skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Our modern perception of the Roman Catholic Church as the janitor of old buildings and the provider of a different geriatric every few years to amuse us with his favourite tricks whilst hiding behind bullet proof glass, is in itself a testament of the degree to which we have separated ourselves from the theocratic oversight of this institution. None of the twenty thousand who were slaughtered at the Massacre of Béziers by Papal instruction could have dreamed of a time when the Holy See’s authority would be reduced to a symbolic figment of an ignorant past. Yet the indoctrination and violent imposition that shaped dark age Europe and resisted the development of our secular modern societies so violently still retains much of its grotesque authority.
29 comments:
Do you really think like this, John, or is this a show?
I'm not a Catholic, so let me respond.
The Pope ¨hides¨ behind bullet-proof glass, of course, because the Soviet Union (?) thought the last Pope was so ¨irrelevant¨ they tried to have him knocked off. Why was that? Read George Weigel and find out. Help liberate 600 million people, and you might get some tyrant mad at you.
Dark Ages? Medieval Europe was the greatest civilization the world had seen to date. I'm walking through the creations of that great civilization every day, here in Oxford. After you're done liberating half a billion people, try building a new Oxford or Cambridge or University of Paris somewhere in Indiana. Now that's some serious indoctrination!
Also, I've just posted a more thorough rebutting of your friend Dr. Avalos' own silly attack on Christian history in CD. (With an assist from Carrier, who does say some sensible things in his chapter on science, though you may not have noticed one of his more enlightening contributions!)
http://christthetao.blogspot.com/2010/10/new-atheism-and-ab-uses-of-history.html
David, I never ever agree with everything I link to. Surely you should know that. Only criticize me for what I write.
The Pope did not liberate 600 million people, and has a very tenuous claim to have liberated the millions of Poland. The Soviet state was in ruins simply because of the nature of its economy; its collapse was inevitable, and even predicted by a handful around its founding.
As for Medieval Europe, Europe was nowhere near the greatest civilization. At that time, the West was second to the Middle East (and probably China and India).
Muslim armies came close to Vienna. Their ships ruled the Mediterranean. Their scientists and mathematicians preserved the ancient knowledge of Rome and Greece and came up with new twists, such as algebra. They also passed on knowledge from further east to the West, such as Arabic numerals (which are actually Indian).
Western civilization modernized, however, and eventually became what it is today. We threw off the chains off the Church (slowly, of course) and loosened the chains of God. So what if the Pope gave us Oxford; there are plenty of affairs in which the Church was anti-science which more than reverse such scraps as it tossed us
The Islamic world stagnated, as did China and India. It still took until the 19th century, if I recall, for the West to have a larger GDP than India.
Zack: The Pope and his church have a very strong claim to having precipitated the liberation of Eastern Europe. Read Weigel, Felak, or (when its out) an upcoming dissertation on this subject by my colleague (like me NOT a Catholic), John Hess.
Muslim ships did NOT ¨rule the Mediterranean.¨ Read Stark on that; he rebuts that old canard pretty well. Life was better in Medieval Europe, EVEN THOUGH civilization developed in the lands Muslim armies conquered, not further north.
I'm a big fan of China, and Song China had its merits (especially artistic): but this was also the period in which the Mongols (Huns) made China a vassal state, then made the Chinese 9th class citizens (literati being just after prostitutes, and just before beggars, on the social totem pole, as I recall.) China was not at the top of its game during our Middle Ages.
John: Thanks for the answer.
Medieval Europe was the greatest civilization in world history? Are you insane? Yes, Medieval Europe was able to create some great vanity projects by diverting the wealth of the entire population to construct a few fabulous buildings for the wealthiest to enjoy. Congratulations on that. That is the great thing about Dictatorships.
The rest of the population lived in wretched poverty, wracked by starvation and disease, utterly at the mercy of their local potentates, utterly without political power. In fact Medieval Europe was not even the greatest contemporary civilization. Both the Middle and Far East had far more advanced civilizations at the time.
Link to the main article:
http://new.exchristian.net/2010/10/why-catholicism-is-childs-play.html
Thanks Johan de Haan for the link to the article. There is no doubting the institutionally-derived abuse of the RCC. And every caring, decent person must continue to challenge the authoritative base of this corrupt corporation. As another Lehman Brothers pedaling false hope of get-rich schemes, while at the same time scurrying money away to the self-interests of its bosses, so too the RCC pedals false hope of the riches of 'the other world' while at the same time ripping into what little physical assets the poor, the dispossessed, the vulnerable and the defenseless may have.
This organisation must be held truly accountable before the very community it is raping.
Cheers
just a few examples of Roman Cathlolic papal bulls during the "great civilization" of medeeval europe. enjoy.
1184 decretal and bull of Pope Lucius III condemned all heretical sects and persons who preached without the authorisation of the Roman Church, whether publicly or privately, and placed them under excommunication.
1252 Ad exstirpanda pope Innocent IV Authorized the use of torture for eliciting confessions from heretics, and authorized the execution of relapsed heretics by burning them alive during the Inquisition.
1452 (June 18) Dum diversas pope Nicholas V Authorized Afonso V of Portugal to reduce any Muslims, pagans, other unbelievers to perpetual slavery.
1455 (January 5) Romanus Pontifex pope Nicholas V Sanctified the seizure of non-Christian lands discovered during the Age of Discovery and encouraged the enslavement of natives.
1521 Decet Romanum Pontificem pope Leo X Excommunicated Martin Luther.
1586 (January) Coeli et terrae pope Sixtus V condemned "judicial astrology" as superstitious.
sounds like a fun time to be alive....if you were catholic.
Dammit Matt! History and the text of the Bible can only be used to bolster the case for Christianity. To do otherwise is to engage in quote mining or history mining, which is improper... Unless you're doing it as a Christian in which case, mine away.
what can I say jeffrey? I don't have an oxford education. I don't even have comparable architecture to help blind me from the truth of the ugly past it took to create it. I guess i'm just a heathen hillbilly from the colonies.
Jeffrey: No, I'm not ¨insane,¨ but you apparently are rude and only marginally literate. I didn't say Medieval Europe was the greatest civilization in world history, only ¨to that point.¨
Everyone was poor, everyone suffered diseases -- this was before they invented vaccines, OK?
But slavery had almost died out in much of Europe. Those cathedrals you culminate against were no more costly than Roman, less than Egyptian, architectural splendours (and arguably more interesting). And the average person was probably better fed than in most competing civilizations. As Stark explains, Europeans also made increasingly good use of technology, beginning quite early on.
I've already explained the problem with China at the time. The Song is also when they began the pleasant custom of crushing little girls' feet to keep them sexy, BTW.
Dictatorships? Again, welcome to universal reality. But the feudal system, and competition between Church and State, allowed for a fair degree of freedom, and Christianity curbed the degree to which authority could be absolute.
Good job, Matt. Two of your six papal bulls from evil ¨medeeval¨ (sic) europe (sic) aren't even from the Middle Ages!
Have you ever cracked a real history book in your life?
I'm sorry david. I did not realize this was a spelling contest. I will try harder to make sure my responses meet your high Oxford standards from now on.
Also, I apolgize for lumping the Papal acts of excommunicating Martin Luther and condemning astronomy as superstitious in the same catagory as papal orders to torture and enslaving people, as it should have been obvious to me that these acts were a full 100 years after the approximatley 1000 years considered to be MEDIEVAL Europe. what was I thinking? I guess I should have included the 5 "holy" crusades instead, so as not to offend your superiour intelect.
I was wondering if you could direct me to where I might find the actual cost of Roman and Egyptian architectural splendours so that I might compare them to cathedral costs? My local library only carries Stephen King novels and George of the Jungle pop up books. thanks.
P.S. Your welcome for my grandfather stopping the Nazis from bombimg your precious university back into the pile of rubble from wence it came, and enslaving your people. I have a feeling you personally would have adjusted well to the hitler superiority mindset, however.
bombimg(sic).
Matt,
I always find it ironic when self-styled atheists denigrate learning. I thought that intelligence and learning let to atheism, not the other way around.
at brad. I have nothing against education. But when I see statements like "you apparently are rude and only marginally literate" and "Good job, Matt. Two of your six papal bulls from evil ¨medeeval¨ (sic) europe (sic) aren't even from the Middle Ages!
Have you ever cracked a real history book in your life?" It strikes me as very condesending, especially coming from an Oxford educated christian man.
I don't denigrate learning. I denigrate "learned" people who talk down to others and avoid the point being made, which is thus: the catholic church has a long, long history of abuse towards huge groups of people, ideas and science in the name of god, all through the MEDIEVAL period (and beyond) especially, and Papal bulls throughout history clearly demonstrate that fact. Unless were going to start "interpreting" them like we do the bible, so they are all about love and compassion.
so pardon me if my ignorant brain reacted in a way you perceived as making light of education. education is what, in the end, will put an end to all this voodoo god nonsense.
Matt,
You may be right about David Marshall (I don't know either of you, so I can't comment on tone in a comment thread), but I've consistently received that type of hand-waving response on this blog. My favorites are "naive", "ignorant" and "brain-washed."
Just wanted to point out it cuts both ways.
brad, you will be hard pressed to find where I have ever called anyone "naive", "ignorant" or "brain-washed." on this blog. I may not be christian, but I do not insult others, and appreciate the same. I try to make my points using documented facts, quotes and my own thoughts (when i have them). I may seem forceful with my arguements sometimes, and not shy about using what some would consider extreme examples and sarcastic humor to make my points, but I do not attack people on a personal level unless provoked. and I would think that others, especially those who claim to be christians and scholars, would be able to do the same.
De-lurking to add a few random thoughts:
1) Jeffrey: If you culminate on those cathedrals, you’ll have to clean it up. And you might go blind.
2) David: You forgot a “sic”—must’ve been too busy fulminating about illiteracy.
3) Brad: I didn’t read Magnificent as dismissing learning; rather, he seemed to me to respond sarcastically to a response that focused more on his style and less on the substance of his claims. I agree with your subsequent implication that we'd probably all be better off keeping the attention on the arguments. Before I do that, however, I'm compelled to say: Regarding your thought that “intelligence and learning let to atheism,” We don’t rent, we own.
4) As for the original post: While I agree with the author’s general claims about the RCC, I’m annoyed at his sloppy rhetoric. The Index predates the doctrine of Papal Infallibility and the Index was never declared or intended to express Infallible doctrine. I agree completely that both the Index and Infallibility are theologically idiotic, but the OP should’ve been more careful. IMO, there’s little that screams “don’t really know much about RCC doctrine” than sloppy attacks on infallibility. (Except perhaps thinking the Immaculate Conception was Jesus’.) If the guy wants to make a case that theologically suspect beliefs about apostolic succession, clericalism, celibacy, misogyny, and poor formation in RCC seminaries (great word, that) have combined to produce an organizational culture that has systematically enabled, denied, trivialized, and erased a pattern of sexual abuse of minors, there’s ample evidence and reasoning to support him. Fulminating about banned books and bullet-proof cars seems to me to be not the best approach.
5) Has anyone else felt the urge to make a Python reference? (“Yes, of course the roads! But apart from the aqueducts, sanitation and the roads…”)
Cheers!
Sorry, Matt, I wasn't talking about you. I had the fearless leader of this blog-revolution in mind and some of the scholar guest-posters.
solipsister,
let should read *led
Brad,
I got that part. Just makin' a funny. Or not.
Hi Solipsister
Great comment. I cannot get past Johan de Haan's noting of the RCC:
.... "Yet to return to the structural objection to the Catholic faith, the child abuse scandal, whilst grotesque in its magnitude and reason alone for the renouncing of this ideological dictatorship, is but an expression of two of the historical pillars of Catholicism, namely, the insistence on both divine authority and its vicarious infallibility, and the Church’s relentless willingness to indoctrinate generation upon generation of boys and girls with the same timeless fairytale, regardless of the terror and destruction its shameless quest at self-preservation lets loose upon its adherents. This combination of tactics in the context of the innocent, the weak and the indoctrinated facilitates the grotesque environment in which men of authority can so abuse their power without fear of consequence, secure in the knowledge that no matter the revelation, faith and fear conquers all."
If ever there was a classical example of institutional anti-social behaviour, the RCC is it.
Cheers
@PapaL: I wouldn't disagree entirely and I certainly share the outrage. I just would tweak his claim that abuse is the expression of authority AND infallibility. I think that the abuse and the systematic coverup of it would have happened even if there had been no Infallibility Doctrine. That's certainly true for the abuse itself, as rates of sexual abuse of minors are no greater in RCC than elsewhere in society. Of course abuse by clergy is worse than soccer coaches, Scout leaders, or random perverts, as it takes place in the context of ministry (alleged divine authority) and, in some cases, vows of celibacy. As for the cover-up, all you really needed was top-down bureaucracy/centralized authority and clericalism to produce the giant clusterfrack we see unfolding.
With apologies for the multiple posts (apparently, when I de-lurk, I really de-lurk):
@PapaL: You're an Aussie, yes?
Have you had a chance to read Bishop Geoff Robinson's "Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church" (2007)? He's from Canberra, I think. The book's a very interesting, no-pulled punches take, albeit from an insider and theist's perspective.
Cheers.
Matt: Apparently you're young; all right, I'll cut you some slack.
It doesn't really matter where you start, but let me just suggest you shut down your computer, or go over to Amazon, and get yourself some good, fair-minded books about the Middle Ages and other great ancient civilizations.
I didn't say I was English, BTW.
@ David
As I recall, the topic at hand was Catholicism, and I think I made my point just fine, thank you. I'm quite familiar with amazon as well. No need to cut me any slack, if you feel you can refute my statements about papal bulls and their abuses during the middle ages, knock yourself out. For a christian, I must say your pretty abrasive. you should speak to your pastor about your holier than thou/I'm smarter than you attitude. after all, doesn't Jesus want you to be kinder to others, as practice for your eternity in superhappyplayland?
"David, I never ever agree with everything I link to."
There's a link? Where does that quotation come from, anyway?
Post a Comment