Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-7f7b94f6bd-lv2sk Total loading time: 0.257 Render date: 2022-06-30T08:17:01.775Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Blind Men Speaking of Colors: Paul's Recollection and the Self-Image of Early Thirteenth-Century Theologians

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 November 2014

Ayelet Even-Ezra*
Affiliation:
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Extract

In the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, Paul writes:

It is doubtless not profitable for me to boast. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord: I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a one was caught up to the third heaven. And I know such a man—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows—how he was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. Of such a one I will boast; yet of myself I will not boast, except in my infirmities. (2 Cor 12:1–5 nkiv)

This brief and enigmatic account is caught between multiple dialectics of power and infirmity, pride and humility, unveiling and secrecy. At this point in his letter Paul is turning to a new source of power in order to establish his authority against the crowd of boasting false apostles who populate the previous paragraphs. He wishes to divulge his intimate, occult knowledge of God, but at the same time keep his position as antihero that is prevalent throughout the epistle. These dialectics are enhanced by a sophisticated play of first and third person. The third person denotes the subject who experienced rapture fourteen years ago, while the first person denotes the narrator in the present. Only after several verses does the reader realize that these two are in fact the same person. This alienation allows Paul the intricate play of boasting, for “of such a one I will boast, yet of myself I will not boast.”

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Augustine, Gen. litt. 12.6 (CSEL 28.1:386–97).

2 Ibid. The theme of reflective thought and self-perception is a central issue of Augustinian thought, developed much further in De Trinitate, Confessiones, and other texts.

3 On the visio mediastina see Wicki, Nikolaus, Die Lehre von der himmlischen Seligkeit in der mittelalterlichen Scholastik von Petrus Lombardus bis Thomas von Aquin (Studia Friburgensia 2.9; Freiburg, Switzerland: Universitätverlag, 1954) 161–66Google Scholar

4 For several aspects of rapture and contemplation as reflected in these quaestiones, see Wicki, Die Lehre, 161–74; de Mottoni, Barbara Faes, Figure e motivi della contemplazione nelle teologie medievali (Micrologus’ Library 18; Florence: SISMEL Edizioni del Galuzzo, 2007)Google Scholar.

5 William of Auxerre, Summa aurea 3.37.3, in Summa aurea (ed. Jean Ribaillier; 5 vols. in 6; Spicilegium Bonaventurianum 16–20; Paris: Éditions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1980–1987) 3:706–8.

6 Ibid., 708.

7 “Nominalis est que fit per nomina aliquo modo exponencia rem, sicut cecus natus cognoscit colorem per rationem istam, color est qui cognoscitur per sensum, cecus autem natus cognoscit colorem per tactum et sic cecus natus habet cognitionem aliquam de colore, sed longe minorem quam ille qui videt” (ibid).

8 (Aristotle, An. Post. 2.10, 93b30, in Analytica priora et posteriora [ed W. D. Ross; OCT; Oxford: Clarendon, 1964; repr., with corrections, 1968] [emphasis added]; see also commentary on 634). The Greek might also be read as if the “or” is not between “” and “,” but between the two attestations of the term “,” the first “of what the name signifies,” and the second “nominal.”

9 Aristotle, An. post. 2.10, in Analytica posteriora (ed. Lorenzo Minio-Paluello and Bernard G. Dod; Aristoteles Latinus 4.1–4; Corpus philosophorum medii aevi; Bruges: De Brouwer, 1968) 83 [emphasis added]. John of Toledo chooses: “Verbum alterum pro nomine positum” (ibid., 167), and Gerard of Cremona: “Sermo positus vice nominis, sicut sermo exponens nomen” (ibid., 261). William of Moerbecke later renders the old translation of “ratio altera nomina ponens” simply as “ratio altera nominalis” (ibid., 329).

10 Aristotle, Phys. 2.1, 193a5–9. I thank Dr. Orna Harari for this reference. The Latin translator renders this passage as follows: “Demonstrare autem manifesta per inmanifesta non possibile iudicare est propter ipsum et non propter ipsum cognitum. Quod autem contingat hoc pati, non inmanifestum est; sillogizabit enim utique aliquis cum natus sit cecus de coloribus; quare necesse est huiusmodi de nominibus inesse rationem, nichil autem intelligere” (Physica. Translatio vetus [ed. Fernand Bossier and Jozef Brams; Aristoteles Latinus 7.1; Corpus philosophorum medii aevi; Leiden: Brill, 1990] 45).

11 “Ad hoc dicimus quod non potuit illud reducere ad memoriam; tamen potuit illud ad reminiscentiam, quoniam potuit de illa reminisci. Intellectus enim potest reminisci, quamvis non possit memorari” (Roland of Cremona, Summae magistri Rolandi Cremonensis O. P. liber tercius [ed. Aloyso Cortesi; Monumenta Bergomensia 7; Bergamo: Edizioni “Monumenta Bergomensia,” 1962] cccxl [992]).

12 Aristotle, Mem. rem. 449b9–23.

13 “Quid igitur est memoria et memorari dictum est, quoniam fantasmatis est sicut ymaginis et cuius fantasma habitus est, et cuius partium que sunt in nobis, quia primi sensibilis quod tempore sentimus” (ibid., 451a15). This Latin translation of Jacobus Venetus is taken from the draft edition of Silvia Donati in the Aristoteles Latinus Database, Brepols, retrieved on April 11, 2013. A future edition for the Aristoteles Latinus series (14.1–2) is being prepared by David Bloch.

14 William of Auxerre does not refer to Aristotle or to any other authority, but it is highly plausible that these statements attracted his attention.

15 Roland of Cremona, Summae magistri Rolandi Cremonensis, lib. 3, cccxl (994).

16 “Facile esset, et absque aliqua dubitatione, dicere quod Paulus vidisset Deum sine aliquibus ymaginibus, et illa archana, si solum possemus videre quomodo potuit recolere que vidisset, magnum esset. Nec auctoritates nec ipsa ratio patitur ut dicamus quod viderit illa per ymaginem” (ibid).

17 Ibid., 996.

18 Ibid., 993.

19 Ibid., 996.

20 Roland seems to have written his Summa only after he left Paris for Toulouse, that is, in the mid-1230s. See Lottin, Odon, “Roland de Crémone et Hugues de Saint-Cher,” RTAM 12 (1940) 136–43Google Scholar.

21 “Cogitabat sollicitus, quid posset haec visio designare, et ad capiendum ex ea intelligentiae sensum anxiabatur plurimum spiritus eius. Cumque liquido ex ea intellectu aliquid non perciperet et multum eius cordi visionis huius novitas insideret, coeperunt in manibus eius et pedibus apparere signa clavorum, quemadmodum paulo ante virum supra se viderat crucifixum” (Thomas Celano, Vita prima 2.3.94, in Legendae S. Francisci Assisiensis. Saeculis XIII et XIV conscriptae [ed. the fathers of Collegium S. Bonaventurae; Analecta franciscana 10; Quaracchi, Italy: Ad Claras Aquas, 1926–1941] 3–115, at 72). I have used here the translation of David Burr, Medieval Sourcebook, accessed April 19, 2012, http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/stfran-lives.html.

22 Roland of Cremona, Summae magistri Rolandi Cremonensis, lib. 3, cccxl (996–997).

23 “Adhuc aliter possumus dicere: numquid non potuit Deus Apostolo suo, postquam rediit ad se, imprimere per creationem, sive per inspirationem aliquas ymagines, sub quibus archana non vidisset, quibus mediantibus reminisceretur eorum archanorum que vidit? Dicimus quod hoc potuit. Et hec solutio videtur magis facilis pro minoribus qui non possunt intelligere occulta superius dicta” (ibid.).

24 “Nec mireris si non aperte possumus videre qualiter Paulus potuit, cum ad se rediit, de his que vidit ratiocinari, quoniam intellectus humanus, qui fuit tunc ad tempus glorificatus, maioris virtutis fuit quam possimus ad presens considerari” (ibid.).

25 “Quomodo rediens ad statum suum potuit recordari eorum que uidit in raptu. Solutio. In uisione naturali et prophetica spiritualis habitus necessarius est, et preter habitum necessaria est species qua mediante procedit cognitio. Sed in illo speculo eternitatis nulla species est necessaria. Ex parte tamen uidentis fuit habitus, scilicet ex parte pauli, et ita non fuit simile de hac uisione, et aliis” (ms Douai, Bibliothèque municipale, 434 II, f. 96ra).

26 “Illud enim lumen infusum in raptu post raptum coniectum fuit fidei, et factum est minus lumen, et ideo in actum suum exire non potuit. Dicendum ergo quod secundum illum habitum fuit recordatio uisorum in raptu et forsitam non plena omnium. nec obstat de sompniantibus qui eorum que uiderunt non recordantur quondam. Cum ergo illorum fit ex communi sensu qui plenus est formis, nec possunt recordari quoniam non fit impressio in sensu singulari. Paulum autem fuit necesse recordari propter utilitatem ecclessie” (ibid.).

27 “Ad xiiii, dicendum quod sicut fit in sompniis quod uidemus quasdam rerum distinctiones quas postea nescimus tamen habemus substantiam sompnii, ita apostolus non retinuerat apud se omnes circumstancias sue uisionis, sed substantiam sciebat. Unde uerba recolebat se uidisse ineffabilia, sed que essent ea nec posset nec sciret tunc narrare, quia non uidebat illa nec sentiebat tunc” (ibid. f. 131va).

28 “Sicut ille qui bibit bonum vinum, postea bene scit quod bonum fuit vinum quod bibit, non tamen tunc sentit bonitatem vini, sed prius senssit. Quod ergo queritur utrum secundum ymaginem aut per se viderit illa archana apostolus, dicendum quod per se non per ymaginem quia facie ad faciem vidit deum sicut dicit augustinus et propter immitationem factam in eo super omni ymagine, recolebat se vidisse et senssisse illa. Recordatio enim potest esse, et eorum que per ymaginem comprehenduntur, et eorum que sui presenciam sentuuntur, unde homo recordatur se bibisse vinum, vel intellexisse suum intellectum. Immitationis enim spiritus remanet, non res vel rei species aut ymago” (ibid.).

29 “Quarto, an fides mansit in illo raptu; Quinto, quomodo habuit memoriam eorum que uidit in illo raptu” (ms Prague, Univ. IV D 13, f. 58ra). The attribution of this question to Guerric rests on a detailed comparison of its text with his commentary on 2 Corinthians in ms BnF Lat. 15604 f. 60ra–61ra.

30 “Si obicitur quomodo induitur illa uisio ymaginibus, respondeo: in uerbo ubi illa uidit uidit que illa induere talibus, talibus et talibus ymaginibus, et uidit ibi ymagines quibus debuit induere uisa et uidendo induit. Unde cum ymagines uidit in primo non oportuit quod per conuersionem ad ipsas auerteretur adeo” (ibid., f. 58vb).

31 “Ad id quod alterius queritur de memoria illius uisionis, dicimus, quod licet uisio per speciem non manserit in se, tamen mansit in effectu. Possibile enim est ut sub speciebus inferioribus repraesententur superiora per assimilationem et excessum, sicut dicimus quod est dulce incomparabiliter melli, et fulgens incomparabiliter soli et huiusmodi” (Albertus Magnus, De raptu, Toulouse, Bibliothèque municipale 737, f. 32v [the question exists also in Vat. lat. 781, f. 14b–16a]).

32 “Ad quartum dicendum quod Paulus postquam cessavit videre Deum per essentiam, memor fuit illorum quae in illa visione cognoverat, per aliquas species in intellectu eius relictas . . . ex ipsa inspectione Verbi imprimebantur in intellectu eius quaedam rerum visarum similitudines quibus postmodum cognoscere poterat ea quae prius per essentiam Verbi viderat” (Aquinas, Thomas, Quaestiones disputatae de veritate 13.3 ad 4, in Sancti Thomae de Aquino, Opera omnia 22 [ed. Antoine Dondaine; 3 vols.; Leonine Edition; Rome: Ad Sanctae Sabinae / San Tommaso, 1970–1976] 2:426Google Scholar).

33 The introduction poses the question “what is love?” in a scholastic manner. It is followed by the definition “love is an inborn suffering,” which is then analyzed into its parts (Capellanus, Andreas, De amore 1.1, as translated in Andreas Capellanus on Love [ed. and trans. Walsh, P. G.; Duckworth Classical, Medieval, and Renaissance Editions; London: Duckworth, 1982] 3233)Google Scholar.

34 Le “Guide de l’étudiant” d’un maître anonyme de la faculté des arts de Paris au XIIIe siècle. Édition critique provisoire du ms. Barcelona, Arxiu de la Corona d’Aragó, Ripoll 109, ff. 134ra–158va (ed. Claude Lafleur with the collaboration of Joanne Carrier; Publications du Laboratoire de philosophie ancienne et médiévale de la Faculté de philosophie de l’Université Laval 1; Québec: Faculté de philosophie, Université Laval, 1992) 57 n. 86.

35 Alexander of Hales et al., Summa theologica seu sic ab origine dicta “Summa fratris Alexandri” lib. 1, tractatus introductorius (ed. the fathers of Collegium S. Bonaventurae; 4 vols.; Quaracchi, Italy: Ad Claras Aquas, 1924–1948) 1:8.

36 “Divina revelatio vel inspiratio rerum eventus immobili veritate denuncians” (Cassiodorus, Expositio psalmorum, prologue [CCSL 97:7]).

37 Philip the Chancellor, Summa de bono (ed. Nikolaus Wicki; 2 vols; Corpus philosophorum medii aevi; Opera philosophica mediae aetatis selecta 2; Bern: Francke, 1985) passim (see for instance 155 on definitions of the soul, 525 on virtus, 757 on prudentia, etc.).

38 de la Rochelle, Jean, Summa de anima (ed. Bougerol, Jacques Guy; Textes philosophiques du Moyen Âge 19; Paris: Vrin, 1995) 5262Google Scholar (“quid sit anima secundum diffinicionem”).

39 Alexander of Hales, Summa fratris Alexandri, 4.1:1072.

40 “Viso quid sit articulus secundum rem videndum est quid sit secundum diffinitionem” (Philip the Chancellor, Summa de bono, 2:618). For Hugh's distinction see his question on prophecy in Torrell, Jean-Pierre, Théorie de la prophétie et philosophie de la connaissance aux environs de 1230. La contribution d’Hugues de Saint-Cher (Ms. Douai 434, Question 481) (Spicilegium sacrum Lovaniense 40; Louvain: Spicilegium sacrum Lovaniense, 1977) 3Google Scholar.

41 On the multiple meanings of experientia and experimentum, their overlap, and their distinction throughout the Middle Ages, see the discussion in Stock, Brian, “Experience, Praxis, Work, and Planning in Bernard of Clairvaux: Observations on the Sermones in Cantica,” in The Cultural Context of Medieval Learning: Proceedings of the First International Colloquium on Philosophy, Science, and Theology in the Middle Ages—September 1973 (ed. Murdoch, John E. and Sylla, Edith Dudley; Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 26; Synthese Library 76; Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel, 1975) 219–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Different studies of this vocabulary since antiquity through Galileo and Hegel are gathered in Experientia. X Colloquio internazionale, Roma, 4–6 gennaio 2001 (ed. Marco Veneziani; Lessico intelletuale europeo 91; Florence: Olschki, 2002). For more on experientia and experimentum see also below, nn. 47 and 51.

42 For Aelred's references to his and his interlocutor's experiences in De anima, see Opera ascetica (ed. A. Hoste and C. H. Talbot; vol. 1 of Aelredi Rievallensis opera omnia; CCCM 1; Turnhout: Brepols, 1971) 685–754.

43 “Praeterea nunc de illo manifestationis genere, quod praeexcellenter theophania dicitur, nec enim est ista bonorum omnium sed perfectorum solum et etiam paucorum inter hos. Unde et infelix ego luteam domum inhabitans, de tam suavi tam excellentis manifestationis dulcedine quod ego non gustavi, aliis eructare non possum. Verumtamen de hoc manifestationis genere ab aliis instructus accepi ego phamas has animae omnino a terrenis suspensae et aeternorum desiderio adeo inflammatae” (Herbert of Bosham, Liber melorum, melus 3, notula 16 [PL 190:1369]).

44 Étienne de Bourbon, Tractatus de diversis materiis 298, in Anecdotes historiques, légendes et apologues, tirés du recueil inédit d’Étienne de Bourbon, dominicain du XIIIe siècle (ed. A. Lecoy de La Marche; Paris: Société de l’Histoire de France, 1877) 251–52. The source of this story, according to Stephen, is a sermon of Nicholas of Flavigny, a master of theology active in the 1220s.

45 See Hamesse, Jacqueline, “Experientia/experimentum dans les lexiques médiévaux et dans les textes philosophiques antérieurs au 14e-siècle,” in Experientia. Colloquio internazionale, Roma, 4–6 gennaio 2001 (ed. Veneziani, Marco; Lessico intellettuale europeo 91; Florence: Olschki, 2002) 7790Google Scholar. As she points out, a history of experimentum in medical discourse is yet to be written. In their introduction to the volume Expertus sum, Thomas Bénatouïl and Isabelle Draelants call attention to the fact that the medieval concept of experientia is used not only in the natural context but with regard to spiritual phenomena and creatures as well (“Introduction,” in Expertus sum. L’expérience par les sens dans la philosophie naturelle médiévale. Actes du colloque international de Pont-à-Mousson, 5–7 février 2009 [ed. Thomas Bénatouïl and Isabelle Draelants; Micrologus’ Library 40; Florence: SISMEL Edizioni del Galuzzo, 2011] 3–18, at 6). The three parts of their volume, however, focus on what I term here the first tradition, that is: natural philosophy, the occult, and medicine.

46 Peter King, “Two Conceptions of Experience,” Medieval Philosophy and Theology 11 (2003) 203–26.

47 Bénatouïl and Draelants, “Introduction,” 4.

48 Thorndike, Lynn, A History of Magic and Experimental Science (8 vols; New York: Columbia University Press, 1923–1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar vol. 2.

49 Two collections of articles have been devoted to the medieval concept of experience in recent years: Erfahrung und Beweis. Die Wissenschaften von der Natur im 13. und 14. Jahrhundert / Experience and Demonstration: The Sciences of Nature in the 13th and 14th Centuries (ed. Alexander Fidora and Matthias Lutz-Bachmann; Wissenkultur und gesellschaftlicher Wandel 14; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2006); and Expertus sum cited above (n. 45). On Robert Grosseteste see Crombie's book, which provoked a lively debate after its publication: Crombie, A. C., Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science, 1100–1700 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1953)Google Scholar. A summary of the main points can be found in idem, “Grosseteste's Position in the History of Science,” in Robert Grosseteste: Scholar and Bishop; Essays in Commemoration of the Seventh Centenary of His Death (ed. Daniel A. Callus; Oxford: Clarendon, 1955) 98–120. Peter King's article cited above (n. 46) refers to William of Ockham in this respect as well. On Roger Bacon and optics with regard to this issue see Fisher, N. W. and Unguru, Sabetai, “Experimental Science and Mathematics in Roger Bacon's Thought,” Traditio 27 (1971) 353–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Unguru, Sabetai, “Experiment in Medieval Optics,” in Physics, Cosmology, and Astronomy, 1300–1700: Tension and Accommodation (ed. idem; Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 126; Dordrecht, Holland: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991) 163–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hedwig, Klaus, “Roger Bacon's Scientia experimentalis,” in Philosophen des Mittelalters. Eine Einführung (ed. Kobush, Theo; Darmstadt: Primus, 2000) 140–51Google Scholar; and Hackett, Jeremiah, “Experientia, Experimentum and Perception of Objects in Space: Roger Bacon,” in Raum und Raumvorstellungen im Mittelalter (ed. Aertsen, Jan A. and Speer, Andreas; Miscellanea mediaevalia 25; Berlin: De Gruyter, 1998) 101–20Google Scholar.

50 See in particular Isabelle Draelants, “Expérience et autorités dans la philosophie naturelle d’Albert le Grand,” in Expertus sum. L’expérience par les sens dans la philosophie naturelle médiévale. Actes du colloque international de Pont-à-Mousson, 5–7 février 2009 (ed. Thomas Bénatouïl and Isabelle Draelants; Micrologus’ Library 40; Florence: SISMEL Edizioni del Galuzzo, 2011) 89–122, where the exact meaning and value of statements such as “expertus sum” are closely examined.

51 “Quidam est ut sciamus ratiocinari, et quidam est ut sciamus rerum naturas, sicut est alkimia, per ipsam enim experimentamur nos de naturis rerum” (Anonymous, De potentiis animae et obiectis, in Callus, D. A., “The Powers of the Soul: An Early Unpublished Text,” RTAM 19 [1952] 131–70, at 146–70; see 160)Google Scholar.

52 On Bernard's extensive use of the verb experiri see Stock, “Experience, Praxis, Work,” 223–25, and McDonnel, Kilian, “Spirit and Experience in Bernard of Clairvaux,” TS 58 (1997) 318Google Scholar.

53 Quoted in Stock, “Experience, Praxis, Work, and Planning,” 223.

54 Ibid. On Bernard's “book of experience,” Augustine's opposition between “word” and “experience,” and the change from the mysticism of sensory experience to the mysticism of non-experience, see McGinn, Bernard, “The Language of Inner Experience in Christian Mysticism,” Spiritus 1 (2001) 156–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Thorndike, History of Magic, 2:338–71; Sannino, Antonella, “Guillaume d’Auvergne e i libri experimentorum,” in Expertus sum. L’expérience par les sens dans la philosophie naturelle médiévale. Actes du colloque international de Pont-à-Mousson, 5–7 février 2009 (ed. Bénatouïl, Thomas and Draelants, Isabelle; Micrologus’ Library 40; Florence: SISMEL Edizioni del Galuzzo, 2011) 6788Google Scholar.

56 William of Auvergne, De anima, in Guilielmi Alverni, Opera omnia (2 vols.; Paris: Hotot, 1674) supp. to vol. 2:99. William does not comment on the problem of Paul's recollection at all, although he does treat Paul's rapture.

57 “Respondeo in hoc quia quemadmodum in omnibus doctrinis et disciplinis adiuvamur testimoniis et experientia sensuum, sic et hic: a sensu enim animarum quibus istae irradiationes fiunt ostenditur certitudo immortalitatis earum” (ibid. 194).

58 William of Auxerre, Summa aurea 3.12.1 (3:199).

59 Coolman, Boyd Taylor, Knowing God by Experience: The Spiritual Senses in the Theology of William of Auxerre (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

60 “Sicut est differentia magna inter cognitionem illius qui cognoscit dulcedinem mellis qui gustavit, et cognitionem illius qui numquam gustavit aliquam dulcedinem sed tantum audivit verba de dulcedine, ita differt intellectus Pauli quo intelligebat creatorem, ab illo intellectu quo intelligebat Aristoteles; similiter dicendum est de sapientia. Unde quem habuit Aristoteles de creatore fuit vanus et non solidus, et quem habuit de angelis; unde et nullum [multum] herravit in sermone de angelis in libro de pura bonitate. Unde idem Aristoteles dicit quod omnis vera scientia intellectiva fit ita quod precedat experientia; in Paulo fuit experientia illorum, non in Aristotele” (Roland of Cremona, Summae magistri Rolandi Cremonensis, lib. 3, cccxv [921]).

61 “Sine experientia enim non habetur ars vel scientia, et omnis intellecta cognitio ex preexistenti cognitione sensitiva fit. Sicut enim qui nunquam gustavit mel, nunquam habet veridicam scientiam de sapore eius, et qui nunquam vidit colores, nunquam habet scientia eorum, quia pereunte uno sensu perit et demonstratio, ita qui non est exercitatus in operibus fidei formate, theologie agnitionem non habet, et tamen scit loqui de theologia. Similiter et cecus natus scit loqui de coloribus, et tamen scientiam eorum non habet” (Cremascoli, Giuseppe, “La Summa di Rolando di Cremona. Il testo del prologo,” Studi Medievali 16 [1975] 825–76, at 867Google Scholar).

62 “Dicendum ergo quod non uidet immediate nisi perfectus. Sed perfectus potest esse aliquis uel ex parte intelligentie, ita quod non ex parte uite licet sit bonus. Et talis potest habere uisionem immediatam, tamen potest exercitari in scripturis, et talis uisio est per medium auditus, non gustus uel uisus. . . et hoc est uisio litteratorum. Aliquando est perfectus in uita set simplex in intelligencia. Et talis potest uenire ad immediatam uisionem que est per medium experientie. Et sic multi simplices sapiunt plus quam sapientes et habent certitudinem experientie. Et horum est non raptus proprie. . .. Aliquando est perfectus ad utrumque et talium est proprie raptus” (ms Padua, Pontificia Bibliotheca Antoniana 152, f. 158ra-rb).

63 Much has been written on the problem of immediate beatific vision in this period from this point of view, in particular with regard to the condemnations of 1241. See, for example, Dondaine, H. F., “L’objet et le ‘medium’ de la vision béatifique chez les théologiens du XIIIe siècle,” RTAM 19 (1952) 60130Google Scholar; Wicki, Nikolaus, Die Lehre von der himmlischen Seligkeit in der mittelalterlichen Scholastik von Petrus Lombardus bis Thomas von Aquin (Studia Friburgensia 2.9; Freiburg, Switzerland: Universitätverlag, 1954)Google Scholar; Contenson, P. M. de, “Avicennisme latin et vision de Dieu au début du XIIIe siècle,” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge 26 (1959) 2997Google Scholar; idem, “La théologie de la vision de Dieu au début du XIIIe siècle. Le De retributionibus sanctorum de Guillaume d’Auvergne et la condamnation de 1241,” RSPT 46 (1962) 409–44; and Trottmann, Christian, La vision béatifique. Des disputes scolastiques à sa définition par Benoît XII (Bibliothèque des écoles françaises d’Athènes et de Rome 289; Rome: École française de Rome, 1995) 175–92Google Scholar.

64 Celano, Thomas, Vita secunda 2.64.98, in Legendae S. Francisci Assisiensis. Saeculis XIII et XIV conscriptae (ed. the fathers of Collegium S. Bonaventurae; Analecta franciscana 10; Quaracchi, Italy: Ad Claras Aquas, 1926–1941) 129260, at 188Google Scholar.

65 On the perception of supernatural knowledge as given to a specific person for the benefit of society, see Even-Ezra, Ayelet, “The Conceptualization of Charisma in the Early Thirteenth Century,” Viator 44 (2013) 151–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Blind Men Speaking of Colors: Paul's Recollection and the Self-Image of Early Thirteenth-Century Theologians
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Blind Men Speaking of Colors: Paul's Recollection and the Self-Image of Early Thirteenth-Century Theologians
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Blind Men Speaking of Colors: Paul's Recollection and the Self-Image of Early Thirteenth-Century Theologians
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *