brian davies and brian leftow Introduction AnselmofCanterburyisatonceoneofthebest-andleast-knownof medievalthinkers.Twochaptersofhisthirdmajorwork(Proslogion 2 and 3) are almost notorious. Commonly said to contain the first “ontological argument” for God’s existence, they are widely read and studied even at the undergraduate level, and they continue to puzzlebothatheistandtheistphilosophers.YettherestofAnselm’s writings have been less subject to scrutiny. Many philosophers and studentsofphilosophyknowlittleaboutthem,whichisregrettable. Anselm had much more to offer about God than a single argument for His existence. And he also had much to say on a range of other topics,someofitstillwellworthattention. The purpose of this book is to introduce readers to the range of Anselm’s thinking in a way that will help them to reflect on it for themselves.So,aswellasincludingachapterontheargumentstobe foundinProslogion2and3(chapter7),andoneonAnselmonGod ingeneral(chapter6),thevolumeincludesaccountsofhowAnselm thought about a number of other matters. Readers who work seri- ouslythroughAnselm’swritingswillfindthathehadthingstosay on matters of religious epistemology, logic, the nature of truth, the reality and significance of human freedom, and the evaluation of human behaviour. In what follows, therefore, readers will find dis- cussions of Anselm covering all these concerns. They will, in addi- tion, find discussions of how Anselm can be situated against his intellectual background, one dominated by the Bible and the writ- ings of St. Augustine (354–430), and of how he applied his mind to questionsarisingfromkeyChristiandoctrinessuchastheteaching that God is somehow three in one, and the claim that people are savedbyvirtueofChrist. 1 CCaammbbrriiddggee CCoommppaanniioonnss OOnnlliinnee ©© CCaammbbrriiddggee UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrreessss,, 22000066 2 brian davies and brian leftow The present volume forms part of a series devoted to major philosophers,andonemightwonderwhetherthereisanythingphilo- sophicaltobegainedfromastudyofAnselmonChristiantheology. Yet a sharp distinction between philosophy and theology (now- adays a rigid one with some people) would have seemed puzzling to Anselm, not to mention many of his intellectual ancestors and heirs. For Anselm, what mattered was thinking well about matters of importance. So, even when he is discussing items of Christian doctrine (as opposed to what are clearly “philosophical topics”), he aimstodrawonthebesthecanprovideinthewayofrightthinking. In other words, Anselm’s theology is very much that of a philoso- pher (taking “philosopher” to mean “someone concerned to argue for conclusions in a cogent way”). So, unless we (surely unreason- ably?)ruleinadvancethatnodiscussionofChristiandoctrinecanbe of philosophical interest, Anselm is of interest as a philosopher (on the understanding of “philosopher” just given) even as he attempts to do what might simply be described as “theology.” For he clearly hadaformidableintellect,whichshowsitselfinalmosteverything he wrote, as the chapters which follow indicate. He never wrote anything which one might imagine editors of contemporary philo- sophical journals to be happy to publish. It is, however, significant that editors of many contemporary philosophical journals happily publisharticlesonaspectsofAnselm’sthinking. Anselm’s life was not one of which Hollywood is likely to make a film. As Gillian Evans notes in chapter 1, it was basically the life of a Benedictine monk. Born in 1033, Anselm joined the Abbey of Bec in1060. He was only twenty-seven at the time, and he lived in a monastic context until the time of his death in 1109. As Evans alsoexplains,however,tosaythisisnottoimplythatAnselmspent his entire life behind the walls of a cloister, nor is it to say that his thinking was bound by any walls. Even as Abbot of Bec (1078–93) Anselmhadtotravelonmonasticbusiness,andfrom1093,whenhe became Archbishop of Canterbury, he was much involved in what aresometimesquaintlycalled“worldlyaffairs.”ReadersofAnselm should,however,notethatwhatwenowthinkofasuniversitiesare very much the successors to monasteries such as those (at Bec and Canterbury)inwhichAnselmlived.TherewasnothinginAnselm’s day that seriously compares with what we mean by the word “university.” But there were places in which people treasured the CCaammbbrriiddggee CCoommppaanniioonnss OOnnlliinnee ©© CCaammbbrriiddggee UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrreessss,, 22000066 Introduction 3 literature of antiquity and thought about the questions it raised. WhenhefirstarrivedatBec,Anselmencounteredaschoolpresided over by Lanfranc (c. 1005–89), himself a notable medieval intellec- tual,andAnselmspentmuchofhismonasticlifeteachinganddis- cussing. He was not an academic in the modern sense, but much of his time was devoted to thoroughly academic matters. Anselm’s worldwasoneinwhichpeoplefeltfreetoargue.Somefruitsofthese argumentscanbefoundinAnselm’swritings. In spite of their origin and their profoundly theological orienta- tion, many of Anselm’s writings appeal to nothing other than what anythinkingpersonmightbeexpectedtoaccept.Take,forexample, theprologuetohisMonologion.HereAnselmexplainsthathewrote thebookattheinstigationofsomeofhisfellowmonks,whowanted “a kind of model meditation” on things he previously said to them about “the essence of the divine.” The word “meditation” echoes theRuleofSaintBenedict,inwhichmonksareencouragedtochew overandthinkabout(tomeditateon)textsliketheBible.SoAnselm isclearlyouttohelphisfellowmonkswhenitcomestowhatthey are all about simply by being monks. As he proceeds, however, he doesnotseemtobepreachingonlytothechoir.Hisbrief,hesays,is toproceedonthisbasis: NothingwhatsoevertobearguedonthebasisoftheauthorityofScripture, but the constraints of reason concisely to prove, and the clarity of truth clearlytoshow,intheplainstyle,witheverydayarguments,anddown-to- earthdialectic,theconclusionsofdistinctinvestigations. InalettertoAnselm,LanfrancexpresseddisapprovaloftheMonolo- gionbecauseofitslackofappealtoecclesiasticalauthority,andone can easily see why Lanfranc was worried. Even though its conclu- sions are of theological significance, the Monologion is clearly out to offer philosophical rather than theological reasoning. The same canbesaidofmuchelsethatAnselmwroteanditwould,therefore, beabsurdtodenyhimthetitle“philosopher.” During his lifetime, Anselm met intellectual opposition from at leasttwonotablefigures,GauniloofMarmoutiers(datesunknown) and Roscelin of Compie`gne (d. 1125), and, though his “ontological argument” is exceedingly well known, it has also been much criti- cized. It was even rejected by no less a medieval heavyweight than ThomasAquinas(1224/6–1274),accordingtowhomitclaimsmore CCaammbbrriiddggee CCoommppaanniioonnss OOnnlliinnee ©© CCaammbbrriiddggee UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrreessss,, 22000066 4 brian davies and brian leftow knowledgeofGod’snaturethanpeopleactuallyhave,andaccording towhomitalsomovesillicitlyfromwhatawordmeanstothecon- clusion that something exists to correspond to it (Summa Contra Gentiles i, 10–11; Summa Theologiae 1a, 2,1). Other medieval authors, however (especially those with more of a taste for Augus- tinian ways of thinking than Aquinas had), were happy to cite Anselm as an authority, and in the last hundred years or more he hasbeenstudiedandwrittenaboutwithconsiderableadmiration. Interestinmedievalideasisnowsomethingofagrowthindustry, and Anselm ranks as one of the figures most worked over in this connection,especiallyatthehandsofpeoplewithaninterestinphi- losophyofreligion.However,withtheexceptionofR.W.Southern’s magisterial Saint Anselm: A Portrait in a Landscape (Cambridge, 1990), and apart from some notable works by Jasper Hopkins (for example A Companion to the Study of St. Anselm, Minneapolis, 1972) and G. R. Evans (for example Anselm, London, 1989), there is little on Anselm to which students and general readers can be referred. That is the chief reason for this book. We believe that it fillsagap,andwehopethatitsreaderswillfindthatitdoessoina useful way, one which might prompt them to further reflection on Anselm. CCaammbbrriiddggee CCoommppaanniioonnss OOnnlliinnee ©© CCaammbbrriiddggee UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrreessss,, 22000066 g. r. evans 1 Anselm’s life, works, and immediate influence Abooklikethishastogiveapicturenotonlyofthemodernphilo- sophicalandtheologicalinterestofitssubject’swritings,butofthe contextinwhichhewrote.Forawriterwhoseworkshavebeenthe subject of debate for nearly a millennium, there is the additional taskofseekingtoconveythechangingnuancesofexpectationwith whichhewasreadcenturybycentury.Allthisisofmorethanhis- toricalimportance.Todiscussintranslationthethoughtofsomeone whochosehiswordsverycarefullyinLatinisnotnecessarilytodis- cuss exactly what he wrote. And to analyze ideas out of context is to discuss matters which, while they may be of high philosophical interest in themselves, may also not be exactly the topics or the solutionsAnselmhadinmind. Anselm of Bec and Canterbury is read as a thinker in his own rightandnotmerelyasaprominentexponentofamodeofthought belonging to a particular period period of medieval thought. Never- theless, he was in a number of respects a man of his time and the thought itself was conditioned by personal and historical circum- stanceswhichneedtobeunderstoodifhisideasaretobeinterpreted withsensitivitytowhatpreoccupiedhimandwhathemeanttosay. Thischapterisbiographicalandhistorical;itseekstoprovideabrief butnecessarycontextandtoencouragethereadertoconsiderinthis light the “Anselmian” complexion of the topics covered in other chapters. the sources: friends and witnesses The evidence about Anselm’s life and writings includes a body of materials unusually full for a figure of his period, and coming from 5 CCaammbbrriiddggee CCoommppaanniioonnss OOnnlliinnee ©© CCaammbbrriiddggee UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrreessss,, 22000066 6 g. r. evans sourcesoftenclosetotheirsubject.Anselmhadabiographerwhowas Boswell to his Johnson in a way which was extremely uncommon in the confined and convention-ridden hagiographical world of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Eadmer met Anselm in 1079 when Anselmwasforty-sixandEadmerprobablybarelytwenty.Theymet again when Anselm came to England and entered on his period as archbishop,andfrom1092/3theywereinoneanother’scompanya good deal in the community at Canterbury where Anselm did his besttorecreatethelifehehadformerlyenjoyedatBec. Eadmer’s Life (Vita Anselmi) is first-hand in places, for he was living with Anselm in the same community for many of his later years. Parts of his account are drawn from Anselm’s own replies, ontheoccasionswhenEadmerquestionedhimabouthisyouthand early life with this biography in mind. Only from Anselm himself can Eadmer have obtained the description of his well-born Italian parents, the generous but spendthrift father and the conscientious motherwhowascarefulwithmoney.1 In about 1100 Anselm was made aware that Eadmer was writing hisLife.Oncehehadgiventhisinformationsomethought,heasked Eadmer to destroy what he had written. Eadmer did as he was told, but he admits that he made a copy. Nevertheless, from that point itwasdifficultforhim,inconscience,togoonactivelyworkingon it. So the Life is weaker on the events towards the end of Anselm’s life.AfterAnselm’sdeath,whentheneedforarecordofhismiracles became more important, Eadmer’s Life began to mutate from biog- raphy to hagiography as, with successive copyings, Eadmer added a littletothemiraculousstories. Eadmer was a historian; he wrote another book, The History of Recent Events (Historia Novorum) in which he was able to tell the storyofAnselminanothermode,whichheintendedtobecomple- mentarytotheLife.Initsprefaceheexplainsthathiscontemporaries areanxioustoknowaboutthedeedsofthosewholivedbeforethem, desiringtobecomfortedandfortifiedbytheexamplestheyhaveset. ThestorythatEadmerhastotellbeginswiththeNormanConquest andthearchbishopricofLanfrancatCanterbury.Thenheintroduces Anselm, his spiritual “hero,” a man as good as he is learned and at the same time dedicated to the contemplative life. So the History ofRecentEventsbecomessomethingnotwhollyseparateinitspur- posesfromtheLife. CCaammbbrriiddggee CCoommppaanniioonnss OOnnlliinnee ©© CCaammbbrriiddggee UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrreessss,, 22000066 Anselm’slife,works,and immediateinfluence 7 Anselmbecamefamousforhisconversationandfortheaddresses hegavetocommunitiesofmonksonhistravels.Talkisofitsnature evanescent,butAnselmhadloyalanddiligentadmirers,whomade an attempt to preserve a record. One of these was Eadmer himself. Another was the monk Alexander of the Canterbury community. There seems to have been a third who cannot so confidently be identified. ThechroniclerWilliamofMalmesbury(c.1080–c.1143)tooka keeninterestinthepreservationoftheAnselmianliteraryremains,2 and he records, consciously treading in the footsteps of Eadmer, a number of features of Anselm’s archbishopric.3 Guibert of Nogent, whoregardedAnselmasamajorinfluenceonhislife,describesinhis autobiography (De Vita Sua) how Anselm visited the monastery at Flyandhowhehelpedhim“managehisinnerman”usingaconven- tional phrase for the soul or “inner man” (interior homo). Gundulf, afriendandpupilofAnselmandmonkofBecwhobecameBishopof Rochester, is the subject of a Life by one of the Rochester commu- nity. It provides another significant contemporary view of Anselm and the flavour of his dealings with others. There is a description ofthewayAnselmwouldtalkandGundulphwouldweep,watering withhistearstheseedsAnselmwassowing. Anselm’s pleasure in finding someone able to meet him even briefly on his own ground as an equal is obvious in the delight he took in the reply to the Proslogion argument which he received from the monk Gaunilo of Marmoutiers. That can be seen even where there is no body of writing from the friend in question to tell us what he thought. Boso, who arrived at Bec about 1085, and eventually became its fourth abbot, was apparently one of the rel- atively few of his own monks who could give Anselm a good argu- ment. He included in On the Virgin Conception a recognition of the way Boso had taken the lead among his friends in encouraging him to complete the Cur Deus Homo.4 The Life of Boso describes his arrival at Bec and the impact, both intellectual and pastoral, that Anselm had on him.5 When Anselm moved to England, he asked to have Boso with him, and Boso crossed the sea to join him. Anselm trusted him enough, according to the Life, to send him to the Council of Clermont in 1095, when he was not able to go himself. Anselm’s exile found Boso returning to Bec, but on his return from his second exile, Anselm asked the Bec community if CCaammbbrriiddggee CCoommppaanniioonnss OOnnlliinnee ©© CCaammbbrriiddggee UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrreessss,, 22000066 8 g. r. evans hemighthaveBosobacktobehiscompanionandBosoreturnedto England. anselm’s life and writings Eadmer’sstoryofAnselm’slifeisnotwithoutitstalesofthemirac- ulousanditsimprovingmorallessons.Butitisalsotruebiography inthesensethatitpreservesagreatdealofwhatAnselmtrustingly told to the enquiring Eadmer as a friend and confidant. One of the conventions of the hagiographer was the inclusion of a vision, usu- ally the vision of the saint’s mother while she was pregnant with him. Anselm evidently provided his own, genuine, vision. He told Eadmerthathehadhadadreamwhenhewasasmallboy.Hismother hadtoldhimthatGodisinheavenandrulesoverallthingsandhe hadimaginedheavenasrestingontopofthemountainswhichsur- rounded his home. In his dream he was told to climb to the top of themountainandtherehefoundGodsittinglikeagreatkinginhis court. They talked and the king’s steward brought him white bread to eat. When he woke, he believed he had been in heaven.6 Eadmer says he became a studious boy, pious and generally beloved, partly perhapsasaconsequenceofthisvision. The small boy became an adolescent. He lost interest in study; his mother died, and with the loss of this “anchor” he was afloat on a sea of worldly enjoyments. Eadmer describes the break-up of the family. Anselm’s father became hostile. Nothing Anselm could do would please him. Anselm decided to leave home, giving up his hopeofinheritingthefamilyestate,andforthreeyearshewandered in Burgundy.7 Probably he was doing what other young men of his generation did, and “sampling” the teaching on offer from various peripatetic masters in this generation before the first glimmerings ofwhatweretobecometheuniversitieswerevisible.Induecourse, Eadmerreports,hearrivedatthenewlyfoundedabbeyofBec,where Lanfranc(c.1005–89)wasfamouslyteachingattheinvitationofthe founder-abbotHerluin(d.1078),8whowashimselfnotaletteredman butaretiredsoldier. AtBecaninnovativekindofschoolhadbeensetupbyLanfranc. Pupilswereflockingtohimwhohadnoplanstobecomemonks,but wantedagoodeducation–itselfastrikingsignofthetimes.Lanfranc, like Anselm, was an educated and able Italian. Anselm found him CCaammbbrriiddggee CCoommppaanniioonnss OOnnlliinnee ©© CCaammbbrriiddggee UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrreessss,, 22000066 Anselm’slife,works,and immediateinfluence 9 lecturingonworksofclassicallogicandrhetoric,aswellasteaching the study of the Bible, and his own intellectual formation in these areaswascorrespondinglystrengthened. ThechroniclerOrdericVitalislaterdescribedthisschool,leaning heavily on the account in the Life of Eadmer. “A great foundation of the study of the liberal arts and the study of Scripture was laid atBecbyLanfrancanditwasmagnificentlyexpandedbyAnselm.” Anselm was apparently soon involved by Lanfranc in the teaching, forhemusthavebeenausefulacquisitiontothelittleschool.9 After he had been at Bec for a time, Anselm decided to become a monk himself. It struck him that he was leading a life of sim- plicity, hard work, dedication, and lack of sleep which would be very little different if he became a monk of Bec. There was some inwardwrestling,describedbyEadmer,whomusthaveheardofthese musings from Anselm’s own lips. To stay at Bec would mean being eclipsedasateacherbytheolderandmoreestablishedLanfranc.To go to Cluny, as was then fashionable, would mean abandoning his studies; in that way he could spare himself the risk of intellectual pridebysubmerginghimselfinritual.Thenagain,hecouldgosome- whereelse,andstandoutasalocalintellectualleader.Thenhecame tohimselfandrealizedthatifheseriouslywantedtobecomeamonk, heshouldnotbeconsideringwherethebestcareeradvantagemight lie.10Heaskedadvice.HewenttoLanfrancandsetouthisoptionsas hesawthem:tobecomeamonk;togointoahermitage;ortoreturn to his home, for by now his father was dead and his inheritance of the family estates had come to him. He had an idea of living there andhelpingthepoor.Hechosethe(stillflourishing)communityof Bec.11 Havingmadehisdecision,hecommittedhimselfcompletely.Here we depend on Eadmer’s praise of the wholeheartedness with which he put from him all worldly interests and set about mastering the Scriptures and practicing “speculation,” the word used at the time (probably because that was the way Boethius used it), to describe theologicalstudy.12 Eadmer puts Anselm’s theological acumen down to his spiritu- ality. The three years he spent in prayers and spiritual exercises whenhefirstbecameamonkgavehimapowerofseeingintodivine mysteries, he says. Indeed, by Eadmer’s account, he could even see throughsolidwalls.13 Hewasremorselessinhisspiritualexercises, CCaammbbrriiddggee CCoommppaanniioonnss OOnnlliinnee ©© CCaammbbrriiddggee UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrreessss,, 22000066 10 g. r. evans in fasting and vigils and prayer, and untiring in his encouragement of others. This bred resentment and a dislike of him in some quar- ters, but Eadmer says he won round the resentful by his peaceable behavior.14 With beginners in the monastic life, Anselm could be a hard taskmaster. The young monk Osbern became his special prote´ge´ and Anselm first treated him gently and then increasingly harshly in order to strip away his childishness and make him grow up in the faith. Osbern suddenly died, just as he reached his spiritual maturity,15 andAnselm’sgriefisnoticeableinhislettersintheyear afterOsbern’sdeath,ashewroteroundaskingforprayerstobesaid for his soul.16 This picture of a severe and demanding Anselm con- trastswiththequitedifferentpictureofagentleAnselmthatEadmer paints later in his Life. Anselm in conversation with an abbot was toldaboutthebadbehaviouroftheabbot’syoungmonks.Theabbot saidhebeatthemdayandnightandtheirbehaviourdidnotimprove at all. Anselm drew a comparison for him with the way a sapling wouldrespondif,afteritwasplanted,itwasenclosedsotightlyand remorselesslythatitcouldnotgrownormally.Naturallyboyswould grow up twisted if they were denied freedom to develop. The boys neededencouragementandgentlepersuasion.17 BynowAnselmhadbecomeprior,insuccessiontoLanfranc,who hadmovedtoCaenin1063.Hefoundhisdutiesburdensomeanda distractionanddisruptiveofhisformertranquillity.Anselmtended toreacttoeventsratherthantoseeksystematicallytocontrolthem. He was manifestly not naturally a good administrator. Letters to Lanfranc18 are revealing about these shortcomings, for example in theefficienthandlingofmoney.HeevenwenttotheArchbishopof Rouen to ask whether he might be allowed to return to his former simplelife.Hedidnotgethiswish.Hewastoldthatitwashisduty to continue with his pastoral burden and that if a higher office was offeredhimheoughttoacceptthattoo.19 When Lanfranc left, Anselm also took charge of the teaching at Bec.Hispupilscontinuedtobebothclericsandlaystudents,accord- ing to Orderic Vitalis. In fact, it is probable that with the departure of Lanfranc the school ceased to take external pupils, such as the sons of the local nobility, and became a true monastic school, in which Anselm was able to foster in a leisurely way over the long term the development of the minds and souls of young and more CCaammbbrriiddggee CCoommppaanniioonnss OOnnlliinnee ©© CCaammbbrriiddggee UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrreessss,, 22000066