And in the dawn of modern thought, when the rising freedom of the intellect was an intoxication, he wrote sound and noble words:
“To know and to think, to see the truth with the eye of the mind, is always a joy. The older a man grows, the greater is the pleasure that this affords him. ... As love is the life of the heart, so is the endeavor after knowledge and truth the life of the mind. Amid the movements of time, the daily labor, perplexities, and contradictions of life, we should lift our gaze fearlessly to the clear vault of heaven, and seek ever to obtain a firmer grasp of ... the origin of all goodness and beauty, the capacities of our own hearts and minds, the intellectual fruits of mankind throughout the centuries, and the wonderful works of Nature around us; but remembering always that in humility alone lies true greatness, and that knowledge and wisdom are profitable only in so far as our lives are governed by them.”
I find the last few sentences a good measuring stick for the plank in my eye. The bastard won’t seem to come out.
De pace fidei is a medieval study in comparative religion. It outlines a strategy for establishing peace among religions by taking each of them seriously while arguing for the supremacy of Christianity. To that end, it streamlines difficult Christian doctrines such as Trinity, incarnation, justification by faith and transubstantiation, reduces them to their philosophical nuts and bolts to make them easy for anyone to accept and does a pretty darn good job of it, too. What I find more problematic is the recurring idea that "prior to all plurality there is oneness", which you either believe or don't without there ever being a compelling reason for you to decide one way or the other.