normal system of the Dominicans,23 made much more use of Aristotle in theology. On the other hand, the Franciscan Bonaventura (Doctor Seraphicus, lecturer in Paris, cardinal, † 1274)24 brought forward the mystic theology again, as well as the scholastic, and endeavored to unite the claims of both. In John Duns Scotus (Doctor Subtilis, lecturer in Oxford, Paris, and Cologne † 1308),25 the Franciscans at last acquired a teacher re

" Immediately after Thomas's death the Dominicans had to protect him against the enmity of the other theologians, both in Paris, where was his most eminent antagonist, Henricus Gandavensis; and in Oxford the Dominican Robertus Oxfordius wrote at that time his Protectorium Thomae Aquinatis (Bulaeus, iii. 409). In the year 1276, Stephanus Tempier, bishop of Paris, de consilio Magistrorum theologiae, even condemned, among many other propositions, some taken from the works of Thomas (d'Argentré de novis erroribus, i. 188; cf. Observationes, p. 204, 217). The University of Oxford also acceded to this condemnation (Bulaeus, iii. 448, 482), and the Franciscan Guillelmus de Lamare in 1285 wrote at Oxford a Reprehensorium F. Thomae (d'Argentré, i. 218). On the other hand, the Dominicans agreed at a general chapter in Paris, 1286 (Martene thes. anecdot. iv. 1817), no. 19, ut Fratres omnes et singuli, prout sciunt et possunt, efficacem dent operam ad doctrinam ven. magistri Fratris Thomae de Aquino recolendae memoriae promovendam, et saltem ut est opinio defensandam. Et si qui contrarium facere attentaverint assertive, sive sint Magistri, sive Baccallarii, Priores et alii Fratres etiam aliter sentientes, ipso facto ab officiis propriis et aliis Ordinis sint suspensi, etc., and many Dominicans wrote against the Reprehensorium (d'Argentré, 1. c.). After that Thomas was canonized by John XXII. in the year 1322, Stephanus de Borreto, bishop of Paris at that time, was induced in 1325 to abrogate the decision of his predecessor against St. Thomas. (See the Decree in Bulaeus, iv. 224, d'Argentré, i. 222.) Thereupon the Dominicans decreed in the general chapter, apud Carcassonam, 1342 (in Holstenii codex Regularum ed. Brockie, iv. 114): Cum praeclarissima doctoris Angelici s. Thomae Aquinatis doctrina in toto orbe terrarum tanquam lux solis eluceat, et ut firmissima ac solidissima doctrinarum omnium a sede apostolica, et a principalibus Ecclesiae doctoribus cum testimonio Episcopi atque Universitatis Parisiensis honorifice approbata fuerit, et divinis laudibus ornata imponimus lectoribus et studentibus, ut spretis et postpositis vanis et curiosis ac frivolis doctrinis, quarum plurimae a veritate abducunt, ejusdem sanctissimi Doctoris doctrinae omnino dent operam, et assidue studeant, juxta quam quaestiones omnes et dubia determinent. But a letter from the Theological Faculty in Paris to the Pope in the year 1387 shows that they found much to censure in Thomas, in Launoy de varia Aristotelis in Acad. Paris. fortuna cap. 10 (ed. Elswich, p. 213 ss.).

24 On his life, see Hist. litt. de la France, xix. 266. Among his theological works are, Commentarius in iv. libb. Sententiarum; and two hand-books of Divinity, Breviloquium (textum recognovit C. J. Hefele, Tubing. 1845. Comp. Münchener gel. Anz., April, 1846, s. 601) and Centiloquium, this last for beginners. Besides, there are many mystical works by him, e. g. Itinerarium mentis in Deum, De vii. gradibus contemplationis, etc.-Opera, jussu Sixti V. emendata, Romae, 1588, t. viii. fol. Venetiis, 1751 ss. t. xiii. 4. 25 There are many philosophical writings by him, especially commentaries on Aristotle. Among his theological works are, Quaestiones in libros iv. Sententiarum (Opus anglicanum s. Oxoniense, in opposition to the earlier unfinished Opus Parisiense, best edition by Hugo Cavellus. Antverp. 1620. 2 voll. fol.), and Quaestiones quod libetales xxi. -Opera ed. Luc. Wadding. Lugd. 1639 ss. t. xii. fol. Baumgarten-Crusius de theologia Scoti (Jenaer Weihnachtsprogr. 1826). Ritter, iv. 354. [Cf. Hauréau, u. s. H. Ritter, Sketch of Scholastic Philosophy in the Historisches Taschenbuch, 1856.]

markable for the most subtle speculations, whom they could set up against the Thomas of the Dominicans.26

The deficiencies and partialities of the theologians of this time were recognized by many,27 most plainly by the great Franciscan Roger Bacon (Doctor mirabilis, lecturer in Oxford † 1294),28 who showed a wonderful keenness of vision on all points in every branch of human knowledge.29

26 Cf. Waddingi annales Minorum, ann. 1308, § 64: In aliquot comitiis generalibus sta tutum est, ut lectores omnes et magistri, tam in cursu philosophico quam theologico, ejus sententiam sequerentur. When first, Wadding does not pretend to determine however, the Franciscan Occam, a pupil of Duns, calls him Ordinis Doctorem.

27 Guil. Durantis (1311) de modo gener. Concilii celebrandi (s. § 62, not 28), P. III. rubr. 16 Cum dicti religiosi (the mendicant friars) dimisso bibliae et verae theologiae studio, et his quae aedificare possent Ecclesiam Dei, dialecticorum tendiculis et fantasmatibus theologiae studium destruentibus, et in sermonibus et praedicationibus ad eorum ostentationem frequenter rhythmis et quibusdam profanitatibus abutantur, et in generalbus et particularibus studiis curiositatibus et vanis disceptationibus vacent, - videretur super his et alus eos tangentibus providendum.

28 Concerning him, compare Sammlung v. merkw Lebensbeschreibungen, grosstenth aus d. britann. Biographie, unter Baumgartens Aufsicht, iv. 616. Jourdain, p. 413. Ritter, iv. 473. Hist. litt. de la France, xx. 227 His most important work, Opus majus (a collection of treatises made in 1226 at the request of Clement IV.), ed. Sam. Jebb. Lond. 1733. fol., in abstract in the Brit. Biogr iv. 627.

29 Compare the passages which Jebb, in the Praef. ad Opus majus, quotes from Bacon's unprinted works: Nunquam fuit tanta apparentia sapientiae, nec tantum exercitium stu. di in tot facultatibus, in tot regionibus, sicut jam a XL. annis. Ubique enim Doctores sunt dispersi,-in omni civitate, et in omni castro, et in omni burgo, praecipue per duos Ordines studentes (Dominicans and Franciscans), quod non accidit nisi a XL. annis vel circiter, cum tamen numquam fuit tanta ignorantia, tantus error.-Si haberem potestatem super libros Aristotelis (namely, the Latin translations); ego facerem omnes cremari, quia non est nisi temporis amissio studere in illis, et causa erroris et multiplicatio ignorantiae ultra id quod valeat explicari.-Vulgus studentum cum capitibus suis non habet unde excitetur ad aliquid dignum, et ideo languet et asininat circa male translata, et tempus et studium amittit in omnibus et expensas. Apparentia quidem sola tenet eos, et non cu rant, quid sciant, sed quid videantur scire coram multitudine insensata -Cf. Opus majus P. i. c. 1 (ed. Jebb. p. 2): Quatuor vero sunt maxima comprehendendae veritatis offendicula, quae omnem quemcunque sapientem impediunt, et vix aliquem permittunt ad verum titulum sapientiae pervenire, videlicet fragilis et indignae auctoritatis exemplum, consuetudinis diuturnitas, vulgi sensus imperiti. et propriae ignorantiae occultatio cum ostentatione sapientiae apparentis.-Ex his autem pestibus mortiferis accidunt omnia mala humano generi: nam ignorantur utilissima et maxima et pulcherrima sapientiae documenta, et omnium scientiarum et artium secreta; sed pejus est, quod homines horum quatuor caligine excaecati non percipiunt suam ignorantiam, sed—aestimant se esse in plena luce veritatis. Cap. 12, p. 16: Cum linguarum cognitio et mathematicae est maxime necessaria studio Latinorum,-et fuit praecise in usu Sanctorum et omnium sapientum antiquorum, nos moderni negligimus, adnihilamus, et reprobamus, quia ista et eorum utilitatem nescimus. Deinde si aliqui sapientes et Sancti alia neglexerunt, aut humana fragilitate devicti aut ex causa rationabili, nos praesentis temporis obstinate et pertinaciter negligi. mus et reprobamus, fortificantes nostram ignorantiam propter hoc quod Sancti et sapientes neglexerunt, non volentes considerare quod in omni homine est multa imperfectio sapientiae, tam in Sanctis quam in sapientibus.-Pars iii. de utilitate Grammaticae, p. 44: Impossibile enim est, quod Latini perveniant ad ea, quae necessaria sunt in divinis et hu

§ 75.

RISE OF THE THOMISTS AND SCOTISTS.

J. Arada controversiae theolog. inter s. Thomam et Scotum super iv. libros sententiarum, in quibus pugnantes sententiae referuntur, potiores difficultates elucidantur, et responsiones et argumenta Scoti rejiciuntur. Coloniae, 1620. 4.

Since the two orders of Dominicans and Franciscans adopted as the systems of their respective orders the differing doctrinal systems of Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus, they entered upon the regions of philosophy and theology from opposite quarters as the hostile parties of Thomists and Scotists. In philosophy the theory of Universals was principally' controverted between them: on this head Thomas held Aristotelian,2 and Scotus rather Platonic3 opinions: in theology again, among many other points of

manis, nisi notitiam habeant aliarum linguarum.-Nam totus textus sacer a Graeco et Hebraeo transfusus est, et philosophia ab his et Arabico deducta est; sed impossibile est quod proprietas unius linguae servetur in alia. - Et ideo nullus Latinus sapientiam sacrae Scripturae et philosophiae poterit ut oportet intelligere, nisi intelligat linguas, a quibus sunt translatae.-Solus Boethius primus interpres novit plenarie potestatem linguarum et solus dominus Robertus, dictus Grossum Caput, novit scientias. Alii quidem mendici translatores defecerunt multum tam in scientis quam in linguis: quod ostendit eorum translatio. Nam tanta est perversitas et horribilis difficultas, maxime in libris Aristotelis translatis, quod nullus potest eos intelligere. Sed quilibet alii contradicit, et multiplex reperitur falsitas, ut patet ex collatione diversorum interpretum et textuum diversarum linguarum. Et similiter in textu sacro inveniuntur falsa, et male translata quam plurima-Ne (Hieronymus) nimia novitate deterreret Latinos, ideo, ut ipse scribit, aliquando coaptavit se LXX. interpretibus, et aliquando Theodotioni, aliquando Aquilae, et ideo multa dimisit, et propter hoc remanserunt plura falsa.-Pars iv. in qua ostenditur potestas mathematicae in scientia, et rebus, et occupationibus hujus mundi. P. 57: sunt quatuor scientiae magnae, sine quibus caeterae scientiae sciri non possunt, nec rerum notitia haberi.-Et harum scientiarum porta et clavis est mathematica, quam Sancti a principio mundi invenerunt, ut ostendam, et quae semper fuit in usu omnium Sanctorum et sapientum prae omnibus aliis scientiis. Cujus negligentia jam per triginta vel quadraginta annos destruxit totum studium Latinorum. Although Bacon prefers Aristotle to all other philosophers, he shows plainly enough in many places that even Aristotle is not free from errors ; e. g. P. II. c. 8, page 36: Hic (Aristoteles) praecedentium philosophorum errores evacuavit, et augmentavit philosophiam, aspirans ad ejus complementum, quod habuerint antiqui patriarchae, quamvis non potuit singula perficere. Nam posteriores ipsum in aliquibus correxerunt, et multa ad ejus opera addiderunt, et adhuc addentur usque ad finem mundi; quia nihil est perfectum in humanis inventionibus.

1 On certain other differences in philosophy, comp. Tennemann VIII. ii. 723 sq. 739,750, 752, 772.

* Cf. Thomae opuscc. 55 et 56, de Universalibus. He adopted the solution of Aristotle: quod universale est in multis, et unum praeter multa; and of Boethius: universale dum intelligitur, singulare dum sentitur. Thus he is not a nominalist, but an Aristotelian realist, Tiedemann, iv. 549. Tennemann, VIII. ii. 560. Ritter, iv. 323.

Scotus in Sentent. lib. ii. dist. 3, qu. 1. Tennemann, VIII. ii. 728. Ritter, iv. 428, Accordingly, Scotus Sent. i. dist. 8, qu. 4, asserts even a distinctio perfectionum essentia

difference, the doctrines of Free Will and Grace were most prominent; with which then the question of the immaculate conceplium in Deo, in opposition to the Thomist dist. perf. attributalium. See Tennemann, s. 770. Ritter, iv. 386.

Thus Scotus, Sent. lib. iii. dist. 19 et 20, attacks the opinion of Thomas about an infinitas meriti Christi. Other differences touching morals see in Stäudlin's Gesch. der Sittenl. Jesu, iv. 394 sq. 403.

Thomas exactly follows Augustine in the doctrine of original sin and the necessity of grace (e. g. Summa theol. Prima Secundae qu. 109, and in his Comment. ad Rom. c. 6, ad Ephes. c. 2, and ad Titum, c. 3): nevertheless, he took care, at the same time, to vindicate human merit. Compare Prima Secundae qu. 114, art. 3: Opus meritorium hominis dupliciter considerari potest. Uno modo, secundum quod procedit ex libero arbitrio ; alio modo, secundum quod procedit ex gratia Spiritus sancti. Si consideretur secundum substantiam operis, et secundum quod procedit ex libero arbitrio: sic non potest ibi esse condignitas, propter maximam inaequalitatem; sed est ibi congruitas, propter quandam aequalitatem proportionis. Videtur enim congruum, ut homini operanti secundum suam virtutem Deus recompenset secundum excellentiam suae virtutis. Si autem loquamur de opere meritorio, secundum quod procedit ex gratia Spiritus sancti: sic est meritorium vitae aeternae ex condigno. Then, indeed, he shows, art. 5, quod nullus potest sibi mereri primam gratiam (or gratiam praevenientem, cf. qu. 111, art. 8); but art. 8, he answers the question, Utrum homo possit mereri augmentum gratiae vel caritatis, in the affirmative: augmentum gratiae cadit sub merito condigni.

Scotus, on the other hand, is Semipelagian. He declares in Sentent. lib. ii. dist. 32, qu. unic. 7, originale peccatum to be only, carentia justitia debitae. Lib. ii. dist. 28, qu. unic. in opposition to the Magister sententiarum, he answers in the affirmative the question utrum liberum arbitrium hominis sine gratia posset cavere omne peccatum mortale? with reference to Rom. ii. 14: ubi videtur Apostolus increpare Judaeos in hoc, quod gentes sine lege data servabant legem: ergo cavebant ab omni peccato; et tamen (ut videtur) non habuerunt gratiam. Lib. iii. dist. 27, qu. unic. against the position of Thomas, naturam intellectualem non posse diligere Deum super omnia sine habitu infuso, he asserts: quod ex puris naturalibus potest quaecunque voluntas saltem in statu naturae institutae diligere Deum super omnia. Lib. ii. dist. 37, qu. 2, to the question: Utrum voluntas creata sit totalis causa et immediata sui velle, ita quod Deus respectu illius non habeat aliquam efficaciam immediatam sed mediatam? he answers: potest dici, quod voluntas est totalis causa et immediata respectu suae volitionis. Quod probatur per rationes: primo, quia aliter ipsa non esset libera; secundo, quia etiam aliter nihil contingenter causare posset; tertio, quia aliter non posset peccare; quarto, quia aliter omnino nullam actionem habere posset; quinto, ex comparatione ejus ad alias causas creatas. On the conditions of the communication of grace, ibid. § 14. Universaliter quidquid Deus dat antecedenter, daret illud consequenter quantum est ex se, nisi esset impedimentum: dando autem voluntatem liberam, dedit antecedenter opera recta, quae sunt in potestate voluntatis, et ideo quantum est ex parte sui, dedit rectitudinem omni actui voluntatis, et voluntati ex consequenti daret, si ipsa voluntas quemcunque actum elicitum recte ageret ex parte sui. Lib. i. dist. 17, qu. 3, § 28: Voluntas est quasi equus liber, et gratia quasi sessor per modum naturae inclinans ad objectum per modum determinatum. Secundum hujus inclinationem actus voluntatis placet, aliter non placeret : sicut quando est peccatum veniale, vel actus indifferens. Quando autem sessor abjicitur, quod fit per peccatum mortale, omnino ipsa voluntas fit displicens. Hoc etiam modo voluntas est pedissequa, quia non ex se ita determinate inclinat ad terminum, propter quam inclinationem actus acceptatur, sicut gratia inclinat: et voluntas potest illud participare a gratia, quia competit gratiae magis per essentiam, quam sibi, et in hoc ipsa erit causa secunda. Tamen in eliciendo actum voluntas habet primam rationem motivi, ita quod in causando aliquid intrinsecum actui non sit voluntas secunda causa, sed in essendo, propter quod actus acceptetur: quod dicit respectum ejus ad extrinsecum, etc.-The conception which each of

tion of the Virgin Mary was connected (see below, § 78, notes 14 and 15. Part 3, § 119).

§ 76.

II. HISTORY OF THE REMAINING THEOLOGICAL SCIENCES.

Next to those scholastic systems of doctrine, canon law was most zealously studied,' after that it likewise had received from Gratian a scholastic and scientific shape.

3

Morals were treated by Abelard in a peculiar manner. The later schoolmen, after the example of Lombard, handled them but cursorily in their theological text-books. The Summa de virtutibus et vitiis of the Dominican Guilelmus Peraldus († 1250), and the Secunda Secundae of Thomas Aquinas, are worthy of notice. Casuistry, as well as moral philosophy, was brought into a scholastic and scientific form by Raymund de Pennaforti,' in the place of the ancient libri poenitentiales: on account of its importance in the performance of ecclesiastical offices, it was held in higher estimation than these books. The mystics, Bernard, Hugo, and Richard de St. Victor, and Bonaventura, did more to develop and rec

them formed of the Pelagian heresy must not be overlooked. Thomas, Summa theol. P. I. qu. 23, art. 5: Posuerunt Pelagiani, quod initium bene faciendi sit ex nobis, consummatio autem a Deo. Scotus in Sent. lib. ii. dist. 28, qu. unic. § 1: in hoc videtur esse haeresis Pelagiana, quod liberum arbitrium sufficiat sine gratia.

1 See above, § 60.

"On the moral philosophy of the schoolmen in general, see de Wette, Gesch. d. christlichen Sittenlchre, ii. 116. Stäudlin's Gesch. d. Moralphilosophie, s. 466. His Gesch. d. Sittenlehre Jesu, iv. 298.

See Ethica, under the title: Scito te ipsum, in B. Pezii thesaur. anecdot. III. ii. 627 (comp. 73, not. 16) in abstract, in Cramer, v. ii. 384, and de Wette, ii. 124. On its peculiarities, see Staudlin's Gesch. d. Moralphilosophie, s. 478 sq. His Gesch. d. Sittenlebre Jesu, iv. 304. Neander d. heil. Bernhard. s. 130, 174 sq. Frerichs comm. de P. Abaelardi doctrina dogmatica et morali. Jenae, 1827. 4. p. 28 ss. Statements from his Ethics were brought against him at the Council of Sens, see in the Capit. errorum Abael. cap. xiii. and xix., above, 73, note 23.

Joh. Sarisbur. metalogic. lib. ii. c. 11: An voluptas bona sit, an praeeligenda virtus, an in summo bono habitudines, an sit in indigentia laborandum, purus et simplex dialecticus raro examinat.

5 Often published, last at Paris 1629. 4. An abstract is found in Schröckh, xxix. 298. De Wette, ii. 169.

• Extracts in Schröckh, xxix. 111. De Wette, ii. 137. Staudlin's Gesch. d. Moralphilos. s. 494 sq. Gesch. d. Sittenl. Jesu, iv. 337.

7 Summa de poenitentia et matrimonio, usually Summa Raymundiana, often published, e g. cum glossis Johannis de Friburgo, Romae, 1603. fol. There is an abridgment in Schröckh, xxviii. 116. On Casuistry in general, see de Wette, ii. 206.