My paper investigates the writings concerning Jews by three 14th-century theologians of different regional and educational backgrounds. I argue that the clear and sometimes substantial variation among these theologians on issues concerning Jews and Judaism can partially be explained by the differences in the social, cultural, and economic conditions in which these theologians studied and wrote; especially significant was the type and context of the contact, or lack thereof, these theologians may have had with Jewish communities before and during the formulation of their doctrines. I will discuss the teachings of the French Franciscan Peter Auriol (d. 1322), the English Dominican Robert Holcot (d. 1349), and the German Cistercian James of Eltville (d. 1392). In treating these theologians’ views I focus primarily upon the discussions found in each theologian’s Sentences commentaries on the validity of the forcible baptism of Jewish children.
This paper examines a curious text found in a collection of sermons by the Dominican John of Naples (d. ca. 1348). Scholarly attention to this collection has mostly concentrated on John’s role as a ‘publicist’ for the Angevin rulers of Naples. However, a cluster of texts later in the manuscript seem to stem from John’s many years as a teacher at the Dominican studium in Naples. Most deal with the teaching of theology, but a small number seem to be connected with teaching medicine, raising a number of questions. Did John write these texts himself, or did he collect them from someone else? How deep was this Dominican’s knowledge of medicine? Where was medicine being taught in Naples in this period, and what were the links between the university and the mendicant studia? This paper will attempt to answer some of these questions by examining the broader contexts of John’s other works and the intellectual and institutional contexts in which he operated.
Following an injunction from Matthew, medieval philosophers treated the act of ‘fraternal correction’ as a duty of charity: When we learn that our neighbor has sinned, we should rebuke her privately to help her reform. Over the course of the 13th and 14th centuries, two important changes occurred. First, writers began to stress the conditions under which we should NOT offer correction. Second, theoreticians emphasized the egalitarian character of fraternal correction, which could be offered even the Pope. The result was a principled limitation of paternalistic treatment and a model for understanding moral equality.