Thanks to everyone who replied to my question re. medieval bishops. Quite a
flurry of correspondence. Some of you wanted to know what answers I got so
here's a summary. The general consensus seems to be, that it's not safe to
assume Michael Scot was a priest because -
1) there are examples of men being becoming bishops from orders other than
priest, e.g. deacon (Thomas Becket).
2) From an earlier era, Ambrose was cited as someone who was made bishop
without being in any kind of orders previously. Indeed, I was told that he
had to be baptised first as well.
3) Nearly everyone thought Scot would have to have been ordained prior to
being consecrated bishop, so he would have been <at least ordainable>. This
was taken to mean unmarried.
4) One person wrote of a family tradition that he was descended from a
medieval bishop, so that raises questions. It wasn't all neat and tidy in
those days, as someone else said.
5) I was also sent a list of C13 bishops of Cashel in which Scot does not
figure. This would be right as he refused the position twice and seems
never to have gone to Ireland. Thanks though. Any record of him there would
be a bonus.
6) Someone said he would probably have to have been in minor orders, since
university education was basically for clerics. Does basically mean
exclusively I wonder, late C12/early C13? Dante, for example (only a couple
of generations later) where did he get his education and was he in minor
orders? Also, we hear of lay people studying in monastic schools, but
that's earlier and from the Irish tradition. Were universities more
exclusive? Sorry, I'm straying way off-list here.
If there are any more comments on this perhaps they could be addressed to
mailbase rather than to me personally, though I'm still happy to hear from
individuals.
best wishes,
Mary
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|