Educational

purposes of

scholasti

develop

power of

(2) to systematize

all doubts and questionings through argument. Faith was, however, still considered superior to reason. The credo ut intellegam ("I believe in order that I may understand") of Anselm was the dominant principle throughout the period. Church doctrines had long been formulated; they were now to be analyzed, defined, systematized.

Educationally, the purpose of scholasticism was included. within this broad purpose. Scholastic training aimed to decism, (1) to Nvelop the power of formulating beliefs into a logical system and the power of presenting and defending such statements of disputation; beliefs against all arguments that might be brought against them. At the same time it strove to avoid developing an attitude of mind that would be critical of the fundamental principles already established by authority. In a more general way the aim of scholastic education was to systematize knowlknowledge; edge and thus give it scientific form. But to the scholastic mind knowledge was primarily of a theological and philosophical character. The scientific form valued was that of deductive logic. In this, the aim of scholastic education was brilliantly successful. Most exhaustive systems of knowledge, compassing the whole range of their interest, were elaborated. In some cases these systems were of such profundity that they have few rivals in more modern times and even yet serve as both basis and content of the intellectual life of large portions of modern society. The third aspect of the educational purpose of scholasticism was to give to the individual a mastery of this knowledge, now reduced to propositions and syllogisms, all systematized into a logical whole.

(3) to give individual mastery of this system of knowl

edge

Religious in

terests su

preme

THE CONTENT OF SCHOLASTICISM. Scholasticism was the complete reduction of religious thought to logical form. Since this organization was furnished entirely by the logical writings of Aristotle, scholasticism is often defined as the union of Christian beliefs and Aristotelian logic. All other phasesof knowledge were subsumed under the religious. All legitimate knowledge had to be sanctioned by the Church; it

had to be given its place in the system of scholastic thought Given a and reduced to the appropriate logical form. To do this was ical form philosophthe task of the Schoolmen.

Church in

doctrines of

terms of Greek philosophy

The primary interests of the times were in the great doc- Statement of trines of the Church concerning justification, predestination, the Trinity, the freedom of the will, the doctrine of the eucharist. The proper philosophical statement of these and of - similar doctrines, the reduction of all to a harmonized system, their presentation with answers to all objections to the orthodox view and with refutations of all unorthodox interpretations, constituted the content of scholastic literature. Now it happened that during the very same period when circumstances emphasized the necessity of supporting by reason the beliefs of the Church, a certain fragmentary knowledge of the fundamental philosophical problems discussed by Plato and Aristotle became prevalent. In the very nature of the problem, the interpretation of the orthodox views came to depend upon the acceptance of some such view of the nature of reality as that of Plato, and the heretical theological views became bound up with a metaphysical doctrine contradictory to that of Plato.

Plato's views that ideas, concepts, universals, constituted the Nominalism only reality, became accepted by the orthodox Schoolmen under vs. realism the name of realism. By the Schoolmen such general concepts were regarded as the archetypes in the Divine reason, and the various phenomenal existences and the species were regarded as merely copies or reflections of these thoughts of the Deity. The view that such ideas or universals are only names, and that reality consists in the individual concrete objects, in the species of Aristotle, was termed nominalism. The conflict between these two schools of metaphysicians continued long and loud, through four centuries and in innumerable volumes.

these philo

But these views were of more than metaphysical interest; Practical they compassed all interests. Consider, for a moment, the bearing of application of the views of the fundamental doctrines pre- sophical viously suggested. At this period the doctrine of transub

views

Great scho

lastic textbooks

stantiation had peculiar practical importance, on account of growing heresies, especially the Manichean. Believing that all matter was evil, the followers of Manicheus held that Christ's life was only an appearance and that the true God was not the God of the Old Testament. Now if ideas, i.e. what Plato called substances, are realities, as the realist held, and are hence independent of the accidents, attributes or qualities which identify them in the concrete and which to the nominalist constitute the only reality, then it is possible to distinguish between the substance and the accident, and it is possible to conceive of a change in the substance without any corresponding change in the attribute. Thus the Church justified its belief in the doctrine of transubstantiation, or the actual change in the bread and wine of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. Thus this sacrament of the Church, wherein contact between Christ and the flesh was demonstrated daily, was an answer to the heresy that the divine could not have lived in contact with a wicked world. The explanations of other doctrines were very similar. So these philosophical views furnished characteristic solutions to all theological problems.

The educational content of scholasticism consisted in the most noted of these systematized schemes of learning, with the innumerable comments upon them. During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the two most noted of these were constructed, The Sententia of Peter the Lombard (c. 1100c. 1160) and the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas (12251274). The former of these was the most generally used textbook of the remaining scholastic centuries. The latter was, and yet remains, the most complete and thorough presentation of the knowledge of the times, or, to be more exact, of the theology of the Church. It is still accepted by the Roman Catholic Church, as the orthodox presentation of its beliefs.

Preliminary to the mastery of such summaries of knowledge, scholastic education demanded the mastery of the science of logic or dialectic as a preparation for the practice of the art.

In general, the content of scholasticism and of scholastic education deals with the abstract and immaterial; while the tendency in current education is to reject all subject-matter of this nature and to deal only with that which is concrete and material in character.

THE FORM OF SCHOLASTIC KNOWLEDGE.-The idea Logical or of organizing knowledge according to the mental development ganization of the student is an idea of much later development. The com- jects of plementary principle, that of organization based upon the logic study

The method of logical analysis

The method

interpre

tation

of the subject, was fixed upon education for many centuries by this period of scholasticism. Hence in the introductory subjects, such as grammar, which the child first attempts in his school work, the most formal logical arrangement was adopted. The subject was presented to the child for his mastery in the order in which it appeals to the most mature mind. Previous to this time, the catechetical arrangement, that of questions and answers, was much followed, even in treatises upon the seven liberal arts. But with scholasticism the systematized, logical form prevailed almost to the exclusion of the other.

THE METHOD OF SCHOLASTICISM was that of logical analysis. In reality there were two distinct methods used by the Schoolmen and in the universities as well. The one in most general approval was the analytical. The entire subject if a treatise by a Schoolman, or the entire text if a course of lectures in the university, was divided into appropriate parts, then into heads, subheads, subdivisions, etc., down to the particular proposition of each sentence. Each topic was examined most minutely after the manner of Aristotelian logic, under the headings of formal, final, material and efficient causes; of literal, allegorical, mystical and moral meaning. Thus with analyzed text and comment upon the basis of each division, the student was overwhelmed with a multitude of fine metaphysical distinctions.

The other and freer method was that of stating the propoof multiple sition, then the several possible interpretations with the difficulties of each interpretation, with the final selection of the favored one. The solution favored gave rise to other problems these in turn suggested varying solutions with their appropriate answers. In respect to definite conclusions and to the systematic arrangement of knowledge, this method was inferior to the former. But in its stimulus to thought, to the freedom of inquiry, and to general progressiveness, it was far more beneficial in its influence.

DEVELOPMENT OF SCHOLASTICISM. The doctrinal