Mary Stroll has argued that the case of Anacletus II was not as straight
forward as previously thought; see The Jewish Pope (Leiden: Brill, 1987).
If so, the recipient might have regarded A. as a true pope & recorded the
privilege.
Tom Izbicki
At 04:13 PM 7/23/2000 +0100, you wrote:
>
>> John Wickstrom wrote:
>> >
>. In a bull of 1097 Urban II proffered the following privilege to the
>abbots of St. Maur sur Loire in Anjou: [snip]
>
>> > The privilege was confirmed by Pope Anacletus II in 1131.
>
>But would this confirmation have been valid ???
>Wasn't Anacletus one of the Anti-Popes ??
>I seem to remember that in 1135 William of Aquitaine was reduced to
>grovelling at the feet of Bernard of Clairvaux, sobbing and renouncing his
>allegiance to Anacletus. [Bernard brain-washing the great (if not the good
>!!!) again.]
>
>Were the confirmations / excommunications &c of anti-popes of any
>significance except to their own followers and during their own time in
>office ?
>
>Brenda M. Cook.
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|