Jump to content

User:Okiyo9228/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Terminology[edit]

Differentiated questions and reflections are not wholly absent in the rich literature on the subject, but the extent to which the simplified, the self-evident, and the unreflective have dominated the concept and the history of ‘church reform’ is very noticeable. Schematic notions derived from the Lutheran reformation or Tridentine reform or from the modern relationship between state and church as well as from such things as school or tax reforms seem to have overlaid our understanding of the extremely complex reality of the high middle ages. We must try cautiously and patiently to get back to the reality itself. […] What church reform in the eleventh century really was is usually defined so inadequately that one can only describe it as an empty formula.
— Gerd Tellenbach, The Church in Western Europe from the Tenth to the Early Twelfth Century[1]

The term "Gregorian Reform" was promulgated by Augustin Fliche's three-volume study of Gregory VII (La Réforme grégorienne). However, the scholarly discourse surrounding this terminology and historiography underwent significant scrutiny and reevaluation by historians such as Joseph Ryan, John Gilchrist, Ovidio Capitani[2] during the latter half of the 20th century, asserting that it represents a misrepresentation and an oversimplification of the multifaceted efforts made by Gregory's predecessors, some of which were not directly influenced by him and consequently purports an image that the reforms were created solely by him.

The centrality of the role of Gregory VII has been assumed by historians since the Reformation, when the judgement of Protestant polemicists, that ‘Gregory VII, the most lauded of popes, [was] far more cruel and wicked than Nero’, sparked off the long and fierce debate about Gregory’s character and influence. This assumption of Gregory’s pre-eminence in the papal reform movement is symbolized in the term ‘Gregorian reform’ coined by Augustin Fliche.[3]

Criticism[edit]

Differentiated questions and reflections are not wholly absent in the rich literature on the subject, but the extent to which the simplified, the self-evident, and the unreflective have dominated the concept and the history of ‘church reform’ is very noticeable. Schematic notions derived from the Lutheran reformation or Tridentine reform or from the modern relationship between state and church as well as from such things as school or tax reforms seem to have overlaid our understanding of the extremely complex reality of the high middle ages. We must try cautiously and patiently to get back to the reality itself. […] What church reform in the eleventh century really was is usually defined so inadequately that one can only describe it as an empty formula.
— Gerd Tellenbach, The Church in Western Europe from the Tenth to the Early Twelfth Century[4]

refs[edit]

  1. ^ Tellenbach, Gerd (30 April 1993). The Church in Western Europe from the Tenth to the Early Twelfth Century (Cambridge Medieval Textbooks). Cambridge University Press. pp. 157–158. ISBN 9780521437110.
  2. ^ Cushing, Kathleen G. (29 September 2005). Reform and the Papacy in the Eleventh Century. Manchester University Press. p. 33. ISBN 978-0719058349.
  3. ^ Lascombe, David (22 November 2004). The New Cambridge Medieval History: Volume 4, c.1024–c.1198, Part 1. Cambridge University Press. p. 302. ISBN 978-0521414104.
  4. ^ Tellenbach, Gerd (30 April 1993). The Church in Western Europe from the Tenth to the Early Twelfth Century (Cambridge Medieval Textbooks). Cambridge University Press. pp. 157–158. ISBN 9780521437110.