Bronisław Dembowski
Reception of the Encyclical "Aeterni
Patris" in Poland
Collectanea Theologica 46/Fasciculus specialis, 187-203
C ollectanea T heologica 46 (1976) fasc. sp ecialis
BRONISLAW DEMBOWSKI, W ARSZAW A
RECEPTION OF THE ENCYCLICAL "AETERNI PATRIS” IN POLAND
The encyclical A eterni Patris of Pope L e o XIII prom ulgated on A ugust 4, 1879, had exercised an enorm ous influence on the rev ival of scholastic thinking w hich began a few decades before and is know n as the neoscholastic movement, for short neoschola sticism 1. The present study aims to fill the gap in the history of philo sophical thinking in Poland, and to show the bearing of the en cy clical in the Polish philosophical centers and the reception it met with.
The w hole study can be divided into four groups of problems: 1) C hristian philosophizing in Poland before the encyclical, 2) the m ain points of teaching in the encyclical, 3) the evaluation of the encyclical in Poland, 4) the response of the philosophers to the recom m endations of the encyclical.
1. Christian Philosophical Thinking in Poland before the Encyclical
W e can say, in a general way, that the main issue of Christian philosophy in Poland, in the middle of 19th century, w as the defence of faith th reaten ed by the rationalistic attitude. The attacks of reasoning w ere seem ingly twofold: on the one hand from the alread y in decay, n ev ertheless still fascinating idealistic philosophy
1 Cf. v a n R i e t , L 'E pis té m olo gie th o m is te , Louvain 1946 (on n eo sch o la sti cism before the en cy clica l A e t e r n i Patris, pp. 1— 114); cf. also E. G i l s o n ,
F rench and Italian P h ilosophy, in: A H is t o r y oi P h ilosophy, E. G i l s o n gen.
of a post-hegelian type, w ith its pantheistic conclusions not com pat ible w ith faith in a Personal God and the personal hum an soul. On the other hand the th reat was brought by the new philosophy of scientists i.e. positivism w ich had all the fascination of novelty and w as also attractiv e by its optim istic and uncom m ensurable faith in scientific approach to know ledge w hich had to solve all problem s w ith the certitude of exact sciences w ithout any need of religious in terpretation of the world, and sometimes against th at in terp ret ation.
In this situation C hristian philosophers adopted th ree positions w hich can be labelled, respectively: catholic philosophers, positiv- istic philosophers and scholasticists.
a) C a t h o l i c P h i l o s o p h e r s . This nam e w as given to those scholars who rep resen ted the view that rational thinking could not disagree w ith religion. They w anted to rationalize faith and tried to in terp ret its m ysteries in such m anner th a t it w ould be com patible w ith still influential idealism of H e g e l . Their re-in- terpretatio n of dogmas had to conform w ith the achievem ents of th e "g reat philosophy”. This attitude often resulted practically in a subordination of faith and revealed tru th to idealistic philosophical principles. Polish catholic philosophers developed, therefore, a kind of 'philosophical fideism ” resem bling that of G ü n t h e r and B a a d e r in Germany, and p artly probably under their influence. They, how ever, saw the danger of pantheism, and rejected it as unable to save the idea of P ersonal God and individual, personal hum an soul. Then they w ould adopt the standpoint of French traditionalists like B a u t a i n , d e B o n a l d and d e L a m - m e n a i s .
In this w ay they have becom e fideistic in their approach to re ligion. The catholic philosophers w ere betw een Scylla and C harybd is: either they changed religion into philosophy and accepted the la tte r in a specific act of faith: or they changed know ledge into belief. They w ere not y et able to find such a solution of the problem of relationship betw een know ledge and faith w hich would accept and respect the autonom y of philosophy as a science, and of re ligion in w hich the reason w ould have its share and proper place, it means the role of philosophy in a faith-act2.
The representatives of catholic philosophers w ere, among others, E. Z i e m i ę c k a (she called hers and sim ilar position ■—
2 Cf. В. D e m b o w s k i , Spór o m e t a f i z y k ę (The D ispute on M etaphysics), W arszaw a 1969, 25 (further called: T h e Dispute).
.A ETE R N I P A T R IS ” IN P O L A N D 189 catholic philosophizing)3, F. В о с h w i с4, J. M a j о г к i e w i с z5,
M. J a k u b o w i c z 6, F ather F. K o z ł o w s k i 7, Father W. S e г - w a t o w s к i8. Their w ritings reflect the above m entioned attitudes
3 Eleonora G a g a t k i e w i c z - Z i e m i ę c k a (1814 or 1819— 1869) in her ea r ly period follow er of the H egelian idealism . She b eliev ed — under the in flu en ce of G ü n t h e r and B a a d e r — that this system w as a stronghold of religiou s truth. She saw the danger of pantheism and started publishing a perio d ic a l „Pielgrzym" (The Pilgrim) 1842—46. In it she fostered traditionalism against pantheism . She cooperated w ith J. J. K r a s z e w s k i (a contem porary writer of renown) w ho held a high opinion of her. She exch an ged sharp polem ical v ie w s w ith B. T r e n t o w s k i . She formed around her a circle of Christian thinkers w ho tried to so lv e the problem of relationship betw een faith and k n ow led ge in the light of the Church's teaching. Main works: M y ś l i o iilozoiii, B iblioteka W arszaw ska 1841: K il k a sl o w o Schellin gu, A theneum 1844: Z a r y s y
Iilo zo iii k a to l ic k i e j, W arszaw a 1857.
4 Florian В o c h w i c (1799— 1856) landlord, fervent advocate of peasants' enfranchisem ent: in his endeavours to recon cile faith and philosophy, he united cath olic dogm as w ith the attitude of French traditionalists in an aw kward com bination, m aking R evelation the p ivot of all cognition. H e w anted to reconcile h is v ie w s with the id ealistic ph ilosop h y of religion of Schelling and w ith th eo lo g ica l thinking of B a a d e r and G ü n t h e r . M ain works: O braz m y ś l i m o je j
n a p a m ią tk ą e g z y s t e n c y i m o j e j ż o n i e i dziecio m , W ilno 1838; Obraz m y ś l i m o j e j n a pa m ią tką żo n ie i dziecio m , W ilno 1839: O braz m y ś li m o je j o celu czło w ieka ,
W iln o 1841; Z a s a d y m y ś l i i uc zu ć m oich, W ilno 1842.
5 J a n M a j o r k i e w i c z (1820— 1847) collaborator of E. D e m b o w s k i , y o u n g philosopher follow er of H e g e l . Sim ilarly to G ü n t h e r and B a a d e r h e tried to recon cile philosophy w ith faith and feelin gs but proposed the leading r o le to reason and, therefore, subordinated th eo lo g y to id ealistic philosophy. H ow ever, he claim ed im m ortality of the soul and the ex isten ce of a personal God. M ain works: H isto ry a serca i r o z u m u (uczucia i w i e d z y ) published posthum ously in 1851.
6 M aksym ilian J a k u b o w i c z (1785— 1853), cla ssica l p hilologist, professor o f Liceum K rzem ienieckie (High School of great renown) up to 1832, from 1834 professor in K iev and M oscow (till 1842). A ware of the danger of pantheism in H e g e l ' s philosophy, his position w as that of traditionalism . He w as a radical fid eist and claim ed that philosophy could not consider God and nature w ithout th e light of R evelation. But it could deal w ith issu es pertinent to man's problems, and all human problem s. It has to be done in clo se unity w ith religion to w hich p h ilosop h y ought to be subordinated. Main work: C h rześ cija ń s ka iilo zolia życia
w p o r ó w n a n iu z filo zofią n a sz e g o w i e k u p a n te i s t y c z n e g o , W ilno 1853.
7 Feliks K o z ł o w s k i (1803— 1872) insurgent of 1831 (Great Uprising of Polish regular Army against the czarist R ussia), emigrant, law yer, 1859 returned to Poland and w as ordained priest in Gniezno in 1861. H e had a dispute w ith T r e n t o w s k i about pantheistic elem ents in his philosophy. H im self a traditio nalist subordinated philosophy to R evelation and saw the criterion of truth in comm on consent. Main work: S t o s u n e k w ia r y u m y s ł o w e j do w ia r y o b ja w io n ej, 1843; Po czą tki fi lozofii c h r z e ś c ij a ń s k ie j w łą c z n i e z k r y t y k ą filozofii B. F. T ren to w -
s k ie g o , v ol. 1— 2, 1845.
8 W alerian S e r w a t o w s k i (1810— 1891) ordained priest in Lwów 1836. A theologian w hose philosophizing w as a defen ce of Catholicism against the errors of H egel and his follow ers. H e tries to g iv e rigorous precision to the term "Catholic Philosophy". He had a polem ic w ith T r e n t o w s k i . He com pletely subordinated p h ilosophy to th eo lo g y and faith thus representing the fideistic attitude. Main works: P ierw o rys s y s t e m u filo zofii z e s t a n o w i s k a c h rz e śc ija ń sk ie g o
of the French traditionalists and of German idealists and sometimes, a characteristic for Polish thinkers, M essianism. The w orks of G ü n t h e r and B a a d e r exercised strong influence on B o c h - w i с and M a j o r k i e w i c z . The French scholars influenced K o z ł o w s k i and J a k u b o w i c z , the latter propagated the most radical fideism. Z i e m i ę c k a at the beginning of her career, was im pressed by H e g e 1' s philosophy, later she adopted the attitude of the French traditionalists. She believed w ith K o z l o w - s к i and J a k u b o w i c z th at Scripture and the C hurch's teach ing are the unique sources of philosophy.
A fter 1863, the y ear of the Polish Uprising against the czarist. Russia, the new trends of positivistic philosophy developed: their aims w ere practical, th ey declared the necessity of h ard and well organized w ork. This practical attitude, stressing the necessity of developm ent of living standards by hard w ork, w as shared by all catholic philosophers. It was combined w ith a most radical fideism, even in questions regarding the solution of social w elfare9. The gap betw een know ledge and faith was increasing. A nd n eith er fideistic French traditionalism , nor G erm an "philosophical fideism ” , nor Polish M essianistic philosophy could furnish a rem edy in this situation10.
The educated people of the time (for instance biologists) w ere all followers of fideism in their religious beliefs. Those w ho w anted to be faithful catholics did not see any w ay out of the dilemma i.e. the relationship betw een faith and know ledge, unless th ey w ere fideistic11. This situation w as prevailing for a long time. H ow ever some predictm ents of a change w hich w as to follow after th e pro nouncem ent of the encyclical A eterni Patris w ere visible even before 1863.
b) P o s i t i v i s t i c P h i l o s op h e r s. This nam e w as given to those Christian philosophers w ho in the same w ay as th e older
p o ję t e j, Kraków 1852; Pogląd na d z i e je ro du lu d z k ie g o z e s t a n o w i s k a c h rz e śc i ja ń s k ie g o , Rocz. TN Krak. v ol. 22 (1852); L is ty otw arte do pani E. Z ie m ię c k ie j z p o w o d u dzieła „Zarysy fiio zoiii k a t o l ic k i e j" W arszaw a 1857, Pam. relig.-m oral.
vol. 32 (1857) and vol. 33 (1857).
9 Fideistic attitude in so cia l problem s w ithout rational foundation w as charac teristic not on ly to Polish catholic thinkers. N o w onder that, as w e shall see later, L e o XIII saw in the ren ew al of Thomism, ad vocated in his en cy clica l
A e t e r n i Patris, a rational base for the establishm ent of so cia l order, too.
10 Cf. T h e Dispute, 25—6.
11 Adam M a h r b u r g (1855— 1913) the m ost outstanding Polish p ositivist. In 1887 he w rote — and n ever changed his opinions that Christianity expressed the opinion credo quia a b s u r d u m on the problem of relationship b etw een reason and faith. He saw the on ly p ossib ility of religion in agnosticism based on feelin g s and moral con sciou sn ess resulting from fideism . Cf. Teoria c e lo w o śc i z e st a n o
w i s k a n a u k o w e g o , in: P i s m a f i l o z o f i c z n e Adama M a h r b u r g a , V ol.
, .A ETE R N I P A T R IS " IN P O L A N D 191 generation of catholic philosophers w anted to m ake a proper appraisal of m odern philosophy, and discarded from posthegelian idealism. There w ere many a reason for their giving up of H egelia nism. They rejected idealism not because it w as incom patible with religion but because it w as in disagreem ent w ith scientific facts. In their positivism, they did not deny the necessity of m etaphysics. Some of them even tried to build up a realistic m etaphysics com pat ible w ith scientific facts. They assum ed that m etaphysics would answ er the question of the relationship betw een faith and reason. They believed that the presen t teaching of philosophy in Catholic A cadem ies should be modified because of the developm ent of mo dern sciences and philosophy. A nd they w ere afraid that the renew al of scholasticism m eant a re tu rn to the old and out-dated philoso phical thinking. It w as the position of Fr. F. K r u p i ń s k i 12 and Fr. S. P a w l i c k i 13.
Fr. K r u p i ń s k i expressed his view s in his first book, it was a translation of S c h w e g l e r ' s The H istory of Philosophy11. S c h w e g l e r was a follow er of H e g e l . The tran slato r added an Appendix: On Polish Philosophy15. That he followed H egelian view s it w as visible in the no tes16. He agreed w ith S c h w e g l e r in his critical evaluation of scholasticism. It w as to him a de generation of sound thinking, not even w orth m entioning in a history of philosophy, especially as its problem s w ere rather
12 Father Franciszek S alezy K r u p i ń s k i (1836— 1898) a religious of School Brothers (pijar), ordained in W arsaw in 1858, licen ce in th eo lo g y in 1858 then studied b io lo g y and philosophy w ith H. S t m v e (1863—66). Since 1866 Rector of the post-jesuit Church in W arsaw in Św iętojańska St. A n orator of renown. Since 1859 taught religion in IVth H igh School in W arsaw . He abandoned H e g e l ' s p h ilosophy and w as the first to teach on C o m t e and J. S. M i l l and S p e n c e r . Main works: Filozofia w Polsce. A ppendix to: A. S c h w e g l e r , Historia
fi lozofii w za rysie , W arszaw a 1863: P rzys zło ś ć filozofii, Bibl. W arsz. v ol. 1, 1864: S z k o ł a p o z y t y w n a , Bibl. W arsz. V ol. 3, 1868: N a s z a historiozo fia , A teneum V ol. 3,
1876: Filozofia d z i e j ó w i j e j historia, A teneum V ol. 4, 1878.
13 Father Stefan P a w l i c k i (1839— 1916), a religiou s of the C ongregation of R essurection of Our Lord. Studied p h ilology and p h ilosophy in W roclaw (Breslau) up to 1858. P h.D . in 1865. Then "habilitation script" and professorship in Szkoła G łów na in W arsaw w here he lectured in history of philosophy for tw o y ea rs sin ce 1866. In D ecem ber 1868 entered the n oviciate of the Fathers of R essurection. Ordained priest in Rome in 1872. Since 1882 professor in philosophy in Jagellon U niversity in C racow in T h eology Dept., since 1895 also professor in p h ilosophy in P hilosophy Dept. M ain works: M aterializ m w o b e c n a u k i, Prz. pol. 4(1869)70: K ilka u w a g o p o d s t a w i e i granicach filozofii, Kraków 1878: Historia
filo z o fii g r e c k i e j od T a les a do śm ier ci A r y s t o t e l e s a (unfinished) Kraków, V o l. 1,
1890; V ol. 2, part 1, 1903; V ol. 2 part 2, 1903— 1917.
14 A. S c h w e g l e r , H istoria filo zofii w zarysie, translated into Polish by F. К. W arszaw a 1863.
15 ibid. 381—479.
16 Cf. J. J. S a w i с к i, Ks. K r u p iń s k i ja k o h i s t o r y k filozofii, St. Phil. Chr. 2(1966)1, 281— 96.
192
theologgical17. This strong criticism w as changed by K r u p i ń s k i a few years later, before the prom ulgation of the encyclical A eterni Patris, w hen the author adopted the positivist attitude of C o m t e . He w as influenced by C o m t e ' s historiosophy. Then K r u p i ń s - k i assum ed that scholasticism w as a necessary step in the devel opm ent of know ledge w hich could not be neglected by a historian. He should awoid being biased against it and investigate this period of European thinking and even correct the cu rren t false opinions en tirely negative18. W e can make a hypothesis w hich needs further investigation that K r u p i ń s k i followed C o m t e ' s view s be cause he saw in them genuine scientific attitude and bold historio- sophical assumptions. He accepted C o m t e ' s philosophical ideas m ore as a com plement to H egel than as his radical rejection.
F ather Stefan P a w l i c k i m et w ith G erm an idealism during his studies in W roclaw lasting from 1858— 1865. His m ajor w as classical philology but he also became in terested in phi losophy and received his Ph.D. w ith a dissertation De Schopen haueri doctrina et philosophandi ratione w hich w as the first doctor al dissertation on S c h o p e n h a u e r . The influence of G erm an idealism was shown in the theses he had to defend, the sixth of w hich read: Omnis philosophia nova ab Schellingio proficisci de b e t19. He w as in terested in idealistic philosophy and attended lectures of professor J. Ch. В r a n i s s, the W roclaw professor in Philosophy, for a w hole year before his Ph.D. (Fr. S. P a w l i c k i w as to a certain degree a self-made philosopher). B r a n i s s was a follower of idealistic m etaphysics combined w ith theology and inspired by the w ork of S c h e l l i n g (hence th at sixth thesis) and S c h l e i e r m a c h e r .
Soon P a w l i c k i changed his view to a m ore realistic phi losophy, as a philologist he alw ays showed appraisal to hi storical know ledge based on facts. He was then regarded by his contem poraries as a positivist who inconsistently becam e a fervent catholic one day, (in 1868)20. A t that time Catholicism w as believed to be incom patible w ith positivism. P a w l i c k i learned to apply rigorous scientific data in his studies of philology and archeology and the same principles w ere applied in his philosophi cal thinking. W e have to stress th at w hen P a w l i c k i becam e a fervent catholic under the influence of P. S e m e n e n k o 21 and
17 Cf. ibid., 282. 18 Ibid.
19 Quoted from H. S t r u v e , H isto ry a lo g iki j a k o te o r y i poznania w Pol
sce, W arszawa 1911, 360 (further quoted: S t r u v e , HL).
20 This opinion of P a w l i c k i is actual up to now cf.e.g. Cz. G l o m b i k ,
C z ł o w i e k i historia. S t u d i u m k o n c e p c j i lilo z o iic zn e j Stefana Pawlic kiego, W ar
szaw a 1973, 298.
.A E T E R N I P A T R IS " IN P O L A N D 193 changed his life radically becom ing a religious, it was not a change in his W eltanschauung from positivism to Catholicism or from indifference to Catholicism, because if w e accept that positivism m eans negation of m etaphysics and religion then P a w l i c k i had n ev er been a positivist213. Ju st the reverse, already in his Inaugural Lecture on Nov. 1,1866 (two y ears before the seem ingly inconsistent conversion) w hen he started lecturing in history of philosophy in the W arsaw Szkoła Główna (Academic School) he exposed a pro gram of realistic m etaphysics. He proposed for the starting-point in philosophy the C artesian fact of self-aw areness in w hich human reason is in real contact w ith reality and not only w ith notions about it.
To avoid C artesian dualism and K antian phenom enalism , he underlined th at the object of direct know ledge given in self-aw ar eness is the reality of the ego w hich is thinking and corporal. As a historian of philosophy he stressed the im portance of Christian thinking in this field w hich was able to create a bond of unity am ong people22. A lready at that time he m entioned the values of scholastic thinking, then neglected because it w as w rapped in confused form ulations difficult to understand23. But seeing the w orth of scholastic system he w arned against its indiscrim inate worship. He saw a danger in the renew al of neo-scholasticism. He w as afraid of the "biased group-spirit” w hich could lead to unscientific a r gum entation in a scientific discussion. Such w as the reason of his
and A. C e l i ń s k i of the C ongregation of Fathers of R esurrection, Father Ge neral of the C ongregation since 1842, then again since 1873 until his death. C onsultant of the Roman C ongregation in the Curia, h igh ly valu ed by Popes P i u s IX and L e o XIII. N ot him self Thomist but stim ulator of the rev iv a l of Christian philosophy b y profound historical studies on Scholasticism . It is possible that he sponsored the en cy clica l A e t e r n i Patris. Main works: Credo. C h r ze ś c ija ń
s k i e p r a w d y w ia ry , 1885; O jc z e nasz, 1896; B ie sia d y Filozoiiczne, Przegląd Poznań
ski 1859—60— 61—62.
2ia M y assum ptions w ere confirmed recen tly by A. P r z y m u s i a l a , Ste fan
P a w licki a p o z y t y w i z m , w; Polska m y ś l filo zoficzna i sp ołeczna, t. 2, W arszaw a
1975, 231—65.
22 „...Nowa ta jedność będzie w ięk szą i w spanialszą niż m iniona grecka, gdy do niej dodane będą ty sią cletn ie zdobycze chrześcijaństw a. Pod ożyw czym tchnie niem ducha chrześcijańskiego w y k o ń czy się gm ach n o w y z olbrzym ią kopułą, w której cien iu spoczną w szy stk ie narody, a kopułą tą... będzie n ow a filozofia”. P a w l i c k i , L ekcja w s t ę p n a (Inaugural Lecture) Gazeta W arsz. 1866, N o. 175.
23 „...W dziełach (m yślicieli średniow iecznych) pełno rzeczy n iezw yk łych , n ie zrozum iałych... pełno tam dow odów w ięcej zaw ieszon ych w pow ietrzu, niż g o tyck ich w ieży c ostrołuki, o których także nie sposób czasem w ykazać na czym one zaw isły... (a jednak) ...uw ażnie w patrując się w ten św iat dziw ny gotyckich w iek ów , czujem y jak uprzedzenia n asze zw olna znikają... Łatwo nareszcie b yłoby nam w ykazać, iż m ądrość średnich w iek ów nie jest ani zatrzym aniem się, ani cofnięciem w ty ł ducha ludzkiego, lecz postępem i że tem u postępow i zaw dzięcza m y w ięcej niż w dumie naszej przyznać chcem y". P a w l i c k i , A b e l a r d i H e
loiza, W arszaw a 1867, 13—4. C ould it be a trace of the polem ic w ith S c h w e g -
1 e r's H is t o r y of P h ilo so p h y translated recently by K r u p i ń s k i ?
194
sharp polemic with M o r a w s k i in 1877/8 and of the opinion of other philosophers w ho believed that after the encyclical A eterni Patiis, P a w l i c k i propagated its teaching not out of conviction but e x officio24.
His later proposals of building up m etaphysics w ere included in a book: Kilka uwag o podstaw ie i granicach filozofii (Some Rem arks on the Foundation and Boundaries of Philosophy), publish ed in Cracow in 1878, before the encyclical. His starting-point for m etaphysics rem ained the fact of selfaw areness, and besides, the distinction betw een direct and indirect know ledge. P a w l i c k i proved the reality of causative relations and delineated the theory of independent being, in this w ay he gave rational foundation to a recognition of the existence of God. He also laid foundation to a m etaphysical system w hich could be form ulated scientifically in a logical sequence and could solve the problem of the relationship betw een know ledge and faith. P a w l i c k i alread y had then an intuition th at m etaphysics ought to expose a theory of a concrete reality of being in its existential aspect. H ow ever, he could not liberate himself from the language of essentialist ontology of the type of W o l f f and H e g e l . H ence w e can find in his w ork a surprising statem ent about the reality of general being, form ulat ed in such strong w ords th at th ey resem ble the most extrem e nation al realism of Plato25.
c) S c h o l a s t i c i s m . Scholastic philosophy before the ency clical A eterni Patris w as taught only in Jesuit colleges. They follow ed the tradition of A ristotelian and Thomistic Ratio Studiorum , i.e. the so-called Christian A ristotelism . In other environm ents even before 1863 some philosophers sought a solution to the problem of relationship betw een faith and know ledge in such a w ay that would resp ect both elem ents; they also tried to see the role of reason in the faith-act. In pioneer endeavours of Father S. C h o ł o n i e w - s к i26 and F ather J. H o 1 w i ή s к i27 some elem ents of scholastic thinking can already be traced back.
24 The dispute b etw een P a w l i c k i and M o r a w s k i is presented in an ex h a u stiv e w ay in T h e Dispute, 59— 81.
25 The trials of P a w l i c k i in building up m etaphysics are described in
T h e D ispute, 28— 38 and 49— 59.
26 Fr. Stanisław C h o ł o n i e w s k i (1792— 1846), w ell know n preacher in the cathedral of K am ieniec P odolski, not a professional philosopher, he understood the danger of traditionalism w hich subordinated k n ow led ge to faith and another danger of th eo lo g y based on German idealism . He tried to g iv e a definition of the relationship b etw een k n ow led ge and faith and tried to sh ow the role of reason in a faith-act. Main works: Sen w Podhorcach, W ilno 1842; Kazania, 2 v o lum es, editor J. В a d e n i , K raków 1888.
27 Fr. Ignacy H o ł o w i ń s k i (1800— 1855), Chairman of C atholic A cadem y in Petersburg since 1842, archbishop of M ohylów since 1851. Translator of S h a
■ A E T E R N I P A T R IS " IN P O L A N D 195 Some deeper insights into Jesu it teaching of scholasticism w ere presented in a book of Father M. M o r a w s k i 28 already m ention ed Filozofia i je j zadania (Philosophy and its Purpose — first edition 1877) in w hich the author m akes references to B a l m e s and A. D m o w s k i SJ29, thus he suggested w here to look for his neoscholastic inspiration. Due to his book M o r a w s k i was re garded by S t r u v e as "the first outstanding Polish rep resentative of scientific trends in neoscholasticism "30.
He was unquestionably one of the leaders of neoscholasticism in Europe; had a vast historical know ledge and w as conscious that general m etaphysics had to be the know ledge of reality and not an a priori notional scheme. He, too, w as not able to liberate himself from the language of essentialists in philosophy. His object of ge neral m etaphysics was "being in general", the most general idea, and not all concrete being from the point of view of its existence. M oreover, w e can see in his w ritings the wolffian division of me taphysics into general and specific, the last divided into theodicy, psychology (pneumatology) and cosmology. M o r a w s k i adopt ed this school-m anual scheme, although he was aw are th at the main issues of theodicy are included into ontology (general metaphysics), he also perceived that m ethodologically the four philosophical disciplines could be divided into two groups; ontology w ith theodicy in one, and psychology and cosmology in the other.
He had the possibility to create a more original classification of philosophy into general m etaphysics, i.e. th eo ry of necessary being (ens a se) and theory of dependent being (ens ab alio); they
k e s p e a r e and P e t r a r c h appreciated by his contem poraries, great orator. In a polem ic w ith T r e n t o w s k i tried to establish th e relationship betw een k n ow led ge and faith and the role of reason in a faithact. He show ed the distinction b etw een philosophy and th eo lo g y recognising the scientific character of both disciplines. Main works: O m e to d z i e iilozoiii, Tyg. Peters. 1842; O s t o s u n k u
b ez p o ś r e d n ie j iilozoiii do religii i c y w il iz a c j i naszej, Tyg. Peters. 1846; H o m i le t y k a , Kraków 1859; Kazania n ie d z ie l n e i św ią t e c z n e , Kraków 1857.
28 Fr. Marian M o r a w s k i SJ (1845— 1901) student in the Jesuit C ollege in Metz, joined the Jesuits, ordained in 1870. Since 1873 professor in philosophy in the Jesuit C ollege Staraw ieś — there he w rote his principal philosophical work P h ilo so p h y an d its Purpose (first edition 1877). Since 1884 chief editor of „Przegląd Powszechny" w here he published his popular book T h e E v e n in g s at
th e L a ke Lem an (1883— 1896) and C e lo w o ść w n a tu r ze (from 1886). Since 1887
professor in dogm atic th eo lo g y at Jagellon U niversity in Cracow. Full professor ship in 1891. B ecause of bad health resigned from lecturing in 1899. H is last book,
T h e C o m m u n io n of Sain ts unfinished, w as w ritten until his death.
29 Fr. A l o j z y D m o w s k i SJ (1799— 1879) Born in the district of Podole. W hen 19 year old entered the jesuits. Professor of C ollegium Romanum in the 40-ies of XIX century. There he introduced scholasticism in philosophical curri culum. Treated by M o r a w s k i as a predecessor of n eosch olasticism equal to B a l m e s . Author of a famous w ork In s tit u ti o n e s Philoso phicae (five su ccessiv e editions).
30 S t r u v e , HL, 481.
196
both em braced treaties on the existence and nature of God w hen psychology and cosmology w ere m ore related in their object for research and m ethodology31.
W e can also speak of some elem ents of scholastic teaching in Diocesan Seminaries but the character and content of this teach ing has to be investigated m ore adequately.
2. The Main Issues of th e Encyclical „A eterni Patris"
Pope L e o XIII prom ulgated the encyclical A etern i Patris on A ugust 4th, 187932 w hich he described in such words: ,,our encycli cal letter on the restoring in C atholic Schools the teaching of C hri stian philosophy, according to the mind of the angelic doctor St. T h o m a s A q u i n a s " (De philosophia Christiana ad m entem S. Thomae A quinatis Doctoris A ngelici in scholis catholicis instaur anda). L e o XIII considered a sound philosophical education the basis for a future restoration of the social order. He assum ed that the best w ay of defending the Church and society itself against the dangers impending them "is the restoration of the right principles of thought and action by the teaching of philosophy" (A.S.S., 12,225). To consider the papal postulate on teaching philosophy as a m ere intellectual luxury, or as an unpractical method to reform the so ciety, would therefore be a com plete m isinterpretation of the Leo nine doctrine.
W hat is "a Christian philosophy" recom m ended by the pope? It has to be a philosophizing according to the best tradition of Chri stian academies, especially the doctrine of St. T h o m a s . It cons ists in uniting the study of philosophy with a Christian docility to accept the Divine Revelation. It does not mean enslaving reason but a "bond of friendship" betw een reason and faith w hich serves them both as a source of m any benefits (A.S.S., 13.57—58).
The best w ay to cleanse the Schools from false philosophy threatening the order of the C hurch and society is to resto re the rig ht philosophy in the Schools and through them into public consciousness. L e o XIII w anted to lay a doctrinal base of phi losophical and social order, i.e. the right thinking and right acting as the two cannot be divided. The above thoughts express G i 1 - s o n ' s opinion and we can add that the purpose of the encyclical w as the defence of faith, the social w elfare and order and the
31 The endeavours of M o r a w s k i in building up m etaphysics in com parison w ith sim ilar P a w l i c k i ' s work are compared in T h e D ispute, 38— 59.
32 The doctrine of the en cy clica l A e t e r n i Patris is described according to the book: T he Church s p e a k s to th e M o d e r n W o r ld . T he social te a c h in g s of Leo XIII. Edited, annotated and w ith an introduction b y E. G i l s o n , D oubleday 1954; T ex ts of the encyclical: ibid. 31— 51.
.A ETE R N I P A T R IS " IN P O L A N D 197 developm ent of know ledge. It can be fulfilled w hen order is estab lished in philosophical thinking; the order resulting from the study of philosophy correlated w ith the obedience to the Church's teach ing (Christian faith). The Fathers of the A ncient C hurch are here our guides together w ith m edieval Doctors and especially T h o m a s A q u i n a s . The study of his doctrine will bring a renew al of the m odern philosophical and theological thinking. This practical attitude of the encyclical is not a result of shallow practicism , but it rem inds the reader that a theory is alw ays at the base of all practical human activity. The recom m endation to teach ad m entem Thomae does not make of Thomistic doctrine a w eapon to w ithhold the investigation on truth. It w as an encouragem ent to continue creative philosophical thinking according to historical lines as the guiding stimulus, and w ith appraisal of the tradition of "philosophi zing in faith" — ad m entam Thomae and not secundum Thomam. M any a C hristian philosopher w as puzzled by the encyclical, and only saw its practical, ideological implications. The aspect secun dum Thomam often prevailed. It did not, how ever, stop the develop ment of historical investigation on genuine texts of Aquinas, foster ed by the encyclical. This scholarly w ork flourished several decades later and guarded against m ere practicism and ideological disputes. It is possible that some scholars proclaim ed Thomism because that w as the w ish of the Holy See, and obviously such attitude w as not right. H ow ever, the historical study on A quinas proved the great wisdom of L e о XIII to shift the attention of the scholars on G reat Scholasticism. Therefore w e ought to study the teaching of T h o m a s not because the encyclical proposed it, but the encyclical encourages the study because w e can learn from T h o m a s the right principles of reasoning and acting, w ith him w e enter the path leading to truth in philosophy and find the right solution of the problem of the relationship betw een faith and reason.
3. Polish Opinions on the Encyclical „Aeterni Patris"
The Polish opinions w ere divergent, and resulted from different philosophical orientations. Among thinkers who did not represen t catholic schools was H enryk S t r u v e33, a follow er of "realistic
33 H enryk S t r u v e (1840— 1912) studied in Tübingen, Erlangen, Göttingen, H alle, Leipzig and Jena. Since 1863 professor in logics in Szkoła G łów na in W ar saw . Since 1864 professor in philosophy in Szkoła Główna. In 1871— 1905 professor in philosophy in the U niversity of W arsaw . Great merits as historian of Polish philosophy. Erudite givin g exh au stive inform ation in his work. His philosophical concepts called "realistic idealism " exp ressed post-Kantian criticizm and were of little influence. Main works; S y n t e z a d w ó c h św ia tó w , 1876; W s t ę p k r y t y c z n y
do lilozolii, 3rd edition 1903; H isto ry a lo g iki j a k o teo r yi poznania w Polsce, 2 ed.
198
idealism " combined w ith post-K antian criticism, who saw in the encyclical only mystical elem ents in the theory of cognition34.
Adam M a h r b u r g35 w as a radical positivist and believed only in em pirical data in K antian sense of empirism, and he oppos ed to call m etaphysics a science. He believed that the prom ulgation of Thomism was harmful, au th o ritarian and limited the liberty of philosophizing. Together w ith L. М. В i 11 i a, an ad herent of the A ugustianin tradition, he called Thomism "philosophy by decree", he saw, how ever, the positive aspects in historical research on T h о m a s36. W e have to rem em ber that M ahrburg treated in the same m anner as Tomism any attem pt of turning back to old philosophical system s37, for instance also the A ugustinian trend of В i 11 i a.
The philosophers of Catholic Schools saw in the encyclical
34 „W św iecie katolickim pierw iastki m istyczne teoryi poznania łączą się ze w znow ieniem filozofii św. T o m a s z a głów n ie w skutek en cyk lik i A e t e r n i Patris L e o n a XIII z r. 1879... Teoryą... poznania św. T o m a s z a , a w szczególności jeg o naukę o dwóch źródłach poznania prawdy, rozumu i objaw ienia, oraz o zm y śle w ew nętrznym , dochodzącym do w iary w objaw ienie, dzięki zach ęcie ze strony Boga, rozw ijają liczni zw olen n icy tak zwanej n eosch olastyczn ej filozofii. Ma ona charakter m istycyzm u religijn ego o ile się pow ołuje na objaw ienie Boskie, jako źródło poznania prawdy najw yższej". S t r u v e , HL, 126.
35 Adam M a h r b u r g (1855— 1913) philosophical studies in Petersburg (un der direction of W ł a d i s ł a w l e w ) and in Leipzig (under W u n d t ) . Organiser and leading professor of clandestine U n iversity teaching in W arsaw since 1891. C oeditor of „Poradnik dla Samouków" and „Przegląd Filozoficzny". Main works:
T e o r y a c e lo w o śc i ze s t a n o w i s k a n a u k o w e g o , Kraków 1888; m any publications,
m ost important articles printed in: Pisma Filozo ficzn e A. M a h r b u r g a, V ol. I and II, W arszaw a 1914.
36 About the en cyclical A e t e r n i Patris M a h r b u r g wrote: „Z jednej strony w zięto się gorliw ie do badań h istorycznych nad scholastyką, a nade w szystk o nad T o m a s z e m z A k w i n u , i to jest najlepszy ow oc tego kierunku; z drugiej strony zaczęto kom entow ać i p rzystosow yw ać filozofię T o m a s z a do w ym agań nauki w spółczesnej, ale i odw rotnie, co jest z góry poronionym ow ocem tego k ie runku. Tak pow stała filozofia z dekretu. („Przegl. Fil." 3,1900, no 1,95 in the rev iew of L. М. В i 11 i a, L’esiglio di sa n t’ A g o s ti n o . N o te sulle c o ntr adizioni di un
si stem a di fiiosofia per decre to, Torino 1899). I. R a d z i s z e w s k i (O d ro d zen ie filozofii s c h o la sty c z n e j, „Przegl. Fil." 4,1901), 465) questions the term "philosophy
by decree" and w rites about the rev iew itself: "There are so m any errors in the review , w e want to b eliev e that com m itted involuntarily, that w e won't g iv e the name of its author".
37 Cf. the irony of the text: „nie brak i za naszych czasów prób w skrzeszenia starych system ów , ich od św ieżenia i inkrustow ania m ateriałem z nauki w sp ół czesn ej czerpanym. Ta jednak m etoda nie zapew ni im w artości naukow ej, jak pozłota lichego materiału nie przekształca w złoto. Stąd to ca ły legion neo, czy now osokratyzm ów , now oarystotelizm ów , now otom izm ów , now okartezjanizm ów itp ., cała fabryka odnaw iania zabytków k opalnych i zakładania szkół i koterii dla m i łośników klubow ej p olityk i w filozofii. W szakże te now oprzeżytki nie zostają w żyw ych stosunkach z nauką i żadnego na nią w pływ u nie w yw ierają, pomimo zalotnych do niej umizgów; p ływ ają tak na pow ierzchni życia, jak łódki rzucone na fale burzliw ego morza, póki się nie rozbiją o pierw szy lep szy szkopuł". Filo
.A ETE R N I P A T R IS " IN P O L A N D 199 a prom otion of the neoscholastic m ovem ent of recen t years. Idzi R a d z i s z e w s k i 38 in a polemic on the use of the term ,.philo sophy by decree", explained th a t it w as not the encyclical which brought about the revival of Scholasticism, but it was a response to already existing return-m ovem ent to medievals. The encyclical gave its support to this revival and deepened and approved some forms of neoscholastics. It gave principles to be followed by C atho lic Schools and corrected some errors and pointed to possible dangers. It is not plausible to state that it was a cause or even the cause of the "return" movement, still m ore that it imposed neoscho lasticism 39. Thomism was in renaissance because of its own intrinsic values. To support his views Idzi R a d z i s z e w s k i mentioned the book of M o r a w s k i Philosophy and its Purpose w hose first edition (1877) preceded the encyclical (1879) by two years and was the result of the renew al of scholastic thinking.
W e adopt the thesis of R a d z i s z e w s k i th at the encyclical A etern i Patris modified the neoscholastic movement, and will now envisage its influence on the view s of P a w l i c k i and M o r a w s k i . A lthough it seems paradoxical but it im pressed m ore M o r a w s k i w ho defended neoscholasticism , than P a w l i c k i who w arned against the abuses of the m ovem ent and therefore was regarded as its enemy. M o r a w s k i under the influence of the encyclical abandoned his treatise on the philosophy of nature in which he followed atom istic approach as the encyclical rather prom ulgated hylom orphysm and w arned against dynam ic-atom istic theories in the philosophy of n atu re40. He n ever returned to that work.
P a w l i c k i saw in the encyclical a modification of the "return " m ovem ent and it appeased his doubts regarding the "biased group spirit" in neoscholasticism . W hat is m ore im portant, he saw in it a confirm ation of his conviction about the necessity of historical studies on philosophical past. It is possible th at the encyclical
38 Fr. Idzi Benedykt R a d z i s z e w s k i (1871— 1922) graduated from C atholic A cadem y in Petersburg, in 1899— 1900 studied philosophy in Louvain under pro fessor M e r c i e r (future cardinal, ordinary bishop of M alines—Brussels). Expert and propagator of n eosch olasticism in Poland. Creator and first editor of the periodical „A teneum Kapłańskie" in 1909 in W łocław ek; 1914— 1918 Chairman of C atholic A cadem y in Petersburg, first Chairman and founder of the C atholic U niversity of Lublin, Poland. Main works: O d ro d zen ie ii lozoiii s c h o la sty c z n e j, „Przegl. Fit.” 1901; T eolo gia a n a u k i p rz yro d n icz e, W łocław ek 1910.
39 I. R a d z i s z e w s k i , O d ro d ze n ie ii lozoiii s c h o l a s ty c z n e j, ,,Przegl. Fil."' 4 (1901) 488. Polem ics w ith an article: Our P h ilo so p h y in „Glos" (1900) no 17 w hose author b eliev ed that Thomism w as autom atically introduced b y the papal decree. He also had a polem ic w ith M a h r b u r g about the same issue, cf. n o te 36.
200
together w ith the dispute w ith M o r a w s к i41, m ade P a w l i c k i aw are of the stability of Scholastic system as a tru e continuation in philosophical thinking of the Ancient. He probably then perceiv ed the consistency of philosophical issues, methods and essential problem s w hich had to be reconsidered in a new manner. In the preface to his m onum ental w ork Historia iilozoiii greckiej (The Hi sto ry of G reek Philosophy) unfortunately unfinished, some of his form ulations resem ble the rem arks of M o r a w s k i42. W e have therefore good reason to suppose that the polemic w ith M o r a w - s к i had a bearing on him. In his historical studies he w ould look then for stable values and organic unity. In the papal ,,decree" he w ould stress the benefits of united efforts of catholic scholars in their investigation of the heritage of M iddle Ages, m ostly T h o m a s A q u i n a s43. The study on the latter — he believed — would becom e more profound w ith the know ledge of ancient G reek phi losophers and especially A r i s t o 1 1 e44.
P a w l i c k i understood b etter the necessity of closer exam in ation of the continuity in philosophical developm ent and in the form ation of the right philosophical thinking and sound reasoning. In his w ork on R e n a n 43 he criticised the fact that in the French Diocesan Seminaries in the middle of the 19th century, philosophy w as taught disregarding its history. It obviously had a harmful influence on clerics, on R e n a n himself among others. They w ere taught that the right philosophical thinking started w ith D e s c a r t e s . Pope L e o XIII show ed a rem edy in this situation. In his encyclical he taught to introduce the study of history of philosophy in all Church Schools. In that w ay the great ancient and m edieval thinkers becam e know n w idely and the students w ere given genuine texts of T h o m a s A q u i n a s and not m ere com pilations46.
The encyclical did not, how ever, change the Jesuits' study and investigations in philosophical issues, except for M o r a w s k i ' s w ithdraw al of his research in philosophy of nature. It seems that
44 Cf. note 24.
42 Cf. P a w l i c k i , H istoria iilozoiii g r e c k i e j od Talesa do śm ier ci A r y s t o
telesa, V ol. I, Kraków 1890, 6— 7i cf. also M o r a w s k i , Kilka s łó w o k s i c ż c e „Filozofia i j e j zadania", „Przegl. Lw." 15/1878/618—9.
43 P a w l i c k i , ibid., 7—8. 44 P a w l i c k i , ibid., 8.
45 St. P a w l i c k i , Ż y w o t i d zieło Ernesta Renana, Kraków 1896. Q uotations from the 3rd edition — W arszaw a 1905.
46 Cf. P a w l i c k i , Ż y w o t i dzieła Ernesta Renana, V ol. I, 27—28. The opinion of Paw licki (ibid. 26) on the manual P hilosophia L u g d u n en sis used then in France, coin cid es w ith the form ulations of G i l s o n : "What surprises us most in it today is that such a mixture of A ristotelianism , of C artesianism , and of ontologism w as im posed by the C atholic hierarchy, in more than one French d iocese, as the standard work to be used in cla sses of philosophy" (E. G i l s o n , French and Ita
lian p h ilo so p h y , in: A H is t o r y oi P h ilosophy, E. G i l s o n gen. editor, vol. IV, N. York 1966, 208).
.A ETE R N I P A T R IS " IN P O L A N D 201 Jesu it professors w ere convinced that they follow the encyclical w hen they followed their traditional curricula called Ratio Stu- dioium .
4. Introduction of Leonine Teaching
The first catholic inform ation on the encyclical in Poland is its analysis done by F ather A ntoni L a n g e r 47 Sw. Tomasz i dzisiej sza iilozoiia (St. Thomas and the modern Philosophy). This article (and some others of the same author), show clearly that Thomism of the Schoolmen was v ery different from the teaching of St. T h o m a s . There is the characteristic description of "five w ays" which shows that L a n g e r knows the scheme of T h o m a s 48 but w hen he describes the "fifth w ay", he introduces m oral argum entation call ing it the ,.fifth w ay" of T h o m a s . He probably w anted to unite the "five w ays" of T h o m a s with the traditional argum entation in Jesuit schools: m etaphysical, physical and m oral argum ents49. He framed the five Thomistic argum ents into the Jesu it fram e work. The three first Thomist "w ays" w ere shown as m etaphysical, the content of the fourth and fifth was presented as a physical argum ent. Finally he gave the nam e of the ,.fifth w ay" to the moral argum entation om itted by Thom as50. The loyalty tow ards Jesuit School tradition combined w ith loyalty tow ards Pope L e o XIII's instructions resulted in an unfortunate hybrid.
A bout 1900 Polish thinkers already instructed by the encyclical en tered the field. Those scholars who taught Thomism in U niversity Chairs are w orth mentioning. They w ere Father Idzi R a d z i s z e w - s к i (professor in the Catholic A cadem y in P etersburg and the first Chairm an of the Catholic U niversity in Lublin, Poland): Father F. G a b г у I51 (professor in Jagellon U niversity, Cracow), Fr. K.
47 Fr. A ntoni L a n g e r SJ (1833— 1902) entered the Jesuit n oviciate in Staraw ieś in 1852. Studied philosophy and th eo lo g y in Rome (1856— 1863), ordained priest in Rome 1860. Professor in philosophy in Staraw ieś (noviciate house) (1863— 68). Professor in th eology in Jesuit C onvent in C racow (1867— 1893). Main w orks: Sw. T o m a sz i d zisie jsza filozofia, ,.Przegl. Pow." 1884; P oję cie о Води
w ch r z e ś c ij a ń s tw i e i u filoz ofów , „Przegl. Pow." 1884—5. In the presentation of
L a n g e r’s opinions I h ave used the analysis of Fr. R. W e s o ł o w s k i from his unpublished M aster Paper: P h ilo so p h y of A n t o n i Langer, W arszaw a 1973.
48 A. L a n g e r , Poję cie o Bogu w c h r z e śc ija ń stw ie i u filoz ofów , „Przegl. Pow." 6/1885/240, 344, 351— 3.
49 Ibid., 8/1885/60.
50 Stating that he w ill now present the "fifth" w ay e x g u b ern a tio n e re rum L a n g e r w rites: „Prawo m oralności, niezatartym i zgłoskam i w sercach ludzkich w yryte, naprowadza nas także na istn ien ie Boga, jako N a jśw iętszeg o Prawodaw c y " — i b i d . , 8/1885/60.
51 Fr. Franciszek G a b r y l (1866— 1914) studied in the Jagellon A cadem y in 1886— 1900. A ttended the lectures of M. M o r a w s k i and S. P a w l i c k i .
202
W a i s 52 (professor in Lwów-Lemberg). They published mostly school m anuals which w ere one of the first Polish U niversity Read- ing-books in philosophy in w hich Polish philosophical term inology w as coined (not only scholastic terminology). W hat they presented was m ostly a system atization of C hristian A ristotelianism — some- -times in post-W olffian shape rath e r than true Thomistic reasoning.
N ot enough consideration w as given to genuine texts of A guinas and the originality of his m etaphysics. The same situation prevailed in all Europe at that time. The m anuals of G a b r y l , W a i s and D. M e r c i e r — the last tran slated into Polish on R a d z i s z e w s k i ' s recom m endation and published in 1900—2 by "Przegląd Fi lozoficzny" — w ere highly estim ated by Polish intellectuals and had exercised a strong bearing on spiritual form ation of C hristian clergy and laity. They p rep ared the w ay to the future interest in Thomistic thinking and the intellectual depth of Polish Catholicism. The next generation of Thomists w ere taught from these manuals.
All philosophical orientations in the second p art of the 19th century w ere characterized by their practical attitude in philoso phical thinking. The scholars w ere interested in philosophy not only as a tool to cogniz of reality but also as a tool in the developm ent of social standards. The catchw ord of "organic hard labor" was accepted both by idealists and positivists and by the catholic thinkers as well. C hristian philosophers w ere m oreover seeking in philosophy argum entation for apologetics and defence of faith. This practical attitude is also characteristic to the encycli cal A eterni Patris. The aim and purpose of the renew al of philo sophy in A etern i Patris are: the defence of faith, the social w elfare and the developm ent of know ledge. The wisdom of the Pope L e o XIII stressed the im portance of the theory as a prerequisite to any practical scheme in view of restoring the social order. It p reserv ed the Christian thinkers from shallow practical concerns and oriented them to theoretical research in philosophy of being
Further studied in Louvain w ith D. M e r c i e r . Professor in Christian Philosophy in Jagellon U niversity since 1902. Main works: N ie ś m ie r te l n o ś ć d u s z y lu d z k ie j,
w ś w ie t le r o z u m u i n o w o c z e s n e j n a u ki, Kraków 1895: Polska iilozotia religijna w w i e k u XI X, V ol. 1—2, 1913— 14. A series of un iversity m anuals, e.g. Logika fo r malna, Kraków 1899; Logik a ogólna, Kraków, 1912; N o e t y k a , Kraków, 1900; M e
tafizyka ogólna, c zy li n a u k a o b ycie , 1903; Psycholo gia, K raków 1906; Filozolia
p r z y r o d y , Kraków, 1910.
52 Fr. Kazimierz W a i s (1865— 1934) ordained priest in Przem yśl 1889. Studied in Insbruck and Rome. Ph. D. 1894, Professor in philosophy in the D iocesan Sem i nary in Przemyśl 1904/5. A ttended lectures of D. M e r c i e r in Louvain. Professor in philosophy in the U n iversity of Lwów since 1909. His Thomism included e le m ents of Scotism, of S u a r e z and D e s c a r t e s . In the custom ary w ay of the Louvain School he tried to base the subject of philosophy on sp ecific scien ces resem bling in it the p ositivists. A uthor of m anuals in p sy ch o lo g y (1902— 3), co s m ology (1931— 2) and o n tology (1926).
„ A E T E R N I P A T R IS " IN P O L A N D 203 and tow ards historical approach of philosophizing. T herefore it is understandable th at P a w l i c k i , the most theoretically-m inded of Polish Christian philosophers, saw and appreciated the encoura gem ent of the encyclical to deepen theoretical study in the history of philosophy. A lthough in his w ritings there are also evident apo logetic instances. The encouragem ents of the encyclical w ere soon to flourish also in Poland in the developm ent and renew al of neo scholastic philosophy.
