Mormonism Has No Good Intellectual System

[Stargazer]

For all his brilliance, and for all the brilliance of his two summas and his other works, I tend to share St. Thomas's own opinion of those writings, famously expressed to his companion, Reginald of Piperno, near the end of Thomas's life.

I was intrigued at this, and annoyed that you didn't tell us what Thomas's own opinion of his writings were. You left it as an exercise for those who would be sufficiently motivated to find out, and I said to myself "I don't have time to go chasing this down!" -- I've taken the week off work so I could finish a house remodel project (but here I am, sitting in front of the computer, stealing time).

Well, I had to see for myself, so I went to wikipedia, found nothing, and then googled it. Hah. Think I found it. Was this what you were referring to?

On December 6, 1273, Thomas was still hard at work on the Summa. But after that dayâ??s morning Mass,

despite repeated urgings, he never took up his pen again. Only to Reginald, his secretary and closet friend,

did Thomas eventually reveal what had happened. The story came out thirty years later, on Reginaldâ??s

deathbed.

While celebrating that Mass, Thomas told Reginald, he had a vision of the crucified Christ, who spoke to

him: â??You have written well of me, Thomas. What would you ask! of me?â? To which Thomas could only

reply, â??Nothing else but you, Lord.â? Compared to what he had seen and understood in this experience,

Thomas explained, everything he had written seemed of no more value than straw. He could write about

theology no more.

Found HERE.

I was profoundly impressed by this. I've never read Aquinas, Augustine, Teilhard, or anyone considered to be a great theologian -- indeed I am not an intellectual to be grubbing about in all that. But I do believe that I will have to tackle Aquinas, at least, and see what he had to say.

Thanks for the exercise, Prof!

[Daniel Peterson]

That's the one. I find the story quite moving and very significant.

Good job.

[Stargazer]

When I prayed after reading the BoM and didn't get any "answer," I was depressed for a few days, but then ultimately decided that the good feelings I had had while reading certain passages were sufficient. I believe President McKay had had a similar experience, and he determined that just continuing in the work would be a means in and of itself.

I can relate to this. When I was preparing to serve a mission, I determined that I really needed to read the Book of Mormon all the way through and "get a testimony" of it. The project took about two weeks, and at the end I knelt down and prayed. I asked God to please tell me that the Book of Mormon was true. Didn't get an answer. I tried a couple more times. Nichts. Nada. Nothing. At this point I became seriously annoyed. Can you believe it, I was actually annoyed with God for not giving me "my" answer! "Oh, come on now, what's the holdup!" I soon realized the problem: I already had a testimony of the Book of Mormon before I even started. Why should God tell me something I already knew?

Reflecting on this later it became even more clear to me. I had had spiritual revelations in response to my own needs before this time, and was fairly familiar at that young age with how the Spirit operated, and even while reading the book for the first time cover-to-cover I had received powerful indications of the truth of what I was reading. Taking the perfunctory step of reading all the way through and then asking was rather like expecting God to be a computer program: if you cross your t's, dot your i's, and get everything just so, then bingo, you're in. I found for myself that God is not an automated system. He's a personage and responds as a personage.