德呂巴克與多瑪斯論自然渴望見神初探

Henri de Lubac and Thomas Aquinas on the Natural Desire to See God

林約光(Yueh-Kuan LIN)

自然渴望見神 ； 對幸福的普遍渴望 ； 質料 ； 種子原理 ； 二種欲求與幸福 ； Natural Desire to See God ； Universal Desire for Happiness ； Matter ； Rationes Seminales ； Two Kinds of Appetite and Happiness

哲學與文化

48卷11期（2021 / 11 / 01）

67 - 89

繁體中文

本文企圖探討當代法國神學家德呂巴克關於人的自然渴望見神的主張及其與多瑪斯的關係。本文首先試圖理解他倡議的動機與反駁純粹自然概念的理由。其次，從歷史的角度，我們將探討奧古斯丁如何論述人對幸福的普遍渴望，發現其與人性悖論之關聯。再次，我們將從多瑪斯的早期著作著手，分析他如何在奧古斯丁主義者與亞里斯多德主義者的意見爭論中，提出對自然渴望見神的創見。多瑪斯主張質料具有多樣潛能性，能接受更高的形式，而種子原理被視為是放置在質料中的能力。因此自然事物的「質料—潛能—自然」本體結構被確立。在此基礎上，多瑪斯明確區分二種欲求與二種幸福，因此看見神的自然欲求不能自行成為看見神的理性欲求，除非新的形式的注入。最後，我們也將從三一形象論的角度簡要分析多瑪斯對自然渴望見神的看法。多瑪斯不僅顧及聖經與奧古斯丁的傳統，他也確立人性的自主與完整。在結論部分，德呂巴克與多瑪斯的同與異將陳明。

This article attempts to explore de Lubac's opinion about man's natural desire to see God and its relationship with Thomas Aquinas. First, I try to understand the motivation of his proposal and the reason for refuting the concept of pure nature. Secondly, from a historical perspective, I will explore how Augustine discussed man's universal desire for happiness, and discover its connection with the paradox of human nature. Thirdly, beginning with Thomas' early works, his innovative discourse regarding natural desire to see God will be analyzed. Thomas maintains that matter has pluripotentiality and can accept higher forms and regards the rationes seminales as the powers placed in matters. Therefore, the ontological structure of the natural things in relation to ＂matter-potency-nature＂ is established. On this basis, Thomas clearly distinguishes two kinds of appetite and two kinds of happiness, so that a natural appetite for the vision of God by itself cannot become a rational appetite for the vision of God except the infusion of the new form. Finally, Thomas' position will be further discussed from perspective of the theory of Trinitarian image. In the conclusion, the agreement and disagreement between de Lubac and Thomas will be indicated.

1. Aertsen, Jan A.(1996).Medieval Philosophy and the Transcendentals: The Case of Thomas Aquinas.Leiden:Brill.
2. Aertsen, Jan A.(2012).Medieval Philosophy as Transcendental Thought: From Philip the Chancellor (ca. 1225) to Francisco Suárez.Leiden:Brill.
3. Augustine,Williams, Thomas(Trans. notes)(2019).Confessions.Indianapolis:Hackett Publishing Company.
4. Bobik, Joseph(1998).Aquinas on Matter and Form and the Elements: A Translation and Interpretation of the De principiis naturae and the De mixtione elementorum of St. Thomas Aquinas.Notre Dame, Ind:Univ. of Notre Dame Pr..
5. Boersma, Hans(2009).Nouvelle Théologie and Sacramental Ontology: A Return to Mystery.Oxford:Oxford Univ. Pr..
6. Borgo, Marta(2013).Early Aquinas on Matter: Notes on the Reception of the Aristotelian Corpus in the 13th Century.Tópicos,45,83-128.
7. De Lubac, Henri. Surnaturel: É tudes historiques. Paris: Aubier, 1946.
8. De Lubac, Henri,Sheed, Rosemary(Trans.),Schindler, David L.(intro.)(1998).The Mystery of the Supernatural.New York:The Crossroad Publishing Company.
9. De Lubac, Henri,Sheppard, Lancelot(Trans.)(1969).Augustinianism and Modern Theology.New York:Herder and Herder.
10. Doolan, Gregory(2008).Aquinas on the Divine Ideas as Exemplar Causes.Washington, D.C.:The Catholic Univ. of America Pr..
11. Feingold, Lawrence(2010).The Natural Desire to See God According to St. Thomas and His Interpreters.Ave Maria, FL:Sapientia Pr. of Ave Maria Univ..
12. Lin, Yueh-Kuan(2019).Universität zu Köln.
13. Mansini, Guy(2009).The Abiding Theological Significance of Henri De Lubac’s Surnaturel.The Thomist,73(4),593-619.
14. Mayer, R. Johannes(2008).Zum desiderium naturale visionis Dei nach Johannes Duns Scotus und Thomas de Vio Cajetan: Eine Anmerkung zum Denken Henri De Lubacs.Angelicum,85(3),737-763.
15. Mayer, R. Johannes(2009).Stockwerkphilosophie gegen Stockwerktheologie. Zum desiderium naturale bei Henri de Lubac und Thomas von Aquin.Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie,56(1),164-193.
16. Merriell, Donald J.(1990).To the Image of the Trinity: A Study in the Development of Aquinas’ Teaching.Toronto, Ont.:Pontif. Inst. of Mediaeval Studies.
17. Nisula, Timo(2012).Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence.Leiden:Brill.
18. O’Donnell, James J.(1992).Augustine: Confessions, Vol. 2. Commentary on Books 1-7.Oxford:Oxford Univ. Pr..
19. Pilsner, Joseph(2006).The Specification of Human Actions in St Thomas Aquinas.Oxford:Oxford Univ. Pr..
20. Speer, Andreas(1999).Principalissimum fundamentum. Die Stellung des Guten und das Metaphysikverständnis Bonaventuras.Die Metaphysik und das Gute: Aufsätze zu ihrem Verhältnis in Antike und Mittelalter: Jan. A. Aertsen zu Ehren,Leuven:
21. Te Velde, Rudi A.(2017).Partnership with God: Thomas Aquinas on Human Desire and God’s Grace.Nova et Vetera (English Edition),15(4),1151-1175.
22. van Nieuwenhove, Rik(Ed.)(2005).The Theology of Thomas Aquinas.Notre Dame, Ind.:Univ. of Notre Dame Pr..
23. Verschoren, Marleen(2002).The Appearance of the Concept concupiscentia in Augustine’s Early Antimanichaean Writings (388-391).Augustiniana,52,199-240.
24. Wood, Jacob W.(2019).To Stir a Restless Heart: Thomas Aquinas and Henri de Lubac on Nature, Grace, and the Desire for God.Washington, D.C.:The Catholic Univ. of America Pr..