Church History (Long Notes)1

{11} Scholasticism & Renaissance

ERA 4 < Medieval Church (2): Growth & Decline of Papacy (AD 1000–1500) > SESSION 2

Reference: Gonzalez, volume 1, chapters 33-36

11.1 Scholasticism

† 11.1.1 Background

Definition: Scholasticism is the theology that developed in the “schools”, and with its own characteristic methodology. It was an attempt to rationalize theology in order to build up faith by reason. In 12th-c, cathedral schools became the centre of theological activity. They were replaced by the universities in 13th-c.
Causes: [1] The emergence of the philosophy of Aristotle led to an attempt to relate it to theology. [2] The mendicant orders were interested in the use of philosophy in the study of revelation.
Periods: There were 3 distinct periods of Scholasticism: early scholasticism [1000–1100], high scholasticism [1100–1300], and late scholasticism [1300–1500].
Method: It sought to prove existing truth by rational processes rather than seeking new truth. They studied the Bible, the creeds and canons of the ecumenical councils, and writings of Church Fathers. It followed a standard method of posing a question, and then quoting authorities who supported different answers, and then showing how it was possible for all the authorities quoted to be correct. The data of revelation were to be organized systematically by the use of Aristotelian deductive logic (syllogism) and were to be harmonized with the newly rediscovered philosophy of Aristotle.
Emphasis on reason: From the early church, most Christian theologians were accustomed to a Platonic or Neoplatonic philosophy. After the discovery of Aristotle’s philosophy in Paris, the emphasis was the independence of reason and philosophy from any constraint imposed by faith and theology. If the conclusions based on reason differed from those of theology, this was a problem for theologians to solve.
Reactions: Some theologians responded to this challenge by affirming the traditional Platonic and Augustinian outlook. Franciscan monk Bonaventure (1221–1274) insisted that faith is necessary in order to achieve the correct understanding. Another route was to explore the possibilities that the new philosophy offered for a better understanding of Christian faith.

† 11.1.2 Schools of scholasticism

[1] Realism—universals exist before created things [dominant in early scholasticism]

Definition of a “universal”: A “universal” is what particular things have in common, namely characteristics or qualities. The noun “universal” contrasts with “individual”, while the adjective “universal” contrasts with “particular”. For example, ancient Chinese philosopher Gongsun Long (325–250 BC, logician school) said that “A white horse is not a horse” because a “particular” horse that is white is not entirely equivalent to the “universal” concept of a horse.
Characteristic: Plato insisted that universals or “ideas” exist apart from particular things or individuals. Men must look beyond this life for ultimate reality. This school was represented by Anselm and Lombard.

[2] Moderate realism—universals exist in created things [dominant in high scholasticism]

Characteristic: Aristotle insisted that universals have an objective existence but that they do not exist apart from individual things but rather in them and in their minds. This school was represented by Abelard and Aquinas.

[3] Nominalism—universals exist after created things [dominant in late scholasticism]

Characteristic: General truths or ideas have no objective existence outside the mind. They are merely subjective ideas of common characteristics developed by the mind as a result of observation of particular things. Universals are only class names. This school was more concerned with the individuals whereas the other two schools were more concerned with the group. These people were forerunners of the empiricists, positivists, and pragmatists. This school was represented by William of Ockham and Roger Bacon.

† 11.1.3 Early scholasticism

Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109)—founder of scholasticism

Life: He moved from Italy to a Benedictine monastery in Normandy to follow abbot Lanfranc. Lanfranc became archbishop of Canterbury [1078] and Anselm was later called to succeed Lanfranc [1093]. Because of conflicts over the question of the relative authority of church and state, he was often exiled from Canterbury.
On reason helping faith: He applied reason to questions of faith, such as the existence of God and the motive for the incarnation. It was not to prove things he did not believe without such proof, but to understand more deeply a truth already known by faith. “I believe in order that I may know.” (Latin credo ut intelligam) Faith must be primary and the foundation of knowledge. This position was held by Augustine—faith seeking understanding. His explanation of the following 2 important questions has been regarded as the standard orthodoxy. They show how reasonable Christianity is; they demonstrate the inner consistency and beauty of Christian faith.
Ontological argument of the existence of God: Anselm’s book Proslogion [1078], originally called Faith Seeking Understanding, demonstrated a logical deduction that has been regarded by many philosophers as the best argument for the existence of God. When one thinks of God, one is thinking of “that-than-which-no-greater-can-be-thought (conceived)”—the greatest conceivable being. The question then is, is it possible to think of “that-than-which-no-greater-can-be-thought” as not existing? Clearly not, for then an existing being would be greater than it. Therefore, by definition, the idea of “that-than-which-no-greater-can-be-thought” includes its existence. Were He not to exist, He would be inferior to an identical being that did exist, and thus would not be “the greatest conceivable being.” The analogy is that to speak of God as not existing makes as much sense as to speak of a triangle with four sides.

◦ Another version: Everyone has an idea of a perfect supreme being in his mind. This idea must correspond to a reality that has an objective existence, for such a being lacking existence would not be perfect nor would it be that than which a greater cannot be conceived. Because no greater idea than that of God as the perfect Supreme Being can be conceived, God must exist in reality.

On the reason for incarnation: Anselm’s book Why God Became Man attempted to show that it was absolutely necessary for God to become man and die in order to save us; that is, God had no choice. The importance of a crime is measured in terms of the one against whom it is committed. Therefore, a crime against God, sin, is infinite in its import. But, one the other hand, only a human being can offer satisfaction for human sin. This is obviously impossible, for human beings are finite, and cannot offer the infinite satisfaction required by the majesty of God. For this reason, there is need for a divine-human, God incarnate, who through His suffering and death offers satisfaction for the sins of all man. This is called the commercial theory of atonement. It ended the patristic view of the atonement as a ransom paid to Satan.

† 11.1.4 High scholasticism

Peter Abelard (1079–1142)

Life: He was a French teaching at the University of Paris. Following attacks of his theology by Bernard of Clairvaux, Abelard was condemned as a heretic at the Council of Sens [1141] but was later reconciled to the church.
On reason and truth: He emphasized the position of reason in the development of truth. “I know in order that I may believe.” (Latin intelligo ut credam) “By doubting we come to enquire and by enquiring we reach truth.”
On universals: Realists held that universals (similar to Plato’s ideas) are more real than the individuals and exist independently of them. Nominalists, in contrast, held that universals have no reality of their own; they are merely arbitrary names. Abelard took a mediating position, seeing universals as mental concepts. They have no existence independently of particular individuals, but they are not just names. He believed that reality existed first in the mind of God, then in individuals and things, and finally in man’s mind. The idea of dog precedes individual dogs in the sense that God planned the creation of dogs so the idea was in His mind. It exists in individual dogs, and its exists in our minds when we have the concept of “dog”.
On atonement: He thought that the death of Christ was not to satisfy God but to impress man with the love of God so that man would be morally influenced to surrender his life to God. The cross becomes the supreme example of love. This is the moral influence theory of atonement.
Impact: His book Yes and No [1122] included 158 theological questions which various authorities did not agree on their answers. He wanted to show that theology must not be content with citing authorities. It was necessary to find ways to reconcile such apparently contradictory authorities. Eventually, scholasticism used his method as the standard.

Peter Lombard (1100–1160)

Life: He was a teacher in the University of Paris [1140], and later the bishop of Paris [1159].
Impact: His Four Books of Sentences [1150] was a systematic treatment of theology, not from his new ideas but based on extracts from the Bible and other authorities. “Sentences” mean maxims and opinions. Topics included the Trinity, the incarnation, the sacraments, and eschatology. It became a basic textbook on theology in universities. Works of major scholastic theologians usually include a Commentary on the Sentences. He emphasized the 7 sacraments which were accepted as authoritative at the Council of Florence [1439].

◦ Bernard of Chartres (??–1130) said: “We are like dwarves sitting on the shoulders of giants (the ancients). We see more than them and things that are further away—not because our sight is better than theirs, nor because we are taller than they were, but because they raise us up and add to our stature by their enormous heights.”

Albert the Great (1206–1280)

Life: He was a professor in Paris and Cologne where he taught Thomas Aquinas.
Philosophy & theology: He made a clear distinction between philosophy and theology. Philosophy is based on autonomous principles, which can be known apart from revelation, and seeks to discover truth by a strictly rational method. Theology, on the other hand, is based on revealed truths, which cannot be known by reason alone. Revealed data (from God) are always more certain than those of reason, which may err. For example, philosophy cannot prove creation out of nothing because the object of inquiry is beyond the scope of human reason.
Science & religion: His chief works, compendiums of theology and creation, treated respectively theological and natural science in an effort to reconcile science and religion.

Roger Bacon (1214–1292)

He laid the foundation for experimental science. Truth can be approached through the realm of nature by experiment.

Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274)—greatest theologian of the Middle Ages

Life: Thomas Aquinas’s mother was the sister of Emperor Frederick Barbarossa. He was a Dominican monk from Italy. He became a professor in Paris. He was nicknamed “the dumb ox”, being big and quiet. He was considered one of the greatest theologian of all time, the foremost proponent of natural theology.
Summa Theologica [1265–1273] (The Sum of Theology)—It was the greatest theological work in the Middle Ages—with 512 questions and 3000 articles. It is an imposing intellectual construction comparable to a vast Gothic cathedral with its symmetry and perfect balance. It tries to synthesize faith and reason into a totality of truth. Because both are from God, there can be no essential contradiction between them.

◦ Part 1 discusses the existence and nature of God, emphasizing God’s being, and Trinity.

◦ Part 2 discusses man’s advance toward God. Thomas noted that man’s nature of morality and the virtues, but he pointed out that man’s will is bent by sin, although it is not completely determined to evil.

◦ Part 3 discusses Christ as our Way to God and stresses Christ’s incarnation, life, death, and resurrection. It concludes with the 7 sacraments as channels of grace instituted by Christ.

On faith & reason: Some truths are within the reach of reason, and others are beyond it. Philosophy deals with the former. There are truths that reason cannot prove, but which are necessary for salvation. So God reveals all truth necessary for salvation, to be dealt with by philosophy and theology. Man by the use of reason and the logic of Aristotle could gain such truths as those of God’s existence, providence, and immortality. Like a two-storey house, Aristotelian philosophy provides the first storey on which Catholic theology can be made perfect and complete by adding the second storey.
On the existence of God: It is impossible to be saved without believing that God exists. The existence of God is an article of faith; even the most ignorant person can accept it. But the existence of God is not a truth beyond the reach of reason. In this case, reason can prove what faith accepts. Therefore, this question is a proper subject for both philosophy and theology. There are 5 ways to prove it. The first way, for example, begins by considering movement; since what is moved must have a mover, there must be a prime mover, God.

Anselm vs Aquinas: Anselm distrusted the senses, and thus started not by looking at the world, but by examining the idea of God. Thomas followed the opposite route, starting with the data known through the senses. This clearly shows Anselm’s Platonic orientation compared to Thomas’s Aristotelian orientation. Whereas Anselm believed that true knowledge is to be found in the realm of pure ideas, Thomas held that sense perception is the beginning of knowledge.

† 11.1.5 Late scholasticism

Characteristics: [1] They searched for ever subtler questions to pose, and for fine distinctions with which to answer them. They developed a dense style and technical vocabulary that were far beyond the reach of the uninitiated. [2] There was an increasing rift between philosophy and theology, between what reason can discover and what is known only through divine revelation.
Duns Scotus (1266–1308)—the Subtle Doctor, Scottish Franciscan

Subtlety: His subtlety and fine distinctions were so frequent that his writings can only be understood by those who have spent many years in philosophy and theology.
On faith & reason: While Aquinas supported the use of reason in helping to understand faith. He rejected that doctrines (such as the immortality of the soul or divine omnipresence) could be proved to be true by the sole and proper use of reason. He stressed the primacy of the will. Reason shows the will what is possible, but the will itself is free to choose whichever of these it will accept. The will does not simply follow whatever reason dictates.
On God’s free-will: He stressed the freedom of God. Things are the way that they are, not because reason requires it but because God freely chose it. While Anselm claimed that the incarnation and the cross of Jesus Christ were necessary and God had no choice, Duns held that they happened because God chose that they should.
On the individual: He laid more emphasis on the individual than on the institution.
On immaculate conception: He was the first major advocate of the doctrine of Mary’s immaculate conception (that Mary was conceived without sin), in contrast to others before him who held that Mary was freed from sin after her conception. He argued that this would make the most perfect form of redemption.

William of Ockham (1288–1349)—English Franciscan

On faith & reason: He held that all true knowledge is acquired empirically through the senses. He insisted that theological dogmas were not rationally demonstrable (they are only probable arguments), and that they must be accepted on the authority of the Bible. Human natural reason can prove absolutely nothing regarding God or the divine purposes. This meant that all the traditional arguments whereby theologians had tried to prove that a doctrine was reasonable lost their power. This view separated faith and reason.
On God’s imperative: Whatever God pleases to do is possible. Nothing is above the absolute power of God—not even reason, nor the distinction between good and evil. Were it not so, one would be forced to declare that God’s absolute power is limited by reason, or by the distinction between good and evil. Strictly speaking, one should not say that God always does good, but rather that whatever God does, no matter what it might be, is good. It is God who determines what is good, and not vice versa. Likewise, it is incorrect to say that God has to act reasonably. It is the sovereign will of God that determines what is to be reasonable and then, by the “ordered” power of God, acts according to those directives.
On universals: He denied the existence of objective universals and held that universals are only names for mental concepts that men develop in their minds. Only the individual is real. Universals have no reality or existence outside of the mind of the person thinking them (Latin universalia post rem). The concept encourages Western individualism. With this, he undermined the authority of the church.
On the pope: He held that the highest authority in the church is not the pope but a general council with lay participation. He believed that only the Bible and the universal church cannot err and that the pope must submit himself to them. He taught that the pope has no secular power and that the emperor can depose the pope.
Occam’s Razor or Law of Economy: It is the law of simplicity—“the simplest explanation is the best” or “it is futile to multiply hypotheses when a few will suffice.”

† 11.1.6 Results of scholasticism