The qualities cultivated by dialectic, and the impartial rational temper,
here displayed, reappear in the works of Abaelard devoted to sacred
doctrine. Enough has been said of the method and somewhat captious
qualities of the _Sic et non_.[475] Unquestionably its manner of
presenting the contradictory opinions of the Fathers, without any attempt
to reconcile them, tended to bring into view the difficulties inhering in
the formulation of Christian belief. And indeed the book made prominent
all the diabolic insoluble problems of the Faith, or rather of life itself
and any view of God and man: Predestination, for example; whether God
causes evil; whether He is omnipotent; whether He is free. The Lombard’s
_Sentences_ and Thomas’s _Summa_ considered all these questions; but they
strove to solve them; and Thomas did solve every one, leaving no loose
ends to his theology. More potently than Abaelard did the Angelic Doctor
employ dialectic in his finished scheme. With him, this propaedeutic
discipline, this tool of truth, perfectly performs its task of
construction. So also Abaelard intended to work with it; but his somewhat
unconsidered use of the tool did not meet the approval of his
contemporaries. Accordingly, in his more constructive theological
treatises his impulse to know and state appears finally actualized in the
systematic formulation of convictions upon topics of ultimate interest, to
wit, theology, the contents of the Christian Faith, the full relationship
of God and man. Did he sever theology from philosophy? Nay, rather, with
him theology was ultimate philosophy.
Several times Abaelard rewrote what was substantially the same general
work upon Theology. In one of its earliest forms it was burnt by the
Council of Soissons in 1121.[476] In another form it exists under the
title _Theologia Christiana_;[477] and the first part of its apparently
final revision is now improperly entitled, _Introductio ad
theologiam_.[478]
The first Book of the _Theologia Christiana_ is an exposition of the
Trinity, not clinched in syllogisms, but consisting mainly of an orderly
presentation of the patristic authorities supporting the author’s view of
the matter. The testimonies of profane writers are also given. Liber II.
opens by saying that in the former part of the work “we have collected the
_testimonia_ of prophets and philosophers, in support of the faith of the
Holy Trinity.” Hereupon, by the same method of adducing authorities,
Abaelard proceeds to refute those who had blamed him for citing the pagan
philosophers. He marshals his supporting excerpts from the Fathers, and
remarks: “That nothing is more needful for the defence of our faith than
that as against the importunities of all the infidels we should have
witness from themselves wherewith to refute them.” Then he points to the
moral worth of some of the philosophers, to their true teaching of the
soul’s immortality, and quotes Horace’s
“Oderunt peccare boni virtutis amore.”
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