The Joys of Studying Medieval Philosophy

I have just finished reading through Fr. Frederick Copleston's massive "History of Philosophy" series through the 'late medieval' section. I still have many more volumes to go before finishing the set, but am going to take a detour to read some other works in medieval philosophy that I have laying around. By the way, if you are looking for the best "History of Philosophy" series to read get Copleston. Whatever you do don't waste your time reading Bertrand Russell's. While he is much more entertaining to read, Copleston goes into far greater detail. This is to be expected as Copleston was a philosopher while Russell was just a mathematician. 

Anyway, the goal of reading his series from the beginning and into the Medieval era was to grasp St. Thomas better. While it was beneficial in that respect, I have to admit that in the end I have found Ockham to be the far most interesting reading of the whole series thus far. While I will have to do more reading on him, it seems based on what I have read thus far that Ockham and the "Ockhamist" or "Nominalist" school was really the unintentional fountainhead of skepticism. Over and over again Ockham maintained that very few Christian dogmas and doctrines could be philosophically proven. Yet he maintained that they were to be believed on the basis of faith, or Church teaching. Granted other Medieval philosophers thought that way about certain doctrines (e.g. St. Thomas with the doctrine of creation), but Ockham seemed to think that about virtually every category of Christian belief. Thus he ended up creating a massive dichotomy between theology and philosophy. Centuries later that was to have disastrous results.