Due to rising demand for literary ability, for professions such as banking, trade, and other bureaucratic positions, more individuals began seeking education. These kind of jobs required literacy, which was very uncommon amongst citizens during the eleventh century. Monks were taught at the monasteries to read, particularly biblical texts, and because literacy was being taught at monasteries, many parents sent their children to be oblates at these monasteries. The focus of the education at the monasteries during this time was reading scripture. Despite the primary source of education being scripture, enough people desired to become literate that these Monastic schools began accepting those who did not specifically wish to attain a pious position. Some of the wealthier monastic schools segregated the holy students from the scholastic students, and they would build external and internal schools for them. Students wishing to study under the name of the Lord would attend the internal schools, while the other students would attend the external. The segregation was to keep out the corruption and temptation that the scholastic attendees would bring in the monastery. In the twelfth century, the Monastery of Cluny shut its doors to external students, followed by Bernard of Clairvaux traveling to Paris. In Paris, Bernard told students to flee to the monasteries in the wilderness, because more pious information was taught there. This was an attempt to convert followers.

The separation of education and theology become more apparent as they begin to diverge. Urban schools begin to form, and later become universities. In regards to the universities, Madigan states “Aristotelian logic was the master tool for harmonizing authorities apparently in conflict.” Masters, or professors, would ask questions often regarding contradictions in the texts they were studying. Following the question, the students were subject to have an oral argument about the contradiction, using logic and grammar as well as other Aristotelian concepts to answer the Master’s initial question. With these methods, students would show that the conflicts with the contradictions are resolvable. The reading, question and argument method was very common amongst universities.

Contrary to the aforementioned Bernard of Clairvaux, Peter Abalard was prescholastic, and supported using Aristotelian logic to solve contradictory texts. He published For and Against, which brought attention to thousands of contradictions of early Medieval thinkers. In Abalard’s How to Study, he states that it’s important to keep in mind that texts can be wrongfully published, or have incorrect quotations. Abalard also encouraged the idea of heavily inquiring on contradictory decisions of canon law in this. Also, it is addressed in the reading, that those who have wrote the text see things like we do; As they are. With this in mind, he reminds the readers that text may be opinion and not fact. These statements and ideas help illustrate the Abalard’s scholastic ideals, and his attempts to expand the way of thinking.

In response to Abalard, Bernard of Clairvaux makes insulting remarks toward Abalard, making statements calling Abalard’s theology “foolology.” Bernard also uses biblical quotes to emphasize the wrongness that is personal interpretation of text, and that it is to be interpreted the same way it has been.