On Tue, 27 May 1997, Thomas Izbicki wrote:
> The idea that Gregory VII had minimal impact on canon law probably is
> based on the fact that only 4 of his letter were included in Gratian's
> Decretum, compared to the more numerous letters of other popes of the
> Investiture period, esp. Urban II, included.
>
> tom izbicki
>
>
>
This again raises problems-- to what extent did Urban build on the legacy
of G VII? I think a lot-- the tour of Aquitaine that began at Clermont in
1095 was in large measure the summation of the rather sucessful
transformation of the church in this region undertaken by G VII in 1078
at Poitiers! G and U were sometimes reffered to together (there are canons
attributed to both of them). Urban was certainly more pragmatic than
Gregory and his legislative legaacy more developed, but the foundation of
that legacy was the work of Gregory. So Urban's legislative legacy which
builds on Gregory's is absorbed into Gratian while much of the
foundational work of Gregory's is left out-- this means that G was
ineffectual and of little influence on canon law? I think not. I
also pointed out in my previous post the weakness of the
"bean-counter" approach to the history of canon law. If I'm not
careful here, I just may step up on my soap box and orate on the
"whiggish" approach to that history which sees all roads leading
to and culminating with Gratian. Finally, I'll leave aside the problem
of evaluating the volume of written material from one papacy to another.
Michael F. Hynes
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|