1

Introduction

I am not that fond of cooking yet fonder of savoring

courses. When I eat, especially if the course is new to me, I

would ask the cook, ‘What are the ingredients of this?’ It makes

me curious of the ingredients which make the food savory or even

the otherwise. And often, even without asking, I can already

identify the ingredients of the course before me.

I am not actually fond of putting condiments. And this is

somewhat peculiar to me, for I do not want to deprive my taste

buds of the original flavor of the food. For me, putting

condiments would violate the ‘law’ of my taste buds, that is,

taste the original.

The goal of this paper is to have a stand to the question,

Is God an ‘ingredient’ or a ‘condiment’ to the philosophy of the

medieval thinkers? What are its implications to their

philosophies?

Therefore, in order for me to arrive at a conclusion, I

would like to present a paper under the historical context,

revisiting the history of philosophy during the Middle Ages as

2

the basis of my investigation. Thus, the conclusion covers the

answer in terms of the generality of medieval philosophy and not

of a particular philosopher. This would enable us to have a grasp

of God’s relevance in the Middle Ages in general.

Aided with the work of Julian Marias1, History of Philosophy,

which I would like to set as the framework of the paper, and

where most of my citations will come from. I would like to

‘savor’ now the succulence of the history of medieval philosophy

and investigate whether God is an ‘ingredient’ or a ‘condiment’

to it.

Bon appétit!

1 In 1941 appeared the first edition of Historia de la Filosofia by Dr. Julian Marias,a Spanish scholar who has become to have an international reputation as a philosopher and teacher.

3

The Birth of Medieval Philosophy

In order to facilitate the flow of thought and to

arrive at a conclusion whatsoever of whether God, in the mind of

the medieval thinkers, is an ‘ingredient’ or a ‘condiment’ to

their line of thinking, immersion to the history has to be

initiated. This will give a full picture as to the development of

the philosophic themes with regards to the development of the

history. And here, as we will try to see, if in this development,

God was present.

Julian Marias in his book History of Philosophy outlined the

history of the philosophy in this way: (1) Greek Philosophy, from

the Pre-Socratics to neo Platonism (2) Christianity, the

Patristic Speculation to Augustine (3) Medieval Philosophy, from

Scotus Erigena to Meister Ekhart (4) Modern Philosophy, from

Descartes to Heidegger. This outline will serve as a skeleton to

the discussion. For here, more or less we will be able to

speculate the movement of the line of thought as dynamic and even

more complex, and how each stage would have their own radiated

philosophy springing from the demands of time.

4

From the Ancient Greek Thinkers to the Christians

In Ancient Greek Philosophy, from the Pre-socratics to neo-

Platonism, the theme under questioned is the origin of the

cosmos, where ‘nature (ϕύσιϛ) is the subject of the entire first

stage of philosophy.’2 They wanted to explore nature, trying to

feed their curiosity out of mere asking ‘why?’. And from this the

first foundations and undying concepts of nature were born. From

Thales’ ‘hydrologic’ claim, to the Parmenidian concept of

permanence wrestling with Heraclitus’ continuous flux, to

Socrates’ claim of ignorance, to Plato’s allegories, to

Aristotle’s ‘rebellion’ towards the truth, to Plotinus’ neo-

platonism, became more evident to the development of the

philosophic pursuit during the ancient period. However, after

the Neo-Platonism, the ‘end’ of the Greek philosophy, another new

philosophic stage dawned on history. And this stage is marked by

Marias as ‘the most profound division in the history of

philosophy’,3 where there is a distinct separation of the two

great phases of Western thought.4 And that is Christianity.

2 Julian Marias, History of Philosophy, p.123 Ibid., p. 1054 Ibid.

5

However, according to Marias, it is an error to think

Christianity as a philosophy neither it be called precisely as

“Christian philosophy.” For Jean Mercier, “Medieval philosophy is

‘Christian’ philosophy, not in the sense that philosophy or

science or geography can be Christian, Hindu or Muslim but

because philosophy of the Medieval period is influenced by

Christianity.”5 Christianity, therefore, played a decisive

influence on the conceptions of medieval philosophy, more

particularly in the metaphysical arena.

Christianity, though cannot be precisely be called a

philosophy but a religion, has altered the ancient conceptions of

the world and the metaphysics started by the Greeks. One example

of which is the notion of being.

The Greeks find their problems in motion, and the

contradictions between being and non-being. From here, we can see

that these ancient philosophers were actually discussing

something that already exists i.e. being. For them, being cannot

start from nothing, for nothing doesn’t even exist, or else it

mere conceiving the idea would demand it to be something.5 From Socrates to Wittgenstein by Jean L. Mercier, p. 33

6

Nevertheless, the rise of Christian thought altered the

situation. Christians do believe in creatio ex nihilo, that is out of

nothing came into being, precisely because they believe in the

concept of the Creation, that God created the world in his

goodness and love out of nothingness. Scandalous it may seem for

the Greeks, but Christianity manage to defend it as it enters the

picture of the medieval ages.

Being as understood by Christian thinkers has two different

meanings in reference to two kinds of being, that is of God’s

being and of world’s being.6 And the concept of Creation points out

these two beings, the created to be the world’s being and the

creator which the creatures owe their existence i.e. God’s

being. And this poses a new philosophic problem. The religious

truth that is posed by the Creation demands the justification of

the ‘creative and the created being’7 and thus requires a review

on the very meaning of being. For this one reason, Christianity

‘affects philosophy in a decisive way.’8 And the truths which

6 “Just as in the life of Christians, there are two worlds – this world and the other – there must be two different meanings in the word ‘being’ if it is to apply to both instances; that is, of God’s being and to the world’s being.” (J. Marias, History ofPhilosophy, p. 106)7 Ibid.8 Ibid.

7

bound the realm of philosophy of the ancient times were startled

as Christianity posed out its major problem, that is, ‘its own

reality before God.’9

Birth of the Christian Europe

Christianity paved its way outside the walls of Palestinian

territory, founded by Jesus Christ himself upon the pillars of

the apostles. It spread out primarily and more visibly at the

entire Europe. The dawn of Christianity on European boundaries

held by the Roman Empire has a great impact on the beliefs and

culture of the European people, and that includes, philosophy.

The emerging stage of philosophy were laid down by the Christians

who were ‘not Greek or Roman philosophers learned Greek and Roman

philosophy’ and of which ‘then adapted it to accord with their

beliefs and practices.’10 In this sense, Christianity drew upon

the established religious beliefs and culture so as to be

accepted in a pagan territory. Here we remember how St. Paul in

the Acts of the Apostles used the polytheistic belief of the

9 Ibid.10 Stephen Brown, The Columbia History of Western Philosophy edited by Richard H. Popkin, p. 219

8

Greeks and used the established philosophy to introduce Jesus

Christ as the ‘unkown god’.

16 While Paul was waiting for them in Athens, he was greatlydistressed to see that the city was full of idols. 17 So hereasoned in the synagogue with both Jews and God-fearingGreeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with thosewho happened to be there. 18 A group of Epicurean and Stoicphilosophers began to debate with him. Some of them asked,“What is this babbler trying to say?” Others remarked, “Heseems to be advocating foreign gods.” They said this becausePaul was preaching the good news about Jesus and theresurrection. 19 Then they took him and brought him to ameeting of the Areopagus, where they said to him, “May we knowwhat this new teaching is that you are presenting? 20 You arebringing some strange ideas to our ears, and we would like toknow what they mean.” 21 (All the Athenians and the foreignerswho lived there spent their time doing nothing but talkingabout and listening to the latest ideas.)

22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said:“People of Athens! I see that in every way you are veryreligious. 23 For as I walked around and looked carefully atyour objects of worship, I even found an altar with thisinscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. So you are ignorant of the verything you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim toyou.

24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lordof heaven and earth and does not live in temples built byhuman hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if heneeded anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life andbreath and everything else. 26 From one man he made all thenations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and hemarked out their appointed times in history and the boundariesof their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and

9

perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not farfrom any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and haveour being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are hisoffspring.’

29 “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not thinkthat the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an imagemade by human design and skill. 30 In the past Godoverlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all peopleeverywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he willjudge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. Hehas given proof of this to everyone by raising him from thedead.”

32 When they heard about the resurrection of the dead, some ofthem sneered, but others said, “We want to hear you again onthis subject.” 33 At that, Paul left the Council. 34 Some of thepeople became followers of Paul and believed. Among them wasDionysius, a member of the Areopagus, also a woman namedDamaris, and a number of others.11

The brilliance of St. Paul led the philosophers to ‘hear him

again of this subject’. And as curiosity grew more intense, they

were unconsciously drawn to the Truth which they were longing

for. As St. Edith Stein would say, ‘Anyone who seeks truth seeks

God, whether or not he realizes it.’

Christianity had its establishment on Europe at the fourth

century. During the first century the Doctors of the Western

Church, St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, and St. Augustine ‘unified and11 Acts 17:16-34

10

rationalized the Christian Doctrine.’12 St. Ambrose justified the

Church’s autonomy, St. Jerome translated the Bible in Latin, and

St. Augustine gave Catholicism philosophical investigations.13

And thus from here, Christianity found its preparedness to

‘conquer’ Europe. Scholars and philosophers sought to chain

philosophy with theology and adapt the philosophy of the Ancient

Greeks to mirror the Christian beliefs, and thus, paving the way

to further pursue a more advance philosophical investigation.14

Rise of Scholasticism

PHILOSOPHY SLEPT?

Stephen Brown in his section in the book History of Western

Philosophy entitled Medieval Christian Philosophy; stated that ‘from the

death of Boethius in 525 until the appearance of John Scotus

Erigena three centuries later, we have no record of any

outstanding Christian philosopher in the West.’15 What happened

to the philosophy in Europe, which by this period has already

been ‘Christianized’ for the inclusive three centuries? The12 Martin Oliver, History of Philosophy; Great Thinkers from 600 B.C. to the Present day, p. 4313 Cf. Ibid. 14 Ibid., p.4115 Stephen Brown, The Columbia History of Western Philosophy edited by Richard H. Popkin, p. 219

11

answer would be that prior to the time when medieval philosophy

properly begins on the ninth century, the activity consisted

‘merely of the labor of compilation and preservation of classical

culture and patristic speculations.’16 Moreover, the skills on

philosophical pursuit is lacking and ‘was only to appear in

schools, which arise at the beginning of the ninth century’17

seemingly, we can say that philosophy in this period prior to the

ninth century slept-half-wake and just waiting to be ‘tapped.’

Marias would put philosophy in this long gap of four centuries18,

that in ‘which actually there is no philosophy.’19 On the other

hand, W.T. Jones in his book The Medieval Mind, considered the gap to

be eight centuries from the death of St. Augustine up to St.

Thomas Aquinas, yet in a more positive outlook. It says, “Yet

this two figures [St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas] were

separated by no less than eight centuries… and though the rate of

cultural change was much slower in the Middle Ages than it is

today, a great and many new ideas and attitudes developed, new

institutions were fashioned, and new values were experienced16 Julian Marias, History of Philosophy, p.14017 Ibid.18 Marias considered 430 A.D., the time of Augustine’s death, to be the cut-off date. 19 Julian Marias, History of Philosophy, p.125

12

during the long period between Augustine’s death and Thomas’

birth.”20 William Turner in his book History of Philosophy regarded the

gap from Augustine’s death up to the rise of the Carolingian

schools on ninth century, roughly three centuries. And here, it

is good to note that most of them put Augustine’s death as the

point of reference in which the next centuries of gap. It gives

us the idea of how the philosophy established by Augustine would

resound for the years in between and where philosophy slept.

Whenever was the start of the ‘real thing’ of medieval

philosophy, more importantly is that an incubation period has

been established to give way to a ‘more’ complex school of

thought – scholasticism. And this period, highly affected by

Christianity, would be, as many historians would regard, the

beginning of medieval philosophy.

THE RISE OF THE SCHOOLS

Primarily, before the rise of the schools and universities,

the academe was limited only inside the walls of the cloister,

where the learned men, the monks, were enclosed. They were bound

to translate writings into Latin, they were taught of the20 W.T. Jones, The Medieval Mind, p. 139

13

writings of the Fathers of the Church etc., and as said before

that in these walls where the labor of compilation and

preservation of classical culture and patristic speculations were

in store. But the Dark Ages began to conquer Europe when

barbarians invaded the Romans as they established the barbaric

rule and when the Roman Empire experienced to be disarmed. There

is a ‘disappearance of the last vestiges of Roman civilization in

Europe and the substitution of a civilization of a new order.’21

Yet, the Church became clear to her mission and firm to her

‘moral and intellectual enlightenment.’22 This is what the

Barbaric kings were attracted to especially Charlemagne who,

illiterate though, came to realize the importance of the revival

of the academic pursuit in his empire. He summoned the Church to

help him, invited ecclesiastics to his court and founded schools,

and entrusted the system of education to the learned men of that

time, primarily the monks, and became the dispenser of the new

intellectual pursuit in the various parts of Europe. But these

schools were not equipped to handle and teach large number of

students. It has to be understood that during this time,

21 William Turner, History of Philosophy, p. 23722 Ibid.

14

primarily, these schools are concerned with ‘giving prospective

clergymen the education necessary to perform their duties.’23

Yet it shouldn’t be mistaken that only theology was taught during

this period of Carolingian renaissance. Though, since, this time,

numbers of cathedral and monastic schools were established, the

scope of education was not purely concentrated on religious

matters. There were faculties of law (canon and civil), medicine

and arts. Moreover, it should be clear that at first,

universities at this time were not like that of the universities

of the present day. As W.T. Jones describes:

“At first there were no buildings, no faculties, not even

corporate institution; there were only groups of young men,

eager to be taught, who gather together and hired someone

to instruct them, as the number of students grew, it became

necessary to provide for their organization and discipline,

and statutes governing the conducts of students and

teachers were laid down. These tended to follow the model

of already existing medieval guilds. Originally indeed,

“university” was a term applied to any corporation; only

gradually did it come to mean a corporation of teachers and

students.”24

23 W.T. Jones, The Medieval Mind, p. 17124 Ibid.

15

But as established before, that prior to this stage, most

learned men, if not all, are the men under the confines of the

monastery. It was during the reign of Charlemagne that the

founding of schools and universities became prevalent, so much so

that Charlemagne actually held the Church responsible for the

system of education in his empire.

SCHOLASTICISM

We now turn closer to the school of thought rose from the

birth of schools and universities during this period– the

scholasticism. Many historians would say that the rise of

scholasticism is the beginning of the medieval philosophy and

that its fall is the end of which. Yet more importantly, we will

try to look on the scholasticism as a school of thought and try

to grasp somehow the main theme of this.

SCHOOLMEN

Since the education in this period is handed now to the

Church, the schoolmen or professors are primarily, most of them

if not all, are monks and friars.25 These schoolmen were

25 Along with the foundation of schools there was an emergence of the mendicant orders primarily of Dominican and Franciscan Orders.

16

Christian philosophers which are known to be the scholastics. By

their profession, one can speculate that the basis of the

philosophy of these men is basically the truths of the Christian

faith (which speculation of this kind is actually true).

Scholasticism is a philosophy that finds its justification in the

doctrines of the Catholic Church. For the scholastics, as William

Sahakian puts it, “…the Church dogma is infallible.”26 And

because of this, philosophy ‘consisted of rational explanations

designed to corroborate the truth of ecclesiastical doctrine.’27

More or less, point of departure is now being established.

Going back to the question under consideration in this paper, a

taste of response can be seeped out of a tiny hole. Yet more

visible considerations have to be established so as to give a

clear answer to the question.

PHILOSOPHY OR THEOLOGY?

What is then the content of Scholasticism? Is it philosophy

or theology?

26 William S. Sahakian, Outline-History of Philosophy, p.9327 Ibid.

17

As established on the earlier part of this paper, perhaps,

we can say that there is no immediate answer to this question.

Yet as we look closely to the historical facts, we can draw an

inference which perhaps can give as another response, or maybe a

confirmation of which, to the question under consideration in

this paper.

Scholasticism is theology.28 This assertion would derive its

truth to the facts that during this time, the Catholic Church

were held responsible for education. Though there are other

faculties as said before, we cannot deny the fact that the

prevailing system of education was more inclined to the truths of

the Catholic doctrines. Moreover, the problems of scholasticism

are primarily theological problems like those handed on by the

Patristic thought which preceded them.29 Yet, it must be

understood that, according to the historical facts, Christianity

held philosophy as their means to Christianize the pagans before.

They adapted and used philosophy to corroborate to their beliefs.

That is why, although the problems of scholasticism are primarily

28 C.f. Julian Marias, History of Philosophy, p.12929 Ibid.

18

theological problems, there can be no denial that these problems

are attacked through the ‘weapons’ equipped in philosophy. And

therefore, fact remains, that philosophy, during this period goes

hand in hand with theology. If there was Scholastic theology,

there was also the Scholastic philosophy.

Moreover, perhaps, if one would try to ask for the

philosophy during this Middle Ages, one would have to dare to

examine the writings of the scholastics. As Julian Marias

asserted, “But it is no less true that if there is any philosophy

in the Middle Ages, it is especially found in the works of the

Scholastic writers.”30 And so, we can assert the presence of

philosophy during this period, especially that according to

Marias, “…in the middle ages, we find some of the most profound

and perspicacious minds in all of the history of philosophy.”31

Yet, there is a problem arising between the relationship of

theology and philosophy. Since the former is that which concerns

the truths of the Catholic doctrine in the light of Divine

revelation while the latter is that which concerns with the

30 Ibid.31 Ibid., p.128

19

truths as far as the human reason can attain. The attempts to

reconcile the two were resolved to the idea of subordination and

that philosophia ancilla theologiae.32 Yet, one should understand the

context where this saying has been formulated. It was formulated

in a Christian perspective. In this view point, ‘philosophy is an

auxiliary, a subordinate discipline, which theology makes use of

for its own ends.’33 Yet, as Julian Marias quoted Aristotle,

“As Aristotle already knew, philosophy is not useful for

anything, and all other sciences are more necessary than

philosophy, though none is superior to it. (Metaphysics, I,

2).”

Of course, whether philosophy is superior to any or not,

requires other investigations. But at least, we have come to

visualize in a wider perspective how much philosophy is affected

by the Christianization of the Medieval Ages. In which, it will

produce the vast reservoir of philosophic investigations and

speculations which in our present time would be using to further

animate the pursuit of the ultimate explanations of things.

32 Philosophy, handmaiden of theology.33 Julian Marias, History of Philosophy, p.129

20

And so, whether the content of scholasticism is philosophy

or theology in reference to the historical facts, it demands an

answer of both i.e. scholasticism is philosophy and theology. For

the basis of, although the problems posed are matters of

theology, the questions that arose were indeed philosophic

questions. Take for example, the theological problem of the

Eucharist:

“This is a religious matter that has nothing to do

with philosophy. But if we wish to understand it in some

fashion, we must have recourse to the concept of

transubstantiation, a strictly philosophical concept. This idea

leads us into a different world, the world of Aristotelian

metaphysics; the question of how transubstantiation of which

the Eucharist consists is possible, is stated in terms of

philosophic theory of substance.”34

It is clear now how philosophy, in this period, was able to

help as a ‘handmaid’ to achieve the ends of the Christian truths.

The considerations underlain have been established. As we

can see, as history would tell us, there is a decisive movement

in the history of philosophy. From the radical shift from the

Greeks to the Christians, there is absolutely a development of34 Ibid.

21

the conceptions of God. The questions posed, so far, due to the

Christianization of the West, were always inclined to the

conception of God. And so, we can say, as far as the early

accounts are concerned, that God might be an ‘ingredient’ to the

medieval philosophic pursuit. But the philosophic investigations

regarding this matter are not yet over. As we move on, this

hypothesis will be challenged as we approach the mid-era of the

Middle Ages and eventually as we approach to the end. There is a

perplexing development on the medieval line of thought as it

approaches its end. And that we will try to investigate as we

deal on the great themes or problems that the medieval philosophy

had namely, Creation, Universals, and Reason.

The Great Themes of the Medieval Philosophy

CREATION

Before the Christian Era in the West, the Greeks

particularly, believe in the idea of genesis or generation. For

them, generation is a ‘type of motion, substantial motion.’35 And

as we look closer to this definition, an inference can be

derived. Recalling that the idea of motion is that which35 Ibid. p. 131

22

‘presupposes a subject, an entity that moves passing from a

beginning to an end,’36 therefore, for them a being came to be

from that which something that is already existing – subject;

just as a carpenter uses wood as the subject, to make a

furniture, so that every being must have come from something.

Therefore, creatio ex nihilo is impossible for them. And this line of

thought dominated for a long time. But when the Christians

introduced the concept of Creation, they were stunned for those

things are ‘new to their ears’. The Christians introduced that

‘in Him [God] we move and have our being’37. For a long time, in

the early medieval ages, they have the principle that ex nihilo nihil

fit38 which seemingly would deny the truth of the Creation. But one

must understand that this context during the early medieval ages

are understood as, nothing can be made out of nothing without

God, and therefore without Creation. Because of this, the

philosophers during this early life of the medieval philosophy,

influenced highly of the ‘platonic, neo-platonic, and broadly

stoic’39 thought, has to rethink of their concept of ‘being’,36 Ibid.37 Acts 17:2838 i.e. Nothing can be made out of nothing39 Paul Vincent Spade, The Oxford History of Western Philosophy edited by Anthony Kenny,p. 57

23

(though the fact insists that neo-platonism are highly regarded

by the Christian mystics which in fact includes Augustine,

regarded to be neo-platonist par excellence40, we cannot also deny the

fact that during this early period, there is a transition from

the Greek philosophy to Christianity). Can this term being be

applied to both God and creation? Will it not be a problem of

equivocation? To discuss this problem requires another

investigation. For now, we just have to put connections back to

the original question this paper would try to answer. An

assertion by Marias in connection with this problem is worth

considering for,

“We see that the development of the problem of Creation in

the Middle Ages philosophers is led to grant the creature

greater independence with regard to the Creator; this

contributes to the estrangement from God.”41

This gives us a disturbing thought with regards to the early

hypothesis that God is an ‘ingredient’ to the philosophy of the

medieval thinkers. We must understand that this problem occurred

during the early stages of the Medieval Ages. And as we approach

40 Anthony E. Gilles, The Evolution of Philosophy, p. 3541Julian Marias, History of Philosophy, p. 133

24

the middle era of this age and eventually to the end, this

hypothesis will be more challenged. Taking into account this

second problem that medieval thinkers faced, the problem of the

universals.

THE PROBLEM OF UNIVERSALS

We shall treat this problem briefly. One important thing to

understand here before going any further that this period of

middle ages, medieval philosophy has already developed. This was

the time when:

“After the brief light afforded by John’s [John Dun Scotus

Erigena] genius, the philosophical scene darkened for

another two hundred years. When, in the second half of the

eleventh century, philosophizing again began.”42

And as it started again, it faced another problem that

demands more investigations. How do the concepts of ‘universals’

which exists in the mind meet with the objects that are perceived

by the senses? We perceive things as particulars yet what we

think of, regarding these perceptions, the universals? What do

42 W.T. Jones, The Medieval Mind, p. 185

25

these universals have to do with the things we perceive? Do these

universals exist in reality? How?

These posited questions were connected not only in highly

serious metaphysical problems but theological problems as well.

We should also understand that during this time, Aristotelian

thought was behind the background, only in Aquinas’ epoch where

Aristotle will be brought to life again. Platonism and neo-

platonism were the dominant schools of thought during this

period.

During this period, there were two extreme positions in

understanding the universals i.e. realism and the opposite extreme of

it, nominalism. Realism ‘maintains that the universals are res,

things’43. The proponents of this extreme form of realism asserts

that the universals (which they regarded to be prior to

individual things, ante rem) are actually present in every

individuals and therefore there is no essential difference

between individuals and the universals, only, accidental

differences.44 On the other hand, the nominalists believed that

43 Julian Marias, History of Philosophy, P. 13344 Cf. Ibid.

26

universals (which for them posterior to the things, post rem) only

exist in the mind and that the individuals are the ones which

actually exist.

This initial contradiction led to a more complex debate

among the medieval philosophers. The development of which can be

found in history in which the reader can thoroughly look for. But

more important than the extensive debate regarding this matter,

is the end product of such a debate. As we can see, this problem

opened up man to ‘turn his eyes towards the world and formulate a

science of nature’45. God in this context was put aside.

Yet not over, the next ‘great question’ of the medieval

philosophy – the controversy of faith and reason – will bring man

‘one more mile away’ from God to arrive on the new theme of the

world.

FAITH AND REASON

In as much as the Medieval Ages are characterized by the

Christian thought, in this third great theme, as Marias would

call it, there were an emerging battle in the reconciliation of

45 Ibid., p. 136

27

faith and reason. Indeed the Christianization had not freed the

concept of reason from its pagan origin. And thus it held its

supremacy, seemingly, over the Christian argument on faith. Is

faith reasonable? Are all Christian truths founded or attainable

by human reason? If not, as to what extent can the reason go? Are

some questions that demands reasonable answer.

W.T. Jones quoted St. Anselm, an eleventh-century philosopher as

he wrote,

“I have been often and most earnestly requested by

many [to write down] the proofs of a certain doctrine of our

faith. . . . This they ask, not for the sake of attaining to

faith by means of reason, but that. . . . They may be always

ready to convince anyone who demands of them a reason of

that hope which is in us.[For] this question . . . infidels

are accustomed to bring up against us , ridiculing Christian

simplicity as absurd.”46

He also cited Aquinas,

“[Since] some . . . , like the Mohammedans and pagans,

do not agree with us as to the authority of the Scripture,

[it is impossible to appeal to authority against them].

Wherefore it is necessary to have recourse to natural

reason, to which all are compelled to assent”47

46 Quoted from Cur Deus Homo, translated by S.N. Deane (Open Court, 1903)47 Quoted from Summa Contra Gentiles (English Dominican Fathers), I, ii

28

In order to have at least a grasp of the debate, Marias

would describe St. Thomas Aquinas’, John Dun Scotus’ and

William Occam’s standpoints,

“In St. Thomas, theory is rational, speculative knowledge.

Theology rests on faith in so far as it is based on

revealed, supernatural information; but man scrutinizes this

information with his reason in order to interpret it and

arrive at a theological knowledge. Therefore, complete

accord between God and human reason is assumed. . . . For

Scotus, theological knowledge is no longer speculative, but

practical, moralistic. Man is a rationalizing animal and

thus will create a rational philosophy, because this is a

matter of logos. But on the other hand, theology is

supernatural; reason has to do little with it; it is, above

all, praxis. . . .For Occam, reason comes to be an exclusively

human concern. Reason is, indeed, characteristic of man, but

not of God. God is omnipotent and cannot be subject to any

law, not even to the law of reason; Occam says that if it

were otherwise, the divine will would be inadmissibly

limited.”48

Perplexed speculations and dialectics grew even more

complicated. Yet even though they were arguing in the context

given the existence of God, we cannot say that God is the center

of their dialectics. It is reason. For if, according to Occam,

God is not reason, then, human reason ‘cannot concern itself with48 Julian Marias, History of Philosophy, p. 138

29

God’. Faith is less given importance since they weren’t able to

put reason beside faith. Of course, St. Thomas Aquinas had

offered a possible reconciliation between faith and reason, which

he termed ‘natural’ theology. But, far more important than the

idea whether the medieval philosophers were able to address the

controversy or not, we would try to put-in-hand the end product

of the debate. With a grasp of the debate, we can sense the

dominance of reason above faith. Thinkers became more concerned

about reason and eventually epistemé rather than faith and

theology.

Marias would conclude his discourse on these three major

problems of the Middle ages giving us a whole picture of the

historical schematic of the themes prevalent during the Middle

Ages. Moreover, taking into account Occam’s argument that God is

not reason, we can have a taste of what will happen for the next

period of philosophical pursuit, the rise of Modern philosophy.

Let Marias speak for himself,

“At the end of the Middle Ages, the Deity ceases to be

man’s great theoretic subject, and this separates man from

God. And this separates man from God. Reason concerns itself

30

again with those objects to which it is appropriate, to a

realm wherein it can be fruitful. What are these objects?

Above all, man himself. Secondly, the world, whose marvelous

order is just then being discovered; it is found to possess

a mathematical as well as rational order. Symbolic

knowledge, to which nominalism had led us, is adapted to the

mathematical character of nature. And this world which is

independent of God – who set it in motion by His act of

Creation but who does not have to sustain it – becomes the

other great object of concern to human reason when the Deity

becomes in accessible to reason. Man and the world are the

two principal themes of the age; therefore, humanism and

modern physics, the science of nature, come to be the two

chief concerns of the Renaissance man, who finds himself

alienated from God.”49

Towards the end of the Middle Ages, where the Renaissance

period is about to begin, philosophy undergone a gradual radical

shift from Christian era to the Period of Enlightenment. With

Occam and Ekhart, according to Marias, medieval philosophy enters

into a rapid decline. In the fifteenth century, Scholasticism

approached its near end.

Conclusion

49 Ibid., p. 139

31

After structuring the framework of the history of the

medieval philosophy, and having at least an overview of what the

medieval thinkers of that time have in mind, we go back to the

question under consideration for this paper, Is God an ‘ingredient’ or a

‘condiment’ to the philosophy of the Medieval philosophers and what are its

implications to their philosophies?

To answer the question more effectively, we have to clarify

the meaning of the words ‘ingredient’ and ‘condiment’ as it is

used in the question, so as to avoid separation of thought in

understanding the question under consideration. The dictionary

will give us the definition of ‘ingredient’ as ‘something that

enters into a compound or is a component part of any combination

or mixture.’50 On the other hand ‘condiment’ is ‘something used

to enhance the flavor of food; especially:  a pungent seasoning’51

and from here we can take these definitions.

After examining the history of medieval philosophy with all

its vast and rich ideals, we can arrive at the conclusion that

indeed, God is an ‘ingredient’ to the philosophy of the Middle

50 Taken from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ingredient51 Ibid.

32

Ages as a whole. If you look from the bird’s view the scheme of

the medieval philosophy, it started when Christianity entered

Europe. And the philosophic problems that have developed through

time started from their very curiosity of the Divine.

Remembering how the Greeks were eager to hear more from St. Paul

regarding this ‘unknown god’ and how St. Augustine and the

Patristic speculations bear fruit in giving the Christian

doctrines and conception of God philosophical foundations, and

how these foundations actually affect the reasoning of John dun

Scotus, St. Anselm and other scholastics. How through the

development of the medieval thought St. Thomas Aquinas

reintroduce Aristotle to a neo-platonic structure. All these

started to the very curiosity of the Divine. Though through the

course of time during this period, God became not the central

figure of the philosophies. As Julian Marias would say that

during this period there is a gradual separation of man from God.

God became not the main theoretic subject as we have an overview

of the great problems of Creation, universals, and reason. In fact,

in these three great themes of the Middle Ages, metaphysics and

33

reason were prevalent. And as it approached the dawn of the

Renaissance period, God was totally left behind.

We should understand that although the philosophers during

this period are labeled as Christian philosophers who believes in

the existence of God, exactly who they are and what they believed

in is I think the main reason why God was somehow ‘alienated’ in

their philosophies during this period. For I think that the

‘givenness’ of the existence of God for them during this period

was absorbed in the whole course of menu which was like the

onions and garlic sautéed first as the first ingredient would

later be absorbed and be covered up by other ingredients, yet

giving the totality of the taste to the course. One may argue,

if so why St. Thomas Aquinas did made the Summa Contra Gentiles? Why

did he formulate the Five ways? Or perhaps, why did St. Anselm

defended the ‘ontological52’ argument? If there is a ‘givenness’

on the existence of God? We must understand that the five ways and

the Summa Contra Gentiles were meant not to attack the other

Christian philosophers of the West but for the ‘pagan’

52 Even though it does not actually address an ontological problem. But since we cannot find the right term to coin the argument, we would use the common term for it.

34

philosophers of the East. St. Anselm meant the ‘ontological’

argument not for those who believe in God but for those

otherwise.

God therefore is an ‘ingredient’ particularly, if put into

an analogy, a garlic (eventhough this hypothesis were challenged

by the radical shift). He is a constitute to a whole course of

menu, the Medieval History, together with other ‘ingredients’

which will constitute as such. If Time is the cook, and it is

cooking the history of the Middle Ages with all its ingredients,

God is the ‘garlic’ who without Him being put into the heated pan

first, no other ingredient will follow. And just as garlic

enhance the flavor and the aroma of the course and so God

enhanced the flavor and aroma of the medieval philosophy. In

fact, culinary experts would tell us that garlic is one of the

most important ingredients in all culinary arts. It is the start

of the cooking.

Time is the cook, History is the course, and God is an

ingredient together with others.

35

We may serve the whole ‘course’ of the medieval philosophy

noticing not the ‘Garlic’ yet as we actually let our taste buds

absorbed the sumptuous menu, we can’t help but to say, DELICIOUS!

36

Works Cited

Brown, S. F. (1999). Medieval Christian Philosophy. In R. H. Popkin, The Columbia History of Western Philosophy (pp. 219-271). New York: Columbia University Press.

Gilles, A. E. (1987). The Evolution of Philosophy. New York: Alba House.

Jones, W. (1969). The Medieval Mind. California: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. .

Marias, J. (1967). History of Philosophy. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.

Mercier, J. L. (1998). From Socrates to Wittgenstein. Bangalore: Asian TradingCorporation.

Oliver, M. (1997). History of Philosophy. New York: Barnes & Noble.

Popkin, R. H. (1999). The Columbia History of Western Philosophy. New York: Columbia University Press.

Sahakian, W. (1968). Outline-History of Philosophy. New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc.

Spade, P. V. (1994). Medieval Philosophy. In A. Kenny, The Oxford History ofWestern Philosophy (pp. 55-105). New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.