 |
 |
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture John Briggs wrote: > I > would suggest that the very fact that there was no translation feast was the > reason why some other event in his life (ordination, consecration) was > celebrated for his "second" feast. This would be very reasonable were it established that there was in the twentieth century no translation feast for Gregory. But repeated proofless assertions that there was no such feast have the same status in argumentation as the original proofless assertion that there was one and are consequently not persuasive. In fairness to John W., and being uninformed as to the details and circumstances of the relatively recent Roman relocation of Gregory's principal feast to 3. September, I prefer to keep an open -- albeit skeptical -- mind about John's statement that "the new date is the traditional translation feast." How traditional it really was (if indeed this feast can be shown to have existed) is of course another matter. Best, John Dillon ********************************************************************** To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME to: [log in to unmask] To send a message to the list, address it to: [log in to unmask] To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion to: [log in to unmask] In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to: [log in to unmask] For further information, visit our web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html