Chapter IV: Theology and Its Battles (8)

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.

IV. The Church and the People.

§ 104. PUBLIC WORSHIP AND ART.

Public worship had for a long time been popularly regarded as a performance fraught with magical power. The ignorant character of the priests led to frequent setting aside of preaching as something unessential, so that the service became purely liturgical. But now popes and synods urged the importance of rearing a race of learned priests, and the carefully prepared and eloquent sermons of Franciscans and Dominicans found great acceptance with the people. The Schoolmen gave to the doctrine of the sacraments its scientific form. The veneration of saints, relics, and images became more and more the central point of worship. Besides ecclesiastical architecture, which reached its highest development in the 13th century, the other arts began to be laid under contribution to beautify the ceremonial, the dresses of the celebrants, and the inner parts of the buildings.

§ 104.1. =The Liturgy and the Sermon.=--The Roman =Liturgy= was
universally adopted except in Spain. When it was proposed at
the Synod of Toledo in A.D. 1088 to set aside the old Mozarabic
liturgy (§ 88, 1), the people rose against the proposal, and the
ordeals of combat and fire decided in favour of retaining the
old service. From that time both liturgies were used side by
side. The Slavic ritual was abandoned in Moravia and Bohemia
in the 10th century. The language of the church services
everywhere was and continued to be the Latin. The quickening
of the monkish orders in the 11th century, especially the
Cluniacs and Cistercians, but more particularly the rise of
the Franciscans and Dominicans in the 13th century, gave a great
impulse to preaching. Almost all the great monks and schoolmen
were popular preachers. The crowds that flocked around them
as they preached in the vernacular were enormous. Even in the
regular services the preaching was generally in the language
of the people, but quotations from Scripture and the Fathers,
as a mark of respect, were made in Latin and then translated.
Sermons addressed to the clergy and before academic audiences
were always in Latin.--As a preacher of repentance and of the
crusades, Fulco of Neuilly, † A.D. 1202, regarded by the people
as a saint and a miracle worker, had a wonderful reputation
(§ 94, 4). Of all mediæval preachers, however, none can be
compared for depth, spirituality, and popular eloquence with
the Franciscan =Berthold of Regensburg=, pupil and friend of
David of Augsburg (§ 103, 10), one of the most powerful preachers
in the German tongue that ever lived. He died in A.D. 1272. He
wandered from town to town preaching to crowds, often numbering
100,000 men, of the grace of God in Christ, against the abuse
of indulgences and false trust in saints, and the idea of the
meritoriousness of pilgrimages, etc. His sermons are of great
value as illustrations of the strength and richness of the old
German language. Roger Bacon too (§ 103, 8), usually so chary
of praise, eulogises _Frater Bertholdus Alemannus_ as a preacher
worth more than the two mendicant orders together.

§ 104.2. =Definition and Number of the Sacraments=
(§§ 58; 70, 2).--Radbert acknowledged only two: Baptism
including confirmation, and the Lord’s Supper. Rabanus Maurus
by separately enumerating the bread and the cup, and counting
confirmation as well as baptism, made four. Hugo St. Victor again
held them to be an indefinite number. But he distinguished three
kinds: those on which salvation depends, Baptism, Confirmation,
and the Supper; those not necessary and forming important aids
to salvation, sprinkling with holy water, confession, extreme
unction, marriage, etc.; those necessary for particular callings,
the ordination of priests, sacred vestments. Yet he prepared the
way for the final ecclesiastical conception of the sacraments,
by placing its _Elementa Corporalia_ under the threefold
category as _divinam gratiam ex similitudine repræsentantia_,
_ex institutione significantia_, and _ex consecratione
continentia_. Peter the Lombard took practically the same
view, but fixed the number of the Sacraments at seven: Baptism,
Confirmation (§ 35, 4), the Supper, Penance, Extreme Unction,
Marriage, and Ordination (§ 45, 1). This number was first
officially sanctioned by the Florentine Council of A.D. 1439
(§ 67, 6). Alexander of Hales gave a special rank to Baptism
and the Supper, as alone instituted by Christ, while Aquinas
gave this rank to all the seven. All the ecclesiastical
consecrations and benedictions were distinguished from the
sacraments as _Sacramentalia_.--The Schoolmen distinguished
the sacraments of the O.T., as _ex opera operante_, _i.e._
efficacious only through faith in a coming Redeemer, from
the sacraments of the N.T. as _ex opera operato_, _i.e._ as
efficacious by mere receiving without the exercise of positive
faith on the part of all who had not committed a mortal sin.
Against old sectaries (§§ 41, 3; 63, 1) and new (§§ 108, 7, 12)
the scholastic divines maintained that even unworthy and
unbelieving priests could validly dispense the sacraments,
if only there was the _intentio_ to administer it in the form
prescribed by the church.[309]

§ 104.3. =The Sacrament of the Altar.=--At the fourth Lateran
Council of A.D. 1215 the doctrine of Transubstantiation was
finally accepted (§ 101, 2). The fear lest any of the blood
of the Lord should be spilt led to the withholding from the
12th century of the cup from the laity, and its being given
only to the priests. If not the cause, then the consequence,
of this was that the priests were regarded as the only full and
perfect partakers of the Lord’s table. Kings at their coronation
and at the approach of death were sometimes by special favour
allowed to partake of the cup. The withdrawal of the cup from
the laity was dogmatically justified, specially by Alex. of
Hales, by the doctrine of _concomitantia_, _i.e._ that in the
body the blood was contained. Fear of losing any fragment also
led to the substitution of wafers, _the host_, for the bread
that should be broken.--A consecrated host is kept in the
_Tabernaculum_, a niche in the wall on the right of the high
altar, in the so-called _liburium_ or _Sanctissimum_, _i.e._
a gold or silver casket, often ornamented with rich jewels. It
is taken forth, touched only by the priests, and exhibited to
the kneeling people during the service and in solemn processions.

§ 104.4. =Penance.=--Gratian’s decree (§ 99, 5) left it to
the individual believer’s decision whether the sinner could
be reconciled to God by heart penitence without confession. But
in accordance also with the teaching of the Lombard, confession
of mortal sins (Gal. v. 19 ff. and Cor. v. 9 f.), or, in case
that could not be, the desire at heart to make it, was declared
indispensable. The forgiveness of sins was still, however,
regarded as God’s exclusive prerogative, and the priest could
bind and loose only in regard to the fellowship of the church
and the enjoyment of the sacraments. Before him, however,
Hugo St. Victor had begun to transcend these limits; for he,
distinguishing between the guilt and the punishment of the
sinner, ascribed indeed to God alone the absolution from the
guilt of sin on the ground of sincere repentance, but ascribed
to the exercise of the priestly function, the absolution from the
punishment of eternal death, in accordance with Matthew xviii. 18
and John xx. 23. Richard St. Victor held that the punishment
of eternal death, which all mortal sins as well as venial sins
entail, can be commuted into temporal punishment by priestly
absolution, atoned for by penances imposed by the priests, _e.g._
prayers, fastings, alms, etc.; whereas without such satisfaction
they can be atoned for only by the pains of purgatory (§ 61, 4).
Innocent III., at the fourth Lateran Council of A.D. 1215, had
the obligation of confession of all sins raised into a dogma,
and obliged all believers under threat of excommunication to
make confession at least once a year, as preparation for the
Easter communion. The Provincial Synod at Toulouse in A.D. 1229
(§ 109, 2) insisted on compulsory confession and communion three
times a year, at Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost. The three
penitential requirements, enforced first by Hildebert of Tours,
and adopted by the Lombard, _Contritio cordis_, _Confessio oris_,
and _Satisfactio operis_ continued henceforth in force. But
Hugo’s and Richard’s theory of absolution displaced not only
that of the Lombard, but, by an extension of the sacerdotal
idea to the absolution of the sinner from guilt, led to the
introduction of a full-blown theory of indulgence (§ 106, 2).
As the ground of the scientific construction given it by the
Schoolmen of the 13th century, especially by Aquinas, the
Catholic Church doctrine of penance received its final shape
at the Council of Florence in A.D. 1439. Penance as the fourth
sacrament consists of hearty repentance, auricular confession,
and satisfaction; it takes form in the words of absolution,
_Ego te absolvo_; and it is efficacious for the forgiveness of
sins. Any breach of the secrecy of the confessional was visited
by the fourth Lateran Council with excommunication, deposition,
and lifelong confinement in a monastery. The exaction of a
confessional fee, especially at the Easter confession, appears
as an increment of the priest’s income in many mediæval documents.
Its prohibition by several councils was caused by its simoniacal
abuse. By the introduction of confessors, separate from the local
clergy, the custom fell more and more into disuse.

§ 104.5. =Extreme Unction.=--Although as early as A.D. 416
Innocent I. had described anointing of the sick with holy oil
(Mark vi. 13; Jas. v. 14) as a _Genus Sacramenti_ (§ 61, 3),
extreme unction as a sacrament made little progress till the
9th century. The Synod of Chalons in A.D. 813 calls it quite
generally a means of grace for the weak of soul and body. The
Lombard was the first to give it the fifth place among the seven
sacraments as _Unctio extrema_ and _Sacramentum exeuntium_,
ascribing to it _Peccatorum remissio et corporalis infirmitatio
alleviatus_. Original sin being atoned for by baptism, and actual
sins by penance, Albert the Great and Aquinas describe it as the
purifying from the _Reliquiæ peccatorum_ which even after baptism
and penance hinder the soul from entering into its perfect rest.
Bodily healing is only a secondary aim, and is given only if
thereby the primary end of spiritual healing is not hindered.
It was long debated whether, in case of recovery, it should be
repeated when death were found approaching, and it was at last
declared to be admissible. The Council of Trent defines _Extreme
Unction_ as _Sacr. pœnitentiæ totius vitæ consummativum_. The
form of its administration was finally determined to be the
anointing of eyes, ears, nose, mouth, and hands, as well as
(except in women) the feet and loins, with holy oil, consecrated
by the bishop on Maundy Thursday. Confession and communion
precede anointing. The three together constitute the _Viaticum_
of the soul in its last journey. After receiving extreme unction
recipients are forbidden again to touch the ground with their
bare feet or to have marital intercourse.

§ 104.6. =The Sacrament of Marriage= (§ 89, 4).--When marriage
came generally to be regarded as a sacrament in the proper sense,
the laws of marriage were reconstructed and the administration
of them committed to the church. It had long been insisted upon
by the church with ever-increasing decidedness, that the priestly
benediction must precede the marriage ceremonial, and that bridal
communion must accompany the civil action. Hence marriage had to
be performed in the immediate vicinity of a church, _ante ostium
ecclesiæ_. As another than the father often gave away the bride,
this position of sponsor was claimed by the church for the priest.
Marriage thus lost its civil character, and the priest came to
be regarded as performing it in his official capacity not in name
of the family, but in name of the church. Christian marriage in
the early times required only mutual consent of parties (§ 39, 1),
but the Council of Trent demanded a solemn agreement between
bride and bridegroom before the officiating priest and two or
three witnesses. In order to determine more exactly hindrances
to marriage (§ 61, 2) it was made a law at the second Lateran
Council in A.D. 1139, and confirmed at the fourth in A.D. 1215,
that the parties proposing to marry should be proclaimed in
church. To each part of the sacrament the _character indelibilis_
is ascribed, and so divorce was absolutely forbidden, even
in the case of adultery (in spite of Matt. v. 32 and xix. 9),
though _separatio a mensa et toro_ was allowed. Innocent III.
in A.D. 1215 reduced the prohibited degrees from the seventh
to the fourth in the line of blood relationship (§ 61, 2).

§ 104.7. =New Festivals.=--The worship of Mary (§ 57, 2)
received an impulse from the institution of the Feast of the
Birth of Mary on 8th of September. To this was added in the
south of France in the 12th century, the Feast of the =Immaculate
Conception= on the 8th December. Radbert (§ 91, 4) by his
doctrine of _Sanctificatio in utero_ gave basis to the theory
of the Virgin’s freedom from original sin in her conception
and bearing. Anselm of Canterbury, however, taught in _Cur Deus
Homo?_ ii. 16, that Mary was conceived and born in sin, and that
she like all others had sinned in Adam. Certain canons of Lyons,
in A.D. 1140, revived Radbert’s theory, but raised the _Sanctif.
in utero_ into the _Immaculata conceptio_. St. Bernard protested
against the doctrine and the festival; sinless conception is a
prerogative of the Redeemer alone. Mary like us all was conceived
in sin, but was sanctified before the birth by Divine power,
so that her whole life was faultless; if one imagines that Mary’s
sinless conception of her Son had her own sinless conception
as a necessary presupposition, this would need to be carried
back _ad infinitum_, and to festivals of Immaculate Conceptions
there would be no end. This view of a _Sanctificatio in utero_,
with repudiation of the _Conceptio immaculata_, was also
maintained by Alex. of Hales, Bonaventura, Albert the Great,
and Aquinas. The feast of the Conception, with the predicate
“immaculate” dropped, gradually came to be universally observed.
The Franciscans adopted it in this limited sense at Pisa, in
A.D. 1263, but when, beginning with Duns Scotus (§§ 113, 112),
the doctrine of the immaculate conception came to be regarded
as a distinctive dogma of the order, the Dominicans felt
called upon to offer it their most strenuous opposition.[310]
(Continuation, § 112, 4.)--To the feast of All Saints, on
1st November, the Cluniacs added in A.D. 998, the feast of
=All Souls= on 2nd November, for intercession of believers
on behalf of the salvation of souls in purgatory. In the
12th century the =Feast of the Trinity= was introduced on
the Sunday after Pentecost. Out of the transubstantiation
doctrine arose the =Corpus Christi Festival=, on the Thursday
after Trinity. A pious nun of Liège, Juliana, in A.D. 1261,
saw in a vision the full moon with a halo around it, and an
inward revelation interpreted this phenomenon to indicate that
the festal cycle of the church still wanted a festival in honour
of the eucharist. Urban IV. gave effect to this suggestion in
A.D. 1264, avowedly in consequence of the miracle of the mass
of Bolsena. A priest of Bolsena celebrating mass spilt a drop
of consecrated wine, which left a blood-red stain on the corporal
or pall (§ 60, 5), in the form of a host. The festival did not
come into favour till Clement V. renewed its institution at
the Council of Vienne, in A.D. 1311. The church, by order
of John XXIII. in A.D. 1316, celebrated it by a magnificent
procession, in which the _liburium_ was carried with all pomp.

§ 104.8. =The Veneration of Saints= (§ 88, 4).--The numerous
=Canonizations=, from the 12th century exclusively in the
hands of the popes, gave an impulse to saint worship. It was
the duty of _Advocatus diaboli_ to try to disprove the reports
of virtues and miracles attributed to candidates. The proofs
of holiness adduced were generally derived from thoroughly
fabulous sources. The introduction of the name of accepted
candidates into the canon of the mass gave rise to the term
canonization. =Beatification= was a lower degree of honour,
often a preliminary to canonization at a later period. It
carried with it the veneration not of the whole church, but
of particular churches or districts. The Dominican Jacobus
a Voragine, who died in A.D. 1298, in his _Legenda aurea_
afforded a pattern for numerous late legends of the saints.
A Parisian theologian who styled it _Legenda ferrea_, was
publicly expelled from his office. The =Veneration of Mary=,
to whom were rendered _Hyperdoulia_ in contradistinction from
the _Doulia_ of the saints, not only among the people, but with
the most cultured theologians, publicly and privately, literally
and figuratively, in prose and poetry, was almost equal to the
worship rendered to God, and indeed often overshadowed it. The
angel’s salutation (Luke i. 28) was in every prayer. Its frequent
repetition led to the use of the _Rosary_, a rose wreath for the
most blessed of women. The great rosary attributed to St. Dominic
has fifteen decades, or 150 smaller pearls of Mary, each of which
represents an _Ave Maria_, and after every ten there is a greater
Paternoster pearl. The small or common rosary has only five
decades of beads of Mary with a Paternoster bead for each decade.
Thrice repeated it forms the so-called _Psalter of Mary_. The
first appearance of the rosary in devotion was with the monk
Macarius in the 4th century, who took 300 stones in his lap,
and after every Paternoster threw one away. The rosary devotion
is also practised by Moslems and Buddhists. In cloisters,
Saturday was usually dedicated to the Mother of God, and
was begun by a special _Officium S. Mariæ_. May was called
the month of Mary.--In the 11th century no further trace is
found of the Frankish opposition to =Image Worship= (§ 92, 1).
But this in no way hindered the growth of =Relic Worship=.
Returning crusaders showered on the West innumerable relics,
which notwithstanding many sceptics were received generally
with superstitious reverence. Castles and estates were
often bartered for pretended relics of a distinguished
saint, and such treasures were frequently stolen at the
risk of life. No story of a trafficker in relics was too
absurd to be believed.--=Pilgrimages=, especially to Rome
and Palestine, were no less in esteem among the Western
Christians of the 10th century during the Roman pornocracy
(§ 96, 1) or the tyranny of the Seljuk dynasty in Palestine
(§ 94). The expectation of the approaching end of the world,
rather gave them an impulse during this century, which reached
its fullest expression in the crusades.--Continuation, § 115, 9.