R. W. Southern (1) (1912–2001)

If Anselm is remembered today, it is usually for one of two of his teachings. One is the so-called ontological argument for the existence of God: God is that object of thought, greater than which cannot be conceived. An object of thought that has real existence is greater than one that does not, therefore . . . . Well, you see where this one is going. The other is his argument for the necessity of the incarnation, which is basically that sin requires an expiation. The collective sin of show more humanity throughout history is so great that only a sacrifice of infinitely great value could atone for it, therefore . . . . This is known as the satisfaction theory of atonement.
I’ve rendered these arguments in the form in which they are usually cited today, often in a condescending tone of voice, dripping with pity for this old archbishop’s naive medieval mind.
It was then a surprise to read this book, ostensibly a biography, but also a learned discussion of the thought of this philosopher and theologian, and find not only that Anselm's reasoning was more sophisticated than the form in which it is now known, but also that he anticipated many of the objections to his positions, and gave well-reasoned answers to them. With regard to the ontological argument, Southern points out: “It is a simplification to say that [it] aimed at proving the existence of God. What he sought to prove is that justice, goodness, and truth are necessarily united in a single Being, who by definition is God. And since justice, goodness, and truth exist, God cannot not exist” (p. 117)
The book is very much a “life and times”, filling in the background modern readers need to understand both Anselm’s actions and thought. He is repeatedly compared and contrasted with his mentor and predecessor, Lanfranc. His mysticism, his assiduous promotion of education and monastic life are explored, as well as his reflection on the nature of friendship, something he not only thought about, but practiced to an avid degree.
Why should we be interested in a monk who has been dead for 900 years? As Southern points out: “It can scarcely be too strongly emphasized that the span of Anselm’s life covered one of the most momentous periods of change in European history, comparable to the centuries of the Reformation or the Industrial Revolution. It is only against this background that his own balancing of the old and new, his mixture of political conservatism and intellectual and spiritual innovation can be justly measured” (pp. 3–4). The author goes so far as to place Anselm together with Gregory VII and William the Conqueror as the three greatest Europeans of the period. The achievement of this scholarly yet readable study is that this reader came away convinced of the justice of this daring claim.
Usually when I rate a book with five stars, I mean it to indicate that anyone interested in books should read it. That may be going a bit far for a book that might appeal to a limited range of readers, but it is so good that I find it impossible to award fewer than five stars. show less

After this brief appearance he vanished from history, and the whole incident might be dismissed as one of those inexplicable approaches of worlds moving in different orbits and disturbing for a moment the even tenor tenor of their course, were it not for what followed.

My reading progression was routinely distracted last week. This is customary, hardly an aberration. A return to Chinese literature was a possibility. The killings at Charlie Hebdo changed that. I really appreciate Dr. show more Southern's work. I'm sure there have been successive waves of disputation and engagement since its publication. This remains a brilliant portrait of an age. The 11th and 12th Centuries were brazen efforts at stability. Augustine, Anselm and Boethius appear to be the heroes in this text. I also appreciated Southern's characterization of the opposition between Byzantines and the Latin West: the obscure rituals of the former appearing to the latter like a visit to the Kremlin. There is a subsequent explanation of the Fourth Crusade which appears to be an attempted justification of the sacking of Constantinople. That aside this is a wonderful text. show less

R.W. Southern was a doyen of medieval history, and as such his Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages remains a good introduction to the development of ecclesiastical institutions in Western Europe. Southern writes well, never talks down to the reader, and he had a great knack for summing up a movement or an order in a deceptively simple yet revealing sentence or two. A vast reading in chronicles and cartularies is displayed in the wide range of (sometimes obscure) anecdotes which show more he used to illustrate his work. Of course, this is still a book conceived and largely written in the 1960s, and its ages shows in a number of aspects—women are shunted off to a small section near the end, there is talk of the end of the early medieval golden age for women religious, etc. Many of his statements about women's religion, and indeed how Southern approaches the church-as-institution have been challenged, if not overturned, by more recent scholarship. Recommended, but with reservations. show less

In the late fourteenth century religious men had some shattering paradoxes and failures before their eyes. The Benedcitines had retreated from the world, and had become great centres of government and institutions of social cohesion. The Cistercians had gone into the wilderness, and had become the greatest organizers of economic forces before the Fuggers and Medicis. The Franciscans had dedicated their lives to poverty, and were comfortably installed in every large town in Europe. In all show more this, effective religion(so it seemed) was lost in superficiality.

Dr. Southern's work affected me, it spawned an almost Pauline conversion. No, I haven't embraced the faith, but I felt my thoughts change. A shift was endeavored. Covering a thousand years in a mere 360 pages remains daunting if not impossible. That said, I tended to agree with the learned medievalist when he opines the significance of the church at such a monumental time in European history. What would've been the result if the church had failed? What other institutions could've kept the wolves of the time from the everyman's door?

The book begins with the differences between the Rome and Constantinople and all their doctrinal baggage. He then proceed to traverse the history of the papacy and follows with other offices of the church and concludes with a history of the myriad Orders and their consequent effect on the development of the West. The book is rife with anecdotes and more than a few charts and graphs. It also succeeded in altering the opinion of this crusty agnostic. show less