<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>aquinas at Yahoo! Groups</title>
    <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/</link>
    <description>The aquinas list is intended to support thoughtful, respectful conversation about the works and ideas of St. Thomas Aquinas and</description>

    <item>
      <title>Re: On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatis</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 16:42:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Doug Mounce</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8624</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8624</guid>
      <description>Hi rglen, I would say `yes&#39;, that, &quot;the adequation of the intellect is the first meaning of the word... &quot;  To be clear, because &quot;adequation&quot; deserves its own</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatis</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 01:19:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>rglencoughlin</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8623</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8623</guid>
      <description>What I meant by saying theology would be part of revealed knowledge is that, if we could know by a theological argument that something really was implied by</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatis</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 01:12:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>rglencoughlin</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8622</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8622</guid>
      <description>It does seem St. Thomas means by &quot;sacra doctrina&quot; not theology as a developed discipline, but revealed knowledge, part of which would be theology. He is really</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatis</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 01:08:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>rglencoughlin</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8621</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8621</guid>
      <description>Certainly the way a thing is the reason a statement about is true, so in some way it is a cause of truth. But the main question I meant to ask is whether the</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatis</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 21:47:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Doug Mounce</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8620</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8620</guid>
      <description>I would say that a thing cannot cause either truth or being.  Regardless of the first cause of a thing, things have the features of truth and being, but things</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatis</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 06:37:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>rglencoughlin</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8619</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8619</guid>
      <description>It seems to me that the first meaning of &quot;truth&quot; is the adequation of the intellect to the thing (Cf. q. 16, I think), but that when we say being is</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatis</title>
      <pubDate>Sun, 28 Apr 2013 02:23:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>mjdubroy</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8618</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8618</guid>
      <description>A few more quick thoughts on point 3: I&#39;m not sure what translation you are reading but either you misquoted it or it seems to obscure the point a bit.  The</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatis</title>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Apr 2013 17:53:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>mjdubroy</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8617</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8617</guid>
      <description>A few more quick thoughts about point 2: The Latin of the words you are referring to are convenientius et certius. They are the comparative forms of &quot;fitting&quot;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatis</title>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Apr 2013 14:06:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>mjdubroy</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8616</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8616</guid>
      <description>Some quick thoughts about the first point: 1. First, maybe it is helpful to understand what that claim means to say that truth is convertible with being.  This</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatis</title>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:23:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>andrewkench</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8615</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8615</guid>
      <description>Hi friends, In question one, St. Thomas distinguishes theology from philosophy. Do we really need theology when we have philosophy? seems to be the question.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>On Question I, The Nature and Extent on Sacred Doctrine, Treatise on</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:49:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>andrewkench</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8614</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8614</guid>
      <description>Aquinas writes: &quot;To place our purpose within proper limits, it is necessary first to investigate the nature and extent of this sacred doctrine.&quot; So St. Thomas</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On the &quot;Prologue&quot; of the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas.</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:36:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>andrewkench</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8613</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8613</guid>
      <description>Hi Dan, Since the intellectual virtues are most likely the habits of mind that Aquinas has in mind for us, I reviewed the original text on them. Aristotle</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On the &quot;Prologue&quot; of the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas.</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2013 22:07:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Doug Mounce</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8612</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8612</guid>
      <description>Thanks Victor, I appreciate that.  God does not equal matter, so I don&#39;t mind letting matter change within what is changeless, but do others agree with that</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On the &quot;Prologue&quot; of the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas.</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2013 21:51:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>VictorM</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8611</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8611</guid>
      <description>... All systems of philosophy begin with a first principle, which is how philosophy ends up affecting theology. Aquinas had an important influence on the</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: On the &quot;Prologue&quot; of the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas.</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:29:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Doug Mounce</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8610</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aquinas/message/8610</guid>
      <description>Another possible foundation, prior to asking questions, might be to reflect on what you believe without either proof or derivation; what they call in physics a</description>
    </item>

  </channel>
</rss>
<!-- rss1.grp.bf1.yahoo.com uncompressed Fri May 24 01:50:02 PDT 2013 -->
