"Pints with Aquinas" Podcasts

[Non Nobis]

"If you could sit down with St. Thomas Aquinas over a pint of beer and ask him any one question, what would it be?"

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=804QoiN9Ctc&list=PLyEkckjvnaAS08uLGsqztGbsPOHiXb7Qv
[/yt]

Check out this series of podcasts "Pints with Aquinas" for quick (half hour) bits of St. Thomas Aquinas, Scripture, etc put together intelligently by Matt Fradd to answer various questions about Theology, Catholic Faith, and moral life in general.

(In at least a couple podcasts he has Edward Feser talk about St. Thomas' proofs for the existence of God; I know some here who really like Feser (I just ordered another of his books).)

Whether you are fairly familiar with St. Thomas' writing, or think it is all "over your head", give it a try.  I'm listening during meals...

(Fradd is not a traditionalist Catholic (he worked for Catholic Answers for 3 years) and you can see that in his podcasts a little, but I think they are mostly quite good)

[Lynne]

Neat! He has an Aussie(?) accent...

[Kaesekopf]

My only quibble is that he doesn't seem to have any theology/philosophy background, so what makes him particularly useful to 'learn' Aquinas from him?  (Y'know?)

[Gardener]

My only quibble is that he doesn't seem to have any theology/philosophy background, so what makes him particularly useful to 'learn' Aquinas from him?  (Y'know?)

If he had a higher post count, he'd have internet cred.

[Kaesekopf]

My only quibble is that he doesn't seem to have any theology/philosophy background, so what makes him particularly useful to 'learn' Aquinas from him?  (Y'know?)

If he had a higher post count, he'd have internet cred.

But you know what I mean? 

Here are his bios from two different sites run by him:
Matt Fradd is a Catholic apologist and speaker, as well as the executive director of The Porn Effect, a website dedicated to helping men and women break free from pornography. He is the author/editor of several books including, 20 Answers Atheism and Delivered: True Stories of Men and Women who Turned From Porn to Purity. Matt speaks to tens of thousands of people every year. He lives in Georgia with his wife Cameron and their four children.

Matt Fradd is a Catholic apologist who speaks to over 50,000 people every year on topics having to do with the Catholic faith. He is the author of "Atheism: 20 Questions," as well as the creator of the podcast Pints With Aquinas. Matt lives with his wife and four children in Georgia.


He doesn't have a philosophy or theology background, seemingly.  The work he does is all well and good, but if I want to learn about Aquinas, what makes him particularly qualified to teach about it?  Personally, it seems like I'd be better off with the Summa and some commentaries, at least this way I'd get Thomas 'from the source' and see respected commentary on it, as opposed to seeing Aquinas through the lens of Fradd.

Peter Kreeft (who has written on the Summa, etc) has a philosophy background.  Fradd seems to have a following and a microphone. 

Sorry (but kinda not really?).  :/

[Non Nobis]

I appreciate the fair criticism.

But I didn't mean to say that "Pints for Aquinas" was the best place to go for a truly scholarly understanding of St. Thomas.  He demands more than a half hour from Matt Fradd who admittedly does not have much of a philosophical or theological background.

However, let me just quote Edmund Feser's remark, as reported by Fradd, on Fradd's book (also called "Pints with Aquinas"):

"It's very difficult to present substantive philosophical ideas in a way that is popularly accessible and entertaining. But Fradd and Delfino pull it off admirably in this fine book. Read, learn, and enjoy.". http://pintswithaquinas.com/podcast/what-edward-feser-just-said-about-my-upcoming-book/. I will admit, though, that I could not find this quote elsewhere on the internet than in Fradd's pintswithaquinas.com site. 

In any case, Edmund Feser WAS interviewed on "Pints with Aquinas", and saw fit to advertise it on his blog:

http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2017/11/dawkins-vs-aquinas-on-pints-with-aquinas.html

Recently I was interviewed by Matt Fradd for his Pints with Aquinas podcast.  We talk a bit about Five Proofs of the Existence of God, but our main topic is Richard Dawkins's critique of Aquinas's Five Ways in The God Delusion.  We work through each of the objections Dawkins raises and discuss where they go wrong.  Matt is posting the interview in two parts, and the first part has now been posted.

I would assume that Feser didn't find "Pints with Aquinas" worthless.

Fradd is just a non-expert cobbling together bits of St. Thomas (etc) for popular consumption.  My own impression (what do I know?) is that he is not doing it badly, and that it is worth doing.  It's not going to be the most popular resource for Thomistic scholars, or those strongly inclined that way. It's also not going to be popular among the general (or even Catholic) populace who think a medieval scholar couldn't possibly have anything worth listening to.   But it might be something that will attract at least some people to St. Thomas who are open to him, but know very little about him yet.

Maybe Fradd is only being pretentious and leading everyone theologically and philosophically astray.  That's not my perception, but "what do I know?".

I would admit that some might think "Pints with Aquinas" is "everything you could possibly want to know about St. Thomas" . But I don't think Fradd is trying to leave that impression.

....

Some people would say, never bother with internet forums (no matter how good they seem to be, e.g. SD  ), because the users are non-experts. Similarly, one could say never bother with things such as "Pints of Aquinas", because you could do so much better. Both criticisms are fair enough.  But SOME truth can be learned from non-experts, as long as you are aware they are non-experts and willing to go further if you can. Don't make the best the enemy of the good.

Yes, if you are especially serious about studying St. Thomas, you should probably start higher. But "Pints with Aquinas" might at least help people "get their feet wet".

[Kaesekopf]

Agreed, Non Nobis.   I just like to complain. 

[Gardener]

My only concern with such things is that very often, it seems the popular appeal of Aquinas, and subsequent theological conclusions, don't match with the very plain positions of notable Thomists like Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange. I've seen before where on the issues of grace, free will, and predestination, the non-philosopher presenter will essentially give a presentation on those issues which completely sidesteps the so-called traditional Thomistic school, or seeks to minimalize the very real conclusions they reach. Problematically, they do this because those conclusions are essentially Calvinist in scope and the traditional school sidesteps with the deflection of "mystery". This calls into question all popular presentations on Aquinas and his thoughts.

[Miriam_M]

My only concern with such things is that very often, it seems the popular appeal of Aquinas, and subsequent theological conclusions, don't match with the very plain positions of notable Thomists like Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange. I've seen before where on the issues of grace, free will, and predestination, the non-philosopher presenter will essentially give a presentation on those issues which completely sidesteps the so-called traditional Thomistic school, or seeks to minimalize the very real conclusions they reach. Problematically, they do this because those conclusions are essentially Calvinist in scope and the traditional school sidesteps with the deflection of "mystery". This calls into question all popular presentations on Aquinas and his thoughts.

Well, just overall, too many uneducated Catholics (lightly educated, or educated in Catholicism Lite) think they're experts on Aquinas, when it takes considerable training both to understand him and explain him, which is why the best location for that is a traditional seminary; it's part of their intellectual formation.  If I have a question on Aquinas or Garrigou-LaGrange I go my trad priest, who is traditionally formed.  I certainly wouldn't go to a lay self-appointed "expert" -- podcast, blog, book, whatever.  In the 21st century, everyone's an expert.  (Not.) 

IOW, I agree with you.