Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T07:28:39.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The letters of the university of Oxford on withdrawal of obedience from pope Boniface IX

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Margaret Harvey
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this paper I shall discuss two letters apparently sent in 1399 by the University of Oxford to Richard II, in answer to the king’s request for advice on whether to withdraw obedience from pope Boniface IX in an endeavour to end the great schism. There has been a controversy about which letter represents the official view of the university, and this argument has largely arisen, I suspect, because hitherto one of the letters has been studied in its printed form which is incomplete and does not give a true idea of its arguments. I will also consider how these letters are to be seen in the context of the final stages of Richard II’s policy on the schism.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Church History , Volume 11: The Materials Sources and Methods of Ecclesiastical History , 1975 , pp. 187 - 198
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 I wish to thank professor H. S. Offler for his help in transcribing the Vatican manuscript referred to below and for reading and criticising this paper in draft. I also thank Dr V. I. J. Flint. I hope shortly to publish the Vatican text.

2 These events have been described in Valois, [N.], [La France et le Grand Schisme] III (Paris 1901) pp 1–187 Google Scholar; Perroy, [E.], [L’Angleterre et le Grand Schisme] (Paris 1933) pp 361-87Google Scholar; Palmer, [J.J.N.], [England, France and Christendom] (London 1972) pp 194-7, 218-22.Google Scholar

3 Ouy, [G.], [‘Gerson et L’Angleterre’], in Humanism in France at the end of the Middle Ages, ed Levi, A.H.T. (Manchester 1970) pp 56–79 Google Scholar, for the Oxford reply. I owe this reference to Dr J. Catto.

4 Ouy p 66 ‘. . . datus pastor cederet iuri suo nee esset alia via qualiter humana ratione comprehendi posset ad unitatem verissimilis; quis tunc ambigeret quin vera caritas pastorem in hoc casu scientem hoc aut sine dubitatione credentem ad cedendum efficaciter inclinaret?’

5 Ouy p 60 ‘... cessio coacta foret nostro iudicio via ad pacem difficillima, tum quia in papa iusto foret iniusta, tum quia non posset fieri verissimiliter nisi per brachium seculare, et forte non nisi per bella, vel saltem per substractionem obediencie; que quidem substractio a papa iusto reos scismatis argueret sub-strahentes.’

6 Perroy pp 414-15; Ehrle, F., ’Neue Materialien zur Geschichte Peters von Luna’, Archiv für Literatur-und Kirchen-Geschichte, 6 (Freiburg-im-Breisgau 1892) p 243 Google Scholar; de St Denys, Chronique du Religieux, ed Bellaguet, M.L., Collection de Documents inédits sur l’histoire de France, II (Paris 1839) p 447.Google Scholar

7 Valois pp 104-7.

8 Valois pp 183-4.

9 Perroy pp 383-4.

10 Palmer, and especially his article ‘England and the Great Western Schism’, EHR 83 (1968) pp 516-22CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Perroy pp 416-18.

12 Mansi 26, col 848.

13 Valois pp 148-87 for the third council. See also Kaminsky, [H.], ‘The politics [of France’s subtraction of obedience from Pope Benedict XIII, 27 July 1398,]’ Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 115, 5 (Philadelphia 1971) pp 366-97Google Scholar; Kaminsky, , ‘Cession, subtraction, [deposition: Simon de Cramaud’s formulation of the French solution to the Schism,]’ Studia Gratiana, 15 (Bologna 1972) pp 295–317 Google Scholar. I am most grateful to professor Kaminsky for supplying copies of these papers and for answering my questions.

14 Mansi 26 col 861.

15 Boulay, [C.E.] Du, [Historia Universitatis Parisiensis] (Paris 1668) IV pp 845-7Google Scholar.

16 Raynaldus, [O.], [Annales Ecclesiastici] (Lucca 1752) VIII pp 13–20 Google Scholar; Du Boulay pp 853-62.

17 Ullmann, [W.], [‘The University of Cambridge and the Great Schism’] JTS, ns 9 (1958) p 55 Google Scholar.

18 Ibid pp 68-75.

19 Rymer, T., Foedera (London 1709) VIII p 62 Google Scholar; C[alendar of]C[lose] R[olls, Richard II], VI (London 1927) p 354; BM MS Cotton Cleopatra E II, fol 236 (modern copy).

20 CCR pp 367-8, printed in full in Reports on the Dignity of a Peer, III (London 1826), Appendix to the first report pp 763-4; BM MS Cotton Cleopatra E II, fol 236v (modern copy). Cambridge was sent a reminder on 6 January, Ullmann P 56.

21 The names are John Trefnant, D.C.L., bishop of Hereford; John Trevaur, D.Cn and C.L., bishop of St Asaph; Henry Beaufort, bishop of Lincoln; Thomas Chillenden, D.Cn.L., prior of Christ Church, Canterbury; Thomas Bekenham, B.Th., prior of St Augustine’s Canterbury; William Welde, D.Cn.L., abbot of St Augustine’s, Canterbury; Geoffrey de Pykering, abbot of Byland; Philip Repingdon, D.Th., abbot of Leicester; John Borard, D.Th., prior of Christ Church, Hants; Thomas Neville, prior of Winchester; Thomas Montague, B.C.L., dean of Salisbury; John Shepey, D.C.L., dean of Lincoln; Ralph Tregisiow, D.C.L., dean of Exeter; John Shirborne, D.Th., chancellor of York; Robert Rygge, D.Th., archdeacon of Barnstaple, former chancellor of the University; John Huntman, D.Th., chancellor of Lincoln; John Play, MA, former fellow of New College, Oxford; John Balton, D.Th. of Balliol College; William Middleworth, former fellow of Merton and Queen’s Colleges; John Kynyngham, D.Th., prior provincial of the carmelites; William Siward, D.Th., former prior provincial of the dominicans; John Hynkley, D.Th., O.S.A.; John Shillyngford, D.C.L. who held various posts in ecclesiastical courts; John Barnet, D.C.L., Lic.Cn.L., official of Canterbury; John Elmer, D.C.L., official of Winchester and former warden of New College, Oxford; Richard Drayton, B.Cn.L., official of Bath and Wells; William Clynt, MA, fellow of Merton College; Michael Kympton, O.S.A., of Merton priory; and Nicholas Fakenham, D.Th., provincial minister of the franciscans. The careers of all those named can be traced from Emden, A.B., Biographical Register of Oxford Graduates to 1500, 3 vols (Oxford 1957-9)Google Scholar.

22 Vatican Archives Arm. LIV vol 25 fols 268-73v, for the letter. The whole collection is described Seidlmayer, M., ‘Die spanischen Libri de Schismate des Vatikanischen Archivs’, Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Kulturgeschichte Spaniens Series I, 8 (Münster 1940) pp 199–262 Google Scholar.

23 Raynaldus pp 35-7.

24 Macray, W.D., Catalogi Codicum Manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Bodleianae, Pars Nona, Codices a . . . Kenelm Digby (Oxford 1883) pp 200-1Google Scholar. The MS belonged to Digby’s tutor, Thomas Allen, who died in 1632.

25 The final item fols 62-6 is an incomplete disputation against withdrawal, addressed to a king. The first item fols 1-46 is a dialogue between Rex and Unitas. Rex consists of the French king’s letter on withdrawal, see note 16 above. The MS may be Flemish in origin. At the end of the Oxford letter fol 61v is written ‘god laet goet wesen’. But it must have been in England in the mid-fifteenth century, since there are scribbled references to cases in the English ecclesiastical courts on fly leaves, for example fol 67v to Matilda abbess of Sion, 1445.

26 Fol 47-61v.

27 From fol 53v extensive quotations from the edict of the French king. Fol 61 contains a reference to the promise of the Parisians to defend themselves.

28 Fol 47 ‘perlectis siquidem iuxta vim et formam vestri solempnis edicti duabus epistolis, altera inclitissimi regis francorum patris vestri, alia Parisiensis studii...’

29 Fol 53 ‘ostensa enim est eis in nostris epistolis prioribus veritatis via cum sua practica’.

30 Fol 59v.

31 Fol 48 has many examples (including that of king Uzzia, 2 Chron. 26, 19) of the dire results of kings usurping the role of priests.

32 Jacob, [E.F.], [Essays in the Conciliar Epoch] (3 ed Manchester 1963) p 64 Google Scholar.

33 Perroy pp 386-7 n 3.

34 Ullmann pp 61-2 n 1.

35 Du Boulay p 847 ‘cui si res exigat, suas rationes, colores atque motiva tempore congruo dabimus.’

36 Digby 188 fol 61 ‘istarum conclusionum contrarias murmurant et affirmunt ac se probaturos promittunt amici nostri parisienses doctores, qui si suis promissis immobiliter stare disposuerunt ... si saltem vestri regalis culminis nutus pre-cesserit, signabimus de nostris tironibus xii doctores electos in clericali militia sufficienter probatos qui contra quorumlibet adversariorum insultuum iacula iudicio contradicionis bello ubi et quando dixeritis clipeos defensionis apponent parati.’

37 Fol 268v.

38 Ouy p 58.

39 Raynaldus pp 35-6; fols 269-71.

40 Bliemetzrieder, F., Das Generalkonzil im grossen abendlandischen Schisma (Paderborn 1904) pp 138-9 n 3 Google Scholar; Fernandez, L. Suarez, Castilla, el Cisma y la Crisis Conciliar (Madrid 1960) p 216 Google Scholar, for a letter from Henry of Castille dated 10 September 1397, saying that Boniface offers a council.

41 Fol 271.

42 Fol 271r/v ‘nec alia in toto clero reperi poterit, nisi sit via ultronee cessionis practicanda tamen cum modo et formis competentibus; quam tamen, cum sit per utramque partem contendencium refutata, sub silentio pretermittimus’.

43 Raynaldus pp 36-7.

44 Fol 272. The parts in square brackets are my additions.

45 Fol 272.v

46 Ibid

47 Fol 273r/v; Raynaldus p 37.

48 Valois pp 163-4; Perroy p 385; Kaminsky articles cited above note 13. Evidence that Cramaud sent his treatise to England from the speech by P. Ravat, bishop of St Pons, at the third council of Paris, Mansi 26 col 886.

49 Perroy p 418.

50 Kaminsky, ‘The Politics’, p 383 and notes.

51 Balliol College, Oxford MS 165 B p 77. Quoted in part by Jacob p 69 n 3, but without realising that the work is by Cramaud. See now Mynors, R.A.B., Catalogue of the Manuscripts of Balliol College, Oxford (Oxford 1963) p 164 Google Scholar. Professor Kaminsky is about to produce an edition of this treatise. See mean-while his article ‘Cession, Subtraction’, esp pp 297 and 310.

52 Cramaud presents many arguments in favour of withdrawal which appear again in Digby, to be there refuted. Kaminsky, ‘Cession, Subtraction’, p 302 notes that the treatise became a kind of manual for both sides at the third council of Paris.

53 Suggestion by Kaminsky, ‘The Politics’, p 397.