John Tolan (Université de Nantes):
Ne De Fide Presumant Disputare: Legal Regulations
of Interreligious Debate and Disputation in the Middle Ages
john.tolan@univ-nantes.fr
Abstract
On March 4th, 1233, in his bull Sufficere debuerat perfidie Iudeorum, Pope Gregory IX complains to the bishops and archbishops of Germany of the many “perfidies” of the German Jews, including their “blasphemies” against the Christian religion, which, he fears, may have an ill effect on Christians, particularly converts from Judaism. He orders the bishops to prohibit Jews from presuming to dispute with Christians and to prevent Christians from participating in such disputations through ecclesiastical censure. Gregory clearly thought that it was dangerous to allow informal discussions or debates about religion between Jews and Christian laymen. At the same time, he was instrumental in the promotion of the two new mendicant orders and in the encouragement of their missionary efforts towards Jews (and to a lesser extent Muslims). Over the course of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the Dominicans in particular became specialists of religious disputation. Laymen were increasingly discouraged or prohibited from engaging in such disputation by both ecclesiastical and royal legislation.
It happened very recently that a debate was held between a Christian and a proselyte Jew. Through the tug-of-war exchange between them, they dragged the day into evening. Also, through the clamouring from
some supporters of both individuals, the truth was being obscured as if by a cloud. Therefore, as a full explanation was impossible on account of everyone speaking at once, it was decided to settle the questions that
have been reconsidered in writing, after a more careful examination of the texts.[1]
Scholars have speculated that Tertullian may be referring to a disputation that he had witnessed in the streets of Carthage. For Richard Lim, the Christian disputant may have been Tertullian himself. In any case, Tertullian was clearly not content with the outcome of the dispute and he sat down to write out his version of what should have been said in his Adversus Judaeos.[2]
The point is that for Tertullian and his readers daily contact and discussion between Jews and Christians was a given and that this kind of theological dispute was at least seen as plausible. And it represented a clear danger, whence the need for a text to quell the doubts inspired by Jewish infidelity and offer Christians appropriate responses to Jewish arguments. While Tertullian’s reaction took the form of literary polemics, we find the
same sort of preoccupations in accounts of early Church councils. In the fourth century, various bishops and councils expressed worries about the dangers of disputing with infidels, in particular heretics. In 381, the Council of Aquileia anathematized Arian bishops Palladius and Secundianus. Bishop Ambrose of Milan warned the council of the rhetorical skills of the accused and succeeded in preventing the council from turning into a disputation.[3] ...
Anmerkungen
1 Tertullian, Adversus Judaeos (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1964).
Geoffrey D. Dunn trans.,Tertullian (London, New York: Routledge, 2004), 68–69.
2 Richard Lim, Public Disputation, Power, and Social Order in Late Antiquity (Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1995), 4–7; Geoffrey D. Dunn, Tertullian’s Aduersus Iudaeos: A Rhetorical
Analysis (Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 2008).
3 Alex J. Novikoff, The Medieval Culture of Disputation: Pedagogy, Practice, and Performance (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013), 20; Lim, Public Disputation, 219–20.
Ne De Fide Presumant Disputare: Legal Regulations
of Interreligious Debate and Disputation in the Middle Ages
john.tolan@univ-nantes.fr
Abstract
On March 4th, 1233, in his bull Sufficere debuerat perfidie Iudeorum, Pope Gregory IX complains to the bishops and archbishops of Germany of the many “perfidies” of the German Jews, including their “blasphemies” against the Christian religion, which, he fears, may have an ill effect on Christians, particularly converts from Judaism. He orders the bishops to prohibit Jews from presuming to dispute with Christians and to prevent Christians from participating in such disputations through ecclesiastical censure. Gregory clearly thought that it was dangerous to allow informal discussions or debates about religion between Jews and Christian laymen. At the same time, he was instrumental in the promotion of the two new mendicant orders and in the encouragement of their missionary efforts towards Jews (and to a lesser extent Muslims). Over the course of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the Dominicans in particular became specialists of religious disputation. Laymen were increasingly discouraged or prohibited from engaging in such disputation by both ecclesiastical and royal legislation.
This article will examine several key texts
involving the dangers of interreligious debate and discussion in the Middle Ages from the perspective of Christian authorities (ecclesiastical, royal or other). Various authors, from Tertullian to Joinville, expressed misgiving about the effects such debate could have on Christian participants and bystanders, and various medieval legal texts, civil and canon, sought to limit or prohibit such debate.
involving the dangers of interreligious debate and discussion in the Middle Ages from the perspective of Christian authorities (ecclesiastical, royal or other). Various authors, from Tertullian to Joinville, expressed misgiving about the effects such debate could have on Christian participants and bystanders, and various medieval legal texts, civil and canon, sought to limit or prohibit such debate.
Textauszug
The question was not new in the thirteenth century.
On the contrary, medieval authors were aware of treatment of the issue by Patristic authors. Perhaps the earliest reference to the dangers of Christians debating with Jews we owe to Tertullian (d. 220). He says that one day a Jewish proselyte and a Christian had a debate:
On the contrary, medieval authors were aware of treatment of the issue by Patristic authors. Perhaps the earliest reference to the dangers of Christians debating with Jews we owe to Tertullian (d. 220). He says that one day a Jewish proselyte and a Christian had a debate:
It happened very recently that a debate was held between a Christian and a proselyte Jew. Through the tug-of-war exchange between them, they dragged the day into evening. Also, through the clamouring from
some supporters of both individuals, the truth was being obscured as if by a cloud. Therefore, as a full explanation was impossible on account of everyone speaking at once, it was decided to settle the questions that
have been reconsidered in writing, after a more careful examination of the texts.[1]
Scholars have speculated that Tertullian may be referring to a disputation that he had witnessed in the streets of Carthage. For Richard Lim, the Christian disputant may have been Tertullian himself. In any case, Tertullian was clearly not content with the outcome of the dispute and he sat down to write out his version of what should have been said in his Adversus Judaeos.[2]
The point is that for Tertullian and his readers daily contact and discussion between Jews and Christians was a given and that this kind of theological dispute was at least seen as plausible. And it represented a clear danger, whence the need for a text to quell the doubts inspired by Jewish infidelity and offer Christians appropriate responses to Jewish arguments. While Tertullian’s reaction took the form of literary polemics, we find the
same sort of preoccupations in accounts of early Church councils. In the fourth century, various bishops and councils expressed worries about the dangers of disputing with infidels, in particular heretics. In 381, the Council of Aquileia anathematized Arian bishops Palladius and Secundianus. Bishop Ambrose of Milan warned the council of the rhetorical skills of the accused and succeeded in preventing the council from turning into a disputation.[3] ...
Anmerkungen
1 Tertullian, Adversus Judaeos (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1964).
Geoffrey D. Dunn trans.,Tertullian (London, New York: Routledge, 2004), 68–69.
2 Richard Lim, Public Disputation, Power, and Social Order in Late Antiquity (Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1995), 4–7; Geoffrey D. Dunn, Tertullian’s Aduersus Iudaeos: A Rhetorical
Analysis (Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 2008).
3 Alex J. Novikoff, The Medieval Culture of Disputation: Pedagogy, Practice, and Performance (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013), 20; Lim, Public Disputation, 219–20.
Abstract und Auszug aus: Ne De Fide Presumant Disputare - Medieval Encounters 24 (2018) 14–28
- Der gesamte Beitrag auch bei academia.edu (mit Passwort)
- Mehr zu Zeitschrift "Medieval Encounters" (Leiden: Brill): hier
Mehr zur Geschichte der Blasphemie von der Antike bis heute >>>
Le blasphème Un délit politique plus que religieux - Mariam Magarditchian in Herodote.net, 13.09.2020)
Le blasphème Un délit politique plus que religieux - Mariam Magarditchian in Herodote.net, 13.09.2020)
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen