VII. Scholasticism’s Apex Under Albertus Magnus

The next two figures to be noted, who exerted a determining influence upon the development of Catholic dogmatic teaching, are two Dominicans-Albertus Magnus and his even more illustrious pupil, Thomas Aquinas.PFF1 653.4

The literary giant of his time was ALBERTUS MAGNUS (1193 or 1206-1280). Born in Swabia, he taught theology and philosophy at Cologne, and also for a short period in Paris, was made bishop of Ratisbon, but resigned soon thereafter, that he might return to his professorship in Cologne.PFF1 653.5

He was a keen student of nature, and wrote effectively on botany, zoology, meteorology, and astronomy. His knowledge was often faulty, though some of his statements have proved to be prophetic of modern discoveries. Because of his vast learning he was called the Doctor Universalis. He sought to harmonize the philosophy of Aristotle with the dogmas of the church. He considered theology, however, as the truest science, and even more than a science—as wisdom. He wrote a number of commentaries; among them were two on Daniel and the Apocalypse.PFF1 654.1

His commentaries were a verse-by-verse explanation, following the method of the glossa, giving not so much his own opinion and explanation as the different possible explanations. For instance, the “ten days” mentioned in connection with the Smyrna church can be the present life of man, which should pass through ten forms of development, or it can mean the Roman rulers, who are indicated by the ten horns of the beast (starting with Nero and ending with Diocletian), or the forms of tribulation which the church must suffer—and after enumerating seven specific tribulations, he adds three of a general nature, namely, the world, the flesh, and the devil. ^{74Albertus Magnus, In Apocalypsim B. Joannis Apostoli, in Opera Omnia, vol. 38, pp. 511, 512.} Often he follows Bede or Haymo or others. Frequently interesting sidelines open up, as for example under Jezebel, mentioned in the Thyatira church, he sees the heresy of Mohammed. ^{75Ibid., p. 520.}PFF1 654.2

Similarly, in his explanation of the fifth trumpet he remarks that the smoke rising from the pit is Antichristian teaching, and the locusts are the forerunners of Antichrist. ^{76Ibid., pp. 614, 615.} The forty-two months mentioned in Revelation 11 refer to the ruling time or period of Antichrist. ^{77Ibid., p. 639.} In the woman in the sun he sees the church in her struggle against Satan. ^{78Ibid., p. 652.} The twelve stars on her head are the twelve apostles of Jesus. But he also gives another explanation, as referring to Mary the virgin-and he mentions Bernard’s Mariology in this connection. ^{79Ibid., p. 654.} We see, therefore, that his explanation is not original, but is rather a compendium of the opinions of others.PFF1 654.3

In the leopard beast of Revelation 13 he sees Antichrist, and in the second, lamblike beast he understands the preachers of Antichrist. ^{80Ibid., p. 670.} In the matter of the thousand years he follows Haymo, who said that it comprises all the time from the Passion of Christ to the end of this saeculum, ^{81Ibid., p. 755.} while the believers are living in faith with Christ during that period. ^{82Ibid., p. 756.} This is, of course, the old Augustinian view that still held general sway. There is here no progress in prophetic interpretation but simply a reiteration of the generally accepted opinion dominant during the Middle Ages. The rejuvenation of prophetical research will obviously come, not through the learned masters of theology and philosophy, but through individuals perturbed by the excesses of their times, and ever searching for a hope which would give them courage to continue their way in this weary world.PFF1 655.1