Artes praedicandi / Artes orandi 9782503360614, 2503360610

Citation preview

TYPOWGIE DES SOURCES DU MOYEN AGE OCCIDENTAL DIRECTEUR : L. GENICOT Fasc. 61 A-VI.B.4 et A-VI.D.4*

ARTES PRAEDICANDI BY

MARIANNEG. BRISCOE, Ph. D. VICE-PRESIDENT AT ST MARY'S COLLEGE OF CALIFORNIA AND

ARTES ORANDI BY

BARBARAH. JAYE PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH MONMOUTH COLLEGE NEW JERSEY

BREPOLS TURNHOUT - BELGIUM

1992

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

__,, ~

--- -

....·

..

,·

~·

_;;

,_

I ••

'

'

l O'I ::

__,

c... ~--I

C Brepola1992 All rigbta reaerved.No part of thia publicationmay be reproduced, atored in a retrieval IY'tCDl,or trammitted,in any form or by any meam, electronic,rnecb•rricel,photoc:opyiDg, recordma,or othenrile, without the priorpermiaion of the publiaber.

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

7

A VBRTISSEMBN'T• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

FIRST PAirr AR.TES PRAEDICtNDI (by Marianne 0. BRISCOE)

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

CHAPTERI : DBPINITION OF THE GENU .

17

CHAPTERII : EVOUJTION OF THE GBNRB 1. ORIGIN OF THE GBNRB . . • . . 2. SCHOLASTICISM AND THE UNIVERSITY SBRMON 3. THE FOURTBBNTH CENTURY : THB FLOURISHING OF THE

27 27 29

36 42

MANUAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. THE CLosING ERA : POPULISM • • • • • . 5. THE FINAL STAGE : RENAISSANCE MANUALS •

48

CHAPTERID : RULES OF CRITICISM 1. THE 'THEMATIC SBR.MON

54 54

2. AUTHORSHIP

58

3. 4. 5. 6.

60 61 63

• • • • • • • • STATE OF THE TBxTs • • . LANGUAGE AND THE STRUC'11JRB OF THE MANUALS MANUSCRIPT AND 1'ExTuAL TRADITIONS • • • • RELATIONSHIP OF THE MANUALS TO PREACHING PRACTICE AND TO 0rHBR PREACHING AIDS

CHAPTERIV :

•

64

67

INFLUBNCB

CHAPTERV : EDITIONS

69

CHAPTERVI : HISTORICAL VALUB .

72

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECOND PAKI' AR.TES ORANDI {by Barbara H. JAYB)

BIBLIOORAPHY

79

•

CHAPTER I : THE DEFINITION OF THE GENRE

84

CHAPTER ll: EVOLUTION OF THE GENRE . . 1. THE APosTOLIC AND EARLY MIDDLE AGES 2. THE EIGHTH THROUGH ELEVENTH CENTuluES 3. THE TwELFTH THROUGH FIFTEENTH CENTullIES 4. THE RENAISSANCE • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

86 86 88 90 107

CHAPTER ill: CllITICAL EVALUATION OF A.RTBS 0RANDI 1. AUTHORSHIP AND TExnJAL RELATIONSHIPS 2. LANGUAGE . • • • • • • • . . • • . • . • 3. PATRONAGE AND AUDIENCE . • • • • • • • 4. STYLE: RHETORIC, DIALECTIC AND GRAMMAR • 5. THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE A.RTBS PRABDICANDI 6. THE A.RTBS 0RANDI AND OTHER WORKS ON PRAYER

110 110 111 111 113 113 114

CHAPTER IV: EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS •

116

V : HISTORICAL VALUB • • • • . .

118

CHAPTER

Digitized by

Go ogle

Originei--ffom

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

AVERl'ISSEMENT Les volumes n° 58 : Ocnonum Rlwtorlc In TteatJ.., Schollonand Comde John 0. WARD, n° 59: 77w..4,u of Poetry and Prose de Douglas KELLY, n° 60: "',..(r., diclamlnl.r, ,Ar., dJctandl"de M. CAMARGO, n° 61 : The "A.rta J»'(1Mlicandl"and the "..4rta orandl,, de Marianne BRISCOEet Barbara H. JAYE, constituent un ensemble qui couvre en principe tout le champ de sources relevant de la ~ dans lea 1itterature latine et vemaculaires du Moyen Age. L'6quipe qui a r6a1ise cet ensemble a etj constitu6e i notre dcmande et animee de mania exemplaire par le Professeur J .0. WARDde l'Univenit6 de Sydney. Qu'il trouve ici l'expression de notre gratitude. 'IMnlary

L. 0ENICOT

w ww;@c

~k

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

FIRSTPART

ARTES PR.A.ED/CANDI BY

MARIANNB G. BRISCOE

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

BIBLIOGRAPHY The study of the an praedicandJhas, appropriately, been closely linked to the study cl medievalpnacbmg Both forms werelargelyneglected and, in the cue cl the sermon, even scorned, by litfl'ary critics until the md cl the nineteenth century 1• Tom in 1879 R. Cruel published~ dN devt.JcJ,en PmJlgt Im Mtadalte and Louis Bourpin publishedLa chaite ~ au XII- slicle. A few years later Albert Lecoy de la Marche's La chain~ au mo,m tfp. ~ au XIII- slkJe (1886) appeared. These monumentalhistories of nauonal preaclringtraditions werefollowed, fortyyears later, by Ga-aid R. Owat'seffortto providethe samecomprehensive review for F11gtisbpreaching2• It was not until the 1920s that scholady aumtion turned in earnestto the medievalrnannalsthat attnnpt-d to ooctify and describe preaching t.eclmiques. It is ironic that, while the manuals themselves continued to be written after the close of the middle ages, indeed continued even into the twentieth century 3, they have received little attention. An praedkandi scholarship thus rests on the pioneering efforts of only a handful of modern bibliographers and editors. Prior to the 1920s, study of these works was limited, for the most part, to the occasional publication of a preaching manual included in a monumental edition such as that prepared by the Quarracbi Brothen for the works of Bonaventure, or in the PatrologiaLatina. This situation began to changein 1925 when ftienne Gilson published Mk:MI MDIDI et la t«hniqw di, fflfflllll """"Wll 4 • Shortly after, Harry Caplan began to publish articles on medieval rhetoric and preaching 5• Marie Madeleine Davy issued her studies and editions of selected thirteenth century French 1 One exception is John M. NBALll'asomewhat superficial survey Jledlanal PrNCMn 1111d Jletllanal Pretu:lrlnf, London, 1856. 2 Prmcldng In Jldnal En,land : .4n 1""°"11t:daft to SfflnOII JltllfUM:l1pl,a/ 1M hrlod, Cambridge, 1926.Jan LoNGl!u'a more recent study cf medieval preachiDa ayntbeaizea and updates these national surveys: La Mdlcatlon Jlld/hak, Paris, 1983 (&odes Auaustinienne •). J Hany CAPLAN IDd Remy H. KING,Lalin »ac::tata hwlllna : .if Book-Lat, in Honard T1wological.Rmrw, 42 (1949), p. 185-206. • kJW d'ldstolref,anciM:alM,2 (1925), p. 301-25. ' For eumple, RMtorlc.aJIIIW!llliolt 1111d SorM ~ Jldnal Thactata on Prwu:ldng,in s,,«,,J,,m, 2 (1927). p. 284-95.

°"

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

12

BIBLIOORAPHY

university preaching in 1931 ; tbae N11DOD1 werethoughtto npreamt the ideal outlined in the Jn8Cbinl manuals. Then, hegiouin1in 1933, came two works that °'&Mind the fieldand establishedthe bibliography that continues to guide an prtMdJcandischolanbip : Harry Caplan'• HantlJlstof arta prtMdJcandi MtllflUCl'fpu(1934, 1936) and Thomu-Marie Omland'• Ana prtMdJcandi(1936). The former inventoriedlibnriel in Europe and America, recorded iDcipitl of arta p,wdk:andJ, established authorshipand tmual traditionsand dated the manuscriptl and the tau themselves wherever po111ble.In all, Caplan analyzedmore than 380 manuacriptl and identified about 200 dift'smt medieval manuals. Hit work created a much-needed framework for further study of the numerous manmcript aemplan and their complex nemmvaHit coatemporary Omland undertook a similar, thouahmuch 1eu mmsive, inventory of preaching manual manmcriptl. While Caplan provided skeleton delCriptiom of the tau, Owland concentrated on known manual authors and provided biographical background on 58 of them. In addition, Owiand publiahed the first modem edition• of manuals, those of Thomas Waleys and Robert Buevorn. The impact of these works on subsequent ICholanbip can be sem in part in the third major modern bibliographicwork, Medlnal RMtorlc : A Bibliography,preparedby James J. Murphy in 1971(2nd edition 1989). Murphy's liltl reveal that since Caplan's and Omland'• works were published, there baa been a modest if steady stream of edition• of preachingmanuals, works about the manuals, their cluaical backgrounds, their currmcy in the middle ages, and their application in preaching practice. Research on the manuals baa alto spawned some atudiea that take the preaching manuals u theoreticalor critical 10urces for other medieval literary genres. This Jut category lllfl'ers from the continued ICarcity of critics' 'and historians' analyaea of the manuals and their milieu. In drawing gmeralization1 about medieval preaching or in studyingmedieval sermons for topical or structural insights into other medieval literary forms, scholars samplina are handicapped by the slenderand not entirely rep1G1CDtative of the materialain print and acce111bleto modem readers. 1b111Richard and Mary ROUiehave criticized M.M. Davy's much quoted survey of thirteenth century preaching at the Universityof Parisu unrepresentative of the materialathat survive from Paris '· In addition, it seems likely 'M.M. DAVY, La

Digitized by

#ffllOIU

Go ogle

...,,.,..,,__

PorlNlu, 1130-1131, Puu, 1931. Richard H.

~

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

13

BIBLIOORAPHY

that the manuals of Thomas Waleyaand Robert of Buevom, by far the two most often cited, do not characterize the majority of the extant manuals. (See chapter Il, below : "Evolution of the Genre"). In addition, too many readers of medieval sennon material fail to appreciate the unusual relationship between oral performance and textual record ; thia misunderstanding leads to unsound "literary" readings of sermon material. (See, for example, SiegfriedWenzel's criticiamof this practice in Preachen, Poets and the Early Eng/uh Lyric, Cllapter 1, Princeton University Press, 1986). Finally, what is probably the most important question for readers and users of the aria pwMt&:andihas hardly been addressed : if these materials were prepared u guides to sermon writing and delivery, how were they used and what wu their reJationahip to the practice of preaching? The following bibliography supplements J. J. Murphy's Med#Wll Rhetoric: A. Blbliograpl,y,2nd edition: BACUS, H. Bibel und an pwMdkandiIm Roland8lledda Pfaffn, Konrad, Berlin, 1966 (StlXlien und Quellen, 36). BARCBLONA, M. DE, Nou.r Mtl11118Crltr ta Fra. Francac Exlntffli{, in Eatudlo.rFrand.rt:ano8, 36 (1925), p. 44~52. BATAILLON, L.-J., iMtru1nenLrta trtnall da prhJil:atnn au XIII• nAcle in Outureet Travaillg/leclue/ daM /'OccidentMldlhal, Centre National de la RechercheScientifique, Centre Regional de la Publication de Paris, 1978. CAPLAN, H. and H. M. ICING, Latin 7ractatu on Preac/rlng: A. Boole Urt in Harvard TMologlcalRnltw, 42 (1949), p. 185-206. ID., Italian Treatl.ra on Preac/rlng:A BooleLI.rt, in Speech Monograph.r, 16 (1949), p. 243-52. ID., Fmtcl, Thlctate.ron Preadrb,g: A BooleLin, in Speech Monograph.r, 17 (1950), p. 161-170. ID., Scandinavian 7ractatu on Preac/rlng: A. BooleUrt, in Speech Monograpl,.r,21 (1954), p. 1-9. ID., Pulpit Eloqwna : A. LI.rt of Doctrinaland Hi.rtorlcal Studla In Engll.rh, in Spuch Monograpl,.r,22 (1955), p. 1-52. ID., Pulpit Eloq,.,ffla : A. Lin of Doctrinaland Hi.rtorlcal Studla In Gmnan, in Speech Monograpl,.r,23 (1956), p. 1-106.

u,1

ud Mary A. RousB.Preaclwn, Ftora.,,a1111d Sennoru: Stud/a In tlw •utlldp,lbu Flonlm .. ,f' non.a, ,f' IrelaNJ,Toronto, Poatiflcal lmtitute cl Medieval Studies, 1979 (Studies ud Tata 47).

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

14

BIBLIOORAPHY

La avlflln d' "a,w1 p,mdicandi " au XII~ ~ d'QJris ks mamucrll.r, in Etudad'hutolle1ittbt,t,y et ~ du XII/• nkk, Ottawa, 1932, p. 41-60. Ev ANS, G. R., ~ "an praedil:andJ" of Johanna ReucJ,Ji,,, in Rltetorlca: Joumal of tM lntBnatlonal Socwtyfor tM Hl.rtoryofRhetoric,3 (1985), p. 99-104. ID., ~ book of Experlal:,e : Alan of U0.'1 U• ofthe Claulcal Rhetorical Topo.rIn Hl.r Panoral Wrltlnp, in Anal«ta Ci.rtercieMla,32 (1976), p. 113-21. FLoRBS, A. S., ed., "L/Mr M praedJcatloM"in Raimundi Lu/Ii, Opera latina : 118, Palma de Mallorca, vol 3 (1961), vol. 4 (1963). JENNINGS, M., Monh and tM aria JIIWdicandi, in Revue "'-dlctiM, 86 (1976), p. 119-28; 88 (1978), p. 389-90. ID.,Abstract II, SymposiumIY : ~ Foun«nthQnlwy PreadrJngManual : CHARLAND, T.-M.,

..Cicero In ~ redlvmd',

in Medina/ Smnon Stlll:lle1 Newikttn, 14 (1984), Supplement, p. 4-5. ID., ed., RanulphHigden : An compoMndl.rmona ; A Critical Edition, Leiden, 1991 (Davis Medieval Texts and Studies, 6). IUPPBLI, T., Review of H. Caplan, Handlin, in An:hiVllffl Fratrum Predicatonan,5 (1935), p. 395-6. (Contains additional manuscript references.) ID., Giacomodi Fu.rignanoO.P., in An:hiVllfflFratnan Praedlcatorum,15 (1945), p. 134-40. KENDRICK, R., He"')'80fland tM Rltetorldan.r: ~ ·ana praedil:andJ.., in Scotti.rh Stlll:lles, 4 (1984), p. 255-70. KITTENOORF, D.E., Cleannul and tM FOllffffnth Qnlwy "arta JJl'Mdi• candi ", in MichiganAcadmridan, 11 (1979), p. 319-30. KLEINHANS, R. G., ErtmnlU'DoctrlM of Preaching: A muly of "Ecc.muta, nw • ratioM condonandl ", doctoral dissertation, Princeton Theological Seminary, 1968 (DAI 29/08, p. 2790). ICONZILI, J., Studien OMr Johanna Ulrid, Su,gant (ca. 1450-1503 ?), in biuchrlftftlr SchwiznucM KircMnpJChlchte, 10 (1976), p. 107· 67. KOBLE, H., Zur angeblichw,n Albm dan Gro.rsen ,afautm "'an JIIW• dicandi", in Ril1rll.rcM Quartabchrlft,36 (1928), p. 324-28. LISCHBR, R., ed., TheoMs of Preaching: Sekc~d Readlngl In theHomiletic Tradition,Labyrinth Press, 1986. LoNGtiRE, J., urg. 1913, p. 388-402. ID., Zur angeblichw,n AO.rt dem Grol# vn/autffl"An pradJcandJ ", in Rilnli.rt:M Quartal.w:Ju1ft 36 (1928), p. 32+328. TROUT, J. M., ill, Alan of LO# and 11,eArt of Preaching In 11,e Tweftla Caauy, doctoral cliasertation,Rutgers University, 1973 (DAI 33/ 108-A, p. 4292-3). ID., Alan tJ,e Mf.ulonary,in Clteaux. 26 (1975), p. 146-54. WENZEL, S., C/uluar and 11,e Languap of Contemporaryheadtlng, in StudiesIn Phllology,73 (1976), p. 138-94. ZINK, M., La 1"'torlque ltonln# et la conwntlon du m-mon"ad natllS" a trawn la "Summa• am p,a«lJcatorld' d'Alaln de LO#, in Alain M LI&, G~r de CJuJtillon, Jakeman ~1'e et lnr Henri ROUSSEL and F. SUARD, ed. Acta du co/loqw de LO#, 1978, Lille, 1980, p. 171-85. SPEARING,

•mps.

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

CHAPTER I

DEFINITION OF 1HE GENRE Modem students of the Middle Ages IOIDetimes use the tam ara prMdkandi to connote a wide variety of preaching materials and aids that do not, strictly, fall within the definition of an .,.ars"'7 • The term an, used in reference to a body of knowledge concerning rhetorical or literary technique, was a familiar one, with a fairly precise meaning, for learned medieval men. The Rlwtorka ad Hemrnlum declared, for example, .,.ara estprMaptio. qUM dat urtam l'lam ratlt,Mmqw dlcendi"' •. The composition of treatises offering sure and reasoned methods came late to preaching in comparison to other literary forms. Works on poetic composition, referring to their topic as .,.arsverafjicalorla"'or .,.anpoetrlae,"'date from the early twelfth century '· Interest in composing and using mwsPrMdicandi, however, did not appear until the very end of the twelfth century, despite the fact that references to preaching in canons and Patristic treatises give ample evidence that learned men were interested in the quality and frequency of preaching from earliest Christian times. In the 4th century, St. Augustine, in his De doctrlna christlana,argued for the use of classical Roman rhetorical techniques in Christian oratory. He was perhaps the first churchman to speak of the value of technique as a supplement to spiritual wisdom and divine inspiration in preaching 10• Early in the twelfth century,

7 Several ruciclea in thia aeries, '1'ypologw da IOfD'Ca du mo.)'ffl dge occidolal, treat topics touched on in thia dilcuuion of the aria prtlMlJcandl.See eapecially DOtel 18, 23, 25 infra. • G.P. GooLD, ed., H. CAPLAN, trans., Clem,, A.d C. Humnbon tk raticJM dicendi (Rll«orica ad Humnlvm), 11M' I, II. 3, London and Cambridge (Mass.), 1954 (Loeb claaaical Library 403), p. 6-9. For further consideration orthia topic, see Margaret Jennings' introduction to her edition or Ranulph Higden'• A.n componendi ttrmOIU!S, Leiden, 1991 (Davis Texts and Studies 6), p. i·xv. 'E. GALLO, TM Grammarians RMtoric: TM •podrla now,• of Geoffrey of Yln.rauf,in J. MURPHY, Mt!dinal E/oqwnct!, Berkeley, 1978, p. 68. See also D. Km.LY, TM A.rt.rof POdry and Prou, Tumbout, 1991 (Typolope des sources du moyen Age occidental, 60). •• See, especially, Book IV or Dt! Doctrlna Christiana.For more on this subject see James J. MURPHY, St. A.ugu.rdnt!and 1M Dt!bak about a Clwtlan Rhetoric,in QlllllUrly Journal of SJ)ffd,, 46 (1960), p. 400-•UO.See also Gregory the Great'• Cura panoralu which empbuizea the duty of the priest to preach and to take eloquence from the Holy Spirit

~.JLL

s, Ooo~lt

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

18

CHAPTER. I

Gwl>ert of Nogent wrote a short treatile titled ..Quo ordtM .mw ferl •~at' 11• It is an angry, cautionarywork admnnisbing preachers to give better, more frequent ICl'Dlons.Gw'bcrt particularly objected to long. that strayed from the true, simple rhetorically self-indulgmt ICl'DlODS meaning of the scripture on which they should be based. But neither Gw'bcrt nor his many predecesson seem ever to have set out to descn'be a sermon or teach their readers how to prepare a good one. Alan of Lille's treatise, written about 1200, does undertake to do these things. But it was later scribes and editors who titled it ..Summa• mw p,-dkalorla". Nowhere in his treatile does Alan call his work an ..an". The fint use of the term in referenceto a preaching guide seems to come some thirty years later in a curious, terse treatise ascribedto William of Auvergne, Bishop of Paris 1228-1249,and also spuriously attributed to A1bertus Mapua and Jacques de Vitry. William's treatile begins with the declaration : Predlcan 'K>lfflllbm mton pmlkandi el coplam /oqwndl In hoc brffl el manuali ~ D«J ~ cuplmla. artljicls omnlum Splrlbu Saned admltutt gratlam ad Id facinublm prlmltw ln\lOCOIIU12•

Since it is often difficult to date preaching manual texts, it may have instead been the >ilb cleric, Thomas of Chobham (fl. first quarter 13th century, also known as Thomas of Salisbury), who first spoke of the ..art" in a long and comprehensive review of the natw'e of preaching. On the 74th folio of his treatile 13, under the rubric ..De predk:atioM", Thomas declares that he will tum now-ad artificiumpredlcanda".Regardless (part 2, Cltapter iv); RAllANVS JIAUIUJS, 1h IIUlllldloM Clerlconlm,in Potrologfa Latbto (• PL), t. 112, col. 842-7 abo addreaaea this iuue. Other CUlODI and decreeatreating the quality and frequency of preaching include the Carolingian Admonldo Gfflfflllu and Canon X of the Fourth Lateran Council (121S).Arcbbiahop Peckham'•Connilutiolu (1281) IUIDIIW'izedthe views near the time the an prtudlcalull came into being:

J,.......,........,. °""°• qu,ra annt, -- """"""° d«4Jofl:""" :«_,.,,.,,.,.,,

duo:l:td.lL.llt 11--.do pr-.Jp#Mw, Ill qlllilb« --,dol

pWlpro,,/iM,u, ffMlllr • .,.J ,- alta

II« at, .,,wJ III qudb« t& 11110Ml#ld Yd pl,,rlb,u, ,apo,141 popu/o ,...arlto', obaqw CJljulbd subllllloll.rICIWG/"""'8dal, ~fiesfour modes of preaching. distinguished by their uses of the "vocal" and "real" concordances introduced by Pseudo-Bonaventure. Each one is characterized according to its degree of beauty and its appropriate audience. The first mode combines "vocal" and "real" concordance and is the most subtle of methods ; its appropriate audience is those who are most wise ; indeed, despite its difliculty for the preacher, i.t is the form that will most edify the laity and move them best to devotion. The second mode is the easiest, i.t uses either sort of concordance at will and is well suited to audiences of novices. Almost totally lacking in subtlety, it is, in John's view, unnecessarily scorned by most of his contemporaries. lbe third mode employs only vocal concordance and is a noJtioua oddity. The fourth method is the most devout and wu practiced by the fathers far more than by modan preachers. It is known u the homiletic method uses neither sort of concordance. John of Wales' c1auifying habits, which can also be aeenin his outlines of the seven methods of division and IUbdiviaion and other precisely numbered options available to the preacher, are taken to a still higher level of development in Robert of Basevorn's Formap,Mdkandi. This work is auociated with the a.tercian monutery at Buinpat, Flint,

and

-

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

38

CHAPTER II

throughits dedication ; little ii known of the author, save bis name which ii revealedin an acrostic in bis text. Manuscript evidencesugests the treatise was written early in the 14th century. Robert claims in bis prologue that •Forma" refen to the topic of bis tnatiae, that ii, to the "formal• causes of preaching. A modem reader ii struck by the future aptness of the term, for Robert bu written a formulary or preacriptive treatise on preaching. Gone are many of the earlier authors' strugles to understand and descn"be an existing practice ; instead the treatise suaests that mastery of Robert's precise distinction • and numerations - exactly six characteristics to Christ's preaching ; euctly 22 ornaments much used in sermons ; and IO OD - will enable the beginner to muter this mfflcult obligation of bis clerical calling. Thomas explains : Siqw pkriqw In IMO/oglcapra«liean d prtudu:atoru did praaunumt, cum lamffl formam nadant prtudlt:andi, qula Jonna rquJa ut d men.n,ra pra~dicandl In omni maurla, llcld lop;a ut rquJa sylloglzandlIn omni

sdDltla"'·

Even Thomas' dmnition of preaching ii more formal and descriptive and, perhaps consequently,less interested in preacbini • affectiveaspects. He does not speak like bis predecessorsof moving or inspiring people to devotion. Instead, •Est autem predicatio plurlb,u facta JMmuuio ad wwrendum,moderatumtempus retinml". He elaborates that the determination of theological questions should not be considered preaching nor should warnings or collations with a small number of people ; nor should civic oratory or deliberative or judicial oratory. The length of the speech is also a defining factor : a sermon should be roughly no longer than the space of a solemnmass with music, nor less than a low mass without music 42• Such precise, practical descriptions, however offputting they may be to modern artistic sensibilities, provide some of our best insights into the emerging,conscious codification of contemporary and ancient preaching methods. These indigenous categorizations are very important, for they record an understanding not only that the sacred oratory of the fourteenth century departed significantly from that of earlier eras, but

°""""""" *

CIIARLAND, .drro pra«llcandl: d l'ltbtol,w lo """1rlqw au Paris,Ottawa. 1936 (Publications de l"'matitutd'~udel medi~alea d'Ottawa

" lbomu·M. mo)'ffl

••

7), p. 233. a L KRULm1. MUllPHY,ec1.,nrw J1«11na1Rltdorlcol""'· Berkeley, 1971, p. 121.

Digitized by

Google

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

39

EVOLUTION OP THB GBNRB

also that different schools of preaching theory were developing within the fourteenth centmy itself. Robert uses an ingenious device to introduce the soon-to-be traditional section on the history of preaching. Since he ia addressingan audience of hep,ning preachers who bring some fixed ideal about preacbing to their work, be begin• by exploding two auumptiona : that there ia but one proper method of praching and that good preaching ia original preaching (Chapter VI). He notea that there are almost u many methoda of preachingu there are preachen ; the objective of the Forma~ ia to present some of the best that can be adapted to modem practice 43• Furthermore, the first preacher, God, (firat in Genesia at the creation of man) choae many forms, including anpla and John the Baptist, and finally His own form in Cbriat, to spread His Word. And u Scripture shows, He continued to make the same points in all His praching 44 • Preachers should thus imitate any of the five greatest : Cbriat, Paul, Augustine, Gregory and Bernard. Cbriat's preachingencompused all great styles and Robert says it is difficult to fully descnl>e hia methoda. There are, though, six primary means, which were also thoae of John the Baptist: by promises, by threats, by example, by reason, obscurely, and clearly. Paul emphasized reason in his preaching and best made his points when he confirmed examples though reason or authority. Among all the earlyfathers, Augustine wu the most important preacher. He primarily offered homilies on Paul's epistles and also relied principally on reason to make his points. Robert advises that homilies which explain an entire gospel are easier to remember than those that offer detailed analysis of a shorter pusage. Gregory's homilies rested on persuasion in moral matters rather than matters of faith. Much of his preachingrested on pusages from the Old Testament. He employed concordances bued both on word and matter (vocal and real) and often piled up authorities or found in a single word many meanings. He also employed "narratioMs •dlficatorlas"' 45 • Robert believes that such devices should be used with restraint and then only for lay audiences. Bernard'smethod ia "without method"' and relies extensively on the citation of confirming Scriptmal authorities. Roberthu special admiration KRUL. op. cit., p. 126• .. Op. cit., p. 126-127. ., CHAllLAND, op. cit., p. 247. a

-

swrn s; Gc.e:glc

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

40

CHAPTBR II

for his use of rhetorical colon winch incite "those who understand more feelingly" to tears and to devotion 46 • Only after he has reviewed preacbing history and ended with praise for Bernard's emotive preaching style does Robert begin to treat the artistic, affective upecta of preacbing which form an important part of most earlier definitions of the form. He does this by attacking those contemporaries who ICOl'D the use of rhetorical colors and arping for their importance in preaching :

w mu.rtin.JutOIi doquer,a and yd mu.rtnot departfrom wudom,which bean of w two. If both cannot 1¥ ~d. MllMr can wudom1¥ ~d. It mnatn.rthm tJ,at II 1.rbdla to lune doqwna than to lade nery good... 17w,efo,ykt tJw,~ who an not productlw tltrougl, wildom llrlH to Thu.,

tr

w

1¥ doqwnt

47.

Having justified bis main topic with this somewhat surprising, almost sophistical tack, Robert then introduces his twenty-two methods of rhetorical ornaments for preachers : invention of theme, winning over the audience, prayer, introduction of theme, division, statement of parts, proof of parts, amplification, digression or transition, correspondence, agreement of correspondence, circuito111development, convolution, unification, conclusion, coloration, modulation of voice, appropriate gesture, timely humor, allusion, firm impression, and \Weighingof subject matter 41• Robert advises that the first fifteen should be used about once in each sermon ; the lut three can be used freely anywhere in the sermon ; humor should be usedvery sparingly. Before devoting a chapter to each ornament, Robert notes that •if perhaps there are more elements than have been enumerated, they can be reduced to these" 49 • The treatise ends abruptly after considering the last of the ornaments. While there may have been comfort for the beginning preacher in closely following Robert's precepts, the approach of Thomas Waleys at mid-century mlllt have been more effective and more welcome to a priest who faced a lifetime of sermon writing. Waleys wu a Dominican master of theology at Oxford University who has been celebrated by Beryl Smalley u one of the great •ctusicizing" or early humanist friars 50• In • KRUL,op. c/J., p. 131. 41 KRUL,op. clJ., p. 132 • KRUL,op. clJ., p. 132 • KRUL,op. clJ., p. 133. ,. En,lbl, Frlan and A1d/qllllyIll tM Eo,ly

Digitized by

Go ogle

~

C..,,,,, ODOl'd, 1960, p. 75-108.

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

41

EVOLUTION OF THE GBNRB

bis free use of classical citatiom, a habit lbared with Robert Baaevom, be reftectathe revivmg interests in ancient texts at 14th century Oxford. Waleys treatise, /k modo COllf/JOMndl #JfflOlla, opens by declaring that its subject is both the form and theory of preaching and its audience is members of the Dominican order who from boyhoodhave been nouriabed with scriptural studies. Waleys ends bis prologue with statements that contrast sharply with Robert of Buevom's approach and that of most manual writers. He quotes Timothy 2 : •ynlJum /kt non ut a/ligalum" and explains that no two sermons are alike and there can be no ready rules to govern human invention. Instead bis manual will consider those styles of preaching that are the most subtle and useful. Some manuscripts include the important additional modifien "well formed" and "famoua." Walcys' is the last known manual until the early 16th century work of Johannes Surpnt to devote extensive consideration to the preacher's training and conduct. His attention may arise from the continued circulation of the work of the much revered Dominican Humbert of Roman's 13th century conduct book for preachers. Like Humbert's bis admonitions concern learnedness and proper comportment for preachers ; but in Waleys' work they are accompanied by some interestingpracticalinaiahts into the non-verbal aspects of effectivepreaching. Thus, when preaching before the laity, the preacher should avoid opulent and curious dress; Waleys adds that cheap dress cannot be recommended either, though he demun that he cannot in COlllCiencecondemn it 51• Waleys also concerns hjmself with delivery in ways that bis fellow authors seldom do. He bepls with a narrative about a youth who delivered bis teacher's aucceuful ICl1DOll, verbatim, and failed to move bis audience. He draws the lesson that the preacher should cultivate a pleasant and inteltigible manner of speech which is potent in both drawing and convincing bis hearers. Like all the handbook writers he urges moderation in delivery and, underscoring the wide inte1lectualand practical scope of bis viewpoint, cites u bis authorities "doctrinamPldlo8ophiet COfflfflllMffl

expnifflllam".

Then he offers e7ceedingly practical adviceon sermon delivery. Oral emphasis in a sermon should be given to the theme and its divisions and any other points that are essential for understanding the main point. The preacher should work for variety in bis diction and not rely too much on phrases prepared in advance ; nor should the unpracticed SI

-

CHAal.ANJ>, Alfa pradk,m,dt .. , p. 331.

&igflffr?u -2,

Gu.;~lc

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

42

CHA.PTBll II

preacher make great use orrhymed and rhythmical lines for they are too easy to forget. A preacher should speak not to the ean of his audience but to their hearts. Avoid prolixity, for one's audience miabt not return. Finally, the beginner, especially, should practice in private before be preaches in public and bis preparation should include gestures, pronunciation and tempo ordelivery. If be ii prepared, the preacher will feel neither feisty nor friabtened when be preaches ; and be will not forget his sermon. 1H modo compollffldi ~ continues in this sage and helpful vein for many paaea. While Waley• does provide lists and descriptions of rhetorical colorations, be fOCUlel on helping the preacher make good selections from the many texts and artifices available. So on lllOlt occasions one should select a theme from the day's lesson; but on solemn days like Christmaswhen more people come to sermons and there are many sermons preached at different hours, a preacher may want other themes as well, though be should not strive for uniqueness. Waley1' writing keeps the requirements of the preacher foremost and in so doing be subordinates many of the traditional manual classifications and distinctions to his more practical concerns. For example, the historical review so important to Robert of Buevom and John of Waleys is not introduced until chapter IV on "The three parts of a sermon in the modern style." Here the methods of Augustine and other fathers are contrasted to those of the ancient preachers and to those or modern practitioners. In this, the treatise represents an impressive work of comprehensive synthesis. Waley• introduces most of the commonplaces of the manual tradition and gives many of them helpful demonstration and rephrasing; but this work's real accomplishment is its un111ualview of its topic and function. It undertakes to help new preachers master a multivarious art form ; most other manuals attempt to codify and stabilize that form. 4. THE CLosING

ERA: POPULISM

The encyclopedic fourteenth century manuals, largely of F.nglisb origin, include works by John of Wales, Buevorn, Tbomu Waleys, Ranulpb Higden, 1acques of Fnsignaoo, and a curio111 attempt to adapt the principles of syllogistic reason to preaching undertaken by lean of Chalons. In contrast to this group is a somewhat later tradition of shorter handbooks that are distingnisbed by a less closely argued style of discourse

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

43

EVOLUTION OP THE GBNRB

and a broad viewpoint. These are the buaineu-like manuals one mipt imap,~ being UICd u ready references by a preacher with immediate need for help. Indeed their brevity was a characteristic the more prolix handbook authon seemed to envy. Some of these writers include the term "bre'Yis"in the title of their works while Waleys apologizesseveral times for going on longer than he should. In other instances, patrom and ICl'lbesseem to have taken matters in hand. John of Wales' treatise circulated in what editor W.O. Ron bu termed an "abstract." Thomas Waleys' did also. Thia manual and many others were also broken up into parts which circulated separately. The aborter manuals treat points practicing preachers probably believed were essential for the actual production of sermons. Some of the worts in this category include those of Geraldus de Piscario, OFM, France; Francese F.mmenes, OFM, Spain; Henryofffeue, Germany 52 ; PseudoAquinu ; Christian Borpleben, OFM, Germany ; Martin of Cordova, OSA, Spain ; and Simon Alcock. England. The group evidences the first attn"butable examples of manuals written outside the influence, and in many cues outside the precincts, of English and Parisian universities. It also ofl'ers a IODlewhat differentemphasis. While the fourteenth century scholastics and their predecessors acknowledged the various sorts of audiences one might preach to, their principal interest wu in the form of the sermon and the methods available for developing a theme. In contrast,this group of late medieval authorsis very interested iDexamining how one preaches to the "people," rather than with preaching to the more educated clergy. The result of this emphasis is a newly critical view of the effectiveness of some of the devices taken up by the previous two centuries of preaching manuals and the introduction of different sorts of technical material borrowed from other rhetorical traditions. Geraldus de Piscario, a Franciscan muter of theology at the University of Toulouse who flourished in the first half of the fourteenth century, ofl'en an early example of this trend. His work, An /aci6ndi #1"mOIIU, consists of eight short chapters which include demonstrations of his points and frequent warnings about abuses in sermon writing that can reduce the effectiveness of preaching. Thus in his second chapter on using connotations of words to divide a theme, he warns that a sermon 53 It abould be DOiedthat tbil attribution (to Remy of Lanpaltein, allo known u Henry of Heue) ii diapated by OW'land on the w,ry pouada that the manual ii too tormal (CHAaL.um, op. di., p. 43).

...,,1 I

l

Jl11

0

Original from

•

I

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

44

CHAPTBll 11

depending entirely on oppoaitea can end up min&the audience more on sinful and negative notions than on the virtues ". Throughout, Geraldua is critical of ovenubtlety, prolixity and affectation. He atreaseathat concordances must be -real," reprdlela of whether they may be Myocal,"because those baaed on concepta are more useful s.. He cautions that a preacher should not introduce more than three members in any division or subdivision55• But he is moat pointed when he speaks of the introduction of the theme and its divisions : A.dmmrbra autsn tlhldatla, Ill luddbu d«lanntur, tkb« ~ prw&ator In lnlroytu aliquo lp«lall d probtmta auctorltata brffll4r d llldM d«l.tlrtztt, MC dlcne JJOllfl/o Vff'ba ""8Clll'a .NU dlfficiJJa, ntri sdm «J IM-Met llldM d«Jaratt, HI tkbet pmJkan ffCM1Ulum popuJlcapadlalm, QC etlam A.Illa ffllm pNdlr,a,,d,,m al laycu, allllr clmd.r, allllr ~ In .,,. commorantibtu,a/Jw /u'JndldbulIn ruribw d campls peco,a ~ "·

•D«tum.

Here Geraldua atreasea the importance of speaking to the audience's capacity to understand, which varies among different aocial strata. The first seven topics in the manual are treated briefty and show considerable familiarity with contemporary preaching practice and abuses. While the viewpoint is different from that of earlier and contemporary 14th century works, this part of the treatise is quite conventional. With the eighth topic, Geraldua abandons his conciseness and introduces a new subject to the genre : tk modo proprla 'IOC;flbu/4l1rNlllffldl d

pa

ad In,._. comblnll1ullat ~ quod sacra Scrlplllra In~ IMlnlltllm « apo8illoM lndigel gramaticaproprla vocabada adaptando, diakctka r«ze dlvldendo, supermembra dMslontrJl'OJJM COIIIIOla1ldo - nam conuqw,u In ~ lnldJigitvr d non e conM'.fO, Ill supra ,uu,n ut - ncdtorlca Ol'IIOU Jl"OPOlfffldo "·

The ranaining two aectiona, equal in combinedlength to all the earlier ones which covered division, connotation, distinction and subdivision, concordance, dilatatlo, and the various models of preaching, oft'er a method of producing synonyms and other appropriately uaociatecl words for dividing themes. Their premises are grammatical and they set out ,, F.M. DBLORIIB,L'",tn /adffldl..w" (1944), p. 181. "DBLORIIB,op. di., p. 184. " DELORME. op. di., p. 183. ,. DBLORIIB,op. di., p. 184. sr DBLORIIB, op. di., p. 186.

Digitized by

Go ogle

tk Ghard tb, i'acMr, in Antofdalaan, 19

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

45

EVOLUTION OF THB GENRE

twelve sub-headings (termedchaptersin the treatise), which are organized by suffix. Thus the first section deals with comparativesending in "-bd' and the first entry is "'accidkmls,"followed by its associated words: ex llldtvotione,ex MJm11tJknda, ex~. In exercido,In effectu,In co,po~ "· Geraldus' use of material taken wholesale from works on grammar is the earliest of a series of attempts to bring other studies to bear on preaching theory. In the last qumter of the fourteenth century, Jean de Cbalons, abbot of Pontipy, produced anothershort manual applying the syllogism to sermon writing "· In what seems like a more useful borrowing, the Franciscan Francis Eixemenes of Barcelona (ob. 1409?) adds to his own brief, interesting manual a lengthy section on memory which has copious references to clasaical and Christian authorities on the topic. Francis F.ixemenes' work, the An pmiJca1ldJpopulo, shows many similarities to that of Geraldus de Pilcario. For one, it apresses in its title the new concern of this school of handbook writers : a focus OD preaching methods that work with the common people, not those that limply satisfy the aesthetic and theological concerns of clergy,particularly learned clergy. Not since Humbert of Romans has an author written from 10 strong a pastoral viewpoint. He sharea Humbert's interest in the conduct of the preacher and similarly provides insipts into the practice of medieval preaching. For eumple, Francis advises the preacher not to speak with his audience before or after a sermon '°·Thia manual is more positive than Geraldus' but it has its share of disdainful views of much contemporary preaching practice. Francis enumerates the f01bles of the "'Jffdicatorlb,u ventolli" 61 and excoriates those who use sophisticated theological arguments, themes &om ancient philosophers, and points baaed OD studies in the """""""1Sed 111111nonnu/li wnto supm,w « ~ i,iflad, madl'lcanUs uerbum Dn, qui In sw uentom predkaclonibu.rnulhan jiMm tk p,edictl.rinlffldunl, 1ed podus rq,ugnanmnsdllat glorlam,famam proprlam « honomn. Et ad hoc In compmnptum uerbl Dn « In ,candalum audiffldum conuertunt 1e ad uerba plcta, rlmata ., rdl,orla omata, quibu.r conlungunt pro "" ""61,n OllffltacioM dkta quadri,dl "' ~. f«11"d1W, astrolop ., lnlllia, liut ,. DBI.ORIOi. op. ell., p. 187. " llouU AND ROUSII, Prmdwn, p. 191. • MARTIDB BARCBLONA.L' •on pnlMJlcandl .. M Francoc E""1Mlrb,in Alllll«ta Sacra 71lnYlconffl.da, 12 (1936). p. 312 " MAllTt,op. di., p. 6.

-

Sktti@S@!iE

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

46

CHAPTBR II Mplu.r Illa lporfflt qw dlolnt. a/lqut,ndt, dvblll d raclona pldJo,opl,ictu uanl.rst1Mpstractanl, Imo .,,. "'fl# ad ~ caput ~ """1llnla, laicaJipopu/JJproponw,I d adducunJ theo/ogil:aab el.r lnattingibillapro hoc statu. Et quia isti qua.rt drocona attralwnla buaclablJim'omnem wntum, abtidffltes anplico officio p,wllcantu. nolummt In allquo JiMpredlclorum Deum ~ In notldam d timomn coramR 12•

nu

The same &esh approach is found in Francis' delcription of the predkadonu ...• appropriate form of the sermon : "'fonna autem o~ vidillat, Ml p,edlcaciounbi dbdnifiat ~. /el'W1lti.uinw. 8JJ(ldo.,e. 63 • This brisk summation, a far deuo~. moralita. p,udenle, ~" distance from Alan of Lille's measured "'pmlicatiout manifuta et publlca IMtrucdo. ex ratlonan #ffl/ta, et auctoritatumfmM prowni,e,u"'64, is followed by appropriately short treatments of each of the recommendedcharacteristics. They comprilc about half the manual ; the balance is devoted to memory - a proportion also encountered in the work of Geraldus. Francis Eiximenes has °'P'Jized the opening sections of his manual much in the style of the sermons he is describing. Thus the more serious and complex points in his treatise are contained in the expansions he provides for his adjectives. In this respect, the work marks a departure from the more obviously ltructUred manuals. For example, under the hNdiog "'moralltd', Francis says that sermons to the laity must carry at least one of just three objectives ; ranked in order, they ahould strive to offer moral instruction, then to warn of punishments, and finally to focus the audience on glory. "'Alitercm:ltu mlchi quad •mpn mt #mlO tn.rlpld,upopuJo{lllQlltlllnCII dJcti.ret wrbi.r altu sit adomalus" ". Under "'prudentd' Francis treats the important subject of voice and address and provides counsel on the practicalities of mendicant preaching He offers a few sentences of guidance for adapting sermons to the status or class of the audience and discusses the importance of making the sermon's theme and development correspond to the occasion, be it saint's day, Sunday, or other feast day. He tells the preacher what sort of demeanor is appropriate for prayer, considers suitable gestures and inflection, and advises the mendicant always to have a sermon ready ". MARTI,op. di., p. 5-6. ., MARTI,op. di., p. 309. 62

.. PL, t. 210, col 111. ., MARTI, op. di., p. 14. 11 "'Opus ffffllOfllOft _,,,,,. lffl«l8 ti lral#tu t4!Cllffl omni tm,pore od pm&a,ul,on." (MARTI, p. 316).

Digitized by

Go ogle

/amillartm d tlMdlJen, Ill

IU prompdtJr

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

EVOLUTION OF THE GENRE

47

"Ordillate"is the rubric for coveringthe methods available for expanding the sermon. It includes Francis' sec1ionon manory ; but it opens with a review of ways to expand samons and make them "copious". Methods sugested include the use of opposites, real and vocal concordances, suitable and unsuitable mea of narratives or stories, and several other means, aDsummarized with a mnemonic which Francia calls a "verse" : "Ra, /Jff'80IUl,loaa, factutn, tonpus, ""1Mnl.r, w,x" 67• These compact. practical manuals have given rise to a generallylow modem opinion of the quality of preaclring theory at the end of the middle ages. Taken alone, they do not give an impression of creative theorizing or responsive, adaptive samon practice in the fifteenth century pulpit or preaching cross. Political and other circumatances contributed to this condition in some ways. Enslaod had been one of the centers of an praedicandiproduction.1be Reformation and the foundation of the Church of Ensland seem to have brought an end to independent production of preaching manuals in this nation (although it seems that earlier manuals continued to circulate); instead model sermons and guides for preaching were issued by the monarchs and archbishops. The practice of preaching in Enslaod reached levels of great distinction with such Reformation preachers as Hugh Latimer and John Fisher, but the manual was no lonpr written. Elsewhere, particularly in southern and eastern Europe, the teachings of the nominaliats, Luther and others further focused the Church on the rights, opportunities and obligations of laymen to effect their salvation. Preaching to the people becamea •ignificsmt issue in these debates and produced increased efforts by preachers to instruct parishioners about their weighty personal religious obligations. While G.R. Owst and others have deplored the decline of preaching in the late fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, this evaluation requires further examination. It is true that most of the manuals of this period are shorter, more formulaic, and highly derivative. Only perhaps in the early 16th century in Johannes Surpnt's Manuale Curatorumdoes one encounter an intellect that has reexamined the manual form and preaching itself and attempted to create a more original, fresh set of insights. Nevertheless, the evidence used to prove that preaching in this period was of a lower standard or perhaps done leas frequently is based oo the writings of individuals involved in theological controversy and should be ..,Mil.rt, op. di., p. 321.

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

48

CHAPTER II

read judiciously if one is to form a balanced impression of the era's preaching. Furthermore, it is likely that the populist relip>us tenor created a greater danaod for aermons, and in IOllle cues perhaps a more aopbiaticated one. Church or royal nwutationand popular demand may have required that more clerics preach more sermons. The response of manual writers wu, apparently, a proliferation of •condensed• manuals that simply provided sketches of the essential rules for sermon making Toe one innovation they offered, appropriately,wu regularattention to preaching to the people and a consistent acknowledgment of the distinction between clerical and lay sermon audiences. Earlier manuals recommended simpler IIJUlllCDtl and demonstrations and a lower aeathetic standard. Toe later manuals instead focus on the requirements of popular audiences in their own right and recommended techniques that were especially effective with such groups. Perhaps because preachers weremorepressured to produce sermons, manual readers and their authon wereleas interested in the subtleties of division and dilation that absorbedPseudo-Bonaventure, Baaevorn and even Jacquea of J.'naipano.

5. THB FINAL STAGE: RENAISSANCE MANUALS There are a few very late treatiaea that offer evidence of the new views of history and literary tradition that characterize the Renaisaance in continental Europe. Two excellent exam.plea of this closing period of the medieval manual are the chapters on preaacbingin Antoninua of Florence's S111n1nM SacTM 1'MologfM(Pan IIl. Tit. xvii, Chap. 3-6) and the Mll1IUO# Curatononof Johannes Ulrich Surpnt. Antoninus, Archbishop of Florence, has very little to add to the centuries old views on the principal parts of the sermon and the appropriate conduct of the preacher. His additions consist of a auatained and expanded emphasis on the necessarily distinct character of sermons for the laity and on the special characteristics of mendicant preaching. He refers to and quotes a much wider range of authorities including nearly contemporary preachers and writers ; and he offers a new, relaxed,constructive reference to his personal experience in preaching and his observation of other preachers' practices. Heretofore, allusion to the practice of other preachers was limited to remarks about the methods of those in the •canon•, such as Gregory, Thomas Aquinas,and Bonaventure, or disdain for the bad practice of unnamed contemporaries. Antoninus' sensitivity to contemporary preaching practice and contro-

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

49

EVOLUTION OP THE GENRE

versies appears early in the treatise. At Section iiii he considers the place where one can preach. Moat manual writers have limited themselves to saying sermom must be given in open, public places. But the place of preaching and the right or liceme to preach in various places had been a point of controversy between the regular clergy and the mendicants for ccoturies. Antoninua tackles the issue behind this matter in a straightforward and adroit manner. He begins by saying that preaching is done in a church ; but it can also be done in a field, a camp, or other places ; furthermore, the preacher need not always speak in the same place. Friars, he notes, generally preach in places and at times when regular clergy have not established special preaching times. In his fourth chapter, he treats the faults in preaching that one ought to avoid as well as an important matter, which, again, had not been addressed directly by previous authors : avoiding exciting and disturbing lay audiences with controversialsubjects that are beyond their ken. His example is clearly a current issue of debate in Antoninua' theological circles: Sic np tmrperandu.r at ffmlD ut non prow,canlll1' subdltl contra domJmun ad aliquod mahan ~ domimu contra mbditM tk materla predatl1latlona et pru~ raroloquatur qula popull mak caplunt 1'mJUmet potbu in dl.rturblwn mffllb qu/11fn,ctllln refervnt - d n pura IMlma nanplll cogat ""Pf' ~ libmtu amllrll ad bonu,n d mahanpa eump/a •.

On the various modes of preaching, Antoninus descnbes the styles of Sta Thomas, Bonaventure, and Bernard, where confirmingauthorities for the theme are taken from the evangelists and the epistles, as "modus magistrali.r et magis sciendjic,d' 69• This is familiar material, though the adjective "sciendjicui' has not been used before. What is more unusual is his description of the Mmodern• method of preaching. Only fifty years earlier, Aquinas, et. al., were considered modern preachers. Now Antoninus refers to the preaching of Jacques de Voragine (J anuensis) and Johannes de Sancto Oeminiano as Mmodern•preachers notable for their practice of taking authorities from a variety of scriptural sources. Antoninus' wide familiaritywith contemporary l>fCl'rhingpractice also appears in his discussion of methods of distinction in the sermon : Bernard used this device ; but, Antoninus notes, so did Mauritius and • BodJei •n MS Auct. m Q in&a L 21, Olapter 4, part • ANTONINUs. Cllapter5, put 2

-

s.

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

so

CHAPTBR II

Johannes Culia.

In conaidering another method of expansion, pa

a.uignatloMm, Antonin111 recommends the preacherreferto several sourcea for ideas "ad lnwnlffldum l.rtlu muJtlplicltald'. They include 1nmrn11on

the virtues and vices, the commentary of Petrus de Tarantuio on the epistles of Paul and a book by one "beato tltomtuoH(whom Antonin111 does not believe is Aquinu, but IODle other excellent preacher of the same name). Many oftheae referencesare difflcult to trace. It is tempting to think that this unknown Thornu is the author of the manual, Mot:bu fflfflOCinandi(xiv), who is known u "'Pseudo-Aquinas" and that Mauritius is Mauritius of Leyden whose fifteenth century manual Caplan finds similar to that of Pseudo-Aquinas. Finally, Antonin111ofl'en one of the first comtructive references to observed preaching practices in the manuala. In discuuing how to divide a theme taken from the day's lection, he cites a variant method, using another entire evangelist or epistle, congruent to the day'• reading. u the matter to be divided in its entirety. This device he recalll seeing done by a contemporary on the Feast of Corpus Christi. Presumably,one would do this to arrive at a somewhatmore original treatment of a much worked lcction such as those on major feast days. Johannes Ulrich Surgant published in 1508 in Bud the Mmiuak Curatonon,a treatise that looks back over the tradition of the preaching manual with considerable reverence, but which unmistakably marks the end of the medieval an prtMdieandi. The work is far longer than Antoninus' and was conceived as a free-standing treatise on preaching that could, but need not be, accompanied by an illustrative sermon collection. It shares many characteristics with the Florentine Archbishop's treatise, especially an interest, both scholarly and humane, in contemporary preaching and the theory that undergirds it. This balance of put and present is immediately apparent. Book one begins with Surgant's very contemporary definition of preaching : "predlcatloen wrbi dei conwnlmr et cong,va dispensatto•. He immediately follows this definition with a quotation from Alan of Lille's manual 70• Surgant also shows a responsive awareness of contemporary pastoral issues. In considering who can preach and where preaching can be done within a traditional format, Surgant distinguishes between the formal situation for preaching by regular clergy and the auspices permitted for the mendicants. One has the impression that Surgant is sympathetic to .,. Johanna Ulrich SURGANT, "'MfllflllJ# °"""""1n",

Digitized by

Go ogle

Buel, 1508, p. viii, verso.

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

EVOLUTION OF THE GBNRE

51

the regular clergy,especially when, in contrast to the Dominican Archbishop of Florence, Surpnt's concession to the friars is that mendicants should be mre to have a license for their preaching - and to observe its limitations. A similar sense of contemporary issues can be seen in his treatment of -who can preach•. He prohibits the laity from preaching ; but Surpnt's is the age of active lay devotional groups flourishing especia11yin the Low Countries. So after a long explanation that the penalty of excommunicationawaits preacbinglaymen, he concedes, "potut ~ 1a1cu.tad hortate proxlmuln ad wana wrltalls m:undum divtnam saipt,uamH. This nice distinction may not carry the wisdom of canon law, but it nftects clearly the pastor's unease about teachings OD this volatile issue. Surpnt also freely cites the works of rather late medieval figures not sem in other manuals. Thus Jean Gerson, the theologian, Bishop of Paris, and author of some of the earliest surviving texts of Continental vernacular preaching, is cited in the Prologue for his wisdom OD suiting the complexity of the preaching material to the audience and for the overall simplicity of his sermons. Other later authors cited include Alexander of Balles, a Chancellor of the University of Paris, Henry of Hesse, Petrarch, and Johannes Henlin, among many others. At the end of the treatise, Surpnt shows his earnestness about the importance of ant/a in preaching. He offers evidence of the impact of printing OD expectations about clerical study and learning, plus further sympathies for the regular clergywhich hint that he himselfwas accuatomed to living and preaching in the same place for rather long periods of time. He sugests titles for the preacher's hbrary, cautioningthat at the outset the preacher cannot own very many books so he must choose carefully. Nonetheless he sugesta such a lengthy list of desirable works that Surpnt must have viewed the mature preacher or at least his chapter house as having a very large collection indeed. Essential is an excellent thesaurus. Then, in addition to the works of the masters Jerome, Augustine, Ambrose and Gregory, the preacher should collect the PostJ/JasOD the evangelists and the epistles of William of Paris, the Sennologium *sauri

novl tk tempore & sanctu, 'Je,ctumsenlffltiariumet Rationale dtvlnorum uj/idorum(probably Beletheus),and the Co,,q¥,,dlll1ntlt«,/oglecum sp«uJo exemplonun.If po111ble, the preacher should also acquire the Summa of Antoninus of Florence and the Cont:ordantitumaloru et Bibliam nunc Btullee lmpraMDn cum glose ordlnarlaet Nfdlolai tk Lyra. lbe list is long and it ends recommending "others printed and unprinted•.

-

S,g,t,l@JJt

'30

~l@

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

52

CHAPTBll II

While Surgant had high ~• for the erudition of preachers, he combined it with an inaiateoce that they preach appropriately and eft"ectively to their audiences. The Vf1CYtitle of his treatise, Milllllllle Curatonan,suggeatathe emphaaia he placea on the whole of the pastor's responsibilities to his cure, not just his preaching obligations. Effective instruction through preaching is at least as important as the writing of wise sermons. Surgant thus insists that the preacher needa more than knowledge of scripture and other moral treatises. In a strongly worded passage reminiPont of Augustine's arguments in the De doctrlnacluutiana, Surgant requires that the pastor also be a good rhetorician. To muter these akilla,he urges readers to study writings on oratory and preaching. imbued with great fruitfulness and utility, ao that he can be a Mdivine rhetor". Later, in Chapter 11, .,De lntrod,,ctioM", Surgant recommends that the preacher take an example from the rhetoricians specializing in letters, orations, and legal debate. Furthermore, in introducing themes and narrations the preacher should supply a proemium that explains why the passage is to be preaented ..,,,,_ via paNtur In ip8llffl quod su.rcqerlmlu narrandum".Elsewhere, showing his sensitivity to thelimitsof the usefulness of contemporary rhetorical learning, Surgant cautions against using grammatical analysis to expand the sermon. In a later section he similarly cautions against building divisions and distinctions on the principles of genus and species ; these belong more to disputation than to preaching. Furthermore, while MtllllllJlecura1on1m is noteworthy for the number of references to late medieval authors, on rhetoric Surgant refers the reader repeatedly to Book 3 of Aristotle's RMtorlc and, somewhat less frequently, to Cicero. A natural adjunct to Surgant's interest in rhetorically eft"ectivepreaching is his concern for the language of preaching. Other fifteenth century and some earlier manual writers observed that sermons to the laity should be preached in the vernacular. Surgant's manual devotes an entire lengthy book to "De practil:a artl8 predkato~ tuna ~ thntonicum" and the opening book on preaching also refers to the appropriate uses of Latin and vernacular in various parts of the sermon. Thus, the five po111ble modes of preaching to the laity include taking a Latin theme "811b silentio,. which is set out with one or more conmmingauthoritiesor quotations ;

"et deinde intToduuN 80lutationemad popu/um in w,igtn

In Chapter 8, on the parts of the sermon, Surgant again notes that if the theme is proposed in Latin, the preacher should switch from the vernacular for the salutation and then restate the thane in the vernacular.

Digitized by

Go ogle

~

#1111DM...

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

53

BVOLUTION OF THE GENRE

Some of the most interesting inmghta on the practice of medieval preaching are oft"eredin Surpnt's advice on -Vemacularizing" sermons. Book I, chapter 18, is titled HIN reguJu YU/garlzandtn and it addreaaea the translation of sermons from Latin to the vernacular. Surpnt makes no uaumption that the preacher would compose his sermon in Latin ; but he is concerned that the vernacular sermon be well spoken. He thus warns against translating through cognates, instead urging the preacher to go llf'rom sense to sense". With the end of the middle ages, defined for our purposes u ca. 1500, the writing of preaching manuals for thematic sermOl'Imaking also came to a virtual conclusion. Some early printed editions of manuals were produced and circulated, but, with the possible exception of Erasmus' IN aJV conclonandithere are no typically "medieval" manuals on thematic preaching produced after the earliest decades of the sixteenth century. The form bu indeed been pradiced up to the present day, often under titles such u "manual on the art of preaching". But increasingly the emphasis on thematic structure and certainty-borne demonstration bu faded. Lasting only about three centuries, the an p,Mdlcandi wu a particularly representative product of the religious culture of the high middle ages.

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

CHAPTER III

RULES OF CRITICISM 1. THE THEMATIC SERMON The an ~dkandi originated to descn1>e and encapsulate a new method of preaching that developed at the end of the twelfth century. Though the manual adapted to changes in the expectations put upon preachers and to shifting trends in pastoral theology in ensuing centuries, all the medieval mws~dkandi began with the assumption that they were guides to the preparation of thematic sermons. Their common purpose makes familiarity with this sermon form and the conventions of instruction in the manuals important for recognizing nuances in the genre's development and evolution. It is most likely that the enumerative precision of many of the scholastic manuals represents eft'ort to descn1>e a complex, 8ourishing sermon practice ; the manuals are not just prescriptions for less able or experienced preachers. With this premise it is easier to understand the contradictions among the manuals about scholastic sermon structure and the functions of the various sermon parts. A tradition had emerged and matured that was regarded as aesthetically and intellectually pleasing, that served, in a range of realizations, several important classes of sermon audiences and that satisfied the main objective of preaching - to incite devotion and good conduct among audiences. The thematic sermon, almost universally, began with a brief' scriptural text, preferably taken from the day's liturgical readings in the evangelists or the day's lesson ; it was thus closely linked to the cycle of the mass. The text was called a theme. Late Roman and early medieval preachers used whole readings as the texts for their sermons and medieval preachers were encouraged to do this u well ; but the medieval thematic method, considered •modem" by the manual writers, took only a complete phrase or sentence as its starting point 71• After quoting the theme, the preacher prayed. Alan of Lille quoted the

11 For dilcu11iom of the •moc1em• method• •ee Robert Buevorn (KRUL, op. di., p. 127-130) and Thomu Waley• (CHAllLAND,Ana praalkandl .•., p. 358-361).

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

55

RULES OF CRITICISM

classical rhetoricians in declaring that the purpose of the prayer was to capture the good will (:'caplill'ebowJOkntlMj of the audience while invoking divine aid 72• 'Ibis purpose never changed. Thomas Waleya added that the prayer asked for aid to enable the preacher to make a good sermon and for the audience to profit from it 73• In these ways the prayer set the voice and address framework of the sermon. Following the prayer the preacher introduced the protheme, the moat difficult feature by far for handbook writers (and modern critics) to explain. E. Gilson, for example, observed that the theme is followed by 74• the protheme "dont le rapport au premilr n'ut PM toujours The protheme consisted of a second quotation, usually acriptmal. not necessarily from the days liturgy, but on a topic relevant to the sermon's general message, which was very briefty discussed. The protheme may have served as a transition section, or as an artful rhetorical digression. Very few surviving sermon texts have clearly identifiable prothemes yet they are discussed in almost every preaching manual. After the protheme, the preacher "introduced" the theme by restating it and hegioning to "expand" it by declaring the divisions or dilations he intended to treat in the body of the sermon. Having nothing or too little to say seems to have been the primary amiety of medieval preachers. Copious supplies of materials for preaching are promised by some manual writers. For example, an anonymous treatise begins "Ad inwmiendumvku diwrsa.rpredit:andi ... " 75• F. Eiximenia' manual sets out an mtire section of ten rules "ad coplo.dorem matmam habendam ad predlcandum•.... 16• Thomas Waleys advisedthat a well chosen theme will never leave the preacher without possibilities. He explains that there are many ways to expand a sermon: "Si ~ aliler fet, hoc mt proJWr auctorilatllm pemmam •·quam non ~tur st tMma MM acuperlt, prudn,tn divunit, ~, a/la ser,awrit quae supm,udocuJ" 11• Most preaching manuals are 0tpoized as part-by-part analyses of the sermon, proposing to move from bqpooing to end in an orderly manner. The majority of manuals follow this format until they reach "division", for division was both a part of the sermon and the essential creative

,.,,_nt"

,,,_dicato,.

n ALAN OF LILLI!, PL, L 210, col 113. » OIAlu.AND,op. cit., p. 349. "•Michel Menot...•, p. 102. "CAPLAN

•S: BerlinMS 637 (Theol fol 252), ft 193-195-.

MARTI,L"'An ,,,.&a,,dl• ... , p. 21 fl'. 77 OIAlu.AND,op. cit., p. 387.

76

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

56

CHAPTBll Ill

activity that made a sermon IUCCeldbl. Preacbing manual, UIWllly fOCUI their attention on division and their structural, part-by-part treatment of the sermon often breaks down at this point into a compendium of preaching strategies and rhetorical devices usem1 for dividing themes. In treating division, or sometimes in di1CU1singtheme, many rnan 11al1 focus clearly on rbetorical invention, deacnbing bow a theme can be chosen and how its diviaiona (or the points to be made in the ICl'IDOD) can be suited to particular occuiona or audiences. Othen viewed their of sermonparts (varioualy sections on division aa advice on writing a IClriea called dtll.do, SMbdivi.rio, dllltatlo) while in fact they were presenq explanations of the second step of composition in claalical rhetoric : diaposition or setting down of parts. Some authors th111 speak of the next "'part" of the sermonaa the division, which it then followed by the subdivision. Sometimes they speak also of the p,o#Cllllo or the playing out of the divisions ; others dilcUla similar ideas under the rubric dililatlo. Additionally, most manuals conlide:r, in some form, the "'colon" of rhetoric, which can properly be seen u the methoda for carrying out the dupo.ritio. The authors of the earliest manuals focmed their advice on invention : on the varieties of moral and spiritual topics a preacher rnipt speak of and the ways in which such topics rnipt be introduced in preaching in a convincing and credible way. The thematic ICl'DlOll at this stage is a topic statement expanded by three divisions which are in tum 111bdivided. The emphasis on citing many, primarily scriptural, authorities to validate the preacher's interpretation of his theme (that ia, hia division and subdivisions) waa the primary contribution of this era. In this regard the manuala of Alan of Lille and William of Auverpe are particularly noteworthy. Pseudo-Bonaventure's contribution in the thirteenth century demonstrates the interest of a later period in further developing aesthetic and intellectual standards for relating the various authority-baaed points and illustrations. 1b111 Pseudo-Bonaventure considen at lmgth the ways in which confinning authorities can properly agree with one another and posits two primary means of "'concording"authorities, -real" and "'vocal". All thia is relatively simple to see in a continuous evolution of preaching form in the manuals until Pseudo-Bonaventure recommendsdutinctlo and dilatatioaa addtdona/means to expand sermons,that ia, aa alternatives to division and 111b-diviaion. Thia conflation of the work of di.rpo.rilioand the means available to achieve it can be seen again when laterwriters

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

57

RULES OF CRITICISM

like Martin of Cordova 71 speak of the division, the dilation and the distinction as various pan., of the sermon itaelf. Despite the proliferation of terms and methoda of expanding and dividing a sermon's thane, what emerged by the later fourteenth century was a gmc:nl agreement that the preacher should present a theme and build bis sermon on several central points (the preference was for three) present in some way in the theme. The preacher was free to choose these points to accompliah the particular lessons he wanted to offer bis audience. The manuals gave advice on ways in which the points could be found in the theme and they called this action "division", probably because one of the most straightforward ways of expatiating on a theme was actually to divide its text into several phrases and consider the meaning of each one. Other methods of "division" included definitions of words in the theme ; selection of a word and consideration of its opposite ; anagogical. spiritual. literal and/or tropological interpretation of the theme or phrases within it ; and so on.climaxing in Baaevorn's inventoly of 22 "colors" - moat of which were intended to be used in this manner "· In the manner of a good orator, preachers were instructed to declare their "division" or the primary points they intended to make in their sermons before setting oft' to make them. Movement from one division or part to the next was to be clearly indicated. What is interesting is that, in practice, far more time and effort seem to have been devoted to the first division than to any others ; indeed the final division of most sermon texts from this period seems hardly expanded at all. Similar haste.perhaps even desultorineas, is apparent in the instructions on ending a sermon. While virtually every manual from the fourteenth century onward sets out to discuss the parts of a sermon. and most provide lengthy explanations on various methods of expanding sermons, almost no attention is given to ending them. Thia applies to Alan of Lille, Pseudo-Bonaventure, Henry of Hesse, Martin of Cordova and "Fernando RUBIO,"Ar.rpraaJlcaNJl"tk FrtryMardllM Cordoba,in La Cbuladtk DIM, 172 (1959), p. 342 n: .,, A few later manualatook up 101De interesting apecialtiea IUCb u venificatioa in sermon •, ayllogiltic proof',or lpecia1 ltylea ol diction in preacbiq. See, for uunple, the manualof Jean of Clwonl, CL 1370,beginning "Hee utan lnvl8 d cJarofacllNJI.,,,...,, ~ artmr syl/ogl.rtlaun." See allo the anonymousmanual in Inmbnlck Univenity MS 569, tr. 1-12 (15th c.) (Caplan• 145) which comider1 cum11 and rhythm in it• review ol preachina technique. See allo the manual titled Ar.rpm/lcaNJI tk 1'ldn) Ill plll1aa,,lllblln atracla d lndpld,ot Illa S,,,,,,,_ ~ (IStb c., Caplan •Sa).

-

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

58

CHAPTER III

many othen. Those who do treat the topic, 'lbomu Waleya and Robert Buevorn, for example, limply advise that a fitting prayer be offered. Surviving preaching texts are limilar in their inattention to the sermon's ending.

2. AUTHORSHIP Scnbal identification of preaching manual authors is often neglected or unreliable. Because a great many of the manuals are shorter than twenty folios, a copy of an an praedk:andiwu often slipped into a codex containing longer works ; the manual writer's identity wu thus not so important to "clefining• the volume and wu often not clearly indicated. Two other complementary forces also complicate issues of authorship : the apparmtly widespread urge to write original preaching manuals, coupled with the desire to enhance their importance by claimin1 distinguished authors for them. The second phenomenon can be seen in the spurious ascriptions to Bonaventure and Aquinu or in the complex textual traditions and ascriptions to Henry of Hesse (also known u Henry of Langenstein, Vice Chancellor at Paris 1378-1382). In addition, Charland has searched for a number of manuals said to have been written by distinguished theologians and religiousfigures and found no texts. These ghosts include manuals by Fran~ de Fabriani, OFM (ob. 1322); Henri E.ger(13281408) ; Philip of Florence, OFM (fl. at Paris ca. 1310); Robert Holkot (ob. 1349) ; Goswin de Hex ; and Hermann Oorwist (also known u Hcnnannus Allemanus ). A great many such incipits or titles are listed in medieval or Renaissancehbrary catalogs but have not been seen since. Complementiq this tendency to attribute manuals to famous men wu the surprising energy relatively unknown men devoted to composing manuals. That there wu a markethungry for preaching manuals can be inferred from the modesty topos that opens the ams of many writers including Humbert of Romans and Robert of Buevom. A good example of this practice is the opening of Geraldus de Piscario Ars /at2ndi ,Jff'ffl()M,J

:

QualYl.rti a

tk fadlndl.r collatlonlb,u et ttrmonlb,u poult an spedalu a/Iqua tnVffllrl. Ad quod brnll4r ,upo,uJ«, quot nc : quam aliqul penit,u ignoranla, out tMmaJadlviMrt a«lpleruJo Scrlptwam datnaml tk .n,a sciffllia prUll1Mndo out antlquonlm crcorla1lt Ctl1ftlbdlol. Unlk taJa

Digitized by

,,w utrum

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

S9

RULES OF ClllTICISM

.ftwqwnt, collationo tit HmlOlla allonon mwla1II " /«:IIM, tit ld«J ut /poranlla, qula nobmJ# cln:a arlem l,uft,mtodl I« quadam 1Mlllb IMrtla laborare.tk cartabdlll ab allb edltls~ : Ignorant enlm (IIIOdta/u an ,el ldmtia llaberl non pomt siM u.n, et eurdlio SJ¥Cla}i•.

~MC'°"""

Many an admired preachcr wu, it would seem, moved to write a manual so that others might learn from him. The enormous number of unattn"buted manuals or manuals thought to survive in fewcr than five copies furthcr mpports the notion that many preachers felt called to write arta praedicandl.A view of this state of affairs can be had by examiningthe manuscript inventories undertaken by Harry Caplan and T.·M. Owland 11• Caplan and Charland have identified texts for about sixty difl'erent manual authors. Nineteen of these authon' manuals are reported to survive in just a single manuscript: Antoninus of Florence (though this manual wu much printed after 1500), Baldus de Perusio, Christian Borpleben, Frater Dionisio, John Felton, Jacob Januensis (also known u Jacques de Voragine), Jacobo Mape, Judocua (Weiter) de Hailbnmna, Johannes Keck, Hugo de Sneyth, Mgr. Korburck, Nicholai Eyfelcr Conlenti, Nicholas Oresimus, Boni Petri, Michael ofHunpry(alsoprinted after 1500),Jobn ofOwerdnia, Landulphe de Manzoriis, Denys Briseno,and Thomas of Salisbmy. Fifteen more authon' works survive in four or fewcr exemplars.In addition, Caplan cites 162 anonymous treatisesoccurringin 172 difl'erent manuscripts. this mm eighty-five appear in single exemplarsand anothcrsixteen in just two exemplars. the sixty known authors, only sixteen produced manuals that have survived in the twentieth century in more than five exemplars ; anothcr four manuals by unknown authors survive in these numbers. This profile underscores the ..cottage industry" nature of the preaching manual tradition - a great many men were motivated to write their own treatises; no single treatise or small number of texts constituted a canon for the genre. To the author listing provided in Caplan's Handlin Supplement(p. 28) should be added Thomas Chobham (xii), Alexandcr of Ashby (xiii, Caplan

or

or

• DBI.OllllB,L' •...tr.r fadlltdl #mllJlld' ...• p. 180. •• Tbae worta are many decadea old now, andthey have not been updated 1be following analysil tb111 may be IOIDeWbalout of date and not relect work done by ICbolua OD •temmata and manUICripttraditiom of individual authors lince that time. Until this new work ii collated with Clwland'1 and Caplan'• lilts, we can only use analyles of the 1011 that follow to determme general trends and pattenu in manUICript diatn"bution and autbonbip.

-

2,;aa;

us ~il

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

60

CHAPTER Ill

•67), Nicholu Bohemua (xiv, •65, • 173), John of OwidcrDia (xiv), Martin d'Ambert (xiv), Nicholu Oreaimua (xiv,• 101), Ludovicua de Rocha (xiv,• 159), Magister ICorburck (xiv, •48), Frater Altaziua, OM (xiv, •91), Ranulph Higden (xiv, •26, • 156), Denys Briseno (xv), Etienne Hoeat (xv), Martin of Cordova (xv), lbomu Penketh (xv), 1bomas of Salisbury (xv), Simon Alcock (xv, •8, •94), John Felton (xv, •9), Jacobo Mapi, (xv, •74), Jacobus Paridilo (xv, •80), Judocus Weiler de Hailbrunna (xv, •23), Nicholu de Lyra (xv,• 145), Nicholu Eyfeler Conftuentini (xv, • l0a), and Johannes Surpnt (xvi). It remains to be ddermined for what audiences these approximately 110 diff'enmt authon wrote. Were these manuals, for example,primarily prepared by canons and muten in houses of study where atudmts written for mendicant or other preaching ~ ? Several, like William of Auvergne who wu Cllancel1orat Paris or Antoninus who wu Archbishop of Florence, held positions of considerable reapon11bilityin the church. Many were attached to universities u faculty at some time during their careers, but it 1eC1D1 in many cues that their preaching manuals may not have been written until after they departedfrom the universities. It is likely that Alan of Lille, one time Muter at Paris, wrote his manual in retirement.Othen seem to have been churchmen of more modest attainments : Richard of Thetford wu a canon regular who wrote the moat widely distributed of all the manuals ; Robert Basevorn, who wrote one of the most elaborate manuals, is unknown to us save for the five manuscripts of his Forma .Plwdicandi. More than half of the known manual writers weremembers of the mendicant orders, Franciscan, Dominican and Augustinian affiliation• being the most frequent. Of the aixty known manual authon dating from the twelfth through fifteenth centuries, twenty-nine are identified by Charland or Caplan u Dominicans, Aupstinians or Franciscans. The religious orders of a great many of the othera are limply unknown to us.

3.

STATE OF THE

TEXTS

The formats in which many medieval scn"bea produced amsprMdicandi sugest that they were working texts for men who did not desire artistic embellishment in their manuscripts. Many of the manuals are written on raw parchment ; the later ones are almost always written on paper. The acribal hands frequently have cursive rather than formal, book hand qualities ; the manuscript& seemnever to have been ilhuninated , Rubrication

Digitized by

Google .

~•

-

61

RULES OP CRITICISM

is also rare, and flourishing. though more common, is not often of high quality nor is it consistently employed in a given codex. While the ana texts themselves vary widely in length and intepity, they are most often recordedin octavo volum~ that is, in formats small enough to be carried conveniently. A great many of them are to be found now in great European libraries where they have been well kept for centuries ; despite this, they show sips of ruged wear, u if they were frequently consulted in small monastic, collegiate or diocesan hbraries. 1be emphasis on practical, usefilltats is alsoevident in the considerable disregard for their intepity. A great many of the aria are abort, in the range of 20,000 words. It is quite common for scribes to combine the work of several different authon, often from different centuries, under a single title and attnbution. Other codices contain several different manuals, u if collected u reference volumes on preaching theory. In many caw, the manuals are tucked into collectionsof other mataiala that might be of use to a preacher : theological treatisea, penitential treatises, and Jloril4#a,or alpbahdic-t collectiom of scriptural and other topoi suitable for sermons. 1be exceptions to the generallyinelegant character of cocticeacontaining preaching manuals are those included with collectionsof sermonsattributed to great medieval preachers like Aqumu, Albertua Magnus and Bonaventure.Oftm produced in folio, IIIU8lly rubricated (or intended to be rubricated and never finished), these manUICripts aomctimca include u prefatory or concluding mataia1 aria which are spurioualy attributed to the great preacher.

4. LANGUAGE AND THB STRUCTUllB OF THB MANUALS Vutually all the manuals are written in Latin and, from the fourteenth century on, u with most texts of this era, the author's native tongue shows itself increasingly in his Latin syntax and diction. An important exception to the Latin tradition of the preaching manuals is the development of vernacular and popular interests in the fifteenth century. Just u the manuals begin to address preaching to the people in this period, so they allO consider issues of vernacular preaching style. This development is especially strong in German speaking regions and in Eastern Europe, u can be seen by the titles and incipita of several manuals:

uL:n;sssgm

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

62

CHAPTBR III

Jonnapmlkatorl.r YDlffltl.r.mn,o,wm /tlffl'I ad popllb,m•, a Latin prologue to a German ICl'lllOll which survives in three 15th century manuscripts (Caplan •S·53c). "CllllOIID rhetorla sacn cum glouulll gmnanlcll' (15th c., Caplan • 14). .,Hie notandll ut

This focus on the vernacular culminates in a set of late preaching manuals written primarily in German: "Modi lncolumdisermonagmnanld', incipit: "Der al1n4ctlgGot .. (15th c., Caplan • S-41). "Ordo predlcandiad popuban Germania", incipit: "In a/Jenguten Waken ... ,. (15th c., Caplan •S9).

Vernacular backgrounds aside.the language of the manuals is highly conventional. The terms for the sermon parts are established at the very beginning of the tradition, in the late twelfth centmy, and genenlly do not change in form or in referent throughout the middle ages. Similarly, the format of the manuals is quite uniform. Moat beginwith a consideration of the vocation of preaching and the necessity for exemplary conduct by preachers. Some address techniques of delivery. They then treat. partby-part, the components of the sermon, generally ending in a detailed review of the rhetorical "coloru'. Molt of the text is devoted to the selection of the theme and the conventions for dividing it. Two interesting exceptions to the general uniformity of the manuals are versed manuals and those that develop extended metaphon. Caplan identified one handbook written in verse. It concerns eleven precepts for sermon delivery. It begins : " JOHN

OP BBLBlllO, Rllllalla#m-on.,,

Oj/idonlM,PL, t. 202, col 54; cf. CCCM, t.

41A, p. 82

-

SMtd@@gfa

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

CHAPTER II

EVOLUTION OF THE GENRE

1. THE APosTOLIC AND EARLY MIDDLE AGES Evidence suggestingan early tradition of teaching catechumens how to pray appears in the ICCOlld-centuryapology of Justin Martyr, but he gives no information about how the teaching waa done 14• From the second until the eighth century works on prayer, usually titled ck modo orandi or simply ck orando,concentrate on the benefits of prayer, the proper state of mind, the posture, time, and place appropriate for prayer. The germ of the an orandi, however, shows itself'in the patristic interest in analyzing and classifying bl"blicalprayer. The model for this simplest kind of codification is I Tunothy 2.1 in which St. Paul recommends ~ supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings (obs~cradoMs, orationes, postu/atioMs, gratlantm actiona) be made for all men". For Paul, praise, petition, and thanks are thus the three basic functions of prayer. Paul's terms, particularly supplication(ob•cratlo) and~r(oratio), bad overlapping definitions even in apostolic times. As we shall see, later commentators strain to distinguish between them without actually correcting the divinely inspired list. St. Paul is descriptive rather than prescriptive, accepting aa valid prayer, in Romans 8.26-27, even "unspeakable groanings (gemllibus iMnam,l,ilibus)".However, in I Corinthians 14.2-27be qualifies the value of speaking in tongues ; this kind of prayer does not profit fellow Christians unless an interpretation is supplied : • And therefore he that speaketh by a tongue, let him pray that be may interpret 15". The earliest commentaries agree with Paul that God does not need prayer to be made in words in order to understand the intent of the one praying. Divine wisdom anticipates all human needs. However, the one praying, and bis auditors, if the prayer is spoken or shared,gain understanding and show worthiness by the act of prayer. w PG, t. 6, col. 345. Tbe treatment cf prayer by Apoqi1ta ii dilcu1Nd by E.G. JAY, Orlp,I '.r tnatiff an Prtry., p. 13-17• ., For a detailed diacuuion of prayer in the Paulineepiadea,see E.G. JAY, op. di., p. s fl'.

Digitized by

Go ogle

~ UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

-

87

EVOLUTION OF THB GENRE

Prayer as a Cbriatian activity is first treated •~ematically by Cement of Alexandria (d. 21S) as part of Book 7 of bis S~is. Cement celebrates prayer as the constant and internal conversation of the Gnostic or near-perfected Christian with God 16• The first three Christian works exclusivelyon prayer were also written in northern Africa, within fifty years of each other, Tertullianand Cyprian writing in the Romanprovmce, Origen in Alexandria. Tertullian wrote his Llbo ,- Orationebetween 200 and 206, Origen wrote his ~atiM on Prayn ca. 231-250, and Cyprian wrote bis Llbo • Oratione Dominica ca. 250 17• All four are more concc:rnedwith the obligations to and benefitsof prayer and the hours and place of prayer than with the verbal aspects. For the study of prayer in western literature Tertullian is the most important of these early writers ; Tertullian acknowledges confeaaion and penance as types of prayer in his diacuaaionof "Forgive 111 our debts" 11• The greatest of the rnmajzed Africans who wrote about prayer was, of course, Augustine of Hippo (354-430). Moat of his works refer to prayer at least in passing. In De Doctrina ChristianaAugustine's analysis of Paul as a rhetoocum set a precedent for applymg classical rhetorical criteria to Christian materials 19• A teacher of rhetoric himself, Augustine's analysis of Paul's rhetoric fostered the classical concept of pakkia, learning through imitation by setting out the beat models and imitating them. Augustine follows the Pauline classification in I Tonothy 20 • He also stresses the importace of prayer as petition 21• Augustine is responsible for two of the major types of paternoster explications. His De Sermonein Monu 22 gave rise to the heptemeral tradition which has received the moat scholarly attention 23 • The second major tradition of 11 CUllolNT OP ALIIXANDJUA,Sl1'0lnlllal,1. a. A.L LILLBY, Praya In Clui.rllanTMology, London, 1925, p. 2; and E.G. JAY, Orlp,r':r n.atw an Prtzy., London, 1954, p. 26-35. 17 E.G. JAY, op. ell., p. 3. JAY providea the beat review of early Cuiltian writen OD prayer, p. 3-85. ••PL, L 1, c:ol 1162-1163. TmlTULUA.Ndiacuaw ooafeuioo and penance in areater detail in /h Poall6tdla, cbapw 9 and /h Baptllmo, cbapler 20. "lln.A.RY OP PomBRS (c. 291-371). in diacuuina the opening worda of IOIDe of the Paalma u ccordla,anticipa&ed Aupatine'1 gmeral approachbut did not carry through with a rhetorical analylia, PL, L 9, c:ol 347-349. » PL, L 33, col 635-636. JI G. OA.JtCIA, DoctrlNI de la orradofa, ill A.......,, 18 (1973), p. 279. DPL, L 34, col 1276-1308. 21 In De SerntOMIn Mo,w AUGUSTINB ulOCiated the N¥eD petitions of the patemotter with the pb oftbe Holy Gboat lilted in luiab 11.2-3 and aeven of the eipt Beatitudes. Heptemerology continued to impire preacben of the Lord'• Prayer iD P.ql1ad until the

°""""""

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

88

CHAPTBR II

paternoster explicationltmll from Aupltine'• Encldrldlonor Handbook24• Neither Augustine'• explanation• of the paternoster nor bi1 other commentaries on prayer is really an an orandl even thouah, u William Noon puts it, "in the later chapters of bi1 Confunon.r, St. Aupatine does sound at times u though he were l'pelldng to God u he might do to a very superior professor m rhetoric" 25 • Augustine's contemporary from Province, Culian (360-435) provided the rationale for including confession of sin u an essential type of prayer. He explained Paul's obMcralloin I Timothy u synonymous with dq,w:atlo, and hence a plea to be freed from sin ». After Cassian the essential types of Clviatian prayer became confession, praise, petition, and thaok•giving. The followers of St. Paul and Cassiancontinued to classify and give examples, adding to the p •a)m1 and the paternoster cited by the earliest writers, hymns, ae1ectiom from the liturgy, and other available or original prayers. 2. THE EIGHTH THROUGH ELBVBNTH CENTuRIES Alcuin (734-804) in his De Usu Psalmorumprovides the next step in the development of the an oTOlldi with his instructions for the use of psalms in private prayer. Alcuin gives eight specific uses of psalms in private prayer. These are, in brieC: 1. To make a good penance, say DomiM M In furore [Psalm 6]; Domine, exaudi [Psalm 16]; beati quo,vm remi.uM 811111 ••• [Psalm 31] also MiMmY ,rwi [Psalms 4, 55, 56] ; Dem, m:undam magnam [Psalm SO]; and De Profundi.r[Psalm 129]... 2. To illuminate your mind with spiritual joy ... say psalms Exaudl, Domine j,uticiam rMam [Psalm 16) ; Ad ~ DomiM, Lnavi [Psalm 24] ...

Reformation. See M. HUSSBY, D. Pdlllolu a/tlwPlll6t'tf0d6 • Jletllnol &tflbl, Lillral,n, in Medblm .Amon, 21 (1958). p. 15. ,. AUGUSTINE, Enddridlon, CCSL, t. 46, p. lUHll, 30.115; tnntJ•ted by LA. llAND, u Falll,, H~ 01td Cluutty. Wcstmimter,Maryland and London,1955, chapter 30, 115 (Ancient Oui1tian Writen, 3). The treatment of the Pe!emoater in the &drlrldlo,a ii diffuse rather than ay1tematic, making up a anaU part of the work which epitomizes moat of Augustine'• major teecbi11gIn the NCti011moat coacemed with the Paternoater, Augustine excludes the salutation end divides the mbtequeat clauaeainto threespiritual petitiom and four temporal 011ea(Encldrldlo,s,chapter 31, 118). 25 W.T. NOON, Podry and Prayer, p. 38-39. » 1h Oratiotw Collallo,PL, t. 49, col 783-784.

Digitized by

Go ogle

Orlginal from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

89

BVOLUTION OF THB GENRE

3. To praise God, say psalms entitled or beginning with .,{/k/uia... or psalms 71, 72, 73... 4. If afflicted with temptations, say psalms beginning with Dn.r, Dn.r mn.r [Psalm 21) ; ,up/a In me... [Psalm 12)... S. If you are disgusted with this present life... chant in this way : Quam &eta [Psalm 84) and Dn.r, Dn.r mn.r [Psalm 21).•• and the mercy of God will console you. .. 6. If you think you are abandoned by God in tribulations ... Domine, Dftu aurlbru nostris [Psalm 43)••. 7. After arriving at tranquility and in a time of prosperity, chant these psalms in praise : &MdJcam Domino [Psalm 33] ; bmedk an/ma IMO [Psalms 102, 103)... 8. If you think it over in your inner mind to exercise younelf in divine praises and precepts and heavenly commands [say] the psalm Beall tmmaculatl In wa[Psalm 118)... Alcuin also contn'butes his own prayers to the psalms and traditional prayers that he recommends. In a final statement of the general use of the psalms, Alcuin says that in the Psalter his reader will have material for reading, study, and teaching until the end of life 27• Later Carolingian prayer books perpetuate Alcuin's instructions for the use of psalms in private prayer 21• The epistolary prefaces to St. Anselm's Prayen and Meditations,written mainly before 1080 19, make his prayers the earliest conscious models for original prayers directed to particular saints. Not only are these prayers written in rhymed prose (the rhetorical cumu), but Anselm has invited Matilda of Tuscany -io compose others after their example• 30• Although Anselm's prayers are studded with rhetorical devices, he does not use any of the rhetorical terms describing parts of composition, except narratio and petldo, words which were never restricted solely to rhetoric 31• Anselm's work wu immensely admired, even inspiring a series U111halnton,m, PL, L 101, col 465-469. • R.W. SOU11111RN, Salld .4JWlm IINI lrb B,,,,.,_; a SIIMly a/ JIOIIIUllt:L(e IINI 7J,oupt, Cambridae (&alancl), 1963, p. 41. • The copy lelll to Matilda of Tulcany WU Nllt in 1104 but the prayen were compoaed earlier. See R.W. SOUTHBllN,op. di., p. 3S-36. • ST. ANSELM, traml., B. WARD,7le P,ayen IINI Jledlladon.raf St. AJWim, New York and Aylesbury, 1970, p. 90. "G.R. EvANS.A WOflb a/ St. AWbn, Millwood (New York). 1984, 4 wt Thia concordance ii keyed to the odition orF.S. ScllloTT: ANsBLM,Opera Omnia, E.dinburgb,1946, rpt. 1961, 6 vol. :rr 1h

~to,_

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

90

CHAPTER II

of DWlUICriptiDuatratiomin which Amelm ii shown presenting Matilda with his book ». Moreover, a large aglutination of anonymous prayers was transmitted with An-elm's genuine works"· Anselm's success seems to have pre rmpted the field for a time, hamperingthe development of more precise manuals. Anselm's prayers were imitated, but apparently not his prefaces. 3. THE TwELFrH

THROUGH FIFrEENTH CENnJRIES

In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the genre ripens and we find two kinds of ana orandl: works with a UDivenity or cathedral IChool background, applying scholastic analysis and the rules of rhetoric to prayer, and works on how to pray written as part of inatructions for mrmbcn of religious orders. These two kinds continue to appear throughout the later middle ages. In addition, a third kind develops, apparently in the fourteenth century : .vs orandl written specifically for the private devotions of laypeople. The traditional structure of an oration, derived from Cicero's De ln'Vffllione and the anonymous Ad Hemuuum consists of an introduction (exordiumor pronnium) which gains the goodwill of the audience (captatio benevolentiM), either directly or indirectly (ln.dnuatio). The body of the oration contains a statement of facts (namulo), enumeration of points the speaker wishes to make (divl.rioor part/llo), proof (co,ifirmatlo),and a refutation of opposing arguments (refvtatio). The oration ends with a summarizing or hortatory conclusion (concbuio). A process of generalization took this rhetorical structure and applied it to letters, presumably since letters were considered speeches at a distance M. In the arta dictaminis the letter begins, like the oration, with an exordium composed of a salutation and captatlo be.volentlM. In the body of the letter the statement of facts is followed not by an enumeration (partttio)but by a request or petition (.Petillo).The letter ends, as letters still do, with a

J°""""

n 0. PA.CRT,71wllbutrollo,u ti St. AIUebn~~ and Medlltltlo#u,in ti 1M WarburgandCouna,,/dJIUIIMu, 19(1956).p.68-83. Plate 16A, &oman Auatriao manuscript of the third quarter of the twelfth century, lb.owl ADlelm banding Im boot to Matilda of Tuscany. JJ Only twenty-two prayers and meditatiom m the ll'lll8mitted coUectioD m one hundnd and eleven piecea haw been accepted u pauiDe; aee R.W. SOUTIIDN, p. 3S. MG. CONSTABLB, lAll68 and~. Turnhout.1976, p. 13 (Typolop, dea IOUJ'CCI c1umoyeo 1ge occidental. rue. 11).

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

91

EVOLUTION OF THE GBNRB

complimentary closing. A reasonable next step on the part of medieval rhetoricians, perhaps influenced by the conventional simile that prayer wu like a messengersent to God, wu to mend the techniques and structure of the letter to prayer. The De Modo Orandiof Hugh of St. Vactor(1096-1141)is the earliest scholastic analysis of prayer. According to Hugh's own criteria in the an an. For Hugh there were only two kinds of writings, one clearly superior to the other : first, textbooks (ana); second, everything else (~ndenda), which 35 included poetry and literature • The De Modo Orandi begins with an epistolary prologue in which Hugh, a monk ('""1IUICllban) captures the benevolenceof an unnamed lord and illustrious father (Domino et Patric:hmvstmo). He prays that the addressee will kindly accept a brief word on the virtues of prayer (hoc &ctionis 'IMM ea wm precor ~ su.,c/plle... Dictatum bNwm tM ""1111 oratloni.f). Hugh modestly states that he sends an unpolished (inelimato) work. His special concern is to show why some of the prayers offered in scriptures do not have the form of petitions ~tltionis fomuun non habent). Hugh concludes his letter by hoping that the recipient will not only accept the gift but expand or improve upon it (IIMntbu donum ~ et donum impfflde,y debetl.r). Hugh's carefully reasoned and innovative clusification of prayer rc:ftects his academic background, giving in.rlnuatlo u one of three kinds of prayer:

DldarcaJlcon. he would consider his De Modo Orandi u

1ra sunt SJ¥Ciaorationl.r,,uppli,catio,po.rtulatio,ln.rlnuatio.Supplkatio ut slM tktmninatioM p«/llonl.r humill.rd dnota pncatio. Postu/atio ut tkterminatae petltioni tncma 1U11Tatio. ln.rlnuatio ut sine petitloM per so/am

narrationem, YObmlalisfacto ngnlficatio. There are three kinda of prayer, nq,plkatio,po.rtu/atio,lnslnuatio.Supplicatio is bumble and devout prayer without specification of petition. Postulatio is unspecific narrative for a particular petition. lnslnuatio is without a petition [but) solely through narrative makes clear what is wanted. (my translation)

Hugh then breaks each kind of prayer into orderly subdivisions. There are three kinds of supplications : the captatlo or winning of good will, "The pauqe appean in PL, t. 176, col 768. a. J. TAYLOR, Tie Dlda.ro/ko,,~ Hugh Ylcttlr,traml, New Yorkand London, 1961, p. 87-88.

~ St.

-

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

92

CHAPTBlt II

the ewdo or demand, and Jlllffl oratlo or pure prayer. Each of theae ii further aubdmded, following the method of the Ad Hnanblm. Hugh illustrates his kinda of prayer with apt biolical citations. For example, generalized prayer, lllpplk:atlo, ii illuatrated by the t'pffling of Psalm 5 : •Qive ear, Oh Lord, to my wonla, undentand my cry. Hearken to the voice of my prayer, Oh my King and my Ood. 11 The moat arrestingpart the work ii Hugh's uniqueme ilulnllatlo, the indirect request made to God solely through narration. Moreover, Hugh's rhetorical training lhowa in his choice of the term tn.rlmlatlo (indirection) u one of the types prayer. 11Ubalatlowu one of the traditional kinda of captado ~ ; it WU used by cluaical onton and medieval letter writen when a direct approach wu not likely to aucceed in winning good will. Hugh's aamplea of iMl1alatlo in prayer are the indirect request for the railing of Lazarus in John 11.21, •Martha therefore said to Jeam : Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother hadst not died" and Marya implied request in saying to Je1111of the weddq at Cana in John 2.3, --ibey have no wine." Hugh inailtl that since nothing ii bidden from God, DO narration ia eaamtial in prayer ; the narration ii for the benefit of the one praying, 10 that he learns to consider what he Ilka for 36• Moreover, the prayer process ii both pleuing to God and contributes to the apiritual growth of the one praying. Hup11 De Modo Orandihad a wide circulation (there are 226 surviving manuacripta),., and influmced the later writers arta orandi. Peter the Chanter (d. 1197) diacuaaea prayer and prayer poaturea in his work on penitence,which aurvivea in a number of illuatrated copies. Peter is concerned, u R. TllExLml says. with "wordlmithing'. For Peter the one praying is an artisan (ani.fex):

ex

ex

ex

ex

The material, of prayer are 1etten IDd syllablea, dictiom and prayers. 1be orator is an artisan,for whom lcnowledp is nece1wy. It teaches him to pray in one of the HVflll model that will be stated (ll. ~302) •.

Peter begins his expositionproper by saying that prayer wins the good will of God (E.rtautem oratlo det bawvolentiMcaptallo, n.321-322). Peter " PL, L 176, col 982

w,,.

,.,R. OOY, Dw 0,,..,.,.,. Mr H,,.. WJ11SI. Ylbor, Stuttprt. 1976, p. ....,.37 (Monograpbien zur Getcbicbte del Mittelaltaa, 14). • PETD TBBCJwmla. R.C. l'Jumn,«l., 71wOritdMOI ~ :OIi...,,,,._~ JltlllllOI A."""'-"IO hi,,_ a...., (tl. 1197), Biapamtoa (New York). 1987, p. 26.

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

93

EVOLUTION OF THB GBNRB

does oot follow any of the traditional categorizations of prayer. He organizes hia presentation according to seven body postures suitable for prayer, and it is these postures which inspired the thirteenth and fourteenth century illustrated manuals •. Al TllBxLBRbu observed, there are two remarkable discussions of verbal aspects of prayer in this text. A startling analysis of the use of the imperative by the one praying, which appears in only two of the manUICl'iptsis, u aummarized by TllxLER : When man is praying. he is almost greater than the Lord. .. The greater command and the lesser obey.•• Man commands when he says to God : •&ue ...• , et •Doce ...• . 1b us ma . ..-.:.. . -•wuu way man hu -----f .,.--....ence over God when he prays (351-358)•.

The second remarkable discussion enmines the effect on prayer as perfonnative speech in the mass if the priest should mispronounce or garble the words (ll. 1524-1551)41• In 1205 Gunther of Pairis (Gunther Cisterciensia) wrote his an omndi, ~ OratioM,Jejunio,et Eleemoqna. He is much more obviously rhetorical than Hugh. There is a two-part introduction (labeled proemium and p,olog,u). The proemium promises to follow the precepts of Cicero in winning the benevolence of the reader 42 and summarizes the thirteen books to come. The p,olog,u begins with scripturaljustifications for prayer, fasting, and alma, and mds with marvellous false modesty as Gunther promises to write bluntly, -not with such elegant words as to excite itching of the ears and not with subtility to conceal the mNoings with shadow" 43• The work is too long and too erratic to outline in full here, although it contains many exuberant passages which invitefurther study. Summary of the three chapters of Book I demonstrates Gunther's approach. His first chapter begins with orderly scholastic hairsplitting, explaining the need to clarify the various meanings of oratlo {quod YOCDbuJum ad plura Mquivocatum ut). There are four kinds of speech: grammatical,which is concerned with accidence ; dlal«tical, utilized for disputations and the construction of syllogisms; rhetorical,made up of all utterances which use persuuion; and catholic speech or prayer (catho&:a oratlo), with • TUxLIR reproducea tbe pictureafrom eiabtIIWlUICriptain bit edition. • Op.di., p. 21. 41 Op.di., p. 31-35. a PL. t. 212, col. 99-100. 0 PL, t. 212, col. 104.

-

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

94

CHAPTER

II

which man supplicata God (104-105). Gunther quotes "f/1/U, quid. ubi, quibu.rauulii.r. CID', quomodo. CW111do" u pertainingto the judicial inquiry (quautio), but does not pursue the matter. He tuma to the enumeration of the parts (pa,w.r) of hit four kinda of speech. Acconliag to Gunther, the number of grammatical parts ia determinedby the number of words : he states that "Priacian reads" bu two parts, 16Priacian reads [a] book" bu three parts. Dialectical speech bu only two basic parts, tubject and predicate. Rhetorical speech bu six parts : "exortlb,m, narratlo, partlllo. conjinnatlo,confatio atqw concbuio".Catholic speech bu u many parts u there are petitions or things askedfor and hence the number varies 44 • Gunther's parallelism breaks down at the end of Chapter I and be devotes his short Chapter II to working out a quasi-Aristoteliandefinition of Catholic speech, concluding that prayer ia a kind of imploring limited to the rational mortal animal, man (cola. 106-107). In Chapter III Gunther cataloguea various subgenera of speech,ranging &om the beat, divine veneration, to the wont, detestable impiety (col 109). He illustrates his catalogue from the bible. Book I closes with an exhortation to pray atudioualy and attentivelyfor all that pertains to the health of the soul. In Books II throughVII Gunther di1CUSsesto whom one should pray, for what things, for whom, why, and bow. Boob IX and X deal with the clauses of the patanoater. In the first three chapters of Book XI Gunther treats the patanoater petitions a second time, but in reverse order. The remainder of Book XI deals mainly with the value of shedding tears, and domestic, monutic, canonical, and eccleaiutical prayers. In Book XII and Book XIIl Gunther leaves the subject of prayer and discusses futing and alms respectively. The best known an orandi is by William of Auvergne 45, Bishop of Paris from 1228-1249, who wrote his Rhetorlca Divina around 1240 46 • In the opening of the Rlwtorlca Divina William explains the need for a "divine rhetoric", to construct and shape prayer. William's rationale ia

.. PL, L 112, col 105-106. 45 WILLIAM OP AUVBRGNB, RMl«'lctlDtllna, in O]¥,a °"'1da, Frankfurt am Main.1963, rpt. of Parit 1674 ed., I, p. 336-406. • Ltrrz, p. 118. WILLIAM OP AUVDGNB ia mo lilted in calalopes and tidea U GUILLAUME OP ALVl!RNII or AltVl!RNII, and WILLIAII OP Pilll. Tbe RlwlorlcaDt,ina forms part of bis Magt.nm,,n ~. a compendiumof putonl anddloolosical tnatitea. Accordingto O'DoNNBLL,the M11D0111 included in the 0,,.. °"'1u of 1695wereprobably written by WILLIAM PllllAULD (p. 324).

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

95

EVOLUTION OF THB GENRE

filled with legatiams; anyone with pastoral respon11'bilities is an advocate before God. As O'Donnell phrues it : No teacher, no preacher, no ecclesiastical judge nor bolder of a benefice can fulfill bis office without prayer. All of these must pray (orare) in order to plead cases (cawa.r) before the divine consistory (in Del altisnmi con.rirtorla).The many technical terms used by 'William,such as, In curia .rununl ,.tr. aJkgabo cau.ram JMam a,w tribunal judids, indicate that William meansthat oratio would fall within the lffl"' judlciak of rhetoric 47•

William's first chapter defends his own intent : prayer is 80 important that it deserves as much effort as grammar and logic. Prayer, like justice, is a divine gift, and as justice can be "directed and illuminated by jurisprudence", 80 prayer can be directed and illuminated by study 41• William's opening moves from the justification of intent to definition of terms. Not all petition is prayer, only petitions directed to God (non omnis petitio est orado, sed ea so/a dlrigaturad Damt). He explains St. Paul's term, obMcratio as parallel to juridical sworn petition: ~ ob.r«:ratio non ut, nl.riadjurativapdlllo, qwmadmodum quando didtur : Obi~ /lk] per ml.Jerfl:ordlam Del, Yd per effi,,.rloMm sangulnb mkmptorir (1, 338).

Wherefore, supplication is nothing if not sworn petition, when in this way it ia said : "I pray you by the mercy of God or by the shedding of the redeemer's blood" (my translation).

The first chapter closes with a careful distinction between prayer and confession, citing the vague authority of the doctors of the church for the view that prayer (oratio)is for the obtaining of good, while confession (tle]ffcatlo) is for the removing of evil (p. 338). The second chapter declares that the parts of divine speech are like those of speeches in secular rhetoric, although the list he gives substitutes the petitio of the an dlctaminu for the partltlo of the .Ad HeJYnnium: "inuntlo... exordium. narrationml,petidoM/m]. cm,fir,natioMm.infirmatio-

nan. concluslo,wm"•. O'DoNNELL's analysis of William's applied rhetoric and rather tortured

metaphor of prayer as incense obviates ,nmmary of these matters here. "'O'DoNNEU.. 71w"lllwttJnea DMNi' tf Wllllam tf Auw,pe ... , p. 324. • O'DoNNEu., op. di., p. 325. • 0: O'DoNNBLL, op. di., p. 326 for dilc:ulaioo tX panlllo and pdldo in the worb of JOIIN OF

-

GAJU.AND and PsBuDO-ALBmtlC

OF MONTBCAS.11NO.

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

96

CHAPTBll II

However, WIiiiam', Chapter 38, headed '"ThatPrayer is like a Messenger Sent to God" influencedmany of the later writers 50• William credits the simile of prayer u a mC!S-enger to a comment by Augustine on •1.et my prayer come in before thee• (Intret oratlo In COMp«tu tuo, DomlM, Psalm 87.3). I have not located any Ille by Augustine of the word -Ountius" in the Enarradona ad Psalmo.ror ellewhere although the idea is implied by Augustine's description of prayer u having ~o wiDp, futing and a1ma• and by the prayer which •c1oeanot cry out to God in a loud voice• 51• Winged prayer also appears in a number orpatristic works, and prayer u meuenger is mentioned by St. Bernard 52, but William himself seems to be the propagator orthis commonplace in later works on prayer. William atreaaea the importance of well-composed prayer in this section. The agility of the mes~ is important : no one •sencta a messenger who cannot walk• "· Jean Gerson (1363-1429)wrote several works OD prayer, four lettertreatises on prayer, addressed to his brother, Jean Celestine,and a Sumo M OratioM. Gerson's letter-treatises OD prayer, lettcn 37, 38, 39 and 40, follow patristic pattern, and are about the obliptiona to and functions orprayer rather than bow to pray. Gerson'• &,mo • OratloM rdlects his familiarity with William or Auvergne's RMtorlca DiYtnain his 111e ormetaphor.Gerson uaes both prayer u an agile messenger and prayer u incense. The Smno is a university sermon based on 1 Peter 2.11 : Dearly beloved,I beseech you u l1nJlam'I and pilarima to refrain younelves from carnal desirel which war apinat the soul,.._

In the first part of the sermon the audience is exhorted to ask for the help of prayer in this war. Prayer is descn'bed u a messenger with two wings, faith and hope, which is given life by charity and adorned with Rlwlorit:aDIYbta,I, 375. "•0ratiooi1 alae duac•. PL. L 36, col. 482; ·OrontJ,,m non wa Mllltllr#, #ti COIUdMlla ad Dftan cJanuuru•,PL, L 39, col 2281. 52 The significanceof the winp of prayer varies in medieval texta.. For EuCIUIIUUS the winp of prayer symbolize the two testament • (Lil¥, F°""""""" Splrllall, ,,,,.,.,,,_, PL, L so, col 749). ST. BERNARD apwm bow the meaaenaer.prayer, lies to the Lord OD wings of fear and hope (PL, L 183, col. 764). " RMtorica Dtnna, I, 375-376. ,_ JEAN GllltSON, (B,nra Ca,,,plito, P. GLOIUIIUX,od., Paris, 1960. The Smno 1M OF'tllitJlvappears in vol 5, p. 398-405. For the letten OD prayer 37, 38, 39, 40, see vol 2, p. 169-197. • WILLIAM OP AUVD.ONB,

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

97

BVOLUTJON OF THE GENRE

plumes of many different virtues (399-400). Gerson tells his audience that prayer should be brief and lucid (lucldo6t brew,) and swift and agile like a swift ninner. Prayer should accompany them on their pi)grimage. It should rise up to the Father like incense. The second part of the sermon implies by Gerson'• use of the first person plural and by its veey formal structure that his audience bu responsibilities to teach others about prayer. Gerson invites his audience to think about three doctrinal considerations ( Colllgam,u Ide spea,,latiwu tte.1 doctrlna.l): 1) other things being equal, it is better to pray in groups or processionally than alone, 2) other things being equal, it is better to pray for the universal good of the church than for oneself, 3) it is more effectiveto pray in groups even with sinners than where no one is joined in prayer. The next section deals with the importance of patient prayer. Patient and benign prayer will heal injuries suffered by the pilgrim on his journey. Genon invites his audience to consider three propositions (p,opositiones) about the efficacy of prayer, 1) that prayers are efficacious in the face of detraction and d,l"ama~ 2) that the prayers of paupers are efficacious, 3) that the prayers of those subject to spiritual temptations are efficacious. Other lists of three follow. The sermon closes by restating the thesis that prayer is the agile and speedy messenger bringinghelp against temptations. The second group of~., orandlare the works written for the instruction of members of relip>us orders in the art of prayer. Although there is a large literature devoted to the novitiate, most of the works, even those by authors with academic backgrounds, like Hugh of St. Victor 54 and William of St. Thierry", are concerned with monastic obligations, aspirations and discipline rather than the specifics of how to pray 56• Stephen of Sawley (ca. 1200-1252), however, is practical and concrete in his SpeculumNovltil51• Twelve of the twenty-five chapters are specifically

,. HUGH OF ST. VICl'OR,1H llulilJdloMIIOWllonlm,PL, t. 176, col 925-952 "WILLIAMOF ST. THlliRRY,J. MCCANN,ed., W. SHEWllINO,tramL, ~ Goldm Epistk of Abbot Wrlliam of St. 11rinry IO tM Cartlrusian.rof Mani Dleu, London, 1930. WILLIAM OF ST. THil!llRYdoes say in the preface to the Goldin Epist/1 that his Medllatiw,~ Orallona are •not altogether unprofitable for tnming young IOula to prayer• (op.di., p. 6). but the1e prayers themselves are dialogues between the IJ>CUer and God and contain no imtructiona for their UIC by others. •C.W. BYNUM,•DOCll'e l'ff6o d aanp1o•: An bp«t of Twlft}t-Calwy Splrfl,lallty, Missoula (Montana), 1979, p. 10-21 (Harvard Theological Studies, 31). "'STEPHEN OF SAWLEY, E. MJCW::DS, ed., U11•Sp«,11,an Ntwllll • inldlt d'ttioM 1M Sa//ai, in Coll«:laMa O.C.R., 8 (1946). p. 17-68; J. O'SULLIVAN, tram., Stql,ffl ofSawi,y's 'lmllua, 1C1Jarn • zoo (Mich.). 1984.

--

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

98

CHAPTER II

about prayer, the rest give advice about daily life in the cloister, the chapter uieetinp, work, and bow to fight temptations. Chapter 13 on meals also concerns prayer and makes a good i11uatration of Stephen's practical approach. He first gives inatructions to the davout lad on how to be thankful even for bad fare. The novice is instructed to "eat a few bites to give the impreaaion of having eaten•, to think of how many worked to prepare it, of the dangers endured by fishermen, of the crucified Christ waiting to be thanked in the church, and of Ouist standing in the cold at the door waiting for leftovers. Stephen then instructs the novice to make a cross from five bread crumbs and say to himsdf "Here the feet, there the hands were nailed to the cross ; here the head res~ there through his side flowed, in a mixture of blood and water, his mercy and plenteous redemption" 51• From Tertullian and Cassian on, as we have seen, confession wu considered a kind of prayer, and Stephen's opening words on the examination of conscience declare his intent to teach verbal prayer. "When you go to confession you may use auch words u these, adding or subtracting to what I am off'eringhere in the measure you feel you have transgressed in these matters 59• • Stephen's teaching techniques embrace the prayers of thankgiving. petition, preparation for sayingthe office and seven ways of meditation. His instructions are always concrete and detailed. He uses direct address and the imperative freely. The novice is told to .w,y,look upon, lwar, thinlc of words and topics for meditation. Direct address and use of the imperative also characterize Stephen's Mt!ditatio,u on tlte Jop of tlte Holy Ybpr Mary, Tlwefo/d Exm:1#, and On the Rt!citatlonof the DivlM Offiu as teaching texts on prayer. The 1"1Nfo/d Eurcw is directed to "the young", not necessarily novices, while the other two works are directed to Stephen's peers. The 'I'lwefo/d Eurcw is a brief treatise based on Augustine and Bernard, exhorting meditation on God's goodness, Mary as the "begettc:r of life and mother of salvation" 60 and the heavenly city of Jerusalem. Although the epistolary preface ends with the conventional disclaimer of elegant style, the earlier protestation of reluctance to write carries unusual

"Ed., Ml~, op.di., p. 56; tnmlation quot.eelfrom O'SULLIVAN,p. 104. "O'SULLIVAN,op. di., tnnsl., p. 85. 11 Op.di., p. 70.

Digitized by

Go ogle

lJ"riginal from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

99

EVOLUTION OF THE GBNRE

conviction. It really does sound like the response of a man asked to take on a task he feels unnecessary : Your request wu. quite naturally. an annoyance to me when I first received it. mainly because the kinds of spiritual exercises you have in mind lean more in the direction of unspoken reflection than to the spoken word. or. I could say. they are more spoken of than written about Also. my own very limited experience leads me to say, it is not easy to find a temptation which discourages, diatracts, and more quickly confounds the youna in the rapture of prayer - that is, souls who are experiencing the first stages of alwina in the embrace of the Spouse - than the sugestion that they somehow reveal to others their spiritual strugles 61•

The generality of the language, which makes this the least interesting of Stephen's treatises, and the brevity of the work are consistent with true reluctance to take on a task. Stephen's Meditation,, a work which anticipates the development of the rosary in its topics and reiteration of the Hail Mary, includes fifteen brief meditations on the joys of Mary. There is an epistolary preface in which Stephen says he is responding to the insistence of another monk, Ma man whose demands are great", that Stephen put down in writing "some muttering on the prerogative Joys of Mary" 62 • The meditations are divided into groups of five, divided by •pauses" in which the virtues of the virgin and the miracles of Christ's public ministry are to be contemplated. Each of the fifteen parts includes a meditation on one of the joys, a formulaic direct address to the virgin, stating the joy, a petition to the virgin, and a Hail Mary. The final teaching text of Stephen of Sawley, On the Recilatlonof the DiviM Offiu,provides a guide to getting the greatest benefit from the compulsory prayer observance, -io keep the mind in harmony with the voice" 63 • Stephen's avowed purpose in the epistolary preface is to provide a plan for •putting a check on the mind's wanderings" during the recitation of the Office. He provides topics for meditation related to the themes of the psalms recited. Stephen occasionally addresses the reader directly in this work, but since it is concerned solely with silent meditation, he rarely uses say, and the exhortations usually take the form of ponMr,

•• Op.di., p. 65. 63 Op.di., p. 27. 61 Op.di., p. 127.

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

100

CHAPTER II

eXlllniM, dwell ofta, m«litall. behold, watch, Yl.nlaltze,etc. " Stephen ia a gifted teachec and seems instinctively to have known that failure to understand the baaic meaning of a text automatically produces boredom and discomfort. His strategy for dealing with the reference problems of biblical style is practical : the interchange of persona and things i • of frequent occurrence in the p •alm •. At time • one vene •peak • of the memben and another verse of the bead. .. you will often •ee •uch example • in the •ame vene, not only in the •ame psalm. Therefore, when there ia a change of persona, cha.nae your interpretation too. You mlllt tranafer the things you cannot undentand about the memben to the bead ; then you will understand them •.

Although nothing in the Llbn Contnnplationb In Deum of the prolific Catalonian, Ramon Lull (b. 1232-1236, d. 1315), fits the criteria of the ones orandi, Ramon does rough out an application of his combinator/a technique to the Ave Maria and Paternoster in his .Ar.rCompe,,dioM, Del. Ramon first delineates the four Augustinian levels of Jneaoing, literal, allegorical, tropological, and anagogical for the salutation of the Ave Maria. Thus, the story and literal meaning of aveis that it is what Gabriel said to Mary at the Annunciation. Considered allegorically,ave is the sign of this salutation and of benevolence. As a tropological sign, ave signifies the act of the incarnation. As an anagogicalsign, ave signifies peace and the salvation of paradise. Ramon then explains how his own system of analysis in the .Ar.rDemon.rtrativashould be applied. The one praying is to reflect on Ramon's Figure S (which categorizes the intellectual powers of the soul), considering aspects B (memory remembering, aligned with the divine attribute boniuu or goodness), F (memory remembering, aligned with divine sapiffltia or wisdom), and G (intellect undecstanding, aligned with divine volunllUor will). A similar but more extensive treatment of the Paternoster follows"· In the Spirllua/ E:urcuu of Gertrud of Helfta (1256-1301/1302)61, we find an energetic secies of prayers and meditations - all but one, that on praise and thanksgiving, reenactments of the ceremonial events in the

.. Op.cit., paalm. 15 Op.cit., p. 141. .. RAIIWNDILULLJ,M.B. OCIIOGAvlA, ed., .4r.r~ Da, CCCAI, t. 39, p. 314321. 67 GERTRUD THE GREAT OF Hlll.FTA, GJ. LBwls and J. Lllwls, tnml., Spt,U,,ollbr6t::ba, Kalamazoo (Mich.), 1989 (Clatcrcian Fathers Series, 49).

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

101

EVOLUTION OF THE GBNRB

lif'e of the nun - and clear instructions on bow to perform them. The subjects of the seven exercisesare : 1. The baptism. 2. The clothing of the nun. 3. The consecration of the nun. 4. The profession of the nun. 5. The spiritual wedding. 6. The celebration of praise and thanksgiving. 7. The preparation for death. Like Stephen of Sawley, whose work she may have known 61, Gertrude's teaching intent is shown by use of direct address and the imperative, for example, "At this point start praising the Lord: [say] rise up, my soul, rise up, shake off' the dust, lift yourself up, and enter beforethe gaze of the Lord" (p. 94). In each exercise Gertrude tells the reader bow to participate, what to say, meditate upon, and desire. Like other mystics, Gertrude uses the imagery of spousal love to evoke the mystical union of soul and Christ, but her exercises are not concerned with the mystical experience per se. The words of her prayers and litanies are to be said, silently if not aloud, and the ceremonies of meditation are spelledout step by step. Hers is the rhetoric of the bible and the church fathers, and she uses it in vivid, usually beautiful, sometimes shocking ways : May the four winged holy animals all of whose viscera belch forth your praise day and nipt, be jubilant to you. .. May the marrow of your divinity and the cream of your gentleneaa, with which the heavenly Jerusalem ia sated and fattened in the splendor of your countenance, be jubilant to you on my behalf.

An anonymous an orandl designed for an upper-class laywoman, a widow, follows the Hours of the Holy Spirit in the fourteenth-century manuscript in Paris, B. N. Nouvelles acquisitions latines 592. This work of 150 folios contains prayers, many of which are given in both French and Latin, and instructions {nudgM~nt.r) explaining the appropriate use of the pray« and sometimes "the mental or physical attitude to be adopted". The work opens with a personal address to the lady in French, telling her to imitate the angels and St. John in abasing herself before God either in church or in privacy : • LEwis and LEwls, Introduction, p. 17.

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

102

CHAPTER II

My lady, since God bu placed you in this world in hiabestate, it ii riaht that you should in body and heart come before him in humility. The angels who are in the kinadom of heaven do 10, u SL John saw them in the Apocalypse, kneelina before God and placina their faces at hil feel So I would advise that the first actions that you do in the morning. in honor of your Creator, Lord and judge, in church if it be convenient for you, or in your room if it be more to your pleuure, be that you kneel in humility and devotion and touch your face to the ground, or nearly 10, and, u the aforesaid saints do, aay the words which they aay.

The Latin prayer with which she ia to bqpn her meditative day is accompanied by a French tranllation and COIDIDClltary.Among the prayers sugested are French translations of Anselm's meditations. The instructions, which spell out a regime of prayer similar to that of a religious, refer to people she governs as well as to her children, and her freedom

from marital responsibility•. An early fifteenth-century an orandl from &gland written in Latin specifically for a layperson ia the ..Instructions for a Devout and Literate Layman" 70• This brief and uniquelypenonal document ia written on a narrow parchment, meant to be rolled up and carried in the owner's purse. The text addresses a city-dwelle:rwith a wtt'e and children. It contains instructions for a daily routine which includes the saying of specific prayers OD rising. OD leaving the house, in church, and while waiting for dinner. The owner is forcerully exhorted to pray humbly : At the door when you go out aay : "All the men of this city or town from the greater to the 1eu are pleuing to God, and only I am worthy of bell. Woe is me. Welawey" ; let thil be said from all your heart 10 that the tears run ; you need not always aay it with your mouth ; it is sufficient to say it with a groan. .. Yet sometimes if you meet a dog or other beast, you may say : "Lord, let it bite me, let it kill me ; this beast is much better than I ; it bu never sinned. I after 10 much grace have provoked

you",.... • R.LA. Cl.All, Exlra-LIAtrglcoJPrayer tu I.lmblaJ ~ bl Lou Jledlr,aJ Lay Dnodon, paper Biven at JC1Junazoo,Micmpn, May 1990, and penonal communication: Cl.All ia preparing an edition of ma. B. N. Nouvellea •cquilitiom latinea S92. ,. W.A PANTIN, ed. and tran1l., lnstrtM:llomfor a Dnout and~ Layman, in Metllr,a/ Leaming and Limature : Euays pruellUd to WIiiiamHUNT, Oxford, 1976, p. 398-422.Thia document i1 from the Throckmorton muoimeotl, Coupton Court, Alcester, Wanricbbire. The owner bu not been idcntffied. •ltbouab two of bis menda, William Bonet •nd Sir William Trimenel are n •med (p. 421). ._ PANTIN, op.ell., p. 398-399.

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

103

EVOLUTION OF THB GBNRB

A fiftec:nth-century illustrated Augustinian work applying rhetorical techniques to the Paternoster 71 is the Exercitlum super P~, No.,tn 72• This blockbook, printed from woodblocks before the invention of movable type, explains the Paternoster in Flemish and Latin. The Exercidum has survived in two recensions. In both a spiritual pilgrim and his spiritual guide visit heaven, purgatory, the mountain of prayer, the house of Grace on top of the mountain, the school of Charity, the house of Pride, and hell. They finally return to heaven to see a faithful soul rewarded at the heavenly gates. The matter of attn"bution is complex. All that is certain about the authors and artists of the E:urcitium is that the second recension of the Eurcidum and the SplritllaJePommumn, attnbuted to Hemicus Bogaadus, active in Augustinian houses of Louvain from 1421 to 1469 74, are clearly from the same studio. Both versions of the E:urcitium super P~ No.,tn teach people how to meditate upon and use the paternoster. The earlier (ca. 1440) Flemish vernacular narrative version is an illustrated textbook aimed directly at the one being taught. The second recension (ca. 1470) is a teacher's version of the textbook, in Latin except for some brief Flemish verses. The first recension fosters meditation by providing the pictures with a narrative. In the illuatration to "Om Father Who Art" (the unusual clause division is peculiar to the E:urcitium texts) the pilgrim and his

71 BLOOMJIIELD, op.cit.• lilta 10111e inc:ipitaof otherworb on the Patemotter whichmay prove relevant to our pare but are beyond the scope of the preNDt atudy: I. 9105 Scptem petitionca in oratiooe dominica ponunturpreter captationembeniuolentie. Mas. MOncbcn, am 4321 ; Zwettle 127. 2 9112 Scptem petitionea buim petitioni1 ponuntur preter captationem beniuolentie quanun tres prime spectant ad patriam. .. Ma. Leipzig, Univ. 193. 3. 9113 Scptem 1UDtpetitionea huim oratioai1 preter capt&tionem beniuolentie que ibi incipiunt : Sanctificetur oomen tuum. Quuumtres priore1 que pertinent ad patriam dipiorel sunt aliis.•. M1. Oxford, Bodi. Laud. misc. 40 f. 111. 4. 911 S Scptem aunt petitiones in oratione dominica preter captationem beniuolentie. M11. Cambridge, Je1m Coll. Q.D.4 (46] ; Kynzvart 33. S. 9116 Scptem IUDt petitiones orationia dominice preter captationem beniuolentie. M1. London, BM Arundel 372. 12 Paris, Bibliotb6que Nationale Reserve 32 See my commentary, edition. and tramlation oftbia work, 77wPilgrlmap a/ Prayer: 11wICOIIOf"IIMY Olld tcm a/lM •Exm:111umIll/¥' Pour Nostd", Salzburg, 1990. n H. DE BACUR, L' •Eurdlban s,q,er Ptzllr Nodd' : ct1ftlribvtlon a l'ldstolreda xylotypa. MODI,1924. p. S-7. 18. u Op.ell., p. 7-9.

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

104

CHAPTER II

guide kneel before the heavmly throne. The accompanying Flemish text gives a narrative account of the visit : Here the meaaeoaer and the brother come together before the Father. There they kneel with Our Lord, Jeaua Ouiat, who kneels with them to help them obtain from the Father what they Ionafor. And to make them welcome to the Father, they peel him thua with bis highestname, saying humbly the first part of the Pater Noster in this way: •0ur Father, who art".,,_

The second-recension Latin teacher's texts are expository rather than narrative. The woodcut text for •0ur Father Who Art" reads : Three thinp are to be noted here. Fint, that aayina Fatlwr is to be u a son in the presence of bis father. Second, that by aayinaour, audience will be given to you because Ouiat is your brother. Third, that by saying who art, the benevolence of God bu been captured because of the dipity of the title, which is proper to Him from eternity"·

A contemporary manuacript Latin gloaa of the pictures bu been pasted on facing pages with the pictures. Thia gloaa was, like the Flemish manuscript text of the first recension, intended to be part of the work. The Latin gloss ia more detailed than the woodcut text and is clearly aimed at someone with a pastoral obligation to teach someone else how to pray. It begins with a prologue using the imageof prayer as a messenger : When the one prayina says the Pater Noster, the prayer is like a meaaeqer of the Church, who is entruated with obtaining the wish of the one prayina and who is sent for this reuon to God the Father. And the messenger wisely ought to attend principally to three things, namely that be knows, first, to whom, second, for whom, and third, for what be ia sent. On that account the following pictures serve ao that whenever the one prayina says the Pater Noster lonaina to progreu, first, be ahall know that it is God the Father to whom the messengeris sent 77•

The discussion of •0ur Father Who Art" in the glo11 expands the doctrinal points in the woodcut text, providing material with which the teacher can explain the signmcance of clauae and picture to the pupil : This picture serves for the first point of the Lord's Prayer, which is a

98-99. 118-119. 77 Op.cit., p. 128-129. Ed. 8. JAYB, p. ,. JAYB, op.cit., p. 'IS

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

105

EVOLUTION OF THE GBNRB

greetina when thus is aaid "Our Father who art". In this picture the one praying is instructed about the three mysteries for meditation by all those wishing to pray to the Father. The first indeed of the mysteries is attended to here because in this salutation Fatheris said ; through which the one praying may congratulate himself and meditate because he is present not as a servant but rather as an adopted son in the presence of God, his father. And that is signified in this picture by the brother kneeling humbly with the messenger of the chw-ch in the presence of God. Second, whenever ""' is said in this salutation, it is given to be understood that the one praying is not there alone by himself, but Christ is there with him as his faithful brother so that through his intercession, the one praying may be given audience at the house of the Father. That is well shown in this picture when Christ lmee1awith the brother and the messenger in the presence of the Father. Third, whenever this brief title, who art, which among the others is most worthy, is attributed to the Father, the one praying can without doubt hope that by the benevolence of the Father he shall be heard: "Ask and you shall receive" John 16:25. And for this reason the excellence of this title is most pleasing to the Father and proper to him from eternity, whence he naming himself said, "I am that I am" Exodus 3:14. And he ordered that Moses, his servant, reply to the children of Israel "He who is sent me to you" Exodus 3:14. Having these three mysteries well inscribed on the tablet of the heart, that is, memory, if whenever the one praying says this short greetina to God the Father, he wishes to repeat this attentively in his mind, he will surely be teaching himself by it throup experience to repel easily the noxious thoughts which are entirely harmful to devotion... Therefore with confidence approach God the Father and, inftamed by this fire of the Holy Spirit, say to him, humbly greetina him thus: "Our Father who art" 71•

The D«or Pwllanon of John the Carthusian of Venice (d. 1483) is an an orandi addressed to a young girl obligatedto the secular life which shows concern for the conflicts between domestic obligations and spiritual

needs79• "Op.ell., p. 136-137. " G. IIASBNOHll,"La vie quotic:tiennede la femme we par reglile: femeipement des 'jourmes chreticnnes' de la fin du moyen-Aae",in Frau und ~ Al/tag, Osterreichischc Akademic der Wisscnschaftcn, philosophisch-historischc Kluse Sitzungsberichte, Band 473. Vienna, 1986. VerOfl'cntlichunaen des Instituu fllr mittclalterlicbe RealicnkundeOstem:ichs,m. 9. Fourteen other texts have been identified by G. HASENOHR u works of spiritual guidance for laywomen. These works are dated from the thirteenth to early aixtecnth centuries and are from France, Italy and Spain. Many of these are penitential guidea and ditcu•PCJG•of the euperiority of vqinity and chute widowhood to marriap. I thank R.LA. Cl.All for calliDg HASENOHR'I work to my attention.

1~

r

,._

-

A

•

~

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

106

CHAPTER II

John of Venice instructs the girl on how and wbm to say private prayers, eg., -When you get up, sign yourself three times in saying &Mdlcamus Patttm ~t Flllum... while dressingraise your eyes and mind to heaven in saying Aglmu.rtlbi gratku. John also encourages her to "turn all to the glory of God,.. He tells her to say her usual prayers and meditate on the attributes of the Trinity and the good and bad angels while washing and dressing.He augeats subjects for meditation during her daily tasks : tum yow- attention to the housework : wake up the servants, liaht the fire, sweep, start breakfast, dre11 the cbildren, make the beds, do the laundry, take care of the cbickem, etc., while meditatina on the celestial hierarchies, the reason, for the d•rnoation of Lucifer, the creation of the world in six days, etc. As R. CLARK observes, ~e strain of maintaining this program must surely have reached its limits at the dinner table,. : When you lit down at table, meditate on the Nativity ; say the Beneclicite and make the sign of the cross on the table ; while eatina the first course, think of the circurncilion ; while eatina the second, of the adoration of the Magi ; and when you have had enough to eat, meditate on the Massacre of the Jnnocenu and the Flight into Egypt•.

A final work on how to pray that falls within the fifteenth century with provenance similar to the Eurdtbtm super Pater NMter was written by Jean Mombaer (1424-1502) of the Brethren of Common Life 11, who set out a series of subjects for meditation by canons regular in his R~tum Exercltiorum Spirltua/lum 12• The prologue in an early printed copy of this work (Paris, B. N. reserve D 2077) explainl that the work is a -rhetoric of prayer", providing topics for meditation and "brief aonp, easily memorized,.. In this copy the work is accompanied by an illustration, a -hand of memory", labeled Chirop8a/terlll, adapted from one of the memorla devices of classical rhetoric. The little finger of the hand is meant to remind the one praying of the familiar Pauline classification of prayer : the joints are labeled obs«ratio, oratlo, dqrecatio. The inner • Tranal. R.LA. Cl.AH, French venion J"eDby ffAsBNoHa. p. 96. 11 Alao known u Jeu Mombauer or JolmmeaMauburnuaor Jean of Brmellea.See J.G.R. ACQUOY, Het Klooster te Wintl&d,am or ztj,, lllwoed, Utrecht. 1880, vol. n. p. 323. See alao P. DBBOIGNIB, Jean Al"""""- M Bl'll-1la, Louvain, 1927. a The incipit reada: Prologm CllbatlamCIIIIOllld ,..,..,. ill .....,,. IWl!flM ,_,ddon.m cl wwdltallonum.

Digitized by

Go ogle

~

IA

107

EVOLUTION OF THE GBNRB

outline of the little finger calls to mind imploratio,and diviM ml.lerlcordia. The base of the little finger recalla the rhetorical structures of quatio, ,apo,ulo, ,efutatlo.The end joint of the thumb is labeled laudatio.and its base recalls the threefold way, purgative, iDnminative, and perfective.

4. THE RENAISSANCE The Renaissance produced many elaborate works on prayec, dominated at first by the popularity of the great Jes~ Ignatius of Loyola, and complemented later by the work of St. Francia de Sales. Oeraon's and Mombaa-'s works may have been known to Ignatius through excerpts in the Ejffl:italorlo • la Ylda Esplrilual of Garcia de Cisneros, published in 1S00 13• The method of meditation in St. Ignatius of Loyola's Splrilual E:urcises (Spanish version of around 1S22, Latin or Vulgate version, 1S33) wu the moat admired and imitated of the later arta orandi. A typical meditation consists of ~ brief prayec, three preludes, three points, and a dialogue. The preparation incorporates the steps needed to write a composition into the meditative process. St. Ignatius prescribes preparation for meditation by choosing a general subject in advance, ordinarily the previous night. Toe next part of the preparation is the limiting of the general subject to some specific aspect to avoid being uselessly general or superficial. The one praying should considec the topic before sleeping and upon awaking. When the actual time set aside for the meditation comes, the one praying establishes a quiet mind, makes a short act of adoration, and then considers the topic chosen. Ignatius' innovation is the mental "composition of place", focusing the imagination on some scene related to the topic. For example, the composition of place in the first meditation, second week, calls for the one praying to envision the whole expansion of the earthand its various nations and then narrow to the little house of the Vu-gin in Nazareth in Galilee in preparation for meditation on the incarnation .. . Toe exord:Jumof the meditation may sometimes take up the entire time, but ordinarily it should occupy only a few minutes. Toe body of the meditation considers the

a

a P. DEBUCHY, /"'1'ot:l»cllo ,t l'ltwk da "'6clca ~ St. lflllla, Ensfrien, 1906. " IGNATIUS OF LoYOLA, tnml., L DIILIIAGB. 7J,e Splrltllal Exm:ba licaland cluaical allusion. He bu a gift for the concrete analogy.As an example, I offer his comparison of venial sin to spiderwebs in a honeycomb: Spiders do not kill the bees, but they spoil and corrupt their honey, and so entangle the honeycombs with their webs that the bees cannot go forward with their work. Now this is to be understood when the spiders make any stay among them. In like manner, venial sin does not kill the soul, but it spoill devotion and entangles the powers of the soul so much with bad habits and vicious inclinatiom that it can no lonpr exert that promptness of charity in which devotion COlllists"·

In sum, the composition of prayers, whether sung as hymns, savored as lyrics or just spoken u communication with a higherorder of being, whether intercessionary saint or godhead, has been continuous from earliest Christianity. While throughout the middle ages study of rhetoric "Plmm OP Al.CANTARA.D. DBVAS,tnml, 7ratatlo tM lo Orodl,n y /,led/lad/,,,, Westminster (Maryland), 1949, p. x. •ST.FRANCIS DB SALIIS,J.M. LIILBN,tnml, /ntrotblt:llor,to a DffOfll Llfa,New York, 1960, p. 81.

Digitized by

Go ogle

I

FIIEEP

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

109

EVOLUTION OP THE GENRE

was also continuous, it was not, apparently, applied to prayer until the eleventh century. People who wrote prayers did indeed have rhetorical training ; Augustine, Alcuin, and Anselm, for instance, either wrote treatises ODthe trivium or used the specialized vocabulary of rhetoric. However, the developed an orandi is associated with the developed scbolasticism of the later middle ages. The renaissance exfoliatiODwas dominated by the works of St. lpatius of Loyola and Francis de Sales. The adaptation of the methods of Ignatius of Loyola and de Sales continues into modern times, as the many twentieth-century publications ODhow to pray attest.

-

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

CHAPTER. III

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF AR.TES ORA.ND/ The moat basic need for further study of aria orandl is for a find.mg list of these texts. The present study is initial spadework, and the worts I have identified u aria orandi may well be an atypical sampling. Nonetheless, some important areas for study are IU(IINted below. 1. AUTHORSHIP AND TExTlJAL RELATIONSHIPS

All the usual problems of an under-examined genre face scholars approaching the aria orandi. Determiningauthorshipmay be diflicult. Moreover, the aria orandlare brief and, u Marianne Briscoe bu pointed out in regard to the an praedJcandi, worts of a few folios are easily misplaced and misattributed. Attributions baaed solely on literary style are always auspect in an era which regarded wholesale plunder of earlier authors u respectful and honorific borrowing. Corporateauthorshipis certain in the cue of the Exncltillm super Patn Nonu 17• In eumining sman orandiit is desirable to considerwhether the work is meant for individual use by laypeople or religious, or is meant u a university teaching text or source book for secular clergy or perhaps novice routers or mistresses. The customary examination of the manuscript may help in this endeavor. lncipits, colophons, and the languages both in the particular an orandl and other works bound with it should be recorded. Identifying and localizing any watermarks is essential if the manuscript is on paper rather than parchment or vellum since paleographical clues to date and place may hdp associate the manuscript with a particular scriptoriumor studio. Size of leaves and page format should be noted (eg., works written in three columns are often of alta'cianorigin). If the work is illustrated, the style of the artist and details of costume may provide information on both provenance and pmpose. Any proper names appearing in prefaces, colophon, on endleaves or margins should be noted and 17

See JAYE, op.cit., p. 28-30.

Digitized by

Go ogle

a

UNIVERsfW

OFJ iRGINIA

CRJTICAL EVALUATION OF ARTBS ORANDI

111

investigated. The degree of wear is aigrriflcsmt: unworn, unfaded leaves sagest occasional reference use ; signs of heavy wear such as abrasions or soiling sugcst a work in daily use. Finally, the incipit should be checked against published lists in the hope of locating additional copies of the work. Studies of the manuscripts and their textual relationships as well as of early printed editions when they exist are needed for most of the artes orandi. Thus far only the manuscripts of Anselm, Hugh of St. Victor, and Peter the Chanter have received much attention 11•

2. LANGUAGB Most of the works recognizedas artu orandi are in Latin. Aside from a few hundred words in Middle High German by Gertrude of Helfta written in the thirteenth century ", the known vernacular examples begin with the French portion of the anonymous fourteenth-century ars orandi addressed to a widow (B. N. Nouvelles acquisitions latines 592). The Flemish first recfflsion of the B:urdllum super Par No.rte, dates from about 1440.French translations of WIiiiamof Auvergne's .RMtorlca Divina, appear in the fifteenth century '°. In the sixteenth century composition in the vernacular becomes the norm. Loyola wrote in Spanish, although he supervised the makingof the Latin or Vulgate version of his Spiritual B:u~s. Additional vernacular examples are likelyto tum up, particularly from the fourteenth through sixteenth centuries. Moreover, the possible relationships of Eastern works on prayer and those of Arabic Spain to the European artes orandl call for investigation. Many works on prayer exist in Greek, Hebrew, and Arabic. Examination of the Arabic works of Ramon Lull might profit scholars familiar with that language.

3. PATRONAGB

AND AUDIBNCB

Questions of patronage and audience need further study. A number • For ANsm.11see A. WILIWlt'I pre&ceto D.A. CA.STBL, M""'4da,u « Prlho tk S. ~. Paria, 1923. p. 11. For HUOR OF ST. VICTOR.•ee F. SCIDon'1 odition. For Plmm THE CHANTl!R.see J.W. BALDWIN, MDNn, Prl1la.s a,ul Mffl:Nllll6 : n,. Social Yww.rof Pdlr 11wCluuur ONJld8 Circ#. Princeton, 1970. l vol • I..EwJsand I..EwJs.op.di., p. 4. tnaalated u an alternative tut on p. 65-66.

• Eg.. Pari• , Bibliotb6queNatioaale, Ma. ~ 24434.

-

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

112

CHAPTER Ill

of the artes orandi have epistolary prologues. These can ~ difficult to evaluate. Most letters IUl'Yivingfrom the Middle Ages were intended u "'quasi-publicliterary documents" •1• When the salutation does not name a recipient, there ii a good possibility the letter wu never intended for any particular addressee. Even when the supencription ii vecy precise, the content ii IUIJ)eCt. Did Anaelm really write bis three prayers to Mary became the friend who requested the first one wu dissatisfied with both it and its 1ucceasor ? R.W. Southern discounts the coercion claimed in Anselm's letter to Gundolf at Caen. According to Southern the letter wu written "'to latisfy the literary convention that an author should write only under presaure from outside" 92 • Is Stephen of Sawley's inliltence that he wu irritated when asked to compoae bis meditation, and mirror for novices to be understood u biographical ltatement or part of the venerable topo8 of false modesty ? We may ~ however, if both cannot be true at times. Perhap1 Steven wu indeed irritated. Stephen of Sawley and Gertrude of Helfta clearly wrote for members of religious hOUlel. However, there are many legitimatequestions about both patrons and audiences for other arta orandl. Mixed or lay audiences for artes orandi were probably common. Al early aa 1104 Anselm's letter to Matilda of Tuscany directs bis wort to an educated noblewomanto whom be wilbea long-laatingjoyfulprosperity ". The use of the vernacular ii not always reliable for distinguishing a lay audience. Matilda must have been fluent in Latin to appreciate Anselm's prayers, u wu the •devout and literate layman" of the an orandi edited by PANTIN ; and Gerson acknowledges the presence in late fourteenth-century France of priests without Latin (l//l#ratu.r)"· One would expect an increasing number of worts aimed at the private devotions of a lay audience aa lita'acy increased and the production of blockbooks made it possible to reach a larger public. Yet there are important differences of language, stance and presumably expected audience among early printed artes orandi ", just aa there are among works in manuscript. · "CONSTABLB, op.di .• p. 11. R.W. SOU111111lN. ill bit foreword to B. W UD'a tnn1latioo ~ ANIBLM'1 1'raya, and Jledllations,New York and Aylesbury.1970. p. 12. "•P,auffllls vita~ cOlllbala d ""'1ffnaIMlarl ,,,,,.,,.,,_., PL, t. 158-159,col 221-222. ,. QUJLLBT, Qw/qw8 Ida_, la prli,-. tb, ~ 0.-., p. 419. "JAYE, Ex.m:JliMm,p. 3-4. 93

- Digitized by

Go ogle -

~

INIA -

CRITICAL BVALUATION OF ARTBS ORANDI

113

4. STYLB : RHETORIC, DIALBCTIC, AND GRAMMAR

Despite the universality of rhetorical training. the works discussed here show a wide range of styles, rangingfrom the plodding (the E:urcitium Paris 2 texts) to the lyric (Gertrude of Helfta), and from the domesticated narrative (the Eurcilium Paris 1 text) to scholastic melanges of biblical and literary allusion (Gunther of Panis and William of Auvergne ). Patterns of organization range from clear but rather pedantic predictability (Stephen of Sawley) to the downright peculiar (Gunther's decision to follow his initial explanation of the paternoster in normal order with another done backward). Even this preliminary review of the genre shows it to be made up of very individual voices, many crying out for detailed stylistic analysis. The overlapping of rhetoric, dialectic, and grammar in the "1Vs orandi is also worth inveatigating. This overlapping is still a concern. A modern teacher of composition knows that at some point the form may become the content. 5. THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE ARTS PRABDICANDI Little is currently known about the relationship of the "1VS orandi to other genres. Except for a common interest in servicing pastoral needs, there seems little connection between the ana orandi and the a~s praedicandi. The relative chronology is uncertain, but two writers, Alan of Lille and William of Auvergne are credited with the authorship of both a work on prayer and an an praedicandi apiece. Alan of Lille's Summa t:k A~ Praedlcatorladates from about 1200 "· The treatise on the paternoster by Alan edited by A. DB POORTBR97 and N. HAllING reflects scholastic philosophy rather than either the ars orandi or the ars pr.dieandi. This commentary describes the paternoster u a •document of celestialphilosophy (ulenl., pl,~ docunwnta)"91• It shows more interest in classification, division, and amplification than in rhetoric. The

"PL. L 210. col 110-198. 97

A. DB PooRTBR.C""'1ofwdo JI#. tk la blbllot/wqw""1ltlwtk la VII, tk Brw,a,

Brugea. 1934, vol. II, p. 89, 188. "ALAN OF LILLB,NiltOLAUSHARING,ed., A C'1fflffWlllilron dw Ow FIIIMr by Alan in AnOkcla C'ufm:lfflda, 31, 1 (Jan.-June, 1975).p. 149-177.

a/ Lllk,

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

114

CHAPTBll Ill

writer classifies prayer u St. Paul does in Tmothy 2.1 ", but his explanation of the clauses of the paternoster is characterized by elaborate Aristotelian subdivisions. For example, the salutation, •0ur father", calls up the "four ways in which children and fathers may be related according to divine scripture, by imitation, adoption, nature, and doctrine" 100• William of Auvergne also is credited with both an an prMdicandi 101 and an an orandi.Again, the two works are discrete entities. William's an un hu nineteen short chapters, each descn"bing a way to amplify the words of the biblical text upon which the sermon wu to be based. The work n:ftecta none of the interest in judicial rhetoric that shapes his RMtorlcaDIYina. Overall, the aria orandl seem only tangmtially related to the ams The guidelines or outlines of sermon constructions do call for an opening and a closing prayer, but there does not seem to be any particular pattern for these prayers except that the opening one should ult God for the power to produce a good sermon and the closing prayer is often the paternoster.

,,,._dicandi

,,,._dicandi.

6. THE ARTBS ORANDI AND OTHER Wons

ON PRAYER

The relationship of the aria orandi to prayer books and individual prayers is worth inve-tigating How were the various kinds of ams orandi intended to be used ? Do prayers in later collections follow the precepts or fall into the categories 10 canfully defined ? Are there relationships with liturgical prayer ? John of Beletho's commentary on the mass, for instance, shows familiarity with the arta orandi.1ohnsees the salutation of the paternoster

as a captatio 'beMYOlmtlM: Nunc diundum ut tk OratioM Dombdca. In qua contiMntur uptem pdlllona.

"Et nota quadripertitumcue apecialepn111 oraodi. Primumeat oblecratio,HCUDdum dicitur oratio, tercium poetulatio, quartum patiarum actio. ALAN OF l.n.LB, op.di .• p. 161. IIO QfUIIIIOr mod/$ dloinl,,r jilll parl#r d palla Ill dbli1IO .,.,.,,.. : """"'1tJM. ""'1f,do,w, nalWa, doctrlna.ALAN OF l.JLLB, op.di., p. 163. IOI A. DE PooRTBR, ed., U11 lfUl1IWl M ~ ""'1ihak, in Jlnw ~ • ~. IIIZ Op.

25 (1923), p. 192-209. di., pauim.

Digitized by

Go ogle

_,

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF ARTBS ORANDI

115

Quad IIIMm ,,,,.,,.,,,,., at q,uul ~ caplalil)... tra prloru ad jlllllram ,ita,n pmintml ,· qualllOr poMriora (l&IM uquuntur, adpraffllml IOJ.

Relationshipsbetween the arta orandland the university debate literature should be explored. A brief work applying the terminology of formal debate to prayer is included in the Summa ~o/ogfca of Alexander of Hales (d. 124S) 1°'.This work, headed~ OratioM Chrl8ti,is not a work on how to pray but an outline following a forensic model. It proposes two qu«nlona concerning prayer by Chriat : whether auist prayed out of or emotion, and whetherall of Christ'sprayen were heard. Alexandergives biblicaland patriaticcitations organizedunder debate heactinp for each qwsdo : for, apinst, response, additionalobjections, etc. Some of the lnl>licalpuaaga aboutprayerquotedby Alexanderare also quoted in arws orandl.

reason

.., RllllaMk mwnon,,,,Oj/idonlm, PL, t. 202.col. 54. * ALIIXANDBROF ffALlls.P.M. PmlANToNI,ed., Summa 11woqica,Quaracchi,1941, vol ... p. 127-129.

Digitized by

Go ogle

Original from

UNIVERSITYOF VIRGINIA

CHAPTER IV

EDmONS

AND TRANSLATIONS

New editions are needed for many of the arta orandi. Moreover, as new examples the genre are ~ these will require editing or re-editing. Moreover, there is DO modan edition William Auvape'a RMtorica Divina or Jean Mombaucr'a RO#Dlm Eurr:itio,vm Spirltualban. The PL, CCSL, CCCM editions, and other edmom and tranalationa used for the present faacicle are as followa :

or

or

or

or

ed., Tractatu.rtM loqwndl et taandl, in DeDavitae deDaopne di BrunettoLatini, Firenze, 1884. ALAN OF LILLE, N. HAIUNG, ed., A Commentaryon tM Our Fatl,n by Alan of LIile, in Analecta ~ 31, 1 (Jan.-June, 1975), p. 149-177. ALculN, De Usu Pmlmorum, PL, t. 101, col. 465-469. ANSELM, F.S. SCHMITT, ed., Opera Omnia. F.dinbwJh, 1946, rpt. 1961, 6 vol. AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO, De DoctrlnaClutrtiana,CCSL, t. 32. Io., EnchirfdJon,CCSL, t. 46, p. 49-114. Io., De &rmone In Monte, CCSL, t. 35. CLARK,R.L.A.. ed., Ms. B. N. Nouwllu acqui8ltlon8 latines 592, in preparation. ExercitiumsuperPater Nona. JAYE, B.H., ed. and transl., The Pilgrimage of Prayer : '11wIconographyand Text.rof tM Exucltlum super Pater N08tn, Salzburg. 1990. GERSON, JEAN, P. GLORIBUX,