A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY Vol.I by Johann Eduard Erdmann 1890

§ i 65, 5-]' HUGO OF ST. VICTOR. 335
remains to man nothing, not even his own self. Whoever
considers such expressions an indication of pantheism is not
acquainted with the language of mysticism.
5. Hugo’s De sacramentis christiance fidei, which is one of
his last, must be regarded as his ripest work. It treats of all
the means of grace and therefore embraces his entire dogmatics.
In this work the objective and subjective elements
of his faith, rational reflection and mystical profundity, appear
more than in any other of his writings, and he shows not
only familiarity with the manner in which others dogmatize
but also dogmatic keenness of his own. Since all that exists
consists of those works of God by which the non-existent
becomes existent (opera conditionis), and again of those by
which the ruined is made better (opera restaurationis), the
first book (^/bid., pp. 187-363) treats of the former, and thus in
general of the creation, and questions connected with it. In
twelve sections, each of which is again divided into many
chapters, are first considered the being and constitution of the
world, then from this conclusions are drawn as to the original
causes which lie at its foundation, and thus God is reached,
and His Trinity is conceived, and parallels pointed out in
creatures, just as by Abelard. Investigations follow in regard
to our knowledge of God, and here the above-mentioned distinction
between supra-rational and irrational is brought out.
Hugo proceeds next to the consideration of the will of God,
and the difficulties which arise from the existence of evil are
met by very fine distinctions between will and signs of the
will, as well as between the willing of evil and the willing
that that which is evil may exist. The creation of angels and
their fall, and the creation and fall of man follow. To this is
joined the consideration of the restoration and of the means
to it, first belief and then the remaining means of grace or
sacramenta as well of the pre- Mosaic time, the sacramenta
naturalis legis, as of the written law. All that is treated in
this book forms at the same time the introduction to the
subject of the second book (pp. 363-618), the means of
grace under the new economy. This book is divided into
eighteen sections and discusses the incarnation, the unity
of the Church as the body of Christ, Church ordinances,
holy garments, consecration of churches, baptism, confirmation,
the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, the
minor sacraments, that is Church usages of all sorts (in which
336 SECOND PERIOD OF MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY. [§ 166 .
connection an excursus upon simony is introduced), finally
marriage and the vow. The incarnation is represented, as
it had been by Anselm, as suitable, even if not absolutely
necessary {vid, § 156, 8). The consideration of virtues and
vices forms the step to the treatment of the confessional, forgiveness
of sins, and supreme unction. Death, the last things,
and the future world are treated in the last three sections, to
which the Summa sententiarum is related as a more historical
introduction.
§ 166.
That which in Anselm was completely one, and in Abelard
at least closely united, appears separated in Gilbert and the
pitri philosophi on the one side, and in Hugo on the other.
The separation of scholasticism into its elements proceeds
however still further, since Hugo is followed by others who
either look upon the content of belief, that which he calls
cognitio or quod fide credihiVy as the principal thing in all
science, or place faith itself, Hugo’s affectio and ipsa fides, so
far above all else that even the doctrine of God recedes
before the doctrine of piety, and they forget everything above
their religious anthropology. Those of both tendencies, which
are related to one another later in the eighteenth century as
the orthodox and the pietistic, are able to make use of Hugo.
The former, however, revere in him especially the author of
the Sttnima se?itentiarumy and are therefore in a position to
make use of the preparatory labours of Abelard, while the
latter accept him because he wrote the Arrha animce and
the Area moralis and ptystica. Both, like their common
father Hugo, occupy a negative relation toward those who
look upon dialectics as the principal part of philosophy.
The more one-sidedly they develop the more hostile will they
become toward each other. The representatives of the
former tendency, the writers of summaries, keep themselves
freer from such one-sidedness, and are aided in this by
the fact that they are not all scholars of a single master.
Among the monks of the monastery of St. Victor, on the contrary,
who allow only their great theologian to be regarded as
an authority, this one-sidedness increases until it results in
decided hatred for every other tendency.