No description available.

No description available.

Le 27 mai 1406, le théologien parisien Pierre Plaoul comparaît devant la cour du Parlement de Paris en tant que représentant de l’Université de Paris dans une affaire qui l’oppose à l’Université de Toulouse. Il y prononce un sermon en latin, ce que la cour lui reproche instantanément, lui demandant de parler en français pour la prochaine séance. Le 7 juin, lors de sa deuxième comparution, il parle cette fois en langue vernaculaire et prononce un discours extrêmement différent du premier, autant dans son genre que dans son registre de citations. Les deux discours sont conservés dans le registre X1a4787 des Archives nationales de France. L’édition des discours permet de comprendre le raisonnement derrière leurs différences, mais il permet surtout de constater que le discours français fait état d’une érudition encore plus grande que son homologue latin et que son orateur n’était nullement gêné par l’usage de la langue vernaculaire. Remis dans le contexte historiographique actuel, il en ressort que l’utilisation du français par Plaoul concorde parfaitement avec l’abandon du modèle de rapport diglossique entre latin et français pour la fin du Moyen Âge, lui préférant plutôt un rapport de langues en contacts. Ce postulat est soutenu par les nombreuses occurrences d’universitaires médiévaux démontrant une excellente maîtrise d’un registre savant de la langue vulgaire, des poètes, aux prédicateurs en passant par les practiciens du droit. Un examen plus attentif de l’utilisation de la langue française par les docteurs en théologie du règne de Charles VI vient aussi appuyer l’hypothèse selon laquelle les universitaires du bas Moyen Âge considéraient la langue vernaculaire comme un instrument approprié à la transmission de la culture savante. / On May 27th 1406, the Parisian theologian Pierre Plaoul appeared before the court of the Parliament of Paris as a delegate of the University of Paris. His alma mater was involved against the University of Toulouse in an affair concerning the great schism. Plaoul made a speech in Latin, which the court immediately reproved, intimating him to speak French the next time. He did so on his second appearance on June 7th, but in a speech dramatically different from the first one. The French speech had a different genre and cited different authorities. Both instances are preserved in the X1a4787 register of the Archives nationales de France. The edition of both speeches helps us to understand the motivation behind such dramatic changes in style. But above all, it shows that the French speech was perhaps even more scholarly than the Latin one, and that the orator was not at all hindered by the use of French rather than Latin. Further analysis of the text shows that this instance is totally in line with the actual research’s tendency. Rather than viewing the relation between the vernacular and Latin of the late Middle Ages as being diglossic, current research prefers a dynamic of language contact. This view is supported by the many instances of medieval academics exhibit an excellent mastery of high-level French, be they poets, preachers or practitioners of law. A closer look at the use of the vulgar language by the doctors of theology during the reign of Charles VI also supports the hypothesis according to which late medieval scholars considered French as an apporiate mean of transmission for scholarly culture.

Prima parte: L'analisi del rapporto tra spiritualità certosina e devotio moderna consente di individuare il contesto in cui maturò ed ebbe fortuna il De tralatione Bibliae di Petrus Sutor, monaco certosino. La spiritualità certosina ebbe forte influsso sulla Congregazione di Montaigu, espressione estrema della devotio moderna, nella quale lo stesso Sutor fu massima autorità spirituale in qualità di priore della Certosa di Parigi. Alla Congregazione di Montaigu appartennero i principali oppositori di Erasmo nel campo della filologia biblica nell'area di Parigi e Lovanio. In essa ebbe fortuna l'opera di Sutor, anche se il mondo di Montaigu mostra due facce. Il mondo parigino di Montaigu risulta infatti più conservatore di quello lovaniense, che nelle figure di Iacobus Latomus e Frans Titelmans mostra una certa apertura all'umanesimo. Seconda parte e appendice: i contenuti del De tralatione Bibliae mostrano i rapporti di Sutor con altri oppositori erasmiani, Stunica in particolare. Emergono le fonti che stanno alla base delle informazioni storiche fornite da Sutor, tra cui emerge Petrus Comestor, e la risonanza del De tralatione Bibliae negli ambienti culturali inglesi, in particolare in John Fisher. / First Part: In order to supply with due context Sutor's De tralatione Bibliae, it is necessary to rediscover the interplay between Carthusian spirituality and devotio moderna. The carthusian influence was particulary strong in the Congregation of Montaigu, which formed an extreme wing of devotio moderna. Sutor himself played a very important role in the Congregation of Montaigu having been his major authority for three years as Prior of the Parisian Charterhouse. The main critics of Erasmus in the field of biblical philology, who were active in Paris and Louvain theological units belonged to the Montaigu Congregation. There were differences between the Paris and Louvain Montaigu cultural and spiritual habits. Louvain shows a particular trend to moderation and acceptance of some fundamental humanistic issues, that we can trace in Iacobus Latomus and Francis Titelmans. Second Part and Appendix: The contents of Sutor's De tralatione Bibliae display the relationship between Sutor and other critics of Erasmus, in particular Stunica. Through the text we rediscover the different sources Sutor uses in order to supply the reader with historical information, especially Petrus Comestor, and we can identify some echoes of Sutor's works in John Fisher and the English cultural circles.

Bien que la relation entre les universités et l’ordre dominicain, nettement orienté vers l’étude depuis ses premières années, attire l’attention des historiens du Moyen Âge depuis longtemps, la rencontre des Prêcheurs avec le système universitaire des grades, qui constituait le premier attrait de l’universitas pour ces religieux, n’a pas encore donné lieu à des études systématiques. Focalisée sur l’époque postérieure au milieu du XIVème siècle, où la prolifération rapide des facultés de théologie en Europe a offert aux dominicains davantage d’occasions d’accéder aux grades universitaires, la présente thèse a pour objectif de mesurer l’impact qu’a exercé le magisterium sur les normes, pratiques et idées des fils de saint Dominique de France, dont l’idéologie était étroitement liée aux activités universitaires. Dans les provinces françaises de l’ordre, où le réseau des studia dominicains ont vu un véritable essor, l’élite intellectuelle se procurent l’estime des frères et de nombreux avantages dès le XIIIème siècle. L’aspiration au statut privilégié des frères savants s’accentue au fur et à mesure que le système des grades de théologie, établi tout d’abord au sein de l’université de Paris, est implanté dans bien des communautés universitaires d’Europe. Il en découle que les supérieurs de l’ordre ont voulu contrôler plus rigoureusement la conquête du diplôme par les frères, ce qui a donné lieu à un régime de surveillance des candidats dominicains aux grades universitaires, codifié dès le début du XVème siècle en vertu d’une nouvelle constitution de l’ordre et raffiné grâce à de nombreuses ordonnances du chapitre général. Les règlements étant établis de façon à conditionner l’obtention des grades universitaires, la relation entre les normes et les pratiques s’avère cependant loin d’être univoque, ce que nous montrent les données prosopographiques des dominicains autorisés à poursuivre le magisterium. Parfois, les normes restrictives s’adaptent aux pratiques que vivent nos religieux. Cette élasticité des législations dominicaines augmente l’importance du jugement ad hoc des supérieurs pour examiner et garantir les qualités intellectuelles et morales des religieux admis à l’obtention des grades, dans la mesure où, après le foisonnement des facultés de théologie, le chapitre général, auquel incombe de façon exclusive la décision finale de l’envoi des religieux vers les universités, se trouve étouffé à cause de l’entassement des dossiers de candidature des frères aspirant au doctorat. D’où un enchevêtrement sensible qui caractérise les pratiques d’autorisation de la conquête du magisterium, auxquelles participent de manière active les religieux désirant le diplôme eux-mêmes. En revanche, la famille religieuse ne semblait pas très préoccupée des actes académiques accomplis en pratique au sein de la faculté, car, en s’appuyant sur la faveur pontificale généreusement accordée, elle pouvait conférer le magisterium aux frères qui le méritaient. La prédilection de nos religieux pour le magisterium est d’autant plus inébranlable que cette dignité s’associe étroitement à la conscience de soi des fils de saint Dominique. Le regard des frères vis-à-vis des magistri se révèle cependant à double tranchant, car l’état doctoral ne peut jamais se libérer de la suspicion de la vanité mondaine. Particulièrement intéressés par cette question récurrente de l’arrogance magistrale, les observants se montrent aussi attachés aux grades que les frères qui n’embrassent pas la cause de la réforme. L’ancrage du système universitaire des grades dans l’idéologie des fils de saint Dominique s’avère si profonde que, voué à un idéal analogue à celui des universitaires – participation par voie intellectuelle à la prospérité de l’Église –, l’ordre dominicain apparaît à son tour comme une universitas des docteurs de la science sacrée à la fin de notre époque. / Although the relationship between the Universities and the Dominican Order in the Middle Ages has attracted historians’ attention for a long time, the impact of the University degree system upon the Friars Preachers has not yet given rise to systematic studies. Focusing on the fifteenth century, where a rapid proliferation of faculties of theology in Europe has given Dominicans more opportunities to access university degrees, this dissertation aims to measure an influence that the magisterium had on the norms, practices and ideas of French Dominican friars, whose ideology was closely linked to university activities. In the French provinces, where the network of Dominican Studia was highly developed, the intellectual elite earned the respect of brothers and enjoyed many advantages within the Order. Aspiration to the privileged status of scholarly Dominicans is accentuated as the degree system of faculty of theology, first established within University of Paris, is implanted in many universities of Europe. As a result, the superiors of the Order wanted to control more rigorously friars’ obtaining of the magisterium. Finally, the Order established a system of supervision for Dominican degree candidates, which was codified in the Order’s new constitution enacted in the beginning of the fifteenth century and refined through many ordinances of the General Chapter. In spite of Dominicans’ efforts to condition the obtaining of university degrees, the relationship between norms and practices was fairly complex, as shown by a prosopographical analysis of the friars authorized to pursue the magisterium. Sometimes, restrictive norms adapt to practices. Such an elasticity of Dominican legislation increased the importance of ad hoc judgments by the superiors, who were responsible to examine and guarantee intellectual and moral qualities of the friars admitted to the degree. Hence, authorizing process of Dominican degree candidates became quite complicated, as the friars who were eager for the degree committed themselves actively in such a process. On the other hand, the Order did not seem very interested in the academic acts which Dominicans performed in practice within the faculty, because, relying on pontifical favor generously granted, it could confer the magisterium on the friars who deserved it. The predilection of Dominicans for the degree seems all the more unshakable as the magisterium is closely associated with their self-consciousness. Friars' view of the magistri is, however, double-edged, for the doctor can never be free from suspicion of worldly vanity. The Observant Dominicans were particularly interested in this recurrent question of masters’ arrogance. They were nevertheless as attached to the degree as the non-reformed friars. The University degree system took root so profoundly in the Dominicans’ ideology that they shared an ideal with University men, that of intellectual contribution to a prosperity of the Church, and the Dominican Order appeared as an universitas of doctors of theology.

This work deals with the application of leisure education graduates on the labor market in the Czech Republic. It introduces the concept of leisure, its origins and historical development of educational activities. It deals with the pedagogy of leisure as a science, pedagogy discipline and the field of study. It introduces the pedagogue of leisure, his vocational training, profile and application. Last but not least, closer to the ties of labor market, it covers the unemployment and status of university graduates on the labor market. The last chapter presents the results of the performed research. The research focused on finding employment of graduates of leisure education from Faculty of Theology of University of South Bohemia on the czech labor market in relation to this field, their preparation for practice and obtaining their opinions about that field of study.