religion and spirituality

The people of his time and culture knew him as "Tommaso D'Aquino." We know him as Thomas Aquinas ... but we also know him as probably the greatest, most systematic thinker that Christianity has ever produced. This five-volume work is the classic Dominican translation of his SUMMA THEOLOGIAE and is probably the most widely used English translation of the work. (As an aside, you may enjoy the encyclical of Pope Leo XIII that sought to rebuild Roman Catholic philosophy and theology on the work of Aquinas; it is included in this edition.) If your love is classic catholic theology, you need a copy of this work in your library. All of Roman Catholic theology was firmly based upon it for centuries and it remains an important foundation for modern catholic theology. Whether you buy it new or get yourself a used copy, you will enjoy the clear thinking process that Aquinas used as he explored the issues and questions of faith. Laid out question by question as Aquinas originally intended, this classic version of his work will endure for as long as the church endures. Though Aquinas seems to have suffered a breakdown at the end of his life and though he pronounced all of his work "but straw," I doubt that you'll agree with that assessment when you venture into this masterpiece.

Anybody who seriously studies theology and/or philosophy, especially those who are Roman Catholic, must have some knowledge of this timeless classic written by St. Thomas Aquinas.

I heartily recommend this English translation of the Summa Theologica; however, if you want to do scholarly research, it would be best to get your hands on a copy of a good Latin version. A good Latin version provides access to many nuances not adequately expressed in the English translation.

Serious and orthodox Catholics, especially, will discover the Summa Theologica to be an endless font of knowledge and wisdom.

If you are a non-specialist or a person with little background in philosophical-theology and the history of ideas, it would be wise to find a companion to guide you. For this purpose, I recommend anything on the topic written by Rev. Dr. Brian Davies, OP (Oxford University), Rev. Dr. Armand Maurer, OSA (Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies), Dr. Ralph McInerny (University of Notre Dame), and/or Dr. Eleonore Stump (Saint Louis University). Be careful not to read St. Thomas blindly without guides who have truly studied his thought. These scholars will provide much needed background and prerequisite knowledge.

You might get the idea from some of these postings that only Catholics could care about Thomas, especially hearing about how he manages to theologically justify some, ah, rather untheological matters (if you have read some of these reviews, you will know what I mean). This is quite false. Most of the Summa is quite interesting to anyone interested in philosophy, especially the two traditions that Thomas inherited and synthesized, the Aristotelian and the Augustinian. Near the very beginning, he divides off the formal features of God (eternity, immutability, simplicity, et cetera) from the attributes proper, which is a very fruitful means to begin. I've also found his work on the will, and on ethics generally, to be insightful, and I think that the kind of concreteness that characterizes Thomas' treatment of the will is incredibly profitable.

I've never read the Summa from cover to cover - indeed, I doubt that too many of the reviewers here have - but there is much here to feast upon for philosophers and theologians of all traditions, especially those interested in Virtue Ethics (a movement I confess I have great sympathy for). Don't be frightened off from it simply because some Catholics act as if the Summa IS Catholicism itself. I think that is a rather naive view, since it is clear that (1) Catholicism has changed a fair bit since Thomas' time, and (2) as Chesterton said, the Catholic Church is bigger on the inside than on the outside - so even within the RCC, there can be huge controversy over some points, such as whether to adopt a Thomistic conception of providence or a Molinist one.

Detractions? Some of his speculative work is, by my lights, too speculative, but this does not detract from the many arguments that are rich, deep, and grounded. Read Thomas for what he does in fact argue, and judge for yourself where he is successful, or where he at least provides fruitful insight.