Why did you take this book to read?It was selected by a little book treatment group that I take portion in.
How did you choose this instead than some other book?It was recommended by a member of a book treatment group I am a portion of by one of the members who had read it many old ages ago and wanted to re-read it this clip and follow it up with some “intellectual” treatment from others.
Identify the subject of the book. and sum up its contents and decisions. The subject of the book is the battle between European layman swayers and the Catholic governments for control of the Catholic Church. The book examines the history of the political relations that fundamentally fueled the uninterrupted battle between the assorted persons and groups who wanted the power that went with the control of the Catholic Church. The book ends after the acrimonious struggle between Gallic King Phillip and Pope Boniface which about caused a concluding blow to the Catholic Church.
What does this book state you about the period of the yesteryear in which it was written?
It tells me how of import the Catholic Church was at the clip. Because at this clip there truly wasn’t any separation of Church and State. the reader can see how this affected the period and the history of this clip. Although many people think of the Catholic Church as being powerful today. unless you read this history it’s hard to see precisely the difference between the power of the Church so and now and how it affects the remainder of society in the sense of work forces want control of what they deem to be powerful and the effects of this desire for control.
How does it assist you to understand this period of the past better?It helps me better understand the inside informations and the history of the power battle within the Catholic Church and how some things came to be. Like the portion of the book that discusses how the Papal Curia initiated the Papal Election Decree to take the German swayers and the secular swayers from enforcing their campaigners to the Papacy. Tierney used some really elaborate accounts in discoursing how the German Bishops were appointed by the German swayers and how questionable their trueness between secular leaders and the Church was.
Every writer has a peculiar position or attack to the topic affair she or he is depicting.What is the attack of this writer? How do you cognize?To state the least. Tierney doesn’t have a batch of fondness for the Papacy. I felt this writer stressed merely how much political relations was involved in this state of affairs. adding to the fuel of this already highly sensitive state of affairs. Tierney didn’t allow any fear toward faith colour his position on his elaborate certification of the Catholic battles and those spiritual leaders and secular work forces involved in them at the clip. However. I must add—those who read this bookholdto esteem Tierney for all of the research and paperss that went into this book.
What kinds of grounds does the writer usage to back up the points he or she is seeking do in the book?Tierney makes it clear in some of the transitions that the reader understand that St. Augustine considered province authorization a necessary immorality due to man’s iniquitous nature. Tierney helps the reader understand merely how much power and prestige the work forces who controlled the monasteries had back so. Besides. the inside informations of the Catholic power battles indicated to me the writer was merely stating history in a consecutive forward. wholly indifferent mode with no personal spiritual prejudices. It was clear foremost that Tierney was doing the historical history of the Catholic struggle the focal point of his book and non his personal feelings of the battle.
Did reading the book alter your position of the subject that the book covers?Actually. I would state it gave me extra information and a broader position on the battle that existed between European layman leaders and the Catholic governments struggle in commanding the “Universal Church. ” I can’t really province that it changed my position because before reading the book I didn’t have adequate information to hold a strong point of view one manner or another.
What is different about how you understand the topic after holding read the book?I have more of an apprehension of the origin of the separation between church and province and how it came to be. Tierney made it clearer merely how much prestigiousness and power that work forces who controlled the monasteries had back so. I think we frequently forget. or I forget. merely how big the land countries that came with the monasteries were and how land represented the wealth and power of whoever owned it. Although historically I was cognizant of the power struggles in the Church’s history. Tierney made it more three dimensional as he addressed the struggle over among the Catholic governments. the monastics. secular swayers. the Popes. the Curia and members of the Church councils when they bickered over lacking duty for the reform of the Church. Besides. the struggle between German’s Henry IV and Pope Gregory VII
How does the attack taken in the book comparison to what you learned about the topic from the text editions. talks. or category treatments in the class?
Tierney. for me. made reading this book every bit interesting as seeing this historical period represented in a quality film. It was merely astonishing to me the item and the arduous research thathadto travel into this to include such a elaborate history of this period. Although I am cognizant of the author’s personal position on some of the stuff in the book. he wrote this history so good I didn’t experience it was unjust at all. I have to acknowledge. I would non see myself to be a reader of history in general but after reading this book I wonder how much of that has been because there aren’t adequate quality authors composing historical histories like Brian Tierney.
Tierney. Brian. The Crisis of Church and State. 1050-1300: With Selected Documents. Medieval Academy reissues for learning. S 102. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. 1980.