LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

a warmer interest in things human than in things divine, a laughing contempt for authority, a handsome presence, and a musical delivery—these were his gifts.[6]

      He takes his place in history, apart from the ever-interesting drama and the deep pathos of his life, in virtue of two distinctions. They are, firstly, an extraordinary ability in imparting such knowledge as the poverty of the age afforded—the facts of his career reveal it; and, secondly, a mind of such marvellous penetration that it conceived great truths which it has taken humanity seven or eight centuries to see—this will appear as we proceed. It was the former of these gifts that made him, in literal truth, the centre of learned and learning Christendom, the idol of several thousand eager scholars. Nor, finally, were these thousands the "horde of barbarians" that jealous Master Roscelin called them. It has been estimated that a pope, nineteen cardinals, and more than fifty bishops and archbishops were at one time among his pupils.[7]

      Abelard's fame as a teacher, with the consequent increase of masters and students at Paris, undoubtedly paved the way for the formation of the University later in the century. This is not however his greatest distinction in the history of education. His most enduring influences came from (1) his independence in thinking, (2) his novel method of dealing with debatable questions, and (3) his contributions to scholastic philosophy and theology. The first two of these are considered below; the last belongs more properly to the history of philosophy.

      (1) Nothing singles Abelard out more clearly among the teachers of his time than his intellectual independence. Most of his contemporaries accepted unquestioningly the view that in religious matters faith precedes reason. One might seek to justify one's faith by reason, but preliminary doubt as to what should be the specific articles of one's faith was inadmissible. As they supposed, these articles had been determined by the church fathers—Augustine, Jerome, and others—and by the Bible. Their view had been formulated by Anselm of Canterbury in the preceding century:

      "I do not seek to know in order that I may believe, but I believe in order that I may know." "The Christian ought to advance to knowledge through faith, not come to faith through knowledge." "The proper order demands that we believe the deep things of Christian faith before we presume to reason about them."

      With his keenly critical, questioning mind Abelard found a flaw in this position: on many questions of faith the authorities themselves disagreed. "In such cases,"—he said in effect—"how shall I come to any definite belief unless I first reason it out?" "By doubting we are led to inquiry, and by inquiry we attain the truth." His attitude—as contrasted with that of Anselm, given above—is set forth in the prologue to his Sic et Non (Yes and No):

      In truth, constant or frequent questioning is the first key to wisdom; and it is, indeed, to the acquiring of this [habit of] questioning with absorbing eagerness that the famous philosopher, Aristotle, the most clear sighted of all, urges the studious when he says: "It is perhaps difficult to speak confidently in matters of this sort unless they have often been investigated. Indeed, to doubt in special cases will not be without advantage." For through doubting we come to inquiry and through inquiry we perceive the truth. As the Truth Himself says: "Seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you." And He also, instructing us by His own example, about the twelfth year of His life wished to be found sitting in the midst of the doctors, asking them questions, exhibiting to us by His asking of questions the appearance of a pupil, rather than, by preaching, that of a teacher, although there is in Him, nevertheless, the full and perfect wisdom of God.

      Now when a number of quotations from [various] writings are introduced they spur on the reader and allure him into seeking the truth in proportion as the authority of the writing itself is commended …

      In accordance, then, with these forecasts it is our pleasure to collect different sayings of the holy Fathers as we planned, just as they have come to mind, suggesting (as they do) some questioning from their apparent disagreement, in order that they may stimulate tender readers to the utmost effort in seeking the truth and may make them keener as the result of their seeking.[8]

      (2) The new method which Abelard formed for discovering the truth is presented in the "Yes and No." He first stated in the form of a thesis for debate the question on which doubt existed. The book contains one hundred and fifty-eight such questions. He then brought together under each question the conflicting opinions of various authorities, and, without stating his own view, left the student to reason for himself in the matter. There is no doubt that this method served his purpose to "stimulate tender readers to the utmost effort in seeking the truth." His boldness in considering some of these questions debatable at all, the novelty of the doubt which they imply, and their incisive challenge to keen thinking are evident from the following list:

      1. That faith is based upon reason, et contra.

      5. That God is not single, et contra.

      6. That God is tripartite, et contra.

      8. That in the Trinity it is not to be stated that there is more than one Eternal being, et contra.

      11. That the Divine Persons mutually differ, et contra.

      12. That in the Trinity each is one with the other, et contra.

      13. That God the Father is the cause of the son, et contra.

      14. That the Son is without beginning, et contra.

      27. That God judges with foreknowledge, et non.

      28. That the providence of God is the cause of things happening, et non.

      32. That to God all things are possible, et non.

      36. That God does whatever he wishes, et non.

      37. That nothing happens contrary to the will of God, et contra.

      38. That God knows all things, et non.

      53. That Adam's sin was great, et non.

      84. That man's first sin did not begin through the persuasion of the devil, et contra.

      55. That Eve only, not Adam, was beguiled, et contra.

      56. That by sinning man lost free will, et non.

      69. That the Son of God was predestinated, et contra.

      79. That Christ was a deceiver, et non.

      85. That the hour of the Lord's resurrection is uncertain, et contra.

      116. That the sins of the fathers are visited upon the children, et contra.

      122. That everybody should be allowed to marry, et contra.

      141. That works of sanctity do not justify a man, et contra.

      144. That at times we all sin against our will, et contra.

      150. That sins are not remitted without confession, et contra.

      153. That a lie is never permissible, et contra.

      154. That a man may destroy himself for some reasons, et contra.

      155. That Christians may not for any reason kill a man, et contra.

      156. That it is lawful to kill a man, et non.

      How he brought out the conflict of opinions is shown by the following example:

      THAT IT IS LAWFUL TO KILL A MAN, AND THE OPPOSITE THESIS.

      Jerome on Isaiah, Bk. V. He who cuts the throat of a man of blood, is not a man of blood.

      Idem, On the Epistle to the Galatians: He who smites the wicked because they are wicked and whose reason for the murder is that he may slay the base, is a servant of the Lord.

      Idem, on Jeremiah: For the punishment of homicides, impious persons and poisoners is not bloodshed, but serving the law.

      Cyprian, in the Ninth

Скачать книгу