makes use of the books of the gentiles?[1] He closely argued the whole question, quoting and rebutting every objection that seemed possible; but the conclusion at which he arrived was far more moderate than that which many masters of his day postulated. The scholars of Chartres, for instance, following their natural tastes rather than any general principles, pursued the study of natural science or of the classics quite regardless of theology: in practice they even travelled beyond the borders of Christianity. Bernard Silvestris too in his Cosmography would only admit theological considerations under protest.[2] Abailard on the contrary was inclined to accept the rule of Plato who excluded the poets from his commonwealth: the study of them, he said, however necessary as a part of education, was not to be indulged in too long.[3] But if the grammatical studies were chiefly valuable as a discipline, far different was his estimate of the higher branches of learning, and he decided that all knowledge was either mediately or immediately useful and therefore to be encouraged. For learning is the vital force which multiplies a man's influence and makes it perennial. Saint Paul has no greater merit than saint Peter, saint Augustin than saint Martin; yet one of each has the larger grace in teaching in proportion to his store of learned knowledge.
Abailard laid a particular stress upon the importance of the ancient philosophy, a department in which men
- ↑ I have translated 'quaedam assumpta de gentilium libris,' Theol. Christ, ii. p. 401, Intr. ad Theol. ii. p. 62, according to the sense, in order to avoid the extra- ordinary misunderstanding of Dr. Reuter, Geschichte der religiösen Aufklärung im Mittelalter 1. 187, that 'die Seher des Alten Bundes, die Apostel des Neuen haben – war die Meinung – aus den Werken der Hellenischen Weisen entlehnt.' Abailard refers simply to quotations from the classics, not to the borrowing of opinions.
- ↑ See the phrase, 'si theologis fidem praebeas argumentis,' De mundi universitate ii. 5, p. 40, ed. Barach and Wrobel.
- ↑ Dr. Schaarschmidt speaks, Johannes Saresberiensis 64 sq., as though Abailard had a special proclivity to classical studies, in the way John of Salisbury had; but the passage cited in the text leads to an opposite conclusion. Abailard had no doubt an immense interest in all literature, but it may be doubted whether his classical reading was equal to that of more than one of his contemporaries. This, I find, is also the opinion of Dr. Deutsch, Peter Abälard 69.
