And on Saint Thomas Aquinas, if you think he taught the protestant heresy of Sola Scriptura:
“On the contrary, The universal Church cannot err, since she is governed by the Holy Ghost, Who is the Spirit of truth: for such was Our Lord’s promise to His disciples (John 16:13): “When He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will teach you all truth.” Now the symbol is published by the authority of the universal Church. Therefore it contains nothing defective.” [Summa Theologica, II-II, 1, 9]
and again he writes:
“The Apostles, led by the inward instinct of the Holy Ghost, handed down to the churches certain instructions which they did not put in writing, but which have been ordained, in accordance with the observance of the Church as practiced by the faithful as time went on. Wherefore the Apostle says (2 Thessalonians 2:14): “Stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word”—that is by word of mouth—”or by our epistle”—that is by word put into writing.[Summa Theologica, III, 25, 3 ad 4]
The Angelic Doctor also wrote:
“Now the formal object of faith is the First Truth, as manifested in Holy Writ and the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the First Truth. Consequently whoever does not adhere, as to an infallible and Divine rule, to the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the First Truth manifested in Holy Writ, has not the habit of faith...........Now it is manifest that he who adheres to the teaching of the Church, as to an infallible rule, assents to whatever the Church teaches; otherwise, if, of the things taught by the Church, he holds what he chooses to hold, and rejects what he chooses to reject, he no longer adheres to the teaching of the Church as to an infallible rule, but to his own will.............. Faith adheres to all the articles of faith by reason of one mean, viz. on account of the First Truth proposed to us in Scriptures, according to the teaching of the Church who has the right understanding of them. Hence whoever abandons this mean is altogether lacking in faith. (Summa, Pt. II-II, Question 5, Art. 3).
So the claim Saint Thomas Aquinas was Luther is false. Aquinas was a great Theologian, among the best, and is 1 of 30 something [I forget the number] Doctors of the Church. I attended primary and Junior high school run by the Dominicans and have great admiration for the Dominican Tradition and he always put himself in service of the Church, not above it.
That Aquinas had a great love of Scripture. No surprise. He also had a great love of the Eucharist and wrote many of the Great Eucharistic Hyms Tantum ergo, Pangia Lingua, etc. He also was one the major theologians on providing the Theological/Philosophical definition of Transubstantiation as it related to the Holy Eucharist.
If you are implying that he was crypto Lutheran, that is laughable.
You would be a lot more enjoyable to talk with if you’d leave the snarky comments behind and have a discussion.
I don’t expect you to change your mind and unless you present evidence I’ve not already considered and rejected as not persuasive, you certainly won’t change mine.
That leaves a reasoned discussion between two FReepers. If that isn’t what you want, just say so or bow out or whatever. If it isn’t what you want - meaning you want to attack me, make snarky remarks, not even consider evidence, etc., no problem. I’ll do the same.
What’s it gonna be? Are you in this to discuss, or do you have a different motive?