{"title":"Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls ed. by Clare Monagle, and Neslihan Şenocak (评论)","authors":"Constant J. Mews","doi":"10.1353/pgn.2024.a935357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls</em> ed. by Clare Monagle, and Neslihan Şenocak <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Constant J. Mews </li> </ul> Monagle, Clare, and Neslihan Şenocak, eds, <em>Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls</em> ( Disputatio, 34), Turnhout, Brepols, 2023; hardback; pp. 219; 3 b/w illustrations; R.R.P. €75.00; ISBN 9782503596808. <p>This volume, edited by two scholars interested in the interaction between theology and pastoral care, provides a helpful collection of perspectives both on the Fourth Lateran Council and the dynamic pope who drove its agenda. The Council was only one of several transformative happenings taking place in that year. Yet, as the editors describe in the 'Introduction', the Fourth Lateran Council would wield an immense impact over every dimension of Christian life in the Latin West. In the 'Introduction', Clare Monagle and Neslihan Şenocak also offer a cogent survey of the range of perspectives that have been taken on the Council. In one way, the Council can be seen as marking the apogee of papal ambition to reform pastoral care within the Church. Yet they also observe its concern to reinforce the power and privileges of the clergy within the Church, as well as their right to teach. The various chapters in this volume tend to position themselves somewhere along this spectrum between the poles of authority and reform. They combine to reinforce a message about the importance of this Council in defining both orthodoxy and the direction of pastoral care.</p> <p>Monagle tackles the tension between these two perspectives in a paper boldly exploring the tension between theology and pastoral care in the official edicts of Lateran IV. The Council was unlike any that preceded it in singling out a single theologian, namely Peter Lombard, as the voice of orthodoxy, defending him against criticisms of his theology that had been made over two decades earlier by Joachim of Fiore. This was a decision with immense consequences for the future of theology; its effect was to marginalise those who sympathised with Joachite criticism of the rising tide of academic theology. Monagle argues that its deeper concern was to define the discourse of orthodoxy within an institution <strong>[End Page 329]</strong> in which competing perspectives were perceived as potentially undermining the authority of the Church. Her focus on the definition of orthodoxy is complemented by that of Marcia Colish, who seeks to unpack the intellectual tradition that underpinned the official vindication of Lombard's Trinitarian orthodoxy against the criticisms made by Joachim. Her sympathies are with the admirers rather than the critics of Lombard, whom she accuses of misreading his text. The most valuable part of her contribution is to unpack the debt of the official defence of Lombard's theology to the teaching of Stephen Langton about terms applied to God. Pope Innocent III appointed Langton to the cardinalate in 1206. His interest in distinguishing between signification and supposition provided a much more effective way of discussing theological terms than anything offered by Prepositinus of Cremona, chancellor of the emerging University of Paris in the years 1206–09. In this perspective, Lateran IV deserves attention as providing an authoritative justification for orthodoxy against incorrect arguments rather than against critics from outside the Parisian schools.</p> <p>Juanita Feros Ruys offers a less traditional angle on the Council by picking up a small, but significant, detail, namely about the devil and other demons rather than the devil and his demons. She argues that while it was a long-established tradition to imagine the devil as in charge of his demons, the Council introduced a subtly different perspective that might have been influenced by Alan of Lille writing against heresy. She offers a close reading of Alan's demonology as that of a community rather than a hierarchy of demons. By contrast, William of Auvergne would reinstate a more traditional demonic hierarchy. While the implications of the Council's terminology are not fully laid out, its terminology perhaps reflects a more astute awareness of the great diversity of challenges then facing the Church.</p> <p>Şenocak's paper, on the pastor as teacher, argues that Lateran IV produced a new model of pastoral care, in which emphasis was increasingly centred on the role of pastors as teachers...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":43576,"journal":{"name":"PARERGON","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls ed. by Clare Monagle, and Neslihan Şenocak (review)\",\"authors\":\"Constant J. Mews\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/pgn.2024.a935357\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls</em> ed. by Clare Monagle, and Neslihan Şenocak <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Constant J. Mews </li> </ul> Monagle, Clare, and Neslihan Şenocak, eds, <em>Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls</em> ( Disputatio, 34), Turnhout, Brepols, 2023; hardback; pp. 219; 3 b/w illustrations; R.R.P. €75.00; ISBN 9782503596808. <p>This volume, edited by two scholars interested in the interaction between theology and pastoral care, provides a helpful collection of perspectives both on the Fourth Lateran Council and the dynamic pope who drove its agenda. The Council was only one of several transformative happenings taking place in that year. Yet, as the editors describe in the 'Introduction', the Fourth Lateran Council would wield an immense impact over every dimension of Christian life in the Latin West. In the 'Introduction', Clare Monagle and Neslihan Şenocak also offer a cogent survey of the range of perspectives that have been taken on the Council. In one way, the Council can be seen as marking the apogee of papal ambition to reform pastoral care within the Church. Yet they also observe its concern to reinforce the power and privileges of the clergy within the Church, as well as their right to teach. The various chapters in this volume tend to position themselves somewhere along this spectrum between the poles of authority and reform. They combine to reinforce a message about the importance of this Council in defining both orthodoxy and the direction of pastoral care.</p> <p>Monagle tackles the tension between these two perspectives in a paper boldly exploring the tension between theology and pastoral care in the official edicts of Lateran IV. The Council was unlike any that preceded it in singling out a single theologian, namely Peter Lombard, as the voice of orthodoxy, defending him against criticisms of his theology that had been made over two decades earlier by Joachim of Fiore. This was a decision with immense consequences for the future of theology; its effect was to marginalise those who sympathised with Joachite criticism of the rising tide of academic theology. Monagle argues that its deeper concern was to define the discourse of orthodoxy within an institution <strong>[End Page 329]</strong> in which competing perspectives were perceived as potentially undermining the authority of the Church. Her focus on the definition of orthodoxy is complemented by that of Marcia Colish, who seeks to unpack the intellectual tradition that underpinned the official vindication of Lombard's Trinitarian orthodoxy against the criticisms made by Joachim. Her sympathies are with the admirers rather than the critics of Lombard, whom she accuses of misreading his text. The most valuable part of her contribution is to unpack the debt of the official defence of Lombard's theology to the teaching of Stephen Langton about terms applied to God. Pope Innocent III appointed Langton to the cardinalate in 1206. His interest in distinguishing between signification and supposition provided a much more effective way of discussing theological terms than anything offered by Prepositinus of Cremona, chancellor of the emerging University of Paris in the years 1206–09. In this perspective, Lateran IV deserves attention as providing an authoritative justification for orthodoxy against incorrect arguments rather than against critics from outside the Parisian schools.</p> <p>Juanita Feros Ruys offers a less traditional angle on the Council by picking up a small, but significant, detail, namely about the devil and other demons rather than the devil and his demons. She argues that while it was a long-established tradition to imagine the devil as in charge of his demons, the Council introduced a subtly different perspective that might have been influenced by Alan of Lille writing against heresy. She offers a close reading of Alan's demonology as that of a community rather than a hierarchy of demons. By contrast, William of Auvergne would reinstate a more traditional demonic hierarchy. While the implications of the Council's terminology are not fully laid out, its terminology perhaps reflects a more astute awareness of the great diversity of challenges then facing the Church.</p> <p>Şenocak's paper, on the pastor as teacher, argues that Lateran IV produced a new model of pastoral care, in which emphasis was increasingly centred on the role of pastors as teachers...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43576,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PARERGON\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PARERGON\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/pgn.2024.a935357\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PARERGON","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/pgn.2024.a935357","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要:评论者 Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls ed. by Clare Monagle, and Neslihan Şenocak Constant J. Mews Monagle, Clare, and Neslihan Şenocak, eds, Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls ( Disputatio, 34), Turnhout, Brepols, 2023; hardback; pp.这本书由两位对神学与牧灵关怀之间的互动感兴趣的学者编辑,收集了关于第四次拉特兰大公会议和推动会议议程的教皇的有益观点。大公会议只是当年发生的几件变革性事件之一。然而,正如编者在 "导言 "中所描述的,第四次拉特兰大公会议将对拉丁西方基督教生活的方方面面产生巨大影响。在 "导言 "中,Clare Monagle 和 Neslihan Şenocak 还对有关大公会议的各种观点进行了有力的概述。从某种意义上讲,大公会议可以被视为教皇改革教会牧灵关怀的雄心壮志的顶峰。然而,他们也注意到了大公会议对加强神职人员在教会中的权力和特权及其教导权的关注。本卷中的各个章节倾向于将自己定位在权威与改革两极之间的某处。它们结合在一起,强化了一个信息,即大公会议在界定正统性和牧灵关怀方向方面的重要性。莫纳格在一篇论文中大胆探讨了拉特兰第四大公会议官方法令中神学与牧民关怀之间的紧张关系,从而解决了这两种观点之间的矛盾。这次大公会议与以往任何一次会议都不同,它只挑出一位神学家,即彼得-伦巴第,作为正统的代言人,为他辩护,反对二十多年前菲奥雷的约阿希姆对他的神学提出的批评。这一决定对神学的未来产生了巨大影响;其结果是将那些同情约阿希姆对学术神学浪潮的批评的人边缘化。莫奈格认为,其更深层次的考虑是在一个机构中定义正统话语,在这个机构中,相互竞争的观点被视为有可能损害教会的权威。玛西娅-科利什(Marcia Colish)的研究与她对正统定义的关注相辅相成,科利什试图解读官方针对约阿希姆的批评为伦巴第的三位一体正统性平反所依据的思想传统。她同情伦巴第的崇拜者而非批评者,指责他们误读了伦巴第的文本。她的贡献中最有价值的部分是解读了官方对伦巴第神学的辩护对斯蒂芬-兰顿关于上帝用语的教导的亏欠。教皇英诺森三世于1206年任命兰顿为红衣主教。他对区分 "意义 "和 "假设 "的兴趣为神学术语的讨论提供了一种比1206-1209年间新兴的巴黎大学校长克雷莫纳的普雷波西蒂努斯(Prepositinus of Cremona)所提供的更有效的方法。从这个角度来看,拉特兰四世值得关注,因为它针对不正确的论点而不是巴黎学派以外的批评者提供了正统的权威性理由。胡安妮塔-费罗斯-鲁伊斯(Juanita Feros Ruys)从一个微小但重要的细节,即关于魔鬼和其他魔鬼而非魔鬼和他的魔鬼,对大公会议提出了一个不那么传统的角度。她认为,虽然将魔鬼想象成掌管他的恶魔是一个由来已久的传统,但大公会议引入了一个微妙的不同视角,这可能是受到里尔的阿兰反对异端邪说的著作的影响。她仔细解读了阿兰的恶魔论,认为恶魔是一个群体,而不是恶魔的等级。相比之下,奥弗涅的威廉则恢复了更传统的恶魔等级制度。虽然大公会议术语的含义没有完全阐明,但其术语或许反映了对当时教会面临的巨大挑战多样性的更敏锐的认识。Şenocak关于牧师作为教师的论文认为,拉特兰第四大公会议产生了一种新的牧灵关怀模式,其重点越来越集中在牧师作为教师的角色上......
Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls ed. by Clare Monagle, and Neslihan Şenocak (review)
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:
Reviewed by:
Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls ed. by Clare Monagle, and Neslihan Şenocak
Constant J. Mews
Monagle, Clare, and Neslihan Şenocak, eds, Lateran IV: Theology and Care of Souls ( Disputatio, 34), Turnhout, Brepols, 2023; hardback; pp. 219; 3 b/w illustrations; R.R.P. €75.00; ISBN 9782503596808.
This volume, edited by two scholars interested in the interaction between theology and pastoral care, provides a helpful collection of perspectives both on the Fourth Lateran Council and the dynamic pope who drove its agenda. The Council was only one of several transformative happenings taking place in that year. Yet, as the editors describe in the 'Introduction', the Fourth Lateran Council would wield an immense impact over every dimension of Christian life in the Latin West. In the 'Introduction', Clare Monagle and Neslihan Şenocak also offer a cogent survey of the range of perspectives that have been taken on the Council. In one way, the Council can be seen as marking the apogee of papal ambition to reform pastoral care within the Church. Yet they also observe its concern to reinforce the power and privileges of the clergy within the Church, as well as their right to teach. The various chapters in this volume tend to position themselves somewhere along this spectrum between the poles of authority and reform. They combine to reinforce a message about the importance of this Council in defining both orthodoxy and the direction of pastoral care.
Monagle tackles the tension between these two perspectives in a paper boldly exploring the tension between theology and pastoral care in the official edicts of Lateran IV. The Council was unlike any that preceded it in singling out a single theologian, namely Peter Lombard, as the voice of orthodoxy, defending him against criticisms of his theology that had been made over two decades earlier by Joachim of Fiore. This was a decision with immense consequences for the future of theology; its effect was to marginalise those who sympathised with Joachite criticism of the rising tide of academic theology. Monagle argues that its deeper concern was to define the discourse of orthodoxy within an institution [End Page 329] in which competing perspectives were perceived as potentially undermining the authority of the Church. Her focus on the definition of orthodoxy is complemented by that of Marcia Colish, who seeks to unpack the intellectual tradition that underpinned the official vindication of Lombard's Trinitarian orthodoxy against the criticisms made by Joachim. Her sympathies are with the admirers rather than the critics of Lombard, whom she accuses of misreading his text. The most valuable part of her contribution is to unpack the debt of the official defence of Lombard's theology to the teaching of Stephen Langton about terms applied to God. Pope Innocent III appointed Langton to the cardinalate in 1206. His interest in distinguishing between signification and supposition provided a much more effective way of discussing theological terms than anything offered by Prepositinus of Cremona, chancellor of the emerging University of Paris in the years 1206–09. In this perspective, Lateran IV deserves attention as providing an authoritative justification for orthodoxy against incorrect arguments rather than against critics from outside the Parisian schools.
Juanita Feros Ruys offers a less traditional angle on the Council by picking up a small, but significant, detail, namely about the devil and other demons rather than the devil and his demons. She argues that while it was a long-established tradition to imagine the devil as in charge of his demons, the Council introduced a subtly different perspective that might have been influenced by Alan of Lille writing against heresy. She offers a close reading of Alan's demonology as that of a community rather than a hierarchy of demons. By contrast, William of Auvergne would reinstate a more traditional demonic hierarchy. While the implications of the Council's terminology are not fully laid out, its terminology perhaps reflects a more astute awareness of the great diversity of challenges then facing the Church.
Şenocak's paper, on the pastor as teacher, argues that Lateran IV produced a new model of pastoral care, in which emphasis was increasingly centred on the role of pastors as teachers...
期刊介绍:
Parergon publishes articles and book reviews on all aspects of medieval and early modern studies. It has a particular focus on research which takes new approaches and crosses traditional disciplinary boundaries. Fully refereed and with an international Advisory Board, Parergon is the Southern Hemisphere"s leading journal for early European research. It is published by the Australian and New Zealand Association of Medieval and Early Modern Studies (Inc.) and has close links with the ARC Network for Early European Research.