 |
I know that torture and persecution took place during the dark ages. I have read through some catholic lit. to find out what there view on the matter was. I can't locate any historic documentation. I only find definitions. If you can enlighten me on this matter, it would help.
Please read both sides of the story. The Church is accused of much, but accusing and proving are two different things.Quote:
Originally Posted by bookmark1
1. It is true that some Catholics even some Priests have committed horrible sins. But they didn't commit those sins because of the Church. The committed those sins IN SPITE of the Church.
2. The Church is accused of torture and persecution during the Inquisitions. But the Inquisitions were COURT CASES. And therefore, court records remain for the vast majority of these cases. These court records reveal that the so called torture and persecution of the Inquisitions is anti-Catholic propaganda.
The Inquisitions of History: The Mythology and the Reality | Reverend Brian Van Hove, S.J. | Ignatius Insight
3. As for the Crusades, today we have evidence of why the Christians fought a long and arduous war against the Muslims which we call the Crusades. All one needs to know to understand the reason behind the Crusades is the Muslim mindset. There are two territories for Islam. One territory is already conquered by Islam. The other is the war territory, which they will conquer for Allah by any means possible.
The Inquisitions of History: The Mythology and the Reality | Reverend Brian Van Hove, S.J. | Ignatius Insight
I hope that helps.
Sincerely,
De Maria
You might find it useful to look at the following:
Owen Chadwick, THe Early Church
R.W. Southern, The Middle Ages
Both are published by Penguin, and are easily found in used paperback. They're not long, written by widely respected scholars, and are intended for non-specialists (so you won't have to wade through lots of scholarly debates).
I recommend that you study history. The subject of the Catholic Church is massive, the church effected every stage of western civ, kiddo.
Fascinating!
The first inquisition came out of southern France where the majority was Cathars. Catharism is a sect with strong Gnostic elements that thrived in the 11th through the 13 centuries. Holding dualist and Gnostic faiths, Cathars held theological views such as the world was created evil by Satan, while considering God of the Old Testament to be the moral equal and opposite of Satan – the yin yang of good and evil. Many hold that Catharism had its theological genesis in Gnosticism with an aberrant mix of Judaism and Mohammedanism.Quote:
Originally Posted by bookmark1
In southern France they formed opposition to the clergy and the Catholic Church. They perceived the individual to be the source of moral, spiritual, and political authority and as such viewed the Catholic Church as corrupt.
Procreation was considered undesirable and child birth was discouraged. They considered sex as a perversion, but at the same timed considered recreational sex as preferable to sex reserved for the purpose of procreation. It seems that taking on concubines was a moral alternative to marriage. It’s really interesting that the Cathars could hold such distain for a natural act while finding recreational sex healthy – it hurts the head doesn’t it? - by refusing to reproduce it’s a wonder they lasted two hundred years.
Much like the radical Islamists of today, this movement can be viewed as the cradle of the Protestant movement. Morally dysfunctional societies such as Cathars refused the authority of the Church. They defended radical attacks against the Church, refused social regulation, taxes, social and moral bans while feeling justified in any moral disorder proclaiming to be above any moral truth taught by the Catholic Church. – When it’s in black and white, its amazing how much they sound like today’s secularists with a twisted freaky dualist god.
Which brings me to my point presented best by Warren H Carroll in The Glory of Christendom,
“The ‘black legend’ of the Inquisition has been the most successful of all historical propaganda offensives against the Catholic Church; and the difficulty of responding to it persuasively is vastly increased by the almost complete inability of modern man to understand how any society could regard a man’s religion as a matter of life and death. But in fact the heretic in Christendom was in every sense of the word a revolutionary, as dangerous to public order and personal safety as yesterday’s Communist or today’s terrorist.”
JoeT
Thank you all so very much for your thorough replies. What sparked my interest was my researching the beginnings of all the primary religions claiming to be true Christians. There are several. Catholic, Lutherine, Presbiterian, and Baptist seem to have the deepest history in that category. My studies took me through the dark ages which gave many accounts of the cruel treatment to those who thought different from the Catholic ideals. Infant baptizm seemed to be the beginning of conflict between groups. I find all the answers very interesting. It has been very helpful. If you have more info. please fill me in.
If you're interested in Christian origins, or in those who have the earliest roots, look into Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. In the series which publishes the two books I mentioned above is another by Kallistos Ware on Orthodoxy. It brings out some of the differences and disagreements between the Orthodox and Catholics. That way you'll get both sides, and some good history. You might also take a look at Called to Communion. It's a little book written by the current Pope, before he was Pope, that offers some really useful history of the early Church along with a good primer on Catholic teaching regarding the nature of the Church. It's short and clear and well worth having a look at.Quote:
Originally Posted by bookmark1
If you have further questions, let me know.
Good luck. And enjoy!
I will agree with Akoe, he book by Ware is great, I feel it is a must read.
And, really, if I can be of any help let me know. Send me a PM anytime. (Don't worry, I won't try to convince you of anything!)
Have you read Warren H. Carroll's "History of Christendom"? If so, what did you think?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
Bookmark1,
One thing to keep in mind as you study Church history is the fact that there were no so-called true Christian church denominations before the reformation.
There were some who claimed to be Christian such as the Gnostics which produce their own books to read as they wanted to teach and even created books like The Gospel of Thomas who did not write it.
Thomas was a missionary far away in what today is India.
There are some groups today who CLAIM to have roots as far back as John the Baptist, but that is bogus history. There is no verifiable evidence of any such group.
One of the best books I read when I was studying the Catholic Church (which I did become a member of) is a book called the Concise History of The Catholic Church.
Sorry I can not remember who the author of that is.
It is very readable and does not skip over some of the problem the Church had over the years.
Peace and kindness,'
Fred (arcura)
Arcura,
What of the churches that Paul wrote letters to in the New Testament? Are not those confirmed in the Word of God to be doctrinally sound churches? In reading through Paul's Epistles, I find clear evidence of Christian churches. In Acts 20:17 it talks about the bishops or pastors began to assume authority not given them in the New Testament.(III John 1:9) They began to claim authority over other smaller churches. This seems to be the beginning of an error which grew into many other hurtful errors. Here it began what seems to be an entire change from the original democratic policy and government of the early churches.
Correction to my earlier post: I said Owen Chadwick. It's Henry Chadwick. (This is what I get for multi-tasking!) Sorry about the confusion.
(Owen Chadwick wrote the volume on the Reformation in the same series. It is also quite good.)
Of value here is Raymond Brown's, The Curches the Apostles Left Behind. (It is short and available in paperback. Brown is one of the most highly respected NT scholars. ) You may also want to look into the so-called Rule of Faith controversy. Chadwick provides a useful overview.Quote:
Originally Posted by bookmark1
Although there has always been collegiality among bishops, the early Church was not democratic.
bookmark1,
The early Church bishops were either the apostles themselves or some disciples or bishops appointed by the original bishops.
Yes there were some break away churches that wanted to teach what they dreamed up, but eventually most of them vanished.
The Coptic is one that is still around but is is closer to true Christianity than those who are long gone.
I hope that helps you understand that the early Church Jesus establish mostly stayed together and recognized Peter as leader thereof.
There are many still existing documents written by the early Church fathers that clearly demonstrate that
Peace and kindness,
Fred
And what about Christianity is democratic, Not really a election for who Christ should be, or who God will be. We serve a King not a elected God.
But the history of the Church with those over the churches, Look at Paul, Peter, John and others that over saw the early church.
While in the early Church priests and bishops were appointed later the Pope was elected.
Just when that started I do not know but would like to know.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:01 AM. |