Burning Heretics at the stake

  • Thread starter Thread starter SheepsCousin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
PickyPicky said:
Similarly I am astonished that people today are unable to see that killing people because of their religious views is wicked.
Click to expand...
It’s high treason. If you don’t see treason as an actionable crime, then we can’t help you.
 
Last edited:
MasterHaster said:
Does that mean you support execution for heresy today? If not, why not?
Click to expand...
No. Because it’s no longer a civil crime.
PickyPicky said:
Let’s say killing people because their religious views differ from our own is wicked.
Click to expand...
Or, we can say that the thought that this was merely about ‘religion’ and not about ‘overthrow of one group of leaders in favor of others’ is a misrepresentation of what happened in Europe in the wake of the Reformation.
PickyPicky said:
The same shuffling off of responsibility.
Click to expand...
When a jury passes judgment, and a judge hands down a (known) sentence, would you say that the jury executes a person? Would you say that it’s a “shuffling off of responsibility” to say “the state of Texas executed John Smith” rather than “twelve members of a jury executed John Smith”? Nah. It’s just convenient to do so, as a means of denigrating a particular group.
😉
PickyPicky said:
Similarly I am astonished that people today are unable to see that killing people because of their religious views is wicked.
Click to expand...
Honestly? I’m kinda astonished that you think this is only about ‘religion’ and not about politics and secular power.
 
MikeInVA said:
Civil rulers saw heretics as threats to their authority. If you read unbiased accounts of the inquisitions you’ll find that the Church generally intervened to keep the civil authorities from torturing and killing their subjects
Click to expand...
Yes to your first point. Yes (sometimes) to your second. I’m not greatly moved to censure the actions of people in the past who acted according to their lights. I am moved to censure people today who won’t accept what the Church’s rôle was, and, even worse, won’t assert that killing people for a difference in religion is wicked.
 
PickyPicky said:
40.png
Anesti33:
If you don’t see treason as an actionable crime, then we can’t help you
Click to expand...
I do see treason as an actionable crime. I see killing people over a religious difference to be wicked.
Click to expand...
Benedict Arnold just felt differently about who should hold the fort, no big deal. Totally wicked to execute Major John André. What were they thinking back then?
 
Gorgias said:
Or, we can say that the thought that this was merely about ‘religion’ and not about ‘overthrow of one group of leaders in favor of others’ is a misrepresentation of what happened in Europe in the wake of the Reformation.
Click to expand...
I agree absolutely. It was of course about a variety of religious and social and political disputes. But can we not, today, say that burning people to death for religious heresy is wicked? Can we not say that today?
 
Anesti33 said:
Benedict Arnold just felt differently about who should hold the fort, no big deal. Totally wicked to execute Major John André. What were they thinking back then?
Click to expand...
I thought the main religious difference at the time was over the British government’s acceptance of Catholicism as the state religion in Quebec. But perhaps I have missed your point.
 
Gorgias said:
Honestly? I’m kinda astonished that you think this is only about ‘religion’ and not about politics and secular power
Click to expand...
If you are talking about the events in history, what makes you believe I think they were only about religion? Of course they weren’t.

But can’t we accept today that burning people to death for heresy is wicked?
 
PickyPicky said:
But can we not, today, say that burning people to death for religious heresy is wicked? Can we not say that today?
Click to expand...
They were burned for the civil crime of heresy. We can definitely say that it is wicked to execute for that civil crime!

(On the other hand, we don’t execute for secular heresies these days… we cancel.)
🤔
 
We’re not discussing the whole Scripture, we are discussing the part where you claimed Jesus Christ instructed his flock to drown heretics.

Once again, I am pointing out to you that you not only applied your own interpretation to that part of Scripture, but misinterpreted the entire verse out of context. Catholics do not interpret Scripture in that way. You’re simply incorrect, and that’s that.

You trying to make this into some argument about the portrayal of God across the whole Bible is just a deflection tactic. If you want to have a violent, murderous picture of God, good luck with that. Maybe when you meet him, he’ll be just like how you apparently want him to be, and that includes towards yourself as well. St. Therese said the soul gets exactly what it expects from God. I’m going for the love and mercy, myself.
 
Last edited:
Gorgias said:
They were burned for the civil crime of heresy. We can definitely say that it is wicked to execute for that civil crime!
Click to expand...
Excellent. The “civil” bit is worth putting up with for the agreement.
 
I believe the execution of Guy Fawkes was wicked, and I oppose it to this very day.
 
Last edited:
PickyPicky said:
Excellent. The “civil” bit is worth putting up with for the agreement.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Now… let’s move the argument forward into the present day: execution methods aside, would we likewise say that it’s wicked to execute those who commit treason or sedition?
 
Gorgias said:
Fair enough. Now… let’s move the argument forward into the present day: execution methods aside, would we likewise say that it’s wicked to execute those who commit treason or sedition?
Click to expand...
I believe capital punishment for any offence to be wrong, but I accept that the morality of killing is not a simple thing. Killing by an individual is different from killing by the state; killing in self defence may be allowable, killing in defence of others may be allowable, killing in defence of one’s country in time of war may be allowable, and so on, so in this difficult area I am far from wanting to use the ”wicked” word against supporters of capital punishment per se.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top