On Fri, 26 Jul 1996, Alasdair Mackintosh wrote:
> In one sense, of course we can't. Medieval texts ought to be
> read with medieval minds.
glad you put that in the plural.
> Surely comparing the old and the new is one way to do this? It may
> be pointless to look for a politically subversive Christ in
> medieval theology, but it's worth asking why we won't find him there.
exactly. or, differently put, if he's there, but not in the texts that
are preserved, copied, and edited by modern historians. Alan Bernstein
has some excellent material on the difference btw what an ecclesiastical
figure might say in a sermon *coram populo* and what he wd right in a
theological tract.
> After all, both contemporary and medieval theoligians are working
> from the same source material (more or less). Why do they reach
> different conclusions?
> (Before everyone rushes to their keyboards, I am not necessarily
> asking this question directly, But, I would like to claim that
> it's a valid question.)
a most valid question. i've been typing enuf. time for someone else to
jump in.
rlandes
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|