- Within the realm of university learning there were certain ways in which the university employed logic and reason in the classroom. First and foremost, the learning and teaching process began with a reading for “lectio” of one of the many authoritative texts that the teachers had at their disposal. These authoritative texts were all agreed upon to be used by the university authorities. Here within the Middle Ages religious texts were also viewed as authoritative texts, useful for teaching undergrads. After the lecture had finished a period of reflection was then administered. The scholastics understood that their job was to harmonize or bring together conflicting authorities regarding religion or other critical matters. From the scholastic point of view every had to be harmonized and in sync with one another. Within the Aristocratic way of teaching “it was the assumption that logic was indispensable for succeeding in the professional curricula of the university” (Madigan, 272). The students main job under the supervision of the professor was to argue the authenticity of particular religious texts or canon law.
- Abelard told people that they had to be very careful when examining writings from church fathers. His fear was that people were mistitling works and giving credit to the Fathers. If such an occurrence (mistitling teachings) where to happen then it would make the writings null and void. The writings then if investigated would not make sense (i.e. saying Paul wrote Genesis wouldn’t historically line up and would cause people to fall into sin and become corrupt). Abelard also urges his followers to look at the purposes and opinions given in the texts that seemingly contradict one another. These ideas would only contradict due to the changing of cultures. He also says that people must take the same precautionary measures when studying and deciphering the canon law. He urges the interpreters to be diligent in making sure that the canon law doesn’t contradict itself. Abelard offers the idea that the church Fathers use opinions rather than the truth. Abelard’s main goal is for young readers to be inspired in their search for the truth. He wants young readers to spur each other into action and to never stop looking for the truth in theological writings.
- Bernard of Clairvaux gives a strong response to Peter Abelard. Bernard says that Peter has “wild baseless speculations about the Bible. He is trying to revive false ideas long since condemned and buried” (Anderson and Bellenger, 233). He says that Abelard is adding new errors to the canonical Bible that simply weren’t there before he had examined it. Bernard also says that Abelard is using a thought process that is unfit of a theological, he is trying to figure out what God is thinking and why God what he does. Frankly, Abelard is trying to find reason in something that cannot be understood by mortal means. Clairvaux goes as far to kill Abelard’s theology a “foology” (233). Clairvaux goes as far to say this because they have disagreeing ideals on private and public faith. Clairvaux argues that Abelard is wrong because his faith is unchangeable, unwavering, and cemented into the fact that miracles from heaven were performed in the name of Christ Jesus and that Christ rose again from the dead. His faith will never change and his faith will always be cemented in truth, the truth of Christ and the resurrection.