Referring to the postings by Phyllis Jestice, Bill East and Jim Kerbaugh on
the gap between 'official' doctrines and popular conceptions:
Doesn't this just 'prove' the point that 'official' and learned medieval
church documents, and a discussion of them, may tell us a lot about what the
medieval church itself saw as important, but not necessarily very much about
the popular interpretation of these various points and thus the popular
beliefs of the time? Add to that a much closer proximity in time to pagan
beliefs and rituals, and it seems to me that one must look for other sources
(as well) to tell us something about the everyday religion (Christianity) as
practised by common people.
Ingegerd H.
Dr. Ingegerd Holand
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|