Being and Participation

PONTIFICAL ATHENAEUM REGINA APOSTOLORUMFACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY Jason A. Mitchell, L.C. BEING AND PARTICIPATION The Method and Structure of Metaphysical Reflection according to Cornelio Fabro Volume I Dissertatio ad Doctoratum in Facultate Philosophiæ Pontificii Athenaei Regina Apostolorum Rome 2012 Vidimus et adprobavimus ad normam statutorum Pontificii Athenæi Regina Apostolorum Prof. P. Jesús Villagrasa, L.C. Prof. P. Alain Contat Prof. P. Rafael Pascual, L.C. Imprimi potest P. Rafael Pascual, L.C. Decanus Facultatis Philosophiæ P. Benjamin Dueñas, L.C. Secretarius Generalis Romæ, ex Pontificio Athenæo Regina Apostolorum, die vi mensis septembris anni 2012 Copyright © 2012 by Jason A. Mitchell, L.C. MITCHELL JASON A., L.C. Being and Participation: The Method and Structure of Metaphysical Reflection according to Cornelio Fabro – Tesi dottorato. Filosofia 14 – in 2 v. indivisibili €. 35,00 Roma : Ateneo Pontificio Regina Apostolorum, 2012. I vol. 432 pp.; II vol. 416 pp.; 17x24 cm. In testa al front.: Ateneo Pontificio Regina Apostolorum. ISBN: 978-88-96990-09-4 Finito di stampare nel mese di dicembre 2012 dalla Tipografia Città Nuova della P.A.M.O.M.- Roma TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME I List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................. 7 Acknowledgements................................................................................................................ 9 Biographical note ................................................................................................................. 11 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 15 1. The problem of metaphysical method.............................................................................. 19 2. Novelty of the dissertation ............................................................................................... 28 3. Division, sources, method and limits of the dissertation ................................................. 31 Chapter One: Fabro’s Interpretation of the History of Metaphysics ........................... 35 1. Fabro’s historical-critical and critical-speculative methods............................................. 37 2. Fabro’s interpretation of the sources of Aquinas’ thought............................................... 49 2.1 Parmenides’ ei=nai ................................................................................................... 52 2.2 Platonic being and the dialectic of participation ..................................................... 64 2.2.1 Plato’s notion of participation ...................................................................... 68 2.2.2 Being as Idea in Plato ................................................................................... 73 2.2.3 Non-being and being in the Sophist .............................................................. 76 2.2.4 The problem of the One and the many in the Parmenides ........................... 78 2.3 The emergence of act in Aristotle ........................................................................... 83 2.3.1 Aristotle’s quadripartite division of being .................................................... 86 2.3.2 Aristotle and ei=nai ........................................................................................ 94 2.3.3 Aristotle’s notion of participation............................................................... 101 2.3.4 Aristotle’s contributions to the Thomistic doctrine of analogy .................. 105 2.4 Esse and participation in Neo-platonism .............................................................. 112 2.5 Esse and participation in Boethius ........................................................................ 125 2.6 Avicenna’s dialectic of possible esse and Necessary esse .................................... 135 3. Being and participation in Aquinas’ metaphysics .......................................................... 141 3.1 The originality of the Thomistic “emergent synthesis” ........................................ 145 3.2 Thomistic esse ...................................................................................................... 155 3.3 The Thomistic notion of participation .................................................................. 164 4. Being and participation in Scholasticism and modern thought ...................................... 173 4.1 Esse and participation in Scholastic thought ........................................................ 173 4.2 Rationalism ........................................................................................................... 177 4.3 Existenz and Sein in Kant ..................................................................................... 178 4.4 Hegel’s Sein and the reduction to fundament ....................................................... 183 4.4.1 Hegelian Sein and Thomistic esse ........................................................... 185 4.4.2 Fabro’s use of the Hegelian term “Diremtion” ....................................... 191 4.4.3 La prima riforma della dialettica hegeliana (1988-2004) ...................... 197 4.5 Heidegger and the forgetting of Sein .................................................................... 207 3 ....2 Tommaso d’Aquino ....... 227 2........................1 Assessment of Fabro’s interpreation........................................... The three principles of the Fourth Way (1954)......2 The problem of metaphysical reflection ............... 360 3.................................. 305 3...................................... Additions to La nozione metafisicia di partecipazione (1950) ............................................................... 284 2.............3 Book Two: The Constitution and Subsistence of Ens..................................................... 315 4.. Method and the real distinction in Neotomismo e Suarezismo (1941) ...................................................................................................... 393 3................................................ 227 1.................................................................................................... 218 5. 250 2....................... 219 5..... 430 4 .... 306 3..........................................................3 Transcendental participation and metaphysical resolutio ......................................................................................................................... 404 6...... 348 3.......2.................5 Summary.. Enciclopedia Cattolica (1952) ............ 397 5.................................................... Logic and metaphysics (1946) ..... 388 3................... “La problematica dello esse tomistico” (1959) .........................................................................................................2 Predicamental participation and dialectical ascension ...................................... 302 3............1 Introduction of the term “emergence” ........................................................................................................................... 223 Chapter Two: The Dialectic of Participation ...........3 The relationship between phenomenology and metaphysics ................................................... 341 1........ 329 5...................... 405 7......... Metaphysical reflection in Introduzione all’esistentialismo (1943) ................................................................ 263 2......1 Towards an understanding of the real distinction .............. 335 Chapter Three: The Resolution of ens ......................................... Dall’essere all’esistente (1957) ........................................................2 The metaphysical problem...................... 309 3..........................................................3 The proof of the real distinction ............................................................2..................................... 320 4..................................6 Summary................ 320 4................2 Book One: The Division of Being ........................................ Metaphysical reflection in NMP (1937-1939) .... 418 9..............................................1 Intensive metaphysical abstraction ......................................................................................................... 394 4............................ 372 3................................1 Metafisica ........................ Summary ...............................1 Introduction: resolutio and reductio as metaphysical method ............. 400 5......................................................................... 400 5....................................... 325 4...................1 Phenomenology and the “position” of reality .......... Metaphysica (1948-1949) .................... 317 4........5............................. Emergence and dialectic in Percezione e Pensiero (1942) ... 405 8....................................................... Method in L’Assoluto nell’esistenzialismo (1953) .................................. Conclusion ...................................................... 346 3.. 299 2................2 The phenomenology of substance ......................................................................................................... Participation and the principle of causality (1931-1936) ........ 421 10......................... 253 2...............5 Method in the Epilogue .................................... 341 2.................................................2 The principles of the real distinction .................................................. 349 3.............................................4 Book Three: Causality ........................................ Summary ...... 318 4.........................................................................................4 The methodological priority of the notion of participation.................. ................6 Conference on the originality and emergence of esse (1991) ............................. 7-66) .............. 517 6..........3 The new problem of being and the foundation of metaphysics (1974).....................2.................................................... 589 2........6 Thomistic esse and the revival of metaphysics ....... 510 5.. 493 5..........................................5 The existence of God and the tension of ens-essentia-esse (1967) ............ 540 1............1 The determination of act in Thomistic metaphysics (1961).2 Divine causality and the derivation of created ens .............................................4 The metaphysical foundation of analogy .......3 Problematic of Scholastic Thomism (1983) .....................................7 Knowledge of esse (1967) ..................1 The emergence of the act of being (1983) .................................................................5 The emergence of Thomistic esse over Aristotelian act (1989-1990) .. Metaphysical reflection and transcendental causality .. 495 5....................... 443 2.............. 499-526) .................. 472 4...........8 Summary. 576 1...................... Metaphysical reflection (1970-1979)........ 486 4...............................1 Predicamental causality and transcendental causality ............. 662 5 .....................................................................2 Analogy of proportionality and analogy of attribution .......................................................................................... 593 2.......... 527 Chapter Five: The Reduction to Fundament ....................................................................... Metaphysical reflection (1980-1995).......1 The return to fundament (1972-1973) ........................................2 The emergence of esse in Fabro’s Thomistic theses (1983) .... 647 3. The emergence of esse (PC.......................................................................................................................................2 The Thomistic notion of participation (1967-1974) ............ 625 2................ Metaphysical reflection (1961-1969)......................................................4 On the search for the foundation of Metaphysics (1986).... 471 4...... 560 1.......................................... 629 3...............................................................1 The role of analogy in the metaphysical reductio ad unum ........................................................ 660 4.............. 487 4....................... 466 4............. 621 2..........3 Notes for the metaphysical foundation of being (1966) ........3 “Mediated” derivation of the created essence .......................2 The “double participation” of essence and esse ...............................................................6 Summary.......................... 652 3.................................................. 571 1....... 632 3............................. 497 5........................................... 330-358) .............................................................. Conclusion . 608 2..........................................2..3 The semantics of metaphysical analogy .......... 655 3..........2............. 599 2........................................... 551 1............. 485 4.... 593 2.............................. 437 1................................. 627 3......... Metaphysical reflection and predicamental causality (PC......4 The interpretation of act in Aquinas and Heidegger (1974) ........................................................................... Metaphysical reflection and analogy (PC........ Metaphysical resolution as a process of foundation (PC...................... 532 1........................4 The transcendentality of ens-esse (1966)............VOLUME II Chapter Four: The Emergence of esse ............................................... 532 1... Summary ..................... 501 5..................................................... 453 3.............. 214-238) .......1 The multiplicity of divine ideas and exemplars ......................... 630 3.......................5 La svolta antropologica di Karl Rahner (1974) ............................... 531 1..................... 586 1...............2 The metaphysical fundament of the Fourth Way (1965) ................................................................................................. .....2 Phenomenological reflection on being ...................................... 666 1.............. 671 1............................3 Resolutio and demonstration ......... 746 4.................................... Evaluation of Fabro’s proposal ..............................1 Formal resolution of participated perfections .... The nature of resolutio according to Fabro ..............................................................2 Real reduction of esse participatum to Esse per Essentiam .........8 Resolutio and causality .........................3 Analogy: the semantics of participation ...... 738 4. 827 6 ........................................... 708 2............................4 Resolutio and argumentation ....................... 694 1................................................. 671 2....................................................... 691 1.........................................2 Principle of separated perfection....................... 786 5..................7 Resolutio and emergence .............................. 708 2. 715 3..........2.......6 Resolutio and participation ......1 Ens as primum cognitum..................................... 672 3..................................... 668 1.. 732 4.....2 Formal...........................................................................1 Resolutio as metaphysical method ................. 726 4.............................................................................................................Chapter Six: The Method of Metaphysical Reflection .......................................................... Types of resolution according to Fabro .................................................................... 677 4..............................2........... 791 5.................. 780 5...3 Principle of participation........... 732 4.................2..........2...............2 Resolutio and the judgment of separation ........................ 725 4.......................... The intensive notion of esse..............................................................1 Causal participation and creation ....................................................................................... 667 1..........................................................1 The real distinction between essence and esse ................... 694 1....................................................................................1 Principle of the emergence of act ........................... 712 3............................................................................................................................... The initial notion of ens .................................................................................................... 665 1.............. 679 Chapter Seven: The Structure of Metaphysical Reflection ........................................................................................ 666 1.............. 725 4........................2 Participative structure of created ens ........................................................................................... 670 1. Passage to the methodological notion of being .3.......1 The problem of multiplicity. 813 Bibliography .............................. 716 3.......................2 Constitution of the genus subiectum of metaphysics ........2............5 Resolutio and analogy............................ Passage to the intensive notion of being ......... 705 2..................... change and movement ...................................... 796 Conclusion ................. 786 5............................................................................................................................. The methodological notion of being ................................. Resolutio as a rational movement from ens to esse ........... 669 1................................................................. predicamental causality ..............................................2 The transcendental properties of being ............................1 Intensive esse .................................................................. 748 4.............................................. 667 1..........................................................3.......................... In Phys. In Perih. Anal.LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Works by Cornelio Fabro BIT ET IST NMP NS PC PP TPM Breve introduzione al Tomismo Esegesi Tomistica Introduzione a San Tommaso La nozione metafisica di partecipazione Neotomismo e Suarezismo Partecipazione e Causalità Percezione e pensiero Tomismo e pensiero moderno Works by Saint Thomas Aquinas De Potentia De Spiritualibus Creaturis De Veritate In Boethii De Trinitate In De Divinis Nominibus In Boethii De Hebdomadibus In Metaph. I-II. I. II-II. III Quaestiones disputatae De Potentia Quaestiones disputatae De Spiritualibus Creaturis Quaestiones disputatae De Veritate In librum Boethii De Trinitate expositio In librum Dionysii De Divinis Nominibus expositio In librum Boethii De Hebdomadibus expositio In duodecim libros Metaphysicorum Aristotelis expositio In libros Peri hermeneias Aristotelis expositio In octo libros Physicorum Aristotelis expositio In libros Posteriorum Analyticorum Aristotelis expositio Scriptum super Sententiis magistri Petri Lombardi Quaestiones de quodlibet Summa Theologiae 7 . In Sent. In Post. Quodlibet. 8 . Father Elvio provided several key texts for this investigation. I would also like to thank Father Luis Romera. Throughout this period. actus essendi. for the many conversations we had on the notion of participation.ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A special thanks goes first of all to Father Jesús Villagrasa. Pensar el ser. metaphysics. I am grateful to him for our many conversations about metaphysics and philosophical theology and for his wise and prudent counsel. such as the structure of the Five Ways. the constitution of the subiectum of metaphysics. Fabro” (Alpha Omega. Almost three years have passed since I defended this dissertation on January 13. Finally. I am grateful to my friend and colleague. I am grateful to him for this and for his lasting contribution to the evangelization of culture. Análisis del conocimento del actus essendi según C. I thank Constantina Pair. whose generosity and interest in Christian philosophy made the publication of this dissertation possible. Father Alain Contat. The initial inspiration for both can be traced to his seminal article on “La resolutio come metodo della metafisica secondo C. and the relationship between final causality and participation in the doctrine of creation and divine governance. 1994). I would like to thank Father Elvio Fontana. I have been able to investigate several themes that I only hinted at in the dissertation. Director of the Progetto culturale Cornelio Fabro. His articles on Fabro’s metaphysics contributed greatly to my understanding of the problems at hand. who met with me to discuss aspects of his doctoral dissertation on Fabro. the theological foundation of the transcendentals. “The Dialectical Emergence of esse ut actus according to Cornelio Fabro” (2007). Rector of the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross (Rome). 2001). the method of philosophical theology. Therefore. and this doctoral dissertation. Secondly. It is my hope that this dissertation honors their efforts and that it may be an inspiration to others to continue along the metaphysical paths opened by Cornelio Fabro. and some conclusions I had reached in my investigations into Fabro’s work. LC. 2010. Fabro (Peter Lang. the director of both my licentiate thesis. and creation. I hope that 9 . IVE. and the reditus of creatures to God. In particular. suppositum and operari. the relationship between nature. effect-cause). This. 10 .those who read this dissertation will consider it only as my first attempt to comprehend Fabro’s interpretation of Aquinas’s metaphysics and that in the years ahead I hope to revisit the themes here presented. the nature of analogical causality. I think. subject-form. the ordo naturalis of spiritual creatures to the vision of God. I would like to clarify and explore Aquinas’s thought on the three modes of participation (particular-universal. should open up to a more complete understanding of the theology of grace as participation in the divine nature. and the relationship between the Trinitarian processions and missions and the development of our spiritual life in Jesus Christ and in the Holy Spirit. vol. 1937. made his perpetual profession on October 25. His laureate thesis dealt with the foundation and defense of the principle of causality1. won first place in the competition (December 20. The Principle of Causality. Thomas”. 1935. Fabro completed his philosophical studies at the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome in 1931. 1932. 2 1 11 . was the first presentation of “the dialectic of participation as the hermeneutic key of the originality of Thomism”3. He was ordained a priest on April 20. its Necessary and Universal Value2. 1. 3 C. xxxiii. An important event occurred in 1933. when the Roman Academy of St. 1911 in Flumignano (Udine). The Lateran University agreed to sponsor Fabro’s entry in the concursus since he had already done his thesis with them on a similar theme. “Premessa”. Fabro began his theology studies at the University of St. 1. On October 28.BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE Cornelio Fabro was born on August 24. Fabro taught cosmology and psychology in Verona (Italy) while finishing studies in natural science at the The thesis is slated for publication in Fabro’s Opere Complete. 1935 with a paper on “God’s Knowledge of Singulars according to St. Libreria Editrice della Pontificia Università Lateranense. according to Fabro. 4 Slated for publication as Volume Two of his Opere Complete. In the fall of that same year. he defended his doctoral dissertation in theology. In 1922. Italy. Thomas (Angelicum) in Rome. he entered the Apostolic School of the Stigmatini Fathers and began his novitiate with them on November 1. After his priestly ordination in 1935. in Esegesi Tomistica (ET). He professed his first vows a year later. its Psychological Origin. Tommaso d’Aquino4. 1927. Thomas announced an international concursus on the problem of “The Critical Defense of the Principle of Causality”. FABRO. which was entitled: La nozione metafisica di partecipazione secondo S. His work entitled. Fabro’s investigations led him to discover the centrality of the notion of participation in St. Roma 1969. Fabro finished his licentiate in theology on July 7. vol. Fabro’s paper will be published in Opere Complete. Philosophical Formulation. 1934) and. Thomas Aquinas’s thought. From 1965 to 1981 he taught various courses at the University of Perugia. That same year. From 1948 to 1956. Existential analysis of daily life (1978-1981): Essere nel mondo. he was named extraordinary professor of metaphysics in the Urbaniana Athenaeum and ordinary professor of metaphysics in 1941. He also taught philosophy of religion at the PUL and PUU from 1970 to 1973. In 1958 he was named a consulter of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Fabro’s second important work was his 1937 theology dissertation C. In 1954. USA) in 1965. He was a “Visiting Professor” at Notre Dame University (Indiana. he won the Chair of theoretical philosophy at the University of Naples. 101-141. In 1947. In 1985. Fabro published part of his 1934 paper on the principle of causality in an article in 1936 entitled. Essere nel corpo. he was named dean of philosophy of the same Athenaeum. “La difesa critica del principio di causa”5. After the publication of his doctoral dissertation in 1939. FABRO. Thomas (SITA). he taught philosophy of religion at the Urbaniana Athaeneum. 1995 at the age of 83. The speculative acumen of the young Fabro can be seen from the fact that the article is still commented on and referenced in our day. In 1957 he taught at the Catholic University of Milan. From 1954 to 1956 he was the director of the LUMSA in Rome.BEING AND PARTICIPATION University of Padova. Fabro gave the “Chaire Cardinal Mercier” lectures at the University of Louvain (Belgium) on “Participation and Causality according to St. professor of the History of Modern Philosophy at the Urbaniana Athaeneum and professor of theoretical philosophy at the LUMSA in Rome. In 1938 he was given the chair of Biology and Rational Psychology at the Urbaniana Athaeneum (Rome). Fabro ended his teaching career at the University of Perugia with a course entitled. “La difesa critica del principio di causa”. at the Pontifical Urbaniana University (PUU). Fabro was elected president of the International Society of St. Rivista di Filosofia Neo-scolastica 28 (1936). he obtained his habilitation for university chair (libera docenza) in theoretical philosophy at the University of Rome (19491950). Fabro passed away in Rome on May 4. In 1959. a position he maintained until 1991. From 1936 to 1940 he taught biology and theoretical psychology and directed a metaphysics seminar at the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome. From 1960 to 1970 he taught metaphysics at the Pontifical Lateran University (PUL). 5 12 . In 1948. Essere nell’io. Metaphysical Works. he founded the first Institute in Europe for the “History of Atheism”. Thomas Aquinas”. 450. Torino 1939. 11 C. During this time. atheism. Descoqs. 87. Fabro also took part in the defense of the Thomistic real distinction between essence and esse in creatures. In 1960-1961. Along with the search for the foundations of the principle of causality and the investigation into the notion of participation. meaning and value of the Fourth Way9. The work contains the results of twenty years of research and complete his exposition of the metaphysical notion of participation in Thomas Aquinas. La nozione metafisica di partecipazione secondo S. 12 C. In 1954. JOHN. Fabro continued to publish articles on various metaphysical problems. Libreria Editrice della Pontificia Università Lateranense. SEI. the problem of perception. FABRO. Worthy of note is his Breve introduzione al tomismo (1960)12. The volume collects articles from 1958 to 1967 that touch on the investigations carried out in PC. 8 Cf. New York. In several articles and in his book Neotomismo e suarezismo (1941) Fabro responded to the objections raised by the P.BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE which he published in 1939 and entitled. Doctor Communis 7 (1954). Thomas and his metaphysics. FABRO. FABRO. significato e valore della IV via”. C. H. Fordham University Press. Tomismo e pensiero moderno. existentialism and Kierkegaard. n. “The Intensive Hermeneutics of Thomistic Philosophy: The Notion of Participation” Review of Metaphysics 27 (1974). Roma 1960. Libreria Editrice della Pontificia Università Lateranense. Roma 1969. he published an important article on the development. 10 C. he authored 113 philosophical articles for the Enciclopedia Cattolica (1948-1954). The volume collects articles from 1936 to 1967 that involve themes similar to the investigations of NMP. 6 13 . Segni 2007. 71-109. 9 C. Over the next two decades Fabro published articles on St. La nozione metafisica di partecipazione6. It deals with “the constitutive participation of the structure of the real”7 and marks a turning point in twentieth century Thomistic thought8. 2. FABRO. After the publication of Partecipazione e causalità. 1966. “Sviluppo. vol. Esegesi Tomistica. 7 C. Breve introduzione al tomismo. The Thomist Spectrum. 16. FABRO. Desclée. the lectures he gave at the University of Louvain were edited and published in French (Participation et causalité) and Italian (Partecipazione e causalità). FABRO. SJ to the Thomistic real distinction between essence and esse. Many of these articles are gathered in the volumes Esegesi Tomistica10 and Tommaso e il pensiero moderno11. Roma 1969. Tommaso. Opere Complete. the development of Scholasticism and the metaphysics of Hegel and Heidegger. Editrice del Verbo Incarnato. Heidegger. Although the Thomistic metaphysics of participation was frequently dealt with in his later works. In the updated volume Fabro drafted a series of 38 “Thomistic theses” which. contain the speculative nucleus of St. Rahner and the problem of freedom. according to Fabro. Hegel.BEING AND PARTICIPATION which was updated in 1983 and published under the title. 14 . fifteen of the projected one-hundred volumes have been published. Kierkegaard. Fabro’s Complete Works are currently being published by the Progetto Culturale Cornelio Fabro and the Institute of the Incarnate Word. the majority of Fabro’s work from 1960 to 1995 is dedicated to the study of the problem of atheism. Thomas’s thought. To date. Introduzione a san Tommaso. Forest. “The Emergence of the Act of Existing in Recent Thomism”. A. RÉGIS. the roles of abstraction and separatio in the constitution of the See H. International Philosophical Quarterly 2 (1962). “Die Methoden der Metaphysik im Mittelalter”. Martin. 303-330. The Thomist 58 (1994). one of the leading figures of twentieth-century Thomism who is often credited with the rediscovery of the pivotal roles of the notion of participation and esse (actus essendi) in Thomistic metaphysics1. 71-91. Hayen. Città del Vaticano 1991. M. A. Kongreß für mittelalterliche Philosophie. L. Geiger. J. Fordham University Dissertation. intern. Regarding Fabro’s place in the movement. “Analyse et synthèse dans l’œuvre de saint Thomas”. L. J. the Thomist revival offered for the first time an interpretation of metaphysics completely centered upon the act of being—the actus essendi” (p. in Studia Mediaevalia in honorem admodum reverendi patris R. Laval Théologique et Philosophique 6 (1950). J. Libreria Editrice Vaticana. SANGUINETTI.-M. Gilson. TAVUZZI.INTRODUCTION This dissertation concerns the method and structure of metaphysical reflection according to Cornelio Fabro (1911-1995). Berlin 1963. J. Garrigou-Lagrange. 199-227. The Meaning of Resolution as a Reflective Method in the Philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. 9-62. de Finance. 197243. VILLAGRASA. AERTSEN. For in this work. de Raeymaeker. “Three Notions of resolutio and the Structure of Reasoning”. “Aquinas on Resolution in Metaphysics”. “La resolutio come metodo della metafisica secondo 1 15 . “Resolution and Composition in Speculative and Practical Discourse”. SWEENEY. 602). New York 1975. E. De Tempel 1948. The New Scholasticism 63 (1989) 405-418. Thomas. OEING-HANHOFF. E. and in a series of articles published about the same time in a major controversy with Père Descoqs. E.-B. 595-620. 2 See L. “Method and Metaphysics: the Via Resolutionis in Thomas Aquinas”. It is well known that later twentiethcentury Thomists dedicated a considerable part of their efforts to explaining different elements of “metaphysical epistemology”: the method of resolutio2. O’BRIEN. Il. “Il triplice senso della ‘resolutio’ in San Tommaso”. Atti dell’IX Congresso Tomistico Internazionale. Maritain. J. The author presents a brief overview of the movement of twentieth-century Thomism and the following authors: R. The Thomist 55 (1991). A. in Noetica. DOLAN. A. 126-132. J. critica e metafisica in chiave tomistica. she writes: “The real climax in the transformation of Thomist metaphysics comes with the publication in 1939 of Father Fabro’s study of participation in the teaching of St. Marc. and L. JOHN. in Die Metaphysik in Mittelalter. PASCUAL. selon saint Thomas d’Aquin”. Pontificia Universitas Gregoriana. J. “The Judgmental Character of Thomas Aquinas’s Analogy of Being”.-V. “Abstractio y separatio como acceso a la metafísica”. Roma 2003. 5. Pamplona 2002. in S. MONDIN. The Preface to Thomistic Metaphysics. Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Divus Thomas 50 (1947). 6 See L. GEIGER. ROMERA. Roma 2005.-B. OWENS. The Thomist 30 (1966). Peter Lang. 62-94. the apprehension of ens as primum cognitum6. GELONCH. Colección Idea. Una interpretación textual del ‘Super Boetium de Trinitate’. Roma 2006. 5 a. 3 See L. CLAVELL – M. “Metaphysics and Separatio according to Thomas Aquinas. Edizioni Università della Santa Croce. MORENO. LÓPEZ SALGADO. L. S. DEWAN. Tommaso d’Aquino e l’oggetto della metafisica. Tommaso d’Aquino e i suoi interpreti. PASCUAL. q. KLUBERTANZ. Caracas 1988. La división de la ciencias especulativas en santo Tomás de Aquino. ‘Separatio’ y objeto de la metafísica en Tomás de Aquino. 206-222. R. SAIZPARDO HURTADO. La metafisica di S. Alpha Omega 1 (1998). LEROY. Thomas on Learning Metaphysics”. the starting point of metaphysics5. 3. L. Revue Thomiste 48 (1948). ROBERT. “La métaphysique. a. J. “Metaphysical Separation in Aquinas”. Bologna 2002. V. C. Gregorianum 35 (1954). the role of Cornelio Fabro”. “St. the relationship between the second operation of the intellect and our knowledge of esse4. VII. “Abstractio et separatio d’après un texte controversé de saint Thomas (annexe a ‘Le savoir spéculatif’)”. “St. Revue des Sciences Philosophiques et Théologiques 31 (1947). A Contribution to the Neo-Thomist Debate on the Start of Metaphysics. 62-73. science distincte de toute autre discipline philosophique. Review of Metaphysics 31 (1978). in Atti del VIII Congresso Tomistico Internazionale. CALDERA. Armando. “Il ‘separato’ come condizione e come oggetto della metafisica”. Intelecto-razón en Tomás de Aquino: Aproximación noética a la metafisica. The Thomist 61 (1997). “Lo separado como el objeto de la metafísica”. “On Judging Existence”. SALAS. 3-40. R. “La scoperta dell’ente in quanto ente”. vol. DE LABORDA. 117-142. Physics. J. BROCK (ed. 109-135. R. Roma 2004. 35-66. MCNICHOLL. “Il primo principio della conoscenza intellettuale”. 35-48. 549-566. 287-306. J. Mediaeval Studies 34 (1972). A. Universidad de 16 . Thomas In de Trinitate q. KNASAS. 5 See G. The Modern Schoolman 85 (2008). 102-116. L. R. and the Principle of Metaphysics”. “The Nature of Metaphysics”.). L. 4952. 328-339. 217-242. 3-17. EUNSA. M. Thomas. “Abstraction et séparation d’après s. Sapientia 19 (1964). WIPPEL. de santo Tomás de Aquino. 431-470. Edizioni Università della Santa Croce. VICENTE BURGOA. 171-229 and 307-337. ESD. La prima captación intelectual. El primado noético del ens como primum cognitum. Metafisica. CLAVELL. Città del Vaticano 1982. 507580. The Thomist 43 (1979). Análisis de la posición de Cornelio Fabro. New York 1990. AERTSEN.-D. 3”. Alpha Omega 4 (2001). B. Divus Thomas 96 (1993).BEING AND PARTICIPATION genus subiectum of metaphysics3. 4 See A. J. OWENS. “Analogy as a Thomistic Approach to Being”. 9 I do not use the term “method of metaphysical reflection” to refer to the way Fabro carries out his metaphysical investigations in general. A Textual Analysis and Systematic Synthesis. L. this dissertation shows that his work is not extraneous to the epistemological endeavors of later twentieth-century Thomistic metaphysicians and will explain his thought on participation and actus essendi in reference to his work on the method9 and structure of Navarra. J. An Interpretation of St. CUA Press. Aquinas and Analogy. but rather to his indications on the method of metaphysics. gradually establishing positions on the role of separatio in the constitution of the subiectum of metaphysics and on the method of resolutio in the reduction of ens qua ens and its transcendental properties to their ultimate principles and causes. Louvain. c. The Hague 1961. 8 See J. “The Esse/Essentia Argument in Aquinas’ De ente et essentia”. Pamplona 1991. “The Problem of the Analogy of Being”. MCINERNY. 75-108. KLUBERTANZ. 553-579. 1-22. J. Review of Metaphysics 10 (1957). La doctrine de l’analogie de l’être d’après saint Thomas d’Aquin. R. FERRARO. I prefer to use the term “method of metaphysical reflection” over “method of metaphysics” since it is closer to the term Fabro himself uses and has the advantage of embracing both the initial resolution according to the notions of act and perfection and the final stages of metaphysics (or philosophical theology) which deal with the demonstration of 17 . “Aquinas’ Distinction at De ente et essentia. Mediaeval Studies 27 (1965).. Ibid. B. C. 279-295.119-123”. they focused their attention on Questions Five and Six of Aquinas’s In Boethii De Trinitate. Nauwelaerts 1963. While Fabro is best known for his two major works on the notion of participation. OWENS. Loyola University Press. The Logic of Analogy. Doctor Angelicus 5 (2005). 99-123. 7 See G.INTRODUCTION analogy in metaphysics7 and whether or not the real distinction between essence and esse in creatures could be demonstrated before proving the existence of God8. Washington DC 1996. “La conoscenza dell’ens e dell’esse dalla prospettiva del tomismo essenziale”. The Thomist 43 (1979). CUA Press. OWENS. In this dissertation. J. MONTAGNES. 4. Thomas. Metaphysical Themes in Thomas Aquinas. OWENS. Mediaeval Studies 24 (1962). Washington DC 1984. WIPPEL. “Stages and Distinction in De ente: A Rejoinder”. Medieval Studies 48 (1986). Journal of the History of Philosophy 22 (1984). 303-322. MCINERNY. Chicago 1960. S. Thomas Aquinas on Analogy. “Aquinas’ Route to the Real Distinction: A Note on De ente et essentia. “Existence / Essence in Thomas Aquinas’ Early Writings”. J. J. 107-132. 4”. WIPPEL. In particular. 157-172. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 37 (1962). Thomas Aquinas”. 264-287. Martinus Nijhoff. The Thomist 45 (1981). SWEENEY. MACDONALD. “Quiddity and Real distinction in St. 97-131. R. St. I will explain Fabro’s proposal of resolutioreductio as the proper method of metaphysics and outline how Fabro structures metaphysical reflection in accordance with this method. n. indicates the two poles around the existence of God. in metaphysics. then. esse ut actus. Although Fabro never dedicated an entire work or article to the theme of the method and structure of metaphysical reflection. yet would allow for an ontological foundation of the transcendentals before the demonstration of the existence of God. we find that throughout the sixty years of his philosophical production he continually made important remarks on both themes. the study of the way in which the task is realized. 10 See J. In this dissertation. 18 . the principle of separated perfection and the principle of participation. To understand Fabro’s metaphysics. This resolutio of accidental act and substantial form to esse ut actus is followed by a reductio of participated esse to Esse per essentiam according to the speculative principles of the Fourth Way: the principle of the emergence of act. I have done the same. My investigation into method concerns the dynamic of Fabro’s metaphysical reflection. VILLAGRASA. The title of the dissertation. He places the exposition of the transcendentals at the end of his Metaphysics course-notes (1947). “L’idea di Dio nella storia della filosofia”. 11 The epistemological locus of the transcendentals is not clear in Fabro’s thought. For Fabro. which is being. where Fabro characterizes NMP as a work that deals with “the resolutive metaphysical function that the notion of participation has in Thomism”. the study of the method of metaphysics—resolutio or analysis—is important”. the demonstration of creatio ex nihilo and the propter quid argument for the real distinction between essence and esse in creatures. Roma 1950. Fabro proposes an initial resolutio of ens to esse according to the Aristotelian couplet of act-potency and the Platonic couplet of participatedparticipant. Coletti. “Being and Participation”. 663.BEING AND PARTICIPATION metaphysical reflection10. See also the last footnote in C. the conclusive moment of metaphysical reflection belongs to the analogy of being as the ultimate semantic expression of participation11. In brief. “La resolutio come metodo…”. 36: “The philosophical project according to Fabro consists in bringing philosophy back to the foundation of metaphysics. and in accomplishing. Fabro argues that there is a theoretical convergence between the arguments for the existence of God. the return or resolutio of ens to its foundation. In this reductio. Dio nella ricerca umana. FABRO. creation and the ultimate comprehension of the participative structure of created ens. the investigation into structure concerns more properly the stages and speculative content of this reflection. 55. My emphasis. Illud autem quod primo intellectus concipit quasi notissimum. In I Sent. non communitate univocationis sed analogiae”. 3 sc 2. tamen habent ordinem ad invicem et una includit alteram et una fundatur super altera. sicut effectus proprii reducuntur in causas proprias. 4 ad 3: “Cum intellectus creatus per suam naturam natus sit apprehendere formam concretam et esse concretum in abstractione. In I Sent. 1: “Sicut in demonstrabilibus oportet fieri reductionem in aliqua principia per se intellectui nota. 1: “Omnes causae reducantur in ipsum Deum sicut in causam”. sed in unum”. 98: “Omne autem quod est per participationem. quae est Deus”. 16: “Potentia non reducitur in actum nisi per ens actu”. ita id quod commune est in effectibus propriis. q. Ibid.INTRODUCTION which Fabro’s metaphysical reflection on ens qua ens spirals upward to God as Ipsum Esse Per Se Subsistens and as the ultimate foundation of all things. q. 1. II. At the heart of this resolutio-reductio is the See I. The problem of metaphysical method In explaining how our intellect comes to know esse. 1 ad 5. 1.. 3. et ideo non reducuntur in diversa principia. a. a. ch. et in vivere includitur esse. I. a.. a. De Veritate. In I Sent. 44. the real distinction between essence and esse in creatures and the relationship (habitudo) between creatures and their Creator. 12.. principia accidentium reducuntur in principia substantiae sicut in priora”. 1. 3: “Haec autem formarum determinatio oportet quod reducatur. alias utrobique in infinitum iretur. Ibid. 9: “Oportet igitur communem quamdam resolutionem in omnibus huiusmodi fieri. 1. 1. 34. reducitur ad id quod est per seipsum”. 13 See In I Sent.. De substantiis separatis. Unde oportet quod sit proprius effectus primae et universalissimae causae. 1. d. et in quod conceptiones omnes 12 19 . d. III. q. a. a. a. In Boethii De Trinitate. ch. per modum resolutionis cuiusdam”. Alia vero agentia reducuntur in Deum sicut in primum agens”. et in suum esse”. Inter omnes autem effectus. 6 ad 2: “Substantia sit prior accidentibus. q. ch. 10: “Omnis autem causa per accidens reducitur ad causam per se”. ita investigando quid est unumquodque. I. d. a. 2. 36. universalissimum est ipsum esse. q. secundum quod unumquodque eorum intellectu resolvitur in id quod est. I. ch. 6. sicut in primum principium. sicut in intelligere includitur vivere. Aquinas refers repeatedly to resolutio12 and reductio13. 45. 15: “Unde oportet quod. Ibid. q. 1 ad 1: “Quod quamvis bonitates participatae in creaturis sint differentes ratione. reducitur ad id quod est per se sicut ad primum. a. q. ch. 5: “Oportet enim universaliores effectus in universaliores et priores causas reducere. In II Sent. 1. 1. ch. Ibid. reducatur in aliquam causam communem”. I. a.. q. q. II.. et sic periret omnino scientia et cognitio rerum.. quae ordinem universi excogitavit. q... 8: “Omne quod est per aliud. in divinam sapientiam. qui in rerum distinctione consistit”. d. Summa contra Gentiles. a. 2 ad 2: “Creator et creatura reducuntur in unum. II. 6: “Omne mobile reducitur ad immobile. the causal relationship between God’s divine ideas and the creature’s being and essence. n. 3. See J. a. De Causis. lect. Ergo reducuntur ad primum. which presents itself both as a participated. 5. 405-418. a.. ch. In I Metaph. sicut ad principium”. My emphasis. n. sicut ad causam. nisi per aliquod perfectum ens actu”.. AERTSEN. est ens”. intrinsic. metaphysics has a method and principles that are proper to it14. 5. ch. 22. 20 . constitutive principle of created ens (measured. the study of the “properties” of the subiectum (the transcendentals). the goal of the science resolvit. Jan A.. et indeterminatum ad determinatum. vel de potentia in actum. ideo quidquid perfectionis est in effectu. Accordingly. 2. a. reducantur in ea. Metaphysics. non reducitur in actum nisi ab aliquo agente”. 68: “Omne quod habet aliquid per participationem. Compendium Theologiae. quae non ita efficaciter operatur sicut causa prima”. n.. 4. Sed creaturae dicuntur a Deo. quod autem est de defectu. quod principalius cadit in consideratione huius philosophiae. In XI Metaph. 2211: “Necesse est enim quod sicut omnia entia reducuntur ad aliquod primum. q. and how created ens is ordered to operation and to God as supreme good and ultimate end of all things. the difference and causal relationship (habitudo) between the creature’s participated esse and God’s nature (Esse per essentiam). reducitur in id quod habet illud per essentiam. quod non contingit idem simul esse et non esse”. lect. 335. quod a Deo dicitur”. principaliter reducitur ad primam causam. The proper method of metaphysics should be apt to the study of the subiectum of the science (ens qua ens). The science is called metaphysics inasmuch as it considers being and what follows upon it – for these transphysical things are discovered in the process of resolution (in via resolutionis) as the more common after the less common. I. a. Hoc autem est. 14 See ARISTOTLE. In II Metaph. limited and determined by a created form or essence) and as Ipsum Esse Per Se Subsistens. q. Thomistic metaphysics seeks to know and understand the role of esse in the creature. 7 ad 15: “Quia causa prima magis influit in effectum quam secunda. ita oportet quod principia demonstrationis reducantur ad aliquod principium. 994b32-995a20 and In II Metaph.. lect. 12. lect. Aertsen points out that St. Ibid. De Potentia. Ibid. quae sunt per essentiam. vivere et intelligere”. 188: “Nihil enim reducitur de imperfecto ad perfectum. “Method and Metaphysics: The via resolutionis in Thomas Aquinas”. Ibid. 18: “Omnes rerum gradus ad tria videtur reducere quae sunt esse.BEING AND PARTICIPATION problem of esse. 83: “Quod autem est in potentia. lect. I.. q. methodological reason for the title “metaphysics” in the prooemium of his Commentary on the Metaphysics. reducendum est in causam secundam. As a speculative science. sicut in principium et causam”.. sicut in causas”. 3. Thomas provides an intrinsic. 296: “Necesse est ut omnia composita et participantia. 4 sc 4: “Omne posterius reducitur ad id quod est primum in aliquo genere. Aristotle states that “it is absurd to search simultaneously for science and the method (tro. whereby human acts reach their due end through appropriate means”19. 335: “Dicit ergo primo.. In his commentary on this passage. he uses terms like “processus scientiae”20. absurdum est. secundum quem proceditur ab uno in aliud”. Et quia non est facile quod homo simul duo capiat. 1: “modus scientiae debet respondere materiae. 5. sed modis quibus potentiae animae 16 15 21 . Aquinas points out that logic ought to be studied first since it considers the method common to all the sciences and that the proper method of each. VILLAGRASA. a. cuius proprium est ordinare. sed dum ad duo attendit. 3. et quod etiam prius suppositum est in principio huius octavi. lect. Et propter hoc debet prius addiscere logicam quam alias scientias.INTRODUCTION (the knowledge of the causes of the subiectum and its properties) and the rational-intellectual nature of the human person who undertakes the science15. quam certa ordinatio rationis quomodo per determinata media ad debitum finem actus humani perveniant”. n. n. we See J. lect. ARISTOTLE. quia logica tradit communem modum procedendi in omnibus aliis scientiis. Et hoc est rationabile: nam processus scientiarum est opus rationis. and “Unde modi scientiarum non respondent potentiis animae. Ergo modus conveniens divinae scientiae est intellectualiter procedere”. quod contingit aliquem motum esse continuum et perpetuum”. neutrum capere potest. erit manifestum id quod nunc Paulo supra diximus. Sed res divinae sunt res intelligibiles per se ipsas. 47-53. quod homo simul quaerat scientiam et modum qui convenit scientiae. a. q. prout proceditur a primis causis et principiis usque ad proximas causas. or “via”22. 21 In Boethii De Trinitate. Anal. 15. 19 In I Post. quae sunt elementa constituentia essentiam rei. n. Modus autem proprius singularum scientiarum. 1. 68: “Et simul etiam secundum eandem methodum. Metaphysics..pon) of the science”16. lect. In Book Two (a) of his Metaphysics. For Aquinas the term “methodus” is a synonym of “ars”18 and refers to “a certain work of the reason. unde in omni opere rationis ordo aliquis invenitur. 995a 13-15) 17 In II Metaph. particular science should be studied at the beginning of each science17. idest secundum eandem artificialem considerationem. in scientiis singulis circa principium tradi debet”. In summary.. When Aquinas speaks about the “method of science”. 1: “In scientiis esse processum ordinatum. idest artem. 6. 1: “Nihil enim aliud ars esse videtur. “La resolutio come metodo…”. quod quia diversi secundum diversos modos veritatem inquirunt. lect. ideo oportet quod homo instruatur per quem modum in singulis scientiis sint recipienda ea quae dicuntur. 18 In VIII Physic. “modus scientiae”21. 20 In I De Caelo et mundo. Lobato looks specifically at one aspect of the problem—access to the concept of ens—and summarizes some of these positions. VILLAGRASA. Geiger’s article. Louvain 1943. Existence and the existent.BEING AND PARTICIPATION can describe the method of a speculative science as a certain work of reason. 9850 mit Einleitung hrsg. 37. Die Methode der Metaphysik. The different interpretations of these two questions have given rise to various currents of thought within Thomism. the other involves a metaphysical intuition of being28. Ontologia. Die Geschichte der Scholastischen Methode. Roma 1971. HESSEN. Fribourg-Louvain 1948. n.”. Société Philosophique. sed etiam penes obiecta”. BALTHASAR. it was only after Geiger’s article in 1947 and Wyser’s publication of St. In librum Boethii De Trinitate Quaestiones quinta et sexta. Vintage Books. 27 J. GRABMANN. was largely overlooked25. RIMAUD. J. 28 J. Institut Superieur De Phil. which deals specifically with the methods of the speculative sciences. procedere possunt. “La resolutio come metodo. ad viae terminum perduci”. Thomas’s Commentary in 194824 that sustained. Question Six. Some of the foremost positions are the following26. WYSER. Thomisme et méthode. PUST. Nach dem Autograph Cod.. scholarly attention was given to In Boethii De Trinitate. 25 See J. J. MARITAIN. 22 .. Berlín-Bonn 1932. N.. LOBATO. spurred a number of articles on separatio and the division of the speculative sciences. 1909. lect. 34: “Nam investigare proprie est per vestigia alicuius euntis per viam. qui non solum diversificantur penes potentias tantum. for example. Desclée de Brouwer. 1. La méthode en métaphysique. 26 See A. although the question about the method of metaphysics was dealt with on occasion in early twentiethcentury Thomism23. 106ff. Paris 1932. 19-21. Thomas von Aquin. 23 M. 1) Jacques Maritain presented two theories regarding our knowledge of being: one is based on his “degrees of knowledge” and proposes a third degree of abstraction as the way in which being is grasped27. Aquinas’ “discourse on method” is found primarily in his Commentary on Boethius’ De Trinitate. It is interesting to note that his only example for resolutio is Fabro. Lat. 24 P. New York 1966. 22 In I De Divinis Nominibus. which orders the procedure of reason from one thing to another in a science so as to determine the adequate means to achieve the goal of that science. Vat. MARITAIN. Distinguer pour unir: ou les degrés du savoir.. While Question Five of the commentary on the division of the speculative sciences received much attention. 9-76. Now. 1925. The enterprise of Thomistic metaphysics. E. At times. of existential Thomism. like M. That act is a direct and intellectually unmediated knowing – on the level of direct experience – that things are. rather than existential” (p. 199-227. this position has been labeled “existential Thomism”33. Robert in 194729. For a defense of Gilson and critique of Fabro see F. 1). 175-177. Revue des Sciences Philosophiques et Théologiques 31 (1947). then. “Lo separado como objeto de la metafísica”. have proposed negative separation as a resolution31. “La métaphysique. J. 3-40.-D. Massimo. Medieval Philosophy and the Transcendentals. 33 See J. This judgment necessitates the constitution of a new science.-B. TAVUZZI. Geiger and J. For a critique of Gilson and defense of Fabro see G. 30 R. “Abstraction et séparation d’après.-D. Divus Thomas 50 (1947).. ROBERT. Thomas Aquinas”. PASCUAL. The New Scholasticism 50 (1976). Some authors. This led to the development of studies on the role of separatio in metaphysics and in the passage from the philosophy of nature to metaphysics.”. act (and so on) as such to be material. Leiden 1996. Aertsen includes Gilson and Fabro together since both hold that “the conception of being [ens] cannot be the result of abstraction”. One either proves the existence of immaterial beings or concludes that it does not belong to being. “Existence and Esse”. WILHELMSEN. Although there are several different positions within this current of thought. 3) Etienne Gilson and his followers tend to stress the role of judgment both in the initial apprehension of ens and in existential judgments in the problem of our knowledge of esse32.. 20-45: “We build a metaphysics of esse as act thanks to our awareness that there is an act in the mind that answers the act of being in the real: judgment. Franciscan Studies 17 (1957). 31 M. L’essere e l’essenza. “Participation and Existence in the Interpretation of St. Metaphysics begins. science distincte. that of metaphysics30. Milano 1988. 280. 32 E. thanks to judgment of separation.. See Gilson’s Constantes philosophiques de l’être (1983) for his most mature thought on the problem. it is commonly held that metaphysics is constituted as “first philosophy” and as a new science because one comes to the knowledge that not all being is material.. with a judgment on the immateriality (or separability) of ens.J.INTRODUCTION 2) Cajetan’s theory on “three degrees of abstraction” was corrected by L. GILSON. 217-242. “Aquinas on Resolution in Metaphysics”.”. is the disengagement. Alpha Omega 1 (1998). Brill. GEIGER. 1-22 and 107-125: “It is more enlightening to characterize the philosophy of being of Aquinas as basically participationist. substance. 206-222.-B. The Thomist 55 (1991). of exigencies concerning this ‘to be’ of things” (p. Tavuzzi. “Gilson 29 23 . 44-45). See L. LINDBECK. AERTSEN. G. MUCK. not that of being. which has been called ‘Existential Thomism.’ Its cognition entails the most fundamental of all judgments. PFLIGERSDORFFER (eds. NEIDEL. being (ens) is not and cannot become an object of purely abstract cognition by means of simple apprehension. there are those who stress the role of resolutio as analysis in the discovery of the subiectum of metaphysics and as the proper method of metaphysics. The difficulty of developing two such lines of resolution is evident in the problem concerning whether there are two lines of participation in the problem of creation or one. by using Kant’s transcendental method”. Brugger and E. W. 540-570. Lotz. 175-176). See especially: the reduction to esse and essentia and the double metaphysical resolution (p. 24 . namely. If the correct definition of being is “that which is”. In a 1989 article and in his volume on the transcendentals in Aquinas (1996). 12: “Another school of thought which found widespread support in the first half of the twentieth century is socalled Transcendental Thomism.. This is the position of Thomists such as C. 2: Vuelta a la herencia escolástica.’ the concept of being. The historical starting point of this influential school is the work of Joseph Maréchal S. The Metaphysics of Being…. Rahner. In his Nature and Creature (1988). existence. judgment. 35 See O. […] While in realist metaphysics the use of objective methods ensures that metaphysical knowledge grasps reality and is guided by objective evidence. AERTSEN. Filosofía Cristiana en el pensamiento católico de los siglos XIX y XX. Fabro and J. Maréchal hoped to arrive at the same conclusions St. that being is. comprises in addition to a simple apprehension of essence the judgment that something exists” (p. that is. “La escuela marechaliana de lengua alemana: la filosofía trascendental como metafísica”. Brill. Madrid 1994. Coreth35. the first conception of the intellect. J. 34 L. In Thomas’s metaphysics. ELDERS. in E. E. Nature and Creature. it necessarily includes an is.). On Gilson’s view. Thomas’s metaphysics with the methodological demands of Kant’s transcendental philosophy (J. Existence is attained only in the second operation of the intellect. Aertsen calls attention to the two types of resolution within discusses the theme of ‘Knowledge and Existence’ in the last chapter of his book Being and Some Philosophers. 182190) and metaphysical resolution (p. Aertsen. Aertsen proposes two resolutions within metaphysics – verum in the line of essence and ens in the line of esse36. CORETH.BEING AND PARTICIPATION 4) “Transcendental Thomism” strives to harmonize certain aspects of St. 36 J. W. Such authors include K. ‘What is conceivable is the essence of a being. Leiden 1988. Maréchal) and elements of Heidegger’s philosophy of Sein34. when using the so-called transcendental method one returns to the subjective conditions of our knowledge.J. Thomas accepted. 271-275). Encuentro Ediciones. vol. 5) Finally.J.-B. it is clear that the most universal cause can only be the cause of being. 38 J. 433: “[W]e saw that in the sixth question of his commentary. p. in this process one discovers the object of metaphysics. Thomas closely connects the method of metaphysics with the method of resolution. 394-395.). BROCK (ed. Aertsen has also proposed that a continued analysis of mobile being as the means by which the subiectum of metaphysics is discovered39. Of them. but cannot explain their being as such. the ascent to the most universal cause. He himself transcends being in general. Being is the proper effect of God. Hylemorphism – the composition of form and matter – can explain the type of being that material things possess. and. Medieval Philosophy and the Transcendentals. AERTSEN. he writes: The distinctive feature of [St. “Method and Metaphysics: The via resolutionis in Thomas Aquinas”. but through the continual analysis of material beings. Roma 2004. Thomas’s transcendental way of thought seeks both the inner principle and the extrinsic cause by which a 38 thing is being . The origin of being in general is understood as creation and explained in terms of participation. “La scoperta dell’ente in quanto ente”. Being as such does not signify dependence. See also. The radical comprehension of the 37 25 . Thomas’s] transcendental way of thought is that it moves in two directions. Being is common to all genera and is therefore called “transcendental. 39 See J. in S. but as beings. for its causality is transcendental. and a resolution secundum rem that terminates in the universal cause of being. it is an intrinsic analysis of that which is. It is indeterminate with respect to every mode of being. Armando. Tommaso d’Aquino e l’oggetto della metafisica. AERTSEN. The New Scholasticism 63 (1989). not by demonstrating the existence of immaterial beings. Given the first resolution. Therefore. He distinguishes two kinds of resolution: a resolution secundum rationem that terminates in the consideration of being and of that which belongs to being as such.INTRODUCTION metaphysics: resolutio secundum rationem and resolutio secundum rem37. toward the transcendentality of being and toward that which is common by causality. In this reduction the specific determinations of things are left outside of consideration. nor does it imply any restriction. They are considered not as this or that being. In general. The formal principle whereby a thing is being (ens) is its act of being (esse). See J. The inner resolution is the condition for another resolution. another way of considering material things is necessary. 405-418.” The first resolution moves on a horizontal plane. The first movement is a resolution by which things are reduced to what is most common in them. AERTSEN. The former resolution is the condition for the latter”. God does not belong to the domain of the maxime communia. 46: “The object of metaphysics is discovered. but. Tavuzzi43 and J. ch. II. q. true nature and ultimate causes”. 2. (66) 1974. several Thomists seem to prefer a kind of synthesis between separatio (Question Five of In Boethii De Trinitate) and resolutio (Question Six of In Boethii De Trinitate). 5. we must first prove that there are immaterial things”. p. Fabro himself highlights the three stages of metaphysics in his 1974 article on Heidegger and St. TAVUZZI. “L’originale metafisica creazionista di Tommaso d’Aquino”. 16: “In order to arrive at the study of being qua being. Wippel44. 42 See L. M. De Substantiis Separatis. Summa contra Gentiles. Il nuovo problema dell’essere e la fondazione della metafisica. insofar as it is grounded in the discernment of intrinsic causes. the process of thought which proceeds from the study of effects to the knowledge of their causes and from the less universal to the more universal”. Fabro speaks about an initial resolution of ens according to act and perfection and a subsequent reduction of participated esse to its fundament. 209-223.J. ch. 37. with the formation of more universal concepts and the determination of the necessary constituents of their contents. 17-18: “it becomes clear that the separation mentioned above gives access to being in a new way so that one may explore its full depth. Thomas Aquinas in a Historical Perspective. 43 See M. Also: J. This synthetic approach. 213-214: “The second moment of metaphysical resolution. ELDERS. De Potentia. VILLAGRASA. is taken by L. Brill. p. a. 41 C. that is. The distinctively metaphysical mental operation of separation is already operative within the various arguments which constitute metaphysical resolution secundum rem. […] Metaphysical resolution secundum rem is therefore effected by negative separation secundum rem”. 40 See I. It is an authentic instance of resolution reasoning not only because by it the mind moves from the grasp of a multiplicity to that of a unity but also because it is a process of reasoning which finds its terminus in the intellectual seizure of the 26 . a. While there question of the origin is decisive for the discovery of ens qua ens. The origin of ens as such surpasses the level of becoming (change. 9. Elders42. 29: “Foremost among the methods used in metaphysics is resolution or reduction. is not directly concerned with realities. 475-510. Unlike Aertsen’s proposal in Nature and Creature. for example. the seizure of God as Ipsum Esse Subsistens is the product of an entire sequence of negative judgments. motion) in nature”. 212: “But it must be noticed that the intellectual seizure which terminates metaphysical resolution secundum rem represents an insight merely into God’s nature rather than into God’s nature. 44. FABRO. “Aquinas on Resolution in Metaphysics”. of remotiones. 3. p. At present. q. Leiden 1993.BEING AND PARTICIPATION Aertsen highlights the relationship between the progress of human reason and the three stages of metaphysics outlined at times by St. Alpha Omega 10 (2007). Thomas40. E. Ipsum Esse Subsistens. Rivista di filosofia neoscolastica. secundum rationem. The Metaphysics of Being of St. Thomas and the foundation of metaphysics41. This second moment of metaphysical resolution is also effected by the exercise of the distinctively metaphysical mental operation of negative separation. Fabro tended to refer to the method of Thomistic metaphysics as a “resolution”. however. CUA Press. Neither of them proposes a passage to metaphysics in via inventionis through a formal demonstration or judgment regarding the immateriality or separability of being from movement and matter. By 1954. I have undertaken a very “nature” of that unity. “synopsis” and “reduction”.INTRODUCTION are differences in terms of emphasis and the precise meaning of the two terms. In La nozione metafisica di partecipazione (1939). 44 See J. “passage to the limit”. yet exclude the possibility that this separatio involves the demonstration of God’s existence. This advance was accompanied by in-depth investigations into causal participation and the latter stages of metaphysics. The Metaphysical Thought of Thomas Aquinas. he uses a variety of terms to refer to the dynamic of the method of metaphysical reflection: terms such as “intensification”. “dialectical emergence”. they generally refer to the role of separatio in the constitution of the genus subiectum of metaphysics. “dialectic of participation”. a “reduction” or a “process of foundation”. Accordingly. 27 . For this reason. Metaphysical resolution secundum rem is effected by what might accordingly be designated as “negative separation secundum rationem”. Washington DC 2000. 23-62. WIPPEL. With regard to the method of resolution within metaphysics. Fabro referred to this method as an “intensive metaphysical abstraction” and a “dialectical ascension”. Fabro’s theory seems to be more in agreement with Aertsen’s work on the discovery of the subiectum of metaphysics through an analysis that changes the question from “What are the causes of mobile ens?” to “What are the causes of ens qua ens?”. The evolution of Fabro’s terminology and thought regarding the method of metaphysical reflection can be problematic for a correct interpretation of his works. Fabro holds that resolutio-reductio is the principal means by which the metaphysician comes to know esse ut actus. At the same time. “return to foundation”. metaphysics can begin its resolution of finite ens to the real composition of essence and esse and reduce participated esse to God as its foundation. But this further type of negative separation must not be confused with that negative secundum rem which had effected metaphysical resolution secundum rem. once a negative judgment is made (a separatio) that matter does not belong to being as such. ROMERA. 95-130. 47 See J. In contrast to Romera’s exposition. Bern 1994. 10: “La reflexión metafísica intensiva”. Thomas’s distinction between resolutio secundum rationem and resolutio secundum rem47. Another important study is J. Peter Lang. 64: “If it is true that the task of metaphysics is the resolution of ens without immanentistic restrictions. the analogy of being and the participative structure of created beings. 11: “De la participación predicamental a la trascendental”. Part Two deals with Fabro’s theory on the nature and content of ens as primum cognitum and Fabro’s critique of Maritain’s and Gilson’s theory. the explanation of ens qua ens by its intrinsic and extrinsic causes.BEING AND PARTICIPATION chronological overview of Fabro’s texts in order to determine both the meanings of the different terms used and the range of their applications. 285-326. Plato. Romera looks at Fabro’s work from a predominantly noetical perspective and deals with two important elements of Fabro’s theory of metaphysical reflection: our initial apprehension of ens and our metaphysical knowledge of actus essendi. ch. Pensar el ser: ch. 2. Also important is A. Part Three concerns Fabro’s theory of our knowledge of actus essendi in metaphysics. Aristotle. VILLAGRASA. and in particular. and ch. Fabro. 4: “El método tomista según Fabro”. Fabro. In this overview. As indicated by the title. 265-284. Novelty of this dissertation To date. then. Part One of Romera’s work looks at Fabro’s interpretation of knowledge of being in Parmenides. Pensar el ser: análisis del conocimiento del “actus essendi” según C. in its intensive meaning of actus essendi. Villagrasa shows how Fabro’s proposal can gain clarity and rigor in light of St. creation. for Fabro. Contat’s 2008 article on the See L. ens as primum cognitum is grasped as a synthetic notion by means of apprehension and that esse. 46 See L. the determination of a task 45 28 . “La resolutio come metodo…”. the most complete presentation of Fabro’s theory of metaphysical reflection is found in Luis Romera’s Pensar el ser (1994)45. by esse and Ipsum Esse Subsistens. namely. Villagrasa’s 2001 article on resolutio as the proper method of metaphysics according to C. is grasped by the intellect at the end of a process called “intensive metaphysical reflection”46. Originally his doctoral dissertation (1991). Romera concludes that. ROMERA. Hegel and Heidegger. I concentrate more on the epistemological aspects and evolution of Fabro’s metaphysical thought and include a summary of the final stages of metaphysical reflection which regard the existence of God. I will include both the texts that directly deal with method and those that indirectly deal with it or apply this method to certain metaphysical problems. 29 . a subsequent resolution to the real distinction between essence and esse. 357-403) on Cornelio Fabro’s metaphysical thought and structures his presentation according to the distinction between resolutio secundum rationem and resolution secundum rem. Several other authors have dealt with Fabro’s metaphysics.INTRODUCTION ontological difference in four twentieth-century Thomists: J. on the relationship between essence and esse and on subsistence and accidental esse. A. Revue thomiste 111 (2011). and it is of inestimable value that he brought clarity to difficult or controversial passages in the Thomistic tradition. Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Contat effectively summarizes and assesses Fabro’s thought on when and how the “ontological difference” between ens and esse is established. and a third resolution to Ipsum Esse Subsistens and ens per participationem. and on the relationship between Aquinas’ real distinction and the metaphysics of Plato and Aristotle. Gilson. 1. Alpha Omega 11 (2008). 77-129 and 213-250. Città del Vaticano 1987. q. L’essere come atto nel tomismo essenziale di Cornelio Fabro. l’esse et la participation selon Cornelio Fabro”. 49 Alain Contat recently published an article (“L’étant. he lacks reference to the principal text of St. Both seek to summarize Fabro’s thought on being (esse) and causality and offer insight into the place of Fabro’s work within the broader context of twentieth-century Thomism. C. With respect to Fabro’s theory of metaphysical reflection. Tommaso. 6. PANGALLO. Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Pangallo has written two books on Fabro’s metaphysics: one on esse ut actus in Fabro’s “essential Thomism” (1987) and one on Fabro’s interpretation of the principle of causality (1991)50. Città del Vaticano 1991. Gonzalez’s Ser y Participación should be followed by the determination of the way to carry this out: the method. l’esse et la participation selon Cornelio Fabro”. 50 See M. Still lacking is a specific study by him on resolutio. In Boethii De Trinitate. yet to date and to my knowledge no one other than the three authors mentioned has dealt specifically and in-depth with the theme of the method and structure of Fabro’s metaphysical reflection49. CONTAT. Contat finds three “resolutions” at work: an initial resolution of ens to esse commune. Thomas. M.-D.. Revue thomiste 111 (2011). 357-403) on Cornelio Fabro’s metaphysical thought and structures his presentation according to the distinction between resolutio secundum rationem and resolution secundum rem. 48 A. Saggio di ontologia tomista alla luce dell’interpretazione di Cornelio Fabro. Idem. in his descriptions. It has been the merit of Fabro to call attention to Thomistic resolutio as the method of metaphysics. Maritain. a. where two diverse ways of resolution are distinguished”. E. Il Principio di causalità nella metafisica di S. Fabro and M. “Le figure della differenza ontologica nel tomismo del novecento”. Philippe48. Alain Contat published an article (“L’étant. L. 107-140 and G. PORCELLONI. Pontificia Universitas Sanctae Crucis. DALLEDONNE. 50 (1997). Maggioli. según Cornelio Fabro. however. 176-192. Rimini 1984.. “Dalla metafisica dell’atto alla verità dell’essere nel realismo tomistico”. “La conoscenza dell’essere in Fabro e Gilson”. “L’essere come atto e Dio in s. Fabro ha dedicado al tema. Eunsa. PIZZUTI. MONDIN. “La metafisica di S. CLAVELL. 7-32. 33-59. “L’itinerario metafisico di Cornelio Fabro”. yet is based in large part on two of Fabro’s articles on the Fourth Way51. Essere e libertà. Olivera Ravasi presented Fabro’s thought on the point of departure of St. at least four collections of articles touching on some aspects of Fabro’s metaphysics have been published: Essere e libertà (1984)54. See especially: M. Fabro”. Pontificia Università Lateranense. Veritatem in caritate: studi in onore di Cornelio Fabro in occasione dell’LXXX genetliaco. APRA. 54 See AA. 85-115. 73-87 and P. Thomas’s metaphysics (2007)53. Two doctoral dissertations on elements of Fabro’s metaphysics should also be mentioned: V. See A. To date. 155-188. “Prospettive per la fondazione di una metafisica dell’atto”. Il confronto di Cornelio Fabro. 56 See Euntes Docete. VV. OLIVERA RAVASI. are dedicated specifically to the theme of the method and structure of Fabro’s metaphysical reflection. 52 See V. Estudio sobre la cuarta vía de Tomás de Aquino. 55 See AA. Pamplona 19791. El punto de partida de la metafísica de santo Tomás de Aquino. See P.). None of the articles. See A. and J. 57 J. Roma 2007. 19952. B.BEING AND PARTICIPATION (1979) is not explicitly a treatise on Fabro’s metaphysics. Roma 1999. E. GONZÁLEZ. 61-84 and B. El fundamento metafísico de la relación entre las analogías de atribución y de proporcionalidad: La interpretación de Cornelio Fabro de la doctrina de Santo Tomás.. Studi in onore di Cornelio Fabro. Tommaso d’Aquino secondo Cornelio Fabro”. PANGALLO. “Le nozione tomistiche di ‘ens per participationem’ e di ‘esse ut actus’ nell’esegesi intensiva di Cornelio Fabro”. Roma 2006. Ser y participación. the 1997 volume of Euntes Docete56 and Neotomismo e suarezismo (2006)57. MAZZARELLA. Potenza 1991. I quote from the 1995 edition: “Mucho debe el autor de estas páginas a la lectura de los dos artículos que C. Cruz Amorós presented Fabro’s interpretation of the metaphysical foundation of analogy (1999)52. “La teoria della partecipazione tomista di Cornelio Fabro”. VV. 20). Veritatem in caritate (1991)55. Tommaso d’Aquino nell’interpretazione di C. 53 See J. CRUZ AMORÓS. Ermes. PELLECCHIA. Neotomismo e suarezismo. ellos fueron los que me condujeron a profundizar y a realizar este estudio de metafísica tomista” (p. VILLAGRASA (ed. 51 30 . The dissertation also clarifies the nature of Fabro’s use of historical-critical and critical-speculative methods in his interpretation of Parmenides. “The Dialectic of Participation”. sources. the epistemological locus of the real distinction in metaphysics. Throughout these years metaphysical reflection is spoken about primarily as a “resolution” and a “dialectical-reduction”. I present the essential lines of Fabro’s interpretation of this history from Parmenides to Heidegger and offer a general framework for the theme of metaphysical reflection in Fabro’s thought. To my knowledge. Plato. method and limits of the dissertation I have divided the dissertation into seven chapters. Division. the principal novelty of this dissertation lies in its comprehensive presentation of the method and structure of Fabro’s metaphysical reflection. the role of the notion of participation in Thomistic metaphysics and the demonstration of the real distinction between essence and esse in creatures. the ultimate foundation of the real distinction in terms of exemplary and efficient causality. “Fabro’s Interpretation of the History of Metaphysics”. I look at Fabro’s thought on metaphysical reflection in his foundational works (1931-1942). In Chapter Two. In Chapter Three. Aquinas. These works deal with the foundation of the principle of causality. In these first works. “The Resolution of Ens”. the dissertation is the first major work in English dedicated exclusively to Fabro’s metaphysics and contains one of the most complete presentations of Fabro’s interpretation of the history of metaphysics. the metaphysical foundation of analogy. Heidegger and others.INTRODUCTION Therefore. 3. Aristotle. The dissertation traces the evolution of Fabro’s thought on the problem of the method and structure of metaphysical reflection and provides an important summary of Fabro’s views on some of the more difficult questions in Thomistic metaphysics: questions such as the participative structure of created beings. I look at the development of Fabro’s work on metaphysical reflection in his works from 1943 to 1959. In Chapter One. and the dynamic and foundation of the Fourth Way. metaphysical method appears as “intensive metaphysical abstraction”. giving particular attention to his Metaphysica course notes (1948-1949). By frequently referring to the work of other Thomists who have commented on and critiqued Fabro’s work. the dissertation works toward the establishment of a status quaestionis of Fabro’s contribution to twentieth-century Thomistic metaphysics. Hegel. 31 . “dialectical ascension” and “formal resolution”. Casale Monferrato 2000. and critiques the theory of those who reduce the grasping of actus essendi to judgment. Regarding the sources of this dissertation. Ens is primum cognitum due to the absolute priority of esse. are an adequate response to the philosophical demands and shortcomings of the thought of Kant. Fabro sees metaphysical reflection as an intensification of ens by means of a progressive understanding of esse. PIEMME. articles and unpublished texts on metaphysics. In Chapter Six. “The Structure of Metaphysical Reflection”. I consider Fabro’s work on metaphysical reflection in the many articles he published from 1960 to 1995. Hegel and Heidegger. reduction and foundation. esse is implicitly grasped within this primum cognitum and that it is the task of metaphysics to bring this esse out and explain the foundational role esse has with respect to ens in the order of reality. my investigation is based on 23 of Fabro’s 35 books. I look at Fabro’s theory of metaphysical reflection in relation to dynamic. on the other. Fabro speaks of the method of metaphysical reflection in terms of resolution. In them. In Chapter Five. In contrast to the latter theory. ens as primum cognitum provides a foundation and principle for knowledge and science. IBID. 58 32 . I have limited myself primarily to Fabro’s books. I establish the structure of his metaphysical reflection based on the method of resolutio-reductio and critically assess some of Fabro’s positions on certain metaphysical questions.. according to Fabro. Several sections of the book were published as articles during this same period. “The Method of Metaphysical Reflection”. In both cases we are dealing with “foundations” which. La prima riforma della dialettica hegeliana. while. causal participation as found in Partecipazione e causalità (1954-1961)58. By studying and analyzing Fabro’s texts in chronological order throughout chapters two through five. two posthumous works59 and I use the dates 1954-1961 to highlight the fact that the book published in Italian in 1960 and in French 1961. Libro dell’esistenza e della libertà vagabonda. over 100 of his more than 900 articles and book reviews. I present a synthesis and critique of Fabro’s proposal of resolutio-reductio as the proper method of Thomistic metaphysics.BEING AND PARTICIPATION In Chapter Four. In total. “The Reduction to Fundament”. FABRO. In Chapter Seven. Segni 2004. “The Emergence of Esse”. yet was first presented at the University of Louvain in 1954. on the one hand. I am able to establish the slight evolution and strong continuity in his thought on the method of metaphysical reflection. Editrice del Verbo Incarnato. Fabro continually calls attention to the fact that. 59 C. I hope to present Fabro’s proposal in its entirety. “A Note on certain Textual evidence in Fabro’s Nozione Metafisicia di Partecipazione”. I have purposely refrained from comparing Fabro’s proposal regarding the method of metaphysical reflection with the theories of Gilson. Fabro’s interpretations of the metaphysics of Aristotle. Needless to say. With regard to the parameters I have set for the dissertation. 391-409. In this way. see R. Necessitas objectiva. I have sought Principii causalitatis. I would like to stress that Chapter One is of an introductory nature and that. Maritain.. 61 For example. “Gli studi sull’ontologia tomista: status quaestionis”. More recently: G. Essere nel mondo (1978-1979). Neo-Platonism. Essere e verità (1966-1967). such investigations go beyond the scope and limits of this dissertation.INTRODUCTION nine as-yet unpublished texts and course notes60. In Chapter One. “Saint Thomas’ Methodology in the Treatment of ‘Postitiones’ with Particular Reference to ‘Positiones Platonicae’”. Ostenditur et defenditur secundum philosophiam scholasticam ab impugnationibus Humii (1931). J. the dissertation constitutes a veritable “compendium” of Fabro’s metaphysics. Idem. Essere e libertà (1967-1968). Aquinas. Aquinas 38 (1995). VENTIMIGLIA. placing Fabro in the second generation. 265-282. as a result. Ventimiglia distinguishes three generations of Thomistic interpretation of St. Geiger and other prominent Thomists. Essere nel corpo (1979-1980). 63-96. I follow a predominantly synthetic method in the presentation of Fabro’s work and reserve analysis and critical evaluation to the conclusions of the various chapters and chapters six and seven. directing my attention to those authors who have critiqued or commented explicitly on Fabro’s work. The dissertation takes into account over 130 books and articles which have dealt with or touched on different aspects of Fabro’s metaphysics. HENLE. Essere e pensiero (1963-1964). 60 33 . The Modern Schoolman 34 (1957). Metaphysica (1948-1949). In the dissertation. In doing so. Gregorianum 32 (1955). Given the synthetic nature of the presentation of Fabro’s interpretation of the history of metaphysics and the chronological exposition of Fabro’s metaphysical works in chapters two through five. Essere nell’io (1980-1981). Hegel and Heidegger each merit more in-depth and complete studies which would need to follow a more exegetical approach in the study of the texts involved and compare and contrast Fabro’s interpretation with the results of more specialized studies and other interpretations61. I have limited any analysis of Fabro’s interpretation of the history of metaphysics to the essentials. Essere ed esistenza in Hegel (1957-1958). I hope to open up several venues for scholars to take up comparative work in the future. Thomas’s Neo-Platonic sources.