UPDATE on the continued disthomism of Doc Angelic of feserismisnotthomism.wordpress infamy, part I
Given that the disthomist critic of Dr. Feser has updated this section of his ill-informed attack, some additional remarks seem to be in order. As our blog argues (meeting no substantial argument from Doc), the usage of "personal God" and its cognates on the part of the Church and St. Thomas is not "enthuasistic" in any sense serious enough to justify his wild speculations concerning Dr. Feser. Contrary to Doc Angelic's assertion, it has not "been used from earliest times in the Church in definitions of the Faith and in the liturgy ". The usage seems to have increased with the necessity of countering errors connected to pantheism arising in force by the end of the 19th century, as is indicated in the sources quoted in the first post. But even then it's not so significant as to entail, absolutely, viewing the non-usage of the English term as seriously suspicious, "a declaration in itself" etc. A somewhat technical aspect demands att