Philosophy’s Resurrection

Richard Fishacre on Theology, Light, and the Stars

Bibliographic Data

ID21363395
AuthorsW J Crozier (0000-0003-0600-2640, Durham University, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume105
Issue4
Pages384-400
Publication date2024-07-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueNew Blackfriars (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0028-4289 • E-ISSN: 1741-2005
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/nbf.2024.7
OpenAlexW4391941117
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited1

This article explores Richard Fishacre’s (1200–1248) thinking on the relationship between theology and philosophy. It shows how, despite constructing what, on the surface at least, appears to be a traditional understanding of theology’s relationship to philosophy, Fishacre in practice offers a very creative interpretation of how the two sciences interact. For Fishacre, theology does not simply illumine philosophy by guiding it away from error. Instead, it steps into the fray of ordinary philosophical dispute so as to uncover novel ways of reading natural phenomena, ones which philosophy, by itself at least, is blind to. To demonstrate how this is so, the article explores how Fishacre appeals to Christ’s resurrected body to justify some of his most controversial arguments in the field of natural philosophy. Two specific areas are considered: Fishacre’s claim that light in medio is a body and his assertion that the stars and planets are made from the terrestrial elements as opposed to the celestial quintessence, as Aristotle claims. Each of these aspects of Fishacre’s physics show how, for the Dominican, theology can, when appropriate, step onto the philosophical plane and help the natural philosopher to discover truths that go against the philosophical consensus

Astronomy · Physics · Stars · Theology · Historical Philosophy and Science · Philosophy

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access