HUGH
523
HUGH
time he held an erroneous view as to the reviviseence,
after a fall, of previously pardoned mortal sins (De
Sacr., Bk. II, P. XIV, c. viii).
As a Mystic. — Historians of philosophy are now coming to see that it betrays a lack of psychological imagination to be unable to figure the subjective co- existence of Aristotelian dialectics with mysticism of the Victorine or Bernartiine type — and even their compenetration. Speculative thought was not, and could not be, isolated from religious life lived with such intensity as it was in the Mitldle Ages, when that speculative thought was active everywhere, in every profession, in every degree of the social scale. — After all, did not the same mind give us the two " Summae" and the Office of the Blessed Sacrament? — Hugh of St. Victor was the leader of the great mystical move- ment of which the School of St. Victor became the centre, and he formulated, as it were, a code of the laws governing the soul's progress to union with God. The gist of his teaching is that mere knowledge is not an end in itself, it ought to be liut the stepping- stone to the mystical life — through thought, medita- tion, and contemplation; thought seeks God in the material world, meditation discovers Him within our- selves, contemplation knows Him supernaturally and intuitively. Such are the " three eyes" of the rational soul. Hugh's mystical teaching was amplified by Richard of St. Victor, whose proud disdain for philos- ophy has been wrongly attributed to Hugh.
Hugh's chief works are; —
(1) " DeSacramentis Christians Fidei" (c. 11.34), his masterpiece and most extensive work, a dogmatic synthesis similar to, but more perfect than, the " In- troductio ad Theologiam" of Abelard (c. 1118), which was only concerned with the knowledge of God and of the Trinity. It is of a more literary character: in it the first place belongs to the argument from author- ity, but the utilization of the dialectical method binds the discussion together. It is at once a summary and a corrected version of his earlier works. The work is divideil into two books comprising twelve and eigh- teen parts respectively each containing numerous chapters. The following analysis of its contents will convey some idea of its range: Book I: 1. The Crea- tion; 2. The end of man's creation; 3. The knowledge of the Triune God; 4. The will of God and its signs; 5. Angels; 6. Man before the Fall; 7. The Fall and its consequences; 8. The restoration of man and the use of sacraments; 9. The sacraments in general; 10. Faith; 11. The sacraments in particular and primar- ily those of the natural law; 12. Sacraments of the written law. Book II: 1. Incarnation of the Word; 2. Grace and the Church; 3. The orders of the ecclesi- astical hierarchy; 4. A mystical explanation of the sacred vestments; 5. Dedication of churches (in which the sacraments are conferred); 6. Baptism; 7. Con- firmation; 8. Holy Eucharist; 9. The lesser sacra- ments (sacramentals) ; 10. Simony; 11. Matrimony; 12. Vows; 13. Virtues and vices; 14. Confession and absolution; 15. Extreme unction; 16. The state of souls after death; 17. Christ's second coming and the resurrection of the dead; 18. The state of things to come. — It is the first complete theological work of the schools.
(2) "Eruditionis Didascaliae, libri septem" com- prises what we should now speak of as encyclopedics, methodology, introduction to Sacred Scripture, and an indication of how we may rise from things visible to a knowledge of the Trinity.
(3) Scriptural commentaries (important both for his theological and mystical doctrines): "Adnota- tiones Elucidatorire in Pentateuchon"; "In librum Judicum"; "In libros Regum" (notes on the literal meaning of the texts); "In Salomonis Ecclesiasten Homiliae xix" (practical rather than exegetical); " Adnotationes Elucidatorire in Threnos Jeremise; in Joelem prophetam" (working out the literal, alle-
gorical, and moral meanings); "Explanatio in Canti-
cum Beatae Maria;" (allegorical and tropological).
The " Qua?stiones ct Decisiones in Epistolas S. Pauli",
printed among his works in Migne, are certainly pos-
terior to Hugh.
(4) " Commentariorum in Hierarchiam Coelestem S. Dionysii Areopagit;=e secimdum interpretationem Joannis Scoti libri x."
(5) His chief mystical works are: "De Area Noe Morah et Mystica"; "De Vanitate Mundi"; "De Arrha Animje"; " De Contemplatione et eius specie- bus" (first published by Hauri-au as an appendix to his book in 1859).
(6) As regards the "SummaSententiarum", usually ascribed to Hugh of St. Victor, considcralile discussion has recently taken place. Haureau, Mignon, Gietl, Kilgenstein, Baltus, Ostler attribute it to Hugh. Denifle, arguing from the anonymity of the MSS., left the question open. But Portalie, basing his argu- ment upon important doctrinal differences, appears to have shown that it is not the work of Hugh, although it belongs to his school. The general line of his argument is that the "Summa Sententiarum" is certainly posterior to the "De Sacramentis", upon which it frequently draws; doctrines, methods, and formula' show evident progress in the "Summa". It would seem that it is absolutely impossible that Hugh should have written the "Summa" after the " De Sacramentis", for the " Summa" borrows from the Aljelardian School errors Hugh would not have taught, and even errors and formula' which he expressly attacked. De Wulf agrees with this, and Pourrat has brought additional evidence, liased upon an examina- tion of the sacramental teaching of tlie two works, in support of the same thesis. None of the writers cited above, as being in favour of Hugh's authorship, liave dealt with Portali(5's evidence.
The Ijest edition of the works of Hugh of St. Victor is that of the Canons of St. Victor, printed at Rouen in 1(348. It is not a critical edition, however, and genuine, spurious, and doubtful works are found side by side. It was republished in 1854, with slight modifications, by the Abb(5 Migne in P. L., CLXXV- CLXXVII, but it is neither complete nor critically satisfactory, and should be used in conjunction with J.-B. Haur^au's "Hugues de St-Victor et I'edition de ses oeuvres" (Paris, 1859) and the same writer's " Les CEuvres de Hugues de Saint-Victor: E.ssai Critique" (Paris, 1886), in which he supplements and corrects many of the conclusions of the earlier work. But Haureau's rationalistic bias renders his exposition of Hugh's doctrine unreliable, without careful checking. __Derlino, Disserlado ile Hunone a S. Victore (Hclinstadt, 1745): LlEBNER, Hufto von S. Victor und die theolog. Rirhtunoen s. Zeil (Leipzig, 1832); W'eis. Hugonis de S. Viclore Melhodns Mysticus (fetr.i-sburg, l.S:i9) ; Hugonin. Essai sur la fondation de I'Ecole de Snint-Victor in P. L., CLXXV; Hauricau, H-ugnes de Saint-Victor: Nouvel Examen de I't'difion de ses ceuvres (Paris, 1S59);Id., Les (Eitvres de Hugiiesde St-Victor: essai critique {Vnris, 1SS6); Hetwer. De Fidei et Scientice discrimine oc consortia juxta mcntem Hugonis a S. Victore. Comvientarius (Breslau, 187.5); Denifle, Arcfiivfiir Litcraturund Kircfiengeschichte des Mittelal- ters. I (ISS.'j), 402. 584 ; III (1SS7), 634-40; Gietl, Die Sentenzen Rolands (Freiburg im Br.. 1891): Mignon. Les origines de la .^cholastique et Hugues de Saint-Victor (Paris, 1S95); Schmidt, Hugo von St. Victor als Piidagog (Meissen. 189.3); Kilgenstein, Die Gotteslehre des Hugo von St. FjV/or (WOrzburg, 1897); Sum- marized by Baltds. Dieu d'avrcs Hugues de St-Victor in Rev. B<%!f<iidt7ie, XV (1898), 109-123; 200-214; Santini. t/f;o rfa .5. Vittore: Studio Filosofico (Alatri. 1S9S); Portalik in Diet, de theol. cath.. a. v. Abelard, I (Paris, 1903). 36 sq. (i. Fasc. was pub- lished in 1899); De Wulf. Histoire de la philosonhie medicvale (Louvain. 1905), 212-15; 228-30; Ostler. Die Psychologic dea Hugo von St. Viktor (1906); Pourrat. La thcologie sacramentaire (Paris, 1907); Bouuaert, Rev. d'Hisl. Eccl.. X (IflO'i*. 278 sq.
Edward Myers.
Hugh of Strasburg, theologian, flourished during the latter half of the thirteenth century. The dates of his birth and death are unknown. His prominence in the history of medieval theology is due to the fact that he is now considered to lie the author of the fa- mous "Compendium theologioe" or "Compendium
