| Albert the Great by Sr. M. Albert Hughes, O.P.
7 Philosopher and Theologian |
  Autumn 1987 Vol. 39 Supplement |
THE catalogue of St. Albert's scientific writings might almost of itself justify the title of Universal Doctor, and yet they form only a part of the total output of his works. The exact number of these is still unknown for many are unedited, many lost or hidden in libraries, and while some unauthentic works are attributed to him, others probably genuine may still go under the name of other authors. One thing is certain: great as was Albert's reputation as a scientist, his fame as a philosopher was even greater. It is in this sphere that he made his greatest contribution to learning, as even a brief outline of his philosophic writings indicates.
He was described by Henry of Hereford as "the most resplendent son of the philosophers of Christendom," and he was called by his contemporaries maximus in philosophia even before he received the general title of "the great." As in natural science, his writings embrace every aspect of the subject -- logic, metaphysics, and moral philosophy, while he has separate treatises against the outstanding philosophical errors of the day. It is true that he did not create a perfectly finished philosophical system as did Thomas; but Thomas could never have produced his system without the preliminary labors of Albert, and without Albert, Thomas might never even have been a philosopher. Roger Bacon, an Englishman who had no love for Dominicans, least of all for Albertus Magnus, tried to belittle and ridicule him when he wrote -- "He had never studied philosophy, nor did he attend lectures on the subject in the schools, he was also never in a Studium Solemne before he became a theologian; he could not have received any instruction in his Order, for he was the first Master of Philosophy in it."
Actually this gibe only serves to show the greatness of Albert as a philosopher. He found the philosophical works of Aristotle proscribed from the schools, accessible only in defective translations, and in the commentaries of Arabs and Jews to whom they had come through African translations and writings which were greatly influenced by Neoplatonic philosophy, so that their Aristotelianism was to a great extent mixed with Neoplatonism. Apparently without any previous training, he set out as he himself said, "to make all the parts [of Aristotle's writings] intelligible to Latins." He succeeded so well that he produced commentaries which are still of value today, collected an immense range of material, secured for Aristotle an entrance into the schools, and prepared the way for the dedication of philosophy to the services of theology, a task which theologians had been attempting since the time of Augustine, and which Thomas was to bring to a happy conclusion.
In his commentaries Albert set out not to give his own views so much as to reproduce those of Aristotle, elucidating them by means of those Arabian and Jewish writers who he thought had understood him most clearly. For he like Thomas -- or perhaps it would be more correct to say that Thomas like Albert -- believed in making use of truth no matter where it was found. He does, however, make it clear that in presenting the thought of Aristotle he does not necessarily make it his own. While agreeing with his system and method as a whole he disagrees very decidedly with some sections of it. And, while following Aristotle in general he does form time to time in his own works adopt the theories and arguments of Plato.
Albert wrote in his commentary on Aristotle's Politics,
It is not I who have said anything in this book; I have only set out what has been said and stated principles and causes. Similarly in all the physical books I have never put forward my own opinions, but have rather expounded as faithfully as I could the views of the Peripatetics. This I only say on account of some lazy people who, seeking an excuse for their laziness, scrutinize the book for something they can find fault with.Yet in the course of his expositions he did, in fact, set down some of his own views, if only in the way he pronounced for or against the views of others which he was reporting. But he never produced the coherent, finished synthesis of St. Thomas, and in different writings he seems to sponsor now one view now another. This is one of the defects of his work, but a defect which springs from and is almost conditioned by its merits. He set out to render Aristotle intelligible to the West, and he certainly succeeded in that self-appointed task. William of Moerbeke's Latin translation from the original Greek, done at the request of Thomas Aquinas, had made available a reliable text, but the need for equally reliable commentaries was urgent. (1)
These commentaries were Albert's own contribution. To write them he made himself master of all the philosophical knowledge of his time, taking especial pains to assimilate the whole body of Arabian and Jewish knowledge with which he became more familiar than did any other Christian scholar of the day. The amount of information which he thereby collected was enormous. He had to sift, criticize, and correct it before setting it out in his commentaries. Small wonder then that he did not attempt to give a decisive vote on every theory which he mentioned. That he left to minds less burdened with detail than his own. For a like reason, he did not produce a complete philosophical system, although he did conceive the idea of linking together all the truths found in the various philosophical systems, and he worked at this in his various monographs, thus founding a self-sufficient Christian philosophy of which the superstructure, the general fundamentals, and many details were taken direct from Aristotle.
The importance of this work, and its completion by St. Thomas, will be the subject of the next chapter. Sufficient has been said hereto show that the universality of Albert's genius embraced the whole philosophical knowledge of his day. Here, by initiating and making possible the formation of a Christian philosophy, the philosphia perennis, his originality and genius found their most perfect expression.
THE THEOLOGIAN
Albert was by natural inclination a naturalist, by conscious effort a philosopher, and with his whole devout soul would from the bottom of a heart which glowed with charity, a theologian.So writes a biographer. Pius XI, in the Bull from which we have quoted so often, declared:
To him belongs this great honor, that (excepting St. Thomas) there is scarcely another doctor of equal authority, whether in philosophy, theology, or the interpretation of Scripture. Indeed it was to theology that the whole trend of his mind was inevitably directed. It would be an endless task to relate all that Albert has done for the increase of theological science.... He used philosophy and the scholastic method as a kind of implement for the explanation of theology. In fact he is regarded as the author of that method of theology which has come down in the Church to our own time as the safe and sound norm for clerical studies.
Yet while Albert takes a first rank among theologians, the defects in his philosophical writings are reproduced here, and he has always to take second place to St Thomas except perhaps in one or two sections. Yet here too Albert prepared the way for Thomas. Neither can be properly appreciated save in relation to the other.
When Albert began to write and teach, theology still meant primarily the study of Holy Scripture, so that it is not surprising to find that, according to his earliest biographer, he commented on the whole of the Bible.(2) The only treatises extant today are the commentaries on the Psalms, the Prophets, the four Gospels, the Book of Job, the Canticle of Canticles, and one on the Mulier Fortis, whom he takes as a type of the Church and of the individual soul.
The style of these different works varies. The commentary on the Psalms was written for the faithful with a view to bringing to memory the moral precepts and truths of the Faith, and so he follows the allegorical method which had traditionally been adopted by the Western Fathers. The commentary on the Prophets, on the other hand, was written to refute the Jews, and here Albert was at pains to establish the literal sense, showing the Prophets as the signposts to Christ, and only referring briefly to the allegorical meaning. The Gospel commentaries are of a different nature again, the allegorical character being almost entirely disregarded, so that the literal sense is thrown into the foreground and the significance of the books as the historical source of Christianity is brought out. These treatises show that Albert had a gift for historical writings, although we do not possess any such works from his pen. Among these commentaries, that on St. Luke's Gospel stands out so conspicuously that Peter of Prussia remarks that in the opinion of many the saint must have been very specially illuminated by the Holy Spirit in writing it. According to tradition this work was written or at least completed while Albert was bishop, which may account for the more than usually severe denunciations of the failings and disorders of the times which it contains. One critic has said of this treatise:
Here the current of Albert's own thought and his mystically inclined disposition find their freest expression, and at times in passages of great nobility and sublime genius, passages which must surely rank with the greatest and most profound in the religious literature of all times.Albert's contribution to scriptural exegesis was three-fold. He strongly insisted on the literal meaning, he led the way in introducing a systematic analysis of the text, and he traced the progressive development of revelation, a thought which was novel in his day. In all these things he pointed the way towards modem exegetical methods, so that although he does not occupy any position of special importance in biblical science -- since the auxiliary sciences at the disposal of the modem scholar were unknown to him -- his position among medieval exegetes is one of outstanding importance, as is witnessed by the epithet applied to him in a 1473 Preface to his Mariale -- "the most renowned interpreter of the Sacred Books."
In the sphere of moral philosophy, Albert's position is the same as that in philosophy and in theology as a whole; he prepared the way for St. Thomas, to whose works his own are inferior. It is interesting to note, however, that while the second part of the Summa, wherein the whole of moral theory is worked out in relation to the good, has long been considered the masterpiece of Thomas's method and exposition, a manuscript has been discovered containing the third part of Albert's Summa de Creaturis wherein he treats of ethics in relation to the good, thoroughly discussing the four cardinal virtues. This was composed a good twenty years before Thomas' Summa. Here as everywhere Aristotle is the basis, but St. Augustine's ethical theories are also given prominence. In an age which was essentially objective in its theological expositions Albert also anticipates later times in giving consideration to the personal element:
The great discerner of souls does not belie himself here. More than once his vast experience of life, his charity in judgment, his just and wise weighing of all the circumstances, manifest themselves. This is especially the case when Albert, as for instance in his teaching on anger, or on the spiritual works of mercy, descends to the particular and gives advice on the proper ordering of life, for then he reveals a unique greatness, a rare combination of high scientific training and a practical wisdom born of his own experience of life.... We can then catch a glimpse of his own soul, as in moving speech his loving heart sings the canticle of God.This introduction of the personal element, in which Albert differs so much from Thomas, will be referred to again in another chapter. Here it may be noted that it follows from his whole conception of theology, which was not to him a dry impersonal abstract science, a theoretical knowledge of God, but a knowledge breathing forth love, intensely practical, in fact 'Mystical Theology' in Pseudo-Dionysius' sense -- the knowledge of God flowing from the Gift of Wisdom. To quote once more from the Bull of canonization:
Albert's numerous theological works, and above all, his commentaries on the sacred Scriptures, bear the marks not only of an enlightened mind and a deep knowledge of Catholic training, but they are stamped with the spirit of piety and arouse in souls the desire to cleave to Christ. We readily discern therein the holy man discoursing of holy things.... His mystical writings show that he was favored by the Holy Spirit with the gift of infused contemplation.In dogmatic theology Albert produced the usual commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard, which belongs to his early teaching days, and a Summa which was unfinished at the time of his death. Neither approaches the sublimity of Thomas' Summa Theologiae, for which, however, all Albert's theological studies prepared the way. As in philosophy, he was usually content to set down the different opinions on a point, leaving it to others to decide which was the true one, so he gives the impression at times of himself wavering between different points of view. On some subjects -- the nature of original sin, and the creation of Adam in a state of sanctifying grace -- he adopted doctrines which were contrary to those usually held and which only became generally accepted when they had been further sponsored by Thomas. His favorite subjects were Our Lady and the Holy Eucharist. He wrote more on Our Lady than did any other scholastic doctor -- the Mariale, a treatise on her virginity, a commentary on the Ave Maria, and lengthy sections in the scriptural commentaries -- and in them he displays a burning love and devotion towards the Queen of Heaven. Peter of Prussia points out that the saint never mentioned her name without adding some epithet in her praise. His most important contribution to Mariology is his teaching on Mary's universal mediation which he developed from her position as Mother of God and co-helper of Jesus.
The doctrine of the Holy Eucharist receives even more attention. Albert's sermons on the eucharist for a long time circulated under the name of Thomas and were extremely popular. De Eucharistico Sacramento is a veritable summa on the subject, while De Sacrificio Missae is an exposition of the prayer and ceremonies of the mass which broke away from the arbitrary and artificial method then common and took a road which is followed even today. In these treatises as in those on our Blessed Lady the saint is obviously dealing with a subject dear to his heart, and the fervor of his devotion cannot be concealed. This is also the case when he deals with the theology of the procession of the Holy Spirit to which he had obviously devoted much thought and study.
It is in the sphere of mystical theology, however, that Albert is at his best, nor was he surpassed even by Thomas. The popular De adhaerendo Deo (On Cleaving to God), so long regarded as his masterpiece, is now considered to be either wholly or in part the work of another. But his other mystical works, especially the commentaries on Dionysius the Areopagite, are quite sufficient to give him a leading place among masters of the spiritual life. He alone of all the scholastics commented on all these books, and his commentaries are a masterpiece of interpretation. Moreover he showed how every word and every phrase can be given an interpretation comfortable to sacred Scripture, although the author was actually tinged with Neoplatonic and unorthodox ideas. He also pointed out many errors into which mystics are liable to fall, especially the dangers of quietism. Rudolph of Nymegen records the following story apropos of the Dionysian commentaries:
A religious renowned for his learning and virtue [whom most people believe to have been Thomas] one day picked up a sheet of paper on which the following was written in Albert's hand. "When I had with much difficulty completed the book on the 'Celestial Hierarchy' I began the exposition of the 'Ecclesiastical Hierarchy.' With incredible difficulty I had got through the first chapter on Baptism, but when I started on the second my strength failed me. I despaired of being able to go any further when after Matins, this vision was vouchsafed to me. I found myself in a church where St. Paul was saying Mass. Consoled beyond measure I felt sure that he himself would enlighten me on the meaning of Dionysius. When the Apostle had said the Agnus Dei, an enormous crowd entered the church, and the celebrant asked what they wanted. "We have brought you a demoniac," replied someone; "please deliver him." When Satan had been driven out, Paul gave Holy Communion to the happy Christian. I offered myself as server, and said with a certain fear, "For a long time I have desired to be instructed on the profound mysteries contained in the pages of the Areopagite, and especially on the nature of true holiness." Paul replied kindly; "After Mass come with me to the house of Aaron the High Priest, situated on the other bank of the river."As a mystical writer Albert had tremendous influence over the German School which followed him, and, as in the case of the natural sciences, if his example and teaching had been followed, a detour of several centuries would have been avoided. "In the field of mysticism Albert not only achieved great things in individual problems, but also laid new foundations, and set up signposts for the further development of the subject."Accordingly when Mass was over I followed the Apostle. When we arrived at the water's edge the Doctor of the Nations crossed without difficulty. It was not so with me; for hardly had I touched the waves than they began to rise so as to make my crossing impossible. St. Paul entered the house which he had pointed out to me; and I asked myself anxiously how I could possibly follow him, and then suddenly I awoke. After some reflection I believed I had found the explanation of the dream. The first chapter of Dionysius treats, in effect, of the expulsion of Satan from the human soul by Baptism. Then the new Christian participates in the sacrament of Holy Eucharist. The following chapter leads him who would receive the holy chrism to the house of Aaron, because here it is a question of the chrism with which bishops are anointed. The deep waters which so suddenly heaped up had terrified me, but by the grace of God the great Apostle had. made my passage easy. I therefore betook myself once more to my writing, and I have completed, with help from on high, what my own feebleness had shown me was an impossibility.
This inadequate survey of Albert's writings may perhaps convey some idea of the universality of his genius. It may be added that he was always a "doctor" in the most literal sense of the word, i.e. a teacher. He studied and wrote not for love of so doing and perhaps not even principally out of a love of truth, but out of a love of God and of souls in God, which made him anxious to impart to others the knowledge which he had himself amassed, and to employ for the good of souls the talents which had been entrusted to him. That one of those was the gift of teaching, of imparting knowledge, is evident. No saint has taught for so long nor been so determined to return to the office of teaching when other works could be laid aside. That he was chosen as the first regent of studies of the studium generale at Cologne shows the esteem in which he was held by the authorities of his order. The crowds who flocked to his lectures proved that the students of Europe had a like opinion of his ability.
A prolific writer is not necessarily a good writer, and to be endowed with an encyclopedic brain is not necessarily a sign of greatness. But in Albert these were manifestations of the essential greatness of his intellect, while his teaching ability depended perhaps most of all on the greatness of his soul. As Pius XI wrote, "All the works of Albert are of monumental value and of imperishable authority. With our predecessor Leo XIII we venture to say, 'Although time will bring its increase to every kind of science, still Albert's teachings which served to form Thomas Aquinas and were regarded in his time as miraculous can never really grow old.' "
1 . William had been sent to Greece by the general chapter of the order about 1242. There he worked indefatigably for the reunion of the Greek and Latin Church. He died in 1281.
2. Holy Scripture was the text-book of the masters in theology, and their commentaries represent their lectures in the schools. Unfortunately it is only of late years that their importance has been realized.
| BACK | CONTENTS | NEXT | INDEX |