviii). His “first aim” is “to make Thomas Aquinas’s reasoning about the nature and existence of God more accessible to those who are new to it” (xviii). His intended audience, however, is broad, including “not just philosophers and theologians,” but also “students and general readers” as well as “specialists in Thomas Aquinas” (xviii).
The book is a commentary on “The Treatise on the One God” (the first 26 questions of the Summa). It does not include all of those questions or all of the articles in them but “carefully chosen excerpts on a variety of topics which demonstrate the overall direction and shape of the argument” (xxxv). It is designed to “equip readers—especially beginners—to work through the omitted parts on their own” (xxxv).
It begins with an “Analytical Table of Contents” (vii–xiv) and a “Commentator’s Introduction” (xvii–xliv), followed by sections that are titled according to the particular question and article under discussion (1–408). The book ends with a “Commentator’s Conclusion” (409–12). Each section starts with the text of a particular article in the translation of “The Fathers of the English Dominican Province” along with a helpful paraphrase. Each segment of text and paraphrase is followed by a corresponding segment of the author’s careful line-by-line commentary. Each section ends with a “Discussion” that allows the author greater scope and freedom in exploring related issues.
Throughout the commentary, B. shows a remarkable ability to give a clear account of Aquinas’s arguments, comment insightfully on his sources, and explain the relevance of his thought for contemporary philosophical and theological issues. In a few brief paragraphs, for instance, he shows how four key notions in Aquinas’s philosophy are not outmoded but deeply needed in modern thought and science. These include hylomorphism, teleology, actuality and potentiality, and realism about values (the teaching that some things are “by nature nobler or more excellent than others”) (xxx–xxxv). B. also sees three reasons why Aquinas is important in our age of increasing relativism where, first, although “people are exposed to many views about God, they are exposed to very few reasoned arguments about Him” (xix); where, second, “one begins with competing views” about God long before one “is presented with any means of deciding among them” (xix); and where, third, “the fallacious notion of religious neutrality” (xix) is widespread. In contrast, Aquinas, first, “does not merely discuss views of God, but presents reasoned arguments about Him”; second, “although he always gives the Objectors the first word, the Tradition is always in the background; it is that massive faith and body of thought against which their objections are presented”; and, “he never imagines that neutrality is possible. Refusing to decide is a decision. Not choosing is not one of the options” (xx).
Aware of his “beginner” audience, B. often puts Aquinas’s arguments into simple logical form. For instance, in discussing arguments for divine immutability (ST I, 9, 1, co.), he says: “So the second argument for God’s immutability works like this: (1) Everything that can change is composite. (2) But God is not composite. (3) Therefore, God cannot change” (131). With the same beginners in mind, he employs numerous engaging examples whenever they are helpful to his arguments. These range from the superheroes of Marvel comic books (82) to Huck Finn’s idea of heaven (150), to St. Francis of Assisi’s “Canticle of the Sun” (111–12), to examples from science such as “junk DNA” (33, 153), the multiverse (162–63), chaos theory (38) and even Schrödinger’s cat (214).
B. has produced a splendid book, filled with philosophical and theological insights as well as encouraging spiritual reflections. We might conclude with one that he offers in his discussion of “whether God is the beatitude of each of the blessed”:
We are, perhaps, frightened of God. It is not that He is bad, but that He is so good He is scary. He desires our good much more ardently than we desire it ourselves, and will not be satisfied with anything less than making us over so that we can experience it fully. We may not want to be made over. . . And so we may loiter at the gate, unwilling to enter, yet unwilling to leave the vicinity. The gate is open. May God grant us the grace to go in. (403)