Peripateticus Palatinus (12)
It was a brave attempt to deal with a particularly difficult question, but
it aroused opposition. It was condemned at the Council of Soissons in 1121
and Abelard was made to throw his own book into the fire. This was the book
which he calls in his autobiography On the Unity and Trinity of God, which
is probably the same book we know as the Theologia 'Summi Boni'. It is not
entirely clear from Abelard's account what fault was found with his
Trinitarian theology. Apparently he narrowly escaped being stoned by a mob
who thought he had preached tritheism; someone at the council muttered
something about Abelard having said that only God the Father was almighty.
Certainly he presents his judges as being thoroughly confused about their
own understanding of the Trinity; but of course, Abelard was not an
impartial observer.
He continued to have trouble with successive versions of the Theologia;
about 1139 William of St Thierry wrote to Geoffrey, Bishop of Chartres, and
to Bernard of Clairvaux, drawing their attention to it. He writes, 'A
little while ago I read by accident a certain treatise of that man, entitled
Theologia of Peter Abaelard.' It should be pointed out that it is a
difficult enough book to read on purpose; William must have been a
remarkable man to read it by accident.
He goes on, 'I have two copies containing almost the same, except that the
one may be a little more lengthy than the other.' Possibly he had both the
Christiana and the 'Scholarium'. William continues, 'In it I have found
certain statements by which I was greatly shocked.' He complains of
'unheard-of novelties of phrase which he applies to matters of faith, as
well as . . . novel senses which he puts upon received terms.'
He mentions some thirteen propositions he had found in the work which
particularly disturbed him. The fifth of these is, 'That the Holy Spirit is
the soul of the world (anima mundi).' There was some truth in the
accusation: Abelard did in fact relate the Platonic and Stoic ideas
concerning the world-soul to the Holy Spirit. William concludes, '. . .
there are, as I hear, some other treatises of his besides, of which the
names are Sic et Non, Scito te ipsum, and some others, about which I fear
that their doctrines may be as monstrous as their titles are strange; but,
as I am told, they hate the light, and cannot be found even when sought for.'
Bernard was alarmed by William's letter, and wrote to the Pope informing him
about Abelard. He complains: 'In short, to describe this theologian in few
words, he distinguishes with Arius degrees and inequalities in the Trinity;
with Pelagius he prefers free will to grace; with Nestorius he divides
Christ in excluding His humanity from union with the Trinity.'
Bernard seems to have been inordinately pleased with this sentence, because
he uses it again in a letter on the same subject to Stephen, Cardinal Bishop
of Palestrina: 'In short, our new theologian distinguishes with Arius
degrees and inequalities in the Trinity, with Pelagius prefers free will to
grace, with Nestorius he divides Christ in excluding His Humanity from union
with the Trinity.' And again, in a letter to another Cardinal, he writes,
'You will see that this theologian distinguishes with Arius grades and
inequalities in the Trinity, that with Pelagius he prefers free will to
grace, that with Nestorius he divides Christ in excluding His Humanity from
the Trinity.' And he uses the same words in a letter to an Italian Abbot.
* * * * *
Elasticus
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|