On Tue, 30 Jul 1996, Richard Landes wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jul 1996, Michael F Hynes wrote:
>
> > Ok, I'll just say one or two things about Urban II.
>
> glad you have. thanks for the material.
>
Thanks for the kind words.
> > reform. Politically adroit, Urban tackled the thorny problem of what to do
> > about schismatic (N.B. that contumacious schism was regarded as
> > a heresy) ordinations and (because of the schism) multiple claimants
> > to the same office, with pragmatism and diplomacy.
>
> in answer to Thomas Izbicki's question about where is the donatism...
> this is a good example of trying to clean up the mess after an episode of
> "donatism." if we redefine the donatist side as the rigorist one, then i
> think the continuities are as clear as the distinctions.
I don't want to beat a dead-horse here, but G VII was not a "Donatist."
His actions and attitudes towards simoniacal priests had pleanty of
precedent. The term he and virtually all his contempories used to describe
simony was "irrata"-- a word which has the techinical legal meaning of
"illegal (but not invalid"-- see the previously mentioned article by
Gilchrist and G.B. Borino< "Notae Gregorianae, 8: Osservazione su una
interpretazione del decreto di Gregorio vii sulle ordinationi simoniache,"
Studi Gregoriani 5 (1956), p. 412. See also my previous post on the
distinctions drawn by the reformers under the influence of Peter Damien.
If I may speculate here, Richard, you are right to see G as an inflexable,
sanctimonious (in the worst sense of the word) purist-- call him that,
but don't be misleading and call him a donatist when he most assuredly was
not. You wd have no problem w/the above characterization of G-- even his
allies at times found him insufferable. Anyone whom Peter D. could call
"his holy Satan" must have been pretty tough to tolerate, to say the
least! BTW, I think that Urban shared G's overall vision-- he just went
about it in a more palatable way. However, even G could show some
flexibility on occasion as his letter "Licet nova consuetudine" (an
oxymoran if ever there was one!) on the proper days for the celebration of
Ember days shows (prob. issued for the Council of Poitiers in 1078).
Rather than try to untangle the various claims put forth about their
proper time of celebration, G just wipped the slate clean. A perfect
compromise-- noone's wrong and noone's right and as a bonus papal
authority gets a boost. Urban was particularly adroit at this type of
manuver-- though he showed himself unwilling to compromise on occasion
(i.e. King Phillipp's marriage).
>
> > Urban suceeded in taming the peace and truce of God (prob.
> > repressed in this region by G VII),
>
> what evidence for this repression (which wd make sense). what elements
> of the peace movt wd the papal reformers find most problematic?
>
The evidence is far too complicated to discuss here (and some of it has
not been looked before-- uncovered by the hard work of your's truely & I
don't want to scoop myself). The main issue for G (or at least I think he
would phrase it that way) was ecclesiological-- the peace involved the
mixing of laymen in ecclesiastical affairs (I'm over-simplifying here, I
know).
> > and (this is especially for you
> > Richard) he took action against the cult of Saint Martial.
>
> i thought he took action against the bishop of Limoges, not the monastery.
Yes he did take action against the bp, but also (my research indicates)
against the cult of Martial.
>
> what, in your opinion, is the best treatment of Urban, the peace, and the
> crusade?
On Urban: A. Becker, Papst Urban II (MGH Schriften 19), Stuttgart, 1964.
On the peace and the Crusade (from a legal pt of view):
J. Brundage, Medieval Canon Law and the Crusader (Madison, 1969).
H.E.J. Cowdrey, "Pope Urban II's Preaching of the First Crusade," History
55 (1970).
H. Mayer, The Crusades (New York- Oxford, 1972)
Robert Somerville, The Councils of Urban II. Volume I. Decreata
Clarmontensia (Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum, Supplementum I; Amsterdam,
1972)-- this contains the critical edition of the canons of the council--
noone should cite Mansi!
Idem, "Mercy and Justice in the Early Months of Urban II's Pontificate."
Idem, "The French Councils of Urban II: Some Basic Considerations."
Idem, "The Council of Clermont (1095), and Latin Christian Society."
Idem. "The Council of Clermont and the First Crusade>"
The above articles are avail. in a Variorum rpt.
As far as secondary lit. on the peace goes, you know. the lit. as well as
I do-- start w/ H. Hoffmann, Gottesfriede und Treuga Dei (MGH Schriften
20; Stuttgart, 1964). I hate to sound immodest, but the best treatment, I
hope, is soon to come!
> richard
>
>
>
>
I hope this helps.
Mike
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|