Slike strani
PDF
ePub

THE

HISTORY

O F

KNOWLEDGE, LEARNING,

AND TASTE,

IN GREAT BRITAIN,

During the Reign of King HENRY the Seventh. From the Year 1485, to the Year 1509.

WE

E are now approaching to a period, in which the hiftory of knowledge will, by degrees, become more and more interefting and copious. The latter end of the fifteenth century prefents us with the dawn of that full light which at length fhone upon these kingdoms. But before we proceed in our narrative, it will be expedient to look back on fome circumftances, an acquaintance with which will affift us in forming a clearer view of our fubject.

In former Articles, we have had occafion to mention, incidentally, the fchool divines who flourished in Great Britain. But we have promifed to confider the fcholaftic theology a little more diftinctly and particularly, as it is a curious phenomenon in the hiftory of the human

mind.

It was early the fault of divines to mix a fpurious philofophy with religion. This difpofition prevailed 1786.

a

foon

foon after the propagation of the Gofpel, and continued, for several of the first centuries of Chriftianity, to be productive of evil effects. But that is not the point to which our prefent enquiry tends. The school divinity, properly fo called, had a later origin. It took its rife in those barbarous ages which fucceeded the downfall of learning, owing to the irruptions of the northern nations, and to other caufes. Perhaps fome preparation was made for the introduction of this divinity by John Damafcenus, in the eighth century; who, having drawn up an abridgment of the logic and ethics of Ariftole, formed a fcheme of theology upon it, in his four books, concerning" the Orthodox Faith." His model, however, in confequence of the general ignorance and barbarity of the fucceeding times, was not speedily followed. Towards the close of the eleventh century, fomething of the fame plan was purfued by Lanfranc and Anfelm, fucceffively archbishops of Canterbury. In the beginning of the next century, the famous Abelard published three books of an introduction to divinity; by the affiftance of which, Peter Lombard, about the middle of that century, compiled his four Books of Sentences, from the writings of the fathers, and especially of St. Auftin. This work was long held in prodigious reputation, and the commentaries upon it were almoft without number. The author of it was entitled, by way of diftinction, "The Mafter of Sentences," and he has often been reprefented as the father of the schoolmen. Hence forward Theology affumed a new form, and was refolved into an infinite number of questions, which were debated with all poffible fubtilty. What contributed, in the highest degree, to this effect was the veneration which was paid to Ariftotle; who now came to be regularly ftudied, and to be made the ftandard of logic and philofophy.

We are not, however, to imagine that the learned of this period were acquainted with Ariftotle in the origi-.

nal.

1

nal. For what knowledge they had of him they were indebted to the Arabians. It is well known, and has formerly been mentioned, that the Saracens, after they had become fettled in the feveral countries which were conquered by them, applied themfelves to literature. Among their other purfuits, being of a fubtile genius, the philofophy of Ariftotle naturally excited their attention and admiration. His logic was fuited to their tafte, and from him they learned to multiply diftinctions without reason, and without end. In commenting upon him their literary men were employed for centuries; and it was only through the medium of the tranflations derived from the Mahometans in Spain that an acquaintance with him was obtained by the rest of Europe. With these translations, the divines of the Romish church adopted the barbarous terms of Avicenna and other Arabians, which terms, being introduced into the Latin tongue, formed a moft extraordinary jargon. What particularly recommended Ariftotle to the theologians was, their belief that they could draw arguments from him which would enable them to confute the tenets of the Mahometans themselves, and to fupport all the docrines of popery. Accordingly, his philofophy was eagerly embraced; and although it was only collected from tranflations ill performed, and worfe understood, it reigned triumphant for many ages. Ariftotle held the chair of divinity, inftead of St. Paul. The persons who principally contributed to this great literary revolution were Albertus Magnus, Bonaventure, and efpecially Thomas Aquinas. He it was who, in the thirteenth century, gave to the fcholaftic theology its full establishment, and raised it to its higheft glory. To him, as the head of the schoolmen, thofe who have been devoted to that fpecies of divinity have ufually looked up with a veneration almost approaching to idolatry. The title bestowed upon him was that of the Angelical doctor, and he has been loaded with innumerable praifes. Thomas Aquinas was the father of the Realifts, whofe diftinguish

[blocks in formation]

ing tenet it was, that univerfals are realities, and have an actual existence, not being merely ideas or imaginations, but fubfifting, as they expreffed it, in their own language, "ex parte rei." His difciples were called Thomifts.

But though the philofophy of Thomas Aquinas maintained fo great a fway, new parties could not be prevented from springing up among the fchool-men. A very eminent fect was formed by Duns Scotus, who departed in various inftances, from the doctrines of Aquinas. The chief points about which they difagreed were, the "Nature of the Divine Co-operation with with the Human Will," the "Measure of the Divine Grace that is neceffary to Salvation," the "Unity of Form in Man," or perfonal identity, and other abstruse and minute queftions. But what contributed most to exalt the reputation of Scotus, and to cover him with glory, was his defence of what-is called the "Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary." Hence he was warmly patronized by the Francifcans, in oppofition to the Dominicans, who entertained different notions with regard to that matter. The difciples The difciples of Duns Scotus were called Scotifts. For a long period, the Thomifts. and the Scotifts contended against each other with all the fubtleties of diftinction they were capable of inventing; nor is the controverfy between them entirely excluded from the Latin fchools, even at the prefent day.

Another formidable adverfary to the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas, was found in William Occam, a Francifcan friar of the feverer order, a follower of Scotus, and a doctor of divinity at Paris. This perfon, in the fourteenth century, was the reviver of the Nominalists, a fect that had long fubfifted, but which had now for fome time funk into general neglect. They had received that denomination, becaufe they maintain

ed

ed that words, not things, were the objects of dialectics. To become learned, it was not enough, they said, to have just ideas of things; but it was likewife neceffary to know the proper names of their genera and fpecies, and to be able to exprefs them clearly and precifely, without confufion and ambiguity. The doctrines of the Nominalists were founded upon the philofophy of Zeno and the Stoics; fo that, in fome refpects, Occam and his followers are to be confidered as oppofers of Aristotle. In the contests which were carried on by them with the difciples of Aquinas, it was not always a war of diftinctions and words. The combatants were fo enraged at each other, that they often proceeded to blows. The Nominalifts were fome times triumphant, especially when they happened to be headed by men of great reputation; but, in general, they were far inferior in number to the Realifts, and at length became of little confideration. The Realifts were fupported by the popes, their method of treating fubjects being thought more favourable to the doctrines and claims of the church of Rome. There was another fect called the Formalifts, who mediated between the extremes of the two grand contending parties, but who, as might be expected, never rofe to any high degree of eminence.

However the school-men might be divided, their dif putes were idle and ridiculous, and their diftinctions abfurd, and, for the most part, unintelligible. In their works they difcuffed an infinite number of theological or philofophical queftions, propofed the arguments on both fides, and determined them by fubtle and analogical reasonings. In doing this they frequently made ufe of the authority of Ariftotle, and fometimes appealed to that of the Fathers; their quotations from whom, being taken at fecond hand, were, in many cases, not only inaccurate, but very injudicioufly applied. The style of their books was generally dry and barbarous, and almost always involved in obfcurity. Their mode

« PrejšnjaNaprej »