Trivium and Quadrivium. The former comprised Grammar, Rhetoric, and Logic; the latter Algebra, Music, Geometry, and Astronomy: No progress had been made; no further improvement had been attained, during the lapse of ages, in the discussion of these sciences. Among all the Universities which subse

, quently arose, that of Paris was most distinguished for Theology. The writings of Aristotle had become known to Christian Europe, through the translations of the Arabs and Moors in Spain. They now became the basis of instruction in all the Universities, and soon his authority was supreme. It is true, that this authority was assailed by portions of the Romish Church, first at the Synod of Paris, in 1209, and afterward by the Papal Legate, in 1215. But these remonstrances and prohibitions were entirely inadequate to resist their accumulating ascendency. Several men of extraordinary talents now came upon the

stage of action, and directed their energies to the study and defense of the new Theology. St. Anselm of Canterbury there labored and taught; a man of extraordinary intellectual vigor, some of whose arguments and processes of reasoning are still retained among theologians, for want of any better substitutes. His most distinguished pupil, Peter Abelard, filled the chair of theology at Paris; whose original and profound investigations, though frequently adventurous and incorrect, awakened the minds of his cotemporaries still more, to a sympathy with intellectual pursuits. His more celebrated scholar, Peter Lombard, the author of the memorable book of Sentences, succeeded him. He was a man of greater, as well as safer, talents.

In proportion as men progressed in general culture, and as the restoration of the civil, together with the reformation of the common, law, advanced, the Universities were enlarged and improved. These changes of course increased the celebrity of these institutions. The number of students became much enlarged. The amount of mind thus brought into active contact, was much augmented. The love of contention was aroused and cultivated. The two great orders of Dominican and Franciscan monks made Aristotle their text-book, and soon elevated him to that same eminence in theology, which he before possessed in philosophy. These questions becoming invested with supreme importance, on the intellectual arena of the age, soon engrossed the attention of the most celebrated thinkers. These causes gradually moulded the character and destiny of the Scholastic Theology. The history of these eminent men forms its most important and prosperous era. Their merits also confer upon it its highest honors.

II. SKETCH OF THE MOST EMINENT SCHOLASTICS. Peter Abelard, Venerabilis Inceptor, may properly be termed the great originator of the theology of the schools. By his means, THIRD SERIES, VOL. III. NO. I.

10

it first obtained a definite form, as well as a decisive pre-eminence in the republic of letters. He was born of noble parentage, at Nantes, in 1079. He was first initiated into Theology by Roscelin, the founder of the school of the Nominalists. He was distinguished for his intellectual ability at an early age. When twenty years old he became the pupil of William de Champeaux, under whose tuition he studied dialectics. He soon established a rival school, which soon eclipsed his master. He subsequently continued his theological studies under Anselm. Disagreeing with his illustrious instructor, whom he seems to have excelled in acuteness, but not solidity of intellect, he established an independent school in theology also, which soon became celebrated.

At the age of forty, he was guilty of the seduction of his pupil, the beautiful and accomplished Heloise. She retired to a convent, and Abelard, after suffering a disgraceful punishment for his crime, resumed his lectures in theology. He now published his celebrated system. This work brought upon him the charge of heresy, and was burned by order of the council of Soissons, in 1121. He retired from his persecutors to a forest in Champaign, where multitudes of students soon gathered around him, and where he established the monastery of the Paraclete. This establishment he afterward presented to Heloise, of which she became Abbess.

He was again charged with heresy by St. Bernard, “the last and best of the Fathers,” and set out for Rome in 1140 to vindicate himself. He stopped on his way at the celebrated monastery of Clugny, where, after remaining two years, and lecturing once more on theology, he died at the age of sixty-three.

His works are chiefly his Epistles, a History of his Life till 1134, his Confession of Faith, his Commentary on Romans, and his Introduction to Theology, in Three Books. His life and adventures are among the most remarkable in history. They present a singular combination of great talents and great misfortunes. The latter he undoubtedly brought upon himself by his own imprudence. They served to embitter his days, as well as deeply tarnish his brightest honors.

Next in the order of time among the great lights of scholasticism, is St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor Angelicus. He was born in 1225, at Aquino. When thirteen years of age, he was sent to the University of Naples. At seventeen, he commenced his novitiate at the Dominican convent in that city. This step was contrary to the wish of his father, Landulph, Count of Aquino. To avoid his family, he left Naples for Rome. Thence he fled to Paris. He was forcibly brought home, and confined in the paternal castle. Here he contrived to escape. Obtaining the encouragement of Innocent IV, he connected himself with the Dominicans at the age of twenty. At twenty-five, he began to lecture in_Theology at Paris. Here he formed a close intimacy with St. Bonaventura,

another eminent scholastic, and wrote his celebrated System of Theology. Having attended the council at Lyons, he was seized on his return with a fever, and died at a Cistercian abbey, near Terracina, in 1274, at forty-eight years of age. He was canonized by John XXII., and is the great ornament of the Dominican order. His works are, a Commentary on the Sentences of Lombard, his Summa Theologica, Questiones Disputatæ et quodlibet Liberales, Opuscula Theologica, and Catena Aurea. They exhibit great acuteness and mental vigor. He belonged to the Nominalist school. His followers received the doctrines of Aristotle and Augustine.

His most distinguished antagonist and rival was Duns Scotus, Doctor Subtilis. He was born in 1275, at Dunstan, in Northumberland. He studied philosophy, jurisprudence, and theology, at Oxford, and there opened his career by giving lectures on theology. In 1304, he visited Paris, and defended the immaculate Conception with unparalleled éclat. In 1308, he lectured on theology in Cologne, and died there at the age of thirty-three. His works consist of Commentaries on Aristotle and Lombard's Sentence. He was the head of the Realists, and adopted the principles of the Platonic philosophy. He was regarded as the profoundest metaphysician of his age, and some derive his name (Scotus) from his depth of obscurīty. He was the pride of the Franciscan order. He was, doubtless, a Semipelagian, for he answers affirmatively the question : Útrum liberum arbitrium hominis sine gratia possit cavere omne peccatum mortale ?

The last name of greatest preëminence which meets us in the annals of the Scholastics, is William Occam, Doctor Singularis. He was born in Surrey, and became a disciple of Duns Scotus. He belonged to the Order of Franciscans. At the beginning of the fourteenth century he occupied a theological chair at Paris. But soon becoming dissatisfied with the principles of his master, he became the head of the Nominalists. His fondness for speculation and his disregard for authority, soon led him into difficulties with the people. He asserted that, in temporal things, the emperor was subject to none but God, and superior to the pope,—thus maintaining Ghibeline views. He was excommunicated by John XXII., in 1330. He then fled to the Court of Lewis of Bavaria, where he died, in 1347. His works consist of Commentaries on Lombard, several works on Logic, Metaphysics and Philosophy, Colloquium Theologicum, and a tract on the Eucharist. He was preferred by Luther to any of the Scholastics. Says he: ejus acumen anteferebam Thomæ vel Scoto.

Besides the great intellectual giants just enumerated, there were some other very eminent writers among the Scholastics. But inasmuch as their works present no remarkable features, and as they were not the founders of any systems or heads of schools, it will be unnecessary to narrate their personal histories. Of these, the

most deserving of notice, besides those whose names have already occurred, were Hildebert of Larardino, Gilbert de Porret, Robert Pulleyn, Albertus Magnus, Alexander Hales, Hugo of Sancto Caro, Richard of Saint Victor, and Raymond Sully. III. PROMINENT CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY.

A want of acquaintance with Biblical and exegetical learning strikingly characterized the writings of all these men. This lamentable deficiency constantly forces itself upon the attention of those who examine their pages. In our day, the man who attempts to construct a theological system, without reposing its foundations upon the dicta of the Bible, is regarded as absurd, as

, , is that man who should attempt to rear a stupendous Gothic edifice upon the drifting snow. The foundations of the temples which the Middle Ages produced, were far more extensive and appropriate, than those of the systems of doctrine preached in them. We seldom hear these writers appeal to the sacred text as a final and conclusive authority. They discuss at the most unprofitable length the minutest points, and although a reference to the Greek or Hebrew would settle all difficulties, they rarely make such an appeal. Indeed, it is recorded of St. Thomas himself, that the Vulgate was the only text ever used by him, and that he had no accurate acquaintance with either of the original languages of Scripture.

Nor have we reason to suppose that any of these famous theologians possessed this most valuable knowledge. It is true that several of the Pontiffs established professorships in different Universities for the culture and study of the Oriental languages in general. But the object of this arrangement was not to prepare the priesthood to expound the Scriptures more clearly and forcibly to the people; but it was designed to fit the heralds of Romanism to proclaim it more successfully to the Oriental nations. It was intended to fortify them in such a way, that they might meet the onslaughts of the Greek and the Turk with their own weapons, and vanquish them in their own languages.

It was not, indeed, until the rise of Reuchlin, who commenced his labors in 1502, that the study of the original languages of the Bible was introduced to any extent. The services which he rendered to the Old Testament were performed by Erasmus, for the interpretation of the New. He began his career in 1516. By their agency a new era was ushered in upon the Church. Yet the scholastic theologians did not enjoy the benefit of their labors. When this revival of biblical studies began, the glory of Scholasticism had passed away. During the Middle Ages no advances whatever were made in philological investigations, or in the science of interpretation. Accordingly, we may wade through volumes of metaphysical discussions, upon some dogma of the Romish Church, where endless quibblings involve and perplex the reader; whereas, an appeal to one or two dicta probantia of the Bible would immediately have removed every difficulty.

To us at this day, such barrenness of exegetical resources seems unaccountable. A sufficient reason for it, however, may be assigned. The Scholastic Theology was the first daughter of that revival of letters, which succeeded the darkness produced by the fall of the Western Empire. Other departments of knowledge were gradually cultivated, as one giant struggle was made after another, to grapple with the darkness and expel it. The want of the merit in question is one great reason why these writings are so uninteresting and profitless to us at the present day. We neglect the jewels which are hidden there, because they are embedded in oceans of mud. Had the giant minds of the Middle Ages appealed to the Bible, with proper exegetical qualifications, they would have produced a glorious fabric of intellectual beauty which would have challenged the admiration of all succeeding generations.

The Scholastics indulged, to an absurd degree, a spirit of abstract metaphysical speculation. It had been usual for theological writters, previous to this mode of study, to prove their various positions, chiefly by citations from the Fathers, and the usages of the apostolic era. But now another method was employed, the dialectical art, which soon entirely superseded all others. That those who first employed this art, did not intend that it should be improperly perverted, is evident both from the nature of their own writings, as well as their declarations on the subject.

In the middle of the eleventh century, Berengarius labored to disprove the doctrine of transubstantiation, which was gradually gaining ground in the Church. To accomplish this he used no other arguments than such as were perfectly rational. His opponent, Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, employed in his replies to him, arguments equally moderate and profound. The Îatter says himself in his tract De Corpore et Sanguine Domini : “God is my witness, and my own conscience, that in treating sacred subjects I do not wish to bring forward dialectical questions; but if the subject under discussion can be most satisfactorily explained by the rules of this art, as far as I am able, I cover over the art by

I citations of equivalent import; that I may not rely more upon this art, than on the truth, and on the authority of the Fathers.” Peter Lombard declares it to be the aim of his works, fidem nostram adversus errores carnalium atque animalium hominum munire, vel potius munitam ostendere, ac theologicarum inquisitionum abdita aperire. John Gerson says of Bonaventura (Doctor Seraphicus), dum studet illuminationi intellectus, totum refert ad pietatem et religiositatem effectus.*

But soon this commendable example was forgotten. The usual * Thus, too, some of the doctrinal expositions of the Scholastics exhibit a similar simplicity and plainness of speech. št. Thomas, for instance, answers the ques

a