> From: [log in to unmask] [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>
> Do you mean that the particular text you cite is considered a forgery, or
> that the bull itself is thought never to have existed? I've read the
> argument for the latter, and haven't been very impressed. John Watt makes
> a good argument that the bull Laudabiliter was indeed issued in 1155. It
> seems hard to make sense of Henry II's church-reforming efforts when he
> got to Ireland without it, or to understand the O Neill Remonstrance. It
> is also peculiar that the papacy has never disowned Laudabiliter, if it is
> indeed a forgery. I'd like to hear your take on the matter.
>
Actually, this is one subject on which I don't have an opinion. ;)
Francine
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|