Saint Albert le Grand
Frère prêcheur, évêque de Ratisbonne, docteur de
l'Église (+ 1280)
Jeune étudiant issu d'une famille noble de Bavière, les premières années de sa vie nous sont mal connues. Il naquit à Lauingen ville située sur les bords du Danube.
Il entra dans l'Ordre des Prêcheurs ou dominicains. Très doué pour les études, il ne passe pas inaperçu et très vite il est chargé d'enseignements tout en poursuivant ses recherches personnelles. Sa grande préoccupation est de rendre accessible au monde latin la pensée du philosophe grec Aristote, redécouvert à travers la tradition arabe de Cordoue. Il veut l'harmoniser avec la pensée chrétienne.
Professeur à Paris, il se prend d'amitié avec un de ses étudiants tout aussi doué que lui : saint Thomas d'Aquin, amitié fidèle et sans faille. Lorsqu'Albert se rend à Cologne poursuivre son enseignement, son disciple saint Thomas le suit. Quand son disciple sera accusé d'hérésie, le vieux maître Albert fera le voyage de Cologne pour prendre sa défense.
Il aurait aimé consacrer toute sa vie à la pensée et à l'enseignement. Mais il est religieux, alors par obéissance, il devient provincial dominicain et bientôt évêque de Ratisbonne (Regensburg).
Deux années suffisent pour qu'on se rende compte que le dévouement est insuffisant, alors on le rend à ses chères études. Son savoir est quasi encyclopédique au point qu'on veut en faire un maître de l'ésotérisme. Mais sa foi est encore plus grande que sa théologie et sa philosophie : "C'est pourquoi on le dit Notre Père, il n'est pas de prière douce et familière qui commence d'une manière plus familière et plus douce", écrit-il dans son commentaire de saint Matthieu.
Illustration: Albert le Grand, fresque à Trévise en Italie, par Thomas de Modène, en 1352.
L'Eglise l'a proclamé docteur de l'Eglise et patron des scientifiques.
- un internaute nous signale la sortie du livre: La Bible mariale, Albert le Grand, éd. Beya: Né dans le sud de l’Allemagne vers 1200 Albert le Grand, appelé « le Docteur universel », est une des figures les plus originales, les plus savantes et les plus prolixes d’ Europe. Saint Albert s’intéresse au grec, à l’arabe, à l’alchimie, à la magie, à la zoologie, à l’astrologie, etc. Mais il se nourrit aussi d’ Empédocle, de Platon, et des auteurs latins. Il fut évêque pendant deux ans à Ratisbonne (Regensburg) et fut régulièrement chargé par le pape ou les autorités de Cologne de régler de nombreux différends. Tous ses voyages (à Rome, Lyon, Strasbourg, Paris, etc.), se faisaient à pied conformément à la règle de son Ordre. Il meurt en 1280 (âgé probablement de 87 ans) à Cologne où se trouve son tombeau, en l’église Saint-André.
Mémoire de saint Albert, surnommé le Grand, évêque et docteur de l'Église. Né
en Bavière, entré dans l'Ordre des Prêcheurs, il enseigna à Paris la
philosophie et la théologie oralement et par ses écrits, ayant parmi ses
étudiants saint Thomas d'Aquin, et sut magistralement unir la sagesse des
saints à la science naturelle et humaine. Ayant dû accepter à contre-cœur
l'évêché de Ratisbonne, mal accueilli par le peuple pour sa manière de vivre
pauvre et sans faste, au bout d'un an il résigna sa charge, préférant à
n'importe quel honneur la pauvreté de son Ordre et il mourut pieusement à
Cologne, entouré de ses frères.
Martyrologe romain
« Seigneur Jésus-Christ, écoutez la voix de notre
douleur. Dans le désert des pénitents, nous crions vers vous pour n'être pas
séduits par de vaines paroles tentatrices sur la noblesse de la famille, le
prestige de l'Ordre, le brillant de la science. » (Prière de saint Albert)
SOURCE : https://nominis.cef.fr/contenus/saint/3/Saint-Albert-le-Grand.html
Vincenzo Onofri, Sant'Alberto Magno / Büste
von Albertus Magnus, 1493), esposto nel Museo civico medievale a Bologna.
Saint Albert Le Grand
Docteur de l'Église
(1193-1280)
Saint Albert le Grand naquit aux environs d'Augsbourg,
de parents riches des biens de la fortune. Dès son enfance, il montra dans ses
études une rare perspicacité; le goût des sciences lui fit abandonner les
traditions chevaleresques de sa famille et le conduisit à l'université de
Padoue, alors très célèbre, où il sut tempérer son ardeur pour l'étude par une
vive piété. À l'âge de trente ans, encore incertain de son avenir, mais inspiré
par la grâce, il alla se jeter aux pieds de la très Sainte Vierge, et crut
entendre la céleste Mère lui dire: "Quitte le monde et entre dans l'Ordre
de Saint-Dominique." Dès lors, Albert n'hésita plus, et malgré les
résistances de sa famille, il entra au noviciat des Dominicains. Tels furent
bientôt ses progrès dans la science et la sainteté, qu'il dépassa ses maîtres
eux-mêmes.
Muni du titre de docteur en théologie, il fut envoyé à
Cologne, où sa réputation lui attira pendant longtemps de nombreux et illustres
disciples. Mais un seul suffirait à sa gloire, c'est saint Thomas d'Aquin. Ce
jeune religieux, déjà tout plongé dans les plus hautes études théologiques,
était silencieux parmi les autres au point d'être appelé par ses condisciples:
"le Boeuf muet de Sicile". Mais Albert les fit taire en disant:
"Les mugissements de ce boeuf retentiront dans le monde entier." De
Cologne, Albert fut appelé à l'Université de Paris avec son cher disciple.
C'est là que son génie parut dans tout son éclat et qu'il composa un grand
nombre de ses ouvrages.
Plus tard l'obéissance le ramène en Allemagne comme
provincial de son Ordre ; il dit adieu, sans murmurer, à sa cellule, à ses
livres, à ses nombreux disciples, et voyage sans argent, toujours à pied, à
travers un immense territoire pour visiter les nombreux monastères soumis à sa
juridiction. Il était âgé de soixante-sept ans quand il dut se soumettre à
l'ordre formel du Pape et accepter, en des circonstances difficiles, le siège
épiscopal de Ratisbonne; là, son zèle infatigable ne fut récompensé que par de
dures épreuves où se perfectionna sa vertu. Rendu à la paix dans un couvent de
son Ordre, il lui fallut bientôt, à l'âge de soixante-dix ans, reprendre ses
courses apostoliques. Enfin il put rentrer définitivement dans la retraite pour
se préparer à la mort.
On s'étonne que, parmi tant de travaux, de voyages et
d'oeuvres de zèle, Albert ait pu trouver le temps d'écrire sur les sciences, la
philosophie et la théologie des ouvrages qui ne forment pas moins de vingt et
un volumes in-folio, et on peut se demander ce qui a le plus excellé en lui du
savant, du saint ou de l'apôtre.
Il mourut âgé de quatre-vingt-sept ans, le 15 novembre
1280 ; son corps fut enterré à Cologne dans l'église des Dominicains. Il lui a
fallu attendre jusqu'au 16 décembre 1931 les honneurs de la canonisation et
l'extension de son culte à l'Église universelle. En proclamant sa sainteté, le
pape Pie XI y ajouta le titre si glorieux et si bien mérité de docteur de
l'Église. Sa fête a été fixée au 15 novembre, jour de sa mort. De temps
immémorial, il était connu sous le nom d'Albert le Grand.
Abbé L. Jaud, Vie des Saints pour tous les jours
de l'année, Tours, Mame, 1950
SOURCE : http://magnificat.ca/cal/fr/saints/saint_albert_le_grand.html
Vicente Salvador Gómez (1637–1678), Aparición de la Virgen a San Alberto Magno, 132 x 100, Museu de Belles Arts de València
BENOÎT XVI
AUDIENCE GÉNÉRALE
Place Saint-Pierre
Mercredi 24 mars 2010
Saint Albert le Grand
Chers frères et sœurs,
L'un des plus grands maîtres de la théologie médiévale
est saint Albert le Grand. Le titre de « grand » (magnus), avec lequel il est
passé à l'histoire, indique l'étendue et la profondeur de sa doctrine, qu'il
associa à la sainteté de sa vie. Mais ses contemporains déjà n'hésitaient pas à
lui attribuer des titres d'excellence; l'un de ses disciples, Ulrich de
Strasbourg, le définit comme « merveille et miracle de notre temps ».
Il naquit en Allemagne au début du XIIIe siècle, et
tout jeune encore, il se rendit en Italie, à Padoue, siège de l'une des plus
célèbres universités du moyen-âge. Il se consacra à l'étude de ce que l'on appelle
les « arts libéraux »: grammaire, rhétorique, dialectique, arithmétique,
géométrie, astronomie et musique, c'est-à-dire de la culture générale,
manifestant cet intérêt typique pour les sciences naturelles, qui devait
bientôt devenir le domaine de prédilection de sa spécialisation. Au cours de
son séjour à Padoue, il fréquenta l'église des dominicains, auxquels il s'unit
par la suite avec la profession des vœux religieux. Les sources hagiographiques
font comprendre qu'Albert a pris cette décision progressivement. Le rapport
intense avec Dieu, l'exemple de sainteté des frères dominicains, l'écoute des
sermons du bienheureux Jourdain de Saxe, successeur de saint Dominique à la
tête de l'Ordre des prêcheurs, furent les facteurs décisifs qui l'aidèrent à surmonter
tout doute, vainquant également les résistances familiales. Souvent, dans les
années de notre jeunesse, Dieu nous parle et nous indique le projet de notre
vie. Comme pour Albert, pour nous tous aussi, la prière personnelle nourrie par
la Parole du Seigneur, l'assiduité aux sacrements et la direction spirituelle
donnée par des hommes éclairés sont les moyens pour découvrir et suivre la voix
de Dieu. Il reçut l'habit religieux des mains du bienheureux Jourdain de Saxe.
Après son ordination sacerdotale, ses supérieurs le
destinèrent à l'enseignement dans divers centres d'études théologiques liés aux
couvents des Pères dominicains. Ses brillantes qualités intellectuelles lui
permirent de perfectionner l'étude de la théologie à l'Université la plus célèbre
de l'époque, celle de Paris. Albert entreprit alors l'activité extraordinaire
d'écrivain, qu'il devait poursuivre toute sa vie.
Des tâches prestigieuses lui furent confiées. En 1248,
il fut chargé d'ouvrir une université de théologie à Cologne, l'un des
chefs-lieux les plus importants d'Allemagne, où il vécut à plusieurs reprises,
et qui devint sa ville d'adoption. De Paris, il emmena avec lui à Cologne un
élève exceptionnel, Thomas d'Aquin. Le seul mérite d'avoir été le maître de
saint Thomas d'Aquin suffirait pour que l'on nourrisse une profonde admiration
pour saint Albert. Entre ces deux grands théologiens s'instaura un rapport
d'estime et d'amitié réciproque, des attitudes humaines qui contribuent
beaucoup au développement de la science. En 1254, Albert fut élu provincial de
la « Provincia Teutoniae » – teutonique – des Pères dominicains, qui comprenait
des communautés présentes dans un vaste territoire du centre et du nord de
l'Europe. Il se distingua par le zèle avec lequel il exerça ce ministère, en
visitant les communautés et en rappelant constamment les confrères à la
fidélité, aux enseignements et aux exemples de saint Dominique.
Ses qualités n'échappèrent pas au pape de l'époque,
Alexandre IV, qui voulut Albert pendant un certain temps à ses côtés à Anagni –
où les papes se rendaient fréquemment – à Rome même et à Viterbe, pour
bénéficier de ses conseils théologiques. Ce même souverain pontife le nomma
évêque de Ratisbonne, un grand et célèbre diocèse, qui traversait toutefois une
période difficile. De 1260 à 1262, Albert accomplit ce ministère avec un
dévouement inlassable, réussissant à apporter la paix et la concorde dans la
ville, à réorganiser les paroisses et les couvents, et à donner une nouvelle
impulsion aux activités caritatives.
Dans les années 1263-1264, Albert prêcha en Allemagne
et en Bohême, envoyé par le pape Urbain IV, pour retourner ensuite à Cologne et
reprendre sa mission d'enseignant, de chercheur et d'écrivain. Etant un homme
de prière, de science et de charité, il jouissait d'une grande autorité dans
ses interventions, à l'occasion de divers événements concernant l'Eglise et la
société de l'époque: ce fut surtout un homme de réconciliation et de paix à
Cologne, où l'archevêque était entré en opposition farouche avec les
institutions de la ville; il se prodigua au cours du déroulement du II Concile
de Lyon, en 1274, convoqué par le pape Grégoire X pour favoriser l'union avec
les Grecs, après la séparation du grand schisme d'Orient de 1054; il éclaircit
la pensée de Thomas d'Aquin, qui avait rencontré des objections et même fait
l'objet de condamnations totalement injustifiées.
Il mourut dans la cellule de son couvent de la
Sainte-Croix à Cologne en 1280, et il fut très vite vénéré par ses confrères.
L'Eglise le proposa au culte des fidèles avec sa béatification, en 1622, et
avec sa canonisation, en 1931, lorsque le pape Pie XI le proclama Docteur de
l'Eglise. Il s'agissait d'une reconnaissance sans aucun doute appropriée à ce
grand homme de Dieu et éminent savant non seulement dans le domaine des vérités
de la foi, mais dans de très nombreux autres domaines du savoir; en effet, en
regardant le titre de ses très nombreuses œuvres, on se rend compte que sa
culture a quelque chose de prodigieux, et que ses intérêts encyclopédiques le
conduisirent à s'occuper non seulement de philosophie et de théologie, comme
d'autres contemporains, mais également de toute autre discipline alors connue,
de la physique à la chimie, de l'astronomie à la minéralogie, de la botanique à
la zoologie. C'est pour cette raison que le pape Pie XII le nomma patron de
ceux qui aiment les sciences naturelles et qu'il est également appelé « Doctor
universalis », précisément en raison de l'ampleur de ses intérêts et de son
savoir.
Les méthodes scientifiques utilisées par saint Albert
le Grand ne sont assurément pas celles qui devaient s'affirmer au cours des
siècles suivants. Sa méthode consistait simplement dans l'observation, dans la
description et dans la classification des phénomènes étudiés, mais ainsi, il a
ouvert la porte pour les travaux à venir.
Il a encore beaucoup à nous enseigner. Saint Albert
montre surtout qu'entre la foi et la science il n'y a pas d'opposition, malgré
certains épisodes d'incompréhension que l'on a enregistrés au cours de l'histoire.
Un homme de foi et de prière comme saint Albert le Grand, peut cultiver
sereinement l'étude des sciences naturelles et progresser dans la connaissance
du micro et du macrocosme, découvrant les lois propres de la matière, car tout
cela concourt à abreuver sa soif et à nourrir son amour de Dieu. La Bible nous
parle de la création comme du premier langage à travers lequel Dieu – qui est
intelligence suprême – nous révèle quelque chose de lui. Le Livre de la
Sagesse, par exemple, affirme que les phénomènes de la nature, dotés de
grandeur et de beauté, sont comme les œuvres d'un artiste, à travers
lesquelles, par analogie, nous pouvons connaître l'Auteur de la création (cf.
Sg 13, 5). Avec une comparaison classique au Moyen-âge et à la Renaissance, on
peut comparer le monde naturel à un livre écrit par Dieu, que nous lisons selon
les diverses approches de la science (cf. Discours aux participants à
l'Assemblée plénière de l'Académie pontificale des sciences, 31 octobre 2008).
En effet, combien de scientifiques, dans le sillage de saint Albert le Grand,
ont mené leurs recherches inspirés par l'émerveillement et la gratitude face au
monde qui, à leurs yeux de chercheurs et de croyants, apparaissait et apparaît
comme l'œuvre bonne d'un Créateur sage et aimant! L'étude scientifique se
transforme alors en un hymne de louange. C'est ce qu'avait bien compris un
grand astrophysicien de notre époque, Enrico Medi, et qui écrivait: « Oh, vous
mystérieuses galaxies..., je vous vois, je vous calcule, je vous entends, je vous
étudie, je vous découvre, je vous pénètre et je vous recueille. De vous, je
prends la lumière et j'en fais de la science, je prends le mouvement et j'en
fais de la sagesse, je prends le miroitement des couleurs et j'en fais de la
poésie; je vous prends vous, étoiles, entre mes mains, et tremblant dans
l'unité de mon être, je vous élève au-dessus de vous-mêmes, et en prière je
vous présente au Créateur, que seulement à travers moi, vous étoiles, vous
pouvez adorer » (Le opere. Inno alla creazione).
Saint Albert le Grand nous rappelle qu'entre science
et foi une amitié existe et que les hommes de science peuvent parcourir à
travers leur vocation à l'étude de la nature, un authentique et fascinant
parcours de sainteté.
Son extraordinaire ouverture d'esprit se révèle
également dans une opération culturelle qu'il entreprit avec succès: l'accueil
et la mise en valeur de la pensée d'Aristote. A l'époque de saint Albert, en
effet, la connaissance de beaucoup d'œuvres de ce grand philosophe grec ayant
vécu au quatrième siècle avant Jésus Christ, en particulier dans le domaine de
l'éthique et de la métaphysique, était en effet en train de se répandre.
Celles-ci démontraient la force de la raison, elles expliquaient avec lucidité
et clarté le sens et la structure de la réalité, son intelligibilité, la valeur
et la fin des actions humaines. Saint Albert le Grand a ouvert la porte à la
réception complète de la philosophie d'Aristote dans la philosophie et la
théologie médiévales, une réception élaborée ensuite de manière définitive par
saint Thomas. Cette réception d'une philosophie, disons, païenne
pré-chrétienne, fut une authentique révolution culturelle pour cette époque.
Pourtant, beaucoup de penseurs chrétiens craignaient la philosophie d'Aristote,
la philosophie non chrétienne, surtout parce que celle-ci, présentée par ses
commentateurs arabes, avait été interprétée de manière à apparaître, au moins
sur certains points, comme tout à fait inconciliable avec la foi chrétienne. Il
se posait donc un dilemme: foi et raison sont-elles ou non en conflit l'une
avec l'autre?
C'est là que réside l'un des grands mérites de saint
Albert: avec une rigueur scientifique il étudia les œuvres d'Aristote,
convaincu que tout ce qui est vraiment rationnel est compatible avec la foi
révélée dans les Saintes Ecritures. En d'autres termes, saint Albert le Grand a
ainsi contribué à la formation d'une philosophie autonome, distincte de la
théologie et unie à elle uniquement par l'unité de la vérité. Ainsi est apparue
au XIIIe siècle une distinction claire entre ces deux savoirs, philosophie et
théologie qui, en dialogue entre eux, coopèrent de manière harmonieuse à la
découverte de la vocation authentique de l'homme, assoiffé de vérité et de
béatitude: et c'est surtout la théologie, définie par saint Albert comme une «
science affective », qui indique à l'homme son appel à la joie éternelle, une
joie qui jaillit de la pleine adhésion à la vérité.
Saint Albert le Grand fut capable de communiquer ces
concepts de manière simple et compréhensible. Authentique fils de saint
Dominique, il prêchait volontiers au peuple de Dieu, qui était conquis par sa
parole et par l'exemple de sa vie.
Chers frères et sœurs, prions le Seigneur pour que ne
viennent jamais à manquer dans la sainte Eglise de doctes théologiens, pieux et
savants comme saint Albert le Grand et pour que ce dernier aide chacun de nous
à faire sienne la « formule de la sainteté » qu'il adopta dans sa vie: «
Vouloir tout ce que je veux pour la gloire de Dieu, comme Dieu veut pour sa gloire
tout ce qu'Il veut », soit se conformer toujours à la volonté de Dieu pour
vouloir et faire tout, seulement et toujours pour Sa gloire.
* * *
C'est avec joie que j'accueille ce matin les pèlerins
francophones, en particulier les jeunes venus de France et le groupe du diocèse
de Vannes. A tous je souhaite de vivre une fervente Semaine Sainte afin de
découvrir toujours plus la profondeur de l'amour de Dieu pour les hommes. Que
Dieu vous bénisse!
© Copyright 2010 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana
_-_Studiolo_di_Federico_da_Montefeltro.jpg)
Justus van Gent (fl. 1460–1480), Pedro Berruguete (1450–1504), Alberto
Magn (Alberto Magno) - Studiolo di Federico da Montefeltro, circa 1472-1476,
116 x 53, Galleria
Nazionale delle Marche
15 novembre
Saint Albert le Grand
Albert le Grand naquit (entre 1193 et 1206) à
Lauingen, dans la partie Souabe du diocèse d'Augsbourg, d’un officier de la
cour qui avait une haute charge dans l'administration de la cité. Etudiant à
Bologne où l’avait emmené un de ses oncles, il fut séduit par le bienheureux
Jourdain de Saxe 1 (second maître général des Prêcheurs)
et entra chez des Dominicains, bien que son oncle et ses condisciples
essayassent de l’en dissuader, avant que son père organisât une tentative d'enlèvement
qui échoua.
Sans doute fit-il ses études chez les Prêcheurs de
Cologne où, en 1228, il était lecteur, ou professeur, s'efforçant d'adapter à
la pensée chrétienne les théories d'Aristote qui avait pour grands interprètes
les Arabes Avicenne et Averroës ; il cherchait aussi à utiliser la
spéculation juive représentée par Moïse Maïmonide. Il enseigna à Hildesheim, à
Fribourg-en Brisgau, puis à Ratisbonne, et enfin à Strasbourg.
En 1244, nommé à Paris pour gagner son doctorat de
théologie et régenter une des deux écoles du couvent Saint-Jacques,
incorporées à l'Université, il expliquait les Sentences de Pierre
Lombard et commençait la vaste encyclopédie scientifique qui lui valut la
célébrité. En 1248, il fut chargé de gouverner le studium generale de
Cologne. En 1252, il intervint pour la cité contre l'oppression féodale de
l'archevêque Conrad de Hochstaden2. A plusieurs reprises, jusqu'en 1272, on lui
demanda d'arbitrer des conflits entre la ville et ses évêques. Le
chapitre provincial d'Allemagne l’élut provincial de Teutonie, de 1254 à 1257,
veillant contre une ascèse indiscrète, nuisible aux bonnes études, et contre
des glissements vers une vie trop commode.
En 1256, il entra en lice dans le combat entre les
séculiers de l'Université et les ordres mendiants ; les premiers
trouvaient que les nouveaux venus leur faisaient dans les chaires doctorales
une concurrence déloyale, et qu'on ne pouvait concilier étude et pauvreté. Le
saint dominicain Albert et le saint franciscain Bonaventure défendirent leur
ordre devant le pape Alexandre IV qui condamna le champion des séculiers,
Guillaume de Saint-Amour3 (5 octobre 1256). Pour la Curie
romaine, Albert commenta saint Jean et discuta l'averroïsme, persuadé qu'il
fallait combattre par la philosophie les erreurs philosophiques du penseur
arabe.
Rentré à Cologne en 1257, il fut relevé de sa charge
de provincial par le chapitre général de Florence et reprit son enseignement.
Au printemps 1259, au chapitre général de Valenciennes, avec Thomas d'Aquin et
Pierre de Tarentaise (futur Innocent V), il élabora un important
règlement pour les études dans l'Ordre. Appelé à Rome, malgré le maître général
Humbert de Romans, Albert dut accepter l'évêché de Ratisbonne (5 janvier 1260)
où il fallut s'ingénier à payer des dettes et réorganiser les finances
épiscopales, tout en combattant les mauvaises mœurs. Le peuple, habitué à un
prélat fastueux, accueillit mal Albert qu’il surnomma Godasse. Albert, dès
qu'il eut quelqu'un capable de le remplacer, s'empressa d'aller résigner son
évêché. En mai 1262, son successeur était nommé, et Urbain IV lui demanda de
prêcher la croisade dans les pays de langue allemande (1263), ce qu'il fit sans
grand effet, malgré les vingt-cinq bulles pontificales venues à sa rescousse.
Albert mettait au point une autre croisade plus efficace, où il faisait marcher
Aristote pour prendre à revers les théoriciens juifs et arabes. Urbain IV
interdit l'enseignement d'Aristote, mais fit réunir les meilleures têtes
dominicaines pour se concerter sur son utilisation. Sa mort, en octobre 1264,
amenait la fin de la mission d'Albert pour la croisade. En février 1264,
celui-ci avait joué un rôle pacificateur à Würtzbourg.
Le maître général Jean de Verceil, songea à envoyer
Albert à Paris, en pleine crise averroïste, mais il fut nommé à Cologne où
il réussit à faire lever l'interdit jeté par le légat de Clément IV
(1270-1274). Il voyageait pour rendre des services liturgiques, consacrant des
églises ou des autels et ordonnant des clercs. Au concile de Lyon, il prononça
un discours en faveur de Rodolphe I° de Habsbourg. En mars 1277, l'évêque
de Paris ayant condamné 119 thèses péripatéticiennes, dont plusieurs étaient
également thomistes, Albert qui venait de compiler son dernier ouvrage,
une Summa theologica, se rendit, semble-t-il, à Paris, pour défendre les
vues de son cher Frère Thomas d’Aquin.
Il mourut le 15 novembre 1280, assis, entouré de ses
frères. Il avait légué ses livres et ses ornements aux Dominicains de Cologne.
Il fut enterré dans leur église, dont il pressait l'achèvement.
Innocent VIII permit aux prêcheurs de Cologne et de Ratisbonne un office
en l'honneur du bienheureux Albert, confesseur pontife (1484) ; après
qu'il fut béatifié par Grégoire XV (15 septembre 1622), obtenaient cette faveur
la ville de Lauingen en 1631, puis tous les couvents dominicains de l'Empire
(1635), ceux des pays vénitiens (1664), ceux de l'Ordre entier (1670),
l'archidiocèse de Cologne (1856) où la fête fut promue au rite double en
1870.
Enfin Pie XI, par la lettre décrétale In
thesauris sapientiæ (16 décembre 1931) le proclama saint Albert le
Grand docteur de l'Eglise et étendit sa messe et son office à l’Eglise
universelle : Albert qui, durant sa vie, collabora avec autant d’énergie
que de succès à ramener la paix entre les Etats et les princes, entre les
peuples et les individus, nous apparaît comme le type véritable de l’arbitre de
la paix. Il possédait en effet à un haut degré le don de la conciliation, grâce
à la renommée que lui valait sa solidité doctrinale et sa réputation de
sainteté. Le tout s’alliait enfin, chez lui, à une grande dignité personnelle
que relevait encore, en l’ennoblissant, le caractère sacré du sacerdoce.
La science elle-même est la meilleure des voies qui
conduisent à une paix stable, quand elle se soumet en même temps à la droite
raison et à la foi surnaturelle. Chez Albert le Grand, les clartés des sciences
tant humaines que divines, se fondent dans une admirable union et le nimbent
d’une glorieuse auréole. Par son exemple magnifique, il nous avertit qu’entre
le science et la foi, entre la vérité et le bien, entre les dogmes et la
sainteté, il n’existe aucune espèce d’opposition ; bien plus, qu’il existe entre
eux une intime cohésion (...)
La puissante voix d’Albert le Grand se fait entendre
dans ses œuvres admirables. Elle nous crie de toutes ses forces, elle nous
démontre surabondamment que la science véritable, ainsi que la foi et une vie
réglée sur la foi, peuvent se concilier dans l’esprit des hommes, qu’elles y
sont même obligées, car la foi surnaturelle est en même temps le complément et
le terme le plus parfait de la science.
Pie XII, dans une lettre apostolique, l'a
proclamé patron céleste de tous ceux qui cultivent les sciences naturelles, à
la demande des académiciens catholiques réunis à Trèves (16 décembre 1941)
: Si les règles ou directies que le grand évêque de Ratisbonne avait
établies à propos de la nécessité de l’expérimentation, de l’observation
pénétrante et de l’importance de l’induction pour arriver à la vérité dans
l’étude des choses de la nature, avaient été, déjà en ce temps, bien comprises
et appliquées, les admirables progrès scientifiques dont se glorifient les
époques plus récentes et aussi la nôtre, auraient pu être des siècles
auparavant découverts et réalisés pour le plus grand profit de l’humanité.
Seigneur Jésus-Christ, écoutez la voix de notre
douleur. Dans le désert des pénitents, nous crions vers vous, pour n'être pas séduits
par de vaines paroles tentatrices sur la noblesse de la famille, sur le
prestige de l'ordre, sur ce que la science a d'attirant.
Quand donc verrons-nous donc de nos yeux ce visage que
si longtemps, ici-bas, nous avons désiré ! Quand donc serons-nous assis
auprès de notre Mère, nous qui sommes si éloignés d'elle ! Quand donc sa
glorieuse présence nous sera-t-elle garantie sans retrait possible !
Oh ! Quand serons-nous ainsi ? Est-ce que nous la verrons ?
Est-ce que nous aurons la persévérance ? Dites, Mère de miséricorde,
est-il écrit quelque part dans le livre de votre Fils, que nous vous verrons,
avec lui ? En attendant, s'il vous plaît, que les larmes soient notre
nourriture jour et nuit (Psaume XLI 4) jusqu'à ce que nous
entendions : Mes fils, voilà votre Mère ! (saint Jean XIX
27) Mes enfants, voilà votre frère !
1 Le
bienheureux Jourdain de Saxe fut le premier successeur de saint
Dominique. Né vers 1185, à Burgberg (Westphalie), il étudia à Paris où il
devint maître ès arts puis bachelier en théologie. A cette activité scolaire se
rattachent son Commentaire in Priscianum minorem et ses Postilles sur
l'Apocalypse. Entré en relation avec saint Dominique, il prit l'habit des
Frères prêcheurs à Saint-Jacques (Paris), le 12 février 1220. Deux mois après,
son couvent le délégua au premier chapitre général de l'Ordre, à Bologne. Un an
plus tard, lorsque saint Dominique fit organiser les provinces dominicaines,
Jourdain fut choisi comme premier prieur provincial de Lombardie. Le 22 mai
1222, au chapitre général de Paris, Jourdain fut élu à la succession de saint
Dominique. Jourdain fut un remarquable directeur spirituel et un grand
prédicateur, apprécié des étudiants de Bologne, de Paris, d'Oxford ou de
Cologne, au fur et à mesure de ses perpétuels voyages entre les chapitres
généraux qui, à la Pentecôte, le ramenaient régulièrement une année à Paris,
une année à Bologne. Soucieux que l'Ordre des Prêcheurs reste fidèle aux
volontés du fondateur Jourdain de Saxe entreprit de relater les conditions dans
lesquelles saint Dominique conçut l'idée d'un Ordre « qui s'appellerait et
serait réellement de Prêcheurs », et selon quelles étapes il le réalisa.
Après la canonisation de Dominique (3 juillet 1234), il raconta en outre, les événements
de la solennelle translation du corps, dont il fut témoin à Bologne. Au retour
d’un voyage en Terre Sainte, Jourdain de Saxe périt (12 février 1237), dans un
naufrage au large des côtes syriennes ; son corps rejeté par la mer fut
enterré au couvent dominicain de Saint-Jean-d’Acre.
2 Conrad
de Hochstaden, archevêque de Cologne de 1238 à 1361), né vers 1198, était
inébranlablement attaché à la poursuite de sa politique ; il mérita, par
sa brutalité et ses violences d'être appelé le « sanguinaire ».
Prince d'Empire, il fut impliqué dans de nombreuses luttes avec les princes
voisins de Juliers, Limbourg, Berg, Clèves, Sayn et Paderborn. D’abord partisan
de l'Empereur, il changea d'orientation politique et se fit l'allié de la Curie
romaine contre les Hohenstaufen. Il devint le chef politique de l'Allemagne
dont il était le plus puissant prince. Il tendit tous ses efforts vers
l'établissement d'un Etat territorial sur le Rhin. Comme évêque et chef
spirituel, Conrad s'est acquis des mérites par l'appui qu'il accorda au
ministère des frères mineurs et aux autres ordres. Il se préoccupa de
promouvoir la discipline dans son archidiocèse. Il restaura et construisit de
nombreuses églises.
3 Guillaume
de Saint-Amour, né à Saint-Amour (Jura), étudia puis enseigna à la faculté des
arts de Paris. Il prit ensuite le doctorat en droit canon et, enfin, entreprit
les longues études qui menaient alors au doctorat en théologie : docteur,
il commença à enseigner la théologie vers 1250. Il se trouva bientôt mêlé aux
luttes que les maîtres de la faculté de théologie de Paris menaient contre les
religieux mendiants et son caractère entier le porta à prendre la tête du
mouvement. Guillaume mena d'abord la lutte à Paris, puis à la Curie romaine qui
se trouvait alors à Anagni ; il était le chef de la députation
universitaire qui s'y présenta en 1254 devant Innocent IV et y remporta une victoire
sur les religieux mendiants : par la bulle Quociens pro communi (4
juillet 1254), le pape reconnut officiellement les statuts universitaires de
1252, aux termes desquels aucun des collèges de religieux ne pourrait avoir
plus d'une chaire magistrale ; les religieux n'appartenant à aucun collège
ne pourraient faire partie de l'université. Quelques mois plus tard Innocent IV
mourait, et son successeur, Alexandre IV, se révélait chaud partisan des ordres
nouveaux. A Paris où il était rentré, Guillaume organisa la résistance,
instiguant des grèves et diverses manœuvres, combattant tous les compromis
proposés. Le pape le condamna le 5 octobre 1256, et le retint même en résidence
surveillée à la Curie où il était revenu pour se défendre. Après une lutte âpre
et parfois cauteleuse, Guillaume obtint de quitter Anagni, mais ne put obtenir
la permission de rentrer en France : il restait d'ailleurs privé de sa
chaire et de ses bénéfices. Il se retira dans son village natal, alors terre
impériale, et, malgré l'interdiction qui lui en avait été faite, entretint des
relations avec ses partisans de Paris. Il mourut le 13 septembre 1272.
SOURCE : http://missel.free.fr/Sanctoral/11/15.php
ALBERT le GRAND - FLEURS D'ORAISON
La persévérance véritable, c'est l'exercice fréquent des bonnes oeuvres.
Il se préserve du monde, celui qui renonce tout à fait à la manière d'agir des mondains, et qui évite, de tout son pouvoir, les péchés de la chair et de l'esprit.
Une preuve de la vraie patience, c'est de ne pas se venger, quand on le pourrait ; et même d'empêcher le châtiment par autrui.
La pauvreté vraie et parfaite abandonne tout à cause de Dieu. Elle n'a rien en dehors de ce qui est vraiment nécessaire. Même le nécessaire, elle pense qu'elle ne mérite pas de l'avoir et en manque volontiers.
On montre que l'on est vraiment pauvre lorsque, sans s'inquiéter aucunement de tout ce qui passe, on s'en remet à Dieu, avec une confiance simple et tranquille.
Il est vraiment libre, celui que rien ne captive, ni le désir des richesses, ni la gloire ou la faveur des hommes, ni le désir de plaire ou la peur de déplaire, ni la jouissance des joies passagères.
Une preuve de la vraie liberté, c'est de ne pas désirer ce qui rend l'âme moins bien disposé à la familiarité avec Dieu ou ce qui l'en éloigne.
l'âme s'éloigne-t-elle de cette heureuse union, aussi tôt la voilà prisonnière de beaucoup de vanité, puisque tout est vain ici-bas, comme le dit l'Ecclésiaste.
Une preuve de la vraie foi, c'est l'exercice fréquent des oeuvres vertueuses, car de même que le corps n'a plus de vie sans l'âme, ainsi la foi sans les oeuvres est morte (Jc 2,17).
L'humilité vraie et parfaite consiste à mépriser l'honneur que l'on vous rend et à ne point souhaiter d'être glorifié. Vous savez bien qu'à Dieu seul sont dus honneur et gloire.
Celui qui aime l'humilité doit planter en son coeur la racine de cette vertu, qui est la connaissance de sa propre fragilité.
On fsit l'éducation de l'humilité en s'exerçant à des oeuvres que personne ne remarque. La sainte Écriture nous enseigne que celui qui se refuse aux oeuvres de l'humilité ne parviendra jamais à cette vertu.
Rechercher toujours la dernière place, prendre en amitié les plus petits, désirer comme offices les fonctions les plus simples et demander toujours les vêtements les plus ordinaires.
ALBERT LE GRAND.
De son vrai nom A. de Bollstaedt. Appelé par ses
contemporains Albertus Lauingensis (de Lauingen), A. Theutonicus, A. de
Colonia, Dominus Albertus (après sa consécration épiscopale), et de bonne heure
par la postérité : A. Magnus.
1. Biographie.
2. Ecrits.
3. Influence.
I. BIOGRAPHIE.
Albert naquit en 1206 (non en 1193, ainsi que le
croient universellement ses modernes historiens) dans la petite ville souabe de
Lauingen sur le Danube. Il était le fils aîné du comte de Bollstaedt, une
famille féodale puissante et riche dévouée à Frédéric II. Élevé dans la société
de jeunes seigneurs, il fut conduit, adolescent, à Padoue, pour y faire ses
études sous la surveillance d’un oncle, vraisemblablement ecclésiastique,
tandis que son père guerroyait en Lombardie, au service de l’empereur. Le
second maître général des frères prêcheurs, Jourdain de Saxe, étant venu
prêcher aux étudiants de Padoue pendant les premiers mois de 1223, attira à
l’ordre un grand nombre de jeunes gens, parmi lesquels Albert, alors âgé de
seize ans et demi. Malgré les résistances de son oncle et de ses condisciples
et une tentative d’enlèvement de la part de son père, Albert entra dans l’ordre
et fut conduit, pour y continuer ses études, dans un ou plusieurs couvents
qu’on ne peut désigner avec sécurité, mais vraisemblablement à Cologne. C’est
là qu’il commença plus tard son enseignement en interprétant deux fois le
Maître des Sentences. Il fut successivement lecteur de théologie dans les
couvents de Hildesheim, Fribourg-en-Brisgau, Ratisbonne (pendant deux ans) et
Strasbourg.
En 1245, Albert fut envoyé à Paris pour y conquérir le
titre de maître en théologie et régenter une des deux écoles dominicaines du
couvent de Saint-Jacques, incorporées à l’université. C’est pendant ce séjour à
Paris qu’Albert commença, concurremment à l’enseignement de la théologie, la
publication de la vaste encyclopédie scientifique qui lui valut son
incomparable célébrité, et qu’il compléta jusque vers la fin de sa vie, bien
qu’elle fût déjà achevée en grande partie en 1256. Le maître quitta
vraisemblablement Paris à la fin de l’année scolaire 1248. Au chapitre général
de cette année, l’ordre des prêcheurs ayant établi quatre studia generalia, en
plus de celui de Paris, pour étendre la formation intellectuelle supérieure de
ses recrues, l’une de ces études générales fut établie à Cologne et Albert en
devint le premier régent. Malgré les nombreuses absences du célèbre maître,
cette ville devait être, jusqu’à la fin de ses jours, sa résidence ordinaire,
ce qui lui valut d’être souvent nommé par ses contemporains Albert de Cologne.
Cette nouvelle période de la vie d’Albert est marquée
par l’intensité de son activité littéraire. Il compta alors Thomas d’Aquin
parmi ses disciples. Pendant son séjour à Cologne, Albert ne cessa aussi
d’intervenir comme arbitre de 1252 à 1272 dans les graves différends qui
éclatèrent entre la ville et ses évêques. En 1254, le chapitre de la province
d’Allemagne, tenu à Worms, confia à Albert le gouvernement de la province dont
il s’occupa très activement. Deux ans plus tard, étant encore provincial, il se
rendit à la cour romaine pour prendre la défense des prêcheurs contre les
attaques de Guillaume de Saint-Amour, dont le célèbre pamphlet De novissimorum
temporum periculis fut condamné à Anagni par Alexandre IV le 5 octobre 1256.
Pendant son séjour à la curie, Albert remplit l’office de lecteur du sacré
palais et interpréta, à la demande du pape et de ses cardinaux, l’Évangile de
saint Jean et toutes les Epîtres canoniques. Ce fut encore pendant ce séjour à
la curie qu’Albert, sur la demande d’Alexandre IV, écrivit contre la théorie
averroïste de l’unité de l’intelligence son traité De unitate intellectus. Ce
voyage jusque dans le midi de l’Italie fournit à Albert, comme tous ses autres
déplacements, l’occasion de recherches scientifiques, et c’est alors qu’il
découvrit le De motibus animalium d’Aristote dont il publia le commentaire.
Albert rentra à Cologne en 1257. Il fut relevé de sa
charge de provincial par le chapitre général de Florence de cette même année,
et reprit le cours de son enseignement. Au printemps de 1259, Albert de rendit
au chapitre général de Valenciennes, où il élabora avec thomas d’Aquin et
Pierre de Tarentaise, le futur Innocent V, un important règlement pour les études
dans l’ordre. Il est très probable qu’Albert se rendit à Rome au cours de cette
même année, appelé par le souverain pontife. Le pape le désigna pour l’évêché
de Ratisbonne, le 5 janvier 1260, malgré les efforts du général de l’ordre,
Humbert de Romans, pour éviter cette nomination. Albert s’adonna avec zèle aux
devoirs de sa nouvelle charge. Mais la nécessité de se mêler à de graves
affaires temporelles, en un temps où les églises d’Allemagne vivaient encore du
régime féodal, poussa le nouvel évêque, plus amoureux d’étude que de guerre, à
résigner sa charge au printemps de 1262.
Le 13 février 1263, Urbain IV le préposa à la
prédication de la croisade pour l’Allemagne, la Bohême et autres lieus de
langue teutonique. Cette mission lui fit parcourir l’Allemagne pendant les
années 1263 et 1264 dans toutes les directions, de Ratisbonne et Cologne
jusqu’aux frontières de la Pologne. De 1265 au commencement de 1267, Albert fit
un long séjour à Wurzbourg où il joua, comme à Cologne, le rôle de
pacificateur, tout en continuant d’étudier et d’écrire. Vers le milieu de 1267,
l’évêque démissionnaire, le seigneur Albert, dominus Albertus, ainsi qu’on
l’appela dès lors jusqu’à la fin de sa vie, offrit au général de l’ordre, Jean
de Verceil, de reprendre l’enseignement. Celui-ci accepta avec reconnaissance
et songea même un instant à le renvoyer professer à Paris.
Ce fut l’étude de Cologne qui le reçut encore une
fois. Bien que résidant ordinairement dans cette ville, Albert se déplaça
fréquemment pendant une dizaine d’années (1268-1277). On le trouve spécialement
pendant cette période en différents points de l’Allemagne, au nord comme au
midi, consacrant des églises nouvelles et des autels, ou faisant même des
ordinations sacerdotales. En 1270, au fort de la lutte soutenue, à Paris, par
Thomas d’Aquin contre Siger de Brabant et les autres averroïstes de la faculté
des arts, Albert intervint par l’envoi d’un mémoire qu’avait sollicité Gilles
de Lessines et dans lequel il réfute les théories fondamentales du péripatétisme
averroïste.
L’année 1274 vit Albert se rendre au second concile
général de Lyon et y siéger parmi les Pères de cette assemblée. Il quitta
encore une fois Cologne, vraisemblablement pendant le second trimestre de 1277,
pour venir à Paris défendre les doctrines de Thomas d’Aquin que l’évêque
Etienne Tempier et les maîtres séculiers de la faculté de théologie avaient
tenté d’envelopper dans une commune réprobation avec les erreurs averroïstes,
le 7 mars précédent. Revenu à Cologne, Albert y rédigea, en janvier 1278, son
testament. Ce fut, semble-t-il, le dernier acte important de sa vie lucide. Le
cerveau de l’homme qui avait absorbé la science de l’antiquité et de son siècle
céda sous le poids du travail et des années. Albert perdit la mémoire et sa raison
s’affaiblit. Il était pris de fréquentes crises de larmes, surtout au souvenir
de son disciple bien-aimé, Thomas d’Aquin, descendu dans la tombe avant lui. Il
mourut le 15 novembre 1280, âgé de soixante-quatorze ans. Cologne lui fit de
magnifiques funérailles. Il a été béatifié par l’Eglise le 27 novembre 1622, et
sa fête de célèbre le 16 novembre.
SOURCES BIOGRAPHIQUES.
Il n’existe pas de biographie d’Albert le Grand écrite
par un contemporain. On peut toutefois reconstituer les faits principaux de sa
vie, avec les données synchroniques tirées soit de ses propres écrits, soit
surtout d’auteurs du XIIIe siècle et des actes officiels émanés d’Albert ou le
concernant. La plupart de ces sources, mais non toutes, sont utilisées dans les
biographies modernes. Comme elles sont très nombreuses, nous renonçons à les
énumérer ici. Nous faisons exception pour la suivante à raison de son
importance, et parce que les biographes d’Albert ne l’ont pas encore utilisée :
H. Finke, Ungedruckte Dominikanerbriefe des 13. Jahrhunderts, Paderborn, 1891,
Passim.
La première notice biographique d’Albert est celle
tracée par Henri de Hervordia († 1370) dans son Liber de rebus memorabilibus
sive Chronicon, édit. A. Potthast, Gœttingue, 1859, p. 201.
Une vie anonyme du XIVe siècle a été éditée par les
bollandistes : Catalogus codicum hagiographicorum bibliothecæ regiæ
Bruxellensis. Codices latini, t. II, Bruxelles, 1889, p. 95-104.
Une autre vie est insérée dans la chronique anonyme
publiée par Martène et Durand : Amplissima collectio, t. VI, p. 358-362.
L’auteur [Alberto Castellani, O. P.] déclare (889) avoir emprunté le fond de sa
chronique à Jacques de Soest, O. P. († 1423). Louis de Valladolid, dans sa
Tabula quorumdam doctorum ordinis prædicatorum, utilisée par Echard ; Petrus de
Prussia, Vita B. Alberti doctoris magni…, Cologne, 1486, et Anvers, 1621, à la
suite du De adhærendo Deo, p. 61-326 ; Petrus Noviomagensis, Legenda
venerabilis Dominis Alberti Magni…, Cologne, 1490.
Le premier travail critique important sur Albert est
l’œuvre d’Echard : Scriptores ordinis prædicatorum, Paris, 1719, t. I, p.
162-184, reproduit au tome I de l’édition nouvelle des Opera omnia B. Alberti
Magni ; G. de Ferrari, Vita del beato Alberto Magno, Rome, 1847 ; J. Sighart,
Albertus Magnus. Sein Leben und seine Wissenschaft, Ratisbonne, 1857 ;
traduction française par un religieux dominicain : Albert le Grand, Paris, 1862
; H. Iweins, Le bienheureux Albert le Grand, 2e édit., Bruxelles, 1874 ; F.
Ehrle, Der selige Albert der Grosse, dans Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, t. XIX,
1880, p. 241-258, 395-414 ; A. Gloria, Quot annos et in quibus Italiæ urbibus
Albertus Magnus moratus sit ? dans Atti del’Istituto Veneto, 1879-80, p. 5,
etc. ; [N. Thoemes], Albertus Magnus in Geschichte und Sage, Cologne, 1880, p.
1-18 ; A. van Weddingen, Albert le Grand, le maître de saint Thomas d’Aquin
d’après les plus récents travaux critiques, Paris-Bruxelles, 1881 ; H. Goblet,
Der selige Albertus Magnus und die Geschichte seiner Reliquien, Cologne, 1880 ;
C. W. Kaiser, Festbericht über die Albertus-Magnus-Feier in Lauingen am 12
september 1881, Donauwörth, 1881.
On trouve des notices sur Albert dans tous les grands
ouvrages biographiques (voir spécialement l’article de Jourdain dans le
Dictionnaire des sciences philosophiques et Hurter, Nomenclator literarius, t.
IV, col. 297-302), dans les histoires de la philosophie (B. Hauréau, Histoire
de la philosophie scolastique, IIe part., t. I, Paris, 1880, p. 214-333 ; A.
Stöckl, Geschichte der Philosophie der Mittelalters, Mayence, 1865, t. II, p.
352-421 ; K. Werner, Der heilige Thomas von Aquino, Ratisbonne, 1858, p. 82-95
; P. Feret, La faculté de théologie de Paris, t. II, Paris, 1895, p. 421-441),
et dans la plupart des ouvrages cités à la fin de cet article. Voir Analecta
bollandiana, 1900-1902.
II. ECRITS D’ALBERT LE GRAND.
L’activité littéraire d’Albert le Grand paraît
incontestablement la plus gigantesque du moyen âge. Elle s’étend à presque
toutes les sciences profanes et sacrées. Deux éditions de ses écrits ont été
publiées sous le titre d’Opera omnia. La première, celle du dominicain Pierre
Jammy, comprend 21 vol. in-fol., Lyon, 1651. La seconde qui la reproduit quant
au nombre de ses écrits, celle de l’abbé Borgnet, est au terme de publication,
commencée en 18901, et comprend 38 volumes in-4° (Paris, Vivès).
Un grand nombre d’ouvrages d’Albert le Grand ont été
édités séparément ou par groupes. Quelques-uns ont eu de nombreuses éditions,
mais il serait ici hors de propos de chercher à les énumérer ici. Un travail
fondamental de critique n’ayant pas été exécuté pour préparer une édition
complète des œuvres d’Albert le Grand, le texte de ses écrits laisse à désirer
et la détermination des œuvres authentiques est insuffisamment établie. De nombreux
et même d’importants ouvrages sont indubitablement restés inédits. Nous donnons
ici la liste de ceux qui font partie des deux éditions des œuvres dites
complètes, en renvoyant aux volumes qui les contiennent.
A. SCIENCES PROFANES, OU PHILOSOPHIE.
– Les éditeurs n’ont pas observé l’ordre naturel entre
les traités d’Albert. Nous le rétablissons, tel qu’il résulte des indications
fournies par les données internes de ces ouvrages, en indiquant, par la lettre
L, les tomes de l’édition de Lyon et, par la lettre P, les tomes de l’édition
de Paris.
I. LOGIQUE (L., t. I ; P., t. I, II) :
De prædicabilibus. De prædicamentis. De sex principiis
Gilberti Porretani. Super duos libros Aristotelis Perihermenias. Super librum
priorum Analyticorum primum. Super secundum. Super librum posteriorum
Analyticorum primum. Super secundum. Super libros octo Topicorum. Super duos
Elenchorum.
II. SCIENCES NATURELLES.
– De physico auditu (L., t. II ; P., t. III). De cælo
et mundo (L., t. II ; P., t. IV). De natura locorum (L., t. V ; P., t. IX). De
proprietabus elementorum (L., t. V ; P., t. IX). De generatione et corruptione
(L., t. II ; P., t. IV). Meteororum libri IV (L., t. II ; P., t. IV). De
passionibus aeris (L., t. V ; P., t. IV). De mineralibus (L., t. II ; P., t.
V). De anima (L., t. III ; P., t. V). De natura et origine animæ (L., t. V ;
P., t. IX). De nutrimento (L., t. V ; P., t. IX). De sensu et sensato (L., t. V
; P., t. IX). De memoria et reminiscentia (L., t. V ; P., t. IX). De intellectu
et intelligibili (L., t. V ; P., t. IX). De somno et vigilia (L., t. V ; P., t.
IX). De spiritu et respiratione (L., t. V ; P., t. IX). De motibus animalium
(L., t. V ; P., t. IX). De motibus progressivis animalium (L., t. V ; P., t.
X). De ætate, de juventute et senectute (L., t. V ; P., t. IX). De morte et
vita (L., t. V ; P., t. IX). De vegetabilibus (L., t. V ; P., t. X). De
animalibus (L., t. VI ; P., t. X-XI).
Dans l’exécution de ses traités de sciences naturelles
Albert n’a pas suivi rigoureusement l’ordre qu’il avait annoncé tout d’abord
Phys., l. I, tr. I, c. IV. Il a en outre ajouté, au cours de la composition, le
De ætate, et il a écrit plus tard trois traités destinés à être intercalés dans
l’ensemble de l’œuvre, à savoir : De passionibus aeris, De natura et origine
animæ, de motibus progressivis.
III. METAPHYSIQUE.
– Metaphysicorum libri XIII (L., t. III ; P., t. VI).
De causis et processu universalitatis (L., t. V ; P., t. X). Ce dernier traité
a été composé plus tard comme complément au Xie livre de la métaphysique.
IV. SCIENCES MORALES.
– Ethicorum libri X (L., t. IV ; P., t. VII).
Politicorum libri VIII (L., t. IV ; P., t. VIII). Le traité qui porte en titre
Philosophia seu Isagoge (L., t. XXI ; P., t. V) est un abrégé de sciences
naturelles. Le De unitate intellectus contra Averroem (L., t. V ; P., t. IX) et
les Quindecim problemata contra Averroistas (édités par nous dans Siger de
Brabant, p. 15-36) sont deux écrits polémiques, le premier de 1256, le second
de 1270. Les traités De apprehensione et apprehensionis modis (L., t. XXI ; P.,
t. V), Speculum astronomicum (L., t. V ; P., t. V), Libellus de alchimia (L.,
t. XXI ; P., t. XXXVII), Scriptum super arborem Aristotelis (L., t. XXI ; P.,
t. XXXVIII) sont apocryphes.
B. SCIENCES SACRÉES.
I. ÉCRITURE SAINTE.
– Commentarii in Psalmos (L., t. VII ; P., t.
XV-XVII). In Threnos Jeremiæ (L., t. VIII ; P., t. XVIII). In librum Baruch
(L., t. VIII ; P., t. XVIII). In librum Danielis (L., t. VIII ; P., t. XVIII).
In duodecim Prophetas minores (L., t. VIII ; P., t. XIX). In Matthæum (L., t.
IX ; P., t. XX, XXI). In Marcum (L., t. IX ; P., t. XXI). In Lucam (L., t. X ;
P., t. XXII, XXIII). In Joannem (L., t. XI ; P., t. XXIV). In Apocalypsim (L.,
t. XI ; P., t. XXXVIII). M. Weiss a édité : Comment. in Job, 1904.
II. THÉOLOGIE.
– Commentarii in Dionysium Areopagitam. De cælesti
hierarchia (L., t. XIII ; P., t. XIV). De ecclesiastica hierarchia (L., t. XIII
; P., t. XIV). De mystica theologica (L., t. XIII ; P., t. XIV). In undecim
Epistolas Dionysii (L., t. XIII ; P., t. XIV). Commentarium in quatuor libros
Sententiarum (L., t. XIV-XVI ; P., t. XXV-XXX). Summa theologiæ (L., t. XVII,
XVIII ; P., t. XXXI-XXXIII). Summa de creaturis (L., t. XIX ; P., t.
XXXIV-XXXV). Compendium theologicæ veritatis (L., t. XIII ; P., t. XXXIV),
n’est probablement pas d’Albert, mais de son école (voir l’article HUGUES DE
STRASBOURG). De sacrificio Missæ (L., t. XXI). De sacramento Eucharistiæ (L.,
t. XXXI ; P., t. XXXVIII). Super evangelium missus est quæstiones CCXXX (L., t.
XX ; P., t. XXXVII).
III. PARENETIQUE.
– Sermones de tempore (L., t. XII ; P., t. XIII).
Sermones de sanctis (L., t. XII ; P., t. XIII). Sermones XXXII de sacramento
Eucharistiæ (L., t. XII ; P., t. XIII). Voir sur cet ouvrage les observations
faites dans un article spécial qui suit. De muliere forti (L., t. XII ; P., t.
XVIII). Orationes super evangelia dominicalia totius anni (L., t. XII ; P., t. XIII).
Le Paradisus animæ (L., t. XXI ; P., t. XXXVII) et le Liber de adhærendo Deo
(L., t. XXI ; P., t. XXXVII) ne sont probablement pas d’Albert. Le De laudibus
B. Virginis libri duodecim (L., t. XX ; P., t. XXVI) et la Biblia Mariana (L.,
t. XX ; P., t. XXXVII) ne sont pas de lui.
Les écrits d’Albert le Grand qui constituent, à peu de
choses près, son encyclopédie scientifique, c’est-à-dire les écrits sur la
logique, les sciences naturelles, la métaphysique et l’éthique proprement dite,
ont été composés avant 1256. Revue thomiste, t. V, p. 95-104.
Les plus anciens catalogues des ouvrages d’Albert le
Grand sont ceux de Bernard Guidonis (Denifle, Archiv für literatur-und
Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters, Berlin, 1886, t. II, p. 236), de Henri de
Hervordia, voyez plus haut, loc. cit., p. 202, de la vie anonyme publiée par
les bollandistes, loc. cit., de la chronique anonyme éditée par Martène et
Durand, loc. cit., les catalogues de Louis de Valladolid et de Laurent Pignon,
utilisés par Echard, loc. cit., celui de Pierre de Prusse, dans la vie
d’Albert, loc. cit. Ces catalogues, qui fournissent de nombreuses et
importantes indications, ne sont pas toujours des guides sûrs dans le détail.
On trouvera dans les ouvrages de bibliographie de
Hain, Brunet, Graesse, Pellechet et autres, l’indication de nombreuses éditions
des écrits divers d’Albert, surtout des plus anciennes et les plus rares. Sur
les éditions et les manuscrits en général, on devra surtout consulter Echard,
Script. ord. Præd., loc. cit., et Melchor Weiss, Primordia novæ bibliographiæ
B. Alberti Magni, Paris, L. Vivès, 1898. Du même, Uber mariologische Schriften
des seligen Albertus, Paris, 1898.
III. INFLUENCE D’ALBERT LE GRAND.
L’action intellectuelle exercée par Albert sur le
moyen âge a été probablement de toutes la plus puissante, sans en excepter
celle de Thomas d’Aquin, qui, étendue à un domaine moins vaste, a été plus
profonde et plus durable. Thomas fut un fleuve, Albert un torrent. On doit
examiner l’influence de ce dernier dans le domaine des sciences profanes dont
l’ensemble portait encore de son temps, comme chez les Grecs, le nom de
philosophie, et aussi son influence dans la science sacrée, qui prit alors
définitivement le nom de théologie.
I. INFLUENCE D’ALBERT SUR LES SCIENCES PROFANES.
L’action littéraire et intellectuelle d’Albert est
liée étroitement au travail d’assimilation de la science antique qui s’opère
spécialement dans l’Europe, au XIIIe siècle. Albert a été le premier et le plus
grand intermédiaire qui ait porté à la connaissance des lettrés de son temps
l’ensemble de la science grecque, latine et arabe. Doué d’une activité et d’une
faculté d’assimilation surprenantes, membre d’un ordre religieux qui, en se
vouant le premier à l’étude, préparait un milieu spécial à la culture
scientifique, Albert joua un véritable rôle de révélateur intellectuel, dans
une époque où le progrès de l’esprit était entravé par des difficultés que ne
pouvaient surmonter la plupart des hommes d’étude.
L’œuvre encyclopédique d’Albert résolvait en effet les
problèmes les plus urgents qui arrêtaient alors le mouvement général de la
pensée. Sa vaste entreprise permettait d’entrer en contact avec tous les grands
résultats de science antique, ou étrangère, sans aller à des sources à peine
abordables, à cause de leur rareté, sous le régime des manuscrits. Albert
lui-même, malgré des conditions exceptionnellement favorables, déclare qu’il a
dû recueillir les écrits fragmentaires d’Aristote avec difficulté et un peu
partout : quæ diligenter quæsivi per diversas mundi regiones. Mineral., l. III,
tr. I, c. I. C’est ainsi que nous savons qu’il découvrit au fond de l’Italie,
en 1256, le De motibus progressivis animalium, tr. I, c. I, ad finem.
D’autre part les sources elles-mêmes faisaient double
et triple emploi, et elles étaient souvent si difficiles à utiliser, à raison
de l’obscurité des traductions, que des hommes d’étude comme Robert Grossetête
et Roger Bacon renoncèrent à s’en servir.
Enfin, en 1210 et 1215, des condamnations
ecclésiastiques avaient prohibé l’usage des écrits d’Aristote, autres que la
logique, dans l’enseignement des écoles de Paris, c’est-à-dire au centre même
de la vie intellectuelle d’alors. En 1231, Grégoire IX avait songé, il est
vrai, à une correction des livres d’Aristote, mais le projet n’eut pas de
suite. Albert, en incorporant les œuvres du Stagirite dans les siennes, et en
rectifiant ses théories opposées à la foi, résolvait le problème de
l’acceptation d’Aristote dans la société chrétienne. Ce fut, en somme,
l’utilité de premier ordre et l’à-propos de l’entreprise d’Albert qui firent
son extraordinaire succès.
Pour réaliser son dessein, Albert ne songea pas, comme
Vincent de Beauvais, à constituer une simple bibliothèque scientifique avec des
extraits et des abrégés d’une multitude d’écrits peu abordable aux gens
d’étude, il chercha à réaliser une encyclopédie formant un corps organique et
embrassant l’ensemble du savoir humain tel qu’il était possible de l’exposer en
ce temps. Pour cela, il adopta une classification ou distribution des sciences
empruntée, dans ses grandes lignes, à l’antiquité et répartit le savoir humain
en trois sections générales : les sciences logiques, physiques et morales. La
seconde division, qui est la principale, porte aussi le nom de philosophie
réelle et embrasse les sciences physiques ou naturelles, les mathématiques et
la métaphysique. Placé entre les divisions classiques d’une part et la
surabondance des matériaux littéraires de l’autre, Albert n’arrive pas toujours
à mettre un ordre bien formel entre plusieurs de ses traités. Il cherche
d’ordinaire à se maintenir dans les cadres tracés par Aristote et les anciens
péripatéticiens. Mais en différents points, son œuvre les déborde de beaucoup.
Albert incorpore, en effet, à son encyclopédie, non seulement tout ce qui lui
vient d’Aristote, mais encore ce que lui apprennent ses commentateurs, ce qu’il
sait de Platon, les sources grecques, latines et arabes, auxquelles il joint ses
recherches et ses expériences personnelles, qui, dans certains domaines, sont
très importantes, si bien que son critique passionné, Roger Bacon, a dû
reconnaître l’étendue de ses observations : homo studiossimus est, et vidit
infinita, et habuit expensum ; et ideo multapotuit colligere in pelago actorum
infinito. Opera, édit. Brewer, p. 327.
Quant à sa méthode d’exposition, on l’a appelée avec
assez de raison une paraphrase, et rapprochée de celle d’Avicenne. Cela est
exact quand Albert interprète Aristote, mais en beaucoup d’endroits, il ne
travaille pas sur Aristote. Il s’est d’ailleurs expliqué lui-même clairement
sur son procédé au début même de ses travaux sur les sciences physiques et
naturelles : Erit autem modus noster in hoc opere, Aristotelis ordinem et
sententiam sequi, et dicere ad explanationem ejus et ad probatione ejus
quæcumque necessaria esse videbuntur, ita tamen quod textus ejus nulla fiat
mentio. Et præter hoc disgressiones faciemus, declarantes dubia subeuntia, et
supplentes quæcumque minus dicta in sententia philosophi obscuritatem quibusdam
attulerunt. Distinguemus autem totum hoc opus per titulos capitulorum, et ubi
titulus ostendit simpliciter materiam capituli, sciatur hoc capitulum esse de
serie librorum Arsitotelis. Ubicumque qutem in titulo præsignatur quod
disgressio fit, ibi additum est ex nobis ad suppletionem vel probationem
inductum. Taliter autem procedento libros perficiemus eodem numero et nominibus
quibus fecit libros suos Aristoteles. Et addemus eliam alicubi partes librorum
imperfectorum, et alicubi libros intermissos vel omissos, quos vel Aristoteles
non fecit, et forte si fecit, ad nos non pervenerunt. Physic., l. I, tr. I, c.
I.
La méthode adoptée par Albert avait l’avantage de
fournir à ses contemporains une somme énorme de connaissances positives.
C’était là d’ailleurs le but poursuivi par l’infatigable encyclopédiste. Les
inconvénients de son système se traduisaient par contre dans le développement
excessif de son œuvre, et le manque partiel de précision dans son interprétation
d’Aristote. Mais ces inconvénients étaient presque inhérents aux conditions qui
présidèrent à la création de l’œuvre d’Albert et en commandèrent le mode
d’exécution.
Les doctrines d’Albert représentent pour le fond les
théories d’Aristote, rectifié sur les points où il pouvait se trouver en
conflit avec l’enseignement chrétien. Dans le domaine des sciences naturelles
surtout, c’est le Stagirite qui est son docteur. Toutefois il déclare
qu’Aristote n’est pas pour lui un dieu, mais un homme qui a pu se tromper comme
les autres, et à l’occasion il n’hésite pas à le contredire. Albert a
d’ailleurs soin de répéter à maintes reprises qu’il a pour but d’exposer les
doctrines des péripatéticiens et non de les faire siennes, ce qui trahit sa
préoccupation de respecter la position encore hésitante de l’autorité
ecclésiastique à l’égard d’Aristote.
Néanmoins, on doit reconnaître que c’est par l’action
d’Albert que le péripatétisme a surtout accompli son entrée chez les lettrés
chrétiens, et a conquis ses lettres de naturalisation dans l’Eglise. Albert
fait d’ailleurs, dans son exposé philosophique, une part importante à Platon
qu’il connaît par plusieurs de ses écrits originaux et leurs dérivés
alexandrins. On a souvent rapporté sa parole qui déclare qu’on ne peut devenir
philosophe que par Aristote et Platon à la fois : Scias quod non perfecitur
homo in philosophia, nisi ex scientia duarum philosophiarum Aristotelis et
Platonis. Metaph., l. I, tr. V, c. XV. Cette formule représente assez son point
de vue, surtout dans les questions métaphysiques où, à l’exemple d’autres
philosophes antérieurs, il rectifie et complète Aristote par Platon. Les
grandes lignes de son système ne sont pas toujours très fermes et très nettes,
comme chez Thomas d’Aquin. Néanmoins il a des vues et des analyses quelquefois
très pénétrantes, qui supportent le parallèle avec la manière de son disciple.
Mais on doit le dire, la gloire et l’influence d’Albert consistent moins dans
la construction d’un système de philosophie originale, que dans la sagacité et
l’effort qu’il a déployés pour porter à la connaissance de la société lettrée
du moyen âge le résumé des connaissances humaines déjà acquises, créer une
nouvelle et vigoureuse poussée intellectuelle dans son siècle, et gagner définitivement
à Aristote les meilleurs esprits du moyen âge.
L’action d’Albert et son succès furent énormes, de son
vivant même et après sa mort. Ulrich Engelbert, un de ses auditeurs, traduit
ainsi l’étonnement où l’œuvre d’Albert jeta ses contemporains, quand il définit
son maître : Vir in omni scientia adeo divinus, ut nostri temporis stupor et
miraculum congrue vocari possit. De summo bono, tr. III, c. IV.
Le témoignage de ses principaux adversaires que trouva
Albert de son vivant est surtout à retenir, car plus que toute autre donnée, il
est significatif. Siger de Brabant, le chef de l’averroïsme parisien, ne nomme,
pour les combattre, que deux contemporains, Albert et Thomas, qu’il qualifie
ainsi : Præcipui viri in philosophia Albertus et Thomas. De anima intellectiva,
III, p. 94. Roger Bacon, le critique passionné et injuste d’Albert, nous montre
à quel degré d’influence et de renommée l’œuvre du maître était parvenue quand,
en 1266, il écrit ces paroles : " La foule des gens d’étude, des hommes
réputés auprès de beaucoup pour très savants, et un très grand nombre de
personnes judicieuses estiment, bien qu’elles se trompent en cela, que les
latins sont déjà en possession de la philosophie, qu’elle est complète et
écrite dans leur langue. Elle a été, en effet, composée de mon temps et publiée
à Paris. On cite son auteur comme autorité, car de même que dans les écoles on
allègue Aristote, Avicenne et Averroès, ainsi fait-on avec lui. Et cet homme
vit encore, et il a eu, de son vivant, une autorité qu’aucun homme n’eut jamais
en matière de doctrine. " Opera, édit. Brewer, p. 30.
Cette influence d’Albert se constate en outre dans les
écrits du XIIIe siècle et des siècles suivants, où les productions de tout
ordre ne cessent de lui faire des emprunts. Cette persuasion de l’universalité
scientifique d’Albert alla même à lui faire attribuer un grand nombre
d’ouvrages à la composition desquels il est certainement étranger, et
spécialement les ouvrages d’alchimie, de magie et autres sciences occultes pour
lesquelles Albert n’eut jamais de goût. Le cycle de légendes, toutes plus
merveilleuses les unes que les autres, qui se forma autour du nom d’Albert, est
aussi la conséquence de la réputation sans pareille qu’il s’était faite chez
ses contemporains dans le domaine des sciences physiques et naturelles.
Rundbogenfenster in der Pfarrkirche Sitzendorf an der Schmida
II. INFLUENCE D’ALBERT SUR LA THÉOLOGIE.
L’action d’Albert dans le domaine de la théologie a
été moins éclatante que dans celui de la philosophie. C’est lui cependant quia
inauguré le mouvement dont saint Thomas d’Aquin est devenu le chef. Albert a le
premier utilisé les nouvelles connaissances philosophiques pour les mettre au
service de la constitution d’un corps de théologie. S’il n’a eu dans ses essais
ni la réserve ni la fermeté de Thomas d’Aquin, manquant de son génie sobre et
synthétique, il n’a pas hésité néanmoins sur le parti que la science sacrée
pouvait tirer de la science profane. Dans cette tentative, il a substitué les
conceptions philosophiques d’Aristote à celles de Platon qui formaient en
différents point la substruction du dogme augustinien, et a préparé la voie à
Thomas d’Aquin, le disciple dont la réputation a surpassé et effacé la sienne.
Albert n’a pas constitué, à proprement parler, une
école théologique indépendante. Thomas, qui a repris et poussé à un degré bien
autrement supérieur la direction qu’il avait inaugurée, a donné son nom et son
cachet définitif à la nouvelle direction théologique que l’Eglise catholique a
considérée comme s’identifiant le mieux à son enseignement officiel.
Il se forma à Cologne, dans le cours du XVe siècle,
une école albertiste. Elle était représentée spécialement par le collège
Laurentien (bursa Laurentii), tandis que le collège du Mont suivait saint
Thomas. Heymeric van de Velde (de Campo) écrivit trois traités sur la
philosophie d’Albert le Grand pour l’opposer à celle de saint Thomas. L’ordre
des frères prêcheurs fut étranger à cette tentative qui traduit l’état de
décadence où étaient tombées les sciences philosophiques et théologiques.
A. et Ch. Jourdain, Recherches critiques sur l’âge et
l’origine des traductions latines d’Aristote, Paris, 1843, p. 310-358 ; Fr.
Rogeri Bacon opera quædam hactenus inedita, édit. J. S. Brewer, Londres, 1859,
p. 30 sq., 327 et passim ; P. Mandonnet, Siger de Brabant et l’averroïsme latin
au XIIIe siècle, Fribourg (Suisse), 1899, passim, surtout les deux premiers
chapitres ; O. d’Assailly, Albert le Grand, l’ancien monde devant le nouveau,
Paris, 1870 ; Reinhard de Liechty, Albert le Grand et saint Thomas d’Aquin, ou
la science au moyen âge, Paris, 1880 ; G. von Hertling, Albertus Magnus,
Beiträge zu seiner Würdigung, Cologne, 1881 ; J. Bach, Des Albertus Magnus
Verhältniss zu der Erkenntnisslehre der Griechen, Lateiner, Araber und Juden,
Vienne, 1881 ; K. Zell, Albertus Magnus als Erklärer der Aristoteles (Der
Katholik, t. LXIX, p. 166-178) ; G. Endriss, Albertus Magnus als Interpret der
Aristotelisohen Metaphysik, Munich, 1886 ; M. Joël, Verhältniss Albert der
Grossen zu Moses Maimonides, Breslau, 1863 ; B. Haneberg, Zur Erkenntnisslehre
von Ibn Sina und Albertus Magnus (Abhandlungen Bayer-Akad. Wissensch., Munich,
1866-68, XI, I, 189-268) ; H. de Blainville, Histoire des sciences de
l’organisation et de leurs progrès, Paris, 1845, t. II, p. 1-95 ; F.-A.
Pouchet, Histoire des sciences naturelles au moyen âge, ou Albert le Grand et
son époque considérés comme point de départ de l’école expérimentale, Paris,
1853 ; L. Choulant, Albertus Magnus in seiner Bedeutung für die
Naturwissenschaften, historisch und bibliographisch dargestelt (Janus,
Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Literatur der Medicin, 1846, p. 127-160,
687-690) ; Bormans, Mémoire sur les livres d’histoire naturelle d’Albert le
Grand (Bulletin de l’Académie royale de Belgique, XIX, 1852) ; F. X. Pfeifer,
Harmonische Beziehungen zwischen Scholastik und moderner Naturwissenschaft mit
spezieller Rücksicht auf Albertus Magnus und Thomas von Aquino, Augsbourg, 1881
; E. Meyer, Albertus Magnus ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Botanik im XIII
Jahrhundert (Linnäa, 1836, t. X, p. 641-741 ; 1837, t. XI, p. 545) ; J. Meyer,
C. Jessen, Alberti Magni De vegetabilibus libri septem, Berlin, 1867 ; S.
Fellner, Albertus Magnus als Botaniker, Vienne, 1881 ; Buhle, De fontibus unde
Albertus Magnus libris XXVI animalium materiam hauserit (Commentationes Societ.
regiæ scientiarum Gottingensis, 1773-1774, t. XII, p. 94-115) ; M. Glossner,
Das objectiv Princip. De aristot. scholast. Philosophie, besonders Albrecht des
Gr. Lehre vom objectiven Ursprung, verglichen mit dem subjectiv Princip der
neueren Philosophie, Ratisbonne, 1880 ; W. Feiler, Die Moral des Albertus Mag.,
Leipzig, 1891 ; A. Schneider, Die psychologie Alberts des Gr., Munster, 1903.
Sur l’école albertine de Cologne. – Bianco, Die atte Universität Köln, t. I,
Cologne, 1855 ; Paquot, Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire littéraire des
dix-sept provinces, Louvain, 1770, t. I, p. 478 ; Goethals, Histoire des
lettres, des sciences et des arts en Belgique, Bruxelles, 1840, t. I, p. 47.
ALBERT LE GRAND. Les XXXII sermones de Eucharistia qui
lui sont attribués. Nous ne plaçons pas sans une expresse réserve les XXXII
sermons sur l’eucharistie parmi les œuvres authentiques d’Albert le Grand. Les
plus anciens catalogues des œuvres d’Albert, ceux de Bernard Guidonis et de
Henri de Herfordia, ne les mentionnent pas, et les manuscrits les attribuent,
quoique à tort, plus souvent à Thomas d’Aquin qu’à Albert le Grand. Weiss,
Primordia novæ bibliographiæ, p. 27. On les trouve même parmi les œuvres de
saint Bonaventure, Bassano, 1767, t. III, p. 756-951. C’est donc un ouvrage
vague. Pierre de Prusse déclare toutefois dans sa vie d’Albert, édit. d’Anvers,
1621, p. 181, avoir vu l’original au couvent de Cologne, écrit partiellement et
corrigé de la main de l’auteur. Le Dr G. Jacob, qui a donné une édition
critique de ces sermons (Ratisbonne, 1893), admet aussi l’authenticité. Un
passage de ces sermons, fréquemment imprimés à la fin du XVe siècle, a fourni
le prétexte aux protestants, depuis la confession de foi d’Augsbourg (1530),
d’accuser les catholiques d’enseigner une doctrine erronée sur la satisfaction
du Christ et les effets de l’eucharistie. Les théologiens catholiques n’ont
cessé d’opposer un démenti formel à ces accusations sans fondement. L’origine
de cette accusation est dans le passage suivant tiré du premier des sermons
attribués à Albert : Secunda causa institutionis hujus sacramenti est
sacrificium altaris, contra quandam quotidianam delictorum nostrorum rapinam,
ut, SICUT CORPUS DOMINI SEMEL OBLATUM EST IN CRUCE PRO DEBITO ORIGINALI, SIC
OFFERATUR JUGITER PRO NOSTRIS QUOTIDIANIS DELICTIS. Cette formule est inexacte,
mais il ne semble pas que dans la pensée de son auteur elle ait le sens
restrictif qu’elle paraît comporter, puisque dans le même sermon il fait dire à
Jésus-Christ : Pro debitis omnium sufficiens sacrificium in cruce offerebam. La
doctrine d’ailleurs exposée ex professo par Albert dans ses autres traités sur
l’eucharistie et dans ses commentaires sur les Sentences est correcte : Dico
quod justificatio naturæ ad causam meritoriam relata, quæ est meritoria
secundum condignum, refertur ad passionem Christi, quia meruit nobis solutionem
a peccato, ad quam sequitur justificatio… Relata autem ad causam sacramentalem…
Secundum debitum originalis (peccati) refertur ad baptismum, secundum debitum
actualis refertur ad pœnitentiam, si est post baptismum. IV Sent., l. III,
dist. XIX, a. 1, solutio. Quant à l’eucharistie, elle n’est pas ordonnée contre
le péché, mais bien contre les suites du péché qu’on peut appeler la faiblesse
spirituelle : Si considerentur reliquiæ (peccati) secundum defectum boni, cujus
longus defectus inediam inducit boni naturalis secundum destitutionem sui in
seipso, sicut longus defectus cibi inducit inediam et defectum boni corporis in
seipso, sic contra reliquias peccati ordinatur sacramentum Eucharistiæ per
modum medicinæ. De Eucharistia, dist. VI, tr. I, c. II, 3. Voir N. Paulus, Une
prétendue " doctrine monstrueuse " sur le sacrifice de la messe,
Revue anglo-romaine, Paris, 1896, t. I, p. 252-260.
Article rédigé par P. MANDONNET. Dictionnaire de
Théologie Catholique
Leçon des Matines 1960
Albert, surnommé le Grand pour sa science
extraordinaire, naquit à Lauingen sur le Danube, en Souabe, et reçut dès
l’enfance une éducation soignée. Il quitta sa patrie pour faire ses études et,
pendant son séjour à Padoue, sur les conseils du bienheureux Jourdain, Maître
général de l’Ordre des Prêcheurs, il demanda, malgré l’opposition de son oncle,
à être reçu dans la famille Dominicaine. Admis parmi les frères, il se
distingua par l’observance religieuse et la piété, il aima ardemment la
Bienheureuse Vierge Marie et brûla du zèle des âmes. Il fut envoyé à Cologne
pour achever ses études. Ensuite, il fut nommé lecteur à Hildesheim, à
Fribourg, à Ratisbonne et à Strasbourg. Il acquit une grande renommée dans son
enseignement à Paris. Il eut pour disciple préféré Thomas d’Aquin et fut le
premier à reconnaître et à proclamer la profondeur de son esprit. A Anagni,
devant le Souverain Pontife Alexandre IV, il réfuta Guillaume qui, avec une
audace impie, attaquait les Ordres mendiants et il fut ensuite nommé évêque de
Ratisbonne. Il sut admirablement donner des conseils et régler des différends,
et on put l’appeler à juste titre médiateur de paix. Il composa de très
nombreux écrits sur presque toutes les sciences, et surtout les sciences
sacrées, il écrivit de façon remarquable sur le Sacrement admirable de l’autel.
Très illustre par ses vertus et ses miracles, il mourut dans le Seigneur, en
1280. Le Pape Pie XI accrut le culte qui, par autorisation des Pontifes
Romains, lui était rendu depuis longtemps déjà dans plusieurs diocèses et dans
l’Ordre des Prêcheurs et, accueillant favorablement le vœu de la Sacrée
Congrégation des Rites, il lui décerna le titre de Docteur et étendit sa fête à
l’Église universelle. Pie XII le constitua Patron céleste auprès de Dieu de
ceux qui étudient les sciences naturelles.
Dom Pius Parsch, le Guide dans l’année liturgique
« Il fut nommé à juste titre un pacificateur »
Saint Albert. — Jour de mort : 15 novembre 1280.
Tombeau : à Cologne, dans l’église paroissiale Saint André. Vie : Saint Albert,
le saint allemand, « la lumière de l’Allemagne », surnommé le Grand à cause de
sa science éminente, naquit à Lauingen, sur le Danube, en 1193, de la noble
famille des Bollstaedt. Il fit ses études à Padoue, où l’influence du
Bienheureux Jourdain, second général de l’Ordre des Dominicains, le décida à
entrer dans cet Ordre des Frères Prêcheurs, récemment fondé. Bientôt il fut
envoyé en Allemagne, où il exerça le professorat dans différentes villes,
spécialement à Cologne ; c’est là qu’il eut pour élève saint Thomas d’Aquin. Il
reçut à Paris, en 1240, le grade de maître en théologie. Il y avait grande
affluence à ses cours. En 1254, il fut élu provincial de son Ordre pour
l’Allemagne. Il séjourna longtemps à la cour du pape Alexandre Il, qui le
nomma, en 1259, évêque de Ratisbonne ; mais il revint, en 1263, à Cologne pour
reprendre en main la direction de son Ordre, œuvre qui fut couronnée du plus
grand succès. Son action comme conseiller, comme pacificateur et comme
directeur spirituel reçut d’abondantes bénédictions de Dieu. Il mourut à
Cologne, à l’âge de 87 ans. Le 16 décembre 1931, le pape Pie XI l’a mis au nombre
des saints et élevé au rang de docteur de l’Église. Le grand œuvre de sa vie
fut sa production littéraire qui remplit 21 volumes. Ce sont, pour une part
importante, des commentaires d’Aristote, qui fut ainsi révélé à l’Occident, et
de la Sainte Écriture. La légende raconte qu’Albert le Grand aurait jeté les
plans de la cathédrale de Cologne ; ce n’est certainement pas exact. En
réalité, il a jeté les plans d’une nouvelle et puissante cathédrale, « de la
nouvelle cathédrale de la philosophie chrétienne, élevée sur les fondations et
sur les piliers de la pensée et de la conception aristotélicienne, que le
disciple de saint Albert, saint Thomas d’Aquin, a achevée » (Söhngen). — La
Messe est du commun des docteurs de l’Église (In medio.
SOURCE : http://www.introibo.fr/15-11-St-Albert-le-Grand-eveque
Saint Albert le Grand (+ 1280)
Selon les conceptions médiévales, Albert, qui avait
plus de cinquante ans, était un homme âgé. Il faisait partie de ces prêcheurs
qui avaient été attirés à l’ordre et revêtus de l’habit dominicain par Jourdain
de Saxe lui-même, successeur de saint Dominique. Cela avait eu lieu en 1229 à
Padoue, où Albert – qui n’était déjà plus un tout jeune homme – étudiait à
l’université de la ville. Né à Lauingen en Souabe d’une famille de
fonctionnaires ou de militaires, c’était un homme circonspect, à qui il fallait
du temps pour se former et s’orienter.
Tel fut le cas pour son entrée dans l’ordre. Assez
longtemps, il fréquenta le couvent des prêcheurs de Padoue; il songeait à y
entrer, mais ne se décidait pas: il craignait de ne pouvoir en supporter les
austérités. Il fut persuadé par l’infatigable Jourdain. Albert lui-même a
souvent évoqué l’histoire de sa vocation, et Gérard de Frachet, autre prêcheur,
en a fait le récit dans sa Vie des frères: ” Il rêva une nuit qu’il était entré
dans l’ordre des prêcheurs, mais l’avait bientôt abandonné. En se réveillant,
il se réjouit de n’avoir pas pris l’habit de l’ordre et se dit à lui-même: “Je
vois bien que ma crainte de devenir frère prêcheur était justifiée.” Mais,
continue Gérard de Frachet, ce même jour Albert entendit un sermon de Jourdain
qui décrivait précisément le dilemme où il se trouvait et montrait la crainte
de ne pouvoir tenir comme une tentation du démon. Le jeune Albert, bouleversé
par ces paroles, alla aussitôt après le sermon trouver Jourdain et lui demanda:
“Maître, qui vous a fait lire dans mon coeur ?” Et il s’ouvrit à lui de ses
projets et de son rêve. Mais le maître de l’ordre lui répondit avec assurance:
“Je te promets, mon fils, que si tu entres dans notre ordre, tu ne
l’abandonneras jamais”, et il le lui répéta plusieurs fois. Sur une assurance
aussi ferme, Albert se tourna de grand coeur vers l’ordre des prêcheurs et
entra aussitôt au convent. “
Selon l’usage, il fut envoyé dans sa patrie,
l’Allemagne. Il fit à Cologne son noviciat et ses études théologiques, et
accéda au sacerdoce. Aussitôt on le nomma lecteur dans différents couvents
récemment fondés de la province allemande de l’ordre: car, selon les
constitutions, aucun couvent ne pouvait être fondé s’il ne disposait pas d’un
lecteur, chargé de compléter la formation théologique des frères (le prieur du
couvent lui-même devait suivre les cours du lecteur). Il ne s’agissait
d’ailleurs pas de hautes spéculations théologiques, mais plutôt d’un apport
théologique à la pastorale. Manifestement il y avait peu de lecteurs dans la
province, c’est pourquoi Albert exerça cette charge successivement à
Hildesheim, Ratisbonne, Fribourg et Strasbourg. C’est alors -entre 1234 et 1242
-que parurent ses premières oeuvres, entre autres le début d’un Traité des
vertus et l’une de ses oeuvres les plus populaires, la Louange de Marie.
En 1242, il fut envoyé par le maître de l’ordre à la
faculté de théologie de Paris pour y enseigner en tant que bachelier et y
obtenir le grade de maître. Le bachelier, à peu près comparable au professeur
assistant d’aujourd’hui, devait faire une année un cours d’Écriture sainte et,
l’année suivante, se consacrer aux commentaires des quatre livres des Sentences
de Pierre Lombard, alors la plus importante oeuvre de théologie.
Les deux cours se donnaient sous la direction du
maître, dont le statut correspondait à celui du professeur d’aujourd’hui. Ayant
passé l’examen de maîtrise, Albert se vit attribuer en 1245 une des deux
chaires de théologie qui, à Paris, avaient été confiées à l’ordre des
prêcheurs. Ces chaires n’étaient accordées que pour trois ans: on désirait
donner la possibilité d’enseigner à de nombreux frères qualifiés. Il était
d’usage que les cours fussent données dans la ” maison ” du professeur: en
l’occurrence, au couvent Saint-Jacques qui se trouva bientôt trop petit, tant
les étudiants se pressaient aux cours d’Albert. Quelques-uns de ses collègues,
peut-être un peu jaloux, le dénigrèrent comme ” novateur ” : en cela ils
n’avaient pas tort, car Albert introduisit dans ses cours la pensée d’Aristote.
C’était une entreprise audacieuse: en 1215, le légat du pape à Paris avait
interdit de se servir, pour les cours de la faculté de théologie, des oeuvres
dAristote portant sur les sciences naturelles et sur la métaphysique. Le pape
Grégoire IX avait renouvelé cette interdiction en 1231, mais en même temps
avait nommé une commission de maîtres chargés d’examiner la Physique du
philosophe antique. Presque rien n’avait encore été fait lorsque maître Albert
se mit à l’ouvrage. La tâche cadrait bien avec ses intérêts personnels. Bien
que ne disposant que de traductions latines assez défectueuses, il réussit à
insérer la philosophie aristotélicienne dans la théologie scolastique.
Il procéda à ce travail avec un esprit libre de
préjugés. Il écrit à peu près ceci: ” Nous n’avons pas, dans les sciences
naturelles, à approfondir la façon dont le Créateur, selon sa volonté libre,
s’est servi de sa création pour faire des merveilles où sa toute-puissance se
manifeste; nous avons plutôt à rechercher ce qui peut arriver dans la nature de
façon naturelle par la causalité propre aux choses de la nature. ” Ailleurs il
dit tout net : ” Je n’ai rien à voir avec les miracles quand je traite des
sciences physiques. ” Et c’est à partir de recherches empiriques qu’il se
formait une opinion: ” Il faut bien du temps avant de pouvoir affirmer que dans
une observation toute erreur est exclue. Préparer l’observation d’une certaine
façon ne suffit pas, il faut la répéter sous les aspects les plus divers, afin
de pouvoir trouver avec certitude la véritable cause de ce qui se manifeste. ”
Cette méthode empirique, aujourd’hui, va de soi: mais c’était une innovation
audacieuse, en un temps où, derrière chaque événement naturel surprenant, on
supposait aussitôt un miracle, une intervention immédiate de Dieu.
Au cours de ses trois ans de séjour à Paris naquirent
les premiers écrits philosophiques d’Albert, début d’une grande oeuvre qui
devait l’occuper constamment jusqu’à sa mort. En 1248, il repartit pour Cologne
afin d’y diriger le studium generale (ou centre d’études supérieures) de
l’ordre. Outre un travail d’organisation, il se consacrait surtout à
l’enseignement de la théologie et de la philosophie. Et parmi les étudiants
qui, de tous pays, venaient se rassembler à Cologne, il y avait Thomas d’Aquin.
Comme il était courant alors, il écrivait les cours du maître, et nous
possédons encore de ces notes de cours, difficiles à lire et détériorées car il
les emportait partout avec lui. Thomas, dans ses écrits, n’a jamais fait
allusion à ce qu’il devait à Albert: une remarque aussi personnelle ne
correspondait pas à sa réserve. Mais il l’a souvent cité; mieux encore, il l’a
placé, en tant qu’autorité scientifique, au rang des auteurs célèbres de la
tradition -et c’est là le plus grand éloge qu’on pouvait faire alors d’un
auteur contemporain. Surtout, Thomas a hérité d’Albert cette liberté d’esprit
qui devrait aller de soi quand on traite de physique et de philosophie, et qui
caractérisait son professeur. Ainsi, Thomas écrivait quelques années plus tard
: ” La vérité de notre foi devient la risée de l’incroyant quand un chrétien,
ne possédant pas les connaissances scientifiques suffisantes, tient pour
article de foi quelque chose qui n’en est pas en réalité et qui, à la lumière
d’un examen scientifique approfondi, se révèle une erreur. ” Albert aurait pu
écrire cette phrase : elle est née de son esprit.
A la différence de Thomas, Albert avait, entre 1248 et
1274, assumé des fonctions dirigeantes dans l’ordre et dans l’Église. De 1254 à
1257 il fut provincial de la province d’Allemagne qui s’étendait alors dUtrecht
à Riga et de Hambourg à l’Autriche. Sa fonction de provincial l’obligeait à
visiter les couvents de prêcheurs et de dominicaines, qui étaient alors au
moins quarante-cinq. Il commença par rappeler l’obligation pour les prêcheurs
de ne voyager qu’à pied et reprit sévèrement un prieur qui s’était rendu à
cheval au chapitre provincial. C’est ainsi qu’il se rendait d’un couvent à
l’autre, avec son secrétaire – alors qu’il avait plus de soixante ans. On n’a
pas conservé de comptes rendus de ces visites, mais deux documents intéressants
sont parvenus jusqu’à nous : les observations personnelles qu’il avait faites
au cours de ses pérégrinations et groupées sous les titres Livre des animaux et
Livre des plantes. Tout ce qu’il rencontrait l’intéressait, et le soir, dans
quelque couvent ou hospice de voyageurs, il s’asseyait pour noter ses remarques
– par exemple, sur une méduse qu’il avait observée au bord de la mer: ” Une
fois tirée de l’eau, elle resta allongée immobile, perdant sa forme, coula
comme un blanc d’oeuf et s’effondra. Lorsque nous la remîmes à l’eau, elle y
resta un moment sans bouger, puis retrouva sa forme hémisphérique et avança,
comme auparavant, par des mouvements d’extension et de contraction. “
L’événement décisif de ces années fut pour lui un
voyage à la cour pontificale, à Anagni, où il défendit devant le pape Alexandre
l’ordre attaqué par quelques professeurs de l’université de Paris. Le pape le
retint quelques mois à sa cour et le chargea d’enseigner à l’École pontificale:
il y donna des cours sur l’évangile de saint Jean et les épîtres pastorales.
Mais lorsque enfin, libéré de sa charge de provincial,
il put regagner sa cellule conventuelle à Cologne, ce furent les bourgeois de
cette ville qui le firent pénétrer dans la vie politique. En 1252, déjà, il
avait servi de médiateur entre les bourgeois et le belliqueux archevêque Conrad
de Hochstaden : il s’agissait surtout alors de droit de douane. Lors de ce
second arbitrage, en 1257, on en était arrivé à une véritable petite guerre
entre la ville et l’archevêque, guerre que celui-ci prolongeait en imposant aux
bourgeois des restrictions pour leur commerce et en exigeant d’eux des
modifications de leur administration. Il fallut à Albert et aux autres arbitres
des semaines d’étude pour voir clair dans ces tractations malaisées, car il n’y
avait guère alors de droit écrit et l’on invoquait toujours le droit coutumier.
Lorsque enfin on put préciser les limites des droits tant de la ville que de
l’archevêque, on estima avoir fait le maximum de ce qui était possible. Les
bourgeois furent visiblement très satisfaits du rôle d’arbitre qu’avait joué
Albert: au cours des années suivantes, ils lui demandèrent de jouer ce rôle
assez souvent, simplement à cause de sa personnalité (car il n’était nullement
juriste) et de sa réputation de ” savant universel “. Ces braves bourgeois ne
devaient guère, pourtant, avoir lu ses oeuvres.
Il était plongé dans ces questions lorsque le pape le
nomma évêque de Ratisbonne (ville libre impériale de Bavière). Son activité n’y
fut pas de longue durée, mais les circonstances de cette nomination nous
éclairent également sur sa personnalité. Le maître de l’ordre, Humbert de
Romans, était depuis quelque temps au fait des intentions du pape et
n’approuvait pas cette élection: il écrivit à Albert pour le conjurer de
refuser, se fondant sur les décisions de plusieurs chapitres généraux qui
n’autorisaient l’acceptation d’une telle charge que dans des cas exceptionnels.
” Qui de nous, qui des mendiants résistera à l’attrait de dignités
ecclésiastiques, lui écrivait-il, si vous y succombez aujourd’hui – Ne
citera-t-on pas votre exemple comme excuse -Qui, parmi les laïcs, ne se sentira
scandalisé, qui ne dira que, loin d’aimer la pauvreté, nous ne la subissons que
jusqu’au moment où nous pouvons nous en défaire ? ” Et la conclusion était
pathétique: ” Plutôt que de voir mon fils bien-aimé dans la chaire épiscopale,
je préférerais le voir au cercueil. “
Le zèle inquiet d’Humbert de Romans était justifié:
qu’un moine mendiant fût évêque de Ratisbonne – et par là même prince d’Empire
– il y avait là une contradiction. Mais par ailleurs on peut assurer qu’était
justifiée aussi l’inquiétude du pape devant l’état affligeant du diocèse, dont l’évêque
n’avait échappé qu’en se démettant de sa charge à un procès imminent pour
dissipation des biens d’Église et autres graves abus.
Albert se décida à accepter ce siège épiscopal avec
l’intention d’y renoncer dès qu’il ne serait plus nécessaire. En un an il
réussit à remettre en ordre la situation financière et, avec l’aide de quelques
abbés bénédictins et grâce à des tournées pastorales, à revivifier le service
des âmes ~ qui avait été négligé. Pour la population, il était si inhabituel de
voir un évêque arriver non en prince d’Empire, à cheval et en cuirasse, mais à
pied, en vêtements de laine écrue, chaussé de simples sandales, qu’ils
donnèrent à Albert un surnom: le ” porteur de sandales “. Quand Albert pensa
avoir trouvé, en la personne du doyen de la cathédrale, un successeur possible,
il alla trouver à Anagni le pape Urbain IV, le pria d’accepter sa démission et
lui suggéra de désigner comme évêque de Ratisbonne le doyen Léon. Le pape fut
d’accord sur tout cela. Mais au lieu de laisser Albert retourner à Cologne et
reprendre ses commentaires d’Aristote, il le retint dans sa cour d’Anagni, puis
l’envoya comme légat pontifical prêcher en Allemagne la croisade qu’on
préparait. Pendant trois ans (1261-1264) ce septuagénaire parcourut les régions
de langue allemande faisant alors partie de l’Empire. Il n’est rien resté de
ces prédications. Mais nous sommes renseignés sur diverses négociations au
sujet de fonctions épiscopales, ainsi que sur ses interventions comme arbitre
entre évêques et bourgeois, entre religieux et seigneurs féodaux, entre évêques
et religieux, et aussi entre couvents.
La mort d’Urbain IV (1264) mit fin à sa charge de
légat, et Albert se retira dans le couvent des prêcheurs de Würzburg pour y
rédiger son grand Commentaire sur l’évangile de saint Luc. En 1267 il
s’installa dans le couvent d’études de Strasbourg, où enseignait son élève
Ulrich de Strasbourg. Il est certain que lui-même y donna aussi des cours. Tout
comme à Würzburg, il fut appelé à arbitrer des litiges. A soixante-quinze ans,
en 1268, il se rendit au Mecklembourg pour aplanir un différend entre la secte
des johannites (conférant le baptême au nom de saint Jean-Baptiste) et le duc
slave Barnim. Il ne recherchait pas de telles missions de conciliation,
préférant servir l’ordre dans le recueillement de sa cellule de Strasbourg. Le
maître de l’ordre lui envoya, en 1269, une lettre de remerciements qui se
termine ainsi : ” Pour tout cela je te remercie, autant qu’il m’est possible,
et te prie de continuer ce que tu as commencé de façon si louable, de telle
sorte que ce soit pour toi un mérite, pour les frères un encouragement, pour
tous ceux qui en sont témoins un exemple. “
Cependant lorsque, peu après, le maître de l’ordre lui
demanda de se charger pour la seconde fois de la chaire de théologie de Paris,
Albert refusa, car il ne voulait plus être mêlé à la querelle suscitée par
l’université de Paris: c’est alors qu’on fit appel à son élève, Thomas d’Aquin.
Mais il ne trouva pas le repos pour autant: une demande de secours lui parvint
de Cologne. Alors qu’il y était comme légat, il avait travaillé à la
réconciliation entre l’archevêque Engelbert, successeur de Conrad, et les
bourgeois. Mais depuis lors la situation s’était aggravée. Au cours d’une
expédition militaire contre la ville et ses alliés, Engelbert avait été fait
prisonnier. On le retenait au château de Nideggen, dans l’Eifel. Le légat que
le pape avait désigné pour cette affaire avait, sans entendre les bourgeois,
pris parti pour l’archevêque et exigé sa libération. N’ayant pas été obéi, il
lança l’interdit sur la ville. Pire encore: en août 1270, tout commerce avec
les bourgeois de Cologne entraînait l’excommunication. C’était atteindre la
ville dans ses sources vives, et le maintien de cette mesure aurait signifié sa
ruine.
Au point où l’on en était, il n’était pas question de
rendre une sentence arbitrale dans les formes habituelles. Pour le légat, la
seule question à envisager était la totale soumission des bourgeois. Albert
misa tout sur une seule carte: il se rendit auprès de l’archevêque prisonnier
et eut avec lui un entretien personnel, au terme duquel celui-ci consentit à
faire la paix avec la ville. Des relations contemporaines et certains des
biographes d’Albert exagèrent probablement en parlant d’une ” conversion ”
d’Engelbert : il était trop prince d’Empire et trop peu évêque. En tout cas, le
paix de Cologne de 1271 rendit à la ville ses droits ancestraux. Le document
porte aussi le sceau d’Albert. L’archevêque respecta le traité, et c’était
l’essentiel. Mais le légat pontifical tenait ferme à son interdit, qui à vrai
dire n’avait plus guère d’effet, car l’archevêque lui-même éleva une
réclamation auprès de la curie contre cette mesure. Comme d’habitude, le procès
traîna en longueur. Au concile de Lyon, Albert intervint auprès du pape en
faveur de la ville: mais ce n’est qu’en 1275 que le successeur d’Engelbert put
faire lever l’interdit.
Albert demeura à Cologne, dans le couvent des
prêcheurs, où il enseigna et travailla à son Commentaire du livre de Job. Mais
appelé en tant qu’arbitre par les corporations les plus diverses, il voyageait
constamment. Il fit son dernier grand voyage en 1274 – âgé de plus de
quatre-vingts ans – pour se rendre au concile de Lyon et y soutenir la
confirmation par le pape de l’élection de Rodolphe de Habsbourg, désigné comme
roi des Romains par les princes allemands en 1273.
Ce n’est que les toutes dernières années de sa vie que
maître Albert put jouir d’une relative tranquillité. Il dictait, il faisait à
l’occasion un cours et à ce sujet une légende se répandit plus tard, quand on
chercha à le défendre d’avoir pratiqué la magie et d’avoir été surtout un homme
de science et un philosophe ” païen ” : mais le fond de la légende est vrai en
ce qu’il traduit l’amour qu’Albert portait à la Vierge Marie. Un jour,
disait-on, comme il faisait un cours, la mémoire lui manqua. Alors il raconta à
ses auditeurs qu’autrefois il avait eu une vision: ” Ce que je ne pouvais
discerner à force d’étude, je le trouvais souvent dans la prière. Je priais constamment
la Mère de Dieu, la Mère de miséricorde, lui disant que je voulais être
illuminé, grâce à son intercession, de la lumière de la sagesse divine, et lui
demandant de garder mon coeur ferme dans la foi afin qu’empêtré dans la
philosophie, je n’en arrive pas à vaciller dans la foi au Christ. A la fin, la
meilleure des mères m’apparut et me consola : “Sois fidèle à l’étude et
persévérant dans la vertu, me dit-elle. Dieu veut par ta science éclairer
l’Église. Mais pour que tu ne vacilles pas dans la foi, avant ta mort toute ta
philosophie te sera ôtée. C’est dans ton innocence et ta sincérité d’enfant et
dans la vérité de ta foi que Dieu t’enlèvera à ce monde. Et voilà le signe qui
t’avertira que ton temps est arrivé dans un cours public, ta mémoire t’abandonnera.”
“
Albert consacra les derniers mois de sa vie à prier et
à méditer dans sa cellule. Il n’en sortait que rarement, soutenu par son
secrétaire Gottfried, pour se rendre sur les tombes de ses frères. Souvent,
pour se préparer à la mort, il assistait dans l’église à l’office des défunts.
Il ne recevait plus aucune visite. Un témoignage contemporain nous dit: ” Un
jour que l’archevêque était venu au couvent pour le voir et avait frappé à la
porte de sa cellule, il entendit une voix lui répondre “Frère Albert n’est pas
ici.” L’archevêque se retira et dit, les larmes aux yeux: “C’est vrai, Albert
n’est plus ici.” ” Il mourut entouré des prières de ses frères, le 15 novembre
1280. (Source : Hertz, Anselm. Nils Loose, Helmuth. Dominique et les
dominicains. Cerf, 1987.)
SOURCE : http://dominicains.ca/figures-dominicaines/saint-albert-le-grand/
Incoronazione di Maria tra i santi Sigismondo e
Alberto - Rivolta d'Adda
Saint Albert le Grand
1193[?]-1280
« Les Parisiens qui traversaient, en l’année 1245, la place Maubert, étaient
témoins d’un bien curieux spectacle. Un homme était là, petit, frèle et débile,
religieux dominicain, entouré d’un cercle épais et serré de jeunes clercs
studieux et avides de s’instruire, auxquels il exposait, dans un magnifique
langage, les connaissances théologiques, philosophiques et scientifiques de
l’époque, leur commentant les travaux d’Aristote et d’Avicenne, leur enseignant la
logique, la métaphysique, la chimie, l’astronomie, leur dévoilant le mécanisme
de l’homme et des animaux, leur infusant la science prodigieuse dont il était
pénétré.
Dans les rangs de cette phalange qui se pressait autour du savant, on aurait pu
voir de jeunes intelligences qui devaient s’illustrer à leur tour : Roger
Bacon, avec sa tunique grise et ses sandales qui annonçaient un
cordelier; Thomas
d’Aquin, qui devait être sanctifié, l’émule de l’illustre maître, le grand
scrutateur du monde intellectuel, des facultés physiologiques et de la
métaphysique; Thomas de Cantipré, Albert de Saxe, Vincent de Beauvais, Jean de
Sacrobosco, Arnold de Villeneuve, Michel Scott, Robert de Sorbon, Guillaume de
Saint-Amour, etc.
Cet homme, ce professeur en plein vent, qui, comme Abailard (i.e. Abélard), avait été
obligé d’entraîner dans la rue la foule immense d’auditeurs que les écoles,
trop petites, des cloîtres et des églises, ne pouvaient contenir, se nommait
Maître Albert.
Il était né, en 1205, à Lavingen, en Souabe, et descendait de la famille des
Bollstadt, qui était alors puissante, célèbre et riche, ce qui permit au jeune
Albert d’aller étudier tour à tour dans les plus renommées écoles de
l’Allemagne, de l’Italie et de la France; pèlerinage indispensable pour celui
qui voulait réunir un vaste réseau de connaissances, à une époque où les hommes
profonds étaient si rares, et où chaque savant embrassait dans ses œuvres
l’universalité des sciences. On pense que ce fut dans l’Université de Pavie
qu’il s’occupa sérieusement de philosophie, de mathématiques et de médecine. Ce
fut encore dans celle-ci qu’il se lia avec Jordan, supérieur général de l’ordre
des Frères prêcheurs, qui employa tout son ascendant pour l’incorporer dans la
congrégation; car, à cette époque, les Frères prêcheurs, dominicains,
ou jacobins, fondés en 1216, s’ils avaient déjà parmi eux des hommes reconnus
par leur savoir et leur éloquence, tels que Jordan, Mathieu Bertrand,
Garrigues, Laurent, Jean de Navarre, Michel Fabre, Jean de Saint-Alban, médecin
de Philippe Auguste, etc., ne se sentaient pas encore assez forts eu égard aux
immenses travaux qu’ils préparaient, et cherchaient de toutes parts des hommes
capables, par leur génie, leurs talents et leur dévouement, de donner un lustre
extraordinaire à la communauté.
Édifié par l’exemple de son ami, subjugué par ses discours, Albert suivit donc
l’entraînement de son époque pour la vie monastique, et il prit l’habit
dominicain en 1222 ou 1223. Il le fit en Italie, où, après avoir demeuré un an
dans un couvent, il alla étudier à Padoue et à Bologne.
Lorsqu’il eut achevé ses études, ses chefs l’envoyèrent à Cologne, à Fribourg,
à Ratisbonne, à Strasbourg, pour y ouvrir des conférences qui furent pour lui
une suite de triomphes.
En l’année 1240, nous le voyons fixé à Cologne, où des biographes et des
peintres le représentent dans une cellule qu’éclairent à peine quelques rayons
de lumière tamisés par d’étroites verrières, entouré de quelques instruments
bizarres de physique et d’astronomie, de fourneaux étrangement compliqués, de
manuscrits, de minéraux, travaillant au grand œuvre.
En 1245, il est à Paris, répandant, comme nous l’avons dit, des flots de
science et de philosophie.
Il ne resta dans la capitale du royaume de France que trois ans, pour courir
ensuite sur les bords du Rhin,
où l’on ne voulait pas être plus longtemps privé de ses lumières.
En l’année 1254, Albert est fait provincial de son ordre et visite à pied, tant
ses mœurs avaient de simplicité, les diverses provinces soumises à sa
juridiction. Alexandre IV, dans l’espoir de le fixer dans la capitale du monde
chrétien, l’appelle à Rome et lui confère la charge de maître du sacré palais.
En 1260, une bulle du pape le nomme évêque de Ratisbonne. La cour de Rome avait
pensé que sa haute vertu et son profond savoir pouvaient seuls remédier au
désordre temporel et spirituel qui régnait au sein du diocèse qu’on lui
confiait.
Mais au bout de trois ans, sollicité par le général des dominicains, Humbert de
Romans, Albert demandait au pape et obtenait la permission d’abandonner sa
prélature; il retournait dans sa chère ville de Cologne, où il avait conquis
tant de gloire et goûté de si pures jouissances au milieu de ses études; et
c’est avec bonheur qu’il échange un titre magnifique contre sa laborieuse
mission de frère prêcheur.
Peu après le pape lui ordonne d’aller prêcher la croisade dans toute
l’Allemagne et la Bohême.
En 1274, un bref de Grégoire X lui enjoint de se rendre au concile de Lyon, où
sa confiance l’appelait pour y faire prévaloir, par son éloquence et son
autorité, les droits de Rodolphe, roi des Romains.
Immédiatement après la session de ce concile, il revint de nouveau reprendre
ses leçons publiques à Cologne, champ de gloire pour lui, mais qui fut aussi
son champ funéraire, car il y mourut le 15 novembre 1289 (*).
Les funérailles du grand homme se firent avec une magnificence en rapport avec
sa haute renommée. L’archevêque Sifrid et les chanoines de la cathédrale et des
collégiales y assistaient, ainsi qu’une foule de gens nobles et d’hommes du
peuple.
Son corps fut enterré au milieu du chœur de l’église du couvent des Jacobins,
et ses entrailles furent portées à Ratisbonne, qui avait réclamé sa part des
restes de son ancien évêque.
Albert le Grand, que l’on connaît encore sous les noms d’Albertus Teutonicus, Albertus
de Colonia, Albertus Ratisbonensis, Albertus de Bollstadt, est
parvenu à la postérité, enveloppé de je ne sais quel nuage de magie, de
sorcellerie, qui est une véritable flétrissure donnée à un si grand génie.
D’infimes productions, imprimées parfois en encre rouge, afin de leur donner un
cachet plus cabalistique, et répandues dans les campagnes sous le nom de Secrets
admirables du Grand Albert, n’ont pas peu contribué à transformer
l’admirable professeur, le profond penseur du treizième siècle en un vil
sorcier. Heureusement que ses œuvres sont là pour le venger de telles
abominations et pour le ranger parmi les plus beaux génies qui ont illustré
l’humanité. Parmi les œuvres publiées sous son nom, immense collection de vingt
et un volumes in-folio, il en est, il est vrai, qui sont apocryphes; mais en
défalquant ces dernières, il reste un monument qui ne jette pas moins dans une
stupéfiante admiration ceux qui veulent bien les lire avec attention et sans
parti pris de dénigrer. Albert le Grand est le véritable chef, au moyen âge, de
l’École expérimentale. La partie philosophique et scientifique de ses ouvrages
n’est au fond qu’un savant commentaire des travaux d’Aristote et d’Avicenne;
mais il les a enrichis de toutes les connaissances renfermées dans les auteurs
postérieurs à ces deux grands hommes, et il remplit les lacunes de ses
prédécesseurs. Il fut pour l’Occident ce qu’Avicenne avait été pour l’Orient;
il agrandit le champ des sciences naturelles en traçant des lois appelées à
jeter sur elles le plus vif éclat.
C’est surtout dans son Traité des animaux (t. VI de l’édition de
Jammy) qu’il faut juger l’évêque de Ratisbonne; c’est là, particulièrement dans
les sept derniers livres qui sont du propre fonds d’Albert, que l’on peut voir
un tableau exact et complet de l’état de la zoologie au treizième siècle, et
découvrir le germe d’une foule de lois scientifiques que notre époque n’a fait
que développer et démontrer. N’est-il pas curieux de lui voir, contrairement
aux autres anatomistes, commencer l’histoire du système osseux par la
description de la colonne vertébrale, base réelle de tout le premier
embranchement de la série animale; de le surprendre considérant la tête comme
une série de vertèbres munies de leurs appendices; essayant de déterminer les
facultés de l’âme d’après les organes extérieurs du crâne, et devançant ainsi
Gall et Spurzheim; descendant l’échelle zoologique depuis l’homme jusqu’à
l’éponge qui en est le dernier terme; définissant très-exactement l’espèce,
montrant le mécanisme au moyen duquel on fait un genre avec les
espèces; posant ainsi les bases d’une véritable classification; décrivant, par
ordre alphabétique, toutes les espèces animales connues; désignant nos Annélidés d’aujourd’hui
sous le nom d’animalium annulosorum; décrivant dans cent soixante pages
in-folio la physiologie et l’anatomie des plantes, leur sommeil, leur
engourdissement nocturne, les diverses espèces connues; passant en revue les
minéraux; inventant le mot affinité dans le sens que nous lui
attachons aujourd’hui; déclarant positivement que les empreintes à formes
organiques qu’on rencontre sur différentes pierres ne sont que des êtres
pétrifiés, …
Au reste, si Albert le Grand a eu ses détracteurs, qui semblent ne l’avoir pas
même lu, ou qui n’ont pas fait la part ni du temps où il écrivait, ni des
nombreuses et indigestes productions qu’on a publiées sous son nom; d’autres
écrivains, après l’avoir médité, après avoir fait un triage nécessaire
dans cette immense encyclopédie de vingt et un volumes in-folio, ont rendu
justice à l’admirable religieux dominicain, en le considérant comme le plus
grand génie qui soit sorti des flancs de l’humanité. Paul Jove, Trithème,
Blount, Quenstedt, Bayle, Tiedmann, Jourdain, de Gérando, Cuvier, de
Blainville, Meyer, Choulant, Dafin, d’Orbigny, Villemain, Haureau, etc., et
surtout, dans ces derniers temps, M. F. A. Pouchet (Histoire des sciences
naturelles au moyen âge, ou Albert le Grand et son époque, Paris, 1853,
in-8), montrent Albert de Bollstadt tel qu’il a été : l’Aristote chrétien.
On trouvera le catalogue complet des œuvres d’Albert le Grand dans les
Scriptores ordinis praedicat des PP. Quetif et Echard, p. 171; il n’y comprend
pas moins de douze pages in-folio. Fabricius (Bibl. lat. med. et inf. aetatis)
a aussi fait l’analyse des vingt et un volumes des œuvres complètes du célèbre
religieux. Les amateurs de livres rares tâcheront de se procurer les éditions
suivantes :
I. Opus de Animalibus (sive de rerum proprietatibus), Romae, 1478,
in-folio. Édition regardée comme la première de cet ouvrage. – II. De
Secretis mulierum opus, 1478, in-4 gothique, très-souvent réimprimé dans le
quinzième siècle. On y a fréquemment ajouté, particulièrement dans les éditions
de 1643, 1655, 1662 et 1699, le Secreta virorum, qui n’est pas d’Albert le
Grand. – III. Liber secretorum de virtutibus herbarum, lapidum et
animalium. 1478, in-4, première édition de ce livre très-souvent réimprimé. –
IV. Albertus Magnus, Ratisbonensis episcopus, ordin. Praedicator. Opera
omnia, edita studio et labore P. Petri Jammy. Lugduni, 1651, 21 vol. in-fol.
Collection très-recherchée et qui atteint dans les ventes le prix de 300
francs. »
A. Chéreau, article «Albert le Grand», dans Jacques Raige-Delorme et Amédée
Dechambre (dir.), Dictionnaire encyclopédique des sciences médicales.
[Première série]. Tome deuxième, Adh-Alg. Paris, P. Asselin, V. Masson et fils,
1865, p. 394-397
(*) Il s'agit sans doute d'une coquille. L'année admise de son décès est 1280.
* * *
Albert le Grand et l'alchimie
« Encyclopédie vivante du moyen âge, Albert, né en 1193, à Lavingen, sur le
Danube, enseigna successivement la philosophie à Ratisbonne, à Cologne, à
Strasbourg, à Hildesheim, enfin à Paris où le nom de la place Maubert (dérivé
de Ma, abréviation de magister, et d’Albert) en rappelle encore le
souvenir. Provincial de l’ordre des Dominicains, il fut nommé évêque de
Ratisbonne. Mais préférant, exemple rare, l’étude des sciences aux dignités de
l’Église, il se démit de ses fonctions épiscopales, et mourut, en 1280, à l’âge
de quatre-vingt-sept ans, dans un couvent, près de Cologne.
Les ouvrages imprimés d’Albert le Grand forment 21 volumes in-fol. (Lyon, 1651,
édit. de P. Jammi). Ce vaste recueil contient plusieurs traités qui intéressent
l’histoire de la chimie.
Le petit traité de Alchimia donne des renseignements précieux sur
l’état de la science au treizième siècle. L’auteur commence par déclarer qu’il
est impossible de tirer quelques lumières des écrits alchimiques. « Ils sont,
dit-il, vides de sens et ne renferment rien de bons… J’ai connu des abbés, des
chanoines, des directeurs, des physiciens, des illettrés, qui avaient perdu
leur temps et leur argent à s’occuper d’alchimie.» – Il conseille surtout aux
adeptes de fuir tout rapport avec les princes et les grands : « Car si tu as,
ajoute-t-il, le malheur de t’introduire auprès d’eux, ils ne cesseront pas de
te demander : Eh bien, maître, comment va l’œuvre? Quand verrons-nous enfin
quelque chose de bon? Et, dans leur impatience, ils finiront par te traiter de
filou, de vaurien, etc., et te causeront mille ennuis. Et si tu n’obtiens aucun
résultat, ils te feront sentir tout l’effet de leur colère. Si, au contraire,
tu réussis, ils te garderont dans une captivité perpétuelle, afin de te faire
travailler à leur profit. » Cet avertissement nous dépeint les relations des
alchimistes avec les seigneurs d’alors.
Malgré quelques doutes, Albert croyait à la possibilité de la transmutation des
métaux. Voici les arguments qu’il invoque à l’appui de sa croyance : « Les
métaux sont tous identiques dans leur origine; ils ne diffèrent les uns des
autres que par leur forme. Or la forme dépend des causes accidentelles que
l’artiste doit chercher à découvrir et à éloigner; car ce sont ces causes qui
entravent la combinaison régulière du soufre et du mercure, éléments de tout
métal. Une matrice malada donne naissance à un enfant infirme et lépreux, bien
que la semence ait été bonne; il en est de même des métaux engendrés au sein de
la terre, qui leur sert de matrice : une cause accidentelle ou une maladie
locale peut produire un métal imparfait. Lorsque le soufre pur rencontre du
mercure pur, il se produit de l’or au bout d’un temps plus ou moins long, par
l’action permanente de la nature. Les espèces sont immuables et ne peuvent, à
aucune condition, être transformées les unes en les autres. Mais le plomb, le
cuivre, le fer, l’argent, etc., ne sont pas des espèces, c’est une même
essence, dont les formes diverses vous semblent des espèces. »
Ces arguments furent souvent reproduits par les alchimistes. Ils étaient
acceptés comme des lois au beau temps des nominalistes et des réalistes.
Albert le Grand a l’un des premiers employé le mot affinité dans le
sens qu’y attachent aujourd’hui les chimistes. « Le soufre, dit-il, noircit l’argent
et brûle en général les métaux, à cause de l’affinité naturelle qu’il a pour
eux (propter affinitatem naturae metalla adurit) » (1). – Il paraît avoir aussi
appliqué pour la première fois le mot vitreolum à l’atrament vert,
qui était le sulfate de fer.
Que faut-il entendre par esprit métallique et par élixir? Voici
la réponse d’Albert : « Il y a quatre esprits métalliques : le mercure, le
soufre, l’orpiment et le sel ammoniac, qui tous peuvent servir à teindre les
métaux en rouge (or) ou en blanc (argent). C’est avec ces quatre esprits que se
prépare la teinture, appelée en arabe élixir, et en latin fermentum,
destinée à opérer la transsubstantiation des métaux vils en argent ou en or. »
– Mais l’auteur a soin de nous avertir que l’or des alchimistes n’était pas de
l’or véritable. Ce n’était probablement que du chrysocale. Il connaissait aussi
le cuivre blanc (alliage de cuivre et d’arsenic), qu’il se gardait bien de
prendre pour de l’argent.
Albert le Grand démontra le premier, par la synthèse, que le cinabre ou pierre
rouge (lapis rubens), qui se rencontre dans les mines d’où l’on retire le
vif argent, est un composé de soufre et de mercure. « On produit, dit-il, du
cinabre sous forme d’une poudre rouge brillante en sublimant du mercure avec du
soufre. »
Il a décrit très-exactement la préparation de l’acide nitrique, qu’il
nomme eau prime, ou eau philosophique au premier degré de perfection. Il
en indique en même temps les principales propriétés, surtout celles d’oxyder
les métaux et de séparer l’argent de l’or. Ce qu’il appelle eau seconde était
une espèce d’eau régale obtenue en mêlant quatre parties d’eau prime avec une
partie de sel ammoniac. Pour avoir l’eau tierce, on devait traiter, à une
chaleur modérée, le mercure blanc par l’eau seconde. Enfin l’eau quarte était
le produit de distillation de l’eau tierce qui, avant d’être distillée, devait
rester, pendant quatre jours, enfouie dans du fumier de cheval. Les alchimistes
faisaient le plus grand cas de cette eau quarte, connue sous les noms de vinaigre des
philosophes, d’eau minérale, de rosée céleste, etc. »
(1) De Rebus metallicis, Rouen, 1476.
Ferdinand Hoefer, Histoire de la physique et de la chimie : depuis les
temps les plus reculés jusqu'à nos jours, Paris, Hachette, 1872, p. 365-367
SOURCE : http://agora.qc.ca/dossiers/Saint_Albert_le_Grand
Also known as
Albert of Lauingen
Albertus Magnus
Doctor Expertus
Doctor Universalis
Profile
Son of a military nobleman. Dominican. Priest. Taught theology at Cologne, Germany,
and Paris, France. Teacher of Saint Thomas
Aquinas. Influential teacher, preacher,
and administrator. Bishop of Regensburg, Germany.
Introduced Greek and Arabic science and philosophy to
medieval Europe.
Known for his wide interest in what became known later as the natural sciences
– botany, biology, etc. Wrote and
illustrated guides to his observations, and was considered on a par with Aristotle as
an authority on these matters. Theological writer. Doctor
of the Church.
Born
1206 at
Lauingen an der Donau, Swabia (part
of modern Germany)
15
November 1280 at Cologne, Prussia (part
of modern Germany)
of natural causes
27
November 1622 by Pope Gregory
XV
16 December 1931 by Pope Pius XI
Cincinnati, Ohio, archdiocese of
scientists (proclaimed
on 13
August 1948 by Pope Pius
XII)
man dressed as a Dominican bishop lecturing
from a pulpit
man arguing with Saint Thomas
Aquinas
Dear Scientist and Doctor
of the Church, natural science always led you to the higher science of God.
Though you had an encyclopedic knowledge, it never made you proud, for you
regarded it as a gift of God. Inspire scientists to use their gifts well in
studying the wonders of creation, thus bettering the lot of the human race and
rendering greater glory to God. Amen.
Additional Information
Book
of Saints, by the Monks of
Ramsgate
Illustrated
Catholic Family Annual
Pope
Benedict XVI: On Saint Albert the Great
On
Union with God, by Saint Albert the Great
Saints
in Art, by Margaret Tabor
Saints
of the Day, by Katherine Rabenstein
books
Our Sunday Visitor’s Encyclopedia of Saints
other sites in english
1001 Patron Saints and Their Feast Days, Australian
Catholic Truth Society
Dictionary of Scientific Biography
Encyclopedia Britannica, 1911 edition
Professor Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira
Saint Charles Borromeo Church, Picayune, Mississippi
School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Saint
Andrews, Scotland
Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy
images
audio
LibriVox: On Union With God, by Saint Albert the Great
video
e-books
On Cleaving to God, by Saint Albert the Great
webseiten auf deutsch
Florilegium Martyrologii Romani
sitios en español
Martirologio Romano, 2001 edición
sites en français
Bibliothèque nationale de France
Abbé Christian-Philippe Chanut
Dictionnaire
de Théologie Catholique
fonti in italiano
Congregazione delle Cause dei Santi
strony w jezyku polskim
Compendium theologicae veritatis
Readings
It is by the path of love, which is charity, that God
draws near to man, and man to God. But where charity is not found, God cannot
dwell. If, then, we possess charity, we possess God, for “God is Charity” (1
John 4:8) – Saint Albert
the Great
The greater and more persistent your confidence in
God, the more abundantly you will receive what you ask. – Saint Albert
the Great
He could not have commanded anything more beneficial,
for this Sacrament is the fruit of the tree of life. Anyone who receives this
Sacrament with the devotion of sincere faith will never taste death. It is a
tree of life for those who grasp it, and blessed is he who holds it fast. The
man who feeds on Me shall live on account of Me. – Saint Albert
the Great on the Eucharist
“Do this in remembrance of me.” Two things should be
noted here. The first is the command that we should use this sacrament, which
is indicated when Jesus says, “Do this.” The second is that this sacrament
commemorates the Lord’s going to death for our sake. This sacrament is
profitable because it grants remission of sins; it is most useful because it
bestows the fullness of grace on us in this life. “The Father of spirits
instructs us in what is useful for our sanctification.” And his sanctification
is in Christ’s sacrifice, that is, when he offers himself in this sacrament to
the Father for our redemption to us for our use. Christ could not have
commanded anything more beneficial, for this sacrament is the fruit of the tree
of life. Anyone who receives this sacrament with the devotion of sincere faith
will never taste death. “It is a tree of life for those who grasp it, and
blessed is he who holds it fast. The man who feeds on me shall live on account
of me.” Nor could he have commanded anything more lovable, for this sacrament
produces love and union. It is characteristic of the greatest love to give
itself as food. “Had not the men of my text exclaimed: Who will feed us with
his flesh to satisfy our hunger? as if to say: I have loved them and they have
loved me so much that I desire to be within them, and they wish to receive me
so that they may become my members. There is no more intimate or more natural
means for them to be united to me, and I to them. Nor could he have commanded
anything which is more like eternal life. Eternal life flows from this
sacrament because God with all sweetness pours himself out upon the
blessed. – from a commentary by Saint Albert the Great on the Gospel
of Luke
MLA Citation
“Saint Albert the Great“. CatholicSaints.Info. 12
November 2021. Web. 15 November 2021.
<https://catholicsaints.info/saint-albert-the-great/>
SOURCE : https://catholicsaints.info/saint-albert-the-great/
BENEDICT XVI
GENERAL AUDIENCE
Saint Albert the Great
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
One of the great masters of medieval theology is St
Albert the Great. The title "Great", (Magnus), with which he has
passed into history indicates the vastness and depth of his teaching, which he
combined with holiness of life. However, his contemporaries did not hesitate to
attribute to him titles of excellence even then. One of his disciples, Ulric of
Strasbourg, called him the "wonder and miracle of our epoch".
He was born in Germany at the beginning of the 13th
century. When he was still young he went to Italy, to Padua, the seat of one of
the most famous medieval universities. He devoted himself to the study of the
so-called "liberal arts": grammar, rhetoric, dialectics, arithmetic,
geometry, astronomy and music, that is, to culture in general, demonstrating
that characteristic interest in the natural sciences which was soon to become
the favourite field for his specialization. During his stay in Padua he
attended the Church of the Dominicans, whom he then joined with the profession
of the religious vows. Hagiographic sources suggest that Albert came to this
decision gradually. His intense relationship with God, the Dominican Friars'
example of holiness, hearing the sermons of Blessed Jordan of Saxony, St
Dominic's successor at the Master General of the Order of Preachers, were the
decisive factors that helped him to overcome every doubt and even to surmount
his family's resistence. God often speaks to us in the years of our youth and
points out to us the project of our life. As it was for Albert, so also for all
of us, personal prayer, nourished by the Lord's word, frequent reception of the
Sacraments and the spiritual guidance of enlightened people are the means to
discover and follow God's voice. He received the religious habit from Bl.
Jordan of Saxony.
After his ordination to the priesthood, his superiors
sent him to teach at various theological study centres annexed to the convents
of the Dominican Fathers. His brilliant intellectual qualities enabled him to
perfect his theological studies at the most famous university in that period,
the University of Paris. From that time on St Albert began his extraordinary
activity as a writer that he was to pursue throughout his life.
Prestigious tasks were assigned to him. In 1248 he was
charged with opening a theological studium at Cologne, one of the most
important regional capitals of Germany, where he lived at different times and
which became his adopted city. He brought with him from Paris an exceptional
student, Thomas Aquinas. The sole merit of having been St Thomas' teacher would
suffice to elicit profound admiration for St Albert. A relationship of mutual
esteem and friendship developed between these two great theologians, human
attitudes that were very helpful in the development of this branch of knowlege.
In 1254, Albert was elected Provincial of the Dominican Fathers'
"Provincia Teutoniae" Teutonic Province which included communities
scattered over a vast territory in Central and Northern Europe. He
distinguished himself for the zeal with which he exercised this ministry,
visiting the communities and constantly recalling his confreres to fidelity, to
the teaching and example of St Dominic.
His gifts did not escape the attention of the Pope of
that time, Alexander iv, who wanted Albert with him for a certain time at
Anagni where the Popes went frequently in Rome itself and at Viterbo, in order
to avail himself of Albert's theological advice. The same Supreme Pontiff
appointed Albert Bishop of Regensburg, a large and celebrated diocese, but
which was going through a difficult period. From 1260 to 1262, Albert exercised
this ministry with unflagging dedication, succeeding in restoring peace and
harmony to the city, in reorganizing parishes and convents and in giving a new
impetus to charitable activities.
In the year 1263-1264, Albert preached in Germany and
in Bohemia, at the request of Pope Urban iv. He later returned to Cologne and
took up his role as lecturer, scholar and writer. As a man of prayer, science
and charity, his authoritative intervention in various events of the Church and
of the society of the time were acclaimed: above all, he was a man of
reconciliation and peace in Cologne, where the Archbishop had run seriously
foul of the city's institutions; he did his utmost during the Second Council of
Lyons, in 1274, summoned by Pope Gregory X, to encourage union between the
Latin and Greek Churches after the separation of the great schism with the East
in 1054. He also explained the thought of Thomas Aquinas which had been the
subject of objections and even quite unjustified condemnations.
He died in his cell at the convent of the Holy Cross,
Cologne, in 1280, and was very soon venerated by his confreres. The Church
proposed him for the worship of the faithful with his beatification in 1622 and
with his canonization in 1931, when Pope Pius XI proclaimed
him Doctor of the Church. This was certainly an appropriate recognition of this
great man of God and outstanding scholar, not only of the truths of the faith
but of a great many other branches of knowledge; indeed, with a glance at the
titles of his very numerous works, we realize that there was something
miraculous about his culture and that his encyclopedic interests led him not
only to concern himself with philosophy and theology, like other contemporaries
of his, but also with every other discipline then known, from physics to
chemistry, from astronomy to minerology, from botany to zoology. For this
reason Pope Pius
XII named him Patron of enthusiasts of the natural sciences and also
called him "Doctor universalis" precisely because of the vastness of
his interests and knowledge.
Of course, the scientific methods that St Albert the
Great used were not those that came to be established in the following
centuries. His method consisted simply in the observation, description and
classification of the phenomena he had studied, but it was in this way that he
opened the door for future research.
He still has a lot to teach us. Above all, St Albert
shows that there is no opposition between faith and science, despite certain
episodes of misunderstanding that have been recorded in history. A man of faith
and prayer, as was St Albert the Great, can serenely foster the study of the
natural sciences and progress in knowledge of the micro- and macrocosm,
discovering the laws proper to the subject, since all this contributes to
fostering thirst for and love of God. The Bible speaks to us of creation as of
the first language through which God who is supreme intelligence, who is the
Logos reveals to us something of himself. The Book of Wisdom, for example, says
that the phenomena of nature, endowed with greatness and beauty, is like the
works of an artist through which, by analogy, we may know the Author of
creation (cf. Wis 13: 5). With a classical similitude in the Middle Ages and in
the Renaissance one can compare the natural world to a book written by God that
we read according to the different approaches of the sciences (cf. Address
to the participants in the Plenary Meeting of the Pontifical Academy of
Sciences, 31 October 2008; L'Osservatore Romano English edition, 5
November 2008, p. 6). How many scientists, in fact, in the wake of St Albert
the Great, have carried on their research inspired by wonder at and gratitude
for a world which, to their eyes as scholars and believers, appeared and
appears as the good work of a wise and loving Creator! Scientific study is then
transformed into a hymn of praise. Enrico Medi, a great astrophysicist of our
time, whose cause of beatification has been introduced, wrote: "O you
mysterious galaxies... I see you, I calculate you, I understand you, I study
you and I discover you, I penetrate you and I gather you. From you I take light
and make it knowledge, I take movement and make it wisdom, I take sparkling
colours and make them poetry; I take you stars in my hands and, trembling in
the oneness of my being, I raise you above yourselves and offer you in prayer
to the Creator, that through me alone you stars can worship" (Le Opere.
Inno alla creazione).
St Albert the Great reminds us that there is
friendship between science and faith and that through their vocation to the study
of nature, scientists can take an authentic and fascinating path of holiness.
His extraordinary openmindedness is also revealed in a
cultural feat which he carried out successfully, that is, the acceptance and
appreciation of Aristotle's thought. In St Albert's time, in fact, knowledge
was spreading of numerous works by this great Greek philosopher, who lived a
quarter of a century before Christ, especially in the sphere of ethics and
metaphysics. They showed the power of reason, explained lucidly and clearly the
meaning and structure of reality, its intelligibility and the value and purpose
of human actions. St Albert the Great opened the door to the complete
acceptance in medieval philosophy and theology of Aristotle's philosophy, which
was subsequently given a definitive form by St Thomas. This reception of a
pagan pre-Christian philosophy, let us say, was an authentic cultural
revolution in that epoch. Yet many Christian thinkers feared Aristotle's
philosophy, a non-Christian philosophy, especially because, presented by his
Arab commentators, it had been interpreted in such a way, at least in certain
points, as to appear completely irreconcilable with the Christian faith. Hence
a dilemma arose: are faith and reason in conflict with each other or not?
This is one of the great merits of St Albert: with
scientific rigour he studied Aristotle's works, convinced that all that is
truly rational is compatible with the faith revealed in the Sacred Scriptures.
In other words, St Albert the Great thus contributed to the formation of an
autonomous philosophy, distinct from theology and united with it only by the
unity of the truth. So it was that in the 13th century a clear distinction came
into being between these two branches of knowledge, philosophy and theology,
which, in conversing with each other, cooperate harmoniously in the discovery
of the authentic vocation of man, thirsting for truth and happiness: and it is
above all theology, that St Albert defined as "emotional knowledge",
which points out to human beings their vocation to eternal joy, a joy that
flows from full adherence to the truth.
St Albert the Great was capable of communicating these
concepts in a simple and understandable way. An authentic son of St Dominic, he
willingly preached to the People of God, who were won over by his words and by
the example of his life.
Dear brothers and sisters, let us pray the Lord that learned theologians will never be lacking in holy Church, wise and devout like St Albert the Great, and that he may help each one of us to make our own the "formula of holiness" that he followed in his life: "to desire all that I desire for the glory of God, as God desires for his glory all that he desires", in other words always to be conformed to God's will, in order to desire and to do everything only and always for his glory.
To Special Groups
Dear Brothers and Sisters, I welcome all the
English-speaking visitors, especially a group of priests, Religious and
seminarians visiting from the Philippines. Upon all the English-speaking
pilgrims and your families, I invoke God's abundant Blessings. Lastly, I greet
the young people, the sick, and the newlyweds. May the Solemnity of the
Annunciation, which we shall be celebrating tomorrow be an invitation to all to
follow the example of Mary Most Holy: for you, dear young people, may it be
expressed in prompt availability to the Father's call, so that you may be
Gospel leaven in society; for you, dear sick people, may it be an incentive to
renew the serene and confident acceptance of the divine will and to transform
your suffering into a means of redemption for the whole of humanity. May Mary's
"yes" awaken in you, dear newlyweds, an ever more generous commitment
to building a family based on reciprocal love and on the perennial Christian
values.
* * *
In our catechesis on the Christian culture of the
Middle Ages, we now turn to Saint Albert, better known as Albertus Magnus,
Albert the Great. A universal genius whose interests ranged from the natural
sciences to philosophy and theology, Albert entered the Dominicans and, after
studies in Paris, taught in Cologne. Elected provincial of the Teutonic
province, he served as bishop of Regensburg for four years and then returned to
teaching and writing. He played an important part in the Council of Lyons, and
he worked to clarify and defend the teaching of Saint Thomas Aquinas, his most
brilliant student. Albert was canonized and declared a Doctor of the Church by
Pope Pius XI, and Pope Pius XII named him the patron of the natural sciences.
Saint Albert shows us that faith is not opposed to reason, and that the created
world can be seen as a “book” written by God and capable of being “read” in its
own way by the various sciences. His study of Aristotle also brought out the
difference between the sciences of philosophy and theology, while insisting
that both cooperate in enabling us to discover our vocation to truth and
happiness, a vocation which finds its fulfilment in eternal life.
* * *
I welcome all the English-speaking visitors, especially a group of priests, Religious and seminarians visiting from the Philippines. Upon all the English-speaking pilgrims and your families, I invoke God’s abundant blessings.
© Copyright 2010 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana
SOURCE : https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/audiences/2010/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20100324.html
St. Albert the Great
St. Albert (or St. Albertus Magnus) is the patron
saint of scientists and was the teacher of St. Thomas Aquinas. He was the
greatest German philosopher and theologian of the Middle Ages. He was the first
among medieval scholars to apply Aristotle’s philosophy to Christian thought.
The Roman Catholic Church honors him as a Doctor of the Church. He is uniquely
called “The Universal Doctor”.
He was eldest son of the Count of Bollstädt, and born
at Lauingen, Swabia, in the year 1205 or 1206, though many historians give it
as 1193. Nothing certain is known of his primary or preparatory education,
which was received either under the paternal roof or in a school of the
neighbourhood. As a youth he was sent to pursue his studies at the University
of Padua; that city being chosen either because his uncle resided there, or
because Padua was famous for its culture of the liberal arts, for which the
young Swabian had a special predilection. The date of this journey to Padua
cannot be accurately determined.
In the year 1223 he joined the Order of St. Dominic,
being attracted by the preaching of Blessed Jordan of Saxony second Master
General of the Order. Historians do not tell us whether Albert’s studies were
continued at Padua, Bologna, Paris, or Cologne. After completing his studies he
taught theology at Hildesheim, Freiburg (Breisgau), Ratisbon, Strasburg, and
Cologne. He was in the convent of Cologne, interpreting Peter Lombard’s “Book
of the Sentences”, when, in 1245, he was ordered to repair to Paris.
There he received the Doctor’s degree in the
university which, above all others, was celebrated as a school of theology. It
was during this period of reaching at Cologne and Paris that he counted amongst
his hearers St. Thomas Aquinas, then a silent, thoughtful youth, whose genius
he recognized and whose future greatness he foretold. The disciple accompanied
his master to Paris in 1245, and returned with him, in 1248, to the new Studium
Generale of Cologne, in which Albert was appointed Regent, whilst Thomas became
second professor and Magister Studentium (Master of Students).
In 1254 Albert was elected Provincial of his Order in
Germany. He journeyed to Rome in 1256, to defend the Mendicant Orders against
the attacks of William of St. Amour, whose book, “De novissimis temporum
periculis”, was condemned by Pope Alexander IV, on 5 October, 1256.
During his sojourn in Rome Albert filled the office of
Master of the Sacred Palace (instituted in the time of St. Dominic), and
preached on the Gospel of St. John and the Canonical Epistles. He resigned the
office of Provincial in 1257 in order to devote himself to study and to
teaching. At the General Chapter of the Dominicans held at Valenciennes in
1250, with St. Thomas Aquinas and Peter of Tarentasia (afterwards Pope Innocent
V), he drew up rules for the direction of studies, and for determining the
system of graduation, in the Order.
In the year 1260 he was appointed Bishop of Ratisbon.
Humbert de Romanis, Master General of the Dominicans, being loath to lose the services
of the great Master, endeavoured to prevent the nomination, but was
unsuccessful. Albert governed the diocese until 1262, when, upon the acceptance
of his resignation, he voluntarily resumed the duties of a professor in the
Studium at Cologne.
In the year 1270 he sent a memoir to Paris to aid St.
Thomas in combating Siger de Brabant and the Averroists. This was his second
special treatise against the Arabian commentator, the first having been written
in 1256, under the title “De Unitate Intellectus Contra Averroem”. He was
called by Pope Gregory X to attend the Council of Lyons (1274) in the
deliberations of which he took an active part.
The announcement of the death of St. Thomas at Fossa
Nuova, as he was proceeding to the Council, was a heavy blow to Albert, and he
declared that “The Light of the Church” had been extinguished. It was but
natural that he should have grown to love his distinguished, saintly pupil, and
it is said that ever afterwards he could not restrain his tears whenever the name
of St. Thomas was mentioned.
Something of his old vigour and spirit returned in
1277 when it was announced that Stephen Tempier and others wished to condemn
the writings of St. Thomas, on the plea that they were too favourable to the
unbelieving philosophers, and he journeyed to Paris to defend the memory of his
disciple.
Some time after 1278 (in which year he drew up his
testament) he suffered a lapse of memory; his strong mind gradually became
clouded; his body, weakened by vigils, austerities, and manifold labours, sank
under the weight of years. He was beatified by Pope Gregory XV in 1622; his
feast is celebrated on the 15th of November. The Bishops of Germany, assembled
at Fulda in September, 1872, sent to the Holy See a petition for his canonization;
he was finally canonized in 1931.
SOURCE : http://www.ucatholic.com/saints/saint-albert-the-great/
Albertitafel, Öl auf Leinwand, Tirol um 1750 (Albertus
Magnus offenbaren sich die neun Punkte zur Führung eines gottgefälligen Lebens).
Wien, Österreichisches Museum für Volkskunde, ÖMV-Inv. Nr. 26.465
Albertitafel, huile sur toile, Tyrol vers 1750 (Albertus Magnus révèle les neuf
points pour mener une vie pieuse). Vienne, Musée autrichien du folklore,
ÖMV-Inv. N° 26.465
St. Albertus Magnus
Known as Albert the Great; scientist, philosopher,
and theologian, born c. 1206; died at Cologne,
15 November 1280. He is called "the Great", and "Doctor
Universalis" (Universal Doctor), in recognition of his extraordinary
genius and extensive knowledge,
for he was proficient in every branch of learning cultivated in his day, and
surpassed all his contemporaries, except perhaps Roger
Bacon (1214-94), in the knowledge of nature. Ulrich
Engelbert, a contemporary, calls him the wonder and the miracle of
his age: "Vir in omni scientia adeo divinus, ut nostri temporis stupor et
miraculum congrue vocari possit" (De summo bono, tr. III, iv).
Life
Albert, eldest son of the Count of Bollstädt, was
born at Lauingen, Swabia, in the year 1205 or 1206, though
many historians give it as 1193. Nothing certain is known
of his primary or preparatory education,
which was received either under the paternal roof or in a school of
the neighbourhood. As a youth he was sent to pursue his studies at the University
of Padua; that city being chosen either because his uncle resided there, or
because Padua was famous for its culture of the liberal arts,
for which the young Swabian had a special predilection. The date of
this journey to Padua cannot be accurately determined. In the year
1223 he joined the Order
of St. Dominic, being attracted by the preaching
of Blessed Jordan of Saxony second Master General of
the Order. Historians do not tell us
whether Albert's studies were continued at Padua, Bologna, Paris,
or Cologne.
After completing his studies he taught theology at Hildesheim, Freiburg (Breisgau), Ratisbon, Strasburg,
and Cologne.
He was in the convent of Cologne,
interpreting Peter
Lombard's "Book of the Sentences", when, in 1245, he
was ordered to repair to Paris.
There he received the Doctor's degree in the university which,
above all others, was celebrated as a school of theology.
It was during this period of reaching at Cologne and Paris that
he counted amongst his hearers St.
Thomas Aquinas, then a silent, thoughtful youth, whose genius he
recognized and whose future greatness he foretold.
The disciple accompanied his master to Paris in
1245, and returned with him, in 1248, to the new Studium Generale of Cologne,
in which Albert was appointed Regent, whilst Thomas became
second professor and Magister Studentium (Master of Students). In
1254 Albert was elected Provincial of
his Order in Germany.
He journeyed to Rome in
1256, to defend the Mendicant
Orders against the attacks of William
of St. Amour, whose book, "De novissimis temporum periculis", was
condemned by Pope
Alexander IV, on 5 October, 1256. During his sojourn in Rome Albert filled
the office of Master
of the Sacred Palace (instituted in the time of St.
Dominic), and preached on the Gospel of St. John and
the Canonical Epistles. He resigned the office
of Provincial in 1257 in order to devote himself to study and to
teaching. At the General Chapter of the Dominicans held
at Valenciennes in 1250, with St.
Thomas Aquinas and Peter of Tarentasia (afterwards Pope
Innocent V), he drew up rules for the direction of studies, and for
determining the system of graduation, in the Order. In the year 1260 he
was appointed Bishop of Ratisbon. Humbert de
Romanis, Master General of the Dominicans,
being loath to lose the services of the great Master, endeavoured to
prevent the nomination,
but was unsuccessful. Albert governed the diocese until
1262, when, upon the acceptance of his resignation, he voluntarily resumed
the duties of
a professor in the Studium at Cologne.
In the year 1270 he sent a memoir to Paris to
aid St.
Thomas in combating Siger
de Brabant and the Averroists.
This was his second special treatise against the Arabian commentator,
the first having been written in 1256, under the title "De Unitate
Intellectus Contra Averroem". He was called by Pope
Gregory X to attend the Council of Lyons (1274) in the
deliberations of which he took an active part. The announcement of the death
of St.
Thomas at Fossa Nuova, as he was proceeding to
the Council, was a heavy blow to Albert, and he declared that
"The Light of the Church"
had been extinguished. It was but natural that he should have grown
to love his
distinguished, saintly pupil, and it is said that ever afterwards he
could not restrain his tears whenever the name of St.
Thomas was mentioned. Something of his old vigour
and spirit returned in 1277 when it was announced
that Stephen Tempier and others wished to condemn the writings
of St.
Thomas, on the plea that they were too favourable to the unbelieving philosophers,
and he journeyed to Paris to
defend the memory of his disciple. Some time after 1278 (in
which year he drew up his testament) he suffered a lapse of memory; his
strong mind gradually became clouded; his body, weakened
by vigils, austerities, and manifold labours, sank under the weight
of years. He was beatified by Pope
Gregory XV in 1622; his feast is
celebrated on the 15th of November. The Bishops of Germany,
assembled at Fulda in
September, 1872, sent to the Holy
See a petition for his canonization;
he was finally canonized in
1931.
Works
Two editions of Albert's complete works (Opera Omnia)
have been published; one at Lyons in 1651, in twenty-one folio
volumes, edited by Father Peter Jammy, O.P., the other at Paris (Louis
Vivès), 1890-99, in thirty-eight quarto volumes, published under the direction
of the Abbé Auguste Borgnet, of the diocese of Reims. Paul von Loë gives
the chronology of Albert's writings the "Analecta Bollandiada" (De
Vita et scriptis B. Alb. Mag., XIX, XX, and XXI). The logical order is given by
P. Mandonnet, O.P., in Vacant's "Dictionnaire de théologie
catholique". The following list indicates the subjects of the various
treatises, the numbers referring to the volumes of Borgnet's edition. Logic:
seven treatises (I. 2). Physical Sciences: "Physicorum" (3);
"De Coelo et Mundo", "De Generatione et Corruptione".
"Meteororum" (4); "Mineralium" (5); "De Natura
locorum", " De passionibus aeris" (9). Biological: "De
vegetabilibus et plantis" (10) " De animalibus" (11-12);
"De motibus animalium", "De nutrimento et nutribili",
"De aetate", "De morte et vita", "De spiritu et
respiratione" (9). Psychological: "De Anima" (5); "De
sensu et sensato", "De Memoria, et reminiscentia", "De
somno et vigilia", "De natura et origine animae", "De
intellectu et intelligibili", "De unitate intellectus"
(9). The foregoing subjects, with the exception of Logic, are treated
compendiously in the "Philosophia pauperum" (5). Moral and
Political: "Ethicorum" (7); "Politocorum (8). Metaphysical:
"Metaphysicorum" (6); "De causis et processu universitatis"
(10). Theological: "Commentary on the works of Denis the
Aereopagite" (14); "Commentary on the Sentences of the Lombard"
(25-30); "Summa Theologiae" (31-33); "Summa de creaturis"
(34-35); "De sacramento Eucharistiae" (38); "Super evangelium
missus est" (37). Exegetical: "Commentaries on the Psalms and
Prophets" (15-19); "Commentaries on the Gospels" (20-24);
"On the Apocalypse" (38). Sermons (13). The "Quindecim
problemata contra Averroistas" was edited by Mandonnet in his "Siger
de Brabant" (Freiburg, 1899). The authenticity of the following works is
not established: "De apprehensione" (5); "Speculum
astronomicum" (5); "De alchimia" (38); Scriptum super arborem
Aristotelis" (38); "Paradisus animae" (37); "Liber de
Adhaerendo Deo" (37); "De Laudibus B. Virginis" (36);
"Biblia Mariana" (37).
Influence
The influence exerted by Albert on the
scholars of his own day and on those of subsequent ages
was naturally great. His fame is due in part to the fact that he was
the forerunner, the guide and master of St.
Thomas Aquinas, but he was great in his own name, his claim to distinction
being recognized by his contemporaries and by posterity. It is remarkable that
this friar of the Middle
Ages, in the midst of his many duties as
a religious, as provincial of
his order, as bishop and papal
legate, as preacher of a crusade,
and while making many laborious journeys from Cologne to Paris and Rome,
and frequent excursions into different parts of Germany,
should have been able to compose a veritable encyclopedia,
containing scientific treatises on almost every subject, and
displaying an insight into nature and a knowledge of theology which
surprised his contemporaries and still excites the admiration of learned men in
our own times. He was, in truth,
a Doctor Universalis. Of him it in justly be said: Nil
tetigit quod non ornavit; and there is no exaggeration in the praises of the
modern critic who wrote: "Whether we consider him as a theologian or
as a philosopher, Albert was
undoubtedly one of the most extraordinary men of his age; I might
say, one of the most wonderful men of genius who appeared in past
times" (Jourdain, Recherches Critiques). Philosophy, in the
days of Albert, was a general science embracing
everything that could be known by the natural powers of
the mind; physics, mathematics, and metaphysics.
In his writings we do not, it is true,
find the distinction between the sciences and philosophy which
recent usage makes. It will, however, be convenient to consider his skill in
the experimental sciences,
his influence on scholastic philosophy, his theology.
Albert and the experimental sciences
It is not surprising that Albert should have
drawn upon the sources of information which his time afforded, and
especially upon the scientific writings of Aristotle.
Yet he says: "The aim of natural science is
not simply to accept the statements [narrata] of others, but to investigate
the causes that are at work in nature" (De Miner.,
lib. II, tr. ii, i). In his treatise on plants he lays down the
principle: Experimentum solum certificat in talibus (Experiment
is the only safe guide in such investigations). (De Veg., VI, tr. ii, i).
Deeply versed as he was in theology,
he declares: "In studying nature we have not to inquire
how God
the Creator may, as He freely wills, use His creatures to
work miracles and
thereby show forth His power: we have rather to inquire
what Nature with its immanent causes can naturally bring
to pass" (De Coelo et Mundo, I, tr. iv, x). And though, in questions
of natural science,
he would prefer Aristotle to St.
Augustine (In 2, Sent. dist. 13, C art. 2), he does not hesitate
to criticize the Greek philosopher.
"Whoever believes that Aristotle was
a god, must also believe that he never erred.
But if one believe that Aristotle was
a man, then doubtless he was liable to error just as
we are." (Physic. lib. VIII, tr. 1, xiv). In fact Albert devotes
a lengthy chapter to what he calls "the errors of Aristotle"
(Sum. Theol. P. II, tr. i, quaest. iv). In a word, his appreciation of Aristotle is
critical. He deserves credit not only for bringing
the scientific teaching of the Stagirite to
the attention of medieval scholars,
but also for indicating the method and the spirit in which that
teaching was to be received. Like his contemporary, Roger
Bacon (1214-94), Albert was an indefatigable student
of nature, and applied himself energetically to the experimental sciences with
such remarkable success that he has been accused of neglecting the sacred
sciences (Henry
of Ghent, De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis, II, x). Indeed,
many legends have been circulated which attribute to him the power of
a magician or sorcerer. Dr. Sighart (Albertus Magnus)
examined these legends, and endeavoured to sift the truth from false or
exaggerated stories. Other biographers content themselves with noting the fact
that Albert's proficiency in the physical sciences was
the foundation on which the fables were constructed. The truth lies
between the two extremes. Albert was assiduous in cultivating
the natural sciences;
he was an authority on physics, geography, astronomy,
mineralogy, chemistry (alchimia), zoölogy, physiology, and even
phrenology. On all these subjects his erudition was vast, and many of his
observations are of permanent value. Humboldt pays a high tribute to his knowledge of physical
geography (Cosmos, II, vi). Meyer* writes (Gesch. der
Botanik): "No botanist who lived before Albert can be compared
with him, unless it be Theophrastus, with whom he was not acquainted; and
after him none has painted nature in
such living colours, or studied it so profoundly, until the time
of Conrad, Gesner, and Cesalpini. All honour,
then, to the man who made such astonishing progress in the science of nature as
to find no one, I will not say to surpass, but even to equal him for
the space of three centuries." The list of his published works
is sufficient vindication from the charge of neglecting theology and
the Sacred
Scriptures. On the other hand, he expressed contempt for
everything that savoured of enchantment or the art of magic: "Non
approbo dictum Avicennae et Algazel de fascinatione, quia credo quod
non nocet fascinatio, nec nocere potest ars magica, nec facit
aliquid ex his quae timentur de talibus" (See Quétif, I, 167). That
he did not admit the possibility of making gold by alchemy or
the use of the philosopher's stone,
is evident from his own words: "Art alone cannot produce
a substantial form". (Non est probatum hoc quod educitur de
plumbo esse aurum, eo quod sola ars non potest dare formam substantialem —
De Mineral., lib. II, dist. 3).
Roger
Bacon and Albert proved to
the world that the Church is
not opposed to the study of nature, that faith and science may
go hand in hand; their lives and their writings emphasize the importance of
experiment and investigation. Bacon was
indefatigable and bold in investigating; at times, too,
his criticism was sharp. But of Albert he said:
"Studiosissimus erat, et vidit infinita, et habuit expensum, et ideo multa
potuit colligere in pelago auctorum infinito" (Opera,
ed. Brewer, 327). Albert respected authority
and traditions, was prudent in proposing the results of his
investigations, and hence "contributed far more than Bacon did
to the advancement of science in
the thirteenth century" (Turner, Hist. of Phil.). His method of
treating the sciences was historical and
critical. He gathered into one vast encyclopedia all that
was known in his day, and then expressed his own opinions,
principally in the form of commentaries on the works of Aristotle.
Sometimes, however, he hesitates, and does not express his own opinion,
probably because he feared that his theories, which were
"advanced" for those times, would excite surprise and occasion
unfavourable comment. "Dicta peripateticorum, prout melius potui
exposui: nec aliquis in eo potest deprehendere quid ego ipse sentiam in
philosophia naturali" (De Animalibus, circa finem).
In Augusta Theodosia
Drane's excellent work on "Christian Schools and
Scholars" (419 sqq.) there are some interesting remarks on "a
few scientific views of Albert, which show how much he owed to
his own sagacious observation of natural phenomena, and how far he
was in advance of his age. . . ." In speaking of the British Isles, he
alluded to the commonly received idea that
another Island — Tile, or Thule — existed in the Western
Ocean, uninhabitable by reason of its frightful clime, "but which",
he says, has perhaps not yet been visited
by man". Albert gives an elaborate demonstration of the
sphericity of the earth; and it has been pointed out that his views on this
subject led eventually to the discovery of America (cf. Mandonnet, in
"Revue Thomiste", I, 1893; 46-64, 200-221).
Albert and Scholastic philosophy
More important than Albert's development of
the physical sciences was
his influence on the study of philosophy and theology.
He, more than any one of the great scholastics preceding St.
Thomas, gave to Christian philosophy and theology the form and
method which, substantially, they retain to this day. In this respect he
was the forerunner and master of St.
Thomas, who excelled him, however, in many qualities required in
a perfect Christian
Doctor. In marking out the course which other
followed, Albert shared the glory of being a pioneer
with Alexander
of Hales (d. 1245), whose "Summa Theologiae" was the first
written after all the works of Aristotle had
become generally known at Paris.
Their application of Aristotelean methods
and principles to the study of revealed doctrine gave
to the world the scholastic system which embodies the reconciliation
of reason and Orthodox faith.
After the unorthodox Averroes, Albert was
the chief commentator on the works of, Aristotle,
whose writings he studied most assiduously, and whose principles
he adopted, in order to systematize theology,
by which was meant a scientific exposition and defence of Christian
doctrine. The choice of Aristotle as
a master excited strong opposition. Jewish and
Arabic commentaries on the works of the Stagirite had
given rise to so many errors in
the eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth centuries that for several years (1210-25)
the study of Aristotle's Physics and Metaphysics was
forbidden at Paris. Albert,
however, knew that Averroes, Abelard, Amalric,
and others had drawn false
doctrines from the writings of the Philosopher; he knew,
moreover, that it would have been impossible to stem the tide of enthusiasm in
favour of philosophical studies;
and so he resolved to purify the works of Aristotle from Rationalism, Averroism, Pantheism,
and other errors,
and thus compel pagan philosophy to
do service in the cause of revealed truth.
In this he followed the canon laid down by St.
Augustine (II De Doct. Christ., xl), who declared that truths found
in the writings of pagan philosophers were
to be adopted by the defenders of the true faith,
while their erroneous opinions
were to be abandoned, or explained in a Christian sense.
(See St.
Thomas, Summa
Theol., I.84.5.) All inferior (natural) sciences should
be the servants (ancillae) of Theology, which is the superior and the
mistress (ibid., 1 P., tr. 1, quaest. 6). Against the rationalism of Abelard and
his followers Albert pointed out the distinction between truths naturally knowable and mysteries (e.g. the
Trinity and the Incarnation) which
cannot known without revelation (ibid., 1 P., tr. III,
quaest. 13). We have seen that he wrote two treatises against Averroism,
which destroyed individual immortality and individual responsibility,
by teaching that there is but one rational soul for
all men. Pantheism was
refuted along with Averroism when
the true doctrine on Universals,
the system known as moderate Realism, was accepted by
the scholastic philosophers.
This doctrine Albert based
upon the Distinction of the universal ante rem (an idea or
archetype in the mind of God), in
re (existing or capable of existing in many individuals),
and post rem (as a concept abstracted by the mind, and compared
with the individuals of
which it can be predicated). "Universale duobus constituitur,
natura, scilicet cui accidit universalitas, et respectu ad multa. qui complet
illam in natura universalis" (Met., lib. V, tr. vi, cc. v, vi). A.T.
Drane (Mother Raphael, O.S.D.) gives a remarkable explanation of
these doctrines (op. cit. 344-429). Though follower of Aristotle, Albert did
not neglect Plato. "Scias
quod non perficitur homo in philosophia, nisi scientia duarum philosophiarum,
Aristotelis et Platonis (Met., lib. I, tr. v, c. xv). It is erroneous to
say that he was merely the "Ape" (simius) of Aristotle.
In the knowledge of
Divine things faith precedes
the understanding of Divine truth,
authority precedes reason (I Sent., dist. II, a. 10); but in matters
that can be naturally known a philosopher should
not hold an opinion which he is not prepared to defend
by reason ibid., XII; Periherm., 1, I, tr. l, c. i). Logic,
according to Albert, was a preparation for philosophy teaching
how we should use reason in order to pass from the known to the
unknown: "Docens qualiter et per quae devenitur per notum ad ignoti
notitiam" (De praedicabilibus, tr. I, c. iv). Philosophy is
either contemplative or
practical. Contemplative philosophy embraces physics,
mathematics, and metaphysics;
practical (moral) philosophy is monastic (for
the individual), domestic (for the family),
or political (for the state, or society). Excluding physics,
now a special study, authors in our times still retain the old scholastic division
of philosophy into logic, metaphysics (general
and special), and ethics.
Albert's theology
In theology Albert occupies a place
between Peter
Lombard, the Master of the Sentences, and St.
Thomas Aquinas. In systematic order, in accuracy and clearness he surpasses
the former, but is inferior to his own illustrious disciple. His "Summa
Theologiae" marks an advance beyond the custom of his time in the scientific order
observed, in the elimination of useless questions, in the limitation of
arguments and objections; there still remain, however, many of the impedimenta,
hindrances, or stumbling blocks, which St.
Thomas considered serious enough to call for a new manual
of theology for the use of beginners — ad eruditionem
incipientium, as the Angelic
Doctor modestly remarks in the prologue of his immortal "Summa".
The mind of the Doctor Universalis was so filled with
the knowledge of
many things that he could not always adapt his expositions of
the truth to the capacity of novices in
the science
of theology. He trained and directed a pupil who gave the world a concise,
clear, and perfect scientific exposition and defence of Christian
Doctrine; under God,
therefore, we owe to Albertus Magnus the "Summa
Theologica" of St.
Thomas.
Kennedy, Daniel. "St. Albertus
Magnus." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 1. New York:
Robert Appleton Company, 1907. 14 Nov.
2021 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01264a.htm>.
Transcription. This article was transcribed for
New Advent by Kevin Cawley.
Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil
Obstat. March 1, 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D.,
Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Copyright © 2020 by Kevin Knight.
Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
SOURCE : http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01264a.htm
Bild des Hl. Albertus Magnus von Egino Weinert
Albert the Great, OP B Dr. (RM)
(also known as Albertus Magnus)
Born in Lauingen, Swabia, Germany, c. 1207; died in
Cologne, 1280; beatified in 1622; canonized and named a doctor of the Church in
1931 by Pope Pius XI.
Among Christians there often arises a dispute
regarding the relative merits of science and theology, of intellectual versus
spiritual understanding. Some say that the two are irreconcilable, forgetting
that, according to the technical definition, myths (such as the Creation Story)
offer more than simply a surface explanation of the mechanics of science.
Studying the life of Saint Albert the Great should put aside these disputes.
Today in Cologne, the spires of a building began seven centuries earlier still
point to heaven. It is only a legend that credits the design of the cathedral
to Saint Albert the Great. But it is so typical of his own life, pointing all beauty
to heaven, that it is a legend that is very easy to believe. Albert, who even
secular history calls "the Great," spent his life in teaching that
science and faith have no quarrel, and that all earthly loveliness and order
can be traced directly to God.
Early Life
Albert was born in a castle in the diocese of Bavaria,
the eldest son of the count of Bollstaedt. Albert was of small stature, but
strongly built, having gigantic shoulders and a mole on one eyelid. Albert's
keen observation, which was later to show itself in his scientific works, had
its initial training in the woods near his father's castle, where he and his
brother Henry--who also became a Dominican--hunted with hawks and hounds, and
became experts in falconry. Their first education was at home under private
tutors.
That both his brother Henry and his sister also became
Dominicans attests to the piety of his family.
In 1222, at the age of 16, he was sent to study law at
the famous university of Padua (some say Bologna) under the supervision of his
uncle who was a canon there. He proved to be an outstanding student, and a
brilliant future lay before him in a well-paid career. But God had other plans
for Saint Albert.
The Call
Here in Italy Albert met Jordan of Saxony, a
fellow-countryman and the second master-general of the Dominican Order
following the death of Saint Dominic on August 4, 1221. Jordan's enormous
charisma earned him the nickname 'Siren of the Schools' as he travelled from
place to place seeking recruits for the young order. Albert was greatly
affected by what he heard, and vowed to become a Dominican.
He wavered, though, both because he doubted whether he
could persevere and because his uncle opposed him. On the false pretext that
travel helps form the character of a youth, his uncle took him on a trip to
Venice, and at the same time obtained from the pope an annulment of the vow
that he thought so rash. But what can a man, even a priest, do against the will
of God?
On their return Albert went to the University of
Padua, where he encountered the crisis of his life when he heard another sermon
by Blessed Jordan. The preacher spoke of those young men who wavered between
certainty and doubt, who hesitated because they feared they might not
persevere, when in reality they ought to offer themselves entirely to God and
trust in him.
Albert was astonished at what he heard. Going after
Blessed Jordan he said, "Master, who has laid bear my heart to you?"
Blessed Jordan comforted him, explaining that he had not been addressing any
particular individual, but all alike who might be so affected, yet no doubt
this was a message of God to him personally; transfixed by these words, he
immediately offered himself. He was received into the Order, probably in 1223,
and completed his theological studies.
A legend is told of this period which serves to bring
out both the greatness of Albert's science and his love for Our Lady. Albert,
it is related, had not worn the white habit for long when it became plain to
him that he was no match for the mental wizards with whom he was studying.
Anything concrete, which he could take apart and study, he could understand,
but the abstract sciences were too much for him.
He decided to run away from it all; planning a quiet
departure, he carefully laid a ladder against the wall and waited for his
opportunity. As he was kneeling for one last Hail Mary before he should go over
the wall, Our Lady appeared to him. She reproached him gently for his
forgetfulness of her--why had he not remembered to ask her for what he wanted?
Then she gave him the gift of science he so much desired, and disappeared.
Whatever the truth behind the legend--and it has survived, almost unchanged,
through the many years--it is equally certain that Albert was a devout client
of Our Lady and a master scientist.
Teaching
Albert was ordained a priest in 1228. He was then sent
to teach in Cologne, where his critical lectures on the Sentences of Peter
Lombard made his name; he afterward came to be known as the greatest German
scholar of the Middle Ages. Later he taught in Hildesheim,
Freiburg-im-Breisgau, Regensburg (Ratisbon) for two years, Strasbourg and again
in Cologne. He traveled from one place to another on foot, preaching, praying,
and observing. His mind was receptive, daring, modern, and picked up an
extraordinary amount of information. From the first his great erudition had
been recognized, to say nothing of his deep piety and humility.
Albert rejected nothing of value that his age could
offer him, doing so not out of a superficial syncretism, which would try to
please everybody, but out of his concern not to lose anything that might be an
element of the truth.
From 1240 to 1248 Albert was at the monastery of
Saint-Jacques in Paris; Place Maubert and Rue Maitre-Albert in the Latin Quarter
evoke his memory, while the Rue du Fouarre recalls the crowd of students who
gathered round his pulpit, seated on their small bundles of straw.
It was in Paris that he had the happiness of seeing a
quiet student from the Kingdom of Sicily rise like a brilliant star that would
outshine all the others. What must it have been like to watch the mind of Saint
Thonas Aquinas develop and unfold to the wisdom of time and eternity, and to
help him open the doors to profound truth?
Albert was one of the first to recognize, cultivate,
and proclaim the brilliance of his good friend and student Saint Thomas
Aquinas. It takes a man of great humility and great sanctity to see and
cultivate the potential for it in others, and these Albert had.
Albert took Thomas under his wing, assigned him a room
adjoining his own, and for nearly five years was his inseparable companion.
They studied together in both Paris, where Albert taught and earned his
doctorate in theology in 1244-45, and in Cologne. He helped adapt the Scholastic
method, which applied Aristotelian methods to revealed doctrine, an approach
that was further developed by Saint Thomas.
In 1248 Albert again moved to University of Cologne,
where he served as regent of the new studia generalia until 1254, when he was elected
provincial of the Teutonia, a vast Dominican province including Alsace,
Belgium, and Germany as far as the frontiers of Poland and Hungary. He
personally visited all the monasteries in his province, convened chapters,
imposed penances, ensured that observances were respected, and, above all,
preached by his own example.
In 1256 Albert went to Rome, where he defended the
mendicant orders against William of Saint Armour (who was condemned later in
the year by Pope Alexander IV). Then he served for a time as the personal
theologian to the pope and professor of Holy Scripture. By 1257, when a general
chapter was held in Florence, Albert had completed his mandate and gladly
resigned his provincialatae to return to his studies and his pulpit in Cologne.
But, unfortunately for him and for his pupils, not for very long.
During his short return to study, together with Thomas
Aquinas and Peter of Tarentais, Albert drew up a new curriculum of study for
the Dominicans (1259).
As Bishop
The time for study was interrupted too soon, when on
January 5, 1260, Pope Alexander IV appointed Albert bishop of Regensburg
(Ratisbon) against his wishes and, though the master general tried the stop the
appointment, very reluctantly Albert was obliged to accept. Vigorous reforms
were needed in Regensburg and Albert was the man for the job.
The new bishop used his authority with severity
against those who were injuring the Church in her temporal possessions. He
cleaned up the administration, ordered economies, put the debts in order,
solicited generous gifts, and restored deteriorating buildings. By his own
example he showed his priests a life of purity, strict poverty, harsh penance,
and piety; he helped greatly to restore to fervor a diocese in disorder. He
dealt severely with his clergy, condemning their concubinage, idleness and
simony.
As for his episcopal robes, he just settled for a pair
of stout shoes, which he needed for his long journeys on foot. The people were
astonished and called him "the bishop in clogs," or simply,
"Clodhopper." Saint Clodhopper for God, forever in the march along
the paths of the Gospel!
The clergy resented his simplicity and rejected his
reforms, and the avaricious nobles refused to return the Church's property.
Once the worst problems were corrected, Albert clearly recognized that he could
serve God better from a pulpit. Albert felt called back to his life's work of
teaching and the restoration of theology.
After two years as bishop, he journeyed to Rome and
asked to be relieved of the office. The petition was granted, but he was
appointed to preach the crusade in the German-speaking countries, a work he
continued for several years with a companion preacher, the Franciscan Berthold
of Ratisbon, going as far as Lithuania. These labors ended with the death of
Pope Urban IV. And Albert returned to Wurzburg (where he lived for three
years), Strasbourg, and once more to Cologne in 1270 to teach again under the
obedience of the Dominican Order.
Old Age
For the last dozen years of his life he taught
theology in Cologne, with a break in 1274 to take an active part in the general
council of Lyons, working for the reunion of the Greek and Roman Churches.
Albert's sadness at the failure of the council was surpassed by the death of
Thomas Aquinas, age 49, on the road from Rome to the council in the little
monastery of Hautecombe. He died calmly while making a commentary on the Song
of Songs. Thomas's last wish, as he told the monks attending him, was to eat a
good French herring. Such is the simplicity of saints.
Albert wept bitterly that the 'glory and ornament of
the world' had gone. He outlived his beloved pupil by several years, and, in
extreme old age, he walked halfway across Europe to defend a thesis of Thomas's
that was challenged. He fiercely and brilliantly defended Saint Thomas and his
position against Bishop Stephen Tempier of Paris and a group of theologians at
the university there in 1277.
On his return to the monastery at Cologne, Albert
ceased teaching forever and retired permanently to his cell. He had kept the
innocence and freshness of his faith, and prayed like a child. He love the
Virgin Mary with tenderly, and wrote one of his most beautiful theological
treatises in her praise. For the last two years of his life, Albert suffered
from increasing memory loss and ill health, which led to his death in Cologne
on November 15, 1280. Saint Albert is enshrined in the church of Saint Andreas
in Cologne.
Works
Albert had an enquiring mind, ranking beside Roger
Bacon as one of the first and greatest natural scientists. He was an
experimenter and a classifier at a time when all experimental knowledge was
under suspicion. There was not a field in which he did not at least try his
hand, and his keenness of mind and precision of detail make his remarks
valuable, even though, because he lacked facts which we now have, his
conclusions were incomplete. It is difficult to estimate his vast erudition,
the acuteness of mind and keenness of intellect of this learned and saintly
man. In philosophy his work exhibited the highest achievement of human reason
when thrown on its own resources.
The whole realm of nature and grace are covered by his
encyclopedic knowledge; he wrote even more than Saint Thomas Aquinas himself.
Some of his works still remain in manuscript unpublished and as many as seventy
others have been lost. His printed works fill 38 quarto volumes and deal with
all branches of learning. Among his works are Summa theologie, De unitate
intellectus contra Averren, De vegetabilibus, and Summa de creaturis.
He stands out in particular for his recognition of the
autonomy of human reason in its own sphere, of the validity of knowledge gained
from sensory experience, and of the value of Aristotle's philosophy in
systematizing theology. Aquinas perfected the synthesis now known as the
Scholastic method.
At the time of his scientific investigations, the
field was almost exclusively in the hands of the Arabian
philosophers--inheritors of the work of Avicenna and Averroes--who had drawn a
great part of their errors from faulty interpretation of Aristotle. Since
Aristotle, who must be regarded as the greatest comprehensive genius of any
age, no other had written on the subject (as far as known), until Albert the
Great.
During the intervening millennia between Aristotle and
Albert, there had been a void; after his time three hundred years passed before
botany was taken seriously. Albert commenced by making a catalogue of all the
trees, plants, and herbs known in his own time. His minute observations on
their forms and variations show an exquisite sense of their floral beauty,
which he attributed to God. He was acquainted with the sleep of plants, with
the periodic opening and closing of flowers, with the diminution of sap during
evaporation from the cuticle of the leaf, and with the influence of the
distribution of bundles of vessels on the foliar indentations. And this is only
the beginning of his observations.
In addition to botany, he wrote in similar detail on
astronomy, chemistry, physics, biology, metaphysics, ethics, scripture,
geography, geology (one of his treatises proved the earth to be spherical),
logic, mathematics, theology, and meteorology; he made maps and charts and
experimented with plants; he studied chemical reactions; designed instruments
to help with navigation; and he made detailed studies of birds and animals. His
brilliance and erudition caused him to be called the "Universal
Doctor" by his contemporaries.
Albert's admiration for Arabic learning and culture
caused suspicion in some quarters. His and Thomas Aquinas's adaptation of
Aristotelian principles to systematic theology and their attempts to reconcile
Aristotelianism to Christianity caused bitter opposition among many of their
fellow theologians. Conservatives condemned these dangerous innovations as
being tainted with heresy since they came from pagan Greek, Islamic, and Jewish
thinkers.
Saint Albert knew that studying the minute beauty and
perfection of creation gives us reason to glorify God. The universe is full of
mystery; the intellect of man has only touched its outer fringe. Had the
students of natural science proceeded along the lines Albert had laid down, the
wrong road taken for three centuries might have been avoided.
In the modern mechanistic view, God is excluded, but
Albert saw the whole universe as the work of God's hand. I've stressed Albert's
erudition, but his whole life was absorbed in God; the Master of the Universe
developed in him a greatest also of soul. He found God everywhere and in all
things and always saw some good in others and in their books. His work was to
sift out the good and to reserve it for Christ.
True greatness of soul is not content with merely
observing the good, but passes on its revelation to others, thus revealing the
noble disposition towards magnanimity. His task was to demonstrate the harmony
between natural truth and divine revelation and to give this abundantly to
others.
Saint Albert was canonized by being enrolled among the
doctors of the Church by Pope Pius XI in 1931. He was also named patron saint
of students of the natural sciences, for he had, said the pope, 'that rare and
divine gift, scientific instinct, in the highest degree . . .; he is exactly
the saint whose example ought to inspire the present age' (Attwater,
Benedictines, Bentley, Delaney, Dorcy, Encyclopedia, Murray, White, Wilms).
Faith and Science
The opposition between science and faith is only
apparent. It originates either in the error of scientists who forward
unprovable hypotheses as undoubted facts--the theory of evolution, for
instance--or in the mistakes of theologians who would give their private, false
opinions as gospel truths. If both would remain within the confines of their
own science, no opposition would be possible.
Saint Albert insisted that 'purely from reason no one
can attain to knowledge of the Trinity, the Incarnation of Jesus and the
Resurrection.'
But, in fact reason and faith are helpful to each
other. Reason gives faith a solid foundation, so that we are not asked to give
blind assent to truths we cannot know. It also furnishes us with strong
extrinsic proof of the contents of divine revelation. Faith, on the other hand,
"furnishes facts to the other sciences," Cardinal Newman says,
"which these sciences, left to themselves, would never reach, and it
invalidates apparent facts, which left to themselves, they would imagine."
Science deals only with secondary causes; when it
questions why things happen it ceases to be science and becomes philosophy, but
religion interests itself with the Primary Cause of all things.
We are surrounded by the mystery of the universe; it
is in no way peculiar to religion. Science may make continual progress and tell
us of countless new and marvelous things, but the why and the wherefore of them
are altogether beyond its scope. There are mysteries in God's world, both of
nature and of grace.
The First Vatican Council teaches us, "The Church
therefore, far from hindering the pursuit of the arts and sciences, fosters and
promotes them in many ways. Nor does she prevent sciences, each in its own
sphere, from making use of their own principles and methods. Yet, while
acknowledging the freedom due to them, she tries to preserve them from falling
into error contrary to divine doctrine, and from overstepping their own boundaries
and throwing into confusion matters that belong to the domain of faith"
(Decree 16.12.41).
Saint Albert is represented in art as a Dominican with
a doctor's cap and a book. Sometimes he is shown (1) lecturing from a pulpit;
(2) with Saint Thomas Aquinas; or (3) as a Dominican bishop with pen and book
(Roeder).
Patron of all natural sciences, scientists, and
students of science (Roeder).
SOURCE : http://www.saintpatrickdc.org/ss/1115.shtml
Albertus Magnus, Naturhistorisches Museum Wien
St. Albertus Magnus
Known as Albert the Great; scientist, philosopher, and
theologian, born c. 1206; died at Cologne, 15 November 1280. He is called
"the Great", and "Doctor Universalis" (Universal Doctor),
in recognition of his extraordinary genius and extensive knowledge, for he was
proficient in every branch of learning cultivated in his day, and surpassed all
his contemporaries, except perhaps Roger Bacon (1214-94), in the knowledge of
nature. Ulrich Engelbert, a contemporary, calls him the wonder and the miracle
of his age: "Vir in omni scientia adeo divinus, ut nostri temporis stupor
et miraculum congrue vocari possit" (De summo bono, tr. III, iv).
Life
Albert, eldest son of the Count of Bollstädt, was born
at Lauingen, Swabia, in the year 1205 or 1206, though many historians give it
as 1193. Nothing certain is known of his primary or preparatory education,
which was received either under the paternal roof or in a school of the
neighbourhood. As a youth he was sent to pursue his studies at the University
of Padua; that city being chosen either because his uncle resided there, or
because Padua was famous for its culture of the liberal arts, for which the
young Swabian had a special predilection. The date of this journey to Padua
cannot be accurately determined. In the year 1223 he joined the Order of St.
Dominic, being attracted by the preaching of Blessed Jordan of Saxony second
Master General of the Order. Historians do not tell us whether Albert's studies
were continued at Padua, Bologna, Paris, or Cologne. After completing his
studies he taught theology at Hildesheim, Freiburg (Breisgau), Ratisbon,
Strasburg, and Cologne. He was in the convent of Cologne, interpreting Peter
Lombard's "Book of the Sentences", when, in 1245, he was ordered to
repair to Paris. There he received the Doctor's degree in the university which,
above all others, was celebrated as a school of theology. It was during this
period of reaching at Cologne and Paris that he counted amongst his hearers St.
Thomas Aquinas, then a silent, thoughtful youth, whose genius he recognized and
whose future greatness he foretold. The disciple accompanied his master to
Paris in 1245, and returned with him, in 1248, to the new Studium Generale of
Cologne, in which Albert was appointed Regent, whilst Thomas became second
professor and Magister Studentium (Master of Students). In 1254 Albert was
elected Provincial of his Order in Germany. He journeyed to Rome in 1256, to
defend the Mendicant Orders against the attacks of William of St. Amour, whose
book, "De novissimis temporum periculis", was condemned by Pope
Alexander IV, on 5 October, 1256. During his sojourn in Rome Albert filled the
office of Master of the Sacred Palace (instituted in the time of St. Dominic),
and preached on the Gospel of St. John and the Canonical Epistles. He resigned
the office of Provincial in 1257 in order to devote himself to study and to
teaching. At the General Chapter of the Dominicans held at Valenciennes in
1250, with St. Thomas Aquinas and Peter of Tarentasia (afterwards Pope Innocent
V), he drew up rules for the direction of studies, and for determining the
system of graduation, in the Order. In the year 1260 he was appointed Bishop of
Ratisbon. Humbert de Romanis, Master General of the Dominicans, being loath to
lose the services of the great Master, endeavoured to prevent the nomination,
but was unsuccessful. Albert governed the diocese until 1262, when, upon the
acceptance of his resignation, he voluntarily resumed the duties of a professor
in the Studium at Cologne. In the year 1270 he sent a memoir to Paris to aid
St. Thomas in combating Siger de Brabant and the Averroists. This was his
second special treatise against the Arabian commentator, the first having been
written in 1256, under the title "De Unitate Intellectus Contra
Averroem". He was called by Pope Gregory X to attend the Council of Lyons
(1274) in the deliberations of which he took an active part. The announcement
of the death of St. Thomas at Fossa Nuova, as he was proceeding to the Council,
was a heavy blow to Albert, and he declared that "The Light of the
Church" had been extinguished. It was but natural that he should have
grown to love his distinguished, saintly pupil, and it is said that ever
afterwards he could not restrain his tears whenever the name of St. Thomas was
mentioned. Something of his old vigour and spirit returned in 1277 when it was
announced that Stephen Tempier and others wished to condemn the writings of St.
Thomas, on the plea that they were too favourable to the unbelieving
philosophers, and he journeyed to Paris to defend the memory of his disciple.
Some time after 1278 (in which year he drew up his testament) he suffered a
lapse of memory; his strong mind gradually became clouded; his body, weakened
by vigils, austerities, and manifold labours, sank under the weight of years.
He was beatified by Pope Gregory XV in 1622; his feast is celebrated on the
15th of November. The Bishops of Germany, assembled at Fulda in September,
1872, sent to the Holy See a petition for his canonization; he was finally
canonized in 1931.
Albert the Great
Albertus Magnus, also known as Albert the Great, was one of the most universal
thinkers to appear during the Middle Ages. Even more so than his most famous
student, St. Thomas of Aquinas, Albert's interests ranged from natural science
all the way to theology. He made contributions to logic, psychology,
metaphysics, meteorology, mineralogy, and zoology. He was an avid commentator
on nearly all the great authorities read during the 13th Century. He was deeply
involved in an attempt to understand the import of the thought of Aristotle in
some orderly fashion that was distinct from the Arab commentators who had incorporated
their own ideas into the study of Aristotle. Yet he was not averse to using
some of the outstanding Arab philosophers in developing his own ideas in
philosophy. His superior understanding of a diversity of philosophical texts
allowed him to construct one of the most remarkable syntheses in medieval
culture.
• 1. Life of Albert the Great
• 2. Philosophical Enterprise
• 3. Logic
• 4. Metaphysics
• 5. Psychology and Anthropology
• 6. Ethics
• 7. The Influence of Albert the Great
• Bibliography
o Primary Literature
o Secondary Literature
• Academic Tools
• Other Internet Resources
• Related Entries
1. Life of Albert the Great
The precise date of Albert's birth is not known. It is
generally conceded that he was born into a knightly family sometime around the
year 1200 in Lauingen an der Donau in Germany. He was apparently in Italy in
the year 1222 where he was present when a rather terrible earthquake struck in
Lombardy. A year later he was still in Italy and studying at the University of
Padua. The same year Jordan of Saxony received him into the Dominican order. He
was sent to Cologne in order to complete his training for the order. He
finished this training as well as a course of studies in theology by 1228. He
then began teaching as a lector at Cologne, Hildesheim, Freiburg im Breisgau,
Regensburg, and Strassburg. During this period he published his first major
work, De natura boni.
Ten years later he is recorded as having been present
at the general chapter of the Dominican Order held in Bologna. Two years later
he visited Saxony where is observed the appearance of a comet. Some time
between 1241 and 1242 he was sent to the University of Paris to complete his
theological education. He followed the usual prescription of lecturing on the
Sentences of Peter Lombard. In addition he began writing his six part Summa
parisiensis dealing with the sacraments of the Church, the incarnation and
resurrection of Christ, the four coevals, human nature, and the nature of the
good. He took his degree as master of theology in 1245 and began to teach
theology at the university under Gueric de Saint-Quentin. St. Thomas Aquinas
became his student at this time and remained under Albert's direction for the
next three years. In 1248 Albert was appointed regent of studies at the studium
generale that was newly created by the Dominican order in Cologne. So Albert,
along with Thomas Aquinas, left Paris and went to Cologne. Thomas continued his
studies under Albert in Cologne and served as magister studium in the school as
well until 1252. Then Thomas returned to Paris to take up his teaching duties
while Albert remained in Cologne, where he began to work on the vast project he
set himself of preparing a paraphrase of each of the known works of Aristotle.
In 1254 the Dominican order again assigned Albert a
difficult task. He was elected the prior provincial for the German-speaking
province of the order. This position mandated that Albert spend a great deal of
his time traveling throughout the province visiting Dominican convents, priories,
and even a Dominican mission in Riga. This task occupied Albert until 1256.
That year he returned to Cologne, but left the same year for Paris in order to
attend a General Chapter of his order in which the allegations of William of
St. Amour's De periculis novissimorum temporum against mendicant orders were
considered. A little later Pope Alexander IV asked Albert to go to Anagni in
order to speak to a commission of Cardinals who were looking into the claims of
William. While engaged in this charge Albert completed his refutation of
Averroistic psychology with his De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas.
Afterwards Albert departed for another tour of the province of Germany. In 1257
he returned to the papal court, which was now located in Viterbo. He was
relieved of his duties as prior provincial and returned again to Cologne as
regent of studies. He continued to teach until 1259 when he traveled to
Valenciennes in order to attend a General Chapter of his order. At that time,
along with Thomas Aquinas, Peter of Tarentasia, Bonhomme Brito, and Florent de
Hesdin, he undertook on behalf of his order an extensive discussion of the
curriculum of the scholastic program used by the order.
The next year of his life found Albert once again
appointed to an onerous duty. In obedience to the wishes of the pope Albert was
consecrated a bishop of the Church and sent to Ratisbon (modern Regensburg) in
order to undertake a reform of abuses in that diocese. Albert worked at this
task until 1263 when Pope Urban IV relieved him of his duties and asked Albert
to preach the Crusade in the German speaking countries. This duty occupied
Albert until the year 1264. He then went to the city of Würzburg where he
stayed until 1267.
Albert spent the next eight years traveling around Germany
conducting various ecclesiastical tasks. Then in 1274 while he was traveling to
the Council of Lyons Albert received the sad news of the untimely death of
Thomas Aquinas, his friend and former student of many years. After the close of
the Council Albert returned to Germany. There is evidence that he traveled to
Paris in the year 1277 in order to defend Aquinas' teaching, which was under
attack at the university. In 1279, anticipating his death he drew up his own
last will and testament. On November 15, 1280 he died and was buried in
Cologne. On December 15, 1931 Pope Pius XI declared Albert both a saint and a
doctor of the Church. On the 16th of December 1941 Pope Pius XII declared
Albert the patron saint of the natural sciences.
2. Philosophical Enterprise
An examination of Albert's published writings reveals
something of his understanding of philosophy in human culture. In effect he
prepared a kind of philosophical encyclopedia that occupied him up to the last
ten years of his life. He produced paraphrases of most of the works of
Aristotle available to him. In some cases where he felt that Aristotle should
have produced a work, but it was missing, Albert produced the work himself. If
he had produced nothing else it would be necessary to say that he adopts the
Aristotelian philosophical-scientific program as his own. Albert's intellectual
vision, however, was very great. Not only did he paraphrase “The Philosopher”
(as the medievals called Aristotle) but Porphyry, Boethius, Peter Lombard,
Gilbert de la Porrée, the Liber de causis, and Ps.-Dionysius. He also wrote a
number of commentaries on the Bible. In addition to all of this work of
paraphrasing and commenting, in which Albert labored to prepare a kind of
unified field theory of medieval Christian intellectual culture, he also wrote
a number of works in which he developed his own
philosophical-scientific-theological vision. Here one finds titles such as De
unitate intellectus, Problemata determinate, De fato, De XV problematibus, De
natura boni, De sacramentis, De incarnatione, De bono, De quattuor coaequaevis,
De homine, and his unfinished Summa theologiae de mirabilis scientia Dei.
Albert's labors resulted in the formation of what
might be called a Christian reception of Aristotle in the Western Europe.
Although Albert himself had a strong bias in favor of Neo-Platonism, his work
on Aristotle shows him to have a deep understanding of the Aristotelian
program. Along with his student Thomas Aquinas he was of the opinion that
Aristotle and the kind of natural philosophy that he represented was no
obstacle to the development of a Christian philosophical vision of the natural
order. In order to establish this point Albert carefully dissected the method
that Aristotle employed in undertaking the task of expounding natural
philosophy. This method, Albert decided, is experientially based and proceeds
to draw conclusions by the use of both inductive and deductive logic. Christian
theology, as Albert found it taught in Europe rested firmly upon the revelation
of Sacred Scripture and the Church Fathers. Therefore, he reasoned, the two
domains of human culture are distinct in their methodology and pose no threat
to each other. Both can be pursued for their own sake. Philosophy was not to be
valued only in terms of its ancillary relation to theology.
3. Logic
Albert carefully prepared a paraphrase of Aristotle's
Organon (the logical treatises in the Aristotelian corpus). He then used the
results of this paraphrase to address the problem of universals as he found it
discussed in the philosophical literature and debates of the medieval
philosophical culture. He defined the term universal as referring to “ … that
which, although it exists in one, is apt by nature to exist in many.”[1]
Because it is apt to be in many, it is predicable of them. (De praed., tract
II, c. 1) He then distinguished three kinds of universals, those that pre-exist
the things that exemplify them (universale ante rem), those that exist in
individual things (universale in re), and those that exist in the mind when
abstracted from individual things (universale post rem).
Albert attempted to formulate an answer to Porphyry's
famous problem of universals — namely, do the species according to which we
classify beings exist in themselves or are they merely constructions of the
mind? Albert appealed to his three-fold distinction, noting that a universal's
mode of being is differentiated according to which function is being
considered. It may be considered in itself, or in respect to understanding, or
as existing in one particular or another.[2] Both the nominalist and realist
solutions to Porphyry's problem are thus too simplistic and lack proper
distinction. Albert's distinction thus allowed him to harmonize Plato's realism
in which universals existed as separate forms with Aristotle's more
nominalistic theory of immanent forms. For universals when considered in
themselves (secudum quod in seipso) truly exist and are free from generation,
corruption, and change.[3] If, however, they are taken in reference to the mind
(refertur ad intelligentiam) they exist in two modes, depending on whether they
are considered with respect to the intellect that is their cause or the
intellect that knows them by abstraction.[4] But when they are considered in
particulars (secundum quod est in isto vel in illo) their existence is exterior
to as well as beyond the mind, yet existing in things as individuated.[5]
4. Metaphysics
Albert's metaphysics is an adaptation of Aristotelian
metaphysics as conditioned by a form of Neo-Platonism. His reading the Liber de
causis as an authentic Aristotelian text influenced his understanding of
Aristotle. It seems that Albert never realized the Neo-Platonic origin of the
work. As with the other works of Aristotle he prepared a paraphrase of the work
entitled De causis et processu universitatis, and used it as a guide to
interpreting other works by Aristotle. However, he also used the writings of
Pseudo-Dionysius to correct some of the doctrine found in the Liber de causis.
Albert blends these three main sources of his
metaphysics into a hierarchical structure of reality in which there is an
emanation of forms directed by what Albert calls “a summoning of the good”
(advocatio boni). The good operates metaphysically as the final cause of the
order of forms in the universe of beings. But it is also the First Cause. And
its operation in the created order of being is discovered as an attraction of
all being back to itself. “We exist because God is good,” Albert explains, “and
we are good insofar as we exist.”[6] Thus the balanced relations of the exit
and return of all things according to classical Neo-Platonism is skewed in
favor of the relationship of return. This is because Albert, as a Christian
philosopher, favors a creationist view of being over the doctrine of pure
emanation. Rejecting also the doctrine of universal hylomorphism Albert argues
that material beings are always composite in which the forms are inchoate until
they are called forth by the ultimate good. Spiritual creatures (excluding man)
have no material element. Their being summoned to the good is immediate and
final. The summoning of the inchoate forms of material beings, however, is not
direct. It depends upon the intervention of the celestial spheres.
The First Cause, which Albert understands as God, is
an absolutely transcendent reality. His uncreated light calls forth a
hierarchically ordered universe in which each order of being reflects this
light. God's giving existence to creatures is understood by Albert as their
procession from him as from a first cause.[7] At the top of this hierarchy of
light are found the purely spiritual beings, the angelic orders and the
intelligences. Albert carefully distinguishes these two kinds of beings. He
basically accepts the analysis of the angelic orders as found in
Pseudo-Dionysius' treatise of the celestial hierarchy. The intelligences move
the cosmic spheres and illuminate the human soul. The intelligences, just as
the order of angels, form a special hierarchy. The First Intelligence, as
Albert calls it, contemplates the entire universe and uses the human soul, as
illuminated by the lower intelligences, to draw all creatures into a unity.
Beneath the angels and intelligences are the souls
that possess intellects. They are joined to bodies but do not depend on bodies
for their existence. Although they are ordered to the First Intelligence so as
to enjoin contemplative unity on the entire cosmos, Albert rejects the
Averroistic theory of the unity of the intellect. Each human soul has its own
intellect. But because the human soul uniquely stands on the horizon of both
material and spiritual being it can operate as a microcosm and thus can serve
the purpose of the First Intelligence, which is to bind all creatures into a
universe.
Finally there are the immersed forms. Under this
heading Albert establishes another hierarchy with the animal kingdom at the
top, followed by the plant kingdom, then the world of minerals (in which Albert
had a deep interest), and finally the elements of material creation.
5. Psychology and Anthropology
Albert's interest in the human condition is dominated
by his concern with the relationship of the soul to the body on the one hand
and the important role that the intellect plays in human psychology. According
to Albert, the essence of man is not the intellect.[8] With regard to the
relationship between the soul and the body Albert appears to be torn between
the Platonic theory which sees the soul as a form capable of existing
independently of the body and the Aristotelian hylomorphic theory which reduces
the soul to a functional relationship of the body. With respect to human
knowing, for example, he maintains the position that the human intellect is
dependent upon the senses.[9] In order to resolve the conflict between the two
views Albert availed himself of Avicenna's position that Aristotle's analysis
was focused on the function and not the essence of the soul. Functionally,
Albert argues, the soul is the agent cause of the body. “Just as we maintain
that the soul is the cause of the animated body and of its motions and passions
insofar as it is animated,” he reasons, “likewise we must maintain that the
lowest intelligence is the cause of the cognitive soul insofar as it is
cognitive because the cognition of the soul is a particular result of the light
of the intelligence.”[10] Having been created in the image and likeness of God
it not only governs the body, as God governs the universe, but it is
responsible for the very existence of the body, as God is the creator of the
world. And just as God transcends his creation, so does the human soul
transcend the body in its interests. It is capable of operating in complete
independence of corporeal functions. This transcendental function of the soul
allows Albert to focus on what he believes is the essence of the soul — the
human intellect.
Viewed as essentially an intellect, the human soul is
an incorporeal substance. Albert divides this spiritual substance into two
powers — the agent intellect and the possible intellect.[11] Neither of these
powers needs the body in order to function. Under certain conditions concerning
its powers the human intellect is capable of transformation. While it is true
that under the stimulus or illumination of the agent intellect the possible
intellect can consider the intelligible form of the phantasms of the mind which
are derived from the senses, it can also operate under the sole influence of
the agent intellect. Here, Albert argues, the possible intellect undergoes a
complete transformation and becomes totally actualized, as the agent intellect
becomes its form. It emerges as what he calls the “adept intellect”
(intellectus adeptus).[12] At this stage the human intellect is susceptible to
illumination by higher cosmic intellects called the “intelligences”. Such
illumination brings the soul of man into complete harmony with the entire order
of creation and constitutes man's natural happiness. Since the intellect is now
totally assimilated to the order of things Albert calls the intellect in its
final stage of development the “assimilated intellect” (intellectus
assimilativus). The condition of having attained an assimilated intellect
constitutes natural human happiness, realizing all the aspirations of the human
condition and human culture. But Albert makes it clear that the human mind
cannot attain this state of assimilation on its own. Following the Augustinian
tradition as set forth in the De magistro Albert states that “because the
divine truth lies beyond our reason we are not able by ourselves to discover
it, unless it condescends to infuse itself; for as Augustine says, it is an
inner teacher, without whom an external teacher labors aimlessly.”[13] There is
thus an infusion involved with divine illumination, but it is not a pouring
forth of forms. Rather, it is an infusion of an inner teacher, who is
identified with divine truth itself. In his commentary on the Sentences Albert
augments this doctrine when he argues that this inner teacher strengthens the
weakness of the human intellect, which by itself could not profit by external
stimulation. He distinguishes the illumination of this interior teacher from
the true and final object of the intellect.[14] Divine light is only a means by
which the intellect can attain its object.[15] This is consistent with his
emphasis upon the analogy of divine light and physical light, which pervades so
much of his thinking. It follows, then, that in the order of human knowing
there are first of all the forms that are derived from external things. They
cannot teach us anything in any useful way until the light of an inner teacher
illuminates them. So light is the medium of this vision. But the inner teacher
himself is identified with the divine truth, which is the final object and
perfection of the human intellect. In his Summa, however, Albert makes further
distinctions concerning the object of human knowing. Natural things, he tells
us, are received in a natural light, while the things that the intellect
contemplates in the order of belief (ad credenda vero) are received in a light
that is gratuitous (gratuitum est), and the beatifying realities are received
in the light of glory.[16] It seems that Albert has abandoned the position that
even naturalia require divine illumination. Strictly speaking, he has not
abnegated his earlier position. Naturalia may very well still require the work
of a restorative inner teacher. In the Summa, however, Albert is anxious to
stress the radical difference natural knowing has from supernatural knowing. He
has already established this difference in his study of the human intellect (De
intellectu) where he tells us, “Some [intelligibles] with their light overpower
our intellect which is temporal and has continuity. These are like the things
that are most manifest in nature which are related to our intellect as the
light of the sun or a strong scintillating color is to the eyes of the bat or
the owl. Other [intelligibles] are manifest only through the light of another.
These would be like the things which are received in faith from what is primary
and true.”[17] But in both natural and supernatural knowing Albert is careful
to stress the final object and perfection of the human intellect. This leads
naturally to a consideration of Albert's understanding of ethics.
6. Ethics
Albert's ethics rests on his understanding of human
freedom. This freedom is expressed through the human power to make unrestricted
decisions about their own actions. This power, the liberum arbitrium, Albert
believes is identified neither with the intellect nor the will. He holds this
extraordinary position because of his analysis of the genesis of human action.
In his treatise on man (Liber de homine) he accounts for human action as
beginning with the intellect considering the various options for action open to
a person at a given moment in time. This is coupled by the will desiring the
beneficial outcome of the proposed event. Then the liberum arbitrium chooses
one of the options proposed by the intellect or the object of the will's
desire. The will then moves the person to act on the basis of the choice of the
liberum arbitrium. Brutes do not have this ability, he argues, and must act
solely on their initial desire. Hence they have no power of free choice. In his
later writings, however, Albert eliminates the first act of the will. But even
so he distinguishes the liberum arbitrium from both the will and the intellect,
presumably so that it can respond to the influences of both these faculties
equally. Thus the way to ethics is open.
Albert's concern with ethics as such is found in his
two commentaries on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics. The prologues to both these
works reveal Albert's original thoughts on some problems about the discipline
of ethics. He wonders if ethics can be considered as a theoretical deductive
science. He concludes that it can be so considered because the underlying
causes of moral action (rationes morum) involve both necessary and universal
principles, the conditions needed for a science according to the analysis of
Aristotle that Albert accepted.[18] The rationes morum are contrasted by him to
the mere appearance of moral behaviour.[19] Thus virtue can be discussed in
abstraction from particular actions of individual human agents. The same is
true of other ethical principles. However, Albert maintains that it is possible
to refer to particular human acts as exemplifying relevant virtues and as such
to include them in a scientific discussion of ethics.[20] Therefore, ethics is
theoretical, even though the object of its theory is the practical.
Another concern that Albert expresses is how ethics as
a theoretical deductive science can be relevant to the practice of the virtuous
life. He addresses this problem by distinguishing ethics as a doctrine (ethica
docens) from ethics as a practical activity of individual human beings (ethica
utens).[21] The outcomes of these two aspects of ethics are different he
argues. Ethics as a doctrine is concerned with teaching. It proceeds by logical
analysis concentrating on the goals of human action in general. As such its
proper end is knowledge. But as a practical and useful art ethics is concerned
with action as a means to a desired end.[22] Its mode of discourse is
rhetorical — the persuasion of the human being to engage in the right actions
that will lead to the desired end.[23] Albert sees these two aspects of ethics
as linked together by the virtue of prudence. It is prudence that applies the
results of the doctrine of ethics to its practice.[24] Ethics considered as a
doctrine operates through prudence as a remote cause of ethical action. Thus
the two functions of ethics are related and ethics is considered by Albert as
both a theoretical deductive science and a practical applied science.
Albert goes beyond these methodological
considerations. He addresses the end of ethics, as he understands it. And here
his psychology bears fruit. For he embraces the idea that the highest form of
human happiness is the contemplative life. This is the true and proper end of
man, he claims. For the adept intellect, as noted above, is the highest
achievement to which the human condition can aspire. It represents the
conjunction of the apex of the human mind to the separated agent intellect. In
this conjunction the separated agent intellect becomes the form of the soul.
The soul experiences self-sufficiency and is capable of contemplative wisdom.
This is as close to beatitude as man can get in this life. Man is now capable
of contemplating separated beings as such and can live his life in almost
stoical detachment from the concerns of sublunar existence.
7. The Influence of Albert the Great
Albert's influence on the development of scholastic
philosophy in the thirteenth century was enormous. He, along with his most
famous student Thomas of Aquinas, succeeded in incorporating the philosophy of
Aristotle into the Christian West. Besides Thomas, Albert was also the teacher
of Ulrich of Straßburg (1225 – 1277), who carried forward Albert's interest in
natural science by writing a commentary on Aristotle's Meteors along with his
metaphysical work, the De summo bono; Hugh Ripelin of Straßburg (c.1200 – 1268)
who wrote the famous Compendium theologicae veritatis; John of Freiburg (c.1250
– 1314) who wrote the Libellus de quaestionibus casualibus; and Giles of
Lessines (c. 1230 – c. 1304) who wrote a treatise on the unity of substantial
form, the De unitate formae. The influence of Albert and his students was very
pronounced in the generation of German scholars who came after these men.
Dietrich of Freiberg, who may have actually met Albert, is probably the best
example of the influence of the spirit of Albert the Great. Dietrich (c. 1250 –
c. 1310) wrote treatises on natural science, which give evidence of his having
carried out actual scientific investigation. His treatise on the rainbow would
be a good example. But he also wrote treatises on metaphysical and theological
topics in which the echoes of Albert can be distinctly heard. Unlike Albert he
did not write commentaries on Aristotle, but preferred to apply Albertist
principles to topics according to his own understanding. On the other hand
Berthold of Moosburg (+ c. 1361) wrote a very important commentary on Proclus'
Elements of Theology, introducing the major work of the great Neo-Platonist
into German metaphysics. Berthold's debt to Albert is found throughout his
commentary, especially with regard to metaphysical topics. Many of these
Albertist ideas and principles passed down to thinkers such as Meister Eckhart,
John Tauler, and Heinrich Suso where they took on a unique mystical flavor. The
Albertist tradition continued down to Heymeric de Campo (1395 – 1460) who
passed it on to Nicholas of Cusa. From Nicholas the ideas pass down to the
Renaissance. The philosophers of the Renaissance seem to have been attracted to
the Albert's understanding of Neo-Platonism and his interest in natural
science.
Albert the Great, Opera Omnia. Ed. P. Jammy, 21 vols
(Lyon, 1651).
Albert the Great, Opera Omnia, Ed. E. Borgnet, 38 vols
(Paris: Vives, 1890–1899).
Albert the Great, Alberti Magni Opera Omnia edenda
curavit Institutum Alberti Magni Coloniense Bernhardo Geyer praeside (Münster:
Aschendorff, 1951 – ).
Albert the Great, Book of Minerals. Transl. Dorothy
Wyckoff (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967).
Albert the Great, Commentary on Dionysius' Mystical
Theology. Transl. Simon Tugwell, O.P. in S. Tugwell, Albert and Thomas:
Selected Writings (New York: Paulist Press, 1988).
Albert the Great, On the Causes of the Properties of
the Elements. Transl. Irven M. Resnick (Milwaukee: Marquette U. Press, 2010).
(First published Mon Mar 20, 2006; substantive
revision Fri Apr 20, 2012)
SOURCE : Führer, Markus, "Albert the
Great", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2012
Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/albert-great/
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/albert-great/
_b_397.jpg)
Das projectirte Albertus Magnus-Denkmal in Lauingen. Nach
einer Photographie
Bild aus Seite 397 in "Die Gartenlaube".
Image from page 397 of journal Die Gartenlaube, 1881.
Catholic Churchmen in Science: Albertus Magnus
Philosopher,
Theologian, Scientist.
There are very few men, probably not more than can be
counted easily on the fingers of the two hands, with whose names in history are
associated the epithet “Great.” As a rule, those who have it as even a more or
less constant attribute are supposed to have merited it because of prowess in
war. It probably will be a surprise to most people to have it called to their
attention that there is one scholar in history to whom by universal consent the
epithet has been so constantly attributed that most readers when they meet the
word do not think of it as an adjective, but consider it to be a portion of his
proper name. Albert von Bollstadt has Magnus or Great so intimately associated
with his name that, as in the case of Charlemagne, it has become quite
identified with him and probably most readers of history never think of either
of them except with the epithet in mind. When we find that Albert was born in
the heart of the Middle Ages, at the end of the twelfth or the beginning of the
thirteenth century, the surprise is likely to be emphasized that at this
portion of human history should have come the one scholar whose name is forever
” the Great.” Even more interesting than the fact that Albert should have been
proclaimed ” the Great” for scholarship in the Middle Ages is the circumstance
that, because of the breadth of his genius and interests, he probably deserves
the title more than any other scholar who has ever lived. He more nearly
reached universality of knowledge in his time than perhaps it has ever been
given to any man alive. I say this deliberately, knowing how much Aristotle
succeeded in exhausting human knowledge in his time, but appreciating the fact
that Albert’s contemporaries who knew their Aristotle very well called him a
new Aristotle, appreciating that he had in addition depths of knowledge in many
developments of Christian revelation as well as in the evolution of modern
scientific ideas, that were far in advance of the old Greek philosopher. Of
course it may be thought that at this time, in the thirteenth century, it would
not be much for a man to exhaust human knowledge, because men did not know very
much. Those who think that, however, know nothing of the curricula of the
Universities of the thirteenth century, and especially ignore the fact that
men’s minds were just as inquisitive and succeeded in finding quite as
satisfactory answers to the more important questions that concern man and his
destiny as any that are accepted at the present time.
It is indeed amusing to note how confidently men who
know nothing at all about the Middle Ages – and are indeed quite willing to
confess that they know nothing – assume that there cannot have been any
education or any interest in science in those times worth while talking about.
For, just as soon as men investigate for themselves the subject of education
and scientific knowledge at that period, their ideas change and they begin not
only to respect but to admire the great work done by thinkers and educators in
those misunderstood ages. Literally men come to scoff and remain to pray. The
more one knows about the Middle Ages the less does one say in depreciation of
them. Just as soon as one studies faithfully any special feature of the work
they did, at once lack of comprehension changes to respect and then to
reverence for their industrious, misjudged and calumniated scholars.
This is as true for men of science as for those who
are interested in art and literature. A typical example is Professor Huxley.
Surely if there was anyone who might be expected to consider what had been done
in the Middle Ages as unworthy the attention of a modern scientific educator it
would be the great Darwinian controversialist. He had studied the educational
situation in the Universities of the Middle Ages, however, for himself, and had
not assumed that he possessed a knowledge of them a priori. Accordingly in
his inaugural address as Rector of the University of Aberdeen, some thirty
years ago, he said: “The scholars seem to have studied Grammar, Logic, and
Rhetoric; Arithmetic and Geometry; Astronomy; Theology; and Music. Thus, their
work, however imperfect and faulty, judged by modern lights, it may have been,
brought them face to face with all the leading aspects of the many-sided mind
of man. For these studies did really contain, at any rate, in embryo –
sometimes it may be in caricature – what we now call Philosophy, Mathematical
and Physical Science and Art. And I doubt if the curriculum of any modern
University shows so clear and generous a comprehension of what is meant by
culture, as this old Trivium and Quadrivium docs.”
Huxley has no illusions with regard to the backwardness
of the Middle Ages in education or in science. He has not assumed to know all
about the period of which he really knows nothing and then talks as if he knew
all about it. He had gone into the investigation of the details of the subject
before making his declarations and as a consequence he differs completely from
those who have only a pretence of knowledge in the matter. His opinion thus
frankly expressed always recalls to me the expression of a famous American
humorist, Josh Billings, which I like to repeat because it sums up so
thoroughly the significance of many opinions held by educators who ought to
know better with regard to the history of education. Josh Billings, writing as
Uncle Esek in the Century twenty-five years ago, said: “It is not so much the
ignorance of mankind that makes them ridiculous as the knowing so many things
that ain’t so.”
As a matter of fact, as I think I have shown in my
book The Thirteenth – Greatest of Centuries,
there probably never was a hundred years in human history that produced such
great men, gave rise to so many important movements, accomplished so much that
was to have enduring influence in art, in literature, in education, and in
democracy, as this century with which Albert’s long life is so nearly coincident.
The surprise with regard to the epithet Great is rather increased than
diminished by this consideration, however, because he received this name which
has clung so tenaciously to him from these generations of the thirteenth
century, themselves so fruitful in supremely accomplished scholars, men with
wonderful power to express in every department of human endeavor the thoughts
that were in them. If they called him Great, then it is no wonder that
succeeding centuries have adopted this title, until now it has become a part of
Albert’s name and constitutes the ready way by which we differentiate him most
easily from many other Alberts in history.
Perhaps the most interesting phase of the history of
Albert’s right to the title, so far as the modern world is concerned, would be
the fact that it was largely due to his knowledge of science.
The assumption that there was no study of nature in
the early times of the Universities is one of those curious unfounded
traditions which exist in people’s minds and which the critical student of
history finds it hard to account for. Anyone who wants to realize how much
nature study there was in the thirteenth century should read his Dante with
attention. In a chapter on the University Man and Science in my book The Popes
and Science, I call attention to a few of the details of Dante’s knowledge of
natural science and his interest in everything in nature. There is scarcely a
poet in the modern time, no matter how recent or how much he has been trained
in modern scientific nature study, who exhibits as much familiarity as Dante
with all the round of sciences as they were known in his time. He does not
parade his erudition. He uses his knowledge merely incidentally in order to
bring out his meaning more clearly by figures drawn from science. There is no
doubt that what we have from his pen in this matter represents only a little of
what he actually knew, yet even that little shows a man familiar with phases of
science utterly foreign to most of our modern poets.
It will not be too much, then, to say that Albertus
Magnus received his title of Great to a considerable degree because of his
knowledge of the physical sciences and the wonderful evolution in what we now
call science that his suggestive original work effected. Science was a very
inchoate department of knowledge at the beginning of the thirteenth century.
Three-quarters of a century later, when Albert came to die, the deep and firm
foundations of modern physical science had been laid, and at least one other
great scientific investigator, who had probably been for a time a student with
Albert, had done work in the physical sciences that was to make his name famous
as one of the great scientists of all time and deserve for him the title
unfortunately usurped by a namesake, who came three centuries later, of the
founder of the experimental method. Roger Bacon and Albert accomplished the
great initial work which means so much for science; they stepped across the
boundaries of the unknown and blazed paths along which it was comparatively
easy for subsequent generations to follow them in the mazes of scientific
discovery. This is the aspect of Albert’s life which is likely to appeal to a
generation interested mainly in physical science.
Quite apart from this controversial standpoint, however,
the most interesting feature of Albert the Great’s life is his profound
interest in physical science. We have come to limit the meaning of the word
science to those branches of knowledge which are concerned with natural objects
and which may be developed by the observation and the study of nature.
Ordinarily we assume that nature study is a modern habit of mind. We are indeed
inclined to criticize the founders of the Universities and the faculties of
them for several centuries for not having devoted more time to the study of
nature around them. They are supposed to have occupied themselves only with
books and with book-learning. One reason for this is usually declared to have
been that the Church, which was a very prominent factor in the Universities,
feared the development of science lest it should disturb men’s minds and take
them away from their simple faith in religious truth. The very attitude of mind
of the scientist, that of an inquirer, is supposed to be entirely opposed to
that calm acceptance of dogmas on authority which the Church considered the
ideal attitude of the human mind all during the Middle Ages.
It is quite unnecessary to say that it is impossible
to give anything like a full account of Albert’s life in the brief space at our
command here. Besides his scientific career there is another phase of his life
that deserves to be called especially to attention. This is the fact that while
his own generation called him Great and subsequent generations adopted their
opinion, the Church of which he was so devout a member all during life, always
looked up to him as an ideal churchman, and nearly five centuries after his
death raised him to her altars and gave him the title of Blessed. There is no
doubt that before many years have passed this will be replaced by the title of
Saint, which he will share with his great pupil and fellow-worker, Saint Thomas
Aquinas. Already the cause of his canonization has been, at the suggestion of
the Bishops of Germany, formally begun. The title will add nothing to his glory
or merit, but will proclaim him one of those men whom the Christian Church
considers to have lived their lives more for others than for themselves, for
that is, I suppose, the simplest definition of a saint. When we reflect, then,
that this ideal churchman was a great scientist, and that indeed most of his
intellectual merit consists of his discoveries in science, it makes a curious
contradiction of the old tradition of Church opposition to science during the
Middle Ages.
Albert’s life contradicts many other false impressions
held with regard to the Middle Ages besides its supposed neglect of science,
and makes it very clear that about the same condition of affairs obtained with
regard to education in the thirteenth century as in our own time. It is
sometimes said that the nobility paid very little attention to education at
this time. Some of them are even declared to have been proud of the fact that
they did not know indeed how to read and write. It is evident that this meant
no more than the declarations of successful business men in the modern time
who, not having had the advantage of university education themselves, sometimes
assert that such an education is a detriment rather than a benefit. The two
greatest scholars of the thirteenth century, Albert and Aquinas, were both
descended from noble families, and not noble families of the lower order, but,
on the contrary, of very high rank. While Aquinas was a younger son of the
Count of Aquino, and what we know of his elder brothers would seem to indicate
that they cared very little for the things of the mind, it would be entirely
wrong to conclude from this example that such intellectual interests were
relegated to younger sons, for Albert was the eldest son of the Count of
Bollstadt.
Albert was born at Lauingen in Suabia about the end of
the twelfth or the beginning of the thirteenth century. There is a considerable
difference of opinion as to the exact date. Some historians place it as early
as 1193; others set it down as late as 1205 or 1206. The evidence for the later
date is more convincing. It is enough for us to know that Albert’s life, like
that of Cardinal Newman in the nineteenth century, ran almost coincident with
his century. We know practically nothing of his early years or of the education
which he received. It is very probable that whatever preparatory education he
received was obtained from tutors under the parental roof. When scarcely more
than a boy, certainly not more than sixteen or seventeen years of age, he was
sent to pursue his studies at the University of Padua. At this time there were
two famous Universities in Italy, one at Bologna, the specialty of which was
the study of law, and the other at Padua, distinguished for the opportunities
afforded for education in the liberal arts. There is a tradition that Albert
had a special predilection for these and a taste for languages which was to
serve him in good stead later in life.
The exact date of Albert’s entrance to the University
of Padua is unknown and the length of his stay there is uncertain. The first
definite evidence that we have with regard to him as a young man is his
entrance into the Order of Saint Dominic. He was attracted to the Order by
being brought in contact with Blessed Jordan of Saxony, the second
Master-General of the Order. The date of his entrance is definitely known to
have been about 1222. Whether he continued his studies in Italy after he became
a Dominican is not known. When next we hear of him he has completed his studies
and is teaching theology in various places in what we now know as South
Germany. There are records of his having occupied the chair of Professor of
Theology at Hildesheim, at Freiburg in Breisgau, at Ratisbon, at Strasburg, and
at Cologne. It was while he was teaching at Cologne, basing his lectures on the
well-known Book of Sentences of Peter Lombard, that in 1245 he was selected to
represent the Dominican Order in the great University of Paris.
There had been considerable jealousy of the religious
orders at Paris. The Franciscans and Dominicans shortly after their foundations
both established houses in the French capital, in order that their young men
might have the advantage of the University life. Very probably also, besides
the opportunity to hear various professors which was there afforded so
abundantly, the orders wished their young men to have the advantage of the
libraries and of various educational opportunities provided in Paris at this
time. Both the Franciscans and Dominicans had tried to secure certain special
privileges for the members of their orders. They wished to have the University
recognize at full value certain courses taken in the religious houses of the
orders and for this asked to have their professors given University rights. For
a time the University authorities refused any such special privileges. The
Pope, as the ultimate authority in all University matters throughout the world,
had to be appealed to, and it was only after considerable delay and after the
subject had been much discussed and the whole question of the rights of
religious orders established by many of their learned men, that special
privileges were accorded to the orders. We owe Saint Thomas Aquinas’s great
work on the religious orders to this controversy. In the meantime both the
Franciscans and Dominicans made it a point to send some of their most
distinguished teachers and pupils to Paris in order that they might be well
represented and that the prestige of their work might obtain the privileges
demanded.
Albert had been teaching at Cologne in the year 1245
when he received the direction to go to Paris. With him at Cologne at the time
was Thomas Aquinas, whose genius only his great teacher as yet really
suspected. Thomas accompanied his master to Paris and they seem to have studied
there together. Albert received the degree of doctor in the University of
Paris, and in 1248 returned, Thomas once more with him, to Cologne, where the
University had been reorganized. Albert now became the Rector of the University
of Cologne, and the prestige of his success at Paris and the fact that he
brought back with him the traditions of that great University did much to make
this studium generate, as Universities were then called, a popular place, for
German students at least. Thomas became the second professor and the magister
studentium – master of students – a term about equivalent to that of Dean at
the present time. His duties were to care for the students in all that related
to the direction of their studies, though doubtless whatever of discipline was
required also fell into his hands.
It was during the next six years, while Albert was the
Rector of the University of Cologne, that he somehow found the time to write
his great works on Physical Science. These are on nearly every subject
connected with what we now call science. He has a treatise on Physics, on
Meteors, on Minerals, on The Heavens and The Earth, on The Nature of Places,
and on The Passions of the Air, the curious symbolic expression which he used
for storms or atmospheric disturbances or what we would now call meteorology.
In the biological sciences he has treatises on Plants, on Animals, on Animal
Locomotion and Nutrition and Nutritives, on Generation and Corruption, on Age,
on Death and Life, and on Respiration. In psychology he has treatises on The Soul,
on Sense and Sensation, on Memory, on Sleep and Waking, on the Intellect, and
on the Nature and Origin of the Soul. When we consider that there are all sorts
of treatises on philosophic and metaphysical subjects besides these, is it any
wonder that his contemporaries called him the universal doctor or that
Engelbert, a writer of the time, calls him the wonder and the miracle of his
age? Of course the ordinary impression of people of the modern time who read
these titles will be that this medieval schoolman could have known very little
about these subjects and that what he wrote must be mainly a tissue of
absurdities. Absurd things there are in Albert’s writings, but almost without
exception he states these on the authority of someone else and nearly always
adds his own disbelief in them. Scholars who have studied Albert’s works most
faithfully have thought the most of them. Among these must be included not only
those whose sympathies, because of religious motives, would naturally go out to
Albert, but those who would on that same ground judge him most severely. We
have the testimony of some very distinguished modern scientists to the depth
and breadth of Albert’s knowledge, while the testimonies which make little of
him come from men who confess that they did not take the trouble to read him
and who gather their opinions from others equally negligent or lacking the
industry for this task.
Indeed for most of what we have just said with regard
to Albert’s wide knowledge in the sciences we can have ample confirmation
without looking farther afield than to so well-known an authority as Humboldt,
the distinguished German physical scientist of the first half of the nineteenth
century, who in his Kosmos has this to say of Albert:
Albertus Magnus was equally active and influential in
promoting the study of natural science and of the Aristotelian philosophy. His
works contain some exceedingly acute remarks on the organic structure and
physiology of plants. One of his works bearing the title of Liber
Cosmographicus de Natura Locorum is a species of physical geography. I
have found in it considerations of the dependence of temperature concurrently
on latitude and elevation, and on the effect of different angles of incidence
of the sun’s rays in heating the ground, which have excited my surprise.
In the chapter of my book, The
Thirteenth – Greatest of Centuries, on What They Studied at
the Universities, I have discussed some additional evidence that we have with
regard to each of these sciences for which Humboldt gives words of praise to
his medieval predecessor in the knowledge of most of what was known in their
respective days. Here I may only call attention to the fact that Humboldt
evidently considers that Albert had made distinct contributions to botany and
especially to the physiology of this science, to physical geography, to
meteorology, and to astronomy. For some of these subjects we have further
evidence that is of very great interest. M. Meyer, in his History of Botany,
says that ” No botanist who lived before Albert can be compared to him, unless
Theophrastus, with whom he was not acquainted; and after him none has painted
nature in such living colors or studied it so profoundly until the time of
Conrad Gessner and Cesalpino.” We may say that, according to his biographer,
Sighart:
He was acquainted with the sleep of plants, with the
periodical opening and closing of blossoms, with the diminution of sap through
evaporation from the cuticle of the leaves, and with the influence of the
distribution of the bundles of vessels on the folial indentations. His minute
observations on the forms and variety of plants intimate an exquisite sense of
floral beauty. He distinguished the star from the bell-floral, tells us that a
red rose will turn white when submitted to the vapor of sulphur, and makes some
very sagacious observations on the subject of germination.
Indeed, Albert’s contributions to botany seem so
valuable to Meyer, the modern German historian of that subject, that he
republished the great schoolman’s treatise in six books on Vegetables and
Plants. This republication did more than anything else to disabuse modern
scholars of the idea that the writings on natural science of the Middle Ages
were either ridiculous or trivial in importance. Since this republication some thirty
years ago, Albert’s other contributions to science have become much better
known, and with him to know is always to admire. As a consequence, frequent
tributes have been paid to the universal doctor, and men have come to realize
how wise the generation was in which he lived. Pagel, the German historian of
medicine, whom we have already quoted with regard to Albert, does not hesitate
to say that his style, far from being uninteresting, is full of information,
and that when he accepts curious stories on the authority of others, he does
not fail to mention that fact and usually gives some hint that he did not
credit the story himself. In a word, his was no merely encyclopedic knowledge,
but it had been garnered in a proper critical spirit.
With regard to other phases of Albert’s scientific
work, we have the same good modern authority as to its thorough-going
significance. Pagel, who has written the chapters on Medieval Medicine and
Science in Puschmann’s three-volume History of
Medicine, says that the treatise on the nature of places which
Humboldt praises, contains many very interesting suggestions with regard to
ethnography and physiology. Pagel also finds words of commendation for various
portions of Albert’s work on Physics. This discussed the principles of what
used to be called Natural Philosophy, and its eight books, while forming a
commentary on Aristotle’s Physics, go far beyond the Greek Philosopher in their
treatment of the underlying principles of physical nature.
With regard to chemistry, there are many interesting
contributions from Albert’s pen. He was, as we shall see, the first to make it
very clear that the substances which were called spirits in the olden times
because they often exploded and did serious damage, were only manifestations of
natural forces and not of occult or other-worldly powers. One of Albert’s
treatises on chemistry bears the name “The Causes and the Properties of the
Elements.” His treatise on minerals contains, according to Pagel, besides an
extended description of the ordinary peculiarities of minerals, which shows his
own acuteness and that of his generation in observing even minute differences,
a detailed description of nearly one hundred different kinds of precious
stones. This book contains also a mine of information with regard to the
metals, of which Albert describes seven, and the other familiar mineral
substances of the time, salt, vitriol, alum, arsenic, amber, niter, and
marcasite.
Albert was particularly interested in all such
questions as relate to man and the higher animals. He gathered into a series of
treatises all the knowledge of his own time and all that he could glean from
the writings of those who had lived before him with regard to every phase of
animal and human life. The result is that a list of his writings is a catalogue
of works in science that can scarcely fail to astonish the modern mind,
unaccustomed to the idea of interest in science, especially in the biological
sciences, during the thirteenth century. Albert has two treatises on Generation
and Corruption (De Generatione et Corruptione). He has a treatise on
Respiration; another on The Motion of Animals (De Animalium Locomotione) which
takes up the question both of the voluntary and involuntary motions performed
by them. Then there is a treatise on The Senses (De Sensibus), another on
Sleeping and Waking (De Somno et Vigilantia), and a third on Life and Death (De
Vita et Morte). His studies in the psychology of animals and in human beings
are especially interesting in the light of the fact that this subject has come
to occupy so much attention in recent years. Besides his treatise on the
Senses, Albert has a monograph on The Memory and The Imagination (De Memoria et
Imaginatione); another, in two books, on the Intellect (De Intellecty,} ; and a
third, in three books, on The Soul (De Anima), in which, of course following
the scholastic philosophy of the time, the soul is considered the vital
principle of the body as well as the underlying principle of the intellect, and
in which of course a vitalism that would be more popular just at the present
time than at any other period for the last half century, is emphatically
taught. Along this same line, Albert has a treatise on Youth and Old Age (De
Juventute et Senectute), in which he discusses many of the important problems
of human life and its relation above all to the development of the will and the
character. There is scarcely a phase of the modern biological sciences, even
that of the higher psychology, which is not touched upon by Albert, and in many
passages he presents what are really marvelous anticipations of some supposedly
very modern thought.
But Albert’s devotion to the biological sciences did
not keep him from paying serious attention to what we now call, in
contradistinction to them, the physical sciences, the classified knowledge of
inanimate things. Some of his work in physics and chemistry deserves to be
better known because it constitutes special chapters in the history of these
sciences.
One of the most interesting things that Albert did in
these subjects was his investigation of the origin of gases. It had often been
noticed that when men descended into certain caves or into mines, or into old
wells, they lost their lives. This was usualy attributed to the devils who were
supposed to inhabit such dark places, and who resented the coming-in of men.
Sometimes when lights were carried into such places, instead of being merely
extinguished, they proved to be the origin of serious explosions. This was, of
course, attributed to the powers of darkness, who doubly resented the presence
of light in their domain. Albert, however, did not accept any such explanation.
He suggested that there were certain substances which emanated from the rocks
or from the soil in these places which led to the deaths of men or of animals
who wandered into them, or which caused the explosions when naked lights were
carried into them. It was in his time, and it is usually considered to be the
result of his initiative that the word spirit came to be applied very generally
to such volatile substances as readily produced gas when heated and which thus
give rise to explosions. The word spiritus had originally been employed for
these substances, because they were supposed to contain within them certain
evil spirits which resented the application of heat; but this idea was
completely overturned by Albert’s investigations. In the light of all that we
know about Albert’s devotion to the physical sciences the attitude of many
historians and scholars toward the question of the Church’s relation to science
at this time is amusing and somewhat amazing. President White, for instance,
acknowledges Albert’s wonderful contributions to science in every form, but
attributes the fact that he should have paid so much attention to Philosophy and
Theology to the opposition which he encountered as regards his scientific
studies and publications.
Surely any such view as this utterly ignores the
extraordinary vogue of Albert’s books on sciences. They existed in many
manuscript copies and were constantly reproduced by the slow labor of writing
by hand. This must have required the unfailing devotion of his disciples and
his Dominican brethren. His works were carefully preserved, written again and
again, although they contain several million words, by successive generations
of Dominicans, and they were looked upon not as suspicious books but as
precious contributions to human knowledge. There is no account anywhere in
Albert’s life of any opposition aroused by his devotion to science.
So far indeed from the fact is President White’s
declaration with regard to Albert’s deliberate neglect of physical science, in
order that he might devote himself more to philosophy and theology, that
Albert’s books and writings on physical science loomed so large in the minds of
his contemporaries and of the immediately succeeding generations, that one of
the objections sometimes urged against Albert is that his interest in
scientific subjects did not permit him to pay as much attention as he ought to
the sacred sciences. This opinion was expressed rather emphatically by Henry of
Ghent in his Ecclesiastical Writers.
The list of Albert’s published works on Philosophy, Theology, and Scripture
forms, as is well remarked by his biographer in The Catholic Encyclopedia, an
all-sufficient vindication from the charge that he neglected Theology and
Sacred Sciences. With this side of Albert’s activity as a writer we have
nothing to do here, because we are interested only in his scientific work.
Those who think that science as we know the term at
the present day is a modern invention or a modern development of human
intellectual accomplishment, need only to read Albert’s original works, and if
they will take the trouble there will be no doubt of the existence of not only
the most enthusiastic interest in natural science during the thirteenth
century, but also the most successful elucidation of many of its problems. The
great foundations of most of the modern sciences were then laid. We are prone
to think that at most a few paths were broken in the unknown land of natural
science and that at best the advances were few, the horizons distant, the views
shadowy. We are apt to imagine that only a science or two, a little physics and
chemistry were touched upon, and that these were followed with such curious
mistaken notions as to make any real advance impossible. We have been
accustomed to make fun of the search for the philosopher’s stone by which base
metals would be transmuted into the precious metals, but ten years ago,
apparently, we found the long-sought-for philosopher’s stone in the metal
radium, for by means of its emanations we can apparently transform metals into
one another. Radium itself changes into helium, though both were thought to be
elementary substances. And at the last meeting of the British Association for
the Advancement of Science Sir William Ramsey announced the transmutation of
copper and lithium by means of radium emanations. Our greatest of living
chemists in the English-speaking world may not have solved the problem of
metallic transmutation, as he thinks he has; but he frankly places himself
beside the old alchemists in his work. Already a modern professor of chemistry
had suggested that he would like to examine a mass of lead-ore carefully, and
having extracted all the silver that occurs in lead ore, would like to lay it
aside for twenty years and see whether, at the end of that time he would not
find more silver in the mass. His idea is evidently that lead in nature
probably constantly changes into silver by slow degrees, so that the old
alchemists were not so foolish, but, on the contrary, anticipated what is most
modern in chemistry.
As a matter of fact, what strikes one after a while
when he has become familiar with what was accomplished in science in the Middle
Ages is that they should have anticipated so much of what is considered to be
modern in science, and that, considering how far they went, it is amazing that
in nearly seven centuries we have gone so little farther than they did. This is
true, however, not only in chemistry and in physics, but in practically every
department of natural science, for all of these were opened up and, as we have
seen, Albert himself was a pioneer and great thinker in nearly every one of
them, as good authorities in modern science familiar with his writings have
declared.
Albert’s attitude toward what we have come to
recognize as the true method of science, the experimental method, is the best
possible evidence for his great accomplishments in science. There are many who
still believe that it was Francis Bacon at the beginning of the seventeenth
century who laid the foundation of the inductive sciences. Any such opinion is
founded entirely on ignorance of what was accomplished during the medieval
centuries, and it has its only reason for being in that curious blindness which
has led so many people during the last three or four centuries to be unable to
see anything good in the Nazareth of the times before the so-called
Reformation. All the real historians of science in the last twenty-five years
have been rejecting the notion of the leadership of Francis Bacon in this
matter and have been engaged in pointing out that he was only a publicist who
had the good fortune to write a book on the subject that became popular, but
that the real father of the inductive sciences was his great namesake Roger
Bacon, nearly four centuries before. While this title of the great Franciscan
of the thirteenth century is indisputable, there is no doubt that his sometime
teacher Albert had anticipated most of the principles of experimental science
and method even before Roger Bacon.
In the epigraphs at the beginning of this sketch I
have quoted some sentences from Albert’s writings that make it very clear how
much of dependence he placed on experiment in science and how thoroughly he
realized that this was the only possible method of obtaining exact knowledge
with regard to natural objects. In bringing those epigraphs together it seemed
worth while to place beside them a great expression from Saint Augustine conveying
the same truth in different language, for from Augustine to Albert there is 800
years and the work of these two has dominated Christianity for 1500 years, so
that their spirit represents the real policy of the scholars and the genuine
attitude of mind of the great theologians. Unfortunately it is the custom of
writers of history only too often to take the expressions of obscure writers,
or chance remarks of such men as Augustine and Albert, apart from their
context, as indicative of the attitude of the Church and of ecclesiastics
during this period to science. The unfairness of this is easy to understand,
but it has represented one of the ways in which history has been, if not
deliberately falsified, at least made to lean toward the opinions of the writer
rather than to express the true significance of events.
There is no doubt at all of Albert’s devotion to
theological science or of the magnificent results that he achieved therein. In
spite of all that his great disciple Saint Thomas Aquinas accomplished in this
department, Albert still continued and continues to be looked upon as one of
the living authorities on this subject. It was this great theologian, however,
who declared in his book on Minerals, “that the aim of natural science is not
simply to accept the statements of others, but to investigate the causes that
are at work in nature.” The rule that he thus laid down for the sciences
relating to inanimate things, he applied also to the biological sciences when
he wrote about plants. In his treatise On Plants he says, in an
expression that has often been quoted since, “experiment is the only sure
method in such investigations.” The wording of the original Latin is worth
remembering because of the deep significance of the expression: Experimentum
solum certificat in talibus.
When we have all this before us from this great
physical scientist and theologian we are not so surprised as we might otherwise
be by his famous declaration: “In studying nature we have not to inquire how
God the Creator may, as He freely wills, use His Creatures to work miracles and
thereby show forth His power: we have rather to inquire what nature with its
immanent causes can naturally bring to pass.” It is this sentence occurring in
his treatise on the Heavens and the Earth that makes it very clear how little
of opposition there was in Albert’s mind between his faith and his science. One
is not surprised to find after this declaration that, although Albert’s
favorite author was Saint Augustine, he preferred Aristotle to Saint Augustine
in matters of science. At the same time he did not hesitate to point out many
errors in Aristotle; in fact, in his famous Summa of theology he devotes a
lengthy chapter to the errors of the Greek philosopher and Albert thus shows
that he still maintained the opinion which he had expressed in his Book of
Sentences: “Whoever believes that Aristotle is a god must also believe that he
never erred, but if one believes that Aristotle is a man, then beyond all doubt
he was liable to err just as we are.”
It is no wonder that we find that Roger Bacon, a
greater physical scientist than Albert, thought much of his great predecessor,
and, although he was rather inclined to be critical of his contemporaries and
forerunners in science, had only praise for Albert. He said of him: ” Albert
was most serious, had a broad outlook on the world of knowledge and an immense
capacity for work. He could therefore collect much information in the vast
scene of writings.” Albert was much more conservative than Roger Bacon, had much
more of sympathy for the failure of others to follow him in his scientific
work, a failure which constitutes one of the sources of that trouble that great
original scientists nearly always prepare for themselves, and as a consequence,
as Turner in his History of Philosophy has so well pointed out, he ”
contributed far more than Bacon did to the advancement of science in the
thirteenth century.” Roger Bacon has insisted on how much of information Albert
obtained from books, but he knew that Albert must have done much personal
investigation. His use of books, as has already been illustrated by his
attitude toward the great Greek philosopher, Aristotle, of whom he thought so
much, was eminently critical and much more like that which has become common in
our own time than is to be noted in any of his contemporaries.
Perhaps the most interesting phase of Albert’s
knowledge for the modern times is his refusal to accept some of the beliefs
which were very commonly credited in his time and which our generation usually
sets down as having been accepted by even the deepest scholars of the Middle
Ages. For instance, though many of his contemporaries believed in the
possibility of the transmutation of metals Albert did not, but on the contrary,
rather emphatically disapproved of the notion and considered that any such
change was absolutely impossible. He thought that substances as we know them
were essentially different, and proclaimed that “art alone cannot produce a
substantial form.” With regard to magic and its supposed marvelous power, so
commonly believed in even by the wisest in the earlier Middle Ages, and which
Albert found so completely accepted by many of his great predecessors and
teachers, the great Dominican scholar was very emphatic in his rejection of all
belief in it. He said, ” I do not approve what Avicenna and Algazel have said
with regard to fascination (of magic) because I believe that magic can do no
harm, that magical arts have no power for evil, and they do not accomplish any
of the things that are feared from them.”
With regard to other curious beliefs of his time
Albert maintained the same sceptical attitude. Even a cursory reading of his
works shows that he refused to accept many of the fairy tales of science and of
popular tradition which were so commonly received in his time. It is only great
original minds of supreme depth and force that are thus able to get away from
the delusions common in their time; and every age, despite its self-complacent
reproach of previous ages for their credulousness, may well consider itself as
subject to them. We have them in our time, and only the great scholars rise
superior to them, as did Albert in the thirteenth century. His biographer,
Sighart, has collected a series of the fables and pseudo-scientific stories
which were rejected by Albert. His paragraph helps to give us a better idea of
what the great scholar thus accomplished than perhaps could be obtained in any
other way. He says:
He treats as fabulous the commonly received idea, in
which Bede has acquiesced, that the region of the earth south of the equator
was uninhabitable, and considers that from the equator to the South Pole, the
earth was not only habitable, but in all probability actually inhabited except
directly at the poles, where he imagines the cold to be excessive. If there be
any animals there, he says, they must have very thick skins to defend them from
the rigor of the climate, and they are probably of a white color. The intensity
of cold is, however, tempered by the action of the sea. He describes the
antipodes and the countries they comprise, and divides the climate of the earth
into seven zones. He smiles with a scholar’s freedom at the simplicity of those
who suppose that persons living at the opposite region of the earth must fall
off, an opinion that can only rise out of the grossest ignorance, “for when we
speak of the lower hemisphere, this must be understood merely as relative to
ourselves.” It is as a geographer that Albert’s superiority to the writers of
his own time chiefly appears. Bearing in mind the astonishing ignorance which
then prevailed on this subject, it is truly admirable to find him correctly
tracing the chief mountain chains of Europe with the rivers which take their
source in each; remarking on portions of coast which have in later times been
submerged by the ocean, and islands which have been raised by volcanic action
above the level of the sea; noticing the modification of climate caused by
mountains, seas, and forests, and the division of the human race, whose differences
he ascribes to the effect upon them of the countries they inhabit! In speaking
of the British Isles he alludes to the commonly received idea that another
distant Island called Tile or Thule existed far in the Western Ocean,
uninhabitable by reason of its frightful climate, but which, he says, has
perhaps not yet been visited by man.
Nothing will so seriously disturb the complacency of
modern minds as to the wonderful advances that have been made in the last
century in all branches of physical science as to read Albert’s writings.
Nothing can be more wholesomely chastening of present-day conceit than to get a
proper appreciation of the extent of the knowledge of the schoolmen. Nowhere
can one get a better notion of the immense amount of even scientific
information possessed by those whom so many educated (!) people now call in
derision the scholastics than from Albert’s writings, consulted at first-hand
and not in the garbled extracts of modern unsympathetic commentators.
But to turn to Albert’s career. For six years after
his return from Paris he remained as what we would now call the Rector of the
University of Cologne. His success in this responsible position naturally
suggested other and higher posts for his administrative ability. Accordingly in
1254 he was elected the Provincial of the Order in Germany. This took him away
from immediate touch with teaching and investigation, but gave him abundant
opportunities for the encouragement of learning in every department in all the
houses of his Order in Germany. His influence was felt everywhere. Two years
after his election as Provincial he went to Rome, in order to defend the
Mendicant Orders against the attacks which had been made upon them,
particularly by William of Saint Amour. The condemnation of William’s book, “On
the Latest Dangers of the Time,” was secured from Pope Alexander IV on 5
October 1256.
It is rather interesting to realize how thoroughly appreciated Albert must have
been. He had been chosen to go to Paris as the representative of what was best
in the intellectuality of his Order. He was delegated to go to Rome to defend
it against the attacks of those who did not appreciate all the spirituality
there was in the religious orders of the time. Evidently Albert was looked upon
as a representative of all that was best in his Order.
How much Albert was thought of in Rome, though he was
now at least fifty years of age and a large part of his life-work in the
natural sciences and in the application of the experimental method had already
been accomplished, may be appreciated from the fact that during his stay in the
Papal capital he was appointed to fill the office of Master of the Papal
Palace. This office had been instituted in the time of Saint Dominic and was
generally considered to be one of the highest honors that could come to a man.
It was honorary rather than administrative, and was usually conferred on men
who were chosen as the recipients of a signal expression of the approbation of
the ecclesiastical authorities. That his selection for this office was no idle
compliment paid to the man or the prestige of his name as a great scholar may
be realized from the fact that he was asked at the same time to preach in Rome
on the Gospel of Saint John and on the Canonical Epistles. Then as now, only
those were chosen to be public preachers in Rome of whose thoroughgoing
orthodoxy and absolute concordance with the spirit and tradition of the Church
there was not the slightest doubt.
The cares of office, however, apparently hung heavy on
Albert’s shoulders and he was not one of those for whom honors and dignities
would make up for the time that he had to devote to administrative details. He
was anxious to get back to his studies and investigations, his teaching, and
his writings. He resigned the office of Provincial in 1257. His departure from
Rome had relieved him of the cares of the office of Master of the Papal Palace.
At once he devoted himself not only to his own studies, but to making the
studies of the members of his Order more effective. Within a few years we can
find him a prominent factor in the reorganization of the Dominican studies,
which had been discussed for some time and finally taken up for formal action
at the general chapter of the Order held at Valenciennes in 1259. This chapter
laid down rules for the direction of the studies of the younger Dominicans and
suggested methods of teaching by which their education would be made more
efficient. The system of graduation was also modified in such a way as to make
it sure that the graduates from Dominican schools would be in every way the equals
of the graduates from the Universities.
It might be thought that the ideas of these men of the
thirteenth century with regard to the methods of teaching and requirements of
graduation would be very vague and indefinite. The members of the committee
responsible for the new order of things then determined on were Albert, Saint
Thomas Aquinas, and Peter of Tarenpasia, who afterwards reached the distinction
of being made Pope under the name of Pope Innocent V. Though his name is not so
familiar to modern scholars as those of the other two members of this perhaps
the most distinguished committee for the revision of studies that ever held
sessions, he was the author of a series of works on philosophy, theology, and
canon law, and of commentaries on the Epistles of Saint Paul and the Book of
Sentences of Peter Lombard, which are well known to scholars. For these
contributions to the philosophic and theological literature of an especially
copious century he is sometimes spoken of as Famosissimus Doctor – the most famous
doctor. It is very evident that the question of the organization of studies was
taken very much to heart by the Dominicans, since they selected three such men
as these for the work, and since three such men were willing to take the time
from their own occupations and were ready to devote their learning and
experience to the subject.
Albert had become so much appreciated at Rome that in
spite of his own anxiety to remain a simple Dominican and devote himself to his
studies he could not succeed in escaping promotion to the hierarchy. In the
year 1260 he was selected as the Bishop of Ratisbon. As soon as he heard of the
proposed elevation to the episcopacy, Albert tried to secure the cancellation
of the appointment and appealed for this purpose to the Master General of the
Dominicans. The latter endeavored as far as was possible to prevent the
appointment of Albert, but the Roman authorities were confident that Albert’s
genius and administrative ability would serve the best purposes of the Church
as a bishop. Albert bowed his head in submission then, and accepted the post.
After two years he had succeeded in reorganizing the affairs of the bishopric,
and then at his earnest request he was allowed to resign and he once more took
up the duties of a professor in the University of Cologne. Here he seems to
have spent the next eight years in peace in the midst of his favorite
occupations of investigating, writing, and teaching. He was too great a man,
however, to be allowed to continue his work so peacefully, and in 1270 we find
him aiding Saint Thomas in combating certain of the philosophical heretics of
the time.
The great distinction of his life was yet to come. In
1274 he was summoned by Pope Gregory X to attend the Council of Lyons, in the
deliberations of which he took a most important part as the direct
representative of the Pope. His colleague in this office of honor and
responsibility was his old pupil and life-long friend, Saint Thomas Aquinas.
Albert received the news of Saint Thomas’s death as he himself was on the way
to the Council. It proved a very serious blow to him. He declared that the
light of the Church had been extinguished. Something of the beautifully
sympathetic relationship that had existed between the two men can be
appreciated from the fact that ever afterwards the master could not restrain
his tears whenever the name of Saint Thomas was mentioned. Many lives of these
two great men have been written, and yet this special chapter of their
beautiful friendship remains to have such treatment as it deserves. They were
the two greatest geniuses of their age, probably also two of the greatest
geniuses that ever lived. In spite of their occupation with the same questions,
involving not a few differences of opinion on minor points, there seems never
to have been anything to disturb the wondrous harmony of their friendship.
Albert was now past seventy years of age and might be
expected to begin to lose something of the vigor of his intellectuality. When
he was nearly seventy-five, however, there is a flash of all his old mental
brilliancy because of a movement on the part of certain writers and thinkers of
the time to bring about the condemnation of the writings of Saint Thomas, on
the plea that Saint Thomas had made too much and held in too high estimation
the old Pagan philosopher, Aristotle. Albert’s physical strength even seemed
renewed at this and he journeyed to Paris in order to defend the memory of his
pupil. For a year more he continued to be the great scholar of his time and the
light of his period. Then, in 1278, his memory began to go and his strong mind
gave way. For a time he seems to have been without the use of his intellectual
faculty in the rapidly advancing senile decay that came over him. He had been a
man of immense labors and this must have been another trial, in as far as he
was conscious of it, but, until the end, he retained his placidity and peaceful
acceptance of the will of God. With his passing who can doubt that there
departed from the scene of his earthly labors one of the most wonderful
geniuses that the world has ever known and one of the most original thinkers in
the history of the race. The more we know of him, the more we admire the
critical judgment of an age that attached to his name for all time the epithet
Great, and the more we learn to appreciate the wisdom of the immediately
succeeding generations, who gave him the title of the Universal Doctor.
from Catholic Churchmen
in Science by James Joseph Walsh, 1909
SOURCE : https://catholicsaints.info/catholic-churchmen-in-science-albertus-magnus/
Albertus Magnus, Schwabentorbrücke (Freiburg im
Breisgau)
_7962_(cropped).jpg)
Albertus Magnus, Schwabentorbrücke (Freiburg im
Breisgau)
ALBERT THE GREAT (Albert of Lauingen, Albert of
Cologne)—theologian, philsopher, natural scientist, Bishop of Regensburg,
called doctor universalis, doctor expertus, a doctor of the Church,
b. around 1200 in Lauingen in Swabia, d. November 15, 1280 in Cologne.
Albert came from a family of Swabian knights. He
studied in northern Italy, chiefly in Padua. In Padua in 1223 he entered the
Dominicans. He was in the novitiate in Cologne and after completing his
theological studies and receiving Holy Orders, from 1223 on he had the role of
lector of the order in various convents (Hildesheim, Freiburg im Breisgau,
Regensburg, and Strassburg). In the early 1240s, at the recommendation of the
Dominican authorities, he went to Paris where he lectured on the Sentences of
Peter Lombard and prepared for a magisterium in theology, which he
obtained in 1245. In Paris he developed his scholarly and didactic work and his
writings, bearing fruit in many eminent works and acquiring exceptional renown.
In 1248 Albert was transferred to Cologne to organize a studium generale for
the Dominicans of the German province, and he directed this until 1254. One of
his students at that school was Thomas Aquinas, who probably also heard
Albert’s lectures while in Paris. In 1252 Albert recommended Thomas for the
position of Master of theology at the University of Paris. From 1254 to 1257
Albert was the provincial of the extensive German province. In Anagni, at the
court of Pope Alexander IV, he participated in a defense of the mendicant
orders (1256). He also led a disputation concerning Averroes’ doctrine of the
unicity of the intellect. He spent the year 1257 to 1260 again in Cologne
teaching. In 1260 Pope Alexander IV appointed Albert as the Bishop of
Regensburg. After two years at his own request he was relieved of his duties as
ordinary of the diocese and as a papal legate preached a crusade in the
German-speaking lands. From 1264 to 1270 he was again in Würzburg and
Strassburg, then returned to Cologne. Besides his scholarly and literary work,
he was active with many duties connected with his authority to consecrate
bishops. He also had the role of judge and arbiter. He took part in the Second
Council of Lyons (1274), but whether he went to Paris (1276) is open to
question (Weisheipl). In Paris he was supposed to defend the positions of
Thomas, who by that time was already dead, against the condemnation that had
been prepared.
Apart from Thomas, who went his own way, even though
he owed so much to his teacher, Albert taught other eminent students (Hugo
Ripelin, Ulrich of Strassburg, and Dietrich of Freiburg). These disciples
chiefly developed his neo-Platonic theories. Albert had a great influence on
the intellectual life of the Middle Ages. In the fifteenth century Albert was
beatified at the request of the University of Cologne where the Albertists had
gained a strong position. He was canonized in 1931.
Albert’s literary accomplishments are imposing. He
wrote De natura boni before 1240. During his time in Paris he
wrote: De Sacramentis, De Incarnatione, De bono, De
quattuor coaequaevis, De homine, and Super IV libros Sententiarum.
His philosophical encyclopedia was written over many years (until around 1270)
and it contains paraphrases of almost all of the known works of Aristotle, and
even goes beyond their catalogue. These works are: Physica, De caelo
et mundo, De natura loci, De causis proprietatum elementorum, De
generatione et corruptione, Meteora, Mineralia, De anima and
the so-called parva naturalia (De nutrimento et nutribili, De
sensu et sensato, De memoria et reminiscentia, De intellectu et
intelligibili, De somno et vigilia, De spiritu et respiratione, De
motius animalium, De iuventute et senectute, and De morte et vita), De
vegetabilibus, De animalibus, De principiis motus processivi, De
natura et origine animae, Metaphysica, Ethica and Super
Ethica, and Politica He connected his paraphrases of Aristotle’s
logical works (Peri hermeneia, Analytica priora, Analytica posteriora, Topica, De
sophisticis elenchis) with paraphrases of Porphyry (Super Porphyrium De V
praedicamentis), Boethius (De divisione), and Gilbert (De sex principiis). His
other paraphrases were Liber de causis (De causis et processu
universitatis a causa prima), the works of Pseudo-Dionysius (Super Dionysium De
divinis nominibus, Super Dionysii mysticam theologian, Super
Dionysium De caelesti hierarchia, Super Dionysii epistulas). His minor
works include: De unitate intellectus, De XV problematibus, Problemata
determinata, and De fato. Albert’ was writing his last work toward the end
of his life, the unfinished Summa theologiae de mirabili scientia Dei.
Many of Albert’s work are biblical commentaries, homiletic works, and works on
Christian spirituality. Not all of Albert’s works have been published, and over
the centuries many inauthentic works have been published under his name
(e.g., Summa philosophiae naturalis, Speculum astronomiae, De
secretis mulierum, De alchemia).
Collections of Albert’s works have been
published: Alberti Magni Opera, ed. P. Jammy, Ly 1651, 21 volumes; Opera
omnia, ed. A. Borgnet, P 1890–1899, 36 volumes; starting in 1951 the Institute
of Albert the Great in Cologne began the publication of a critical edition (Editio
Colonensis) which is planned to include 40 volumes: Sancti Doctoris
Ecclesiae Alberti Magni, Ordinis Fratrum Praedicatorum, Opera omnia, ad fidem
codicum manuscriptorum edenda, apparatu critico, notis prolegomenis, indicibus
instruenda curavit Institutum Alberti Magni Coloniense Bernhardo Geyer praeside
(ab 1978 Wilhelmo Kübel praeside). At present 13 volumes have been published,
consisting of 9 volumes that have two parts each and 4 single volumes, and 2
other volumes have been published in part.
Certain texts have been separately published prior to
that, e.g., De animalibus libri XXVI, 2 volumes, ed. H. Stadler, Mr
1916–1920. There are also fragmentary lectures in modern languages.
Albert’s accomplishments are primarily connected with
the history the reception of Aristotelianism in western Europe, a history that
was not without conflict. He was the first to attempt to explain and transmit
the whole of Greek and Arab philosophical and scientific thought to Latin
culture, as he was convinced that this would be an opportunity for progress and
growth. In his works, Albert collected a wealth of material from diverse
sources (Aristotelianism, neo-Platonism, Arab thought, Augustinianism) and from
diverse domains (theology, philosophy, and various areas of the science of his
time), but his ability to compile sources was often not equal to his ability to
integrate them into a whole. Yet he was not merely a collector, compiler and
man of erudition, as some have judged him. In some recent scholarly works we
see a tendency to explore Albert the Great’s texts in greater depth, which
makes it possible for us to reach the leading ideas that unify the polymorphous
world of his thought, and a new method of interpretation has been proposed (H.
Anzulewicz).
THEOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY. Albert the Great’s
philosophical and theological position rose from his conviction that natural
knowledge, as he called philosophy following Aristotle, does not pose a threat
to theology, since they are different domains, both with respect to their
objects and to their methods. Theology speaks in the light of Revelation of God
as the highest good and the beatific end of human desires, and of piety as the
path to union with God. It is affective knowledge, involves the entire man, and
gives him an orientation in life. We should emphasize that Albert the Great’s
understanding of theology was not the same as Thomas’. In his conception of
theology, Albert remained faithful to St. Augustine, while in his conception of
natural science (or philosophy) he followed Aristotle. For Albert, philosophy
had value in itself, not only in view of its service to theology. Philosophy
seeks the truth in the world and relies on the reason as the ultimate instance
of evidence. In his theological works, Albert employed his wide philosophical
learning. He was interested in comparing what the “saints” had said (those who
expressed the doctrinal traditions of Christianity) with the opinions of the
philosophers, and he valued the role of philosophy in investigating and
defending the truths of the faith.
THE PHILOSOPHY OF BEING. Albert the Great followed
Aristotle in dividing theoretical philosophy (which he called “real”, as
distinct from “moral” and “rational” philosophy, namely ethics and logic) into:
(a) physics, whose object is the “changing body” (“corpus mobile”); (b)
mathematics, which studied the quantitative aspect of material things; and (c)
metaphysics, which studies being as being, prior to the more specific
descriptions and differentiations that were studied by the other sciences, and
for this reason metaphysics is the first philosophy. Since metaphysics rises to
the knowledge of immaterial beings and the first cause, it excels the other
sciences also in dignity (it is the “divine” science).
Albert’s paraphrase of the Metaphysics presents
a systematic lecture in the first philosophy. For Albert as for Aristotle,
substance is the fundamental category of being, while form is the fundamental
element of being. Form gives a being “esse” (form shapes a being’s essence).
Form gives a being “ratio” (form is the principle of knowledge and the basis
for definition). Besides the “form of the part” (“forma partis”), which shapes
matter in hylemorphically composite beings, Albert introduces the “form of the
whole” (“forma totius”), which shapes the specific nature of an individual
being. Here Albert uses the terminology of Boethius who distinguishes in every
being apart from the first being “quo est” or “esse” (the defined specific
nature), and “quod est” (the individual being). Albert uses this distinction
when he explains the ontological structure of spiritual beings (angels and the
human spirit—the structure of spiritual beings is expressed differently in
philosophical writings such as De anima). Albert also uses this
distinction to explain intellectual abstraction. It is thus connected with the
problem of universals (Albert distinguishes the universal “ante rem”, “in re”,
and “post rem”; the universal “post rem” is the intellectually apprehended
total form), and it is connected with Avicenna’s conception of a “common
nature” (“natura communis”). Both distinct forms concern the same essential
level in the analysis of being. This leads to difficulties in interpretation.
His sporadic use of the term “esse” (“quo est”) to denote existence does not
play any greater role in Albert’ writings, as some have thought. Albert rejects
the concept of spiritual matter and universal hylemorphism. He demonstrates
that hylemorphic composition occurs only in material beings. He also rejects in
principle pluralism of forms. Lower forms do not actually co-exist in one being
with a higher form, but they become potencies of the higher form according to
the principle of the order of formal causes (e.g., the vegetative and sensory
souls do not actually exist in man apart from his rational soul, but they are
the potential “parts” of the rational soul). Albert conceives of prime matter
as the potential element in being, but his conception differs from that of
Thomas. Albert holds that if a form is to be united with matter, it must first
be initiated or in a germinal state in the matter (“inchoatio formae”, a
counterpart to “rationes seminales”?); thus prime matter is not pure potency.
Aristotle’s first motor of the universe becomes for
Albert the Great the first efficient cause of everything, God the Creator and
the end of the desires of all creatures, and the form that shapes everything by
his light. Albert interprets Aristotle in the light of the Liber de causis,
holding that this text is the completion and crowning of the Metaphysics.
In Albert’s paraphrase of the Liber de causis, called De causis et
processu universitatis, Albert writes of all being in relation to the first
cause. The work presents a neo-Platonic image of the universe inscribed on to
an Aristotelian model of the cosmos. It is an hierarchical universe connected
by a chain of transmitted and received influences. The universe is described in
a manner close to the metaphysics of emanation, although it is interpreted in
the spirit of monotheism and creationism. Albert strongly emphasizes God’s
transcendence. We know of God only what we can infer from the fact that he is
the first cause and creator, and the highest intellect who penetrates and
encompasses the whole universe with his uncreated light (which is the principle
that shapes the universe). God is the source of all being and knowledge, the
efficient and formal cause of everything. He is absolutely first, necesesary, unique
and simple. He is life, fulness of wisdom, the highest good, omnipotent, and at
the same time inconceivable in his essence. The universe is a reflection in
degrees of God’s uncreated light. The intelligences stand highest in the
hierarchy—these are pure spiritual beings who move the cosmic spheres yet exist
in complete independence from matter and bear in themselves a likeness to the
first cause. Albert follows his model (the Liber de causis) and repeats
that “to-be (esse) is the first among created things.” “Esse” is the first
direct effect of the first cause. It is “being” is its highest generality,
before all closer determinations and concretizations. How this first “esse” is
related to the first intelligence is not completely clear. The first intelligence
occupies a special place in the universe and seems to contain the outline of
the entire universe. After the intelligences are the souls endowed with
intellect (animae nobiles, which exist “at the boundary of eternity and time”).
Although they are connected with bodies, they are like the intelligences
independent of matter in their existence. Next there are forms that are
inseparably connected with matter, starting from sensory and vegetative souls,
which partially overcome an immersion in matter, to minerals and elements,
whcih are completely immersed in matter. The uncreated light operates in the
whole universe, pouring out through all its regions and using their
intermediate degrees and their operations as instruments. The operations of the
intelligences, the motions of the heavenly spheres, the “virtus formativa” in
seeds, the properties of the elements, and the elementary qualities are all
connected into the dynamic structure of the universe. This structure is created
and upheld by the first cause. These visions are inspired by the Liber de
causis and the writings of Pseudo-Dionysius, and they are repeated
throughout Albert’s works. They are the framework for Albert’s particular
exposition of philosophy. In this context, the concepts of Aristotelian
metaphysics (especially the concept of form) take on new meaning. The metaphor
of light is raised to the rank of an ontological principle. Albert refers here
not only to neo-Platonic conceptions, but to a metaphysics of light.
THE CONCEPTION OF MAN. Albert repeatedly treats the
problematic of man, beginning with his Summa de homine, and in both his
theological and philosophical writings. His conception of man differs from that
of Thomas, although there are verbal similarities. Albert insists on a conception
of the soul that comes from Augustine (and ultimately from Plato), that the
soul is a complete spiritual substance. However, he does not reject Aristotle’s
conception of the soul as the form (act or perfection) of the body. He tries to
treat both conceptions of the soul as complementary and Avicenna provides him
with the key to resolve the problem. Albert accepts Avicenna’s explanation that
Aristotle conceives of the soul not in its essence, but with respect to its
function for the body. In itself, the soul is a spiritual substance like an
angel, but differing from an angel in its “inclination to a body” (“inclinatio
ad corpus”), or its ability to join with a body (the soul is “unibilis corpori”).
In De anima, the soul is treated as being similar
to an intelligence, as an “somewhat clouded intelligence” (or “creata in umbra
intelligentiae”), The soul truly shapes the existence of the body and gives the
body “esse et ratio”, but it is not the form of the body by its essence.
Furthermore, the body must capable of connection with the soul and shaped in a
certain way before the connection takes place (of all the bodies on earth, the
human body is most similar to a heavenly body). Some writers see in Albert the
Great’s conception of the soul a certain form of corporeality. In Albert’s
later writings, beginning with De anima, the “division” of the soul is
more strongly emphasized. One model that accurately illustrates the human being
is the metaphor of the sailor and the boat (the nauta and navis from
Plato’s laws). According to Albert, for the soul to be the act of the body
means that the soul performs living operations (opera vitae); the soul is “the
body’s motor”. The soul animates and “governs” the body (which Albert explains
in terms of the instrumental nature of the body as it was emphasized by
Avicenna). In light of the definition of the soul as a “dynamic whole” (“totum
potestativum”), the soul alone is the basic subject of all living operations.
Some of these operations are performed with the help of the bodily organs
(sensory and vegetative operations), while others (spiritual operations) are
performed without the participation of the body. The soul has its own structure
of being: it is composed of “quo est” and “quod est” and therefore is “hoc
aliquid” (a complete substance). In his philosophical writings, Albert uses
other terms (the actual and potential principle, the light from the first
cause—the subject that receives and limits the light).
The active and potential intellects are components of
the soul’s structure. The active intellect (intellectus agens) flows out from
the soul’s “quo est” (or from its actual element), and the potential intellect
is based in the soul’s “quod est” (or in the structural potential principle).
Both intellects, as “parts” of the saoul, are an endowment of being for each
individual soul and they constitute the soul’s “essential parts” (partes
essentiales). Besides this ontological justification of the theory of two
intellects, we find in Albert’s writings a justification based on an analysis
of the process of intellectual knowledge. This analysis is based on Aristotle’s
genetic empiricism. Intellectual knowledge consists in the potential intellect
grasping a cognitive form that the active intellect abstracts from mental images.
This is the form of the whole. It becomes the universale post rem by
being divided from “matter”, i.e., from individualizing conditions (in De
anima we read of the abstraction of the “common nature”). The active
intellect also acts directly upon the potential intellect by “illuminating” and
actualizing it. In connection with this, the potential intellect is called
(in De anima), the “place of intelligibles”. When it has received a
cognitive form, the potential intellect becomes the “speculative” intellect (Albert
borrows this from Averroes’ corresponding concept of “the intellect in act”).
Beginning in De anima, Albert diverges widely on the degree of
actualization in the intellect and follows Arab thinkers when he introduces a
degree of complete actualization of the intellect, when the intellect becaomes
the “intellectus adeptus”, the “acquired” intellect. While the intellect in
ontological terms is a “part of the soul”, as a faculty of knowledge it is not
individual (otherwise knowledge would not have universal value; in this
instance Albert is influenced by Averroes’ argments). At the stage of “intellectus
adeptus”, the active intellect becomes the form of the potential intellect, and
then it is “acquired.” The collaboration of the senses is no longer needed. The
intellect has become capable of knowing itself and spiritual beings, and is
opened to the light of the intelligences and first causes. It becomes the “intellectus
assimilativus.”. This is the state of highest happiness for the soul. Albert
calls the intellectus adeptus “the root of immortality” (also in
his Summa de mirabili scientia Dei). Like an angle or an intelligence, the
soul is joined with the cosmic order and opened to illumination. It needs to
use the collaboration of the sense only before attaining the state of adeptio
intellectus. The idea that the human intellect is illuminated by a higher light
was always present in Albert’s thought. Already in his Commentary on the
“Sentences” (from his period in Paris), he speaks of the fortification of
the active intellect by its being connected with the Divine Intellect (“as the
light of a star with the light of the sun”). The De anima is crowned
with a text of neo-Platonic character—De intellectu et intelligibili, just as
the Metaphysics was crowned with the Liber de causis (Albert
connects both of these texts in their origin with “a certain letter of
Aristotle about the beginning of all being”). All Albert’s arguments on the
soul are connected by the thought that the soul is created according to the
likeness of God (the philosophical works). The Augustinian motifs are
interwoven here with neo-Platonic motifs. Some think (including Gilson) that
Albert’s conception of the soul is derived from the idea that the image of God
is impressed upon man’s soul.
DOCTRINE CONCERNING NATURE. Albert was the most
outstanding investigator of nature over a period of several centuries. His
works on nature take in a wide range of topics—anatomy, physiology, medicine,
zoology and embryology, botany, mineralogy, and applied knowledge of nature,
such as agronomy. He understood the science of animate nature as a subdivision
of the philosophy of nature, and therefore he resorts to his philosophical
conceptual apparatus, including his conception of the soul, but in a wide range
of questions he calls upon empirical investigations (experimentum) and uses a
descriptive method. Aristotle’s zoological works and the work De plantis ascribed
to him serve as Albert’s foundation, but Albert also draws widely upon later
works (especially upon Galen, and he also cites Avicenna’s Canon of
medicine in the field of botany). Albert made many corrections and
simplified complex passages in others, although he also made mistakes because
he did not have the proper tools for research.. His contribution is chiefly in
the particular material acquired by his own observation, but also in his
approach and methodological reflections. His description of the world of plants
and animals remains of interest today. He often uses the ordinary popular names
for plants and animals, and he presents abundant synonyms for various species.
His attempts to systematize the plant and animal kingdoms are interesting. His
systematization is based on the literature he had available, and it is based on
the prevalent but often misleading categories. Albert includes man in the world
of animals with respect to his body, as the most perfect animal (animal
perfectissimum). He connected his lecture concerning the formation of the human
fetus with the conception of the human soul, which is created by the first
cause and is not drawn out of mater by any collection of principles operating
in nature, as is the case with the vegetative or sensible soul. The foundation
of man’s perfection as a being is his soul, for he is often not equal to beasts
in the efficiency of his senses (man does not need to use the senses to the
same degree as beasts, since by his soul he rises above the material world).
Albert’s knowledge of the human body, its construction and functions, is
noteworthy, e.g., his knowledge of the human brain and its connection with
man’s psychic life (the localization of the exterior senses). Albert the Great
was interested in the connection between a man’s physical features and his
abilities and inclinations, but he did not believe in determinism. In order to
see the full image of man in Albert’s thought, we should consider besides his
conception of the soul what he says as a natural scientist about man’s physical
nature.
Albert thought that nature was a worthy object of
investigation and knowledge on its own terms. In his research he postulated the
necessity of experience (experimentum). Some writers emphasize that Albert’s
works in natural science marked an important stage in the development of
natural science, and he is regarded as the most outstanding investigator of
nature from Aristotle up to modern times.
A. Schneider, Die psychologie Alberts des Grossen
nach den Quellen dargestellet, “Beiträge”, 4, Mr 1903–1906, 5–6; H.
Balss, Albert Magnus als Zoologe, Mn 1928; M. H. Laurent, M. J.
Congar, Essai de bibliographie albertinienne, RT 36 (1931), 422–468; G.
Meersseman, Introductio in opera omnia B. Alberti Magni, Bruges 1931; M.
Grabmann, Der heilige Albert der Grosse. Ein wissenschaftliches
Charakterbild, Mn 1931; H. C. Scheeben, Albertus Magnus, Bo 1931, K 19552;
U. Dähnert, Die Erkenntnislehre des Alberts Magnus gemessen an den Stufen
der “abstractio”, L 1934; A. M. Ethier, Les parts potentielles de
l’intellect chez S. Albert le Grand, Études et Recherches Philosophie 2 (1938),
63–83; É. Gilson, L’âme raisonnable chez Albert le Grand, AHDLMA 14
(1943–1945), 5–72; M. Grabmann, Albertus Magnus, Theologe, Philosoph und
Naturforscher, PJ 61 (1951), 473–480; Studia Albertina. Festschrift für
Berhnard Geyer zum 70. Geburtstag, Mr 1952; M. Feigl, Albert der Grosse
und die arabische Philosophie. Eine Studie zu den Quellen seines Kommentars zum
“Liber de causis”, PJ 63 (1955), 131–150; L. Ducharme, “Esse” chez Saint
Albert le Grand, Revista da Universidade Católica de Sao Paulo 21 (1961),
36–88; R. Kaiser, Zur Frage der eigenen Anschauung Alberts des Grossen in
seinen philosophischen Kommentaren, FZPhTh 9 (1952), 53–62; A. Paszewski, Albert
z Lauingen jako botanik [Albert of Lauingen as a botanist], Wwa 1962; B.
Geyer, Albertus Magnus und die Entwicklung der scholastischen Metaphysik,
in: Die Metaphysik im Mittelalter, B 1963, 3–13; F. Van
Steenberghen, La philosophie au XIIIe siécle, Lv 1966, 19912,
245–275; G. Wieland, Untersuchungen zum Seinsbegriff im
Metaphysikkommentar Alberts des Grossen, Mr 1972; L. Hoedl, Albert der
Grosse und die Wende der lateinischen Philosophie im 13. Jahrhunderte,
in: Virtus politica. Festgabe Alfons Hufnagel zum 75. Geburtstag, St 1974;
I. Craemer-Ruegenberg, Albertus Magnus, Mn 1980; Albertus Magnus—Doctor
Universalis (1280–1980), Mz 1980; J. Schöpfer, in: Albertus Magnus—Doctor
Universalis, Mz 1980, 495—514; Albertus Magnus. Sein Leben und seine
Bedeutung, Gr 1982; B. Thomassen, Metaphysik als Lebensform:
Untersuchungen zur Grundlegung der Metaphysik im Metaphysikkommentar Alberts
des Grossen, Mr 1985; C. Wagner, Alberts Naturphilosophie im Licht der
neueren Forschung (1979-1983), FZPhTh 32 (1985), 65–104; M. Lohrum, Albert
der Grosse, Forscher—Lehrer—Anwalt des Friedens, Mz 1991; K. Kloskowski, Święty
Albert Wielki z Lauingen jako przyrodnik i myśliciel [Saint Albert the
Great of Lauingen as a naturalist and thinker], Universitas Gedenensis 9
(1993), 25–39; A. Symowiecki, Substancja i forma—u podstaw albertyńskiej
filozofii człowieka [Substance and form—at the foundations of the
Albertist philosophy of man], ibid. 9 (1993), 9–24; Albert Magnus und der
Albertismus: Deutsche philosophische Kultur des Mittelalters, Lei 1995; J. A.
Aertsen, Albertus Magnus und die mittelalterliche Philosophie, Allgemeine
Zeitschrift für Philosophie 21 (1996), 111–128; M. Kurdziałek, Średniowiecze
w poszukiwaniu równowagi między arystotelizm a platonizmem [The Middle
Ages in search of balance between Aristotelianism and Platonism], Lb 1996; H.
Anzulewicz, Die Aristotelische Biologie in den Frühwerken des Albertus
Magnus, in: Aristotle’s Animals in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, Lv
1999; idem, De forma resultante in speculo. Die theologische Relevanz des
Bildbegriffs und des Spiegelbildsmodells in den Frühwerken des Albertus Magnus,
I–II, Mr 1999; idem, Neuere Forschung zu Albertus Magnus. Bestandaufnahme
und Problemstellungen, RTAM 66 (1999), 163–206; L. Honnefelder, M.
Dreyer, Albertus Magnus und die Editio Coloniensis, Mr 1999; G.
Wieland, Zwischen Natur und Vernunft. Alberts des Grossen Begriff vom
Menschen, Mr 1999; H. Anzulewicz, Die Denkstruktur des Albertus Magnus.
Ihre Dekodierung und ihre Relevanz für die Begrifflichkiet und Terminologie,
in: L’élaboration du vocabulaire philosophique au Moyen Âge, Turnhout,
Brepols 2000, 269–396.
Antoni Skwara
_9239.jpg)
Bronzefigur Unterlinden nähe Rotteckring in Erinnerung
an das ehemalige Predigerkloster, zerstört 27. November 1944.
Bronze sculpture of Albertus Magnus on an external wall of a building in Unterlinden, a square in the Altstadt (Old City) of Freiburg im Breisgau, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. It commemorates the destruction of a former Predigerkloster ("preaching cloister" – probably a reference to a Dominican monastery) on 27 November 1944.
_9234.jpg)
Bronzefigur Unterlinden nähe Rotteckring in Erinnerung
an das ehemalige Predigerkloster, zerstört 27. November 1944.
Bronze sculpture of Albertus
Magnus on an external wall of a building in Unterlinden, a square in
the Altstadt (Old City) of Freiburg im Breisgau, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. It commemorates the
destruction of a former Predigerkloster ("preaching
cloister" – probably a reference to a Dominican
monastery) on 27 November 1944.
Saint Albertus Magnus
Born
about 1200
Lauingen an der Donau, Swabia (now Germany)
Died
15 November 1280
Cologne, Prussia (now Germany)
Summary
Albert (or Albertus Magnus) was a German Dominican who wrote a commentary on Euclid's Elements. He was made a Saint in 1931 and, in 1941, was made patron of natural scientist
Biography
Albert (or Albertus) was born into the
wealthy Bavarian family of the Count of Bollstädt, being the eldest son in the
family. He was later given the name "Magnus" (The Great) and
also "Doctor Universalis" to indicate the esteem that he was held in
by his contemporaries. He spent his early years in Lauingen and must have been
educated at home or at a school close to his home. His uncle lived in Padua so,
since the university there was famous for liberal arts, it was a natural place
for his studies. After studying liberal arts at the University of Padua he
joined the Dominican Order at Padua in 1223 being attracted by the
teachings of Jordan of Saxony who was the head of the Order. This meant that he
was not tied to a parish or a monastery, so could study and teach over a wide
area.
After joining the Dominican Order, he studied and taught at Padua, Bologna, Cologne
and other German convents in Hildesheim, Freiburg, Ratisbon, Strasbourg, and
Cologne. He was sent to the Dominican convent of Saint-Jacques at the
University of Paris in about 1241 where he read the new translations,
with commentaries, of the Arabic and Greek texts of Aristotle.
This was a period when the writings of Arabic scholars, and through them the
texts of ancient Greek philosophers, was becoming known throughout Christian
Europe and it was having to come to terms with this new knowledge. Albertus
would play a major role in accepting this new learning into Europe with his
wide ranging scholarship over essentially the whole of knowledge.
He taught for four years at Saint-Jacques, giving courses on the Bible and on
the theological textbook The Book of the Sentences which had been
written by Peter Lombard. In 1245 he received the degree of Master of
Theology from the University of Paris and, after receiving this degree, one of
the first students he taught was Thomas Aquinas. While in Paris Albertus began
the task of presenting the entire body of knowledge, natural science, logic,
rhetoric, mathematics, astronomy, ethics,
economics, politics and metaphysics.
He wrote commentaries on the Bible, Peter Lombard's Book of the Sentences,
and all of Aristotle's
works. These commentaries contained his own observations and experiments. By
'experiment' Albertus meant 'observing, describing and classifying'. For
example, in De Mineralibus Ⓣ Albertus
wrote:-
The aim of natural science is not simply to accept the
statements of others, but to investigate the causes that are at work in nature.
We should not underestimate the importance of such
ideas, for most scholars at that time believed that knowledge could only be
obtained from a study of the scriptures. In the 13th century few were
prepared to even consider the possibility of scientific research, and most
considered that knowledge all came from God through ancient divinely inspired
writings. Not only did Albertus advocate what we would call today the
scientific approach to studying the real world, but he did so in such a way
that his ideas were accepted by the Church. Again in a work on plants Albertus
wrote:-
In studying nature we have not to inquire how God the
Creator may, as He freely wills, use His creatures to work miracles and thereby
show forth His power: we have rather to inquire what Nature with its immanent
causes can naturally bring to pass.
These quotes show that, although he did an immense
amount of valuable work in collecting and propagating the ideas of earlier
scientists in his numerous and wide ranging writings, he also saw the value of
new research by experiment. Not everyone held Albertus in high esteem,
however. Bacon,
who was a contemporary, and in many ways a rival of Albertus, was highly
critical (although one can sense that he is attacking someone whom he
considers to have undeservedly achieved more than he has). Bacon writes
that Albertus:-
... is a man of infinite patience and has amassed
great information, but his works have four faults. The first is boundless,
puerile vanity; the second in ineffable falsity; the third is superfluity of
bulk; and the fourth is his ignorance of the most useful and the most beautiful
parts of philosophy.
One has to understand that Bacon was
himself an even stronger advocate of experimental science than was Albertus
but, although himself a devote Christian, unlike Albertus he overstepped what
the Church might accept. Bacon was
also correct to see errors in Albertus's writings for Bacon had
a deeper understanding of science than had Albertus.
In 1248 Albertus left Paris to set up the new Studium Generale which
was essentially a Dominican university in Cologne. He was Regent of the Studium
Generale from the time that he set it up until 1254 and during
this time he lectured, wrote important works, and worked closely with his
student Thomas Aquinas who was appointed Master of Students (at least
until 1252 when Aquinas returned to Paris). In 1254 Albertus
became superior of the Dominican province of Teutonia (Germany). He now
had a heavy administrative load but still found time to continue his scientific
work. However, wishing to spend still more time on scientific work, he resigned
from his role of Provincial in 1257 and returned to Cologne.
In 1260 he was appointed Bishop of Ratisbon despite the efforts of
Humbert de Romanis, the Head of the Dominican Order, to keep Magnus within the
Order. After two years he resigned as bishop and returned to his position as
professor at the Studium Generale in Cologne. In 1274 Pope
Gregory X required Albertus to attend the Second Council of Lyon. At this Roman
Catholic Council Albertus took a full part in discussing questions of doctrine,
administration, discipline, and other matters. Thomas Aquinas died in 1274 (actually
on his way to the Council in Lyon) and three years later certain factions
within the Church tried to condemn his teachings on the grounds that he was too
favourably disposed to non-Christian philosophers, both Arabic and Greek. By
this time Albertus was an old man, but he travelled to Paris to argue in favour
of Thomas Aquinas, whose ideas of course, although not identical to his own,
were similar in their support for the teachings of Aristotle.
We should note, however, that Albertus did not treat Aristotle's
writings as absolutely and necessarily correct. He stated:-
Whoever believes that Aristotle was
a god, must also believe that he never erred. But if one believes that Aristotle was
a man, then doubtless he was liable to error just as we are.
In Summa theologiae he argues for
reconciling the teachings of Aristotle with
Christian thinking, but nevertheless, devotes a chapter to what he calls
"the errors of Aristotle".
What of Albertus's contributions to mathematics? In [6] Anthony
Lo Bello gives:-
... an English translation, with mathematical and
philosophical notes, of three sections of the commentary by Albertus Magnus
on Euclid's
Elements : (1) the prologue, (2) the question "Is an
angle a quantity?" and (3) Book I, Proposition 11.
In [7] J
E Hofmann examines a manuscript in the Dominikaner-Bibliothek Vienna which
contains a treatment of the books I to IV of Euclid's Elements in
Latin by Albertus. The text shows that Albertus was familiar with the Latin
translations from Arabic of Euclid's Elements by Boethius and Adelard of
Bath. Since Albertus has clearly not read the translation by Campanus then,
given the range of Albertus's scholarship, one can reasonably assume that
Albertus wrote his commentary on Euclid before
that of Campanus.
In Super Dionysii epistulas Ⓣ Albertus
considers the motion of the "Sphere of Stars" with the aim of
determining whether the eclipse at the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth was
natural or miraculous. His methods of tracing back the positions of the sun and
moon is interesting. The methods used by Albertus are examined in detail
in [9].
Among his other works is De natura locorum (on the nature of places) which
is a work on geography in which Albertus presents data on locations and
features and emphasises the importance of geography in understanding the world.
Although Albertus was able to argue convincingly for Thomas Aquinas in 1277,
by the following year his memory was beginning to fail him. Over the next three
years he rapidly declined both mentally and physically
Albertus was made a Saint and declared a Holy Doctor of the Church on 16 December 1931 and
his feast day is 15 November in each year. In 1941 Albertus
was made patron of natural scientists by Pope Pius XII.
SOURCE : https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Albertus/
Bleiglasfenster (Ausschnitt) in der katholischen
Pfarrkirche Mariä Himmelfahrt in Üxheim,
Darstellung: Albertus Magnus
Sant' Alberto Magno Vescovo e dottore della
Chiesa
15
novembre - Memoria Facoltativa
Lauingen (Baviera), 1206 circa - Colonia, 15 novembre
1280
Nacque in Germania verso il 1200. Molto giovane venne
in Italia per studiare le arti a Padova e forse anche a Bologna e Venezia.
Durante il soggiorno nella penisola conobbe i domenicani, dai quali fu inviato
a Colonia per la formazione religiosa e per lo studio della teologia. Approdò
infine a Parigi dove tenne la cattedra di teologia per tre anni, durante i
quali ebbe un allievo d’eccezione:Tommaso d’Aquino. Rimandato dai superiori a
Colonia per fondarvi lo studio teologico, portò con sé Tommaso con il quale
avviò un progetto molto ambizioso: il commento dell’opera di Dionigi
l’Areopagita e degli scritti filosoficonaturali di Aristotele. Alberto vedeva
il punto d’incontro di questi due autori nella dottrina dell’anima. Posta da
Dio nell’oscurità dell’essere umano (Dionigi), secondo Aristotele l’anima si
esprime nella conoscenza e negli aspetti pratici dell’esistenza umana.In questo
agire complesso e meraviglioso, essa svela la sua origine divina. Alberto
dava così avvio all’orientamento mistico nel suo ordine che sarà sviluppato da
maestro Eckhart, mentre la ricerca filosofico-teologica verrà proseguita da san
Tommaso. Grande studioso delle scienze naturali, Alberto non rifuggì dagli
incarichi pastorali. Fu provinciale dell’ordine domenicano per il nord della
Germania, per breve tempo vescovo di Ratisbona, partecipò al concilio di Lione.
Il «dottore universale» morì nel 1280.
Patronato: Scienziati
Etimologia: Alberto = di illustre nobiltà, dal
tedesco
Emblema: Bastone pastorale
Martirologio Romano: Sant’Alberto, detto Magno,
vescovo e dottore della Chiesa, che, entrato nell’Ordine dei Predicatori,
insegnò a Parigi con la parola e con gli scritti filosofia e teologia. Maestro
di san Tommaso d’Aquino, riuscì ad unire in mirabile sintesi la sapienza dei
santi con il sapere umano e la scienza della natura. Ricevette suo malgrado la
sede di Ratisbona, dove si adoperò assiduamente per rafforzare la pace tra i
popoli, ma dopo un anno preferì la povertà dell’Ordine a ogni onore e a Colonia
in Germania si addormentò piamente nel Signore.
Alberto, della nobile famiglia Bollstadt, prese ancora giovanissimo l’Abito dei Predicatori dalle mani del Beato Giordano di Sassonia, immediato successore del Santo Patriarca Domenico. Dopo aver trionfato nel mondo, al giovane studente sembrò ostacolo insormontabile le difficoltà che incontrava nello studio della Teologia, e fu tentato di fuggire dalla casa del Signore. La Madonna, però, di cui era devotissimo, lo animò a perseverare, rassenerandolo nei suoi timori, dicendogli: “Attendi allo studio della sapienza e affinché non ti avvenga di vacillare nella fede, sul declinare della vita ogni arte di sillogizzare ti sarà tolta”. Sotto la tutela della Celeste Madre, Alberto divenne sapiente in ogni ramo della cultura, sì da essere acclamato Dottore universale e meritare il titolo di Grande, ancor quando era in vita. Insegnò con sommo onore a Parigi e nei vari Studi Domenicani di Germania, soprattutto in quello di Colonia, da lui fondato, dove ebbe tra i suoi discepoli San Tommaso d’Aquino, di cui profetizzò la grandezza. Fu Provinciale di Germania e, nel 1260, Vescovo di Ratisbona, alla cui sede rinunziò per darsi di nuovo all’insegnamento e alla predicazione. Fu arbitro e messaggero di pace in mezzo ai popoli, e al Concilio di Lione portò il contributo della sua sapienza per l’unione della Chiesa Greca con quella Latina. Avanzato negli anni saliva ancora vigoroso la cattedra, ma un giorno, come Maria aveva predetto, la sua memoria si spense. Anelò allora solo al cielo, al quale volò dopo quattro anni, il 15 novembre 1280, consumato dalla divina carità. La sua salma riposa nella chiesa parrocchiale di Sant’Andrea a Colonia. Papa Gregorio XV nel 1622 lo ha beatificato. Papa Pio XI nel 1931 lo ha proclamato Santo e Dottore della Chiesa. Il 16 dicembre 1941 Papa Pio XII lo ha dichiarato Patrono dei cultori delle scienze naturali.
Autore: Franco Mariani
SOURCE : http://www.santiebeati.it/dettaglio/29950
Heiligendarstellung auf Pergament. Ca. 15,5 x 20 cm.
18. Jahrhundert.
BENEDETTO XVI
UDIENZA GENERALE
Piazza San Pietro
Sant'Alberto Magno
Cari fratelli e sorelle,
uno dei più grandi maestri della teologia medioevale è
sant’Alberto Magno. Il titolo di “grande” (magnus), con il quale egli è passato
alla storia, indica la vastità e la profondità della sua dottrina, che egli
associò alla santità della vita. Ma già i suoi contemporanei non esitavano ad
attribuirgli titoli eccellenti; un suo discepolo, Ulrico di Strasburgo, lo
definì “stupore e miracolo della nostra epoca”.
Nacque in Germania all’inizio del XIII secolo, e
ancora molto giovane si recò in Italia, a Padova, sede di una delle più famose
università del Medioevo. Si dedicò allo studio delle cosiddette “arti liberali”:
grammatica, retorica, dialettica, aritmetica, geometria, astronomia e musica,
cioè della cultura generale, manifestando quel tipico interesse per le scienze
naturali, che sarebbe diventato ben presto il campo prediletto della sua
specializzazione. Durante il soggiorno a Padova, frequentò la chiesa dei
Domenicani, ai quali poi si unì con la professione dei voti religiosi. Le fonti
agiografiche lasciano capire che Alberto maturò gradualmente questa decisione.
Il rapporto intenso con Dio, l’esempio di santità dei Frati domenicani,
l’ascolto dei sermoni del Beato Giordano di Sassonia, successore di san
Domenico nella guida dell’Ordine dei Predicatori, furono i fattori decisivi che
lo aiutarono a superare ogni dubbio, vincendo anche resistenze familiari.
Spesso, negli anni della giovinezza, Dio ci parla e ci indica il progetto della
nostra vita. Come per Alberto, anche per tutti noi la preghiera personale
nutrita dalla Parola del Signore, la frequenza ai Sacramenti e la guida
spirituale di uomini illuminati sono i mezzi per scoprire e seguire la voce di
Dio. Ricevette l’abito religioso dal beato Giordano di Sassonia.
Dopo l’ordinazione sacerdotale, i Superiori lo
destinarono all’insegnamento in vari centri di studi teologici annessi ai
conventi dei Padri domenicani. Le brillanti qualità intellettuali gli permisero
di perfezionare lo studio della teologia nell’università più celebre
dell’epoca, quella di Parigi. Fin da allora sant’Alberto intraprese quella
straordinaria attività di scrittore, che avrebbe poi proseguito per tutta la
vita.
Gli furono assegnati compiti prestigiosi. Nel 1248 fu
incaricato di aprire uno studio teologico a Colonia, uno dei capoluoghi più
importanti della Germania, dove egli visse a più riprese, e che divenne la sua
città di adozione. Da Parigi portò con sé a Colonia un allievo eccezionale,
Tommaso d’Aquino. Basterebbe solo il merito di essere stato maestro di san
Tommaso, per nutrire profonda ammirazione verso sant’Alberto. Tra questi
due grandi teologi si instaurò un rapporto di reciproca stima e amicizia,
attitudini umane che aiutano molto lo sviluppo della scienza. Nel 1254 Alberto
fu eletto Provinciale della “Provincia Teutoniae” – teutonica - dei Padri
domenicani, che comprendeva comunità diffuse in un vasto territorio del Centro
e del Nord-Europa. Egli si distinse per lo zelo con cui esercitò tale
ministero, visitando le comunità e richiamando costantemente i confratelli alla
fedeltà, agli insegnamenti e agli esempi di san Domenico.
Le sue doti non sfuggirono al Papa di quell’epoca,
Alessandro IV, che volle Alberto per un certo tempo accanto a sé ad Anagni -
dove i Papi si recavano di frequente - a Roma stessa e a Viterbo, per avvalersi
della sua consulenza teologica. Lo stesso Sommo Pontefice lo nominò Vescovo di
Ratisbona, una grande e famosa diocesi, che si trovava, però, in un momento
difficile. Dal 1260 al 1262 Alberto svolse questo ministero con infaticabile
dedizione, riuscendo a portare pace e concordia nella città, a riorganizzare
parrocchie e conventi, e a dare nuovo impulso alle attività caritative.
Negli anni 1263-1264 Alberto predicava in Germania ed
in Boemia, incaricato dal Papa Urbano IV, per ritornare poi a Colonia e
riprendere la sua missione di docente, di studioso e di scrittore. Essendo un
uomo di preghiera, di scienza e di carità, godeva di grande autorevolezza nei
suoi interventi, in varie vicende della Chiesa e della società del tempo: fu
soprattutto uomo di riconciliazione e di pace a Colonia, dove l’Arcivescovo era
entrato in duro contrasto con le istituzioni cittadine; si prodigò durante lo
svolgimento del II Concilio di Lione, nel 1274, convocato dal Papa Gregorio X
per favorire l’unione con i Greci, dopo la separazione del grande scisma
d’Oriente del 1054; egli chiarì il pensiero di Tommaso d’Aquino, che era stato
oggetto di obiezioni e persino di condanne del tutto ingiustificate.
Morì nella cella del suo convento della Santa Croce a
Colonia nel 1280, e ben presto fu venerato dai confratelli. La Chiesa lo
propose al culto dei fedeli con la beatificazione, nel 1622, e con la
canonizzazione, nel 1931, quando il Papa Pio
XI lo proclamò Dottore della Chiesa. Si trattava di un riconoscimento
indubbiamente appropriato a questo grande uomo di Dio e insigne studioso non
solo delle verità della fede, ma di moltissimi altri settori del sapere;
infatti, dando uno sguardo ai titoli delle numerosissime opere, ci si rende
conto che la sua cultura ha qualcosa di prodigioso, e che i suoi interessi
enciclopedici lo portarono a occuparsi non solamente di filosofia e di
teologia, come altri contemporanei, ma anche di ogni altra disciplina allora
conosciuta, dalla fisica alla chimica, dall’astronomia alla mineralogia, dalla
botanica alla zoologia. Per questo motivo il Papa Pio
XII lo nominò patrono dei cultori delle scienze naturali ed è chiamato
anche “Doctor universalis” proprio per la vastità dei suoi interessi e del suo
sapere.
Certamente, i metodi scientifici adoperati da
sant’Alberto Magno non sono quelli che si sarebbero affermati nei secoli
successivi. Il suo metodo consisteva semplicemente nell’osservazione, nella
descrizione e nella classificazione dei fenomeni studiati, ma così ha aperto la
porta per i lavori futuri.
Egli ha ancora molto da insegnare a noi. Soprattutto,
sant’Alberto mostra che tra fede e scienza non vi è opposizione, nonostante
alcuni episodi di incomprensione che si sono registrati nella storia. Un uomo
di fede e di preghiera, quale fu sant’Alberto Magno, può coltivare serenamente
lo studio delle scienze naturali e progredire nella conoscenza del micro e del
macrocosmo, scoprendo le leggi proprie della materia, poiché tutto questo
concorre ad alimentare la sete e l’amore di Dio. La Bibbia ci parla della
creazione come del primo linguaggio attraverso il quale Dio – che è somma
intelligenza – ci rivela qualcosa di sé. Il libro della Sapienza, per esempio,
afferma che i fenomeni della natura, dotati di grandezza e bellezza, sono come
le opere di un artista, attraverso le quali, per analogia, noi possiamo
conoscere l’Autore del creato (cfr Sap. 13,5). Con una similitudine
classica nel Medioevo e nel Rinascimento si può paragonare il mondo naturale a
un libro scritto da Dio, che noi leggiamo in base ai diversi approcci delle
scienze (cfr Discorso
ai partecipanti alla Plenaria della Pontificia Accademia delle Scienze, 31
Ottobre 2008). Quanti scienziati, infatti, sulla scia di sant’Alberto
Magno, hanno portato avanti le loro ricerche ispirati da stupore e gratitudine
di fronte al mondo che, ai loro occhi di studiosi e di credenti, appariva e
appare come l’opera buona di un Creatore sapiente e amorevole! Lo studio
scientifico si trasforma allora in un inno di lode. Lo aveva ben compreso un
grande astrofisico dei nostri tempi, di cui è stata introdotta la causa di
beatificazione, Enrico Medi, il quale scrisse: “Oh, voi misteriose galassie
..., io vi vedo, vi calcolo, vi intendo, vi studio e vi scopro, vi penetro e vi
raccolgo. Da voi io prendo la luce e ne faccio scienza, prendo il moto e ne fo
sapienza, prendo lo sfavillio dei colori e ne fo poesia; io prendo voi stelle
nelle mie mani, e tremando nell’unità dell’essere mio vi alzo al di sopra di
voi stesse, e in preghiera vi porgo al Creatore, che solo per mezzo mio voi
stelle potete adorare” (Le opere. Inno alla creazione).
Sant’Alberto Magno ci ricorda che tra scienza e fede
c’è amicizia, e che gli uomini di scienza possono percorrere, attraverso la
loro vocazione allo studio della natura, un autentico e affascinante percorso
di santità.
La sua straordinaria apertura di mente si rivela anche
in un’operazione culturale che egli intraprese con successo, cioè
nell’accoglienza e nella valorizzazione del pensiero di Aristotele. Ai tempi di
sant’Alberto, infatti, si stava diffondendo la conoscenza di numerose opere di
questo grande filosofo greco vissuto nel quarto secolo prima di Cristo,
soprattutto nell’ambito dell’etica e della metafisica. Esse dimostravano la
forza della ragione, spiegavano con lucidità e chiarezza il senso e la
struttura della realtà, la sua intelligibilità, il valore e il fine delle
azioni umane. Sant’Alberto Magno ha aperto la porta per la recezione completa
della filosofia di Aristotele nella filosofia e teologia medioevale, una
recezione elaborata poi in modo definitivo da S. Tommaso. Questa recezione di
una filosofia, diciamo, pagana pre-cristiana fu un’autentica rivoluzione
culturale per quel tempo. Eppure, molti pensatori cristiani temevano la
filosofia di Aristotele, la filosofia non cristiana, soprattutto perché essa,
presentata dai suoi commentatori arabi, era stata interpretata in modo da
apparire, almeno in alcuni punti, come del tutto inconciliabile con la fede
cristiana. Si poneva cioè un dilemma: fede e ragione sono in contrasto tra loro
o no?
Sta qui uno dei grandi meriti di sant’Alberto: con
rigore scientifico studiò le opere di Aristotele, convinto che tutto ciò che è
realmente razionale è compatibile con la fede rivelata nelle Sacre Scritture.
In altre parole, sant’Alberto Magno, ha così contribuito alla formazione di una
filosofia autonoma, distinta dalla teologia e unita con essa solo dall’unità
della verità. Così è nata nel XIII secolo una chiara distinzione tra questi due
saperi, filosofia e teologia, che, in dialogo tra di loro, cooperano
armoniosamente alla scoperta dell’autentica vocazione dell’uomo, assetato di
verità e di beatitudine: ed è soprattutto la teologia, definita da sant’Alberto
“scienza affettiva”, quella che indica all’uomo la sua chiamata alla gioia
eterna, una gioia che sgorga dalla piena adesione alla verità.
Sant’Alberto Magno fu capace di comunicare questi
concetti in modo semplice e comprensibile. Autentico figlio di san Domenico,
predicava volentieri al popolo di Dio, che rimaneva conquistato dalla sua
parola e dall’esempio della sua vita.
Cari fratelli e sorelle, preghiamo il Signore perché
non vengano mai a mancare nella santa Chiesa teologi dotti, pii e sapienti come
sant’Alberto Magno e aiuti ciascuno di noi a fare propria la “formula della
santità” che egli seguì nella sua vita: “Volere tutto ciò che io voglio per la
gloria di Dio, come Dio vuole per la sua gloria tutto ciò che Egli vuole”,
conformarsi cioè sempre alla volontà di Dio per volere e fare tutto solo e
sempre per la Sua gloria.
Saluti:
C’est avec joie que j’accueille ce matin les pèlerins
francophones, en particulier les jeunes venus de France et le groupe du diocèse
de Vannes. à tous je souhaite de vivre une fervente Semaine Sainte afin de
découvrir toujours plus la profondeur de l’amour de Dieu pour les hommes. Que
Dieu vous bénisse!
I welcome all the English-speaking visitors,
especially a group of priests, Religious and seminarians visiting from the
Philippines. Upon all the English-speaking pilgrims and your families, I invoke
God’s abundant blessings.
Von Herzen heiße ich alle deutschsprachigen Gäste
willkommen, heute besonders die Schulgemeinschaft aus Essen-Werden. Suchen wir
wie der heilige Albert der Große Gott in seinem Wort, in der Schönheit der
Natur und in der Liebe zu begegnen. Der Herr segne euch auf allen Wegen!
Saludo cordialmente a los peregrinos de lengua
española, en particular al Cardenal Francisco Javier Errázuriz Ossa y al
Presidente de laConferencia Episcopal de Chile, Mons. Alejandro Goić
Karmelić, con la Delegación venida para recibir una imagen de la Virgen del
Carmen, que bendeciré como signo de afecto a los hijos de ese País, que celebra
su bicentenario, y los acompañará en estos momentos de dificultad tras el
reciente terremoto sufrido. Saludo también a los grupos venidos de España,
México y otros países latinoamericanos. Muchas gracias.
Amados peregrinos de língua portuguesa, a minha
cordial saudação no Senhor Jesus! Como penhor da graça salvadora que Ele nos
mereceu com a sua Cruz, desça sobre vós e vossas famílias a minha Bênção. Vivei
em paz e encorajai-vos mutuamente no caminho da santidade. E o Deus do amor e
da paz estará convosco!
Saluto in lingua polacca:
Drodzy bracia i siostry. Jutro przypada uroczystość
Zwiastowania Pańskiego. W Polsce jest ona obchodzona również jako Dzień
Świętości Życia. Tajemnica Wcielenia odsłania szczególną wartość i godność
ludzkiego życia. Bóg dał nam ten dar i uświęcił, gdy Syn stał się człowiekiem i
narodził się z Maryi. Trzeba strzec tego daru od poczęcia aż do naturalnej
śmierci. Z całego serca jednoczę się z tymi, którzy podejmują różne inicjatywy
na rzecz poszanowania życia i budzenia nowej społecznej wrażliwości. Niech wam Bóg
błogosławi.
Traduzione italiana:
Cari fratelli e sorelle. Domani ricorre la solennità
dell’Annunciazione del Signore. In Polonia essa è celebrata anche come Giornata
della Sacralità della Vita. Il mistero dell’Incarnazione svela il
particolare valore e la dignità della vita umana. Dio ci ha dato questo dono e
lo ha santificato, quando il Figlio si è fatto uomo ed è nato da Maria. Bisogna
salvaguardare questo dono dal concepimento fino alla morte naturale. Con tutto
il cuore mi unisco a coloro che intraprendono diverse iniziative a favore del
rispetto per la vita e per la promozione della nuova sensibilità sociale. Dio
vi benedica!
Saluto in lingua ungherese:
Szeretettel köszöntöm a magyar híveket, különösen is a
kolozsvári csoport tagjait. Hálásan köszönöm imáitokat. A nagyböjt kedvező
időszak arra, hogy átalakítsuk életünket. Otthonaitokban és közösségeitekben
legyen meg a kiengesztelődés és a kölcsönös jóakarat. Erre adom áldásomat.
Dicsértessék a Jézus Krisztus!
Traduzione italiana:
Un saluto cordiale rivolgo ai fedeli di lingua
ungherese, specialmente ai membri del gruppo di Cluj-Napoca. Vi sono grato
per le vostre preghiere. La Quaresima è il tempo opportuno per trasformare la
nostra vita. Nelle vostre famiglie e nelle vostre comunità regni sempre lo
spirito di riconciliazione e di reciproca benevolenza. Dio vi benedica.
Sia lodato Gesù Cristo!
Saluto in lingua croata:
S velikom radošću pozdravljam sve hrvatske
hodočasnike, a na poseban način policajce iz Splita, liječnike i osoblje dječje
bolnice iz Zagreba te nastavnike i gimnazijalce iz Mostara. Dok iščekujemo
Kristov ulazak u Jeruzalem i njegovo predanje u volju Očevu, prepoznajmo koliko
nas je ljubio te, slijedeći njegov primjer ljubimo svoju braću. Hvaljen Isus i
Marija!
Traduzione italiana:
Con grande gioia saluto tutti i pellegrini Croati, e
in modo particolare i poliziotti di Split, i medici ed il personale dell’Ospedale
per i fanciulli di Zagreb ed i docenti e studenti del Ginnasio di Mostar.
Nell’attesa di rivivere l’entrata di Cristo a Gerusalemme ed il suo abbandono
alla volontà del Padre, prendiamo coscienza di quanto egli ci ha amato e, a
nostra volta, amiamo i nostri fratelli. Siano lodati Gesù e Maria!
* * *
Rivolgo un cordiale benvenuto ai pellegrini di lingua
italiana. In particolare, saluto i diversi gruppi di religiose qui presenti,
assicurando la mia preghiera per loro e per i rispettivi Istituti, affinché
sappiano annunciare con rinnovata gioia Gesù Cristo, Salvatore del mondo.
Saluto i sacerdoti, i diaconi e i seminaristi del Movimento dei Focolari, ed
auspico di cuore che questa visita rinsaldi in ciascuno la fedeltà al Vangelo e
l'amore alla Chiesa.
Saluto infine i giovani, i malati e gli sposi novelli.
La Solennità dell'Annunciazione, che domani celebreremo, sia per tutti un
invito a seguire l'esempio di Maria Santissima: per voi, cari giovani, si
traduca in pronta disponibilità alla chiamata del Padre, perché possiate essere
fermento evangelico nella società; per voi, cari ammalati, sia sprone a
rinnovare l'accettazione serena e confidente della volontà divina e a
trasformare la vostra sofferenza in mezzo di redenzione dell'intera umanità; il
sì di Maria susciti in voi, cari sposi novelli, un sempre più generoso impegno
nel costruire una famiglia fondata sul reciproco amore e sui perenni valori
cristiani.
© Copyright 2010 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana
SOURCE : http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/it/audiences/2010/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20100324.html
Albèrto Magno, santo
Enciclopedia on line
Albèrto Magno (A. di Bollstadt, A. de
Lauging [Lauingen], A. di Colonia, A. Teutonicus), santo/">santo. -
Filosofo e teologo, detto doctor Universalis (Lauingen, Svevia, forse 1193 o
1200 o 1206 - Colonia 1280). Maestro di Tommaso
d'Aquino, si impegnò a far conoscere la filosofia aristotelica con
parafrasi e commenti degli scritti del filosofo. Grande fu il suo interesse per
le scienze e per le esperienze di ordine fisico, ove è da notare l'attenzione
posta all'osservazione del particolare. Pose una netta separazione tra
filosofia aristotelica e teologia, nella consapevolezza che nella
considerazione fisica della natura non si possono far intervenire principi
miracolosi.
VITANato,
secondo recenti studi, da una famiglia di militari (e non dai conti di Bollstädt),
studiò a Padova,
e vi divenne domenicano (1223); dal 1228 insegnò successivamente a
Colonia, Hildesheim,
Friburgo, Ratisbona, Strasburgo e,
probabilmente, dal 1245, a Parigi, ove
divenne magister e dottore: ivi forse, e certo poi a Colonia ove andò
nel 1248 a dirigere il nuovo Studium generale dell'ordine,
ebbe scolaro Tommaso d'Aquino. Provinciale di Germania (1254-57),
difese davanti alla curia papale in Anagni gli ordini
mendicanti contro Guglielmo di S. Amore (1256); vescovo di Ratisbona,
rinunciò (1260-61); fu predicatore della crociata in Germania (1263-64); si
stabilì a Würzburg,
quindi a Strasburgo (1267-70) e a Colonia; partecipò al concilio di Lione
(1274); è dubbio che nel 1277 sia tornato a Parigi. Fu dichiarato santo e
dottore della chiesa da Pio XI (16 dic. 1931), patrono dei cultori delle
scienze naturali da Pio XII (16
dic. 1941); festa, 15 novembre.
OPERELa
produzione letteraria di A. è abbondantissima (21 voll. nell'ediz. Jammy, Lione
1651, 38 nell'ediz. Borgnet, Parigi 1890-99, entrambe imperfette; è in corso
dal 1951, a cura dell'Istituto Alberto Magno di Colonia, una nuova edizione di
tutte le opere) e comprende scritti di "filosofia razionale" o
logica, "reale" (fisica, matematica, metafisica) e
"morale", e di teologia (esegesi biblica, teologia sistematica,
parenetica). Molti sono commenti a opere di Aristotele, ma anche di Boezio e
all'Isagoge di Porfirio, o a libri dell'Antico Testamento e ai Vangeli, agli
scritti mistici dello pseudo-Dionigi Areopagita; numerosi i sermoni.
Dell'autenticità di alcuni scritti attribuitigli si discute; qualche opera di
lui è ancora inedita (tra cui di notevole importanza il commento allo
pseudo-Dionigi).
A. è consapevole della grande importanza culturale di
tutto il complesso di opere greche e arabe tradotte in latino nel giro di circa
un secolo e ormai, alla metà del Duecento, diffuse e discusse negli ambienti
scolastici; di qui il suo programma di "rendere intelligibile ai
latini" la filosofia peripatetica, attraverso libere parafrasi delle opere
di Aristotele,
in cui faceva rifluire disordinatamente notizie e motivi accolti da altri
autori greci e arabi. Preponderante influenza esercitarono sulla sua
interpretazione dell'aristotelismo gli scritti platoneggianti di Avicenna e degli
altri commentatori, e in particolare il Liber de causis che,
attribuito ad Aristotele e considerato come l'ultimo dei suoi libri metafisici,
dava una impronta e una prospettiva platonica a tutto il sistema peripatetico.
Chiarissima è l'influenza platonica nel suo De causis et processu
universitatis, in cui combinando motivi avicennistici e neoplatonici (accolti
anche attraverso lo pseudo-Dionigi), prospetta una "processione" del
molteplice dall'uno (Dio intellectus universaliter agens), secondo un
processo degradante (che ricalca i temi della metafisica della luce) di
"intelligenze" e di "cause", fino all'anima e alla natura
materiale. Ma non è facile distinguere nell'opera "filosofica" di A.
quello che è il suo pensiero e quanto invece è semplice "esposizione"
del pensiero dei "peripatetici" (in cui indifferentemente classifica
anche autori platoneggianti), tanto più che egli continuamente sottolinea la
sua intenzione di "recitare" e spiegare la loro filosofia, nulla
aggiungendo di proprio. Comunque la sua complessiva esposizione della filosofia
peripatetica - con la forte accentuazione dei temi platonici - eserciterà
grande influenza, soprattutto sulla scuola di Colonia (v. oltre). Notevole è la
netta separazione ch'egli pone tra filosofia peripatetica e teologia, nella
consapevolezza che "i principî fisici non si accordano con i principî
teologici", e che nella considerazione fisica della natura non si possono
far intervenire principî miracolosi: di qui la sua polemica contro il
concordismo di filosofia peripatetica e teologia perseguito da certi "dottori
latini" (tra i quali possiamo scorgere anche Tommaso d'Aquino), e la sua
accettazione di certe tipiche dottrine averroistiche, accolte in sede di
esegesi aristotelica (una tarda notizia indica Sigieri di
Brabante come discepolo di A.).
L'interesse di A. per la filosofia naturale si
manifesta nei suoi numerosi trattati scientifici (tra cui De animalibus, De
vegetalibus, De mineralibus), ove è notevole il gusto per l'osservazione diretta
della natura che si unisce sempre al carattere dossografico-erudito.
Scuola albertina di Colonia. Sotto questa
denominazione la storiografia indica il gruppo di seguaci di Alberto Magno
formatisi alla sua scuola; in particolare nel sec. 13° si ricordano Ugo Ripelin
di Strasburgo, Ulrico di
Strasburgo e Teodorico di
Vriberg (con il discepolo Bertoldo di
Moosburg). Caratteristica di questa scuola è il prevalere di motivi
neoplatonici (metafisica della luce, dottrina dell'illuminazione come
fondamento dell'intendere, ecc.), anche nell'interpretazione di Aristotele;
quindi la larga utilizzazione così degli scritti di Proclo come di quelli dei
platonici arabi, in particolare di Avicenna; significativo anche l'interesse
per problemi di carattere scientifico (Teodorico di Vriberg).
Accademia e Società Alberto Magno. L'Albertus Magnus Akademie fu
fondata dal card.
Schulte a Colonia (1922), come Istituto cattolico di filosofia; l'Albertus
Magnus Verein a Treviri (1899),
per assistere gli studenti cattolici.
SOURCE : https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/santo-alberto-magno
Statua di sant'Alberto, chiesa di Santa Maria del
Carmine, Rovereto (Trentino)
ALBERTO Magno
di Giuseppe Saitta - Enciclopedia Italiana (1929)
ALBERTO Magno. - Alberto di Bollstädt, che i suoi
contemporanei chiamavano Alberto di Colonia, nacque, secondo alcuni, nel 1193,
secondo altri, nel 1206 o 1207. Entrò nell'ordine domenicano nel 1223. Dal 1228
al 1245 insegnò successivamente a Colonia, Hildesheim, Friburgo, Ratisbona,
Strasburgo, Parigi, e poi di nuovo a Colonia, dove ebbe come scolaro Tomaso
d'Aquino. Dal 1254 al 1257 tenne l'ufficio di provinciale, e dal 1260 al 1262
l'altro di vescovo di Ratisbona, che lo distrassero dagli studî. Dopo il 1262
si ritirò, rinunziando alle cariche, a Colonia, dove riprese il suo
insegnamento. Nel 1277 si recò a Parigi per difendere le dottrine del suo
grande discepolo Tomaso d'Aquino, condannate dal vescovo di Parigi, Stefano
Templare (Étienne Templier, o di Senlis). Morì a Colonia il 15 novembre 1280.
L'influenza esercitata da Alberto Magno sulla
filosofia fu straordinaria. La vasta e profonda dottrina di lui era
riconosciuta perfino da Ruggero Bacone, che per il suo indirizzo di pensiero
gli era ostile. Anzi, contrariamente alla regola che vigeva nel Medioevo, egli,
benché vivente, era citato per nome negli scritti scientifici.
Il programma filosofico che Alberto prefisse a sé
stesso fu questo: rifare Aristotele ad uso dei Latini (Nostra intentio est
omnes dictas partes - physicam, metaphysicam et
mathematicam - facere Latinin intelligibiles, Phys. l. I, tract.
I, c. 1). Per rendere intelligibile Aristotele, egli, come ha giustamente
osservato il Mandonnet, si serve di tutti i materiali d'Aristotele e dei suoi
commentatori; e riesce a fare una parafrasi ampia e minuta della dottrina dello
Stagirita. Ma la stessa immensa erudizione che Alberto aveva saputo acquistare
appesantiva e affievoliva il suo spirito critico, in guisa da farlo cadere in
gravi errori. Conoscitore degli scrittori giudaici e arabi, A. mescola spesso
senza coscienza storica le loro dottrine con quelle aristoteliche, agostiniane
e anche neoplatoniche. Si direbbe che nell'intento di volgarizzare Aristotele
egli non avesse altra mira che quella di preparare tutti i materiali per una
riscossa aristotelica; epperò, mentre da un lato cerca a suo modo di liberare
il pensiero aristotelico dalle dottrine dei commentatori ebrei ed arabi, e
segnatamente da quelle di Avicebronio e di Averroè, dall'altro lato lo ha
trasformato in senso scolastico; e così appare come un complesso di dottrine
improntate ad Aristotele, ma in cui spesso inavvertiti entrano forti residui
neoplatonici, agostiniani e arabi. Perciò Alberto, sebbene abbia saputo creare
ai suoi tempi una nuova e poderosa direzione filosofica destinata a trionfare
nel seno della scolastica, pure è apparso un filosofo non originale. Ma senza
di lui non sarebbe stata possibile l'opera filosofica e teologica di Tomaso
d'Aquino il quale, in fondo, non fece altro che chiarire, scegliere e ordinare,
soltanto in parte, il materiale che il suo maestro aveva preparato. Difatti le tesi
tomistiche sono facilmente riconoscibili in quelle albertine. come p. es.
la conoscenza umana fondata sulla esperienza sensibile e la conseguente
impossibilità della prova ontologica dell'esistenza di Dio; l'indimostrabilità
della creazione del mondo nel tempo, l'individualità dell'intelletto agente, la
distinzione netta del creatore e della creatura, l'unità dell'anima, ecc. Ma,
benché la filosofia di Alberto dia l'impressione d'un che d'incomposto e
d'indifferenziato, dove talvolta alcune tesi contraddicono ad altre, pure è da
parlare d'una originalità di esse, la quale non consiste nella delineazione di
dottrine determinate, bensì nell'atteggiamento nuovo che condusse ad una
direzione rigorosamente speculativa. Il fatto che lo stesso ordine domenicano,
a cui Alberto apparteneva, combatté l'indirizzo peripatetico come un avversario
formidabile della teologia, è assai significativo. Contro questi suoi
confratelli Alberto, che aveva coscienza d'iniziare un movimento
razionalistico, diceva: "Vi sono degl'ignoranti che vogliono combattere
con tutti i mezzi l'uso della filosofia, e specialmente presso i Predicatori,
dove nessuno resiste loro; animali bruti che bestemmiano ciò che ignorano (tamquam
bruta animalia blasphemantes in iis quae ignorant)". Il razionalismo, che
in alcuni scolastici minacciava di compromettere lo stesso contenuto teologico,
in Alberto assume una fisionomia caratteristica, la quale è data da una
separazione netta fra la filosofia e la teologia. Questa separazione importava
l'autonomia della filosofia, la quale aveva l'ufficio di dimostrare ciò che è
dimostrabile, servendosi unicamente della ragione. Onde non può stupire che il
pensiero aristotelico sia apparso ad Alberto come l'espressione della ragione
naturale, e in quanto tale da rivendicare. Sono di lui queste parole a
proposito del contrasto fra filosofi e teologi su alcune verità: "Quando
essi sono in disaccordo, bisogna credere ad Agostino piuttosto che ai filosofi
in ciò che concerne la fede e i costumi. Ma se si tratta di medicina, io
crederei piuttosto ad Ippocrate o Galeno; e se si tratta di fisica, credo ad
Aristotele, perché è lui che conosce ottimamente la natura". Ma l'autorità
filosofica o scientifica in tanto ha valore in quanto essa è, senz'altro,
razionalità (philosophi enim est, id quod dicit, dicere cum ratione).
Il caldo amore e il senso vivo della potenza e insieme dei limiti della ragione
lo avevano indotto a studiare le scienze della natura: la zoologia, la
botanica, la geografia, l'astronomia, la mineralogia, l'alchimia, la medicina.
Così egli non proclamò soltanto il valore della deduzione, ma anche
dell'induzione (oportet experimentum non in uno modo, sed secundum omnes
circumstantias probare). Di gran lunga superiore in questo a Tomaso d'Aquino,
egli, dando valore all'empirismo aristotelico, intuisce chiaramente che nel
particolare il sillogismo è infecondo, perché experimentum solum
certificat in talibus. Sicché in Alberto Magno s'incontrano, mantenendosi però
nettamente distinti, l'indirizzo razionalistico e quello empiristico.
Delle numerose opere di Alberto Magno segnaliamo solo
le seguenti: De praedicabilibus, De praedicamentis, De sex principiis
Gilberti Porretani, Super duos libros Aristotelis perihermenias e gli
altri commenti alle opere aristoteliche (Analytica, Topica, Elenchi e
alle varie parti della Fisica aristotelica), De coelo et mundo, De
natura locorum, De proprietatibus elementorum, De generatione et
corruptione, De meteoris, De mineralibus, De anima, De
sensu et sensato, De memoria et reminiscentia, De intellectu et
intelligibili, De somno et vigilia, De spiritu et respiratione, Metaphysica, Ethica, Politica, De
unitate intellectus contra Averroem, Quindecim problemata contra
Averroistas.
Scritti teologici: Summa theologiae, e Summa
de creaturis, commenti ai libri dello pseudo Dionigi Aeropagita e alle Sententiae di
Pier Lombardo. Ricordiamo ancora i commenti ai Vangeli, all'Apocalisse, libri
dell'Antico Testamento, e i sermoni. Gli Opera Omnia furono
pubblicati a Parigi (1890-1899) in 38 voll. in edizione non critica ed
incompleta. La paternità albertina dei 32 sermoni sull'eucaristia, oggetto di
controversie tra protestanti e cattolici, è contestata dal Mandonnet.
Bibl.: Sighart, Albertus Magnus, Ratisbona 1857;
G. von Hettling, Albertus Magnus, Festschrift, Bonn 1880; Van
Weddingen, A. le Grand maître de Thomas d'Aquin, Bruxelles 1881; P.
Mandonnet, Siger de Brabant et l'averroïsme latin, 2ª ed., Lovanio 1911,
I, cap. 1 e 2; id., in Diction. de Théologie catholique, 3ª ed., I, Parigi
1923, s. v.; M. De Wulf, Histoire de la philosophie médiévale,
Lovanio-Parigi 1912; Gilson, La philosophie au Moyen Âge, Parigi 1922; F.
Pelster, Kritische Studien z. Leben u. z. Schriften Alberts d. Grossen,
Friburgo in B. 1920.
SOURCE : https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/alberto-magno_(Enciclopedia-Italiana)/
Hildesheim, ehem. Dominikanerkirche St. Paulus,
vermauertes Westportal mit dem Bischofssiegel des hl. Albertus Magnus
Alberto Magno
Dizionario di filosofia (2009)
Alberto Magno (A. di Bollstädt, A. de
Lauging [Lauingen], A. di Colonia, A. Teutonicus)
Filosofo e teologo (Lauingen, Svevia, forse 1193 o 1200 o 1206- Colonia 1280),
detto Doctor universalis, santo.
Vita e opere. Nato da una famiglia di militari (e
non dai conti di Bollstädt, come sostenuto in passato), studiò a Padova, e vi
divenne domenicano (1223); dal 1228 insegnò successivamente a Colonia,
Hildesheim, Friburgo, Ratisbona, Strasburgo e, probabilmente, dal 1245, a
Parigi, dove divenne magister e dottore: lì forse, e certo poi a
Colonia, dove andò nel 1248 a dirigere il nuovo Studium generale dell’ordine,
ebbe scolaro Tommaso d’Aquino. Provinciale di Germania (1254-57), difese
davanti alla curia papale in Anagni gli ordini mendicanti contro Guglielmo di
S. Amore (1256); vescovo di Ratisbona (1260), rinunciò nel 1261; fu predicatore
della crociata in Germania (1263-64); si stabilì quindi a Würzburg, e poi a
Strasburgo (1267-70) e a Colonia; partecipò al concilio di Lione (1274); è
dubbio che nel 1277 sia tornato a Parigi. La produzione letteraria di A. è
ricchissima (è tuttora in corso un’edizione di tutte le opere a cura
dell’Istituto Alberto Magno di Colonia, iniziata nel 1951) e comprende scritti
di ‘filosofia razionale’ o logica, ‘reale’ (fisica, matematica, metafisica) e
‘morale’, e di teologia (esegesi biblica, teologia sistematica, parenetica).
Molti sono commenti a opere di Aristotele, ma anche di Boezio e all’Isagoge di
Porfirio, o a libri dell’Antico Testamento e ai Vangeli, agli scritti mistici
dello pseudo-Dionigi Areopagita; numerosi i sermoni. Dell’autenticità di alcuni
scritti attribuitigli si discute; qualche opera di lui è ancora inedita.
Il confronto con la filosofia peripatetica. A.
era consapevole della grande importanza culturale di tutto il complesso di
opere greche e arabe tradotte in latino nel giro di circa un secolo e ormai,
alla metà del Duecento, diffuse e discusse negli ambienti scolastici; di qui il
suo programma di «rendere intelligibile ai latini» la filosofia peripatetica,
attraverso libere parafrasi delle opere di Aristotele, in cui faceva rifluire
disordinatamente notizie e motivi accolti da altri autori greci e arabi.
Preponderante influenza esercitarono sulla sua interpretazione
dell’aristotelismo gli scritti platoneggianti di Avicenna e degli altri
commentatori, e in particolare il Liber de causis, che, attribuito ad
Aristotele e considerato come l’ultimo dei suoi libri metafisici, dava una
impronta e una prospettiva platonica a tutto il sistema peripatetico.
Chiarissima è l’influenza platonica nel suo De causis et processu
universitatis, in cui, combinando motivi avicennistici e neoplatonici (accolti
anche attraverso lo pseudo-Dionigi), prospetta una «processione» del molteplice
dall’uno (Dio intellectus universaliter agens), secondo un processo
degradante (che ricalca i temi della metafisica della luce) di «intelligenze» e
di «cause», fino all’anima e alla natura materiale. Ma non è facile distinguere
nell’opera ‘filosofica’ di A. quello che è il suo pensiero e quanto invece è
semplice ‘esposizione’ del pensiero dei «peripatetici» (in cui
indifferentemente classifica anche autori platoneggianti), tanto più che egli
continuamente sottolinea la sua intenzione di «recitare» e spiegare la loro
filosofia, nulla aggiungendo di proprio. Comunque la sua complessiva
esposizione della filosofia peripatetica – con la forte accentuazione dei temi
platonici – eserciterà grande influenza, soprattutto sulla scuola di Colonia.
Notevole è la netta separazione ch’egli pone tra filosofia peripatetica e
teologia, nella consapevolezza che «i principi fisici non si accordano con i principi
teologici», e che nella considerazione fisica della natura non si possono far
intervenire principi miracolosi: di qui la sua polemica contro il concordismo
di filosofia peripatetica e teologia perseguito da certi «dottori latini» (tra
i quali possiamo scorgere anche Tommaso d’Aquino), e la sua accettazione di
certe tipiche dottrine averroistiche, accolte in sede di esegesi aristotelica
(una tarda notizia indica Sigieri di Brabante come discepolo di A.). Un forte
interesse A. manifestò anche per la filosofia naturale, come dimostrano i suoi
numerosi trattati scientifici (tra cui De animalibus, De vegetalibus, De
mineralibus), nei quali risulta notevole il gusto per l’osservazione diretta
della natura, che si unisce sempre al carattere dossografico-erudito.
Biografia
Alberto Magno
1193 ca. Nasce a Lauingen, in Svevia
1223 Entra a Padova nell’ordine domenicano
1228-1245 Insegna a Colonia, Hildesheim,
Friburgo, Ratisbona, Strasburgo e forse Parigi
1248 Viene chiamato a dirigere lo Studium di
Colonia, dove ha come scolaro Tommaso d’Aquino
1261 Rinuncia alla carica di vescovo di Ratisbona
ottenuta l’anno precedente
1267-70 Si stabilisce a Strasburgo e poi a
Colonia
1274 Partecipa al concilio di Lione
1280 Muore a Colonia
SOURCE : https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/alberto-magno_(Dizionario-di-filosofia)/
Klosterkirche Maria Medingen, Statuen (um 1750):
Albertus Magnus
Albertus Magnus
deutscher Beiname: der Große
auch: von Regensburg, de Lauing (von Lauingen), Theutonicus (der Deutsche),
Coloniensis (von Köln)
Gedenktag katholisch: 15. November
nicht gebotener Gedenktag
Regionalkalender für das deutsche Sprachgebiet
Fest im Erzbistum Köln, im Bistum Regensburg und im Dominikanerorden
gebotener Gedenktag im Bistum Augsburg
nicht gebotener Gedenktag in Österreich (Diözesen Eisenstadt, Feldkirch,
Graz-Seckau, Gurk-Klagenfurt, Innsbruck, Linz, Salzburg, St. Pölten, Wien): 16.
November
Gedenktag evangelisch: 15. November
Name
bedeutet: durch Adel glänzend (althochdt.)
Bischof von Regensburg, Ordensmann, Kirchenlehrer
* 1193 oder um 1206 in Lauingen an der Donau in Bayern
† 15. November 1280 in Köln in
Nordrhein-Westfalen
aus: Paulus Jovius: Vitae illustrium virorum, Basel 1577
Albertus stammte aus einer Ministerialenfamilie, sein
Vater übte wohl die Herrschaftsrechte der Staufer in Lauingen 1 aus.
1222/1223 lebte er bei einem Onkel in Venedig und
studierte an der damals neuen, renommierten Universität im Palazzo
Bo in Padua.
Nachdem er den
neuen Generalminister des Dominikanerordens, Jordan von Sachsen kennen gelernt hatte, trat er 1223 in den noch
jungen Orden ein und studierte weiter in der am Kölner Dom angesiedelten Schule. 1243
bis 1244 lehrte er an der theologischen Fakultät in Paris,
wo auch Thomas
von Aquin sein Schüler war, und wo er 1245 zum Magister der Theologie
promoviert wurde. 1248 wurde Albertus als erster Leiter des Studium generale
nach Köln geschickt, wo er eine Ordensuniversität gründete, aus der sich später
die Kölner
Universität entwickelte. Er förderte den Plan zum Bau des Kölner Domes
und richtete Ausbildungsstätten am Dominikanerkloster in Straßburg - an der Stelle
des heutigen Temple
Neuf - sowie am Kloster in
Freiburg im Breisgau und in Hildesheim ein.
Albertus wurde 1254 im damaligen Kloster -
an der Stelle der heutigen Hauptpost - in Worms zum Provinzial der Dominikanerprovinz Teutonia gewählt.
Er bereiste in diesem Amt den Westen Europas, oft zu Fuß, wanderte von Kloster
zu Kloster und sorgte für die Einhaltung der strengen Regeln. 1256 verteidigte
er gegenüber der Kurie des
Papstes in Anagni das
Konzept der Bettelorden gegen die Angriffe v. a. aus der Pariser Universität;
dort griff er in einer öffentlichen Disputation auch den Averroismus 2 an,
woraus seine Schrift De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas, Über
die Einheit des Verstandes, gegen die Averroisten wuchs, die dann Thomas
von Aquin rezipierte.
Im Gehorsam
gegenüber dem Willen von Papst Alexander IV. und gegen den des Ordensgenerals
übernahm Albertus 1260 das herunter gewirtschaftete Bistum Regensburg. Er war zwei Jahre Bischof von
Regensburg und warb dann im Auftrag von Papst Urban IV. 1263/64
in Böhmen und
Deutschland mit Predigten für den 7.
Kreuzzug. 1264 bis 1266 lehrte er in Würzburg 3,
danach in Straßburg,
bevor ihm der Papst um 1269 die Rückkehr in die Ruhe des Klosters
bei St. Andreas in Köln erlaubte. 1271 vermittelt er hier wieder
zwischen dem Erzbischof und der Stadt; insgesamt sind über zwanzig
Schiedsverfahren und Friedensschlüsse durch Alberts Vermittlungen bezeugt.
Unsicher ist die Überlieferung, nach der er 1277 die Lehren des Thomas
von Aquin an der Pariser Universität
verteidigte.
Albertus war einer der ganz großen theologischen
Lehrer des Mittelalters, deshalb auch Doctor expertus, erfahrener
Lehrer und Doctor venerabilis, verehrungswürdiger
Lehrer genannt. Und er war einer der ersten großen mittelalterlichen
Naturwissenschaftler in den Fächern Medizin, Biologie, Chemie, Physik,
Astronomie und Geografie, daher sein Ehrenname Doctor universalis. Aber
auch der Verdacht der Zauberei wurde deshalb gegen ihn erhoben. Seine
Wiederentdeckung der Naturwissenschaften ergab sich aus der Einführung der
aristotelischen Philosophie in die mittelalterliche Scholastik, bei der
Albertus zur Schlüsselfigur wurde. In den scholastischen Kreisen des frühen 13.
Jahrhunderts waren die Werke von Aristoteles weithin abgelehnt worden, die
Kenntnisse der kirchlich geschulten Scholastiker beschränkten sich auf
Aristoteles' Logik, wie sie in der Tradition von Augustinus und
den Neuplatonikern ausgelegt wurde.
Albertus beschäftigte sich eingehend mit den Schriften
von Aristoteles, unterzog sie einer gründlichen Untersuchung, kommentierte sie
und widersprach ihnen gelegentlich aufgrund eigener sorgfältiger Beobachtungen.
Seine Gelehrsamkeit umfasste auch arabisches und jüdisches Gedankengut. Er
verfasste grundlegend neue Werke und war zu seiner Zeit mit der Autorität des
Aristoteles zu vergleichen. In seiner Summa Theologiae, seiner umfassenden
Darstellung der Theologie, erschienen um 1270, versuchte er aristotelisches
Gedankengut mit den christlichen Lehren zu vereinen. Menschliches Denken könne
die Offenbarung nicht widerlegen, gleichzeitig sei aber auch das Recht des
Philosophen zu verteidigen, die göttlichen Mysterien zu erforschen. Das Werk
blieb unvollendet, es wurde sicher zur Inspiration für das gleichnamige
Monumentalwerk von Albertus' Schüler Thomas.
Albertus blieb
zeitlebens ein frommer Beter und ein demütiger und bescheidener Mensch. Auch
als Bischof von Regensburg behielt
er die Fußbekleidung eines Bauern bei und bekam deshalb auch den
Kosenamen Bischof Bundschuh.
Albertus' Reliquien ruhen in der Kölner St.-Andreas-Kirche, seine Hirnschale in der Pfarrkirche St. Martin seiner Geburtsstadt Lauingen. Dort
wurde er schon bald nach seinem Tod in einer ihm geweihten Kapelle bei
seinem Geburtshaus verehrt,
die 1604 abgerissen und nach dem 30-jährigen Krieg durch einen Betsaal ersetzt
wurde. Seit 1631 feierte man jedes Jahr seinen Festtag, 1932 wurde ihm ein
Denkmal auf dem Rathausplatz aufgestellt, das Gymnasium ist nach ihm benannt.
Am 700. Todestag 1980 besuchte Papst Johannes
Paul II. das Grab in Köln.
In Padua ist Albertus die moderne Kirche Sant'Alberto
Magno geweiht.
Kanonisation: Albertus
wurde 1622 von Papst Gregor XV. selig- und am 16. Dezember
1931 von Papst Pius XI. heiliggesprochen, gleichzeitig wurde ihm der Titel
eines Kirchenlehrers verliehen.
1941 erklärte ihn Papst Pius
XII. zum Patron aller Naturwissenschaftler.
Patron von Lauingen und Bollstadt; der Theologen, Philosophen, Naturwissenschaftler,
Medizintechniker, Studenten und Bergleute
1 Dass
Albertus in Lauingen und nicht, wie verschiedentlich behauptet,
in Bollstadt - heute Ortsteil von Amerdingen bei Nördlingen -
geboren wurde, hat Adolf Layer aufgewiesen, auch wenn dort die Hauptstraße des
Ortes nach Albertus benannt ist. (Adolf Layer: Albert von
Bollstadt oder Albert von Launingen? In: Historischer Verein Dillingen a. d.
Donau: Albert von Lauingen … Festschrift 1980, 2. erw. Aufl. Lauingen 1980)
2 Die dem arabischen Philosophen Averroes
zugeschriebene Lehre von der Einheit und Einzigkeit des Intellekts besagt, dass
der Intellekt – sowohl der tätige als auch der aufnehmende, passive – nur ein
einziger und somit in allen Menschen derselbe ist, weil sein Gegenstand, die
Naturgesetze und die Logik, immer und überall gleich ist. Dem tätigen Intellekt
wiesen die Averroisten eine Schlüsselrolle in der Weltordnung zu; manche
identifizierten ihn sogar mit Gott.
3 Das
ehemalige Kloster der Dominikaner in Würzburg ist seit 1813 das Kloster der Augustiner.
Worte des Heiligen
(Natur-) Wissenschaft und Offenbarung schließen sich nicht gegenseitig aus:
Kein Wissen, auch nicht das naturwissenschaftliche, ist, richtig verstanden, zu
verwerfen. Dem, der die Naturwissenschaft von Grund aus recht versteht, sind
die Worte des Herrn kein Anlass zum Zweifel. Weltliche Weisheit und Klugheit
sind gut, wenn sie gut verwendet werden. Ob das Streben nach Wissen sittlich
gut oder schlecht ist, hängt vom Beweggrund ab, der uns bei diesem leitet. Aus
Ruhmsucht oder um reich zu werden, Wissenschaft zu treiben, ist verwerflich,
gut dagegen ist es, nach Wissen zu streben, um gut zu werden und sich zu
erbauen; denn das ist Klugheit, gut auch, dies zu tun, um andere zu erbauen;
denn das ist Liebe. Wissen zu wollen, damit du wissest, ist eine ernste
Beschäftigung und kein eitles Beginnen.
In bewusst provokanten Formulierungen macht Albert in
seiner Albert-Tafel auf das wesentlich Christliche aufmerksam:
Es gibt zwölf gute Stücke:
Das erste ist: Wer einen Pfennig in der Liebe unseres Herrn in diesem Leben gibt: Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger und dem Menschen nützlicher, als wenn seine Nachkommen nach seinem Tode so viel Gold und Silber austeilten, um Dome zu bauen, die von dieser Erde bis zum Himmel reichten.
Das andere ist: Wer ein hartes Wort geduldig erträgt, Lieb und Leid in rechter Demut von Gottes Hand empfängt und beides als Gottes Gabe erkennt: Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger, als wenn er auf seinem Rücken alle Tage einen Wagen voll Birkenreiser zerschlüge.
Das dritte ist, dass du dich vor Gott demütigst unter alle Geschöpfe: Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger, als wenn du von einem Ende der Welt bis an das andere gingst und deine Fußstapfen von Blut gerötet wären.
Das vierte ist, dass du Gott mit seiner Gnade stete Reue bietest in deiner Seele: Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger, als wenn du von einem Ende der Welt bis an das andere liefst.
Das fünfte ist, dass der Mensch einen Tropfen aus lauterer Liebe wegen des Leidens Christi weint: Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger, als wenn seine Nachkommen aus Schmerzen einen Bach so groß wie die Donau weinten.
Das sechste ist: Geh selber zu Gott! Das ist dir nützlicher, als wenn du alle Heiligen und alle Engel, die im Himmel sind, hinsenden würdest.
Das siebte ist: Verurteile oder verdamme niemanden! Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger, als wenn du sieben Stunden am Tag dein Blut vergössest.
Das achte ist, dass du mit Geduld entgegennimmst, was Gott über dich verhängt: Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger, als wenn du wie St. Paulus bis in den dritten Himmel entrückt würdest.
Das neunte ist: Hab Mitleid mit deinen Mitmenschen! Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger, als wenn du so viele Kranken speisest, wie in einem ganzen Lande leben.
Das zehnte ist, dass, wenn du heilige Werke und andere reine Tugenden siehst und bei deinem Nächsten wahrnimmst, du dich freust in rechter Liebe: Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger, als wenn du dich mit Gott im Himmel freutest.
Das elfte ist, dass du strebst, die Sünder von ihren Sünden zu bringen: Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger, als wenn du mit Gott selber im Himmel säßest.
Das zwölfte ist, das du dich selber erkennst und dich selber zu Gott ziehst und
bringst: Das ist Gott wohlgefälliger, als wenn du die ganze Welt zu den ewigen
Gnaden brächtest, du selber aber ewiglich verdammt würdest.
Quelle: Rh. Liertz: Albert der Große - Gedanken über
sein Leben und aus seinen Werken. Münster 1948, S. 253, 261; bearbeitet
Die Naturwissenschaften suchen nach Antworten auf Fragen, die die Welt betreffen, das Bittgebet ist der Weg, um Gott zu suchen:
Bittet, dann wird euch gegeben; sucht, dann werdet ihr finden; klopft an, dann
wird euch geöffnet. (Matthäusevangelium 7, 7) … Hier ist zu beachten, dass
einer jeden der drei Aufforderungen je eigens eine Entsprechung hinzugegeben
wird, dem Bitten wird die Gewährung der Gabe zugesagt ..., dem Suchen das
Finden, d. h., der Suchende kommt im Inneren weiter, indem er eine Erfahrung
macht; denn das Suchen geschieht durch tugendhaftes Handeln, und dann kann es
nicht anders sein, als dass er durch das Erfahren eines geistlichen Genusses es
empfindet, wie geschmackvoll die Tugend ist; das sittlich-richtige Tun und das
dadurch erreichte Gute geht ja von der lebenden und wahrnehmungsfähigen Seele
aus. Denn ihr habt erfahren, wie gütig der Herr ist (1. Petrusbrief
2, 3). Kostet und seht, wie gütig der Herr ist (Psalm 34, 9). So
gelangt der Suchende innerlich zu den Früchten des Geistes (Galaterbrief
5, 22 f), in dessen Kraft er im Guten voranschreitet. Dem Anklopfen wird als
Entsprechung das Öffnen verheißen, d. h. der Zugang zur beständigen inneren
Ruhe; denn das vollendete Glück ist der ganz friedvolle Zustand in der
Vereinigung mit dem vollkommenen Gut, in dem jeder Wunsch erfüllt ist. Die Tür
zu jenem Zustand ist die Entdeckung der Gegenwart [Gottes], die nicht
angewiesen ist auf die Nachbildungen [Gottes] im Menschen als dem Ebenbild
Gottes und in den anderen irdischen Geschöpfen als den Spuren Gottes. Das
Schreiten durch diese Tür ist schließlich das Innewerden des höchsten Gutseins
Gottes.
Quelle: Albertus Magnus: Ausgewählte Texte, hrsg. und
übersetzt von A. Fries. = Texte zur Forschung, Bd. 35. Darmstadt 1981, S. 253
Zitate von Albertus Magnus:
Die Liebe besiegt alles. Darum lasst die Liebe über uns Herrscherin sein.
Durch Gebet und Frömmigkeit erreicht man in den göttlichen Wissenschaften mehr als durch Studium.
Im Rahmen seiner Vollkommenheit kann jeder Mensch glücklich werden; denn er will glücklich sein.
Du hast, o Gott, es so eingerichtet, dass jeder ungeordnete Geist sich selbst zur Strafe wird.
Der Mensch steht in der Mitte der Schöpfung, zwischen Stoff und Geist, zwischen Zeit und Ewigkeit.
Die schönsten Dinge auf dieser Welt in der Natur, die alles von Menschenhand Geschaffene in den Schatten stellen, kosten gottlob überhaupt kein Geld.
Alle Wissenschaften sind nur Wege zum Übersinnlichen.
Gott ist der höchste und oberste Künstler. Er steht zur geschaffenen Welt wie jeder menschliche Künstler zu seinem Werk.
Wir müssen Könige sein: Wir müssen das Reich, das uns anvertraut ist, derart verwalten, dass Gott sich herablässt, in uns Wohnung zu nehmen. Das Reich, das Er uns anvertraut hat, ist unsere Seele. Über unsere Seele müssen wir in Gerechtigkeit, Freude und Frieden im Hl. Geiste herrschen. Dann wird auch Christus in uns herrschen.
Du darfst niemanden so lieben, dass du ihm zuliebe die Wahrheit aufgäbest.
Wer sich mit göttlichen Dingen beschäftigt, wird nach ihrem Bilde umgestaltet.
Der Dienst an der Wahrheit ist Heiligkeit.
Ein starkmütiger Mann ist der, der nicht fürchtet, was nicht zu fürchten ist.
Die Unterscheidung ist die Lenkerin der Tugenden; sie muss die Demut wie die
Liebe in den rechten Bahnen halten.
Quelle: Rh. Liertz: Albert der Große - Gedanken über sein
Leben und aus seinen Werken. Münster 1948, S. 262 - 264; bearbeitet
zusammengestellt von Abt em. Dr. Emmeram Kränkl OSB,
Benediktinerabtei Schäftlarn,
für die Katholische
SonntagsZeitung
Martyrologium
Romanum Flori-Legium
Schriften
von Albert und seine Gesammelten Werke gibt es online zu lesen in den
Documenta Catholica Omnia.
Die Katholische Pfarrgemeinde St. Albertus
Magnus in Ottobrunn bietet schön zusammengestellte
Informationen über ihren Patron.
Der Dom in Regensburg ist täglich ab 6.30 Uhr geöffnet,
im Juni bis September bis 19 Uhr, im April, Mai und Oktober bis 18 Uhr, im
Winter bis 17 Uhr. Der Domschatz ist täglich von 11 Uhr bis
17 Uhr, sonntags erst ab 12 Uhr geöffnet, der Eintritt beträgt 3 €. (2021)
[…]
Autor: Joachim
Schäfer - zuletzt aktualisiert am 12.06.2021
Quellen:
• Vera Schauber, Hanns Michael Schindler: Heilige und Patrone im Jahreslauf. Pattloch,
München, 2001
• Hiltgard L. Keller: Reclams Lexikon der Heiligen und der biblischen
Gestalten. Reclam, Ditzingen 1984
• Erhard Gorys: Lexikon der Heiligen. dtv, München, 1997
• C. S., Brief vom 22. Juni 2008
• http://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/Home/Nachrichten/Startseite/Artikel,-Eine-lila-Tafel-fuer-den-heiligen-Albertus-_arid,1638239_regid,2_puid,2_pageid,4288.html
• Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, begr. von Michael Buchberger. Hrsg. von
Walter Kasper, 3., völlig neu bearb. Aufl., Bd. 1. Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau
1993
korrekt zitieren: Joachim Schäfer: Artikel Albertus Magnus, aus dem Ökumenischen Heiligenlexikon - https://www.heiligenlexikon.de/BiographienA/Albertus_Magnus.htm, abgerufen am 15. 11. 2021
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet das Ökumenische
Heiligenlexikon in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte
bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://d-nb.info/1175439177 und http://d-nb.info/969828497 abrufbar.
SOURCE : https://www.heiligenlexikon.de/BiographienA/Albertus_Magnus.htm
Albertus Magnus. Rottweil, Predigerkirche, Statue
Voir aussi : http://agora.qc.ca/dossiers/Saint_Albert_le_Grand
http://www.traditioninaction.org/SOD/j230sd_AlbertusMagnus_11-15.html
