Was it wrong....

[lorathon]

While reading a book on Church history a question has come to mind…

Have all of the executions, torturing, excommunications, etc… of the past been wrong? This includes all Christian denominations. It was not just Catholics who did these things.

Or is it just that we are using a 21st century mindset to look back at the middle ages and determine what is right and what is wrong.

I personally believe that we are a product of our times just as they were. If you had lived in those times you would have agreed with the sentences just as everyone else did. If you look at the start of the reformation the leaders of all the sects that sprang up did the same things. So even these were spawned in controversy.

Today if we see heresy we talk and debate it. In the middle ages they just took care of the problem by banishing or burning or whatever. But that is the way it was.

And beside all of this, is it really that big a part of history. How many untold people have been saved by either the Church or the protestants over the past 2000 years? Even if you count all of the persecuted in that same period, it would be just a drop in the bucket to the countless people who just carried on with the Faith through the ages. To denounce ANY religion based on such a minuscule percentage is pointless.

 

[Thing]

Executions are still happening for all sorts of crimes. Treason is prolly’ the most historically consistant cause of death in every country.

“Murder is now generally considered the worst of crimes, but in the past, treason was thought of as worse. In English law high treason was punishable by being hanged, drawn and quartered (men) or burnt at the stake (women), the only crime which attracted those penalties (until the Treason Act 1814). The penalty was used by later monarchs against people who could reasonably be called traitors, although most modern jurists would call it excessive. Many of them would now just be considered dissidents.” - wiki.

 

[edjco]

I was just reading something on John Martignoni’s website about this issue exactly. The way John puts it was that you can’t indeed look at it through 21 century glasses. He goes on to explain that in those days also, with Church/state actually combined, that heresy was looked upon exactly as we look upon treason today, punishable by death or imprisonment.
John recommends a great book “Why apologize for the Inquisition”. I ordered one on-line (only a few bucks), and it was done by an historian using actual records of the inquisition (they apparently kept very good records), not by someone with an axe to grind against the Church.
Apparently for the first time, in the Inquisition court, there were rules of evidence, etc. much like our modern legal system.
The book even talks about people in prison who would commit heresy just to get transferred to the Inquisition court because it was so fair.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

While reading a book on Church history a question has come to mind…

Have all of the executions, torturing, excommunications, etc… of the past been wrong? This includes all Christian denominations. It was not just Catholics who did these things.

Or is it just that we are using a 21st century mindset to look back at the middle ages and determine what is right and what is wrong.

I personally believe that we are a product of our times just as they were. If you had lived in those times you would have agreed with the sentences just as everyone else did. If you look at the start of the reformation the leaders of all the sects that sprang up did the same things. So even these were spawned in controversy.

Today if we see heresy we talk and debate it. In the middle ages they just took care of the problem by banishing or burning or whatever. But that is the way it was.

And beside all of this, is it really that big a part of history. How many untold people have been saved by either the Church or the protestants over the past 2000 years?

To whom are you referring ?​

The 30 Years’ War of 1618-48 in Europe & the Wars of Religion in France (1562-98) did enormous damage; Christian love was not exactly plentiful: the earlier war was punctuated by massacres committed by both sides. As for the (successful) revolt of the Dutch against the cruelties of the Spanish, neither side distinguiished themselves by their mercy & kindness.

As for executions, they happened constantly - boiling alive, hanging, breaking on the wheel, burning, hanging in chains, beheading, drowning, ripping apart by horses, take your pick: they were a form of enterainment. (I almost forgot Vlad the Impaler)

Even if you count all of the persecuted in that same period, it would be just a drop in the bucket to the countless people who just carried on with the Faith through the ages. To denounce ANY religion based on such a minuscule percentage is pointless.

Is it minuscule ? The Jews suffered from both sides - as did witches.​

ISTM you’re trying to argue to several different conclusion, which are not entirely compatible. Otherwise, I tend to agree with you

 

[grandfather]

Treason is a crime against the state. We still understand it somewhat in the way it was understood in the past, but not entirely.

Heresy is a crime against religion. We no longer understand it as did our forebears. Apart from how it is punished or dealt with we can try to see it as it once was understood.

Heresy was once feared, which can help explain why it was not tolerated. Why was is so feared?

The medieval mind saw heresy as a great danger. We still believe that God revealed certain truths to us that need to be followed in order for souls to be saved. We used to believe we needed these truths in order to build a healthy society according to God’s plan, that would be able to be just and sustained, kind of staying on the right path. People thought that if we depart enmass from divinely revealed truths about who we are, why we exist, where we are going, how we should live together, our society will go in the wrong direction and there will be great suffering and consequences. The vision of the Old Testament of Israel either following God or going astray was applied to Christian civilization, the new Israel. Heresy was seen as a threat to civilization, because it was a departure from the truth that is revealed and if embraced it would cause the destruction of civilization.

So in this understanding heresy had to be supressed. When the Church found someone to be a heretic who would not recant the Church turned the person over to the civil authorities to be dealt with.

Today we have no fear of heresy. We allow freedom to all to believe and teach whatever they wish in matters of religion.

 

[MonkeyTape]

While reading a book on Church history a question has come to mind…

Have all of the executions, torturing, excommunications, etc… of the past been wrong? This includes all Christian denominations. It was not just Catholics who did these things.

It certainly wasn’t just the Church that did any of these things. The short answer is no, certainly not ALL were wrong. Even today execution of criminals is not always wrong. While in countries like the US the case that execution is today not necessary is very strong. Even a hundred years ago the conditions were dramatically different. If a society cannot keep itself safe from criminals then it must take appropriate measures. Today prisons are such that there is minimal fear of violent criminals escaping and such. I am not necessarily convinced that makes execution wrong, but it does probably make in unnecessary.

Excommunication is still a legitimate course of action in today’s Church and as such not wrong.

Torturing could be a factor of the society of the day, I haven’t looked into it really. We should remember that Paul referred to slaves being treated well, not that they should be released. So perhaps there is a good argument to certain things and people being creatures of their times.

Or is it just that we are using a 21st century mindset to look back at the middle ages and determine what is right and what is wrong.

I personally believe that we are a product of our times just as they were. If you had lived in those times you would have agreed with the sentences just as everyone else did. If you look at the start of the reformation the leaders of all the sects that sprang up did the same things. So even these were spawned in controversy.

Today if we see heresy we talk and debate it. In the middle ages they just took care of the problem by banishing or burning or whatever. But that is the way it was.

And beside all of this, is it really that big a part of history. How many untold people have been saved by either the Church or the protestants over the past 2000 years? Even if you count all of the persecuted in that same period, it would be just a drop in the bucket to the countless people who just carried on with the Faith through the ages. To denounce ANY religion based on such a minuscule percentage is pointless.

I don’t think this last argument is good. Wrong is wrong, evil is evil. No amount of evil being perpetrated in the name of good or salvation is proper. Perhaps it could be an understandable course of action, but that doesn’t really make the action itself right. For instance, we may sin and that sin is still a sin, even if our culpability for that sin is mitigated by a lack of knowledge or a lack of free will in committing the sin. Likewise, while we may understand a person’s theoretical actions in the past, it doesn’t make those actions correct.

If that is anywhere near clear.