[208] Cp. Poole, p. 153. It is difficult to doubt that the series of patristic deliverances against reason in the first section of Sic et Non was compiled by Abailard in a spirit of dissent. [↑]
[209] Cp. Hardwick, p. 279; and see p. 275, note, for Bernard’s dislike of his demand for clearness: “Nihil videt per speculum et in aenigmate, sed facie ad faciem omnia intuetur.” [↑]
[210] Poole, p. 161. Cp. Dr. Hastings Rashdall on the “pious scurrility” of Bernard. The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, 1895, i, 57, note. Contrast the singularly laudatory account of St. Bernard given by two contemporary Positivists, Mr. Cotter Morison in his Life and Times of St. Bernard, and Mr. F. Harrison in his essay on that work in his Choice of Books. The subject is discussed in the present writer’s paper on “The Ethics of Propaganda” in Essays in Ethics. [↑]
[211] Erdmann, History of Philosophy, Eng. tr. 3rd ed. i, 325. [↑]
[212] Hauréau, Hist. de la philos. scolastique, i (1872), 534–46. [↑]
[213] Id. citing the Polycraticus, l. vii, c. 2. [↑]
[214] Polycraticus, l. vii, c. 7. [↑]
[215] Cp. Poole, pp. 220–22; the extracts of Hampden, pp. 438–43; and the summing-up of Hauréau. Hist. de la philos. scolastique, i (1870), 357. [↑]
[216] Historia calamitatum, as cited. Cp. p. 10 for Abailard’s own opinion of Anselm of Laon, whom he compares to a leafy but fruitless tree. [↑]
[217] Matthew Paris, sub. ann. 1201. There is a somewhat circumstantial air about this story, Simon’s reply being made to begin humorously with a Jesule. Jesule! Matthew, however, tells on this item the story of Simon’s miraculous punishment which Giraldus tells on a quite different text. Matthew is indignant with the scholastic arrogance which has led many to “suppress” the miracle. [↑]