¹ (Oxford 1983), p. xv.

² See Walsh, K., A Fourteenth-Century Scholar and Primate. Richard FitzRalph in Oxford, Avignon and Armagh (Oxford, 1981), esp. pp. 318, 378, 452–75Google Scholar. More recently see Dawson, J.D., ‘Richard FitzRalph and the fourteenth-century poverty controversies’, JEH, xxxiv (1983), pp. 315–44Google Scholar; Coleman, J., ‘FitzRalph’s antimendicant proposicio (1350) and the Politics of the Papal Court at Avignon’, JEH, xxxv (1984), pp. 376–90.Google Scholar

³ The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages by the late Hastings Rashdall, ed. F.M. Powicke and A.B. Emden, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1936), iii, p. 139, n. 2.

⁴ For examples of the wide-ranging implications of the friars’ scriptural teaching in and beyond the schools see Smalley, Friars, pp. 28-34.

⁵ Courtenay, W.J., ‘The Lost Matthew Commentary of Robert Holcot, O.P.’, AFP, 1 (1980), pp. 103–4.Google Scholar

⁶ For these disputations and for the confusion surrounding the identity of the various Graftons see Courtenay, W.J., Adam Wodeham. An Introduction to his Life and Writings = Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought, xxi (Leiden, 1978), esp. pp. 90–112.Google Scholar

⁷ Walsh, Richard FitzRalph, esp. pp. 16-17, 176-9, 466.

⁸ Courtenay, Adam Wodeham, pp. 78-9.

⁹ A.J. Minnis, ‘“Authorial intention” and “literal sense” in the exegetical theories of Richard FitzRalph and John Wyclif: an essay in the medieval history of biblical hermeneutics’, PRIA, lxxv, C(1975), esp. p. 2. See also the same author, ‘Discussions of “Authorial Role” and “Literary Form” in Late-Medieval Scriptural Exegesis’, Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur, xcix (1977), pp. 37-65; ‘Late-Medieval Discussions of Compilatio and the Rôle of the Compilator’, ibid., ci (1979), pp. 389-421; Medieval Theory of Authorship: Scholastic literary attitudes in the later Middle Ages (London, 1983).

¹⁰ Minnis, ‘“Authorial intention”’, pp. 7-8, indicates a number of cases in which FitzRalph was not prepared to follow Lyre, notably when prophecy is related to problems of predestination and future contingents.

¹¹ Manuscript circulation and content of FitzRalph’s most popular scholarly work is discussed in Walsh, Richard FitzRalph, pp. 129-77, 469-71. For a review of recent opinion on the levels of meaning, the senses of scriptural exegesis, see Smalley, Bible, pp. viii-xvi.

¹² Minnis, ‘“Authorial intention”’, p. 2.

¹³ This sermon has been edited by Zimmermann, B.M., ‘Ricardi Archiepiscopi Armacani Bini Sermones de Conceptione B.V. Mariae … annis 1342 et 1349’, Analecta Ord. Carm. Discalc, iii (1931), pp. 179–89.Google Scholar

¹⁴ For a general characterization of FitzRalph’s preaching style, see Gwynn, A., ‘The Sermon Diary of Richard FitzRalph, Archbishop of Armagh’, PRIA, xliv, C (1937). pp. 17–46Google Scholar; Walsh, Richard FitzRalph, pp. 182-238; Schneyer, Repertorium, v, pp. 150-8.

¹⁵ This title figures regularly in the satirical poems cited by Erikson, C.M., ‘The fourteenth-century Franciscans and their Critics’, Franc Stud, ns, xxxv (1975), pp. 107–35Google Scholar; ibid., xxxvi (1976), pp. 108-47, esp. pp. 117-18. It was also used by Nicholas of Hereford (1382), see Hudson, A., ‘A neglected Wycliffite text’, JEH, xxix (1978), p. 263.Google Scholar

¹⁶ For example Göttweig (O.S.B.), Klosterneuburg (Can. Reg. O.S.A.), Stams (O.Cist.), and the collegiate church of St Nicholas in Passau.

¹⁷ Minnis, ‘“Authorial intention”’, p. 30. Whether Lollard students of Scripture were able or willing to distinguish between the underlying presuppositions of FitzRalph and of the Franciscan exegete is however open to question.

¹⁸ For the extent to which Wyclif actually read FitzRalph and closely studied extensive portions of his work, see Benrath, G.A., Wyclifs Bibelkommentar = Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte, xxxvi (Berlin, 1966), pp. 35–6, 293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁹ As the editio princeps of FitzRalph’s Summa, that of Johannis Sudoris (Paris, 1511) is notoriously deficient, the text will be cited here from the printed edition for reference purposes, and from one of the better early-manuscripts, BAV, Vat.Lat. 1033, dating from 1393.

²⁰ For such a discussion by the pre-Reformation preacher in Strassburg, Geiler of Kaisersberg, see Douglass, E.J. Dempsey, Justification in Late Medieval Preaching. A Study of John Geiler of Keisersberg = Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought, i (Leiden, 1966), pp. 65–74.Google Scholar

²¹ Summa, ed. Sudoris, ff. II^ra-III^vb; Vat.Lat. 1033, fol. 1^v-4^r.

²² Smalley, B., ‘William of Auvergne, John of La Rochelle and St. Thomas Aquinas’ on the Old Law’, St. Thomas Aquinas 1274-1974. Commemorative Studies, 2 vols. (Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Toronto, 1974) i, pp. 16, 54–5.Google Scholar

²³ Minnis, ‘“Authorial intention’”, pp. 4-8.

²⁴ II. Cor., iii. 6; Summa, I, v, ed. Sudoris, f. III^rb; Vat.Lat. 1033, f. 3^v.

²⁵ For the relevant documents concerning the promotion of biblical studies and the provision of the required linguistic instruction see Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, ed. H. Denifle and E. Chatelain, 4 vols. (Paris, 1891-9), ii, pp. 154-5, 200-1, 576-88; see also D. Wood, ‘… novo sensu sacram adulterare Scripturam’, above, pp. 237-49.

²⁶ Summa, VII, i-v, ed. Sudoris, ff. XLV^ra-XLVI^va; Vat.Lat. 1033, ff. 45^r-47^r.

²⁷ Benrath, Wyclifs Bibelkommentar, p. 293.

²⁸ Summa, XVIII, i-ix, ed. Sudoris, ff. CXLIIII^va-CXLVII^vb; Vat.Lat. 1033, f. 149^v-52^v.

²⁹ Cited in Dempsey Douglass, Justification in Late Medieval Preaching, p. 65.

³⁰ Summa., XVIII, vi, ed. Sudoris, ff. CXLVI^v-CXLVII^r; Vat.Lat. 1033, f. 152^r.

³¹ All 35 chapters of bk. xix are devoted to the topic.

³² In this view of the Bible as a book among books, FitzRalph is following Lyre, and his view depends on the distinction between the sacred auctor and the human scriptor. See Minnis, ‘“Authorial intention”’, p. 11; ‘Late-Medieval Discussions’, pp. 418-19.

³³ For a recent review of the problem of nationality in the Middle Ages see Schmugge, L., ‘über “nationale” Vorurteile im Mittelalter’, DA, xxxviii (1982), pp. 439–59.Google Scholar

³⁴ The basis for these views is discussed in Walsh, Richard FitzRalph, and requires no further treatment here, though a shift in the argument in favour of greater familiarity with his native diocese may be noted.

³⁵ See Charland, Th.M., Les Artes Praedicandi. Contribution à l’histoire de la rhétorique du moyen âge = Publications de l’institut d’Etudes médiévales d’Ottowa, vii (Paris and Ottowa, 1936), esp. pp. 327–403Google Scholar for the text of the De modo componendi sermones of Thomas Waleys; see also Bataillon, L.-J., ‘Approaches to the study of medieval sermons’, Leeds Studies in English, ns, xi (1979, for 1980), pp. 19–35Google Scholar, which concentrates mainly on the thirteenth century; Schneyer, Wegweiser, pp. xi-xxv.

³⁶ De Pauperie Salvatoris, bks. i-iv, ed. R.L. Poole, in: John Wyclif, De dominio diuino WS, (1890), p. 277.

³⁷ See R.H. and Rouse, M.A., ‘The verbal concordance to the Scriptures’, AFP, xliv (1974), pp. 5–30Google Scholar. The only extant manuscript of such a concordance known to have been in circulation in late medieval Ireland is now Dublin, Trinity College, MS 65. Made in Dorchester, c. 1348, it later passed into Irish Franciscan hands and is unlikely to have been available to FitzRalph. However, in view of the wide circulation of such expensive handbooks among wealthy prelates and at the papal curia, it is possible that he possessed a copy personally, ibid., pp. 21-2. See also von Nolcken, C., ‘Some Alphabetical Compendia and how Preachers used them in Fourteenth-century England’, Viator, xii (1981), pp. 271–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gillespie, V., ‘ Doctrina and predicacio: the Design and Function of some Pastoral Manuals’, Leeds Studies in English, ns, xi (1979, for 1980), pp. 36–50Google Scholar; Bataillon, L.J., ‘Les instruments de travail des prédicateurs au XIII^e siècle’, Culture et travail intellectuel dans l’Occident médiéval. Bilan des “Colloques d’humanisme médiéval” (1960-1980) fondes par le R.P. Hubert, O.P., ed. Hasenohr, G. and Longère, J., Institut de Recherche et d’Histoire des Textes, (Paris, 1981), pp. 197–209.Google Scholar

³⁸ The sermon-diary will be cited here from Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodl. 144. The notes for the extended version of this sermon are on ff. 39^v-42^r.

³⁹ MS Bodl. 144, f. 42^v.

⁴⁰ MS Bodl. 144, ff. 42^v-43^v.

⁴¹ See Wenzel, S., ‘The Seven Deadly Sins: some Problems of Research’, Speculum, xliii (1968), pp. 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Vices, Virtues, and Popular Preaching’, MARS, vi (1976), pp. 28-54.

⁴² This sermon was edited by Gwynn, A., ‘Two sermons of Primate Richard FitzRalph’, Archiuium Hibernicum, xiv (1949), pp. 53–63Google Scholar, and the topic in question is alluded to at pp. 56-7. See also Walsh, Richard FitzRalph, pp. 326-33. With regard to the tone of this sermon it is worth noting that the synod took place during the second week of February 1352, precisely at the time when the controversy over the disputed provision to the rectory of Stabannon (Co. Louth) came to a head. Apart from the legal problem posed by the nomination of two candidates, respectively under the Great Seal of England and under that of the Irish chancellor, FitzRalph’s primary concern appears to have been the question of suitability for office with cura animarum, and the issue is a welcome illustration of the pastoral context within which the Archbishop had to work. See Sayles, G.O., ‘Ecclesiastical Proceedings and the Parsonage of Stabannon in 1351’, PRIA, lv (1952), pp. 1–23Google Scholar. I am grateful to Professor J.A. Watt, who drew my attention to the significance of this episode.

⁴³ For examples see d’Avray, D. and Tausche, M., ‘Marriage sermons in ad status collections of the Central Middle Ages’, AHDLMA, xlvii (1980), pp. 71–119Google Scholar; D. d’Avray, ‘The Gospel of the Marriage Feast of Cana and Marriage Preaching in France’, above, pp. 207—24. Apart from the Franciscan Bishop of Ossory, Richard Ledred, there is little literary evidence for mendicant preaching or pastoral activity among FitzRalph’s contemporaries, though a large proportion of his fellow bishops were members of the regular clergy, especially friars. See Colledge, Edmund, The Latin Poems of Richard Ledred, OFM, Bishop of Ossory, 1317-1360 = Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Studies and Texts xxx (Toronto, 1974)Google Scholar. Polemical in tone, but useful for the documentation contained, is Maclnerny, M.H., A History of the Irish Dominicans from original sources and unpublished records, vol. I: Irish Dominican Bishops (1224-1307), (Dublin, Belfast, Cork, and Waterford, 1916)Google Scholar. No further volumes appeared.

⁴⁴ Even the notes indicate his righteous indignation: ‘Quoad detestacionem peccati auaricie et ipsum medicandum dicta fuerunt tria remedia, scilicet, diuiciarum laudabilitas, earum insaciabilitas, et possessoris propter eorum retencionem finalis calamitas. Quoad laudabilitatem dicta fuerunt facta communia mercatorum et principum …’, MS Bodl. 144, f. 42^v.

⁴⁵ The most detailed statement of his views on the matter are to be found in the notes in the diary for the sermon preached in Drogheda, 18 December 1351. Briefer notes survive, but the tone is appreciably sterner, for that delivered in the same venue a year later, 2 December 1352. MS Bodl. 144, ff. 58^r-62^v, 62^v-63^r.

⁴⁶ MS Bodl. 144, ff. 20^r-22^v.

⁴⁷ MS Bodl. 144, f. 43^v; Matt., v. 2-10, 20-25, vi. 9-13.

⁴⁸ MS Bodl. 144, ff. 43^v-44^r.

⁴⁹ The rectory of St Mary’s Mansfieldstown was held by, among others, William Moner, bachelor of laws and proctor of Archbishop Nicholas Fleming at the papal curia (from 1405), and official principal of the archiepiscopal court (from 1407), see BRUO, p. 1293; H.J. Lawlor (ed.), ‘A Calendar of the Register of Archbishop Fleming’, PRIA, xxx C (1912) ad indicem (p. 182). It was also held, from before 1431 until at least 1449 by Thomas Hussey, rural dean of the deaneries of Ardee and Dundalk, see Chart, D.A. (ed.), The Register of John Swayne, Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of Ireland 1418-1439 (Belfast, 1935), pp. 133, 189, 193–5Google Scholar. In the assessments of 28 June 1431 it was valued at 10 s., the same sum as the vicar’s stipend in the church of Stabannon, ibid., p. 137.

⁵⁰ MS Bodl. 144, f. 44^r.

⁵¹ MS Bodl. 144, ff. 9^r-13^r.

⁵² Walsh, Richard FitzRalph, pp. 284-8.

⁵³ MS Bodl. 144, f. 44^v.

⁵⁴ MS Bodl. 144, ff. 45^r-v.

⁵⁵ BRUO, p. 746.

⁵⁶ Owst, G.R., Preaching in Medieval England (Cambridge, 1926), p. 93Google Scholar; Dempsey Douglass, Justification in Late Medieval Preaching, pp. 87-90.

⁵⁷ See J. I. Catto, ‘Wyclif and the Cult of the Eucharist’, below pp. 269-86.

⁵⁸ In the course of the anti-mendicant sermons in London in the winter of 1356 he ridiculed those who appealed to the authority of the Gloss, MS Bodl. 144, f. 92^v, cited in Walsh, Richard FitzRalph, p. 410. See also Zenner, J.R., ‘Armachanus über Widerspruche und Irrthümer in der heiligen Schrift’, Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie, xv (1891), p. 350Google Scholar, and B. Smalley, ‘Use of the “Spiritual” Senses of Scripture in Persuasion and Argument by Christian Scholars in the Middle Ages’, RTAM (in press).