medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
I had a chance to check the Jesuit Constitutions (1616 ed.), and George Brown is correct about them having a regulation against physical contact. It's one of the Regulae communes, no. 34: "Ut ea, quae religiosos decet, gravitas et modestia retineatur, nemo alium etiam joco tangat, praeterquam in signum caritatis amplexando, cum quis aut abit, aut redet peregre" (In order that the gravity and modesty befitting religious be preserved, no-one should touch another even in jest, except by embracing as a sign of charity when someone goes or returns from afar).
The Jesuit legislation was enormously influential on subsequent religious, so it wouldn't surprise me if many later congregations incorporated some similar rule. However, my rather desultory inquiries haven't found anything exactly comparable in the older orders. Did this prohibition express an early modern rather than a medieval anxiety? -- Paul Chandler
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and cultureLots of information in Chandler's intervention, to which I want to add that in the Jesuit Order there is a rule forbidding touch, and "ne taceas" was taken very seriously especially in the novitiate, where penalties were prescribed for violation of that rule, even in sports. Though it was not overtly state, I always though the rule was to guard chastity.Surely there must be a similar rule in earlier religious orders, esp. since Ignatius used some of them as models for his.GHB