But the figure which stands as a worthy rival of Thomas Aquinas, and whose subtleties brought scholas- tic tlieology not only to its meridian of glory, but also to that stage of excessive development which broke the way for its decline, is the Franciscan mf)nk Duns Scotus (died 1308). Scotus was unquestionably an orig- inal, creative genius. He impressed upon the course of theological development a specifically new character. He was not merely a personal rival of Aquinas, but he was an independent master. He shared, with the other scholastics, the conviction of the absolute truth of the official orthodoxy of the Church. He differed from Aquinas in making a less impassable gulf between faith and knowledge. He reduced the claims of philosophy, and in the same measure enlarged the scope of theol- ogy. With him theology is the science of man in his relations to (iod, and of God in his relations to the uni- verse. He comes to a clearer conception and a larger use of man as an image of God than is previously met with. From the fact that man is in the likeness of God follows the consequence that man is able to know God, and that the intuitions of essential truth lie in germ in the very nature of the soul. Upon the path of man's likeness to God, Duns Scotus was led to a more clear distinguishing of will from nature in (^od than had previously been done, as also to the assigning to (iod's freedom a very large role. The creation of the universe was not a matter of pantheistic necessity, but was the result of a special divine volition. God might even have made the world other than as it is, and he might have given to man a different moral law. He might also have adopted a different plan of salvation. Thus, while teaching the great truth of the divine freedom and combating the determinism of Aquinas, Scotus did not guard the divine freedom against irrational arbitra- riness by representing it as finding its norm of action in the divine wisdom. This great defect in Scotus"s system led directly to the defeat of the most earnest endeavor of his life — viz. to settle Christian science upon an absolutely solid foundation; for it sapped the rational ground of the universe, and thus planted in the- ologv a germ of universal scepticism. The reason of this failure lay not in a lack of aliility in Scotus, but in the fundamental mistake of the whole body of scholastic theologians, viz. in the uncritical assumption of the ab- solute correctness of the formal <iogmas of the official Church. This assumption shut them off at once from any adequate appreciation of the two true sources of all theology and philosophy, viz. Scripture and experience.
It was by developing the consequences of the scho- lastic method to their dangerous extremes that Duns Scotus has the merit of having at the same time raised scholastic theology to its fullest glory and also given an
SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY 422
SCHOLASTICISM
impulse towards its dissolution. Earliest among those who became conscious of the radical defectiveness of the whole scholastic method was lio^er Bacon (died 1294). Bacon declaimed, in an almost Protestant Sjiirit, against the enslavement of theology to liuman authorities, and jiointed towards the Scriptures and experience as the real fountains of truth. But his influence towards the decline of scholasticism had a less potent effect to that end than the further development of scholasticism itself.
Of this third stage in the scholastic movement we can mention but the most prominent features. First of note stands the acute and independent-minded Du- rand of St. Pourt^aiu (died looo). Durand lield an eclectic relation to the opposed systems of Aquinas and Scotus. He was a nominalist like Scotus, but his nom- inalism had a realistic background. AVith Acjuinas, he held that man is l)y nature incapable of knowing the laws of God. The intuitions and generalizations of the human mind have only subjective validity. The true knowledge of God can be derived only from the Script- ures, as officially interjireted by Kome. Theology aims not at the knowledge of the nature of God, but only at such a practical knowledge of God as leads to salvation. Theology relates to the will, and is hence a ])urely prac- tical science. Faith cannot be begotten by arguments, but is a simple virtue; and its meritoriousness is in pro- jiortion to its difficulty. Durand denies even that the liijht of tlie Spirit shows us the evidence of Gospel truth. This also would destroy the merit of faith. He agrees with Aquinas in exalting the transcendental (josition of (Jod in regard to man, and with Scotus in giving arbi- trary play to the divine will and grace. The outcome of his whole system was to discomage the activity of human reason, and to promote a spirit of unquestioning submissiveness to the official Church. It denied all worth to philosophy, and reduced theology to a mere method of practice.
This attitude of theology was now more fidly devel- oped by Occam (died 1347). A disciple of Scotus, he yet varies from him in manj' points. He boldly op- ])Osed some of the claims of the popes, and substituted nominalism for the prevalent scholastic realism. This was a necessary logical outcome. Scholastic realism had utterly failed to resolve the truths of philosophy and theology into any unitarj- substratum of general knowledge. Hence its sole resource in order to attain to unity of thought was to give up all effort at knowing things 7)f>' se, and to reduce our highest intuitions and ideas to mere creations of our own subjectivity, desti- tute of objective value. Our highest ideas are mere jidiones, ahs/ractiones. This nominalism was so strong with Occam that it gave to his whole system a posi- tively sceptical tendency. Thenceforth nominalism reigns almost without rival in the waning life of scho- lastic theology.