Εικόνες σελίδας
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση



canon law, drawn from the letters of the pontifs, c E N T. the decrees of councils, and the writings of the ancient doctors. Pope EUGENIUS III. was extremely satisfied with this work, which was also received with the highest applause by the doctors and professors of Bolonia, and was unanimously adopted, as the text they were to follow in their public lectures. The professors at Paris were the first that followed the example of those of Bolonia, which in process of time, was imitated by the greatest part of the European colleges. But, notwithstanding the encomiums bestowed upon this performance, which was commonly called the decretal of GRATIAN [k], and was entitled by the author himself, the re-union or coalition of the jarring canons [1], several most learned and eminent writers of the Romish communion acknowledge, that it is full of errors and defects of various kinds [m]. As, however, the main design of this abridgement of the canons was to support the despotism, and to extend the authority of the Roman pontifs, its innumerable defects were overlooked, its merits were exaggerated ; and, what is still more surprising, it enjoys at this day, in an age of light and liberty, that high degree of veneration and authority, which was inconsiderately, though more excusably, lavished upon it in an age of tyranny, superstition, and darkness (ni.

VII. [k] Decretum GRATIANI. iu Concordia Discordantium Canonum. im See, among others, ANTON. AUGUSTIEUS, D: Emendarione GRATIANI, published in 8vo at sirnbam, A. D. 1678, with the learned observations of STEPH. BALUZIUS and GER. a MASTRICHT.

[n] See GERHARD. a MASTRICHT, Historia juris Ecclesiaslisi, sect. 293. p. 325.-B. JUST. HUN. BOMMERI jus. Eccies. Protestant. tom. i. p. 100. and more particularly the learned Preface, with which this last mentioned author enriched the new edition of the Canon Law, published at Hal. in 4to in the year 1747. See also ALEX. MACHIAVELL! Observationes ad Sigoniz D 2



[ocr errors]

CENT. VII. Such among the Latins as were ambitious Xil.

J. of making a figure in the republic of letters, - applied themselves, with the utmost zeal and diphilosophy

hot ligence, to the study of philosophy, Philosophy, among the taken in its most extensive and general meaning, Latins.

comprehended, according to the method which was the most universally received towards the middle of this century, four classes; it was divided into theoretical, practical, mechanical, and logical. The first class comprehended natural theology, mathematics, and natural philosophy. In the second class were ranked ethics, æconomics, and politics. The third contained the seven arts that are more immediately subservient to the purposes of life, such as navigation, agriculture, hunting, &c. The fourth was divided into grammar and composition, the latter of which was farther subdivided into rhetoric, dialectic, and sophis:ry; and under the term dialectic was comprehended that part of metaphysic which treats of general notions. This division was almost universally adopted. Some, indeed, were for separating grammar and mechanics from philosophy ; a separation highly condemned by others, who, under the general term philosophy, comprehended the whole circle of the sciences [0].

Hist. Bononiensem, tom. iii. Oper. Sigonii, p. 128. This writer has drawn from the Kalendarium Archigymnasii Bononiensis, several particularities concerning GRATIAN and his work, which were generally unknown, but whose truth is also much disputed. What increases their suspicion of their being fabulous is, that this famous Kalendar, of which the Bolonians boast so much, and which they have so often promised to publish in order to dispel the doubts of the learned, has never as yet seen the light. Besides, in the fragments that have appeared, there are manifest marks of unfair dealing.

[o] These literary anecdotes I have taken from several writers, particularly from Hugo a St Victor, Didascali Libroüi. cap. ii. p. 7. tom. i. opp, and from the Metalogicum of John of Salisbury.

[ocr errors]


VIII. The learned, who treated these different C E N T. branches of science, were divided into various factions, which attacked each other with the ut- -- med

Dis entives most animosity and bitterness []. There were, at this time, three methods of teaching philosophy philosothat were practised by different doctors. The first Phers was, the ancient and plain method, which contined its researches to the philosophical notions of PORPHYRY, and the dialectic system, commonly attributed to St AUGUSTINE, and in which was laid down this general rule, that philosophical inquiries were to be limited to a small number of subjects, lest, by their becoming too extensive, religion might suffer by a profane mixture of human subtilty with its divine wisdom. The second method was called the Aristotelian, because it consisted in explications of the works of that philosopher [], several of whose books, being translated into Latin, were now almost every where in the hands of the learned. These translations were, indeed, extremely obscure and incorrect, and led those who made use of them in their academical lectures, into various blunders, and often into notions, which were not more


absurd [p] See GODOF. de St Victor. Carmen de Sectis Philosoph. published by LE BOEUF, in his Diss. sur l'Histoire Ecclesiast. et Civile de Paris. tom. ii. p 254.-BOULAY, Hist. Acad. Paris. tom. i. p 562.-ANT. Wood, Antiq Oxoniens. tom. i. p. 51. Jo. SARISBURIENSIS Metalog. el Policrat. passim.

[9] ROB. DE MONTE, Append. ad Sigeberium Gemblacens. published by 'Luc. DACHERIUS, among the works of GUIBERT, abbot of Nogent, ad A. 1128, p. 753. “ Jacobus Clericus de Venecia transtulit de Græco in Latinum quosdam libros Aristotelis et commentatus est, scilicet 'Topica, Annal. priores et posteriores et elenchos. Quamvis antiquior translatio super eosdem libros haberetur.“ THOM. BECKET, Epistolar. lib. i. es. xcii. po 454. edit. Bruxell. 1682, in 4to. “ Itero preces, quatenus libros Aristotelis, quos habetis, mihi faciatis exscribi... Precor etiam iterata supplicatione quatenus in operibus Aristotelis, ubi difficiliora fuerint, notulas fasciatis, eo quod interpretem aliquatenus suspectum habeo, quia licet eloquens fuerit alias, ut srepe audivi, minus tamen fuit in gramnatica institutus."

CE N T.absurd than whimsical and singular. The third

XII. PAR' 11. was termed the free method, employed by such as

were bold enough to search after truth, in the manner they thought the most adapted to render their inquiries successful, and who followed the bent of their own genius, without rejecting however, the succours of ARISTOTLE and Plato. Laudable as this method was, it became an abundant source of sophistry and chicane, by the imprudent management of those that employed it; for these subtle doctors, through a wanton indulgence of their metaphysical fancies, did little more than puzzle their disciples with vain questions, and fatigue them with endless distinctions and divisions fr]. These different systems, and vehement contests that divided the philosophers, gave many persons a disgust against philosophy in general, and made them desire, with im

patience, its banishment from the public schools. The con- IX. Of all the controversies that divided the

I the philosophers in this century, there were none cians, Rea- carried on with greater animosity, and treated lists, and with greater subtilty and refinement, than the ists describ-contest of the Dialectics concerning universals,

The sophistical doctors were wholly occupied about the intricate questions relating to genus and species, to the solution of which they directed all their philosophical efforts, and the whole course of their metaphysical studies ; but not all - in the same method, nor upon the same principles [s]. Thetwo leading sects into which they had


tests of th

[ocr errors]


[r] See Jo. SARISBURIENSIS Policrat. p. 434. et Metalog. p. 814. &c.

[s] John of Salisbury, a very elegant and ingenious writer of this age, censures, with a good deal of wit, the crude and unintelligible speculations of these sophists, in his book intitled, Pe. licraticon seu de Nugis Curialium, lib. vii. p. 451. He observes, that there had been more time consumed in resolving the question


[ocr errors]

been divided long before this period, and which C E N T: were distinguished by the titles of Realists and par Nominalists, not only subsisted still, but were moreover subdivided, each into smaller parties and factions, according as the two opposite and leading schemes were modified by new fancies and inventions. The Nominalists, though they had their followers, were nevertheless much inferior to the Realists both with respect to the number of their disciples, and to the credit and reputation of their doctrine. A third sect arose under the name of Formalists, who pretended to terminate the controversy, by steering a middle course between the two jarring systems now mentioned; but, as the hypothesis of these new doctors was most obscure and unintelligible, they only perplexed matters more than they had hither. to been, and furnished new subjects of contention and dispute [t.]

Those relating to genus and species, than the Cæsars had employed in making themselves masters of the whole world ; that the riches of CROESUS were inferior to the treasures that had been exhaust: ed in this controversy; and that the contending parties, after having spent their whole lives upon this single point, had neither been so happy as to determine it to their satisfaction, nor to make, in the labyrinths of science where they had been groping, any discovery that was worth the pains they had taken. His words are : “ Veterem paratus est solvere questionem de generibus et speciebus (he speaks here of a certain philosopher) in qua loborans mundus jam senuit, in qua plus temporis consumptum est, quam in acquirendo et regendo orbis imperio consumpserit Cæsarea domus : plus effusum pecuniæ, quam in omnibus diviliis suis possederit Creesus. Hæc enim tam diu multos tenu. it, ut cum hoc unum tota vita quærerent, tandem nec istud, nec aliud invenirent.”

See the above-cited author's Policrai. lib. vii. p. 451. where he gives a succinct account of the Formalists, Realists, and Nominalists in the following words : “ Sunt qui more mathematicorum FORMAS abstrabunt, et ad illas quicquid de universalibus dicitur referunt." Such were the Formalists, who applied the doctrine of universal ideas to what the mathematicians call abstract forms. Alii discutiunt INTELLECTUS et eos universalium nominibus censori confirmant. Here we find the Realisis pointed D 4


« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »