Peter Aberlard (Draft)
Essay Preview: Peter Aberlard (Draft)
Report this essay
Peter Abelard was to twelfth-century dialectic what Barry Bonds is to the modern era of baseball: by far the most influential in the “field” of play but like Barry is accompanied by controversy or in Peters case, contradictions. They, like in Barrys case have never been enough to overshadow his achievements. Peter was all over the place in Sic et Non selection; from encouraging doubt which yields inquiry through which we perceive truth to us not being able to decipher the Holy Spirit inspired word because we unlike them lack the same guidance and even proved scribal errors in the gospels. None of these were more gratifying than the fact that later authors shouldnt try to fix apparent contradictions or misunderstandings in the Bible themselves but to present them unchanged.
As they say “If it is not broken, dont fix it”. In this case it seems broken and trying to fix it breaks it. This refers to scribes mentioned by Peter who sought to amend an apparent mistake when they ran into a never mentioned before prophet Asaph. He suggests ascertaining whether the texts quoted from the fathers may be the ones that they themselves had retracted and corrected or rather giving their personal opinions or those of others buy presenting it first before any assertions.
Along the same lines, he recommends that for the way not be blocked to leave personal opinions out of it altogether instead of questioning the integrity of the writing. Present it the way it is and let the excited minds of young readers maximize their inquiry into the truth and sharpen their minds in the process. In no other way would it fuel doubt, then inquiry and consequently the truth. Dont try to fix it because you think it is broken or you will break it some more. Point well taken.