THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
whereas the just punishment is not against reason, and hence sin is a greater evil and must be hated more than punishment. This is a way of viewing things which comes near to that of Kant, but is just as far removed from that of Anselm as from that of Luther. No less removed from Anselm is Durand also with respect to the necessity of redemption through the satisfaction by the son of God. If Thomas allowed it at least relatively, Durand denies in the first place all necessity for God to redeem the fallen race, secondly also, if a redemption was to take place, the necessity of a perfect satisfaction, since God could have refused all satisfaction or could have been satisfied with a lesser one (III., dist. 20, qu. 12). That not all have part in the salvation, and that there exists a difference between the predestined and non-predestined, must be assumed on the ground of revelation. For a rational argument one may assert with Thomas that in this way in the order of the universe not only the bonum miser icordice but also the bonum justitice punientis is fully asserted, but Durand finds this reason not cogent because the punitive justice is only a relative good, in so far as it serves as remedy, for " the universe were better off without guilt and punitive justice than with them; just as nature were better off without sickness and medicine than with them " (I., dist. 41, qu. 2, no. 13).
Concerning the sacraments Durand adopted the already customary number seven, but he went back again to the more ancient distinction between sacraments in the narrower and wider sense and considered marriage as a sacrament only in the wider sense. The doctrine of transubstantiation caused him, like many of his contemporaries, great difficulties. His older contemporary and monastic colleague, John of Paris, taught a kind of consubstantiation — the substances remain after the consecration but not in propria supposito —
5. His Doc- he was tried on that account but died trine of the at Avignon before the trial was ended.
Sacraments. Durand is more cautious; he remarks indeed that the reasons for the doctrine are not satisfying, but he also states that the assumption that the substance of the elements remains would remove many difficulties (IV., dist. 11, qu. 1, no. 15-17). Against all these considerations however stands the authority of the Church, to which one must be subject. He wishes therefore only to oppose a certain form of transubstantiation— the common one — according to which a complete change of the substances takes place, and tries to explain this as conceivable by assuming a change of the form of the elements, whereas the substance turns into the form of the body of Christ. Taking all together the importance of Durand may thus be expressed: (1) he is a theologian of a strictly ecclesiastico-conservative tendency, and only within these limits of one com-
6. His Sig- paratively more liberal (2) a somewhat nificance as larger freedom was made possible for a Teacher, him by the separation of the domains
of faith and knowledge, but even in this form he used it in a very moderate manner. (3) His talent is predominantly critical,not produc-
tive; he is stronger in critical reflection on the points under discussion than in the deeper apprehension of the subjects; (4) the preceding considerations taken together explain why he was unable to produce an epoch-making impression. Such could have proceeded mainly from the treatment of the preliminary questions of theology and from his nominalism, but in both respects he was outstripped by the boldness of Occam and, as it were, placed in the shade. (5) Nevertheless his main work has for a long time enjoyed an authority on account of the excellences mentioned above and on account of its dogmatic correctness. Gerson recommended him beside Thomas, Bonaventura, and Henry of Ghent, and in the sixteenth century there still existed at Salamanca a special chair for Durand.
S. M. Deutsch.
Bibliography: The commentary on Peter Lombard has ' been often printed; the Antwerp edition of 1567 is quoted above. 0. Raynaldus, Annales ecclesiastici, ad. an. 1534, Cologne, 1694-1727; C. E. du Boulay, Historic*, universitatis Parisiensis, iv. 954, 6 vols., Paris, 1665-73; C. Oudin, Commentarius de scriptoribus ecclesice, vol. iii., Frankfort, 1722; A. H. Ritter, Geschichte der Philosophic, viii. 550 sqq., Hamburg, 1845; idem, Die christliche Philosophie, i. 712 sqq., Gottingen, 1858; A. Stockl, Geschichte der Philosophic des Mittelalters, ii. 976-986, Mainz, 1865; J. B. Haureau, De la philosophic scolastique, ii. 411 sqq., Paris, 1850; idem, Histoire de la philosophic scolastique, ii. 2, pp. 47 sqq., ib. 1880; C. von Prantl, Geschichte der Logik im Abendlande, iii. 292 sqq., Leip> sic, 1867; K. Werner, Thomas von Aquino, iii. 106 sqq. Regensburg, 1859; idem, Die nominalisierende Psychologic des spateren Mittelalters, Vienna, 1882; idem, Die Scholastik des spateren Mittelalters, vol. ii., ib. 1883 J. E. Erdmann, Hist, of Philosophy, vol. i., London, 1889; C. Baumker, Beitrage zur Geschichte der Philosophic des Mittelalters, 3 vols., Minister, 1891-1901.
DURAND OF TROARN: Roman Catholic abbot of Troarn; b. at Neubourg (13 m. n.w. of Evreux) apparently in the early part of the eleventh century; d. at Troarn (5 m. e. of Caen) Feb. 11, 1088. He entered a monastery in early youth, and in 1059 was appointed abbot of Troarn, an office which he held for the remainder of his life. He is noteworthy for his share in the second eucharistic controversy, his De corpore et sanguine Christi dating apparently from about 1054. In his opinion the entire controversy centered about the question whether in the Sacrament there was a symbol or a true substance, he himself maintaining the latter teaching as the belief of the entire Catholic Church. His book is noteworthy, as showing the feeling that the attacks of Berengar on the doctrines of Paschasius Radbertus imperiled the truth of Christianity, and as indicating the opposition of the older traditionalistic theologians to any explanation of controverted problems. In conformity with his theory that all difficulties may be solved by the statements of the Church Fathers, a large portion of his work consists of compilations from such predecessors as Hilary, Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, Cassiodorus, Bede, Amalarius, Hincmar, and Fulbert. Noteworthy also are his data concerning the course of the Berengarian controversy from 1050 to 1054.
(A. Hauck.)
Bibliography: The work of Durand is appended to L. dAchery's edition of Lanfranc, Paris, 1745, and in MPL, cxlix. Consult: Hist, litteraire de France, viii. 239; H. Sudendorf, Berengarius Turonensis, pp. 25 sqq., Gotha,