What do you think?
Censure and Heresy at the University of Paris, 1200 - 1400
The book documents thirty cases in which university-trained scholars were condemned for disseminating allegedly erroneous opinions in their teaching or writing, and focuses particularly on four academic censures that have occupied prominent positions in the historiography of medieval philosophy. Thijssen grants central importance to a number of questions so far neglected by historians regarding judicial procedures, the authorities supervising the orthodoxy of teaching, and the effects of condemnations on the careers of the accused.
224 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1998
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
May 30, 2011
While thirteenth and fourteenth century inquisitors in Italy and southern France were prosecuting lay heretics such as the Beguins and Cathars, other ecclesiastical and academic authorities were censuring and restricting the teachings of certain students and professors who were disseminating heretical teachings at the University of Paris. J. M. M. H. Thijssen takes up this important theme of academic heresy in his slim volume, Censure and Heresy at the University of Paris, and focuses on the understudied institutional procedures against these dissident scholars. Throughout, Thijssen argues that the University of Paris played a key role in many of the academic censures of the thirteenth and fourteenth century. Contrary to the opinion of some, a gradual shift from Paris to Avignon did not occur; though the papacy did become involved in several of the latter trials, the University of Paris retained its interest over time. In order to make this argument, Thijssen has selected and analyzed four of the most notable cases of thirteenth and fourteenth century academic censure: Stephen Tempier's condemnation of 1277, the censure of Ockhamist fallacies in 1340, and the proceedings against Nicholas of Autrecourt and John of Mirecourt in the mid 1340s. Moreover, he works from whatever relevant sources he can find which, because of their scarcity, include papal decrees, letters of appeal, defenses, and other trial documents.
The book contains five chapters, an introductory preface, a conclusion, and an extensive bibliography, useful for anyone interested in medieval academic censures. In the preface, Thijssen briefly contextualizes and outlines his text. Here, he states that he will generally sidestep the contents of the heresies in order to focus on the methods of investigation and censure carried out against the accused. Following the preface, the first chapter details the operations and rules governing university censures. Scholars of all levels owed their allegiance to their order, if they belonged to one, and their academic superiors to whom they swore an oath. Were they to teach doctrines challenging the tenets of their order, they, like Durand of St. Pourçain or Peter Olivi, would be tried at their minister general's tribunal. Alternatively, if their teachings challenged general Catholic doctrine, they would often be tried first in Paris and then, if they appealed, in Avignon. As Thijssen argues, even those cases, such as William Ockham's or Nicholas of Autrecout's, that seem to have begun in Avignon can be traced back to Paris where the accusations originated. Academics who were censured and refused to recant were excommunicated, evicted from their orders, and condemned as heretics.
The next three chapters examine four notable cases of academic censure which, in each case, were affiliated with the University of Paris. Whereas Tempier's Condemnation was a manifestation of the university's concern with limiting the dissemination of 219 heretical propositions, the admonishment of William Ockham in 1339 and his followers in 1340 was unique in being the only recorded censure carried out by the University of Paris' arts faculty. In chapter four, Thijssen examines the trials of both Nicholas of Autrecout and John of Mirecourt carried out by Paris' faculty of theology. In each case, the proceedings against these academics began with the university of Paris. Though Autrecout's trials were held in Avignon, Thijssen contends that the evidence against him was initially collected in Paris. Pope Benedict XII had simply heard of Autrecourt and summoned him to Avignon. Similarly, Mirecourt's teachings, though examined in Avignon, seem to have been initially questioned in Paris.
In studying the proceedings against these four figures, Thijssen engages in some detective work. For instance, in chapter three, when examining the censorship of Ockham's views, Thijssen tries to solve a certain inconsistency in dates. Whereas the statute against Ockham was composed on December 29, 1340, Henry of Unna, who was proctor of the University of Paris in January and February of 1341, claims that he issued a statute against Ockham's teachings during his term as proctor. To resolve this inconsistency, Thijssen suggests that there was a delay between the composition of the statute and its sealing. Moreover, because the seal was at the proctor's house, the statute had to be sealed there. Thus, in working through this apparent contradiction, Thijssen comes to some quite precise conclusions about the nature of censorial proceedings.
The final chapter of Thijssen's monograph looks at the concept of academic censorship as it was accepted during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Today, we are inclined to think that such censoring was the result of reason's suppression and the dominance of 'superstition.' Thijssen challenges this view and suggests, on the contrary, that the proceedings against various questionable views in the thirteenth and fourteenth century manifests the emphasis laid on teaching authority. He then looks at and compares the views of four academics who wrote on this subject. Whereas Servais of Mt. St. Ellias argued that bishops can only censure what the pope has already condemned, Godfrey of Fontaines and William Ockham stated that the pope's authority is second to scripture and the church fathers. Finally, Pierre D'Ailly defended the role of authority of bishops and popes against the heretical claims of John of Monzón.
In general, Thijssen has produced a very detailed and nuanced study which, as I have shown, engages in some detective work and challenges the notion that academic censorship gradually shifted from Paris to Avignon during the fourteenth century. This having been said, because Thijssen's text neither explains the heretical teachings in question nor the reasons for their condemnation, it should be read not for its conclusions on academic heresies per se but for its valuable contribution to the study of the procedures and institutions that made censuring possible. Hence, I recommend this book to those who are familiar with academic heresies of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries as well as those interested in the broader notion of censorship and medieval inquisitions.
The book contains five chapters, an introductory preface, a conclusion, and an extensive bibliography, useful for anyone interested in medieval academic censures. In the preface, Thijssen briefly contextualizes and outlines his text. Here, he states that he will generally sidestep the contents of the heresies in order to focus on the methods of investigation and censure carried out against the accused. Following the preface, the first chapter details the operations and rules governing university censures. Scholars of all levels owed their allegiance to their order, if they belonged to one, and their academic superiors to whom they swore an oath. Were they to teach doctrines challenging the tenets of their order, they, like Durand of St. Pourçain or Peter Olivi, would be tried at their minister general's tribunal. Alternatively, if their teachings challenged general Catholic doctrine, they would often be tried first in Paris and then, if they appealed, in Avignon. As Thijssen argues, even those cases, such as William Ockham's or Nicholas of Autrecout's, that seem to have begun in Avignon can be traced back to Paris where the accusations originated. Academics who were censured and refused to recant were excommunicated, evicted from their orders, and condemned as heretics.
The next three chapters examine four notable cases of academic censure which, in each case, were affiliated with the University of Paris. Whereas Tempier's Condemnation was a manifestation of the university's concern with limiting the dissemination of 219 heretical propositions, the admonishment of William Ockham in 1339 and his followers in 1340 was unique in being the only recorded censure carried out by the University of Paris' arts faculty. In chapter four, Thijssen examines the trials of both Nicholas of Autrecout and John of Mirecourt carried out by Paris' faculty of theology. In each case, the proceedings against these academics began with the university of Paris. Though Autrecout's trials were held in Avignon, Thijssen contends that the evidence against him was initially collected in Paris. Pope Benedict XII had simply heard of Autrecourt and summoned him to Avignon. Similarly, Mirecourt's teachings, though examined in Avignon, seem to have been initially questioned in Paris.
In studying the proceedings against these four figures, Thijssen engages in some detective work. For instance, in chapter three, when examining the censorship of Ockham's views, Thijssen tries to solve a certain inconsistency in dates. Whereas the statute against Ockham was composed on December 29, 1340, Henry of Unna, who was proctor of the University of Paris in January and February of 1341, claims that he issued a statute against Ockham's teachings during his term as proctor. To resolve this inconsistency, Thijssen suggests that there was a delay between the composition of the statute and its sealing. Moreover, because the seal was at the proctor's house, the statute had to be sealed there. Thus, in working through this apparent contradiction, Thijssen comes to some quite precise conclusions about the nature of censorial proceedings.
The final chapter of Thijssen's monograph looks at the concept of academic censorship as it was accepted during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Today, we are inclined to think that such censoring was the result of reason's suppression and the dominance of 'superstition.' Thijssen challenges this view and suggests, on the contrary, that the proceedings against various questionable views in the thirteenth and fourteenth century manifests the emphasis laid on teaching authority. He then looks at and compares the views of four academics who wrote on this subject. Whereas Servais of Mt. St. Ellias argued that bishops can only censure what the pope has already condemned, Godfrey of Fontaines and William Ockham stated that the pope's authority is second to scripture and the church fathers. Finally, Pierre D'Ailly defended the role of authority of bishops and popes against the heretical claims of John of Monzón.
In general, Thijssen has produced a very detailed and nuanced study which, as I have shown, engages in some detective work and challenges the notion that academic censorship gradually shifted from Paris to Avignon during the fourteenth century. This having been said, because Thijssen's text neither explains the heretical teachings in question nor the reasons for their condemnation, it should be read not for its conclusions on academic heresies per se but for its valuable contribution to the study of the procedures and institutions that made censuring possible. Hence, I recommend this book to those who are familiar with academic heresies of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries as well as those interested in the broader notion of censorship and medieval inquisitions.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review