On Tue, 15 Jul 1997, Thomas Izbicki wrote:
> Repetition might be concerned with non-observance, efforts to reach the
> people of a different region (local synods addressing the same topic) or
> (with the lapse of time) efforts to indoctrinate a different generation.
> Local studies often show not just different local usage but also local
> non-compliance with what higher authorities mandate. (Brentanno did an
> interesting article on these local phenomena in the festschrift for
> Stephan Kuttner edited by Somerville & Pennington.)
Thanks, Tom. I wonder if inertia must often be considered as a factor too.
Constitutions of religious orders, for example, tend to remain
comparatively stable over long periods of time even when occasionally
reissued. The considerable difficulty of revising legislative texts
(particularly if lengthy, and especially in committee, as we all know),
must militate against making more amendments than strictly necessary,
particularly if the competent legislator (chapter, synod, etc.) does not
have much time at its disposal for the task, which is often the case.
Do we need not only to note the fact of repetition, but to evaluate the
circumstances of it in the particular case? This would require addressing
such issues as you mention and perhaps others, including the usual rate of
change and adaptability of the kind of legislation in question.
My own order (Carmelites) had pretty much the same Constitutions from
mid-14th century till 1645, and then from 1645 till 1904, though they were
reissued with revisions several times and regularly had capitular decrees
added. In this case, the inertia factor would make it hazardous to
conclude much from the fact of repetition alone: it is rather the changed
or added elements which seem to be the more revealing.
--
Paul Chandler || Yarra Theological Union
[log in to unmask] || Melbourne College of Divinity
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|