Freethought & Rationalism Archive

James Hannam · 08-08-2009, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Leo the Great is a 5th century figure; Nicaea II is 787, as you say.

I wonder whether you have some references for this that I could look at?

Hi Roger,

On the Acts of John, see p 193 of vol. 2, NT Apopcrypha, ed. W. Schneemelcher (Lutterworth Press, London: 1965). IIRC, there's a lot more stuff on what survived and measured taken in there as well.

Best wishes

James

Doug Shaver · 08-09-2009, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

but we sure know that the Christians destroyed the Greek Aristarchus' writings on heliocentrism

How do we know? Who says they did, and what were their sources?

DCHindley · 08-09-2009, 07:46 AM

Roger,

Yes, it was references such as these that prompted my statement. Both Eisler and Mead discussed the general Roman attitude towards magic, and there is also some discussion about it in Morton Smith's Jesus the Magician. I think too I also read some background about magical books and how the official attitude towards it had affected the survival of the examples we have dug up in Egyptian garbage dumps, in Hans Dieter Betz's The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation.

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I find that Augustus as Pontifex Maximus ordered (Suetonius, Augustus 31) that all books of magic should be burned, and some 2,000 were.

"31. After he finally had assumed the office of pontifex maximus on the death of Lepidus (for he could not make up his mind to deprive him of the honour while he lived) he collected whatever prophetic writings of Greek or Latin origin were in circulation anonymously or under the names of authors of little repute, and burned more than two thousand of them, retaining only the Sibylline books and making a choice even among those; and he deposited them in two gilded cases under the pedestal of the Palatine Apollo."

There were repeated expulsions of magicians and astrologers from Italy during the 1st century BC and AD.

avi · 08-10-2009, 05:02 AM

In response to my assertion, undocumented, that Christians destroyed the only remaining copies of Aristarchus' monumental discovery of heliocentrism, (originally published 1700 years before Copernicus' encounter with those Greek immigrants--fleeing Turkish persecution in Constantinople, to Italy--who had brought with them copies of Aristarchus' research efforts,) Doug asked for sources to support my notion that a pagan challenge to the veracity of the biblical description of the solar system would have met with censorship, including burning of the source material, by the Christians of Italy in the sixteenth century.

http://www.gulker.com/columns-and-essays/on-censorship/

http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/c...sbn=0521782430

http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journ....grendler.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish...ion#Censorship

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia link

Such lists of prohibited books were common in Europe a decade before the Inquisition published its first. The first Index published in Spain in 1551 was, in reality, a reprinting of the Index published by the University of Louvain in 1550, with an appendix dedicated to Spanish texts. Subsequent Indexes were published in 1559, 1583, 1612, 1632, and 1640. The Indexes included an enormous number of books of all types, though special attention was dedicated to religious works, and, particularly, vernacular translations of the bible.

Roger Pearse · 08-10-2009, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

but we sure know that the Christians destroyed the Greek Aristarchus' writings on heliocentrism

How do we know? Who says they did, and what were their sources?

My thoughts entirely.

One thing that no-one was in any hurry to do was destroy technical knowledge. That's why it got translated from Greek into Syriac (twice, in the case of Aristotle); from Syriac into Arabic; and from Arabic into Latin. People want know-how, as you might expect.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 08-10-2009, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

In response to my assertion, undocumented, that Christians destroyed the only remaining copies of Aristarchus' monumental discovery of heliocentrism ... Doug asked for sources to support my notion that a pagan challenge to the veracity of the biblical description of the solar system would have met with censorship <snip change of subject>

No he didn't. He asked for documentation that "Christians destroyed Aristarchus."

Please produce your evidence.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 08-10-2009, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Hannam

On the Acts of John, see p 193 of vol. 2, NT Apopcrypha, ed. W. Schneemelcher (Lutterworth Press, London: 1965). IIRC, there's a lot more stuff on what survived and measured taken in there as well.

Sadly for me I have a later edition (1992), but I find on p.156 under "Contents of the tradition":

Quote:

At its fifth session the Nicene council of 787 pronounced on the Acts of John: "No-one is to copy (this book): not only so, but we consider that it deserves to be consigned to the fire." 49

49. Conc. Nic. II, actio V (Mansi vol. 13, col. 176 A)

In the West Leo the Great had given a similar verdict to the entire compass of the apocryphal literature used by the Priscillianists: "The apocryphal writings, however, which under the names of the apostles contain a hotbed of manifold perversity, should not only be forbidden but altogether removed and burnt with fire." 50

50. Leo the Great, Letter to Turribius of Astorga on 21 July 447, c. 15; PL 54, col. 688A.

These judgments sufficiently explain why the Acts of John have survived only in fragmentary form.

Schneemelcher makes the point that the Acts of John were quoted in support of iconoclasm at Nicaea II.

Interesting quotations; not sure I agree with the last sentence. Do they amount to an explanation, unless they were put into effect more enthusiastically than usual?

I might look further into the original texts.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Doug Shaver · 08-10-2009, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Doug asked for sources to support my notion that a pagan challenge to the veracity of the biblical description of the solar system would have met with censorship, including burning of the source material, by the Christians of Italy in the sixteenth century.

That is not an accurate summary of our exchange.

Here is what you said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

but we sure know that the Christians destroyed the Greek Aristarchus' writings on heliocentrism

Here is what I responded with:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

How do we know? Who says they did, and what were their sources?

You said nothing about censorship, and neither did I. You said Christians destroyed certain writings, and you said we know they did. The four sources you linked to allege censorship, not destruction.

Roger Pearse · 08-11-2009, 02:44 AM

Leo the Great, Letter 15 (to Turribius, against the Priscillianists) is online in English here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leo I

And on this subject your remarks under the fifteenth head make a complaint, and express a well-deserved abhorrence of their devilish presumption, for we too have ascertained this from the accounts of trustworthy witnesses, and have found many of their copies most corrupt, though they are entitled canonical. For how could they deceive the simple-minded unless they sweetened their poisoned cups with a little honey, lest what was meant to be deadly should be detected by its over-nastiness?

Therefore care must be taken, and the priestly diligence exercised to the uttermost, to prevent falsified copies that are out of harmony with the pure Truth being used in reading. And the apocryphal scriptures, which, under the names of Apostles, form a nursery-ground for many falsehoods, are not only to be proscribed, but also taken away altogether and burnt to ashes in the fire. For although there are certain things in them which seem to have a show of piety, yet they are never free from poison, and through the allurements of their stories they have the secret effect of first beguiling men with miraculous narratives, and then catching them in the noose of some error.

Wherefore if any bishop has either not forbidden the possession of apocryphal writings in men's houses, or under the name of being canonical has suffered those copies to be read in church which are vitiated with the spurious alterations of Priscillian, let him know that he is to be accounted heretic, since he who does not reclaim others from error shows that he himself has gone astray.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 08-11-2009, 06:29 AM

Mansi, vol. 13 is here.

As far as I can make out, the Fifth Session of the synod was spent listening to extracts from the Fathers on the question of icons. On p.90 (col. 167D) there seems to be the start of the discussion of this text. The Acts of John are being quoted, although not named -- the text refers to bogus itineraries of the apostles --, and various members of the synod point out the obviously heretical nature of the text.

Our bit is right at the bottom of p.93/top of p.94 of the PDF. I find the Greek almost unreadable; the Latin translation reads:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Constantinople II

Joannes reverendissimus monachus et vicarius orientalium pontificum dixit: Si placet sancta ac universali huic synodo, fiat sententia, ne ulterius scribant aliqui sordidum istum librum.

Sancta Synodus dixit: Nemo scribat: non solum hoc, sed igni eum dignum judicamus fore tradendum.

This does not seem to me to be a general decree; so much as a rejection of the book as evidence for the purposes of the council.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.