III. Theological Science and its Controversies.

§ 99. SCHOLASTICISM IN GENERAL.[290]

The scientific activity of the Middle Ages received the name of

=Scholasticism= from the cathedral and cloister schools in which it

originated (§ 90, 8). The Schoolmen, with their enthusiasm and devotion,

their fidelity and perseverance, their courage and love of combat, may

be called the knights of theology. Instead of sword and spear they used

logic, dialectic and speculation; and profound scholarship was their

breastplate and helmet. Ecclesiastical orthodoxy was their glory

and pride. Aristotle, and also to some extent Plato, afforded them

their philosophical basis and method. The Fathers in their utterances,

_sententiæ_, the Councils in their dogmas and canons, the popes in

their decretals, yielded to this Dialectic Scholasticism theological

material which it could use for the systematising, demonstrating, and

illustrating of the Church doctrine. If we follow another intellectual

current, we find the Mystical Scholasticism taking up, as the highest

task of theology, the investigating and describing of the hidden life

of the pious thinker in and with God according to its nature, course,

and results by means of spiritual contemplation on the basis of one’s

individual experience. Dogmatics (including Ethics) and the Canon

Law constituted the peculiar field of the Dialectic Theology of the

Schoolmen. The standard of dogmatic theology during the 12th century

was the Book of the Sentences of the Lombard (§ 102, 5); that of the

Canon Law the Decree of Gratian. Biblical Exegesis as an independent

department of scientific study stood, indeed, far behind these two,

but was diligently prosecuted by the leading representatives of

Scholasticism. The examination of the simple literal sense, however,

was always regarded as a secondary consideration; while it was esteemed

of primary importance to determine the allegorical, tropological, and

anagogical signification of the text (§ 90, 9).

§ 99.1. =Dialectic and Mysticism.=--With the exception

of the speculative Scotus Erigena, the Schoolmen of the

Carlovingian Age were of a practical turn. This was changed

on the introduction of Dialectic in the 11th century. Practical

interests gave way to pure love of science, and it was now the

aim of scholars to give scientific shape and perfect logical form

to the doctrines of the church. The method of this =Dialectic

Scholasticism= consisted in resolving all church doctrines into

their elementary ideas, in the arranging and demonstrating of

them under all possible categories and in the repelling of all

possible objections of the sceptical reason. The end aimed at was

the proof of the reasonableness of the doctrine. This Dialectic,

therefore, was not concerned with exegetical investigations

or Scripture proof, but rather with rational demonstration.

Generally speaking, theological Dialectic attached itself to

the ecclesiastical system of the day as positivism or dogmatism;

for, appropriating Augustine’s _Credo ut intelligam_, it made

faith the principal starting point of its theological thinking

and the raising of faith to knowledge the end toward which it

laboured. On the other hand, however, scepticism often made its

appearance, taking not faith but doubt as the starting point

for its inquiries, with the avowed intention, indeed, of raising

faith to knowledge, but only acknowledging as worthy of belief

what survived the purifying fire of doubt.--Alongside of this

double-edged Dialectic, sometimes in conflict, sometimes in

alliance with it, we meet with the =Mystical Scholasticism=,

which appealed not to the reason but to the heart, and sought

by spiritual contemplation rather than by Dialectic to advance

at once theological science and the Christian life. Its object

is not Dogmatics as such, not the development of _Fides quæ

creditur_, but life in fellowship with God, the development of

_Fides qua creditur_. By contemplative absorption of the soul

into the depth of the Divine life it seeks an immediate vision,

experience and enjoyment of the Divine, and as an indispensable

condition thereto requires purity of heart, the love of God

in the soul and thorough abnegation of self. What is gained

by contemplation is made the subject of scientific statement,

and thus it rises to speculative mysticism. Both contemplation

and speculative mysticism in so far as their scientific

procedure is concerned are embraced under the name of scholastic

mysticism. The practical endeavour, however, after a deepening

and enhancing of the Christian life in the direction of a

real and personal fellowship with God was found more important

and soon out-distanced the scientific attempt at tabulating

and formulating the facts of inner experience. Practical

mysticism thus gained the ascendency during the 12th, 13th

and 14th centuries, and formed the favourite pursuit of the

numerous inmates of the nunneries (§ 107).

§ 99.2. =The Philosophical Basis of Dialectic Scholasticism= was

obtained mainly from the Aristotelian philosophy, which, down to

the end of the 12th century, was known at first only from Latin

renderings of Arabic and even Hebrew translations, and afterwards

from Latin renderings of the Greek originals (§ 103, 1).

Besides Aristotle, however, Plato also had his enthusiastic

admirers during the Middle Ages. The study of the writings of

Augustine and the Areopagite (§ 90, 7) led back again to him,

and the speculative mystics vigorously opposed the supremacy

of Aristotle.--At the outset of the philosophical career of

scholasticism in the 11th century we meet with the controversy

of Anselm and Roscellinus [Roscelin] about the relations of

thinking and being or of the idea and the substance of things

(§ 101, 3). =The Nominalists=, following the principles of the

Stoics, maintained that General Notions, _Universalia_, are mere

abstractions of the understanding, _Nomina_, which as such have

no reality outside the human mind, _Universalia =post= res_.

=The Realists=, on the contrary, affirmed the reality of General

Notions, regarding them as objective existences before and

apart from human thinking. But there were two kinds of realism.

The one, based on the Platonic doctrine of ideas, taught that

General Notions are really existent before the origin of the

several things as archetypes in the Divine reason, and then

also in the human mind before the contemplation of the things

empirically given, _Universalia =ante= res_. The other, resting

on Aristotle’s doctrine, considered them as lying in the things

themselves and as first getting entrance into the human mind

through experience, _Universalia =in= rebus_. The Platonic

Realism thought to reach a knowledge of things by pure thought

from the ideas latent in the human mind; the Aristotelian, on the

other hand, thought to gain a knowledge of things only through

experience and thinking upon the things themselves.--Continuation,

§ 103, 1.

§ 99.3. =The Nurseries of Scholasticism.=--The work previously

done in cathedrals and cloister schools was, from about the

12th century, taken up in a more comprehensive and thorough

way by the =Universities=. They were, as to their origin,

independent of church and state, emperor and pope. Here and

there famous teachers arose in the larger cities or in connection

with some celebrated cloister or cathedral school. Youths from

all countries gathered around them. Around the teacher who first

attracted attention others gradually grouped themselves. Teachers

and scholars organized themselves into a corporation, and thus

arose the University. By this, however, we are to understand

nothing less than a _Universitas litterarum_, where attention

was given to the whole circle of the sciences. For a long time

there was no thought of a distribution into faculties. When the

multitude of teachers and students demanded a distribution into

several corporations, this was done according to nations. The

name signifies the _Universitas magistrorum et scholarium_

rather than an articulated whole. The study here pursued was

called _Studium generale_ or _universale_, because the entrance

thereto stood open to every one. At first each university

pursued exclusively and in later times chiefly some special

department of science. Thus, _e.g._ theology was prosecuted in

Paris and Oxford and subsequently also in Cologne, jurisprudence

in Bologna, Medicine in Salerno. The first university that

expressly made provision for teaching all sciences was founded

at Naples in A.D. 1224 with imperial munificence by Frederick II.

The earliest attempt at a distribution of the sciences among

distinct faculties was occasioned by the struggle between the

university of Paris and the mendicant monks (§ 103, 1), who

separated themselves from the other theological teachers and

as members of a guild formed themselves in A.D. 1259 into a

theological faculty. The number of the students, among whom

were many of ripe years, was immensely great, and in some of

the most celebrated universities reached often to ten or even

twenty thousand. There was a ten years’ course prescribed for

the training of the monks of Clugny: two years’ _Logicalia_,

three years’ _Literæ naturales et philosophicæ_, and five

years’ Theology. The Council at Tours in A.D. 1236 insisted

that every priest should have passed through a five years’

course of study.[291]

§ 99.4. =The Epochs of Scholasticism.=--The intellectual work

of the theologians of the Middle Ages during our period ran its

course in four epochs, the boundaries of which nearly coincide

with the boundaries of the four centuries which make up that

period.

1. From the 10th century, almost completely destitute of any

scientific movement, the so-called _Sæculum obscurum_, there

sprang forth the first buds of scholarship, without, however,

any distinct impress upon them of scholasticism.

2. In the 11th century scholasticism began to show itself, and

that in the form of dialectic, both sceptical and dogmatic.

3. In the 12th century mysticism assumed an independent place

alongside of dialectic, carried on a war of extermination

against the sceptical dialectic, and finally appeared in a

more peaceful aspect, contributing material to the positive

dogmatic dialectic.

4. In the 13th century dialectic scholasticism gained the

complete ascendency, and reached its highest glory in the

form of dogmatism in league with mysticism, and never, in

the persons of its greatest representatives, in opposition

to it.

§ 99.5. =The Canon Law.=--After the Pseudo-Isidore (§ 87, 2)

many collections of church laws appeared. They sought to render

the material more complete, intentionally or unintentionally

enlarging the forgeries and massing together the most

contradictory statements without any attempt at comparison

or sifting. The most celebrated of these were the collections

of bishops Burchard of Worms about A.D. 1020, Anselm of Lucca,

who died in A.D. 1086, nephew of the pope of the same name,

Alexander II., and Ivo of Chartres, who died in A.D. 1116. Then

the Camaldolite monk =Gratian= of Bologna undertook not only

to gather together the material in a more complete form than

had hitherto been done, but also to reconcile contradictory

statements by scholastic argumentation. His work appeared about

A.D. 1150 under the title _Concordantia discordantium canonum_,

and is commonly called _Decretum Gratiani_. A great impulse was

given to the study of canon law by means of this work, especially

at Bologna and Paris. Besides the _Legists_, who taught the Roman

law, there now arose numerous _Decretists_ teaching the canon

law and writing commentaries on Gratian’s work. Gregory IX.

had a new collection of Decrees of Councils and Decretals in

five books, the so-called _Liber extra Decretum_, or shortly

_Extra_ or _Decretum Gregorii_, drawn up by his confessor and

Grand-Penitentiary, the learned Dominican Raimundus [Raimund]

de Pennaforti [Pennaforte], and sent it in A.D. 1234 to the

University of Bologna. Boniface VIII. in A.D. 1298 added to

this collection in five parts his _Liber Sextus_, and Clement V.

in A.D. 1314 added what are called after him the _Clementinæ_.

From that time down to A.D. 1483 the decretals of later popes

were added as an appendix under the name _Extravagantes_,

and with these the _Corpus juris canonici_ was concluded.

An official edition was begun in A.D. 1566 by the so-called

_Correctores Romani_, which in A.D. 1580 received papal sanction

as authoritative for all time to come.[292]

§ 99.6. The Schoolmen as such contributed nothing to =Historical

Literature=. Histories were written not in the halls of the

universities but in the cells of the monasteries. Of these

there were three kinds as we have already seen in § 90, 9. For

workers in the department of Biblical History, see § 105, 5;

and of Legends of the Saints, § 104, 8. For ancient Church

History Rufinus and Cassiodorus were the authorities and the

common text books (§ 5, 1). An interesting example of the manner

in which universal history was treated when mediæval culture

had reached its highest point, is afforded by the _Speculum

magnum s. quadruplex_ of the Dominican =Vincent of Beauvais=

(_Bellovacensis_). This treatise was composed about the middle

of the 13th century at the command of Louis IX. of France as

a hand-book for the instruction of the royal princes. It forms

an encyclopædic exposition of all the sciences of that day in

four parts, _Speculum historiale_, _naturale_, _doctrinale_,

and _morale_. The _Speculum doctrinale_ breaks off just at

the point where it should have passed over to theology proper,

and the _Speculum morale_ is a later compilation by an unknown

hand.[293]

§ 100. THE _SÆCULUM OBSCURUM_: THE 10TH CENTURY.[294]

In contrast to the brilliant theological scholarship and the

activity of religious life in the 9th century, as well as to the

remarkable culture and scientific attainments of the Spanish Moors

with their world-renowned school at Cordova, the darkness of the

10th century seems all the more conspicuous, especially its first

half, when the papacy reached its lowest depths, the clergy gave way

to unblushing worldliness and the church was consumed by the foulest

corruption. During this age, indeed, there were gleams of light even

in Italy, but only like a will o’ the wisp rising from swampy meadows,

a fanatical outburst on behalf of ancient classic paganism. The

literature of this period stood in direct and avowed antagonism to

Christian theology and the Christian church, and commended a godless

frivolity and the most undisguised sensuality. A grammarian Wilgard

of Ravenna taught openly that Virgil, Horace, and Juvenal were better

and nobler than Paul, Peter, and John. The church had still so much

authority as to secure his death as a heretic, but in almost all the

towns of Italy he had sympathisers, and that among the clergy as well

as among laymen. It was only by the influence of the monks of Clugny,

the reformatory ascetic efforts of Romuald (§ 98, 1) and St. Nilus the

Younger, a very famous Greek recluse of Gaeta, who died in A.D. 1005,

aided by the reformatory measures for the purification of the church

taken by the Saxon emperors, that this unclean spirit was gradually

driven out. The famous endeavours of Alfred the Great and their

temporary success were borne to the grave along with himself. From

A.D. 959 however, Dunstan’s reformation awakened anew in England

appreciation of a desire for theological and national culture. The

connection of the imperial house of Otto with Byzantium also aroused

outside of Italy a longing after old classical learning. The imperial

chapel founded by the brother of Otto I., Bruno the Great (§ 97, 2),

became the training school of a High-German clergy, who were there

carefully trained as far as the means at the disposal of that age

permitted, not only in politics, but also in theological and classical

studies.

§ 100.1. The degree to which =Classical Studies= were pursued

in Germany during the period of the Saxon imperial house is shown

by the works of the learned nun =Roswitha= of Gandersheim, north

of Göttingen, who died about A.D. 984. The first edition of her

works, which comprise six dramas on biblical and ecclesiastical

themes in the style of Terence, in prose interspersed with

rhymes, also eight legends, a history of Otto I., and a history

of the founding of her cloister in leonine hexameters, was

issued by the humanist Conrad Celtes, with woodcuts by Dürer

in A.D. 1501.--=Notker Labeo=, president of the cloister

school of St. Gall, who died in A.D. 1022, enriched the old

German literature by translations of the Psalms, of Aristotle’s

_Organon_, the _Moralia_ of Gregory the Great, and various

writings of Boethius [Boëthius].--In =England= the educational

efforts of =St. Dunstan= (§ 97, 4) were powerfully supported

by Bishop =Ethelwold= of Winchester, who quite in the spirit of

Alfred the Great (§ 90, 10) wrought incessantly with his pupils

for the extension and enrichment of the Anglo-Saxon literature.

Of his scholars by far the most famous was =Aelfric=, surnamed

Grammaticus, who flourished about A.D. 990. He wrote an

Anglo-Saxon Grammar, prepared a collection of homilies for all

the Sundays and festivals and a free translation from sermons of

the Latin Fathers, translated also the Old Testament heptateuch,

and wrote treatises on other portions of Scripture and on

biblical questions.[295]

§ 100.2. =Italy= produced during the second half of the century

many theologians eminent and important in their day. =Atto=,

bishop of Vercelli, who died about A.D. 960, distinguished

himself by his exegetical compilations on Paul’s epistles, and

as a homilist and a vigorous opponent of the oppressors of the

church during these rough times. Still more important was his

younger contemporary =Ratherius=, bishop of Verona, afterwards

of Liège, but repeatedly driven away from both, who died A.D. 974.

A strict and zealous reformer of clerical morals, he insisted

upon careful study of the Bible, and wrought earnestly against

the unblushing paganism of the Italian scholars of his age

as well as against all kinds of hypocrisy, superstition, and

ecclesiastical corruptions. This, and also his attachment to

the political interests of the German court, exposed him to

much persecution. Among his writings may be named _De contemptu

canonum_, _Meditationes cordis_, _Apologia sui ipsius_, _De

discordia inter ipsum et clericos_.--In =France= we meet with

=Odo of Clugny=, who died in A.D. 942, famed as a hymn writer

and homilist, and, in his _Collationum Ll. iii._, as a zealous

reprover of the corrupt morals of his age. In England and France,

=Abbo of Fleury= taught toward the end of the century. From

England, where he had been induced to go by St. Dunstan, he

returned after some years to his own cloister of Fleury, and by

his academic gifts raised its school to great renown. He wrote on

astronomy, mathematics, philosophy, and history. He also composed

a treatise on dialectics, in which he makes his appearance as

the first and most eminent precursor of the Schoolmen. Chosen

abbot of his monastery and exercising strict discipline over his

monks, he suffered a martyr’s death by the hand of a murderer in

A.D. 1004.--=Gerbert of Rheims=, afterwards Pope Sylvester II.

(§ 96, 3, 4), during his active career lived partly in France,

partly in Italy. Distinguished both for classical and Arabic

scholarship, he shone in the firmament of this dark century

as it was passing away († A.D. 1003) like a star of the first

magnitude in theology, mathematics, astronomy, and natural

science, while by the common people he was regarded as a magician.

Under him the school of Rheims reached the summit of its fame.

§ 101. THE ELEVENTH CENTURY.

During the 11th century, with the moral and spiritual elevation of

the church, eager attention was again given to theological science. It

was at first mainly prosecuted in the monasteries of the Cistercians

and among the monks of Clugny, but afterwards at the seminaries which

arose toward the end of the century. The dialectic method won more

and more the upper hand in theology, and in the Eucharist controversy

between Lanfranc and Berengar, as well as in the controversy between

Anselm and Gaunilo about the existence of God, and between Anselm and

Roscelin about the Trinity, Dogmatism obtained its first victory over

Scepticism.

§ 101.1. =The Most Celebrated Schoolmen of this Century.=

1. =Fulbert= opens the list, a pupil of Gerbert, and

from A.D. 1007 Bishop of Chartres Before entering on

his episcopate he had founded at Chartres a theological

seminary. His fame spread over all the West, so that pupils

poured in upon him from every side.

2. The most important of these was =Berengar of Tours=,

afterwards a canon and teacher of the cathedral school

of his native city, and then again archdeacon at Angers.

He died in A.D. 1088. The school of Tours rose to great

eminence under him.

3. =Lanfranc=, the celebrated opponent of the last-named,

was abbot of the monastery of Bec in Normandy, and from

A.D. 1070 Archbishop of Canterbury (§ 96, 8). He died in

A.D. 1089. He wrote against Berengar _Liber de corpore et

sanguine Domini_.

4. Bishop =Hildebert of Tours=, who died in A.D. 1134, famous

as a writer of spiritual songs, was a pupil of Berengar.

But he avoided the sceptical tendencies of his teacher, and,

warned of the danger of dialectic and following the mystical

bent of his mind, he applied himself to the cultivation of

a life of faith, so that St. Bernard praised him as _tantam

columnam ecclesiæ_.

5. The monastic school of Bec, which Lanfranc had rendered

celebrated, reached the summit of its fame under his pupil

=Anselm of Canterbury=, who far excelled his teacher in

genius as well as in importance for theological science.

He was born in A.D. 1033 at Aosta in Italy, educated in the

monastery of Bec, became teacher and abbot there, was raised

in A.D. 1093 to the archiepiscopal chair of Canterbury, and

died in A.D. 1109. As a churchman he courageously defended

the independence of the church according to the principles

of Hildebrand (§ 96, 12). As a theologian he may be ranked

in respect of acuteness and profundity, speculative talent

and Christian earnestness, as a second Augustine, and

on the theological positions of that Father he based his

own. Though carrying dialectic even into his own private

devotions, there was yet present in him a vein of religious

mysticism. According to him faith is the condition of true

knowledge, _Fides præcedit intellectum_; but it is also with

him a sacred duty to raise faith to knowledge, _Credo ut

intelligam_. Only he who in respect of endowment and culture

is not capable of this intellectual activity should content

himself with simple _Veneratio_. His _Monologium_ contains

discussions on the nature of God, his _Proslogium_ proves

the being of God; his three books, _De fide Trinitatis et

de incarnatione Verbi_, develop and elaborate the doctrine

of the Trinity and Christology; while the three dialogues

_De veritate_, _De libero arbitrio_, and _De casu diaboli_

treat of the object, and the tract _Cur Deus homo?_ treats

of the subject, of soteriology. The most able, profound,

and impressive of all his writings is the last-named,

which proves the necessity of the incarnation of God in

Christ for the reconciliation of man with God. It was an

epoch-making treatise in the historical development of the

church doctrine of satisfaction on Pauline foundations.[296]

Anselm took part in the controversy of the Greeks by his

work _De processione Spiritus_ (§ 67, 4). He discussed the

question of predestination in a moderate Augustinian form in

the book, _De concordia præscientæ et prædest. et gratiæ Dei

cum libero arbitrio_. In his _Meditationes_ and _Orationes_

he gives expression to the ardent piety of his soul, as also

in the voluminous collection (426) of his letters.[297]

6. =Anselm of Laon=, surnamed Scholasticus, was the pupil

of Anselm of Canterbury. From A.D. 1076 he taught with

brilliant success at Paris, and thus laid the first

foundation of its university. Subsequently he returned

to his native city Laon, was made there archdeacon and

Scholasticus, and founded in that place a famous theological

school. He died in A.D. 1117. He composed the _Glossa

interlinearis_, a short exposition of the Vulgate between

the lines, which with Walafrid’s _Glossa ordinaria_

(§ 90, 4), became the favourite exegetical handbook of

the Middle Ages.

7. =William of Champeaux=, the proper founder of the University

of Paris, had already taught rhetoric and dialectic for

some time with great success in the cathedral school, when

the fame of the theological school of Laon led him to the

feet of Anselm. In A.D. 1108 he returned to Paris, and

had immense crowds listening to his theological lectures.

Chagrined on account of a defeat in argument at the hand

of Abælard, one of his own pupils, he retired from public

life into the old chapel of St. Victor near Paris, and there

founded a monastery under the same name for canons of the

rule of St. Augustine. He died in A.D. 1121 as Bishop of

Chalons.

8. The abbot =Guibert of Nogent=, in the diocese of Laon,

who died about A.D. 1124, a scholar of Anselm at Bec,

was a voluminous writer and, with all his own love of

the marvellous, a vigorous opponent of all the grosser

absurdities of relic and saint worship. He wrote a useful

history of the first crusade, and a work important in

its day entitled, _Liber quo ordine sermo fieri debeat_.

His great work was one in four books, _De pignoribus

Sanctorum_, against the abuses of saint and relic worship,

the exhibition of pretended parts of the Saviour’s body,

_e.g._ teeth, pieces of the foreskin, navel cord, etc.,

against the translation or distribution of the bodies

of saints, against the fraud of introducing new saints,

relics, and legends.

§ 101.2. =Berengar’s Eucharist Controversy,

A.D. 1050-1079.=--Berengar of Tours elaborated a theory of the

eucharist which is directly antagonistic to the now generally

prevalent theory of Radbert (§ 91, 3). He taught that while the

elements are changed and Christ’s body is really present, neither

the change nor the presence is substantial. The presence of His

body is rather the existence of His power in the elements, and

the change of the bread is the actual manifestation of this power

in the form of bread. The condition however of this power-presence

is not merely the consecration but also the faith of the receiver.

Without this faith the bread is an empty and impotent sign.

Such views were publicly expressed by him and his numerous

followers for a long while without causing any offence. But

when he formally stated them in a letter to his friend Lanfranc

of Bec, this churchman became Berengar’s accuser at the Synod

of Rome in A.D. 1050. The synod condemned him unheard. A second

synod of the same year held at Vercelli, before which Berengar

was to have appeared but could not because he had meanwhile

been imprisoned in France, in an outburst of fanatical fury

had the treatise of Ratramnus on the eucharist, wrongly ascribed

to Erigena, torn up and burnt, while Berengar’s doctrine was

again condemned. Meanwhile Berengar was by the intervention of

influential friends set at liberty and made the acquaintance of

the powerful papal legate Hildebrand, who, holding by the simple

Scripture doctrine that the bread and wine of the sacrament

was the body and blood of Christ, occupied probably a position

intermediate between Radbert’s grossly material and Berengar’s

dynamic hypothesis. Disinclined to favour the fanaticism of

Berengar’s opponents, Hildebrand contented himself with exacting

from him at the Synod of Tours in A.D. 1054 a solemn declaration

that he did not deny the presence of Christ in the Supper, but

regarded the consecrated elements as the body and blood of Christ.

Emboldened by this decision and still always persecuted by his

opponents as a heretic, Berengar undertook in A.D. 1059 a journey

to Rome, in order, as he hoped, by Hildebrand’s influence to

secure a distinct papal verdict in his favour. But there he found

a powerful opposition headed by the passionate and pugnacious

Cardinal Humbert (§ 67, 3). This party at the Lateran Council

in Rome in A.D. 1059, compelled Berengar, who was really very

deficient in strength of character, to cast his writings into

the fire and to swear to a confession composed by Humbert which

went beyond even Radbert’s theory in the gross corporeality of

its expressions. But in France he immediately again repudiated

this confession with bitter invectives against Rome, and

vindicated anew against Lanfranc and others his earlier views.

The bitterness of the controversy now reached its height.

Hildebrand had meanwhile, in A.D. 1073, himself become pope.

He vainly endeavoured to bring the controversy to an end by

getting Berengar to accept a confession couched in moderate

terms admitting the real presence of the body and blood in the

Supper. The opposite party did not shrink from casting suspicion

on the pope’s own orthodoxy, and so Hildebrand was obliged, in

order to avoid the loss of his great life work in a mass of minor

controversies, to insist at a second synod in Rome in A.D. 1079

upon an unequivocal and decided confession of the substantial

change of the bread. Berengar was indiscreet enough to refer

to his private conversations with the pope; but now Gregory

commanded him at once to acknowledge and abjure his error.

With fear and trembling Berengar obeyed, and the pope dismissed

him with a safe conduct, distinctly prohibiting all further

disputation. Bowed down under age and calamities, Berengar

withdrew to the island of St. Come, near Tours, where he lived

as a solitary penitent in the practice of strict asceticism, and

died at a great age in peace with the church in A.D. 1088. His

chief work is _De Cœna S. adv. Lanfr._--Continuation, § 102, 5.

§ 101.3. =Anselm’s Controversies.=

I. On the basis of his Platonic realism, Anselm of Canterbury

constructed the ontological proof of the being of God, that

there is given in man’s reason the idea of the most perfect

being to whose perfection existence also belongs. When he

laid this proof before the learned world in his _Monologium_

and _Proslogium_, the monk Gaunilo of Marmoutiers, who

was a supporter of Aristotelian realism, opposed him, and

acutely pointed out the defects of this proof in his _Liber

pro insipiente_. He so named it in reference to a remark

of Anselm, who had said that even the _insipiens_ who,

according to Psalm xiv. 1, declares in his heart that there

is no God, affords thereby a witness for the existence of

the idea, and consequently also for the existence of God.

Anselm replied in his _Apologeticus c. Gaunilonem_. And

there the controversy ended without any definite result.

II. Of more importance was Anselm’s controversy with

=Roscelin=, the Nominalist, canon of Compiègne. He in

a purely nominalistic fashion understood the idea of the

Godhead as a mere abstraction, and thought that the three

persons of the Godhead could not be _una res_, οὐσία, as

then they must all at once have been incarnate in Christ.

A synod at Soissons in A.D. 1092 condemned him as a

tritheist. He retracted, but afterwards reiterated his

earlier views. Anselm then, in his tract _De fide Trinitatis

et de incarnatione Verbi contra blasphemias Rucelini_,

proved that the drift of his argumentation tended toward

tritheism, and vindicated the trinitarian doctrine of the

church. For more than two centuries Nominalism was branded

with a suspicion of heterodoxy, until in the 14th century

a reaction set in (§ 113, 3), which restored it again to

honour.

§ 102. THE TWELFTH CENTURY.

In the 12th century dialectic and mysticism are seen contending

for the mastery in the department of theology. On the one side

stands Abælard, in whom the sceptical dialectic had its most

eminent representative. Over against him stands St. Bernard as

his most resolute opponent. Theological dialectic afterwards assumed

a pre-eminently dogmatic and ecclesiastical character, entering into

close relationship with mysticism. While this movement was mainly

carried on in France, where the University of Paris attracted teachers

and scholars from all lands, it passed over from thence into Germany,

where Provost Gerhoch and his brother Arno gave it their active support

in opposition to that destructive sort of dialectic that was then

spreading around them. Although the combination of dogmatic dialectic

and mysticism had for a long time no formal recognition, it ultimately

secured the approval of the highest ecclesiastical authorities.

§ 102.1. =The Contest on French Soil.=

I. =The Dialectic Side of the Gulf.=--=Peter Abælard=, superior

to all his contemporaries in acuteness, learning, dialectic

power, and bold freethinking, but proud and disputatious,

was born at Palais in Brittany in A.D. 1079. His first

teacher in philosophy was Roscelin. Afterwards he entered

the school of William of Champeaux at Paris, the most

celebrated dialectician of his times. Having defeated

his master in a public disputation, he founded a school at

Melun near Paris, where thousands of pupils flocked to him.

In order to be nearer Paris, he moved his school to Corbeil;

then to the very walls of Paris on Mount St. Genoveva;

and ceased not to overwhelm William with humiliations,

until his old teacher retreated from the field. In order

to secure still more brilliant success, he began to study

theology under the Schoolman Anselm of Laon. But very soon

the ambitious scholar thought himself superior also to this

master. Relying upon his dialectical endowments, he took

a bet without further preparation to expound the difficult

prophet Ezekiel. He did it indeed to the satisfaction of

scholars, but Anselm refused to allow him to continue his

lectures. Abælard now returned to Paris, where he gathered

around him a great number of enthusiastic pupils. Canon

Fulbert appointed him teacher of his beautiful and talented

niece Heloise. He won her love, and they were secretly

married. She then denied the marriage in order that he

might not be debarred from the highest offices of the

church. Persisting in this denial, her relatives dealt

severely with her, and Abælard had her placed in the nunnery

of Argenteuil. Fulbert in his fury had Abælard seized during

the night and emasculated, so that he might be disqualified

for ecclesiastical preferment. Overwhelmed with shame, he

fled to the monastery of St. Denys, and there in A.D. 1119

took the monastic vow. Heloise took the veil at Argenteuil.

But even at St. Denys Abælard was obliged by the eager

entreaties of former scholars to resume his lectures. His

free and easy treatment of the church doctrine and his

haughty spirit aroused many enemies against him, who at

the Synod of Soissons in A.D. 1121 compelled him before the

papal legate to cast into the fire his treatise _De Unitate

et Trinitate divina_, and had him committed to a monastic

prison. By the intercession of some friends he was soon

again set free, and returned to St. Denys. But when he

made the discovery that Dionysius at Paris was not the

Areopagite the persecution of the monks drove him into

a forest near Troyes. There too his scholars followed him

and made him resume his lectures. His colony grew up under

his hands into the famous abbey of the Paraclete. Finding

even there no rest, he made over the abbey of the Paraclete

to Heloise, who had not been able to come to terms with

her insubordinate nuns at Argenteuil. He himself now became

abbot of the monastery of St. Gildasius at Ruys in Brittany,

and, after in vain endeavouring for eight years to restore

the monastic discipline, he again in A.D. 1136 resumed

his office of teacher and lectured at St. Genoveva near

Paris with great success. He wrote an ethical treatise,

“_Scito te ipsum_,” issued a new and enlarged edition of

his _Theologia christiana_, now extant as the incomplete

_Introductio ad theologiam_ in three books, and composed

a _Dialogus inter Philosophum, Judæum et Christianum_, in

which the heathen philosophers and poets of antiquity are

ranked almost as high as the prophets and apostles. In _Sic

et Non_, “Yes and No,” a collection of extracts from the

Fathers under the various heads of doctrine contradictory

of one another, the traditional theology was held up to

contempt.

§ 102.2.

=Abælard= maintained, in opposition to the

Augustinian-Anselmian theory, that faith preceded

knowledge, that only what we comprehend is to be believed.

He did indeed intend that his dialectic should be used not

for the overthrow but for the establishment of the church

doctrine. He proceeded, however, from doubt as the principle

of all knowledge, regarding all church dogmas as problems

which must be proved before they can be believed: _Dubitando

enim ad inquisitionem venimus, inquirendo veritatem

percipimus_. He thus reduced faith to a mere probability

and measured the content of faith by the rule of subjective

reason. This was most glaring in the case of the trinitarian

doctrine, which with him approached Sabellian modalism. God

as omnipotent is to be called Father, as all wise the Son,

as loving and gracious the Spirit; and so the incarnation

becomes a merely temporal and dynamic immanence of the Logos

in the man Jesus. The significance of the ethical element

in Christianity quite overshadowed that of the dogmatic. He

taught that all fundamental truths of Christianity had been

previously proclaimed by philosophers and poets of Greece

and Rome, who were scarcely less inspired than the prophets

and apostles, the special service of the latter consisting

in giving currency to these truths among the uncultured. He

turns with satisfaction from the theology of the Fathers to

that of the apostles, and from that again to the religion of

Jesus, whom he represents rather as a reformer introducing

a pure morality than as a founder of a religious system.

Setting aside Anselm’s theory of satisfaction, he regards

the redemption and reconciliation of man as consisting in

the awakening in sinful man, by means of the infinite love

displayed by Christ’s teaching and example, by His life,

sufferings and death upon the cross, a responding love of

such fulness and power, that he is thereby freed from the

dominion of sin and brought into the glorious liberty of

the children of God.[298]--Abælard’s fame and following

grew in a wonderful manner from day to day; but also

powerful opponents dragged his heresies into light and

vigorously combated them. The most important of these were

the Cistercian monk William of Thierry and St. Bernard, who

called attention to the dangerous tendency of his teaching.

St. Bernard dealt personally with the heretic, but when

he failed in converting him, he appeared in A.D. 1141 at

the Synod of Sens as his accuser. The synod condemned as

heretical a series of statements culled from his writings

by Bernard. Abælard appealed to the pope, but even his

friends at Rome, among whom was Card. Guido de Castella,

afterwards Pope Cœlestine II., could not close their

eyes to his manifest heterodoxies. His friendship for

Arnold of Brescia also told against him at Rome (§ 108, 7).

Innocent II. therefore excommunicated Abælard and his

supporters, condemned his writings to be burnt and himself

to be confined in a monastery. Abælard found an asylum

with the abbot Peter the Venerable of Clugny, who not

only effected his reconciliation with Bernard, but also,

on the ground of his _Apologia s. Confessio fidei_, in

which he submitted to the judgment of the church, obtained

permission from the pope to pass his last days in peace at

Clugny. During this time he composed his _Hist. calamitatum

Abælardi_, an epistolary autobiography, which, though

not free from vanity and bitterness, is yet worthy to be

ranked with Augustine’s “Confessions” for its unreserved

self-accusation and for the depth of self-knowledge which

it reveals. He died in A.D. 1142, in the monastery of

St. Marcellus at Chalons, where he had gone in quest of

health. He was buried in the abbey of the Paraclete, where

Heloise laid on his coffin the letter of absolution of Peter

of Clugny. Twenty-two years later Heloise herself was laid

in the same quiet resting place.[299]

§ 102.3.

II. =The Mystic Side of the Gulf.=--Abælard’s most famous

opponent was =St. Bernard of Clairvaux= (§ 98, 1), born

in A.D. 1091 at Fontaines near Dijon in Burgundy, died in

A.D. 1153, a man of such extraordinary influence on his

generation as the world seldom sees. Venerated as a miracle

worker, gifted with an eloquence that carried everything

before it (_doctor mellifluus_), he was the protector and

reprover of the Vicar of God, the peacemaker among the

princes, the avenger of every wrong. His genuine humility

made him refuse all high places. His enthusiasm for the

hierarchy did not hinder him from severely lashing clerical

abuses. It was his word that roused the hearts of men

throughout all Europe to undertake the second crusade,

and that won many heretics and schismatics back to the

bosom of the church. Having his conversation in heaven,

leading a life of study, meditation, prayer, and ecstatic

contemplation, he had also dominion over the earth, and by

counsel, exhortation, and exercise of discipline exerted

a quickening and healthful influence on all the relations

of life. His theological tendency was in the direction

of contemplative mysticism, with hearty submission to the

doctrine of the church. Like Abælard, but from the opposite

side, he came into conflict with the theory of Anselm;

for the ideal of theology with him was not the development

of faith into knowledge by means of thought, but rather

the enlightenment of faith in the way of holiness. Bernard

was not at all an enemy of science, but he rather saw in

the dialectical hair-splitting of Abælard, which grudged

not to cut down the main props of saving truth for the

glorification of its own art, the overthrow of all true

theology and the destruction of all the saving efficacy of

faith. Heart theology founded on heart piety, nourished and

strengthened by prayer, meditation, spiritual illumination

and holiness, was for him the only true theology. _Tantum

Deus cognoscitur, quantum diligitur. Orando facilius quam

disputando et dignius Deus quæritur et invenitur._ The Bible

was his favourite reading, and in the recesses of the forest

he spent much time in prayer and study of the Scriptures.

But in ecstasy (_excessus_) which consists in withdrawal

from sensible phenomena and becoming temporarily dead to

all earthly relations, the soul of the pious Christian

is able to rise into the immediate presence of God, so

that “_more angelorum_” it reaches a blessed vision and

enjoyment of the Divine glory and that perfect love which

loves itself and all creatures only in God. Yet even he

confesses that this highest stage of abstraction was only

attained unto by him occasionally and partially through

God’s special grace. Bernard’s mysticism is most fully set

forth in his eighty-six Sermons on the first two chapters

of the Song of Solomon and in the tract _De diligendo Deo_.

In his controversy with Abælard he wrote his _Tractatus de

erroribus Petri Abælardi_. To the department of dogmatics

belongs _De gratia et libero arbitrio_; and to that of

history, the biography of his friend Malachias (§ 149, 5).

The most important of his works is _De Consideratione_,

in 5 bks., in which with the affection of a friend, the

earnestness of a teacher, and the authority of a prophet,

he sets before Pope Eugenius III. the duties and dangers

of his high position. He was also one of the most brilliant

hymn writers of the Middle Ages. Alexander III. canonized

him in A.D. 1173, and Pius VIII. in A.D. 1830 enrolled him

among the _doctores ecclesiæ_ (§ 47, 22 c).--Soon after the

controversy with Abælard had been brought to a close by the

condemnation of the church, Bernard was again called upon

to resist the pretensions of dialectic. Gilbert de la Porrée

(Porretanus), teacher of theology at Paris, who became

Bishop of Poitiers in A.D. 1142 and died in A.D. 1154,

in his commentary on the theological writings of Boëthius

(§ 47, 23) ascribed reality to the universal term “God”

in such a way that instead of a Trinity we seemed to have

a Quaternity. At the Synod of Rheims, A.D. 1148, under

the presidency of Pope Eugenius III., Bernard appeared as

accuser of Porretanus. Gilbert’s doctrine was condemned,

but he himself was left unmolested.[300]

§ 102.4.

III. =Bridging the Gulf from the Side of Mysticism.=--At the

school of the monastery of St. Victor in Paris, founded

by William of Champeaux after his defeat at the hands

of Abælard, an attempt was made during the first half of

the 12th century to combine mysticism and dialectic in the

treatment of theology. The peaceable heads of this school

would indeed have nothing to do with the speculations of

Abælard and his followers which tended to overthrow the

mysteries of the faith. But the mystics of St. Victor

made an important concession to the dialecticians by

entering with as much energy upon the scientific study

and construction of dogmatics as they did upon the devout

examination of Scripture and mystical theology. They

exhibited a speculative power and a profundity of thought

that won the hearty admiration of the subtlest of the

dialecticians. By far the most celebrated of this school

was =Hugo of St. Victor=. Descended from the family

of the Count of Halberstadt, born in A.D. 1097, nearly

related to St. Bernard, honoured by his contemporaries

as _Alter Augustinus_ or _Lingua Augustini_, Hugo was one

of the most profound thinkers of the Middle Ages. Having

enjoyed a remarkably complete course of training, he was

enthusiastically devoted to the pursuit of science, and,

endowed with rich and deep spirituality, he exerted a most

healthful and powerful influence upon his own and succeeding

ages, although church and science had to mourn their loss by

his early death in A.D. 1141. In his _Eruditio didascalica_

we have in 3 bks. an encyclopædic sketch of all human

knowledge as a preparation to the study of theology, and

in other 3 bks. an introduction to the Bible and church

history.[301] His _Summa sententiarum_ is an exposition of

dogmatics on patristic lines, an ecclesiastical counterpart

of Abælard’s _Sic et Non_. The ripest and most influential

of all his works, and the most independent, is his _De

sacramentis christ. fidei_, in 2 bks., in which he treats

of the whole contents of dogmatics from the point of view

of the Sacraments (§ 104, 2). His exegetical works are less

important and less original. His mysticism is set forth _ex

professo_ in his _Soliloquium de arrha animæ_ and in the

series of three tracts, _De arca morali_, _De arca mystica_,

and _De vanitate mundi_. He makes Noah’s ark the symbol of

the church as well as of the individual soul which journeys

over the billows of the world to God, and, by the successive

stages of _lectio_, _cogitatio_, _meditatio_, _oratio_,

and _operatio_ reaches to _contemplatio_ or the vision of

God.--Hugo’s pupil, and from A.D. 1162 the prior of his

convent, was the Scotchman =Richard St. Victor=, who died

in A.D. 1173. With less of the dialectic faculty than

his master--though this too is shown in his 6 bks. _De

trinitate_, a scholastic exposition of the _Cognitio_

or _Fides quæ creditur_--he mainly devoted his energies

to the development on the mystico-contemplative side of

the “_Affectus_” or _Fides qua creditur_, which aims at

the vision and enjoyment of God. This he represents as

reached by the three stages of contemplation, distinguished

as _mentis dilatatio_, _sublevatio_, and _alienatio_.

Among his mystical tracts, mostly mystical expositions

of Scripture passages, the most important are, _De

præparatione animæ ad contemplationem, s. de xii.

patriarchis_, and the 4 bks. _De gratia contemplationis

s. de arca mystica_. These are also known as _Benjamin

minor_ and _B. major_. In Richard there appears the first

indications of a misunderstanding with the dialecticians

which, among the late Victorines, and especially in the

case of Walter of St. Victor, took the form of vehement

hostility.

§ 102.5.

IV. =Bridging the Gulf from the Side of Dialectics.=--After

Abælard’s condemnation theological dialectics came more

and more to be associated with the church doctrine and to

approach more or less nearly to a friendly alliance with

mysticism. Hugo’s writings did much to bring this about.

The following are the most important Schoolmen of this

tendency.

1. The Englishman =Robert Pulleyn=, teacher at Oxford

and Paris, afterwards cardinal and papal chancellor

at Rome, who died about A.D. 1150. His chief work is

_Sententiarum Ll. VIII._ Though very famous in its day,

it was soon cast into the shade by the Lombard’s work.

2. =Petrus [Peter] Lombardus [Lombard]=, born at Novara

in Lombardy, a scholar of Abælard, but powerfully

influenced by St. Bernard and Hugo St. Victor, was

Bishop of Paris from A.D. 1159 till his death in

A.D. 1164. He published a dogmatic treatise under

the title of _Sententiarum Ll. IV._; of which Bk. 1

treated of God, Bk. 2 of Creatures, Bk. 3 of Redemption,

Bk. 4 of the Sacraments and the Last Things. For

centuries this was the textbook in theological

seminaries and won for its author the designation

of _Magister Sententiarum_. He himself compared this

gift laid on the altar of the church to the widow’s

mite, but the book attained a place of supreme

importance in mediæval theology, had innumerable

commentaries written on it and was officially authorized

as the theological textbook by the Lateran Council of

A.D. 1215. It is indeed a well arranged collection of

the doctrinal deliverances of the Fathers, in which

apparent contradictions are dialectically resolved, with

great skill, and wrought up together into an articulate

system, but from want of independence and occasional

indecision or withholding of any definite opinion, it

falls behind Hugo’s _Summa_ and Robert’s _Sentences_.

It had this advantage, however, that it gave freer scope

to scholars and teachers, and so was more stimulating as

a textbook for academic use. The Lombard’s works include

a commentary on the Psalms and _Catenæ_ on the Pauline

Epistles.

3. The Frenchman =Peter of Poitiers= (_Pictaviensis_), one

of the ablest followers of the Lombard, was chancellor

of the University of Paris toward the end of the century.

He wrote 5 bks. of Sentences or Distinctions, which in

form and matter are closely modelled on the work of his

master.

4. The most gifted of all the Summists of the 12th

century was the German =Alanus ab Insulis=, born at

Lille or Ryssel, lat. _Insulæ_. After teaching long

at Paris, he entered the Cistercian order, and died

at an advanced age at Clairvaux in A.D. 1203. A man

of extensive erudition and a voluminous writer, he was

called _Doctor universalis_. He wrote an allegorical

poem _Anticlaudianus_, which describes how reason and

faith in union with all the virtues restore human nature

to perfection. His _Regulæ de s. theologia_ give a

short outline of theology and morals in 125 paradoxical

sentences which are tersely expounded. A short but able

summary of the Christian faith is given in the 5 bks.

_De arte catholicæ fidei_. This work is characterized

by the use of a mathematical style of demonstration,

like that of the later school of Wolf, and an avoidance

of references to patristic authorities, which would have

little weight with Mohammedans and heretics. He is thus

rather an opponent than a representative of dialectic

scholasticism. The _Summa quadripartita c. Hæreticos

sui temporis_ ascribed to him was written by another

Alanus.

§ 102.6. =The Controversy on German Soil.=--The provost

=Gerhoch= and his brother, the dean =Arno= of Reichersberg

in Bavaria, were representatives of the school of St. Victor

as mediators between dialectics and mysticism. In A.D. 1150

Gerhoch addressed a memorial to Eugenius III., _De corrupto

ecclesiæ statu_, and afterwards he published _De investigatione

Antichristi_. He found the antichrist in the papal schisms of

his times, in the ambition and covetousness of popes, in the

corruptibility of the curia, in the manifold corruptions of the

church, and especially in the spread of a dialectic destructive

of all the mysteries of the faith. The controversy in which

both of these brothers took most interest was that occasioned

by the revival of Adoptionism in consequence of the teaching

of French dialecticians, especially Abælard and Gilbert. It

led to the formulating of the Christological doctrine in such

a form as prepared the way for the later Lutheran theories

of the _Communicatio idiomatum_ and the _Ubiquitas corporis

Christi_ (§ 141, 9).--In South Germany, conspicuously in the

schools of Bamberg, Freisingen, and Salzburg, the dialectic of

Abælard, Gilbert, and the Lombard was predominant. Its chief

representatives were =Folmar of Triefenstein= in Franconia and

Bishop =Eberhard of Bamberg=. The controversy arose over the

doctrine of the eucharist. Folmar had maintained like Berengar

that not the actually glorified body of Christ is present in

the sacrament, but only the spiritual substance of His flesh

and blood, without muscles, sinews and bones. Against this gross

Capernaitic view (John vi. 52, 59) Gerhoch maintained that the

eucharistic body is the very resurrection body of Christ, the

substance of which is a glorified corporeity without flesh and

blood in a carnal sense, without sinews and bones. The bishop

of Bamberg took offence at his friend’s bold rejection of the

doctrine approved by the church, and so Folmar modified his

position to the extent of admitting that there was on the altar

not only the true, but also the whole body in the perfection

of its human substance, under the form of bread and wine.

But nevertheless both he and Abælard adhered to their radical

error, a dialectical dismemberment of the two natures of Christ,

according to which the divinity and humanity, the Son of God and

the Son of man, were two strictly separate existences. Christ,

they taught, is according to His humanity Son of God in no other

way than a pious man is, _i.e._ by adoption; but according to His

Divine nature He is like the Father omnipresent, omnipotent, and

omniscient. In respect of His human nature it must still be said

by Him, “My Father is greater than I.” He dwells, however, bodily

in heaven, and is shut in by and confined to it. Only His Divine

nature can claim _Latria_ or _adoratio_, worship. Only _Dulia,

cultus_, reverence, such as is due to saints, images, and relics,

should be given to His body and blood upon the altar. Gerhoch’s

doctrine of the Supper, on the other hand, is summed up in

the proposition: He who receives the flesh of the Logos (_Caro

Verbi_) receives also therewith the Logos in His flesh (_Verbum

carnis_). Folmar and Eberhard denounced this as Eutychian heresy.

A conference at Bamberg in A.D. 1158, where Gerhoch stood alone

as representative of his views, ended by his opponents declaring

that he had been convicted of heresy. In A.D. 1162 a Council

at Friesach in Carinthia, under the presidency of Archbishop

Eberhard of Salzburg, reached the same conclusion.

§ 102.7. =Theologians of a Pre-eminently Biblical and

Ecclesiastico-Practical Tendency.=

1. =Alger of Liège=, teacher of the cathedral school there,

was one of the most important German theologians in the

beginning of the 12th century. He resigned his appointment

in A.D. 1121, to spend his last years in the monastery of

Clugny, in order to enjoy the company and friendship of

its abbot, Peter the Venerable; and there he died about

A.D. 1130. The school of Liège, in which he had himself

been trained up in the high church Cluniac doctrine there

prevalent, flourished greatly during his rule of twenty

years. His chief works are _De Sacramentis corporis et

sanguinis Domini_ in 3 bks., distinguished by acuteness

and lucidity, and a controversial tract on the lines of

Radbert against Berengar’s doctrine condemned by the church.

In his _De misericordia et justitia_ he treats of church

discipline with circumspection, clearness, and decision.

2. =Rupert of Deutz=, more than any mediæval scholar before

or after, created an enthusiasm for the study of Scripture

as the people’s book for all times, the field in which the

precious treasure is hid, to be found by any one whose eyes

are made sharp by faith. He was a contemporary and fellow

countryman of Alger, and died in A.D. 1135. Though he

refers to the Hebrew and Greek texts, he cares less for

the literal than for the speculative-dogmatic and mystical

sense discovered by allegorical exegesis. In his principal

work, _De trinitate et operilus ejus_, he sets forth in

3 bks. the creation work of the Father, in 30 bks. the

revealing and redeeming work of the Son, from the fall

to the death of Christ, and in the remaining 9 books the

sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit, from the resurrection

of Christ to the general resurrection. He maintains in

opposition to Anselm (who was afterwards followed by Thomas

Aquinas) that Christ would have become incarnate even if

men had not sinned (a view which appears in Irenæus, and

afterwards in Alexander Hales, Duns Scotus, John Wessel,

and others). In regard to the Lord’s Supper he maintained

the doctrine of consubstantiation, and he taught like pope

Gelasius (§ 58, 2) that the relation of the heavenly and

earthly in the eucharist is quite analogous to that of the

two natures in Christ.[302]

3. The Benedictine =Hervæus= in the cloister of Bourg-Dieu,

who died about A.D. 1150, was distinguished for deep piety

and zealous study of Scripture and the fathers. He wrote

commentaries on Isaiah and on the Pauline Epistles, the

latter of which was ascribed to Anselm and so published

among his works.

§ 102.8.

4. =John of Salisbury=, _Johannes Parvus Sarisberiensis_,

was a theologian of a thoroughly practical tendency, though

a diligent student of Abælard and an able classical scholar,

specially familiar with the writings of Cicero. As the

trusted friend of Hadrian IV. he was often sent from England

on embassies to the pope. In Becket’s struggle against the

encroachments of the Crown upon the rights of the church

(§ 96, 16) he stood by the primate’s side as his faithful

counsellor and fellow soldier, wrote an account of his

life and martyrdom, and laboured diligently to secure his

canonization. He was made Bishop of Chartres in A.D. 1176,

and died there in A.D. 1180. His works, distinguished

by singularly wide reading and a pleasing style, are

pre-eminently practical. In his _Policraticus s. de

nugis Curialium et vestigiis Philosophorum_ he combats

the _nugæ_ of the hangers on at court with theological

and philosophical weapons in a well balanced system of

ecclesiastico-political and philosophico-theological

ethics. His _Metalogicus_ in 4 bks. is a polemic against

the prostitution of science by the empty formalism of the

schoolmen. His 329 Epistles are of immense importance for

the literary and scientific history of his times.

5. =Walter of St. Victor=, Richard’s successor as prior

of that monastery, makes his appearance about A.D. 1130,

as the author of a vigorous polemic against dialectic

scholasticism, in which he combats especially Christological

heresies and spares the idolized Lombard just as little

as the condemned Abælard.[303] He combats with special

eagerness a new heresy springing from Abælard and developed

by the Lombard which he styles “Nihilism,” because by

denying the independence of the human nature of Christ

it teaches that Christ in so far as He is man is not an

_Aliquid_, _i.e._ an individual.

6. =Innocent III.= is deserving of a place here both on

account of his rich theological learning and on account

of the earnestness and depth of the moral and religious

view of life which he presents in his writings. The most

celebrated of these are _De contemtu mundi_ and 6 bks.

_Mysteria evang. legis ac sacramenti Eucharistitæ_, and

during his pontificate, his epistles and sermons.

§ 102.9. =Humanist Philosophers.=--While Abælard was striving

to prove Christianity the religion of reason, and for this was

condemned by the church, his contemporary =Bernard Sylvester=,

teacher of the school of Chartres, a famous nursery of classical

studies, was seeking to shake himself free of any reference to

theology and the church. Satisfied with Platonism as a genuinely

spiritual religion, and feeling therefore no personal need of the

church and its consolations, he carefully avoided any allusion

to its dogmas, and so remained in high repute as a teacher

and writer. His treatise, _De mundi universitates. Megacosmus

et Microcosmus_, in dialogue form discussing in a dilettante,

philosophizing style natural phenomena, half poetry, half prose,

was highly popular in its day. It fared very differently with

his accomplished and like-minded scholar =William of Conches=.

The vehemence with which he declared himself a Catholic Christian

and not a heathen Academic aroused suspicion. Though in his

_Philosophia mundi_, sometimes erroneously attributed to Honorius

of Autun, he studiously sought to avoid any contradiction of the

biblical and ecclesiastical theory of the world, he could not

help in his discussion of the origin of man characterizing the

literal interpretation of the Scripture history of creation as

peasant faith. The book fell into the hands of the abbot William

of Thierry, who accused its author to St. Bernard. The opposition

soon attained to such dimensions that he was obliged to publish

a formal recantation and in a new edition to remove everything

objectionable.

§ 103. THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY.

Scholasticism took a new departure in the beginning of the

13th century, and by the middle of the century it reached its climax.

Material for its development was found in the works of Aristotle and

his Moslem expositors, and this was skilfully used by highly gifted

members of the Franciscan and Dominican orders so that all opposition

to the scholastic philosophy was successfully overborne. The Franciscans

Alexander of Hales and Bonaventura stand side by side with the brilliant

Dominican teachers Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas. As reformers

of the scholastic philosophy from different points of view we meet with

Raimund Lull and Roger Bacon. There were also numerous representatives

of this simple biblical and practical tendency devoted to Scripture

study and the pursuit of the Christian life; and during this period we

find the first developments of German mysticism properly so called.

§ 103.1. =The Writings of Aristotle and his Arabic

Interpreters.=--Till the end of the 12th century Aristotle was

known in the Christian West only through Porphyry and Boëthius.

This philosophy, however, from the 9th century was diligently

studied in Arabic translations of the original text (§ 72) by

Moslem scholars of Bagdad and Cordova, who wrote expositions and

made original contributions to science. The most distinguished

of these, besides the logicians Alkindi in the 9th, and Alfarabi

in the 10th century, were the supernaturalistic Avicenna of

Bokhara, † A.D. 1037 Algazel of Bagdad, inclined to mysticism or

sufism, † A.D. 1111, and the pantheistic-naturalistic Averroes

of Cordova, † A.D. 1198. The Moors and Spanish Jews were also

devoted students of the peripatetic philosophy. The most famous

of these was Maimonides, † A.D. 1204, who wrote the rationalistic

work _More Nebochim_. On the decay of Arabic philosophy in Spain,

Spanish Jews introduced the study of Aristotle into France.

Dissatisfied with Latin translations from the Arabic, they

began in A.D. 1220 to make translations directly from the Greek.

Suspicions were now aroused against the new gospel of philosophy.

At a Synod in Paris A.D. 1209 (§ 108, 4) the physical writings

of Aristotle were condemned and lecturing on them forbidden.

This prohibition was renewed in A.D. 1215 by the papal legate

and the metaphysics included. But no prohibition of the church

could arrest the scientific ardour of that age. In A.D. 1231

the definitive prohibition was reduced to a measure determining

the time to be devoted to such studies, and in A.D. 1254 we

find the university prescribing the number of hours during

which Aristotle’s physics and metaphysics should be taught.

Some decades later the church itself declared that no one should

obtain the degree of master who was not familiar with Aristotle,

“_the precursor of Christ in natural things as John Baptist was

in the things of grace_.” This change was brought about by the

belief that not Aristotle but Erigena was the author of all the

pantheistic heresies of the age (§§ 90, 7; 108, 4), and also

by the need felt by the Franciscans and Dominicans for using

Aristotelian methods of proof in defence of the doctrine of the

church. Philosophy, however, was now regarded by all theologians

as only the handmaid of theology. Even in the 11th century Petrus

[Peter] Damiani had indicated the mutual relation of the sciences

thus: _Debet velut ancilla dominæ quodam famulatus obsequio

subservire, ne si præcedit, oberret_.[304]

§ 103.2. On account of their characteristic tendencies Avicenna

was most popular with the Schoolmen and after him Algazel, while

Averroes, though carefully studied and secretly followed by

some, was generally regarded with suspicion and aversion. Among

his secret admirers was Simon of Tournay, about A.D. 1200, who

boasted of being able with equal ease to prove the falseness

and the truth of the church doctrines, and declared that Moses,

Christ, and Mohammed were the three greatest deceivers the world

had ever seen. The Parisian scholars ascribed to Averroes the

=Theory of a twofold Truth=. A positive religion was required

to meet the religious needs of the multitude, but the philosopher

might reach and maintain the truth independently of any revealed

religion. In the Christian West he put this doctrine in a less

offensive form by saying that one and the same affirmation might

be theologically true and philosophically false, and _vice versa_.

Behind this, philosophical scepticism as well as theological

unbelief sought shelter. Its chief opponents were Thomas Aquinas

and Raimund Lull, while at a later time Duns Scotus and the

Scotists were inclined more or less to favour it.

§ 103.3. =The Appearance of the Mendicant Orders.=--The

Dominican and Franciscan orders competed with one another in

a show of zeal for the maintenance of the orthodox doctrine,

and each endeavoured to secure the theological chairs in the

University of Paris, the principal seat of learning in those

days. They were vigorously opposed by the university corporation,

and especially by the Parisian doctor William of St. Amour,

who characterized them in his tract _De periculis novissimorum

temporum_ of A.D. 1255 as the precursors of antichrist. But

he was answered by learned members of the orders, Albert the

Great, Aquinas, and Bonaventura, and finally, in A.D. 1257, all

opposition on the part of the university was checked by papal

authority and royal command. The Augustinians, too, won a seat

in the University of Paris in A.D. 1261.--The learned monks gave

themselves with enthusiasm to the new science and applied all

their scientific gains to polemical and apologetical purposes.

They diligently conserved all that the earlier Fathers down to

Gregory the Great had written in exposition of the doctrine and

all that the later Fathers down to Hugo St. Victor and Peter

the Lombard had written in its defence. But what had been simply

expressed before was now arranged under elaborate scientific

categories. The Summists of the previous century supplied

abundant material for the work. Their _Summæ sententiarum_,

especially that of the Lombard, became the theme of innumerable

commentaries, but besides these, comprehensive original works

were written. These were no longer to be described as _Summæ

sententiarum_, but assumed with right the title of _Summæ

theologiæ_ or _theologicæ_.

§ 103.4. =Distinguished Franciscan Schoolmen.=--=Alexander

of Hales=, trained in the English cloister of Hales, _doctor

irrefragabilis_, was the most famous teacher of theology in

Paris, where in A.D. 1222 he entered the Seraphic Order. He

died in A.D. 1245. As the first church theologian who, without

the excessive hair-splitting of later scholastics, applied the

forms of the peripatetic philosophy to the scientific elaboration

of the doctrinal system of the church, he was honoured by his

grateful order with the title of _Monarcha theologorum_, and is

still regarded as the first scholastic in the strict sense of the

word. His _Summa theologica_, published at Nuremberg in A.D. 1482

in 4 folio vols. was accepted by his successors as the model of

scientific method and arrangement. The first two vols. treat of

God and His Work, the Creature; the third, of the Redeemer and

His Work; the fourth, of the Sacraments of the O. and N.T. The

conclusion, which is not extant, treated of _Præmia salutis

per futuram gloriam_. Each of these divisions was subdivided

into a great number of _Quæstiones_, these again into _Membra_,

and these often into _Articuli_. The question at the head of

the section was followed by several answers affirmative and

negative, some of which were entitled _Auctoritates_ (quotations

from Scripture, the Fathers, and the teachers of the church),

some _Rationes_ (dictates of the Greek, Arabian, and Jewish

philosophers), and finally, his own conclusion. Among the

authorities of later times, Hugo’s dogmatic works (§ 102, 4)

occupy with him the highest place, but he seems to have had no

appreciation of his mystical speculations.--His most celebrated

disciple =John Fidanza=, better known as =Bonaventura=, had a

strong tendency to mysticism. Born at Bagnarea in the district

of Florence in A.D. 1221, he became teacher of theology in

Paris in A.D. 1253, general of his order in A.D. 1257, was made

Cardinal-bishop of Ostia by Gregory X. in A.D. 1273, and in the

following year was a member of the Lyons Council, at which the

question of the reunion of the churches was discussed (§ 67, 4).

He took an active part in the proceedings of that council,

but died before its close in A.D. 1274. His aged teacher

Alexander had named him a _Verus Israelita, in quo Adam non

peccasse videtur_. Later Franciscans regarded him as the noblest

embodiment of the idea of the Seraphic Order next to its founder,

and celebrated the angelic purity of his personality by the

title _doctor seraphicus_. Sixtus IV. canonized him in A.D. 1482,

and Sixtus V. edited his works in 8 fol. vols. in A.D. 1588, and

gave him in A.D. 1587 the sixth place in the rank of _Doctores

ecclesiæ_ as the greatest church teacher of the West. Like

Hugo, he combined the mystical and doctrinal sides of theology,

but like Richard St. Victor inclined more to the mystical. His

greatest dogmatic work is his commentary in 2 vols. fol. on the

Lombard. His able treatise, _De reductione artium ad theologiam_,

shows how theology holds the highest place among all the sciences.

In his _Breviloquium_ he seeks briefly but with great expenditure

of learning to prove that the church doctrine is in accordance

with the teachings of reason. In the _Centiloquium_, consisting

of 100 sections, he treats summarily of the doctrines of Sin,

Grace, and Salvation. In the _Pharetra_ he gives a collection

of the chief authorities for the conclusions reached in the

two previously named works. The most celebrated of his mystical

treatises are the _Diætæ salutis_, describing the nine days’

journey (_diætæ_) in which the soul passes from the abyss of

sin to the blessedness of heaven, and the _Itinerarium mentis

in Deum_, in which he describes as a threefold way to the

knowledge of God a _theologia symbolica_ (=_extra nos_),

_propria_ (=_intra nos_) and _mystica_ (=_supra nos_), the

last and highest of which alone leads to the beatific vision

of God.

§ 103.5. =Distinguished Dominican Schoolmen.=--(1) =Albert

the Great=, the oldest son of a knight of Bollstadt, born in

A.D. 1193, at Laningen in Swabia, sent in A.D. 1212, because too

weak for a military career, to the University of Padua, where he

devoted himself for ten years to the diligent study of Aristotle,

entered then the Dominican order, and at Bologna pursued with

equal diligence the study of theology in a six years’ course.

He afterwards taught the regular curriculum of the liberal arts

at Cologne and in the cloisters of his order in other German

cities; and after taking his doctor’s degree at Paris, he taught

theology at Cologne with such success that the Cologne school,

owing to the crowds attracted to his lectures, grew to the

dimensions of a university. In A.D. 1254 he became provincial of

his order in Germany, was compelled in A.D. 1260 by papal command

to accept the bishopric of Regensburg, but returned to Cologne in

A.D. 1262 to resume teaching, and died there in A.D. 1280, in his

87th year. His amazing acquirements in philosophical, theological,

cabalistic, and natural science won for him the surname of the

Great, and the title of _doctor universalis_. Since the time

of Aristotle and Theophrastus there had been no investigator in

natural science like him. Traces of mysticism may be discovered

in his treatise _Paradisus animæ_, and in his commentary on

the Areopagite. Indeed from his school proceeded the greatest

master of speculative mysticism (§ 114, 1). His chief work in

natural science is the _Summa de Creaturis_, the fantastic and

superstitious character of which may be seen from the titles

of its several books: _De virtutibus herbarum, lapidum, et

animalium_, _De mirabilibus mundi_, and _De secretis mulierum_.

He wrote three books of commentaries on the Lombard, and

two books of an independent system of dogmatics, the _Summa

theologica_. The latter treatise, which closely follows the

work of Alexander of Hales, is incomplete.[305]

§ 103.6. The greatest and most influential of all the Schoolmen

was the _Doctor angelicus_, =Thomas Aquinas=. Born in A.D. 1227,

son of a count of Aquino, at his father’s castle of Roccasicca,

in Calabria, he entered against his parents’ will as a novice

into the Dominican monastery at Naples. Removed for safety to

France, he was followed by his brothers and taken back, but two

years later he effected his escape with the aid of the order, and

was placed under Albert at Cologne. Afterwards he taught for two

years at Cologne, and was then sent to win his doctor’s degree at

Paris in A.D. 1252. There he began along with his intimate friend

Bonaventura his brilliant career. It was not until A.D. 1257,

after the opposition of the university to the mendicant orders

had been overcome, that the two friends obtained the degree of

doctor. Urban IV. recalled him to Italy in A.D. 1261, where he

taught successively in Rome, Bologna, Pisa, and Naples. Ordered

by Gregory to take part in the discussions on union at the Lyons

Council, he died suddenly in A.D. 1274, soon after his return

to Naples, probably from poison at the hand of his countryman

Charles of Anjou, in order that he might not appear at the

council to accuse him of tyranny. John XXII. canonized him in

A.D. 1323, and Pius V. gave him the fifth place among the Latin

_doctores ecclesiæ_.--Thomas was probably the most profound

thinker of the century, and was at the same time admired as

a popular preacher. He had an intense veneration for Augustine,

an enthusiastic appreciation of the church doctrine and the

philosophy which are approved and enjoined by this great Father.

He had also a vein of genuine mysticism, and was distinguished

for warm and deep piety. He was the first to give the papal

hierarchical system of Gregory and Innocent a regular place

in dogmatics. His _Summa philosophiæ contra Gentiles_, is a

Christian philosophy of religion, of which the first three books

treat of those religious truths which human reason of itself may

recognise, while the fourth book treats of those which, because

transcending reason though not contrary to it, _i.e._ doctrines

of the incarnation and the trinity, can be known only by Divine

revelation. He wrote two books of commentaries on the Lombard.

By far the most important work of the Middle Ages is his _Summa

theologica_, in three vols., in which he gives ample space to

ethical questions. His polemic against the Greeks is found in

the section in which he defines and proves the primacy of the

pope, basing his arguments on ancient and modern fictions and

forgeries (§ 96, 23), which he, ignorant of Greek and deriving

his knowledge of antiquity wholly from Gratian’s decree, accepted

_bona fide_ as genuine. His chief exegetical work is the _Catena

aurea_ on the Gospels and Pauline Epistles, translated into

English by Dr. Pusey, in 8 vols., Oxf., 1841, ff. In commenting

on Aristotle Thomas, unlike Albert, neglected the treatises on

natural science in favour of those on politics.--The Dominican

order, proud of having in it the greatest philosopher and

theologian of the age, made the doctrine of Thomas in respect

of form and matter the authorized standard among all its members

(§ 113, 2), and branded every departure from it as a betrayal

not only of the order but also of the church and Christianity.

The other monkish orders, too, especially the Augustinians,

Cistercians, and Carmelites, recognised the authority of the

Angelical doctor. Only the Franciscans, moved by envy and

jealousy, ignored him and kept to Alexander and Bonaventura,

until the close of the century, when, in Duns Scotus (§ 113, 1),

they obtained a brilliant teacher within their own ranks, whom

they proudly thought would prove a fair rival in fame to the

great Dominican teacher.[306]

§ 103.7. =Reformers of the Scholastic Method.=--=Raimund Lull=,

a Catalonian nobleman of Majorca, born in A.D. 1234, roused

from a worldly life by visions, gave himself to fight for Christ

against the infidels with the weapons of the Spirit. Learning

Arabic from a Saracen slave, he passed through a full course of

scholastic training in theology and entered the Franciscan order.

Constrained in the prosecution of his mission to seek a simpler

method of proof than that afforded by scholasticism, he succeeded

by the help of visions in discovering one by which as he and

his followers, the Lullists, thought, the deepest truths of all

human sciences could be made plain to the untutored human reason.

He called it the _Ars Magna_, and devoted his whole life to its

elaboration in theory and practice. Representing fundamental

ideas and their relations to the objects of thought by letters

and figures, he drew conclusions from their various combinations.

In his missionary travels in North Africa (§ 93, 16) he used his

art in his disputations with the Saracen scholars, and died in

A.D. 1315 in consequence of ill treatment received there, in

his 81st year. Of his writings in Latin, Catalonian, and Arabic,

numbering it is said more than a thousand, 282 were known in

A.D. 1721 to Salzinger of Mainz, but only 45 were included in

his edition of the collected works.

§ 103.8. =Roger Bacon=, an English monk, contemporary with

Lull, worked out his reform in a sounder manner by going back

to the original sources and thus obtaining deliverance from

the accumulated errors of later times. He appealed on matters

of natural science not to corrupt translations but to the

original works of Aristotle, and on matters of theology, not

to the Lombard but to the Greek New Testament. He prosecuted

his studies laboriously in mathematics and the Greek language.

Roger was called by his friends _Doctor mirabilis_ or _profundus_.

He was a prodigy of learning for his age, more in the department

of physics than in those of philosophy and theology. He was

regarded, however, by his own order as a heretic, and imprisoned

as a trafficker in the black arts. Born in A.D. 1214 at Ilchester,

he took his degree of doctor of theology at Paris, entered

the Franciscan order, and became a resident at Oxford. Besides

diligent study of languages, which secured him perfect command

of Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and Arabic, he busied himself with

researches and experiments in physics (especially optics),

chemistry, and astronomy. He made several important discoveries,

_e.g._ the principle of refraction, magnifying glasses, the

defects of the calendar, etc., while he also succeeded in making

a combustible material which may be regarded as the precursor

of gunpowder. He maintained the possibility of ships and land

vehicles being propelled most rapidly without sails, and without

the labour of men or animals. Yet he was a child of his age, and

believed in the philosopher’s stone, in astrology, and alchemy.

Thoroughly convinced of the defects of scholasticism, he spoke

of Albert the Great and Aquinas as boys who taught before they

learnt, and especially reproached them with their ignorance

of Greek. With an amount of brag that smacks of the empiric

he professed to be able to teach Hebrew in three days and Greek

in the same time, and to give a full course of geometry in seven

days. With fearless severity he lashed the corruptions of the

clergy and the monks. Only one among his companions seems to

have regarded Roger, notwithstanding all his faults, as a truly

great man. That was Clement IV. who, as papal legate in England,

had made his acquaintance, and as pope liberated him from

prison. To him Roger dedicated his _Opus majus s. de emendandis

scientiis_. At a later period the general of the Franciscan order,

with the approval of Nicholas IV., had him again cast into prison,

and only after that pope’s death was he liberated through the

intercession of his friends. He died soon after in A.D. 1291.[307]

§ 103.9. =Theologians of a Biblical and Practical Tendency.=

1. =Cæsarius of Heisterbach= near Bonn was a monk, then prior

and master of the novices of the Cistercian monastery there.

He died in A.D. 1230. His _Dialogus magnus visionum et

miraculorum_ in 12 bks., one of the best specimens of the

finest culture and learning of the Middle Ages, in the

form of conversation with the novices, gives an admirable

and complete sketch of the morals and manners of the times

illustrated from the history and legends of the monks,

clergy, and people.

2. His younger contemporary the Dominican =William Peraldus=

(Perault), in his _Summa virtutum_ and _Summa vitiorum_,

presents a summary of ethics with illustrations from life

in France. He died about A.D. 1250, as bishop of Lyons.

3. =Hugo of St. Caro= (St. Cher, a suburb of Vienne),

a Dominican and cardinal who died in A.D. 1263, gives

evidence of careful Bible study in his _Postilla in univ.

Biblia juxta quadrupl. sensum_ (a commentary accompanying

the text) and his _Concordantiæ Bibliorum_ (on the Vulgate).

To him we are indebted for our division of the Scriptures

into chapters. At the request of his order he undertook a

correction of the Vulgate from the old MSS.

4. =Robert of Sorbon= in Champagne, who died in A.D. 1274, was

confessor of St. Louis and teacher of theology at Paris. He

urged upon his pupils the duty of careful study of the Bible.

In A.D. 1250 he founded the Sorbonne at Paris, originally

a seminary for the education and support of the poorer

clergy who aspired to the highest attainments in theology.

Its fame became so great that it rose to the rank of a full

theological faculty, and down to its overthrow in the French

Revolution it continued to be the highest tribunal in France

for all matters pertaining to religion and the church.

5. =Raimund Martini=, Dominican at Barcelona, who died after

A.D. 1284, was unweariedly engaged in the conversion of Jews

and Mohammedans. He spoke Hebrew and Arabic as fluently as

Latin, and wrote _Pugio fidei contra Mauros et Judæos_.[308]

§ 103.10. =Precursors of the German Speculative Mystics.=--=David

of Augsburg=, teacher of theology and master of the novices in

the Franciscan monastery at Augsburg, deserves to be named first,

as one who largely anticipated the style of speculative mysticism

that flourished in the following century (§ 114). His writings,

partly in Latin, partly in German, are merely ascetic directories

and treatises of a contemplative mystical order, distinguished

by deep spirituality and earnest, humble piety. The German works

especially are models of a beautiful rhythmical style, worthy of

ranking with the finest creations of any century. He is author

of the important tract, _De hæresi pauperum de Lugduno_, in which

the pious mystic shows himself in the less pleasing guise of a

relentless inquisitor and heresy hunter.--A brilliant and skilful

allegory, =The Daughter of Zion=, the human soul, who, having

become a daughter of Babylon, went forth to see the heavenly

King, and under the guidance of the virgins Faith, Hope, Love,

Wisdom, and Prayer attained unto this end, was first written in

Latin prose; but afterwards towards the close of the 13th century

a free rendering of it in more than 4,000 verses was published

by the Franciscan Lamprecht of Regensburg. Its mysticism is like

that of St. Bernard and Hugo St. Victor.--In speculative power

and originality the Dominican =Theodorich of Freiburg=, _Meister

Dietrich_, a pupil of Albert the Great, far excelled all the

mystics of this century. About A.D. 1280 he was reader at Treves,

afterwards prior at Würzburg, took his master’s degree and taught

at Paris, A.D. 1285-1289. About A.D. 1320, however, along with

Meister Eckhart (§ 114, 1), he fell under suspicion of heresy,

and nothing further is known of him. Among his still unpublished

writings, mostly on natural and religious philosophy, the most

important is the book _De beatifica visione Dei per essentiam_,

which marks him out as a precursor of the Eckhart speculation.--On

Female Mystics, see § 107.