Richard Barbe's (1380 †) philosophical profile through the lens of Etienne Gaudet

Fiche du document

Date

30 septembre 2025

Périmètre
Langue
Identifiants
Relations

Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement//n°101132781/EU/REcovery Past Stories for Future/RESTORY

Collection

Archives ouvertes

Licence

info:eu-repo/semantics/OpenAccess



Citer ce document

Monica Brinzei, « Richard Barbe's (1380 †) philosophical profile through the lens of Etienne Gaudet », HAL SHS (Sciences de l’Homme et de la Société), ID : 10670/1.d52d88...


Métriques


Partage / Export

Résumé En

At the beginning of the fifteenth century, a reference to a so-called Richard Barbe circulates in the group of Viennese theologians. In Book IV, q. 1 of many Sentences commentaries stemming from the Faculty of Theology at Vienna, one can read the name of the totally unknown Richard Barbe, who apparently was a bachelor in theology in Paris in 1363-1364. 1 His name is referenced in a joint quote with the German Cistercian Godescalc of Nepomuk, who also read his set of Sentences questions in Paris in 1366-1367. Richard Barbe and Godescalc of Nepomuk are connected by the Viennese theologies, such as Nicholas of Dinkelsbühl and Peter of Pirchenwart, in the context of discussions about the moment of the instauration of the sacraments, as one can read in this recycled or transgenerational passage: Nicholaus de Dinkelsbühl:Secundo infero quod ante lapsum angelorum non fuit necessarium seu congruum institui aut esse aliquod /143vb/ sacramentum. Patet plane ex prima parte conclusionis et eius probatione. Ex quo patet minus probabilem esse opinionem magistri Richibarbe (!) quam etiam sequitur dominus Gotschalcus qui dicit quod congruum fuit invisibilem sanctificationem adornari aliquo sacramento praevio merito salvatoris instituto. 2 ("Secondly, I infer that before the fall of the angels it was not necessary or appropriate for any sacrament to exist or to be instituted. This is plainly clear from the first part of the conclusion and its proof. From this it is clear that the opinion of Master Richibarbe (!) is less probable, which opinion lord Gottschalk also follows, saying that it was appropriate for the invisible sanctification to be adorned by some sacrament previous to the one instituted on the merit of the Savior.") Petrus Pirchenwart:Secundo infero quod ante lapsum angelorum non fuit necessarium seu congruum institui aut esse aliquod sacramentum. Patet plane ex prima parte conclusionis et eius probatione. Ex quo patet minus probabilem esse opinionem magistri Richardi Barbe quam etiam sequitur dominus Gotschalcus qui dicit quod congruum fuit [invisibilem] angelorum sanctificationem adornari aliquo sacramento praevio merito salvatoris instituto.3 Vienna Group (levels IV and V):

document thumbnail

Par les mêmes auteurs

Sur les mêmes sujets