Did we burn witches?

[Kaninchen]

The French Revolution erupted as the result of secularism and liberal democracies spreading throughout France. The only difference is that the “liberal” democracy was not very “liberal” given that France itself even restricted its people more than before.

Well, that would be ever so meaningful if it weren’t so anachronistic.

To say the Inquisition was the parent of the French Revolution is truly, like the poster before me said, rubbish. With no historical foundation coupled with the fact that the French Revolution caused by hatred of religion.

I think you rather missed the point which was about the impulse for social perfectability but never mind.

 

[Kaninchen]

Rubbish.

Well argued.

 

[thegreypiper]

Well argued.

Sometimes that’s all a statement deserves.

 

[Kaninchen]

Sometimes that’s all a statement deserves.

Rubbish.

Sorry, that wasn’t fair. From your perspective I suppose it would be.

 

[Major_Tom]

I was reading the news. Someone said the following about the Catholic Church…
“Lest We Forget this is the same Church that burned and stoned people to death for opposing the Church’s teachings of the earth being flat and people accused of being witches.”

Now I was always of the mind that it was the protestants who were into burning witches. Am I wrong? Help me here folks.

Karen Armstrong, in her book A History of God writes that Pope Innocent VIII, with his Bull Summa Desiderants, “marked the beginning of the great witch craze” in both Catholic and Protestant communities. “Thousands of men and women were cruelly tortured until they confessed to astonishing crimes”. Granted, she didn’t say burned, but tortured isn’t much better.

Separately, I do know that people were burned, though I’m not aware of any great scale. I know of Giordano Bruno, burned alive during the Inquisition period, though not for any witchy activities.

 

[JoeT777]

Protestants say the bible is the sole infallible rule of faith. Many verses in the Old Testament literally read that the universe revolves around the earth or that the earth is flat. Today, such literalists laugh at the authority of the Pope, after all there is the Galileo story.

When the subject of the Galileo vs. the Church comes up, the same self-styled literalists complain that the Pope was unfair insisting on a literal reading of Scripture; heaping ridicule on the Church for pushing doctrine over holy Science.

The story revolves around the Catholic cleric Copernicus’ theory. Galileo published Discourse on Floating Bodies in 1612 . The first claim that the Copernican theory was heretical was raised by the Grand Duchess Christina citing scripture at a banquet where insisted the Protestant like literal translation. Galileo later circulated a letter saying scripture should not be taken so laterally. The conversation was picked-up by a Dominican priest Tommaso Caccini who, from the pulpit, suggested that the Copernican theory should be declared heretical. Father Caccini’s denunciation pointed to Joshua commanding the sun to stand still at Ajalon. The Copernican theory doesn’t permit the motion of the celestial bodies to stop, thus it was heretical; so much for astronomical acumen of Dominican priests. In any event Father Caccini complained to the Roman Inquisition stating that mathematicians along with Galileo should be banished from Christendom. The complaint against Galileo included that he engaged in publishing his private interpretation of Scripture. This charge was summarily dismissed by the Inquisition in February 1615. Cardinal Bellarmine wrote in the summary that the Copernican theory was yet to be proven and until such time should not be applied to interpretation of Scripture.

In December that same year against better advice, Galileo decided to visit friends in Rome. And, like most of us men with a new toy (the telescope) and a bright idea (the Copernican theory) he went about town troubling the aristocracy with the idea that their secure position in the center of the cosmos had just been usurped and replaced with the insignificant third planet from the sun. Consequently the Pope, Paul V called for a formal decision on Copernican theory in February of 1616.

Don’t forget, at this time there was still little separation from the natural sciences and theology. A committee of eleven theologians and one natural scientist, and a mathematician, met and pronounced that the Copernican theory was nonsense; after all everyone knew that man and his planet were at the center of the universe.

Cardinal Bllarmine, a renowned Catholic apologist tried to intervene knowing that if the Copernican theory was later found to be correct, it would put the Church in an untenable position of defending a position that is contrary to nature – the Church has held, from the time of Christ, through Peter, that what is true in nature is, in some way, a revelation of nature’s creator. As a result of this verdict, Galileo’s book was put on the index of Forbidden Books. Cardinal Bellarmine convinced the Congregation of the Index of Forbidden Books to stop circulation until a new preface was written simply stating that the theory was not proven. As insurance that Galileo would follow through, the jurists insisted on a document prohibiting Galileo from teaching his new theory.

As any good Catholic, Galileo submitted himself to censure. In an audience with Pope Paul V, Galileo was assured support “discouraged and disappointed, but not defeated”, he went to Venice which was his home, where he continued his worked freely until 1624.

Publishing his book The Assayer Galileo advocated the atomic theory for the composition of matter. Wisely he avoided the mentioning the Copernican theory. Even still, he was attacked by overzealous critics who saw this theory as an attack on transubstantiation. The ‘insurance’ document appeared stating that Galileo had been enjoined from teaching his theory in any way.

In 1624, Pope Urban VIII, successor to Paul V stated “that the Church had never declared the works of Copernicus to be heretical and would not do so”, but added, “a proof of its truth would ever be forthcoming.” Encouraged, Galileo wrote Dialogue on the Two Great World Systems in 1632 to provide that proof. Father Riccardi said that the Dialogue focused on “the mathematical examination of the Copernican position on the earth’s motion, with the aim of proving that, if we remove divine revelation and sacred doctrine, the appearances could be saved with this supposition…so that one would never be admitting the absolute truth of this opinion, but only its hypothetical truth without the benefit of scripture.” Again, bull headedly Galileo continued to insist that his theory was an absolute.

By coincidence the Dialogue was published at the worst possible time, the Thirty years War was raging in Bavaria and the Protestants had succeeded in expelling Jesuits and winning several battles. This forced Pope Urban VIII to prove his orthodoxy and turned on Galileo because of the Jesuit denouncement of the Dialogue. In any event Galileo was deposed twice in front of the Inquisition on the charge of disobeying the mysteriously reappearing injunction. The charges were eventually dropped, Galileo was censured for being “vehemently suspected of heresy”. For teaching the heliocentric theories, the Dialogue was banned by the Index for more than 200-years. Galileo was required to make a public renunciation and was placed under house arrest. Petro Redondi said that “this heresy was inquisitorial – that is, disciplinary, not theological or doctrinal – both according to the words of the manuals of criminal heresiology”. In short, Galileo was found guilty of disobedience, not of heresy. (Source: Warren H. Carroll, The Cleaving of Christendom, 2000.-494)

See if you can figure it out.

JoeT

 

[Major_Tom]

Protestants say the bible is the sole infallible rule of faith. Many verses in the Old Testament literally read that the universe revolves around the earth or that the earth is flat. Today, such literalists laugh at the authority of the Pope, after all there is the Galileo story…

See if you can figure it out.

JoeT

Interesting post. I do not see the relation to witches and/or black magic, but interesting nonetheless.

And curiously, I can’t really say that it’s a defense of the Church, because it has critical components to it. I also can’t say that it’s an attack piece, as it includes appropriate context…

 

[JoeT777]

Interesting post. I do not see the relation to witches and/or black magic, but interesting nonetheless.

And curiously, I can’t really say that it’s a defense of the Church, because it has critical components to it. I also can’t say that it’s an attack piece, as it includes appropriate context…

Major T, et al:

First I wouldn’t presume to ‘defend’ the Catholic Church, anything I would say would be far outweighed by her own holiness.

Since the story was rather lengthy, in favor of telling the real history,I elected to edit out portions better related to the thread.

Many who make the claim such as that quoted by Shellac seem to me to be operating outside of right reasoning - more like subjectivism. The non-Catholic often claims the Catholic Church and her doctrine are antiquated or are based on superstition. However, we find that witch hunts were conducted more vigorously by non-Catholics - usually claiming Catholics were the witches. From the 16th century to the late 18th century it was predominately the (non-superstitious?) Protestants who burned witches. Some suggest that over a 100,000 witch executions occurred during Luther’s ‘Thirty Years War’ alone; again, mostly Protestants burning Catholics.

Frankly, I’m bit confused by those who claim the bible is the sole infallible rule of faith often claiming a right to interpret faith and morals with a self-serving relativism; most of these make the claim with a literal interpretation of Scripture. In a like manner when Pope Urban or Pope Paul likewise interpret Scripture they are ridiculed. You do know you can find many verses in the Old Testament that would suggest the universe revolves around the earth or that the earth is flat. However, when the Church had difficulty with this science, these same self ruled (or book ruled) people ridicule the Church for essentially being like today’s Protestant. Hypocrisy?

Again, when the Magisterium of the Church teaches the literal meaning of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist, these same theologians of subjectivism ridicule the Church as ‘primitives’. I do see relevancy to this thread don’t you? Hypocrisy, maybe?

JoeT

 

[GaryTaylor]

The past has it share of injustice, a good reason to safe guard the moves made in politics and religion as we speak… Centurys from now there will be those, just like us here today saying “What the heck were they thinking”?

 

[Major_Tom]

Here’s a very good article on the subject:

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4005&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=642287

Not a bad article. From the conclusion:

“It is helpful to know that the number of victims has been grossly exaggerated, and that the reasons for the persecutions had as much to do with social factors as with religious ones.” I think this point is overstated. Governments and the CHurch were so intertwined, I think that it’s a disingenouos cop-out to claim that “we didn’t do it. The civil authorities did”.

Also from the conclusion:
“But although Catholics have been fed **comforting errors by overeager apologists **about the Church’s part in persecuting witches, we must face our own tragic past. Fellow Catholics, to whom we are forever bound in the communion of saints, did sin grievously against people accused of witchcraft.”

 

[Axion]

Karen Armstrong, in her book A History of God writes that Pope Innocent VIII, with his Bull Summa Desiderants, “marked the beginning of the great witch craze” in both Catholic and Protestant communities. “Thousands of men and women were cruelly tortured until they confessed to astonishing crimes”. Granted, she didn’t say burned, but tortured isn’t much better.

Separately, I do know that people were burned, though I’m not aware of any great scale. I know of Giordano Bruno, burned alive during the Inquisition period, though not for any witchy activities.

I wouldn’t trust a lot of what Karen Armstrong says. Her great thing these days is to be an apologist for Islam. The idea that the Pope sparked the protestants to do anything is laughable. They would have done the opposite of whatever he said.

The scottish Calvinists - from whom Unitarians are descended - burnt a great many witches.

The fact is that witches have been hunted in societies across the world - many with no connection whatsoever with Christianity - let alone Catholicism.

 

[Contarini]

I was reading the news. Someone said the following about the Catholic Church…
“Lest We Forget this is the same Church that burned and stoned people to death for opposing the Church’s teachings of the earth being flat and people accused of being witches.”

Now I was always of the mind that it was the protestants who were into burning witches. Am I wrong? Help me here folks.

One of the parts of the statement you quoted is absurd, but you’re going after the wrong one.

The idea that only Protestants burned witches is an unfortunate myth which has spread among Catholic apologists. It derives from the fact that the Spanish and Roman Inquisitions in the sixteenth century were relatively restrained in their dealings with accusations of witchcraft. I believe that these Inquisitions did hand over some witches for burning, although the vast majority of offenders recanted and were punished in lesser ways.

There was a wave of witchcraft persecutions before the Reformation (the infamous Malleus Maleficarum was written by two Dominican inquisitors in the late 15th century, though it wasn’t nearly as influential as people often claim), and in the larger and more vicious post-Reformation wave of persecutions Catholics and Protestants seem to have participated with equal fervor. The Catholics who participated, however, were mostly from France and Germany (I think there were also a number of cases on Poland), not from Spain and Italy. Hence, as I said, the misunderstanding that “Catholics did not burn witches.”

The claim as you quoted it is still misleading and unfair to Catholicism, because it doesn’t take into account the centuries during which the Church insisted (against popular superstition) that witches had no power and should not be feared, and generally because it lacks any understanding of the historical context.

The really outrageous claim you quoted, however, is that the Church executed people for not believing in a flat earth. One early medieval theologian, St. Virgil of Salzburg, was threatened with excommunication for believing that there were people in the Southern Hemisphere (this was considered unorthodox because everyone thought the equator was impassable; hence, such people would not be descended from Adam and Eve). However, he was not excommunicated as far as I know, let alone executed; the controversy did not concern the shape of the earth per se (as far as I know, contra Daniel Boorstin, it was perfectly orthodox to say that the world was round but that there were no living people in the Southern Hemisphere, which is the view you find in Dante); and he was eventually canonized by the Church!

The Church never taught that the world was flat, let alone executing anyone for denying it.

Jeffrey Burton Russell has an excellent book on the subject, called Inventing the Flat Earth.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

There were witch-burnings in ‘Early Modern’ Europe in both Catholic and Protestant Europe (not England where very few were burnt).

Not to nit-pick, but you’re contradicting yourself. You say “very few,” which means that they did happen. I don’t recall the numbers myself–I agree that they were much fewer than along the Rhine valley, but if I recall correctly they were not insignificant.

Edwin

 

[Gara3987]

I was reading the news. Someone said the following about the Catholic Church…
“Lest We Forget this is the same Church that burned and stoned people to death for opposing the Church’s teachings of the earth being flat and people accused of being witches.”

Now I was always of the mind that it was the protestants who were into burning witches. Am I wrong? Help me here folks.

There is a good explanation at EWTN