I am currently working in the area of sermon literature and the
stereotype of the Jews. I have a very technical question. Is there a
difference between the word "image" and the word "stereotype"? For
example, Trachtenberg in his work on the Jews as an image of the Devil
states that he "will discuss the subconcious image" of the Jew. And
James Parkes states that it "was the language of the popes and bishops
which made the imagining possible". Is it safe to merely assume that
these images are stereotypes? I am well aware of Langmuir and the
distinctions he makes, but these help define stereotypes alone, and not
necessarily "images". Are there any works, medieval or not, which
discuss this type of distinction?
Thanks in advance
Timothy Kovalcik
On Thu, 27 May 1999 13:01:26 +0100 (BST) George FERZOCO
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Following earlier messages from Nicole and Melissa, Jim Brundage adds the following
> helpful information. (I am forwarding it to the list on his behalf, while we get some
> technical glitches sorted out; speaking of such glitches, I've had some myself, so if
> you've written me recently, don't panic: I'll be writing you shortly! -- George)
>
> Speaketh Jim:
>
> > In addition to the text of the 4th Lateran canons in Tanner's _Decrees of
> >the Ecumenical Councils_, which several people have already referred to,
> >please note that the BEST edition of those canons is the one by Antonio
> >Garcia y Garcia, _Constitutiones Concilii quarti Lateranensis una cum
> >commentariis glossatorum_, Monumenta iuris canonici, Corpus glossatorum,
> >vol. 2 (Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1981). As the title
> >indicates, this volume also includes the very important glosses, as well as
> >the texts of the canons. You should also be aware that the Latin text in
> >the Tanner volume is identical with the text given in _Conciliorum
> >oecumenicorum decreta_, 3rd ed. by G. Alberigo and many others (Bologna:
> >Istituto per le Scienze Religiose, 1973). The relevant canon for your
> >question is c. 18. As Tom Izbicki has already mentioned, this canon (and
> >all the rest of the 4 Lateran canons except _Ad liberandam_) were
> >incorporated in Gregory IX's _Liber Extra_ (1234). The teaching of 4
> >Lateran on this topic was linked, of course, to much earlier prohibitions
> >on clerics participating in bloodshed, whether as soldiers or as judges in
> >capital cases. The glosses in Garcia's edition will lead you to those
> >prohibitions. The prohibition on the practice of surgery was in substance
> >incorporated in the 1918 _Codex iuris canonici_ c. 139 s. 2, with the
> >proviso that a cleric could be exempted by apostolic mandate. It appears
> >(at least from a cursory glance) to have been dropped from the 1983 _Codex
> >iuris canonici_.
> >
> > JAB
> >
> >At 10:40 AM 5/25/99 -0400, you wrote:
> >>Judging from the date alone I would hazzard a guess that this injunction
> >>came from the 4th Lateran Council... I remember that the University of
> >>Paris also had injunctions against teaching surgery, presumably after
> >>1215. I *suspect* that the injunction was against *clerics* not just
> >>priests, but now we are entering the realm of hazy recollection :) I know
> >>that the various edicts of Lat. IV are in Mansi. There ought to be a more
> >>recent edition, perhaps even one in translation (?), but offhand I don't
> >>know of it. Does anyone else on the list?
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>
> >>Nicole
> >>
> >>
> >>On Tue, 25 May 1999, Melissa Raine wrote:
> >>
> >>> I have read that from 1215, priests were not allowed to perform surgery
> >>> (inclusing phlebotomy), but I am not sure where I would go to find the
> >>> injunction itself. But even more difficult, I suspect, is to find out
> >>> how long this rule stayed in place; was it ever repealed? Was it
> >>> eventually ignored? Is it still the rule? Does anybody have any
> >>> answers?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks, Melissa
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>...........................................................................
> >....
> >> Nicole Morgan Schulman <[log in to unmask]>
> >> Research Associate, Pontifical Institute for Mediaeval Studies
> >>...........................................................................
> >....
> >>Omittamus studia, dulce est desipere et carpamus dulcia iuventutis tenere!
>
> James A. Brundage
> History & Law
> University of Kansas
> <[log in to unmask]>
>
----------------------
TM Kovalcik, Theology and Religious Studies
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|