-
1. The Suppression of False Teaching
- University of Pennsylvania Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
I The Suppression of False Teaching The Notions ofHeresy and Error in the World ofLearning In his Dialogus William Ockham explains that there are three types of heresy . One kind amounts to an almost verbatim denial of the truths offaith. Another is so obvious that "anyone who understands anything, even if illiterate;' can see in what way Divine Scripture is contradicted. A third is perceptible only to the literate and learned who are well versed in Divine Scripture, after a long and subtle deliberation. These are heresies such as "Christ as a man is not something;' or "two persons are present in ChriSt?'l Heresies of the latter type are the concern of the present chapter, and, as a matter of fact, of the entire book. Ockham's definition brings out two important facets of the phenomenon of academic censure. First, academic censures concern university-trained scholars, involved in academic issues, that is, in fine points ofscholastic theology and philosophy. Second, judicial actions that resulted in academic censure were started by accusations of heresy. The term "heresy" was regularly used in the context of academic censure , either openly, by qualifying the suspect opinions as "heretical;' or in a more implicit way. Academics were, for instance, charged with holding opinions against Catholic faith, Holy Scripture, Evangelical truth, or sound doctrine (sana doarina) , thus causing scandal (scandalum) and endangering the souls of believers, as well as the fabric ofsociety itself.2 The suspect doctrines were described as dangerous, or even as diseases.3 Other documents concerning academic censure might use the standard formula "faith and good morals" (in fide a bonis moribus), or a variant thereof, when assessing the heretical character of suspect views, thus hinting at the moral dimension of the medieval concept of heresy, which could be expressed in immoral conduct, impiety, or the violation ofsacraments.4 2 Chapter I The roots of academic heresy were sought in the theologians' indulgence in vain curiosity (vana curiositas). The existence of a more than tenuous link between vain curiosity and heresy is made particularly clear by Jean Gerson. In his Contra vanam curiositatem, an eloquent fulmination against the neglect ofScripture and religiOUS meaning in the study oftheology , during his lifetime, Gerson informs the reader that it was Eve's curiosity that made her err.5 In other texts, Gerson presents curiositas as the daughter of pride (superbia).6 Knowledge generating pride is contrasted with wisdom (sapientia) generating humility. Pride is the major vice ofthe heretic, for it is pride, rather than ignorance, that creates heretics.7 Moreover , as medieval theory had it, pride manifested itself in heretics through many specific sins, such as pertinacity (pertinacia) and presumptuousness (presumptio), also a current theme in documents pertaining to academic censure.8 In particular, the application of philosophy- one ofthe forms of speculative curiositas- to the interpretation of the message of Christ was a continuous source of suspicion to the guardians of orthodoxy all through the Middle Ages.9 In manyofficial documents and other texts, philosophers and theologians were exhorted not to cross the boundaries of their own fields-a reference to Proverbs 22:28-and not to become theologizing philosophers and philosophizing theologians.10 Although there is no doubt that the word "heresy" and its derivatives were employed in the context of academic censure, they were used in a rather loose sense. Strictly speaking, academic condemnations concerned false teachings and erroneous views, rather than clear-cut heresies. The difference between "untrue" (falsus) , "erroneous" (erroneus), and "heretical " (hereticus) was clearly perceived by medieval intellectuals. The theologian Godfrey ofFontaines, for instance, observed that errors are faults that endanger our salvation; they become heresies when they are defended with pertinacity.ll The same sentiment was expressed by the council often theologians who in 1320 were asked by Pope John XXII to examine whether necromancy should be considered heretical. In the learned treatises that preceded their reports, these theologians made the point that a heretic is someone who by his own will obstinately chooses to adhere to his errors.12 And again, when Meister Eckhart was on trial, he claimed before his judges that he could be in error, but that he could not be a heretic, "for the first belongs to the intellect, the second to the will." Precisely because he did not obstinately adhere to his errors, Meister Eckhart claimed that the proceedings against him as a heretic were unjustified.13 Eckhart also pointed to the canonistic roots of the connection between pertinacity and heresy in...