The Reception of Turner's Newman: A Reply to Simon Skinner
In his article on the critical reception of the late Frank Turner's John Henry Newman: the challenge to Evangelical religion, Simon Skinner contends that Turner's study is ‘empirically exhaustive, contextually assured and critically rigorous’, and he cites with approval Andrew Wilson'...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
2012
|
| In: |
The journal of ecclesiastical history
Year: 2012, Volume: 63, Issue: 3, Pages: 534-548 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1784771503 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20220105044125.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220105s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1017/S0022046912000735 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1784771503 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1784771503 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Duffy, Eamon |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 4 | |a The Reception of Turner's Newman: A Reply to Simon Skinner |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2012 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a In his article on the critical reception of the late Frank Turner's John Henry Newman: the challenge to Evangelical religion, Simon Skinner contends that Turner's study is ‘empirically exhaustive, contextually assured and critically rigorous’, and he cites with approval Andrew Wilson's judgement that it ‘revolutionizes Newman studies’.1 But this historical masterpiece, he thinks, has been unjustly howled down by a benighted posse of Roman Catholic reviewers, ‘almost none of [whom] are … tenured in a university history department’. Turner's Catholic reviewers, ‘which is to say nearly all reviewers’, are therefore ‘amateurs’, who ‘literally could not comprehend’ what Turner was up to.2 But history is not an arcane discipline, and Skinner's complaint about the ‘lack of disciplinary equipment’ of these hostile reviewers seems hardly to the point in relation to a book offered by a major publisher to a general readership. The ordinary rules of historical evidence are intelligible to anybody, and a de haut en bas restriction of the right to an opinion on Turner's book to the gild of professional historians runs the risk of seeming both arbitrary and condescending. | ||
| 601 | |a Skinner, B. F. | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t The journal of ecclesiastical history |d London [u.a.] : Cambridge Univ. Press, 1950 |g 63(2012), 3, Seite 534-548 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)265785375 |w (DE-600)1466476-8 |w (DE-576)078707234 |x 1469-7637 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:63 |g year:2012 |g number:3 |g pages:534-548 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022046912000735 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-ecclesiastical-history/article/reception-of-turners-newman-a-reply-to-simon-skinner/4A3C1AF91F4B14F0B4ED45FED2AD7B48 |x Verlag |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 935 | |a mteo | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4030075843 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1784771503 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20220105044125 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 220105||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-12-29#02E49471F1AC6893762E709D02A4FD9FF55C1A02 | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixrk |a zota | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||