The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 11 : $b France, 843-1715
History
The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 11 : $b France, 843-1715
World history
He who began this revolution was not a priest; he was a handsome young
man, of brilliant and engaging qualities, and of noble race. No one,
like him, could write love verses in the vulgar tongue, and he sang them
himself; then his erudition was extraordinary for the times--he was the
only man who knew Greek and Hebrew.[6] Perhaps he had frequented the
Jewish schools (there were many of them in the south), or the rabbis
of Troyes, Vitry, or Orleans. There were then two principal schools in
Paris; the old episcopal school of Notre Dame, and that of St. Geneviève,
on the mountain, where William of Champeaux was in the zenith of his
fame. Abelard became one of his pupils, laid his doubts before him,
puzzled his master, made sport of him, and put him to silence. He would
have done the same with Anselm of Laon, had not the professor, who was
a bishop, expelled him from his diocese. Thus did the knight-errant of
dialectics go about unhorsing the most famous champions. He says himself
that he renounced the other kind of tilting, that of the tournaments,
only from his love for the war of words. Thenceforth, victorious and
unrivalled, he taught at Paris and at Melun, where Louis the Fat resided,
and where the lords were beginning to gather in great numbers. These
knights encouraged a man of their own order, who had beaten the priests
upon their own ground, and who put the most self-sufficient of the clerks
to silence.
The whole body of Christianity was at stake; it was attacked at its base.
If original sin, as Abelard said, was not a sin, but a penalty, that
penalty was unjust, and redemption was useless. Abelard defended himself
from such a conclusion; but he justified Christianity by means of such
feeble arguments, that he rather did it more damage by declaring that
he had no better answer to give. He suffered himself to be brought to a
stand by means of the _argumentum ad absurdum_, and then he appealed to
authority and faith. And so, then, man was no longer guilty; the flesh
was justified and restored to honour; all the sufferings with which
men had immolated themselves were superfluous. What became of so many
voluntary martyrs, so many fastings and mortifications--the vigils of
monks, the tribulations of hermits, the countless tears shed before God?
All was vanity--mockery. God was an amiable and easy God, who had nothing
to do with all this.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account