I don’t think the reverence for Thomas Aquinas is quite what is usually meant by a personality cult. I think of personality cults as the followings of movie stars or charismatic politicians etc. Aquinas was not a very charismatic individual; he was more of an academic nerd by modern standards. I think it is more like the reverence for philosophers, ideologies, etc. You get people who are diehard Kantians, diehard Marxists, diehard Libertarians, diehard Whiteheadians, diehard classical neo-Darwinians, diehard Democrats, diehard JWs, etc., who are convinced that one person or one ideology or theory has all the answers, and tend to accept everything about that person or ideology or theory as a “package deal”. I’m not built for that kind of “all or nothing” agreement with persons or programs. Philosophical argumentation for such people tends to decay into ideology or apologetics.
I think Thomas Aquinas was one of the greatest thinkers and teachers who ever lived, and I don’t take his views on things lightly, even where I disagree. But I can’t be an Aquinas groupie. I would say that Aquinas is vastly preferable to someone like Ken Ham, much closer to a proper intellectual and philosophical appropriation of religious faith. But I’m not a Thomist, just someone who admires Thomas more than he admires “Thomism”.