Quod omne discentium studium debet ad theologiam, idest diuinam tendere scientiam.
All Study Directed to God
Every discipline must serve divine knowledge as its true end, for God is the end of all things and only theology is wisdom in the fullest sense.
Furthermore, any eager student ought to direct every field of study toward the building up of himself or his neighbor, in keeping with the words of blessed Bernard mentioned above. Every art or discipline ought to serve divine knowledge — which exists for the building up of faith and morals — and be referred or directed to it as to its own end. Just as God is the end of all things, so too the knowledge that concerns divine matters is the end of all the arts. It alone is philosophy, and it alone is wisdom worthy of the name. Mercury Trismegistus the philosopher agrees with this as well, saying to Asclepius: 'Philosophy is the frequent contemplation of divinity and holy devotion.'1 . . 'For to worship God with a simple mind, to revere His deeds, and to give thanks to the will of God — which is the one supreme goodness — this is philosophy unsullied by any troublesome curiosity of the mind.'2
The Danger of Curious Speculation
Curiosity corrupts not only the sciences but theology itself, which alone deserves the name of philosophy as the love of wisdom.
This is that one. And he's right to say 'violated by no mind's curiosity,' because through curiosity not only are other sciences violated and corrupted, but theology itself as well. And then by that very thing it falls from the nature of philosophy, because philosophy is the love of wisdom. This is, according to some, what Aristotle calls metaphysics. Hence the same Aristotle, showing its excellence in the first book of the Metaphysics, speaks thus, saying: 'It is the first philosophy, and most knowable, because the most knowable things are principles and causes.' For on account of this, and from these things other things are known, and not the other way around. Now we are said to know each thing when we think we grasp its first cause. .
The Divine Ownership of True Knowledge
Divine science alone is truly liberal because it exists for its own sake, and its possession belongs properly to God rather than to human effort.
. This alone, then, of all the liberal sciences is truly liberal, because it alone exists for its own sake. . . And so its possession is rightly considered not a human thing but a divine one. . . For in many ways human nature is a servant — but God is also in a certain sense the principle of all causes, and this science belongs either to Him alone or to Him most of all.
The Philosophers on Divine Science
Aristotle and Avicenna both affirm that divine science is the highest wisdom, above all other disciplines, because it concerns the knowledge of God.
. . Therefore nothing is more important than this. He also says in book four: 'It is fitting to call this the wisdom of the sciences, inasmuch as it is the chief and most powerful, to which the other sciences, as handmaids, ought not to contradict.' For the others exist for the sake of this one.' This is Aristotle's view. On this point Avicenna also says in his Metaphysics: 'Divine science is about things separated from matter and limit and definition, so called from the more worthy part, which is its end: that is, the knowledge of God.' It is also called first philosophy, because it is higher than the other parts of philosophy.
The False Name of Ungodly Sciences
Other disciplines are rightly called sciences only when ordered toward divine wisdom; otherwise they bear a false name, and even grammar or geometry lack the knowledge of piety.
It is also called metaphysics, because it stands above physics—that is, above the science of nature. This is what Avicenna says. Rightly, then, the other disciplines are ordered toward that science; otherwise they are called sciences by a false name, because they don't even tend toward wisdom. On the contrary, those that are rightly and orderly directed toward that science can also be comprehended under the name of wisdom. Hence Boethius, in his book On the Articles of Faith: 'Knowledge,' he says, 'is the comprehensive grasp of causes, through which and on account of which something has its being; and if it is naturally suited to good uses, it is accustomed to be called wisdom.' Hence also Jerome, on the Epistle to Titus: 'The teaching of the grammarians,' he says, 'can also advance one toward life, provided it is taken up for better uses.' And so, if anyone has learned grammar or dialectic so as to have a correct method of speaking and to be able to judge what is true and what is false, we don't disapprove. Geometry and arithmetic indeed possess truth within their own domain of knowledge, but that is not the knowledge of piety, which would tend toward piety.
The Simplicity of Divine Speech
Wisdom can be reached without the liberal arts, for divine utterances, though simple in language, are full of hidden sweetness, unlike the deceptive eloquence of the philosophers.
The knowledge of piety, however, is to read the divine Scriptures and to understand the prophecies, and so on. Furthermore, as Seneca says to Lucilius, 'it is possible — . . — one can come to wisdom even without the liberal studies.' Finally, as Hugh says in the fourth book of the Didascalicon, 'The writings of the philosophers, like a shining wall whitewashed with the splendor of eloquence, are impressive on the outside — yet whenever they put on the appearance of truth, by mixing in false things as if overlaid with a certain color, they conceal the sorrow of error. On the other hand, divine utterances are most fittingly compared to a honeycomb: they appear dry because of the simplicity of their language, yet inside they are full of sweetness.'✦ These are Hugh's words.
The Structure of Sacred and Secular Knowledge
Divine Scripture surpasses secular knowledge by containing both words and things, and the arts of words and things can be systematically divided into the trivium and quadrivium.
In this matter too, as Richard says in his Book of Exceptions, 'divine Scripture is far more excellent than secular knowledge, because in it there are not only words that signify, but things as well.' Just as, then, in that sense which lies between words and things, a knowledge of words is necessary, so in that sense which concerns things and deeds or mystical actions, a knowledge of things is necessary. Knowledge of words consists in two things: in pronunciation, which belongs to grammar alone, and in signification, which belongs to dialectic alone. To pronunciation and signification together belongs rhetoric. Knowledge of things consists in form and nature: form lies in the arrangement of external things, nature in the quality of internal things. Every arrangement is either in number, to which arithmetic pertains, or in proportion, to which music pertains, or in position, to which geometry pertains, or in motion, to which astronomy pertains. To interior quality, however, physics pertains. .
The Arts in Service of Divine Wisdom
All the arts rightly ordered serve divine wisdom, with the trivium serving historical understanding and the quadrivium serving allegorical and tropological senses of Scripture.
. All the arts, then, serve divine wisdom, and lower knowledge, when rightly ordered, leads to what is higher. Under that sense, then, which concerns the relation between words and things, history is contained, and three sciences serve it, namely: grammar, dialectic, rhetoric. And under that sense which concerns the relation between things and mystical deeds, allegory is contained. And under that sense which concerns the relation between things and mystical things to be done, tropology is contained, and serving these two are arithmetic, music, geometry, astronomy, and physics. These things [are from] Richard. Furthermore, concerning the authority of sacred books in their excellence above all others, Augustine says in the eleventh disputation against Faustus: 'There are certain books which are written by us not with the authority of commanding, but for the exercise of proficiency.
The Authority of Sacred Scripture
Canonical Scripture holds a unique and supreme authority above all later writings, and the faithful must submit their judgment to it rather than presume to correct it.
For it is among these people that we belong, to whom the apostle says: "And if you know anything else, God has also revealed that to you."✦ This kind of writing is to be read not with the necessity of believing, but with the freedom of judging. Yet if this kind of writing were shut out and its place taken away from later generations, the most wholesome labor of tongue and style — set apart for treating and handling the most difficult questions — would be lost. It is distinguished from the books of later writers by the excellence of canonical authority: the authority of the Old Testament and the New, established in the time of the apostles, confirmed through the successions of ages and the spread of churches, as if set on a throne in a certain seat of sublime authority. Let every faithful and devout mind serve that authority. In Scripture, if you come across something that seems absurd, you are not permitted to say, 'The author of this book did not hold to the truth.' Rather, either the manuscript is faulty, or the translator made an error, or you simply don't understand. In the lesser works of later writers, however — . . Although the same truth may be found there, the authority is far from equal.
The Necessity of Canonical Authority
Without the firm authority of canonical Scripture, human weakness has no sure guide, and the faithful must accept even obscure passages as true by virtue of their canonical confirmation.
. . So unless by some clear reason or by that canonical authority — . . It's clear that whatever has been debated or recounted — if anyone has rejected it — is not held against them. But in the canonical authority of sacred Scripture, even if one finds that some prophet, apostle, or evangelist has included something obscure in his own writings, the very confirmation of the canon declares that one is not permitted to doubt it is true. Otherwise there will be no standard by which the weakness of human inexperience is governed, if the most wholesome authority of books is either despised and entirely abolished or confused without limit. So says Augustine.
Read the original Latin
Porro ad edificacionem sui uel proximi iuxta predicta uerba beati bernardi debet studiosus quilibet tendere, in quacumque studeat facultate. Nam omnis ars uel doctrina diuine sciencie, que ad edificacionem fidei et morum est, debet famulari et ad illam tanquam ad finem suum referri uel ordinari. Sicut enim deus est finis omnium rerum, sic et sciencia, que est de diuinis, est finis omnium arcium. Ipsa est sola philosphia, solaque ueri nominis sapiencia. Cui eciam consonat mercurius trimegistus philosophus dicens ad asclepium: ‘philosophia est in cognoscenda diuinitate frequens obtutus et sancta religio . . . Simplici enim mente diuinitatem colere eiusque facta uenerari, agere eciam dei uoluntati gracias, que est sola bonitas plenissima, hec est nullius animi inportuna curiositate violata philosophia.’
hec ille. Et recte dicit ‘nullius animi curiositate violata,’ quia per curiositatem violantur et adulterantur non solum alie sciencie sed eciam ipsa theologia. Et tunc eo ipso cadit a racione philosophie, quia philosophia est amor sapiencie. Hec est secundum quosdam, quam uocat aristotiles methaphisicam. unde idem aristotiles excellenciam eius ostendens in libro methaphisicorum primo sic loquitur, dicens: ‘Ipsa est prima philosophia, maximeque scibilis, quia maxime scibilia sunt principia et cause. propter hoc enim et ex hiis alia cognoscuntur, non econuerso. Tunc autem scire dicimur unumquodque, cum primam causam opinamur cognoscere . .
. Hec itaque sola scienciarum liberalis est, quia sola suiipsius gracia est . . . unde iuste non humana existimatur illius possessio sed diuina . . . Multipliciter enim humana natura ancilla est, deus autem et causarum omnium principium quoddam est, et hanc scienciam aut solus aut maxime habet .
. . Hac igitur pocior nulla est.’ Idem quoque dicit in libro iiio: ‘Hanc uocare scienciarum sapienciam congruit, secundum quod princeps et potentissima est, cui alias sciencias ut famulas non contradicere iustum est. huius namque gracia sunt alie.’ hec aristotiles. de hac eciam dicit auicenna in methaphisica sua: ‘Diuina sciencia est de rebus separatis a materia et termino et diffinicione sic dicta a parte digniore, que finis est eius: hoc est dei cognicione. Dicitur et prima philosophia, quia ceteris philosophie partibus alcior est.
Dicitur etiam methaphisica, quia supra phisicam, id est naturalem scienciam.’ hec auicenna. Recte igitur ad illam ordinantur alie, alioquin falso nomine appellantur sciencie, quia nec saltem ad sapienciam tendunt. Econtra uero recte ad illam ordinate possunt eciam conprehendi sub nomine sapiencie. unde boecius in libro de articulis fidei: ‘Sciencia,’ inquit, ‘est vis conprehensiva causarum, per quas et propter quas aliquid esse habet, que si bonis usibus naturaliter accommoda est, sapiencia dici solet.’ Hinc et ieronimus super epistolam ad tytum: ‘Gramaticorum,’ inquit, ‘eciam potest ad uitam proficere doctrina, dum in meliores usus fuerit assumpta. Itaque, siquis gramaticam uel dyaleticam nouerit, ut habeat recte loquendi racionem et uera falsaque diiudicare possit, non inprobamus. Geometria uero et arismethica in sua quidem habent sciencia ueritatem, sed illa non est sciencia pietatis, que tendat ad pietatem.
Sciencia uero pietatis est diuinas legere scripturas et intelligere prophecias etcetera.’ Ceterum, ut dicit seneca ad lucilium, ‘potest . . . eciam sine liberalibus studiis ad sapienciam ueniri.’ Denique, sicut dicit hugo in libro didascalicon iiiio, ‘philosophorum scripture quasi lucens paries dealbatus eloquii nitore foris pollent, que si quando ueritatis speciem pretendunt, falsa quoque miscendo quasi quodam colore superducto luctum erroris operiunt. Econtra uero diuina eloquia fauo aptissime conparantur, que et arida propter simplicitatem sermonis apparent et intus dulcedine plena sunt.’ hec hugo.
In hoc eciam, ut dicit richardus in libro excepcionum, ‘valde excellencior est diuina scriptura sciencia seculari, quod in ea non solum uoces sed et res significatiue sunt. Sicut igitur in eo sensu, qui est inter uoces et res, necessaria est cognicio uocum, sic in eo sensu, qui inter res et facta uel facienda mystica uersatur, necessaria est cognicio rerum. Cognicio uocum in duobus consistit: in pronunciacione, ad quam solam pertinet gramatica, et significacione, ad quam solam dyaletica. ad pronunciacionem simul et significacionem pertinet rethorica. Cognitio rerum consistit in forma et natura; forma est in exteriorum disposicione, natura in interiorum qualitate. Omnis autem disposicio siue in numero est, ad quam pertinet arismetica, uel in proporcione, ad quam musica, uel in situ, ad quem geometria, uel in motu, ad quem astronomia. Ad interiorem uero qualitatem spectat phisica . .
. Omnes igitur artes subseruiunt diuine sapiencie et inferior sciencia recte ordinata ad superiorem conducit. Sub eo igitur sensu, qui inter uoces et res uersatur, continetur hystoria et ei subseruiunt tres sciencie, scil. gramatica, dyaletica, rethorica. Et sub eo sensu, qui inter res et facta mystica uersatur, continetur allegoria. Et sub illo sensu, qui est inter res et facienda mystica, continetur tropologia, et hiis duabus subseruiunt arismetica, musica, geometria, astronomia et phisica.’ hec richardus. Porro de sacrorum auctoritate librorum excellenti respectu omnium aliorum dicit augustinus in xia disputacione contra faustum: ‘Sunt quidam libri, qui non precipiendi auctoritate sed proficiencie excercitacione conscribuntur a nobis.
Inter hos enim sumus, quibus dicit apostolus: Et si quid aliud sapitis, id quoque deus uobis reuelauit. Quod genus litterarum non cum credendi necessitate, sed cum iudicandi libertate legendum est. Cui tamen he intercluderetur locus et adimeretur posteris ad questiones difficillimas tractandas atque uersandas lingue et stili saluberrimus labor distincta est a posteriorum libris excellencia canonice auctoritatis ueteris testamenti et noui, que apostolorum firmata temporibus per successiones temporum et propagaciones ecclesiarum tanquam in sede quadam sublimiter constituta est, cui seruiat omnis fidelis et pius intellectus. Ibi si quid uelut absurdum nouerit, dicere non licet: “auctor huius libri ueritatem non tenuit,” sed aut codex mendosus est, aut interpres errauit, aut tu non intelligis. In opusculis autem posteriorum . . . licet eadem inueniatur veritas, longe tamen est impar auctoritas .
. . unde nisi uel certa racione uel ex illa canonica auctoritate . . . demonstretur, quod disputatum est uel narratum, si quis noluerit, non reprehenditur. In ista uero canonica eminencia sacrarum litterarum, eciam si unus propheta uel apostolus uel euuangelista obscurum aliquid in litteris suis posuisse inuenitur, ipsa canonis confirmacione declaratur, non licet dubitare quin uerum sit. Alioquin nulla erit pagina, qua humane impericie regatur infirmitas, si librorum saluberrima auctoritas aut contempta penitus aboletur aut interminata confunditur.’
hec augustinus.
Scripture echoes
Notes
De eruditione filiorum nobilium (On the Education of Noble Children) companion
Formation starts with the parents' own practice
Model a daily devotional habit your children can see — Chosen Portion makes it a free 10-minute routine.
Vincent taught that children are formed by the daily practices of their household; Chosen Portion gives parents the daily devotional practice that anchors that household rhythm.
- A short daily devotional you can read before the kids wake up
- Family-friendly portions from the same historic tradition Vincent drew on
- Build a visible 30-day habit your children can imitate