BCCCAP00000000000000000000821

312 IGNATIUS BRADY Guilelmus Brito, is identified as Varallon only in the manuscript of Paris; yet this receives an interesting corroboration in Gilles Charlier's refutation of Vaurouillon's thesis. Writing against those who hold de facto that through the words of Christ St. John became the son of Mary, Charlier relates that such a doctrine was preached by two Franciscans on Good Friday 1466, one at Cambrai, the other at Douai. When the Cambrai preacher was asked to explain how this was possible, he replied in almost the same words de' Domenichi attributed to the magíster antiquus: that Christ gave these words the power to transubstantiate John into Christ, just as he gave the words of consecration the power to change the bread and wine into his body and blood 105 • While the friar was not made to retract his thesis, he was compelled to read a statement to the people, to do away with any doubt or error that his sermon might have caused. Since he expressly mentions William of Vaurouillon and the debate or appeal at the Curia, the document is of prime importance: « Declaratio indicta fratri ad populum. - Pour che que l 'offi.ce de sainete predication... A ceste cause est venu escandele a pluiseurs [sic] de ceulx qui furent a mon sermon le iour de bon venredi en cest place quant ie parlay que nostre signeur pendant en la crois dist a sa glo– rieuse mere vierge ecce filius tuus et a saint ieh' ecce mater tua fut fet a ces paroles filz naturele de la vierge et que par avant pour ceste matere ung appelle maistre guillem vorillon en ala a rome et y moru... »106_ magíster, et qui multas annos cathedram rexerat, in sermone suo ad populum predicavit, quod illa verba dicta a Domino in cruce, scilicet Ecce filius tuus, fuerunt tante eflicacie et virtutis, quod per illa Johannes potuit esse factus filius naturalis beate Virginis: sicut illa verba sacramentalia, Hoc est corpus meum, sunt tante eflicacie quod per illa panis efficitur corpus Christi. Quod cum esset ad romanam curiam delatum tanquam esset propo– sitio scandalosa erronea et impía, et ídem magíster ex doctrina aliquorum et specialiter Fran– cisci de Maronis eam defenderet: invitatus ut in corona [i.e. theologorum] aliquid dicerem, adduxi contra eum aliqua argumenta et alia etiam post superaddidi que nunc describam ad veritatis investigationem, semper subiiciendo ea que dixero indicio melius sententium » (Vat. lat. 6234, f.68r; B.N. lat. 12390, f.3lr; editions, f.93r-v. I have used the edition of Ve– nice 1573, in the British Museum). The account indicates a public debate took place in the curia: « Et per simile arguebat unus Rev. Dominus... arguitur... dicebatur... Post hoc alius disputavit publice Rome et tenuit eandem conclusionem ut probabilem, et accepit etiam aliud fundamentum » (ed. cit., f.l00r and 129r-v). 105 Aegidius Carlerius, Sportula, Bruxillis 1478-1479, f.215v: « Contra tenentes quod beatus Johannes Ev. factus fuit filius naturalis Virginis quando Christus in cruce pendens dixit matri sue ecce filius tuus... Duo fratres ordinis minorum unus cameraci alter douaci suis sermonibus ad populum factis in die parasceves anno 1466 super illo passu mulier ecce filius tuus dixerunt quod aliqui doctores tenent quod per illa verba Iohannes evangelista factus fuit filius naturalis b. virginis, et cum unus illorum scilicet ille de cameraco in– terrogaretur de modo quo hoc factum fuerat dixit quod Christus in cruce pcndcns dedit istis verbis Ecce filius tuus virtutem transsubstantiandi Iohannem in Christum, sicut dedit verbis sacramentalibus virtutem transsubstantiandi panem in corpus Christi et vinum in sanguinem ». (Copy in British Museum). 106 Sportula, f.224a. This forms part of an account written by Charlier (f.223r ss)