Was the burning of heretics justified?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 6glargento
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thank you Mirdath

Well actually I stand by what I have said. Just seems so many postings ago since I said it.

The central tenet to my arguement is that Mother Church opposed some pretty perverse groups, among them some who proclaimed that suicide and human sacrifice was pleasing to God.

There were other equally bizare and perverse teachings which the Church quite rightly challenged. 👍
 
I agree with our sentiment.

A more accurate translation of the commandment is "Thou Shall Not Murder.’

Check the Catachism of the Catholic Chruch. There are instances where killing is permissible: Self defense or in defense of the defenseless (to include defensive war), a person who endangers others (like a mass murderer or rapists) when there is no other way to protect society from them, and the state has the right to protect the good of society. The catch is that has to be the last resort, when there are no other options.
then heretics shouldn’t fall into this category right?🙂
 
Thank you Mirdath

Well actually I stand by what I have said. Just seems so many postings ago since I said it.

The central tenet to my arguement is that Mother Church opposed some pretty perverse groups, among them some who proclaimed that suicide and human sacrifice was pleasing to God.
And lowered itself to their level by making a sacrificial holocaust of them. Nice going. Not to mention that it stooped well below the levels of many groups who did not have such moral issues.

I would be interested to know which group you’re referring to with the ‘human sacrifice’ part. The Albigensians they are not.
 
I agree with our sentiment.

A more accurate translation of the commandment is "Thou Shall Not Murder.’

Check the Catachism of the Catholic Chruch. There are instances where killing is permissible: Self defense or in defense of the defenseless (to include defensive war), a person who endangers others (like a mass murderer or rapists) when there is no other way to protect society from them, and the state has the right to protect the good of society. The catch is that has to be the last resort, when there are no other options.
actually our Pope…including Pope JP2 didn’t believe in capital punishment…I recall signing a petition to have it outlawed in PA.
 
Mirdath posted:
And lowered itself to their level by making a sacrificial holocaust of them. Nice going. Not to mention that it stooped well below the levels of many groups who did not have such moral issues.
Well if I ever get convicted by a court of law and all they do to me is ask me to recant and stop slaughtering innocents. Or to undertake some penances then I will consider I have got off lightely

If the Inquisitonal courts were so barbaric as you are suggesting, then why was it that common criminals in the civil courts used to blaspheme in order to get their case transfered to an Inquisitional court as they believed they would not only get a fairer hearing but a much less sentence if convicted.

Doesn’t sound much like holocaust to me. But then again, maybe it is because my vision is not obstructed by a plank 😛
 
Mirdath posted:

Well if I ever get convicted by a court of law and all they do to me is ask me to recant and stop slaughtering innocents. Or to undertake some penances then I will consider I have got off lightely

If the Inquisitonal courts were so barbaric as you are suggesting, then why was it that common criminals in the civil courts used to blaspheme in order to get their case transfered to an Inquisitional court as they believed they would not only get a fairer hearing but a much less sentence if convicted.

Doesn’t sound much like holocaust to me. But then again, maybe it is because my vision is not obstructed by a plank 😛
ouch!:o
 
If the Inquisitonal courts were so barbaric as you are suggesting, then why was it that common criminals in the civil courts used to blaspheme in order to get their case transfered to an Inquisitional court as they believed they would not only get a fairer hearing but a much less sentence if convicted.
As I said earlier, a step up from rock bottom still isn’t that great.
Doesn’t sound much like holocaust to me. But then again, maybe it is because my vision is not obstructed by a plank 😛
Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius! - Papal legate Arnaud-Amaury, leader of the Catholic armies, before the first battle of the Albigensian Crusade.

The words mean ‘Kill them all! God will know his own!’.

The Catholic Church is inspired to far better than that. No matter how long ago it was, what can one do but weep for the victims of such brutality?

Also, if you’d reread the passage you reference, the plank is in your eye, the speck in the other’s. Not the other way around.
 
“Was the burning of heretics justified?”

Morally, no. Practically, yes. It helped keep the Church intact, which in turn kept Medieval Europe intact. Still, murder is hard to justify. When the great rebellion came in 1517 (e.g., The Reformation), it plunged Europe into a new dark age. :confused:
 
“Was the burning of heretics justified?”

Morally, no. Practically, yes. It helped keep the Church intact, which in turn kept Medieval Europe intact. Still, murder is hard to justify. When the great rebellion came in 1517 (e.g., The Reformation), it plunged Europe into a new dark age. :confused:
The Reformation was a reaction to just that sort of behavior on the part of the Church, among others such as the sale of indulgences. If the Inquisition had been more restrained, the split would likely have been less painful.
 
then heretics shouldn’t fall into this category right?
Most heretics did not fall into that category. Most were not executed. The ones who were executed are a mixed bag. Some were criminals. I’ll give you some examples.

Remember that the Kings of many European countries had laws which made heresy a form of treason. This was not unusual throughout history. In the secular state, all unrepentant heretics were guilty of treason. I don’t buy that a person is treasonous because they are a heretic. But many heretics were anything but peaceful and did indeed challenge the kingdoms.

For example some Cathars murdered a Papal representative.
The Cathars believed that suicide was close a very good thing as it relieved the soul from the prison of the body. They had rituals in which a person would starve themselves to death. Or if a person wanted to be a martyr, the clergy would suffocate them with a pillow. There are reported instances of parents suffocating their babies to save the babies soul from being trapped in an animal body. They had other strange believes but these are the worst of it.

Any Cathar who participated in the assisted suicides or murder children are in my mind criminals who could receive the death sentence. My bet is that many of them who were executed fell into this category. Any Cathar who hid one of these people was an accessory to murder, IMO.

Many of the heresies were not just peaceful people looking for freedom of religion. Many were violent movements that let to insurrections, wars and a lot of death.

(1524-25) War of the Peasants was both political and religious in nature (as most are from that time) Anabaptists were the major religious influence. About 100,000 were killed in the fighting. In Subsequent years, some of the heretics were tried and executed.

(1534-35) In the **Münster Rebellion. **Anabaptists (heretics) took over the city of Munster. **Their plan? To set up in Munster and then start their conquest of the world. They established new laws… for example polygamy was allowed. Their leader took 16 wives. He beheaded one of his wives himself **in the marketplace. They stole the personal property of all who abandoned the town. They ransacked all churches, stealing everything in them. After the city was won back the leaders were executed. The following link has more about the Anabaptists… they were not peaceful heretics.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnster_Rebellion

About 3000-5000 people were executed in the inquisitions. I have no doubt that some of them were executed wrongfully (IMHO). But some were not, some were criminals.

Look at Luther, he was a heretic who was excommunicated. He was not executed. Why is that? Perhaps because he did not engage in the violence or insight violence. So maybe a good number (if not all) of those executed actually were a threat or had already committed crimes. But I have no idea about all of the cases.
 
The Reformation was a reaction to just that sort of behavior on the part of the Church, among others such as the sale of indulgences. If the Inquisition had been more restrained, the split would likely have been less painful.
It is hard to believe that the reformation was a reaction to the inquistion since as soon as the reformers got control of an area, they themselves started executing anyone who did not agree with them and those they called heretics.

As for the selling of indulgences. IT was not the policy of the Vatican to do this. Individual priests did it. The vatican was addressing the issue. Luther knew this but in his 95 Thesis mislead the Church’s position on indulgences.
 
Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius! - Papal legate Arnaud-Amaury, leader of the Catholic armies, before the first battle of the Albigensian Crusade.

The words mean ‘Kill them all! God will know his own!’.

The Catholic Church is inspired to far better than that. No matter how long ago it was, what can one do but weep for the victims of such brutality?..

From all I’ve read those words were never spoken. They were introduced into popular rumor decades after his death.
 
actually our Pope…including Pope JP2 didn’t believe in capital punishment…I recall signing a petition to have it outlawed in PA.
Before I posted about the Church’s position on killing and capital punishment I reread The Catechism of the Catholic Church. The CCC says that I stated…. In a lot more words. Pope John Paul II believed that capital punishment could be used when there was no other way to keep society and other people safe. But he believed that in this day and age we have the resources to protect society from the worst criminals, so today justification for capital punishment would be rare it at all.
 
Before I posted about the Church’s position on killing and capital punishment I reread The Catechism of the Catholic Church. The CCC says that I stated…. In a lot more words. Pope John Paul II believed that capital punishment could be used when there was no other way to keep society and other people safe. But he believed that in this day and age we have the resources to protect society from the worst criminals, so today justification for capital punishment would be rare it at all.
Yes, I know…I would like to think it wouldn’t be necessary…I mean, if someone is imprisoned forever…why is ‘death’ needed??
 
Yes, I know…I would like to think it wouldn’t be necessary…I mean, if someone is imprisoned forever…why is ‘death’ needed??
It’s a good question.

Can we be sure that the criminal will never escape?

Can we be sure that some judge will not set them free? This has happened so many times in the past years that it’s become a clique… how many children have been raped and killed by men who were released when they should not have been?

Can we ensure that they will not harm others while in prison?

A friend of mine in college (a good student, good kid) was out with friends one night. They saw and abandoned car in a field so the guys all got in it and drove it around the field. The state troopers came along and arrested all of them … the car had been stolen. They were all charged with auto theft even though they had not stolen it. My friend agreed to take the rap for all of them. He was sentenced to the state penitentiary. He was dead within 6 months. A good looking young man… you can guess who they killed them.

Those men who did this were habitual violent criminals who had nothing to lose. They did not intend to kill him, only to scare him into submission and have a lot of ‘fun’. If a person is not already hard core going into prison, they are when they come out… why? Because even the guards cannot prevent the most hard core prisoners from abusing the rest of the prisoners. Remember that most who are in prison are released back into the population. They were not rehabilitated. They bring this back into your neighborhood.
 
It’s a good question.

Can we be sure that the criminal will never escape?

Can we be sure that some judge will not set them free? This has happened so many times in the past years that it’s become a clique… how many children have been raped and killed by men who were released when they should not have been?

Can we ensure that they will not harm others while in prison?

A friend of mine in college (a good student, good kid) was out with friends one night. They saw and abandoned car in a field so the guys all got in it and drove it around the field. The state troopers came along and arrested all of them … the car had been stolen. They were all charged with auto theft even though they had not stolen it. My friend agreed to take the rap for all of them. He was sentenced to the state penitentiary. He was dead within 6 months. A good looking young man… you can guess who they killed them.

Those men who did this were habitual violent criminals who had nothing to lose. They did not intend to kill him, only to scare him into submission and have a lot of ‘fun’. If a person is not already hard core going into prison, they are when they come out… why? Because even the guards cannot prevent the most hard core prisoners from abusing the rest of the prisoners. Remember that most who are in prison are released back into the population. They were not rehabilitated. They bring this back into your neighborhood.
That’s a terrible story…I’m sorry to hear what happened to your friend.😦

Should the men in prison have been executed, in your opinion?
 
That’s a terrible story…I’m sorry to hear what happened to your friend.😦

Should the men in prison have been executed, in your opinion?
I don’t know if they should have been executed. I do know that my freind did not deserve his fate.

I have no doubt that the world is a worse place because our legal system allowed them to live. I wonder how many other young men they have hurt in all these years since then? Obviously our system does not have the capability to protect people from the hardcore criminals. Inmates like them should either be locked up in solitary for life or executed.

We as a society have the obligation to protect people from the hardened criminal… that includes inmates. IMHO it was a crime to all them in the general prison popualtion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top