§ 108. THOMAS AQUINAS. 675
death the settled policy of the Church and the State. At any rate he cleared away all objections as far as it was pos sible to clear them away. Heresy, as has already been said, he taught, is a crime to be punished like coin-clipping. No one may be compelled to enter the Church, but once having entered it and turned heretic, he must, if necessary, be forced by violent measures to obey the faith — hceretici sunt compellendi utfidem teneant. It will thus be seen from this sur vey, which is supplemented in the chapters on the sacra ments, the future state and Mariology, that the theology of the Angelic doctor and the theology of the Roman Catholic Church are identical in all particulars except the immaculate conception. He who understands Thomas understands the mediaeval theology at its best and will be in possession of the doctrinal system of the Roman Church.
Thomas Aquinas was elevated by the Dominican order to the position of authoritative teacher in 1286. His scholars were numerous, but his theology was not universally accepted.
Some of his statements were condemned by the University of Paris as early as 1277, and about 1285 William of Ware, l trained at Oxford, which was a citadel of the Franciscans, wrote against the eminent Dominican. Soon after the death of the Franciscan Duns Scotus, the differences between him and Thomas were emphasized, and involved the two orders in controversy for centuries. No less than eighty-six theo logical differences between these two teachers were tabulated. 2
The theology of Thomas Aquinas controlled Dante. The first printed commentary on the Summa was written by Car dinal Cajetan, Venice, 1507-1522. The Thomists lost by the decree of the immaculate conception of Mary, 1854. That doctrine had been the chief bone of contention between them
1 A number of MSS. left by Ware are preserved in Oxford.
2 In the controversies theol. inter Thomam et Scotum, by De Rada, the Franciscan bishop of Trani, Cologne, 1620. Werner devotes the whole third volume of his Life of Thomas, filling 876 pages, to the posthumous influence of Thomas. It takes up the teaching of his pupils, the conflicts with the Franciscans and Jesuits, etc., and brings in the names of Des Cartes, Leib nitz, Malbranche, Schelling, etc. See also art. Thomismus und Scotismus, in Wetzer-Welte, XI. 1699-1710.
676 THE MIDDLE AGES. A.D. 1049-1294.
and the Franciscans. The decision of Leo XIII., making Thomas' theology and philosophy the standard for all Catho lic teaching, has again, as it were, equallized matters.
The Protestant Reformers, in their indignation against the Scholastic theology, could not do justice to Thomas Aquinas. Luther went so far as to call his Summa the quintessence of all heresies, meaning papal doctrines. He spoke of him as " the fountain and original soup of all heresy, error, and Gos pel havoc, as his books bear witness." l " You are much to be condemned," Luther said to Prierias, "for daring to obtrude upon us, as articles of faith, the opinions of that sainted man, Thomas, and his frequent false conclusions." On one occasion, he compared Thomas to the star of the book of Revelation which fell from heaven, the empty speculations of Aristotle to the smoke of the bottomless pit, the univer sities to the locusts, and Aristotle himself to his master Apollyon.2
Such polemic extravagances have long since yielded to a more just, historical estimate of this extraordinary man. Thomas merits our admiration by his candor and clearness as a systematic theologian, and by his sincerity and purity as an ethical thinker. In the great fundamentals of the Chris tian system he was scriptural and truly catholic. His errors were the errors of his age above which he was not able to rise, as three centuries later the clear and logical Protestant theologian, John Calvin, was not able in some important par ticulars to rise above the beliefs current in his time, and that in spite of his diligent study of the Scriptures and wide acquaintance with their teachings.
The papal estimate, as given expression to in the encycli cals of Leo XIII. , is a practical denial of any progress in theology since the thirteenth century, and in effect ignores the scientific discoveries of ages. From the standpoint of an unalterable Catholic orthodoxy, Leo made no mistake in fixing upon Thomas Aquinas as the model expounder of
1 Thomas war der Brunn und Grundsuppe aller Ketzerei^ Irrthumb und Vertilgung des Evangelium wie seme Bucher beweisen. Erl. ed. , 24. 240.
2 Kostlin, Leben M. Luthers, I. 431.