FRANCISCAN SCHOOLS AT OXFORD.
Learning necessary to the friars.--The first readers to the
Franciscans at Oxford.--Nature of the office of lector; Grostete and
Adam Marsh.--The lector and his _socius_.--Later lectors were ordinary
Regent Masters.--Appointment to the lectureship.--Special regulations
concerning the lectors.--System of instruction recommended by
Grostete.--Lectures by friars.--Controversy with the University about
theological degrees in 1253.--Controversy between the University and
Dominicans, and its results.--Study of philosophy (Arts) before
theology insisted on by the University.--Roger Bacon on the necessity
of a preliminary training for friars.--Extortion of graces by external
influence: ‘wax-doctors.’--Career of a student Minorite.--On the
numbers of friars sent to Oxford.--Course of study before
‘opposition.’--‘Opposition’ and ‘Responsion.’--The degree of
B.D.--Exercises before inception.--The degree of D.D.: the
licence.--Vesperies.--Inception.--Questions disputed on these
occasions in the thirteenth century.--How far the statutable
requirements as to the period of study were a reality.--Expenses at
inception.--Necessary Regency.--Conditions on which dispensations were
granted.--Maintenance of Franciscan students at the University.--What
proportion took degrees.--Relative numbers of the various religious
Orders at Oxford.
St. Francis himself was always strongly opposed to the learning of his
age.
‘Tantum habet homo de scientia quantum operatur,’ he said, ‘et
religiosus tantum est bonus orator quantum operatur[187].’
But it was inevitable that the missionaries to the towns should be armed
with a knowledge of theology to enable them to cope with the numerous
heresies of the thirteenth century, and with a knowledge of physical
science to enable them to cope with the frequent pestilences caused by the
disregard of sanitary conditions[188]. In addition to this the influence
of many learned men in the Order could not but be felt; and the early
Franciscans in England were as zealous for learning as for good works.
‘They were so fervent,’ Eccleston tells us, ‘in hearing the divine law
and in scholastic exercises, that they hesitated not to go every day
to the schools of theology, however distant, barefoot in bitter cold
and deep mud[189].’
Agnellus, though in Wood’s words ‘he never smelt of an Academy or tasted
of humane learning[190],’ frankly recognised the necessity. The school
which he built at Oxford has already been noticed:
‘but afterwards,’ adds Bartholomew of Pisa[191], ‘he had reason for
regret, when he saw the friars bestowing their time on frivolities and
neglecting needful things; for one day when he wished to see what
proficiency they were making, he entered the schools whilst a
disputation was going on, and hearing them wrangling and questioning,
_Utrum sit Deus_, he cried: “Woe is me, woe is me! Simple brothers
enter Heaven, and learned brothers dispute whether there is a God at
all!” Then he sent 10_l._ sterling to the Court to buy the Decretals,
that the friars might study them and give over frivolities.’
Agnellus rendered the greatest service to his Order by persuading Robert
Grostete, the foremost scholar of his time, and the most influential man
at Oxford, to accept the post of lecturer to the friars[192]. The exact
date at which he undertook these duties is uncertain. He resigned the
archdeaconries of Northampton and Leicester in 1231, but he may have been
lecturer to the Franciscans some time before this; certainly he was
closely connected with their house at Oxford[193]. He was resident in the
University in 1234[194], and according to both Eccleston[195] and the
Lanercost Chronicle[196], he gave up his lectureship only to accept the
bishopric of Lincoln in 1235.
He was succeeded by Master Peter[197], who afterwards became a bishop in
Scotland. The third reader was Master Roger Wesham[198], who afterwards
(namely in or before 1239) was made Dean of Lincoln, and then (1245)
Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield. The fourth was Master Thomas Wallensis,
who,
‘after he had lectured laudably at the Friars’ in the same place, was
appointed (in 1247) to the bishopric of St. David’s in Wales[199].’
Thomas was made Archdeacon of Lincoln by Grostete in 1238, at which time
he was lecturing in Paris[200]; he was then young[201] and it is probable
that he was already archdeacon when he lectured to the friars at Oxford.
All these men were seculars, not friars: it was important at a time when,
as Roger Bacon says[202], ‘the Order of Minors was new and neglected by
the world,’ to secure the services of men of recognised position and
ability. Of Master Peter nothing further is known. The other two were
certainly close friends of Grostete[203]. Matthew Paris bears testimony to
the high character and learning, the kindness and tact, of Roger
Wesham[204]. Bacon ranks Thomas Wallensis among ‘the wise men of
old[205],’ who studied foreign languages and knew the value of philology;
and even Paris admits that this enemy of monks[206] was a man of lofty
purpose, and accepted the bishopric of St. David’s, though it was the
poorest see,
‘because it was in his native country, Wales, and he desired to
console his wretched fellow countrymen by his presence, advice, and
help[207].’
The divinity lecturer to the Franciscans or ‘Master of the Schools[208],’
as he was also called, had, as such, no status in the University. It is
even doubtful whether he counted as a ‘regent master,’ unless he also
lectured in the University Schools. Thus Adam Marsh protested against
being required by the Masters to subscribe a new statute on the ground
‘that he had three years ago retired from the office of teaching in
their University[209].’
But in a letter written shortly before this, and referring to the same
subjects, he mentions that he was ‘lecturing on Holy Scripture’ to the
friars[210]. The position of the _lector_ was, in fact, not unlike that of
a college tutor, except that he was always a man of proved ability and
long experience. To the friars he was far more than a theological
lecturer; he was a trusted friend, on whose advice and sympathy and help
they might reckon in all the conduct of life. Such at least was the
tradition established by Grostete and carried on by Adam Marsh[211]. Both
of them men versed in affairs of state, both men of acknowledged weight in
the counsels of the realm[212], and fearless opponents of illegality and
oppression, they not only trained the friars in theology and philosophy,
but taught them to comprehend the social needs of the age.
‘I return your lordship,’ writes Adam to Grostete[213], ‘the breviate
which you wrote, “_Of the rule of a kingdom and a tyranny_,” as you
sent it, sealed with the seal of the Earl of Leicester;’
and Simon de Montfort had frequent consultations with the friar about his
government of Gascony[214]. It was from their daily intercourse with men
like these that the Oxford Franciscans became, if not the leaders, the
spokesmen of the constitutional movement of the thirteenth century[215].
The corpse of Simon de Montfort was buried by the Grey Friars of Evesham,
and it is probably to the Franciscan school that the Latin poems in his
honour are to be ascribed[216], as well as the form of prayer addressed to
him:--
‘Sis pro nobis intercessor
Apud Deum, qui defensor
In terris extiteras[217].’
The Oxford Franciscans regarded him as a saint and a martyr, though he
died excommunicate, and testified to the miracles which he wrought[218].
The _lector_ had also his _socius_[219], a younger friar who acted as his
secretary, and whose time was almost entirely at his disposal. The
position of both _lector_ and _socius_ will be best illustrated by two
extracts from the letters of Adam Marsh.
In the first of these[220], addressed to the Provincial, he writes that he
has found Friar A. de Hereford, whom the Provincial had assigned to him as
his _socius_, affectionate and of good character, docile and well-read,
and far more capable than ‘some of those who are appointed by the counsel
of the discreet to instruct in Holy Scripture.’
‘I see,’ he continues, ‘that any friar who is associated with me to
help me in my various[221] and constant toil, will have to subordinate
his ecclesiastical labours and apply himself continually to supplying
my defects, and directing my goings, and supporting my burdens, though
this might sometimes produce in him virtue and industry and endurance.
Far be from me therefore such impious tyranny, as that I should be
willing to see the great gifts and spiritual progress in the said
friar stunted or retarded or thwarted by any consideration of private
convenience; especially as I can through the Saviour’s pity, be
provided, as I have heretofore been by your grace, with a competent
companion without injury to the general welfare. I have also reason to
think that Friar A., however great be his willingness and energy, will
be unable without bodily suffering and mental disquietude to continue
permanently with me, unless the stringent rules are relaxed in his
favour (_nisi quatenus urgentia mitigat obedientiae salutaris diurnos
aestus et vigilias nocturnas_).
‘... I ask therefore confidently, that you will, if it be not
displeasing to your holy paternity, send to me without delay Friar
Laurence de Sutthon, as my _socius_, if he consents, and that you will
send Friar A. to London to study, as he himself greatly desires, if it
be your good pleasure. And though Friar Laurence suffer some tolerable
defect, he is yet peculiarly fitted to help me, though vulgar
obstinacy may not think so.’
The other letter[222] is also directed to the Provincial.
‘I am not a little surprised,’ he writes, ‘that through some excessive
caution and severity, no provision has yet been made for the beloved
Friar W. de Maddele, who has up to now diligently borne the burden of
teaching (_eruditionis impendendae_), long since imposed on him. He is
thus compelled, not only to exhaust the vital spirit by excessive
studies, but also to wear out his bodily powers by writing every day
with his own hand, though his strength is not the strength of stone,
nor his flesh the flesh of brass. And while the other friars who have
been deputed to the office of lecturing, especially those to whom he
has succeeded, had great volumes and the assistance of _socii_
provided for them, he alone does not seem to be cared for; though I
hear that he has a pleasant faculty of lecturing, is acute in arguing,
and in writing and speaking useful and acceptable to both friars and
seculars. It will therefore be for you, if you please, without delay
to take thought for the peace of mind and provide for the advancement
(_provectui_) of those who study.’
The position of the _socius_ probably altered but little after this time.
That of the _lector_ underwent a change. The Franciscans assimilated their
system of teaching to the system in vogue in the University generally:
from the time of Adam Marsh the lecturers to the Franciscans were merely
ordinary Regent Masters in theology belonging to the Order. This will be
evident from a comparison of the dates at which the various lecturers,
whose names have been preserved, held the office: a sufficient number of
these dates has now been recovered, on the indisputable evidence of
contemporary records, to put the matter beyond all doubt[223].
The appointment to the lectureship was in the hands of the Provincial
Chapter[224]; practically the person recommended by the leading brethren
at Oxford was elected[225]. This is true of the later as well as of the
earlier lectors. No Minorite could proceed to any degree unless he were
first authorised to do so by papal ordinance or by the election of his
Order[226].
According to the Constitutions of Benedict XII, no Minorite might lecture
on the Sentences in a University (_i.e._ become B.D.),
‘unless he had first lectured on the four books of the Sentences with
the writings of the approved doctors in other _studia_ which are in
the same Order called _Generalia_,’
or in one of certain specified convents[227]. The friars of the English
province were specially favoured in respect to the degree of D.D. It was
decreed in the General Chapter at Rome in 1411
‘that no one shall be promoted to the degree of master, unless he
first go to Paris, according to the papal statutes and the general
institutes, and do all that he is bound to do, _Provincia Angliae
excepta_[228].’
However, the Franciscans at Oxford never obtained the right which was
enjoyed by the Dominicans at Paris, of being the sole judges of the
fitness of any friars of their own Order for academical degrees[229]. In
the case of Adam Marsh, the term of office was one year[230]; and this was
probably the general rule[231], though the readers might perhaps be
re-elected in the annual Provincial Chapter[232]. They often remained at
Oxford after the expiry of their year[233], and no doubt continued to
lecture, though they ceased to be _ex officio_ representatives of the
friars in their dealings with the University or other bodies.
Even in the earliest times it was found necessary to modify the stringency
of the rule in favour of the lecturers. Visiting and good works were
subordinated to their scholastic duties[234]. They were provided with more
ample accommodation than the other friars, and their privacy was at
certain times inviolable[235]. In the Constitutions of Benedict XII (1337)
regulations for their support are given with some detail[236]. Masters,
lectors, and bachelors in Universities were to be provided with the
necessaries of life by the convents of the places where they lectured. But
their other expenses, such as those connected with the necessary books,
were to be assessed by the General or Provincial Minister and to fall on
the convent from which they were sent; or, if the convent was unable to
‘procure’ the funds, these were to be supplied by the custody or province
in which the native convent of the lecturer was situated. In addition to
this, seculars and members of other religious Orders who attended the
lectures, would no doubt have to pay fees[237].
We may reasonably infer that Grostete practised in the Franciscan school
the system of instruction in theology which he subsequently recommended to
the University. When consulted by the latter, he answered that the Regent
Masters in theology ought to take the Old and New Testaments as the only
sure foundations of their teaching and make them the subject of all their
morning lectures, according to the custom of the Doctors of Paris[238].
Roger Bacon laments the exaggerated respect which was paid to the
‘Sentences’ in his day, and points out that
‘the learned men of old, some of whom we have seen, such as Robert
bishop of Lincoln and Friar Adam de Marisco, used only the text’ which
was ‘given to the world from the mouth of God and of the Saints[239].’
At the Friary, as in the rest of the University, much of the teaching in
the theological faculty was, even in the thirteenth century, done by
bachelors[240]; the admission to the degree of B.D. was accompanied by a
licence to ‘lecture on the book of the Sentences.’ Some of the lectures
would probably be for the brethren alone; others were open to the
University[241]. The latter would certainly be the case when a friar
delivered the lectures, which he was bound to give as ‘Necessary Regent,’
in his monastery. These courses seem however to have been sometimes
delivered in the University Schools in School Street[242].
The academic studies of the friars were confined to the faculty of
theology (in its wide mediaeval sense), and of canon law, the ‘handmaid’
of theology. The regulars were for the most part subject to the same
statutes as the secular students in these faculties, with some important
modifications.
The rules of the two Orders forbade their members to take a degree in
Arts[243]. The customs of the University, on the other hand, required
that the student of theology should have graduated in Arts[244]. The issue
was definitely raised in 1253[245], and we have from the pen of Adam Marsh
a detailed account of the struggle[246]. In February the Chancellor and
Masters of the University were formally petitioned to allow Friar Thomas
of York,
‘a man of high repute among the great and the many, on account of the
eminence of his character, ability, learning, and experience, to
ascend the chair of ordinary regent in Holy Scripture.’
The objection was then raised that he had not ruled in Arts. A committee
of seven was appointed by the Masters to prepare a report, and the
deliberations lasted, with a short interval, the whole of the next
fortnight (Feb. 22 to March 8). On Saturday, March 8, ‘the chancellor and
masters and some bachelors’ assembled to consider the report, which was to
the effect that Friar Thomas should incept this time, but that a statute
should be passed providing that for the future no one should incept in
theology unless he had previously ruled in Arts in some University, and
read one book of the Canon (of the Bible) or of the Sentences, and
publicly preached in the University; the Chancellor and Masters reserved
to themselves the right of granting dispensations, but provided against
the use of undue influence of powerful patrons in procuring such ‘graces’
by the clause:
‘but if any one shall attempt to extort a grace from the University
through the influence of any magnate, he shall _ipso facto_ be
expelled from the society of the Masters and deprived of the
privileges of the University[247].’
The report was at once accepted as the basis of a statute, to be signed by
‘the Chancellor and all the regent masters in theology, and Friar Hugh
of Mistretune, and the other regent masters in decrees and laws, and
the two rectors (proctors) for the artists, and Friar Adam called de
Marisco[248].’
Adam however refused to sign, and the meeting was prorogued till the next
day, the first Sunday in Lent, only to be postponed again till Monday,
when Adam, ‘in the presence of the chancellor, masters, and scholars,’
repeated his objections, adding others. He could not, he argued, agree to
a statute of which he disapproved, merely to gain his immediate point. The
promised ‘graces’ were fallacious,
‘since by the opposition of any one man such a grace could be long
delayed or altogether prevented; thus even the best men would be
rejected, and he who was approved by divinity would be reproved by
inhumanity.’
Further, it was unreasonable to require his signature, seeing that he was
now almost a stranger (_quasi foras factus_), having for three years
retired from the office of lecturing in their University. At length he
formally washed his hands of the whole matter, withdrawing even his
opposition,
‘since the measure, dangerous as it was and distasteful to him, did
not seem to him to be conceived in a spirit of wilful injustice,’
(_non videtur secundum planum sui praeferre iniquitatem_).
He then left the assembly, while the seven commissioners withdrew to
decide on the terms of the statute, which was merely a recapitulation of
the original report. The Chancellor at once sent Adam the final decision,
‘written with his own hand,’ which the latter duly forwarded to the
Provincial Minister. He left Oxford on Wednesday, the very day on which
the statute was passed, while Thomas of York celebrated his ‘vesperies’ on
Thursday and his inception on Friday, under the presidency of Friar Peter
de Manners. In view of the bitterness which marked both the contemporary
struggle between the University and Mendicants at Paris, and the disputes
between the University and Dominicans at Oxford sixty years later, it is
impossible not to be struck with the good feeling and moderation displayed
both by Adam and his opponents.
The controversy at the beginning of the fourteenth century was to a large
extent the sequel to the events we have just related[249]. The Dominicans
in 1311 appealed first to the King, and when this proved of no avail, to
the Pope, complaining that graces were frequently refused to fit
candidates, and demanding the repeal of the statute of 1253. The appeal
was read in the church of the Minorites,
‘in the presence of a vast multitude of people there assembled on the
occasion of a public sermon to the clerks,’
but the Franciscans took no active part in the matter, and the details of
the struggle belong to the history of the Black Friars. The other
Mendicant Orders however were no doubt involved in the odium which
attached to the conduct of the Dominicans, and from this time forth the
jealous feeling between the friars and the University never died out.
The issue of the controversy concerned the Franciscans no less than the
Preaching Friars. In 1314 the arbitrators to whom the matter had been
submitted published their award[250]. The statute of 1253 was upheld, but
the right of refusing to any one, who had not ruled in Arts, the grace to
incept in theology, was practically withdrawn from each individual member
of Congregation and vested in the Regent Masters of the Theological
Faculty.
‘On such a grace being asked, every Master shall be bound to swear on
the gospels ... that he will not refuse such grace out of malice,
hatred or rancour, but only for the common utility and honour of the
university. And if notwithstanding this oath such grace be refused by
any one, the reason of the refusal shall at once be set forth in the
same Congregation of Masters in the presence of the Chancellor and
proctors of the university and the Masters ruling in Theology, and
within ten days or less it shall be discussed for the decision of the
university whether that reason be sufficient or not. And if the reason
of the aforesaid refusal be sufficient in the judgment of the Masters
then ruling in Theology or of the majority of them, the refusal of the
grace shall hold good; but if the reason of the refusal be
insufficient in the judgment of the same persons, _eo ipso_ the grace
shall be granted[251].’
The Dominicans however hoped with the Pope’s assistance[252] to get more
favourable terms, and it was not till 1320 that they finally submitted to
the University[253]. The wording of the award was certainly vague and
required explanation. What, for instance, was the meaning of the
expression, ‘the common utility and honour of the university’? It is
probably to this period that the following decree is to be referred, and
it may be regarded as a gloss on the award of 1314[254]:--
‘_Item_, quod nullus de cetero, nisi prius in artibus rexerit, in
disputatione solemni alicujus doctoris in theologia, publice opponere
permittatur, nisi prius coram Cancellario et Procuratoribus
Universitatis juramentum praestiterit corporale, quod philosophiam per
octo annos, solis philosophicis principaliter intendendo, et postea
theologiam per sex annos completos ad minus audierit, seu partim
audierit et partim legerit, per spatium temporis supradicti: ad
fidelem vero hujus statuti conservationem, noverint doctores in
theologia Regentes se fore specialiter obligatos.’
The award of 1314 remained the permanent law of the University, and for
the next century the friars confined themselves to insisting on the due
execution of its provisions. In 1388, Richard II, hearing that,
‘contrary to the decision of the aforesaid declaration you maliciously
prevent the friars from taking degrees in theology,’
wrote two strongly worded letters to the Chancellor, Proctors, and Regent
Masters of the University, ordering them, ‘under pain of our heavy
displeasure,’ to observe the statute of 1314[255]. In 1421, in
consideration of remonstrances from the King and the Archbishop of
Canterbury, the University gave a solemn undertaking to carry out the same
statute, with some changes in detail[256]. So long however as the
condition, that the candidate must have ruled in Arts, was inserted in the
‘form of licensing to incept in theology[257],’ the religious felt
themselves to be at a disadvantage in comparison with the seculars, and
bitterly resented their inferiority. When therefore, in 1447, the
University was raising funds for the erection of the new schools, the
Mendicants seized the opportunity to secure the abolition of this clause,
promising in return that each friar should pay 40_s._ to the University at
the time of receiving the licence[258]. This may however have been only a
temporary arrangement: the Registers of Congregation supply little
evidence as to its having been carried out[259].
The object of these statutes was partly to prevent the regulars from
having an undue advantage over the seculars in the matter of theological
degrees, but they must have had the effect of ensuring to the friars some
preliminary training before the commencement of their theological
studies. Roger Bacon, as usual, has a decided opinion on the necessity of
such a training. Writing in 1271[260], he says:--
‘During the last forty years there have arisen some in the
Universities (_in studio_) who have made themselves doctors and
masters of theology and philosophy, though they have never learnt
anything of real value (_dignum_) and are neither willing nor able to
do so on account of their ‘_status_.’... They are boys inexperienced
in themselves, in the world, in the learned languages, Greek and
Hebrew; ... they are ignorant of all parts and sciences of mundane
philosophy, when they venture on the study of theology, which demands
all human wisdom.... They are the boys of the two student Orders, like
Albert and Thomas and others, who enter the Orders when they are
twenty years old or less.... Many thousands enter who cannot read the
Psalter or Donatus, and immediately after making their profession,
they are set to study theology.... And so it was right that they
should make no progress, especially when they did not procure
instruction for themselves in philosophy from others after they
entered the Order. And most of all because they have presumed in the
Orders to investigate philosophy by themselves without a teacher--so
that they have become masters in theology and philosophy before they
were disciples--therefore infinite error reigns among them.’
The Oxford friars however could not have acquired their great scholastic
reputation unless they had been better fitted than the seculars for the
study of theology; and Friar William Woodford had little difficulty in
pointing to many who, having entered the Order in their youth,
‘wrote many works of great wisdom, which remain for the advantage of
the Church[261].’
The clause of the statute of 1253 which prohibited the extortion of graces
or dispensations by means of the letters of influential persons was not
altogether effective. When, in 1358, the bitter feeling against the friars
found a spokesman in Richard Fitzralph and again burst forth into open
hostility, the clause was re-enacted in a more stringent form[262]. Any
one using such letters was declared for ever incapable of holding or
obtaining any degree at Oxford, and the University determined to hold up
these ‘wax-doctors’ to obloquy.
‘These,’ begins a proclamation of the same year[263], ‘are the names
of the wax-doctors, as they are called who seek to extort graces from
the University by means of letters of lords sealed with wax, or
because they run from hard study as wax runs from the face of fire. Be
it known that such wax-doctors are always of the Mendicant Orders, the
cause whereof we have found[264]; for by apples and drink, as the
people fables, they draw boys to their religion, and do not instruct
them after their profession, as their age demands, but let them wander
about begging, and waste the time when they could learn, in currying
favour with lords and ladies.... These are their names: Friar Richard
Lymynster incepted in theology by means of the prince’s letters, and
his grace contained the condition that he should incept and not
lecture, but that Friar John Nutone his predecessor should continue
lecturing[265]: and Friar Giuliortus de Limosano of the Order of
Minors, who asserted that he was secretary of the King of Sicily,
extorted from the University, or rather from the theological faculty,
by letters of the King, grace to oppose.’
These instances hardly seem to justify the violent language of the
proclamation, and it is uncertain to what extent the Oxford Minorites were
guilty of the practice here denounced. Wiclif repeats the charge against
the Mendicants generally:--
‘A what cursedness is this, to a dead man, as to the world, and pride
and vanitie thereof, to get him a cap of masterdom by praier of
Lords[266]!’
It remains for us to give an account of the academic, or rather scholastic
career of a Friar Minor at Oxford. As many of the friars entered the Order
in tender years, there is no doubt that boys’ schools formed part of many
of the friaries[267]. There is no evidence of such a school at Oxford, but
at Paris one existed where the student friars received a preliminary
education[268]. It is probable that the names of friars who showed ability
were sent up by the various convents to the Provincial Chapter and that a
certain number were elected by the ‘discreet men’ there assembled to go to
the University[269]. There is no evidence of any definite rule fixing the
number or proportion of friars who might be sent from each convent,
custody, or province, to Oxford[270]. The average number of friars living
in the convent at Oxford at any time during the last quarter of the
thirteenth and the first half of the fourteenth century was probably
between seventy and eighty[271].
A friar usually completed his eight years’ study of Arts, and often began
his course of theology[272], at his native convent. On coming up to Oxford
he at once entered on or continued his theological studies. A secular
student of Divinity during his first three years attended ‘cursory’
lectures on the Bible and was admitted to oppose after the end of the
fourth year[273]. In the friaries the course of study would in the main
correspond with that adopted by the University. After six years[274]
(instead of four) spent chiefly in the study of the Bible, a friar was
presented by his teacher, a Regent Master of the same Order[275], to the
Chancellor and Proctors; special enquiry was then made as to his knowledge
of the liberal arts, his age, morals, and stature; and if he satisfied the
University officers on these points, he was admitted to ‘oppose in
theology[276].’ Two more years elapsed before he could become a
‘respondent[277].’ Opposition or opponency and responsion were the two
sides of a disputation: some question in theology was proposed, probably
by the Master of the Schools; the opponent took one side (affirmative or
negative) and _put_ his case; the respondent then had to take the other
side. The difficulty of the respondent’s task was probably augmented by
his having to answer the arguments of more than one opponent[278]. These
regulations however were apparently superseded in 1358, when it was
enacted that no religious who had not ruled in Arts should presume to read
the Sentences until he had opposed duly and publicly a whole year in the
ordinary disputations of the Masters, no other person of the same Order
opposing at the same time[279]. This appears to have been the theory, and
to some extent the practice, during the times about which we have any
detailed information--i.e. the period covered by the early Registers. In
none of the supplications and graces of the Minorites is there mention of
the lapse of two years or anything approaching it between opponency and
responsion; the latter exercise indeed is usually coupled with opponency,
and treated as a very secondary affair[280]. A few instances will be
sufficient as illustrations. In 1515 a grace was granted to Friar W.
German, scholar of theology, with the stipulation that half a year should
elapse between his opposition and responsion; the condition was
subsequently withdrawn at German’s request[281]. In 1457, Friar Gonsalvo
of Portugal supplicated that he might count two terms of opponency as a
year[282]; Richard Ednam in 1455 was allowed to count eight oppositions
_pro completa forma oppositionis_[283]. Friar John Smith was admitted B.D.
six months after he was admitted to oppose[284]. The opponent had to
dispute in each of the Schools of the Masters in theology[285]; towards
the end of our period, oppositions were held in the new Schools of
theology[286].
After nine years spent in theological study, the friar might be admitted
to read the _Sentences_ of Peter Lombard publicly in the Schools[287],
that is, to take the degree of B.D. On the presentation of the candidate
to the Chancellor and Proctors, one at least of the Regents in theology
must swear that he _knew_ him to be a fit person in morals and learning,
the other Regents, that they _believed_ him to be such[288]. Within a year
from this time[289], the new Bachelor had to begin his lectures on the
_Sentences_, which he continued for a year (three terms), reading the text
on most of the ‘legible’ days of each term, with questions or arguments
pertinent to the matter, giving the accepted interpretation. He was not to
raise doubtful points or attack the conclusions of another, more than once
a term, except at the first and last lectures on each book of the
_Sentences_[290]. In the first year also, he had to preach an examinatory
sermon, which before 1303 was usually held at the Black or Grey Friars,
after that date at St. Mary’s[291]; another Latin sermon, ‘_qui non sit
examinatorius_’ at St. Mary’s[292]; and a third, before his inception, in
the Dominican church, according to the statute of 1314[293]. In the next
two years he had to continue his studies, and perhaps lecture on a book of
the canon of the Bible[294]: the lecturing in this case was apparently to
be done _biblice_; i.e. without commenting or discussing questions, except
only on the text (_quaestiones ... literales_)[295]. Further, after the
lapse of a year from the conclusion of his lectures on the Sentences, he
had to respond to eight Regents in theology separately (or to all if there
were less than eight); all or most of these responsions were to be
‘ordinary,’ or at least ‘concursive’ (_concursivae_), and responsions at
vesperies and inceptions were included in the eight[296]. Whether the rest
of these responsions took place at the terminal disputations in the
Theology School is not quite clear; but a later statute (1583) provides
that none of these terminal disputations shall count to any one ‘_pro
forma_[297].’ The responsions were latterly held in the new schools:
before these were built, in the schools of the various Masters. The
Bachelor had then completed the studies necessary for the degree of S.T.P.
or D.D.
These exercises seem usually to have been insisted on, more or less fully,
even in the century before the Reformation. Friar John Sunday in 1454,
having finished his lectures on the Sentences, supplicated for leave to
incept after responding to each of the doctors and completing his course
on the Bible: the grace was conceded on condition that he should respond
and oppose eight times ‘_pro forma_,’ and respond twice ‘_preter
formam_[298].’ Friar Thomas Anyden, S.T.B., supplicated (1507) that three
responsions in the new schools with an examinatory sermon and
‘_introitus_’ of the Bible should suffice that he should be admitted to
incept[299]. It was rarely that three years intervened before the
admission to read the Sentences and inception[300]. Thus Friar Gilbert
Saunders was admitted to oppose in Nov. 1511, and incepted in July
1513[301]. Friar John Smyth was admitted B.D. in Dec. 1512, and D.D. in
July 1513[302]. Another of the same name however was allowed to incept in
1507 if he had spent four years in the study of theology after taking the
bachelor’s degree[303].
We now come to the exercises and ceremonies connected with inception.
First the grace had to be asked of Congregation; there was no fixed time
for doing this[304]. Secondly came the ‘deponing,’ which was done by all
the regent masters in the faculty present; all of them had to swear that
they _knew_ the candidate to be a fit person; he must be of good life and
honest conversation and not deformed in body (_corpore vitiati_)[305]. He
then received in the ordinary form the Chancellor’s licence to incept,
after swearing to observe the statutes of the University and to incept
within a year of his admission[306].
On the day preceding the day fixed for his ‘vesperies,’ the licentiate
sent to each Master of Theology and requested him to attend the latter
ceremony[307]. Theological vesperies were in the thirteenth century held
in the various schools; a Franciscan celebrated his vesperies in the
school or church of the convent under the presidency of his own
master[308]. At the beginning of the fourteenth century, a statute was
passed enacting that every inceptor in theology should celebrate his
vesperies in St. Mary’s Church[309]. It does not seem that the masters in
the faculty were bound to attend[310], but the prospect of an important or
exciting discussion often attracted a large audience[311]. The exercises
at vesperies consisted of disputations on theological questions proposed
probably by the candidate[312], and announced to Congregation. All the
masters present both at vesperies and at the Act had the right to bring
forward their arguments in turn[313]. Thus Friar Hugh of Hertepol (c.
1280-1290) disputed ‘in the vesperies before the inception of Friar John
de Persole at Oxford[314].’ About the same time ‘Sneyt (debated) a
question in the vesperies of Robert de Bromyard; Thomas of Malmesbury,
preacher, responded[315].’ The proceedings were terminated by a speech
delivered by the presiding master in praise of the inceptor[316]. Grostete
is said to have presided and given the oration at the vesperies of Adam
Marsh[317].
Inception followed the next day. Even this ceremony in the thirteenth
century took place sometimes in the churches of the friars[318]; but at
the beginning of the fourteenth century, it was certainly the custom to
hold the Act in St. Mary’s[319]. The inceptor was admitted into the gild
of Masters by one of the Masters (not the Chancellor), who was called the
Father[320]. In the case of a Franciscan, the Father would usually, though
not always, be a doctor of the same Order[321]. Those about to incept
first read their lectures, then opened a discussion on certain
questions[322]. In later times the exercises consisted of the discussion
by all the inceptors, as opponents, of three questions proposed by the
respondent and sanctioned by Congregation; the respondent, while
statutably a D.D., was usually some M.A. or B.D. who was allowed to count
this responsion _pro forma_[323]. In the more vigorous days of
scholasticism, it is probable that the disputation was more of a
reality--that the inceptor (who took the part of opponent) chose his own
subjects[324] and was answered by a rival among the doctors[325].
Many of the questions discussed at vesperies, inceptions, and other
disputations at Oxford at the end of the thirteenth century--probably in
the convent of the Minorites--are preserved in a manuscript at
Assisi[326]. The question on which Friar Hugh of Hertepol disputed at the
vesperies of Friar John de Persole was: _An Christus in primo instanti
potuit mereri perfectione_. Other questions of the same Friar Hugh were:
_An deus eadem ratione formali videatur trinus et unus_, _An incarnacio
sit possibilis_. The following are also among the questions in the same
volume: _Utrum deus sit infinite potencie_, _Utrum virgo concepit sine
semine_, _An intellectus sit forma corporis_, _An deus sit in omnibus
rebus_, _An omnes beati equaliter participant beatitudine_, _An ratio
ymaginis est in actuali visione dei_.
We may next enquire how far the statutable requirements as to the period
of study were carried out: the only evidence obtainable is from the
registers, which begin about 1450. The statutes, as we have seen, required
that a religious should have studied Arts (i.e. philosophy) and Theology
for fourteen years before opponency. The periods mentioned in the
supplications vary from sixteen to eight years, the most usual number of
years being twelve. Before inception, six more years of study were
demanded, i.e. twenty in all. The period in the supplications varies from
fourteen to twenty years; the usual number is eighteen. There is however
reason to believe that these figures are not very exact. We have no means
of checking them with regard to opponency, and the University was probably
in the same position. But it frequently happened, that a friar, who had
been admitted to oppose on the ground of having studied ‘logic, philosophy
and theology’ for twelve years, supplicated two years later or less for
grace to incept on the plea that he had studied the same subjects for
eighteen years[327].
The expenses at inception were very heavy. The _religiosi_ wore their
usual habit[328], and Mendicants were exempted from the payment of
‘commons’ to the University[329]. Further, when several inmates of the
same convent incepted on the same day, the charges (fees to the bedells
and others?) were the same as for one inceptor[330]. But these details did
not touch the largest expenses. According to ancient custom, every
inceptor on the day of his inception feasted the Regent Masters
(apparently of all faculties)[331], and Wiclif inveighs against the
Mendicant Doctors for their
‘great gifts and making of huge feasts of a hundred and many hundred
pounds[332].’
Friar William Woodford, Wiclif’s contemporary, started from London to take
his D.D. with £40 in his purse[333].
Attempts were made to curtail the expenses of the friars. In his
constitutions for the reformation of the Franciscan Order in 1336, Pope
Benedict XII decreed[334], that
‘at inceptions[335] of Masters of the Order in theology, or of
bachelors beginning the Sentences, they shall not spend in food and
drink, except once only, more than would suffice for the moderate
refection of the convent of the place where such inceptions take
place. Other bachelors, lecturers or other students, both at Paris and
at other _studia generalia_ and _studia particularia_, shall not spend
anything at their own inception or scholastic act or at the inception
or act of others.’
It became usual, both among religious and seculars, to commute the
expenses of the feast for a fixed money payment to the University.
According to the scale fixed by statute in 1478[336], seculars who were
able to spend at the University more than £40 and less than £100 (a year),
paid twenty marks in lieu of the feast; those able to spend £100 or more,
paid £20. A monk’s composition was assessed at twenty marks; a friar’s at
ten marks or £6 13_s._ 4_d._ (equivalent to about £80 of present money).
The sums actually paid by the Franciscans varied considerably. Sometimes
the statutable amount was paid[337]. Friar John Whytwell (1449/50) paid
£10[338]. Friar Richard Ednam (1463) was required to give £15, as well as
a _liberata_ to the Regents _ex sumptu proprio_[339]. More often
(especially in the sixteenth century) a reduction of the sum was granted
by the University, the concession being usually accompanied by the
condition that the friar should say masses _pro bono statu
Regentium_[340]. Friar Thomas Anneday was allowed to pay seven marks,
‘because he is poor and has few friends[341].’ Others obtained a reduction
of their composition by one half[342]; or the whole sum might be remitted
under certain conditions, as in the case of Friar Nicholas de Burgo[343].
Sometimes Congregation refused to allow the full reduction asked for[344].
It was further customary for inceptors to provide robes for masters and
others attending their inception. Perhaps a trace of this custom may be
seen in the grace to Friar Gonsalvo of Portugal, who at his inception was
to
‘give a livery, i.e. _cultellos_, according to the ancient practice,
to all the Regents[345].’
During the period of necessary regency, which followed inception, a
secular had the right to attend all meetings of Congregation, and was
bound to deliver ‘ordinary’ lectures publicly in the schools for the
remainder of the year in which he incepted and the whole of the following
year[346]. A statute of 1478 states the custom as enforced in the case of
the Mendicants[347]:--
‘Every one of them so incepting shall be bound to necessary regency
for twenty-four months to be reckoned continuously from the day of his
inception, including vacations, or he shall be regent and pay to the
University according to the ancient customs; and although it happen
that some other of the same Order incept within the term of the said
months, he shall yet be bound to observe the foresaid form of regency,
so that however only one of them come to the house of Congregation,
according to the custom hitherto in use; proviso, that none of them
shall omit to lecture (_expendet_) more than thirty days in a year by
virtue of any grace whether general or special.’
Perhaps the exclusion of the friars, except one of each Order, from the
house of Congregation and consequently from the government of the
University, dates from the middle of the fourteenth century[348]. In 1454
Friar John David, S.T.P., supplicated for leave
‘to resume his ordinary lectures and exercise the acts of regent
excepting the entry to the house of Congregation[349].’
Dispensations from necessary regency were often obtained. In 1452 Friar
Anthony de Vallibus, D.D., asked leave to absent himself from all
scholastic acts for a fortnight in order to visit his friends who were
sick[350]. Friar William Walle was dispensed from fifteen days of his
regency in 1518[351]; Friar John Brown from his regency during Lent in
1514[352]. Gilbert Sander and Walter Goodfeld were released from the whole
of their necessary regency[353]. John Smyth obtained a similar grace as
being ‘warden of a convent and consequently very busy[354].’ Dispensations
from the sermon which was to be preached in St. Mary’s within a year of
inception were also very frequent[355].
These and other graces were usually granted subject to certain
conditions. The recipient was often to say masses ‘for the pestilence’ or
‘for the welfare of the Regents’[356]: or he had to lecture gratuitously
on some specified book[357] or preach a sermon[358]; or again the payment
of a sum of money was imposed as a condition[359]. Thus in 1515 Friar John
Flavyngur was allowed to give extraordinary lectures on a book of the
Decretals,
‘on condition that he would pay 6_s._ 8_d._ to the University on the
day of his admission and would read two books of the Decretals[360].’
Friar Thomas Frances received permission in 1521 to incept
‘on condition that he would pay 40_d._ within a month for the repair
of the staff of the junior bedell of arts and would preach a sermon at
St. Paul’s within two years and an examinatory sermon before his
degree[361].’
Franciscan students were maintained at the Universities by a system of
exhibitions. These were provided sometimes by private benefactors[362],
usually by the native convent of the student out of the ‘common alms,’
with the occasional assistance of other convents[363]. From the few traces
which remain of the custom we may infer that the exhibition was generally
reckoned at £5 a year, and that this sum covered the ordinary expenses of
living[364]. Masters, lecturers and bachelors, as already stated, were
supported by the convent in which they lectured[365]: but their allowance
was probably not much larger than that of the ordinary student friars.
Nicholas Hereford, preaching at Oxford in 1382[366], asserted that those
of the Mendicants who had graduated as masters or bachelors, in addition
to the ample allowance which they got from their community, begged for
themselves, saying, ‘I am a bachelor (or master) and require more than
others, because I ought to be able to live up to my position.’ (_Quia
oportet me habere ad expendendum secundum statum meum._)
It is impossible to say what proportion of the Franciscans at Oxford
proceeded to a degree. In 1300 we have the names of twenty-two members of
the convent: of these, ten at least were then, or became afterwards,
Doctors of Divinity[367]. But the proportion of graduates to non-graduates
and B.D.’s in the whole convent cannot have been nearly so large. The
following statistics are derived from the University Registers[368]. From
1449 to 1463, five Franciscans obtained or supplicated for the doctor’s
degree; five others for that of bachelor only. From 1505 to 1538 (i.e.
about thirty-three years, as some pages of the Registers are missing),
twenty-five Franciscans incepted or supplicated for the degree of D.D.;
twenty-six others obtained or supplicated for that of B.D. (one of them
also for B.Can.L.): three more were admitted to oppose: one more
supplicated for B.Can.L. The proportion of D.D.’s to B.D.’s would
generally be larger than this: from 1532 to the dissolution in 1538
fourteen obtained, or supplicated for, the degree of bachelor, two only
became D.D.’s: we may reasonably suppose that some of the fifteen
bachelors would have proceeded to the doctor’s degree had not the
dissolution intervened.
The following figures will show the relative numbers of the various
religious houses in Oxford[369]. The Registers from 1449 to 1463 contain
the names of 10 Franciscans, 13 Dominicans, 12 Carmelites, 9 Austin
Friars, 44 Benedictines, and 8 Cistercians: from 1505 to 1538, of 57
Franciscans, 40[370] Dominicans, 24 Carmelites, 23 Austins, 169
Benedictines, and 44 Cistercians.