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 ex parte rei." His difciples were called

language, Thomifts.

66

But though the philofophy of Thomas Aquinas maintained fo great a fway, new parties could not be prevented from fpringing up athong 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 abftruse 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 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 Nominalifts, a fect that had long fubfifted, but which had now for fome time funk into general neglect. They had received that denomination, because they maintain

ed

ed that words, not things, were the objects of dialectics. To become learned, it was not enough, they said, to have juft 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 re putation; 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 trotting 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 analogi, cal reasonings. In doing this they frequently made ufe of the authority of Ariftotle, and fometimes appeal ed to that of the Fathers; their quotations from whom, being taken at fecond hand, were, in many cafes, not only inaccurate, but very injudiciously applied. The ftyle of their books was generally dry and barbarous, and almost always involved in obfcurity. Their mode

of preaching was adapted to their fcholaftic method of study. In their fermons they abounded with divifions and low comparisons; and it was very feldom that they treated any point of morality in its proper extent, or established it upon folid principles, or urged it with eloquence and fpirit. The more elaborate commentaries. on fcripture were full of allegories and myftical interpretations. Those who wrote upon the rites and ceremonies of the church, wholly employed themselves in feeking or inventing myfterious reafons for the obfervance of them. But the grand bufinefs of the more eminent fchoolmen, was the illuftration of Aristotle, On him incredible numbers of comments were written, of which it may justly be faid, that they only served to darken counfel, by words without knowledge,

Nothing could be more unfavourable to true theology, and true fcience, than the school-divinity, and the fchool-philofophy. That we may judge of the ridicu lous purposes to which this divinity and philofophy were applied, we fhall mention a few of the queftions that were the objects of difcuffion, No less than twentyfour chapters are employed by Albertus Magnus, in examining whether the Angel Gabriel appeared to the Virgin Mary in the fhape of a ferpent, of a dove, of a man, or of a woman;"" whether he feemed to be young or old;"" in what drefs he was;" "whether his garment was white, or of two colours ;"" whether his linen was clean or foul;" "whether he appeared in the morning, at noon, or in the evening;" what was the colour of the Virgin Mary's hair;" whether fhe was acquainted with the mechanic and liberal arts;"" whether fhe had any skill in grammar, rhetoric, logic, mufic, aftronomy, &c." and "whether he had a thorough knowledge of the book of Sentences, and of all the chapters it contains ;" a book which was compofed above eleven hundred years after her death. Some of the questions cifcuffed by Thomas Aquinas were inde

cent, as well as ridiculous: fuch as, "why Chrift was not an hermaphrodite ;" "why he did not affume the female fex;" whether there were excrements in paradife;" and "whether the faints will rife with their intestines." Other topics of difputation, ftill more fcandalous and fhameful, we forbear to fpecify. One enquiry, which was, "whether a million of angels might not fit upon a needle's point," is truly laughable.

The abfurd veneration in which Ariftotle was held by the greatest part of the fchoolmen, will appear from the extravagant things which were advanced concerning him. It was afferted, that nature herfelf had fet her fignet to what he invented. One divine maintained, that it was impoffible for the utmost ftretch of human understanding, without the particular affiftance of a genius, to penetrate into the fecrets of nature fo far as Ariftotle had done. Another affirmed, that this philofopher, in all his undertakings, ufed to advife with a fpirit, which he had brought down from the fphere of Venus, by the facrifice of a haltered lamb, and fome other ceremonies... A third contended, that he had no need of fuch affiftance; and that he was able, by the mere ftrength of his natural genius, to arrive at as perfect a knowledge in divinity, as that which was communicated to our firft father when he was afleep in paradife, or to St. Paul in his extacy. It was declared by a fourth, that Ariftotle was the fore-runner of the Meffias in the myfteries of nature, as John the Baptift was in the mysteries of grace. By fome perfons it was acknowledged, that if he had not been employed in the accurate diftinction of all forts of reafonings, the church would have wanted many articles of faith. "The authority of Ariftotle, fays Nicius Erythræus, has taken too deep root to be afraid of the power of any man. His doctrine does and will flourish, and the measure of every one's understanding will be rated by what proportions of knowledge he has imbibed from bis fountain

24

1

fountain of learning: nor will any one who has a grain of fenfe, not choose, in matters relating to philofophy, to err with the God, if I may fo fay, of philofophers, than to think right with any other petty retailers of literature."

With all the mifapplication of their talents, the school divines and philofophers were many of them great men. Thomas Aquinas, in particular, had extraordinary abilities, which, if they had been properly directed, might have rendered him very ufeful to mankind. Nor is it to be imagined that every thing in him is trifling and ridiculous. There are, it is believed, parts of his works which might even now be read with pleasure and advantage.

So far as it is an honour to have produced the fchoolmen, our own country had its full fhare in that honour. Not to mention Lanfranc and Anfelm, Duns Scotus was a Briton, probably born in Scotland, and William Occam was an Englishman. Alexander Hales, John Baconthorp, Thomas Bradwardine, and a large lift of names might be produced, if it were neceffary to rescue them from the oblivion in which they have long flept,

At the clofe of the fifteenth century, the school philofophy ftill retained its dominion, and continued to do fo, among divines in general, to a much later period. It was not, however, fo univerfally followed as it had hitherto been; for other objects began now to engage the attention of mankind. Some few perfons went even fo far as to perceive the folly of the fcholaftic difquifitions and diftinctions, and to treat them with contempt and ridicule. Others, who still adhered to the fyftem, wifhed to ftrip off the uncouth and barbarous language with which it had been clothed, and to put it in a more eafy and graceful drefs: but it was not

of