Vorkosigan

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sojourner553:
[QB]


Now Stalin and Pol Pot were atheists. [/b]

Communists, you mean. They converted from one authority system to another. In any case, both were raised believers in the supernatural....mwahaha.

Amos

As usual, I don't know much about history but from picture books I have seen the ambition of witches in action.

The "brewpot and ladel" image tells me that they gathered bible passages and brewed these into a plan for salvation from the scriptures.

The "flying broom" image tells me that they could soar on these through midheaven if fired up by the scriptures they burned while soaring.

The "burning at the stake" image is when they crashed at the foot of the cross in repentence for their sins and unworthiness of salvation. Many remained there and "oxidized" away instead of becoming "incorruptable" while on the cross. Such, it tells me, was their lot and destiny in life.

Bede

Ignoring the headbangers, but pleased to find Egoinos has joined us....

I know a little about the subjects of torture and witches in England and Scotland. However, I have not researched torure in Europe and try to avoid the subject as I find it too disturbing. Edward Peters has written a very well regarded history but I have not read it as I really need to be able to sleep at night. Let me be clear about what I do know: in much of Europe secular courts could use torture to get confessions and did so frequently. Most witches were tried in secular courts and torture was freely applied - many heretics were tried as traitors in secular courts too and again torture was widespread (probably more widespread in treason cases than any other). Church courts, including the inquisition, rarely used torture and when they did it was supposed to be whips or beating only (Sojounrer and I have seen this in Augustine). It is important not to confuse the two cases although I appreciate the "let's blames the church for everything" tendency is quite strong around here.

In England torture has never been legal in criminal cases except for treason. You will find a large exhibition in London called the London Dungeon full of waxworks of English torture instruments (with appropriate sound effects) but the fact that torture required the direct orders of the monarch should not be overlooked. This meant that torture was not used in English witch trials and it is estimated that hangings (they were not burnt) totally about 1,000. Apart from the Civil War period, when Matthew Hopkins (the infamous witchfinder general) was active, capital witch trials had largely ceased by 1600.

In Scotland only thumbscrews could be used in criminal cases but the North Berwick case was considered treason as the King was one of the alleged targets. James VI actually wrote a book on witchcraft which we have just read for class where he tries to argue against those who insist it doesn't exist. Scotland had a total of about 1,500 executions in a much smaller population than England - perhaps the use of torture contributed to the higher conviction rate.

Just to note that Kepler's mother was accused of witchcraft and not tortured so it was not universal.

The proto-Protestant idea seems to imply that most trials were under Catholic auspices whereas in fact Protestants were just as active. But perhaps there is a link between late 15th century Catholic concern about witchcraft with Hussites and Lollards which then carried over to Protestants concerned about Catholics. Is there any evidence of this?

Yours

Bede

<a href="http://www.bede.org.uk" target="_blank">Bede's Library - faith and reason</a>

lugotorix

I don't think that's accurate. Later analyses that I've seen point out that there was a power struggle between two prominent families in Salem, the Putnams and the Porters, which came to the fore in the witch trials. As for the victims, certainly the first accused witches (the slave Tituba and the two other women accused with her) were outside the mainstream. Some were, however, rich and prominent members of the society, like George Burroughs, the former minister of Salem.

The Salem Trials were not typical of the witch hysteria either. There was documented public opposition to at least some of the convictions (especially once the more prominent citizens were being accused). By the fall of 1692 the court rejected the use of "spectral evidence", with the result that 28 of the last 33 trials ended with acquitals. And finally, one of the judges involved, Samuel Sewall, publicly apologized for his actions in the trials.

I think the incidents in Salem do illustrate what more than likely led to the witch hunts, though -- basically mass hysteria fueled by 1) a strict and unforgiving interpretation of Christianity, 2) societal unrest, and 3) interpersonal politics.

Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.


lugotorix

Amos

Sojourner<strong> </strong>

While it is not my intent to defend the Malleus Maleficarum before I read it please allow me to offer some justification for the lines you cited.

The "blighting of crops" was the metaphor used to to describe the removal of artistic expression from society. The evidence of this is the flat world of protestants as opposed to the round world of Catholics and let the ever increasing richess of the Church here count as proof that such is desirable to this day.

Witches caused a premature rebirth of the child within that would eventually die because it could never mature into the fullness of God (the suicide of Macbeth speaks volumes on this if you keep in mind that he represented the Church of England's method to become "king [in the] hereafter").

The absence of transfiguration (no blood around the door) foretold the Church offials that the stigmata would never follow and that the child would die instead of re-appear now bearing the stigmata. This as based on "as the father send me so I am sending you" while showing the stigmata to his followers (the Catholic way). This leaves the evangelists without the stignmata like the religious conquerers from Matthew 28:19 that now becomes the protestant way).

This child must become 'the father of man' is shown when Joseph claimed the body of Jesus as his own to be buried in the cave he carved as if with his own hands. So the renewed Joseph is the father of son of man and therefore our partron saint of the holy family, ie: from sinner to saint.

The diseases caused by the witches are simply the result of old age while we remain in exile. We remain in exile because the murder of our inner child that was to become the father of man. This will prevent the renewal of our mind and therefore also the renewal of our body.

HaysooChreesto!

On a less angry sounding note, I will say this; it is not atypical for many Christians who discover the true history of their church/faith to either minimize or outrightly deny the witch hunts, inquisitions, and the myriad atrocities of the Crusades. In one crusade alone, some 200,000 children were sent to slay the Saracen hordes and practically none ever came back...
That's 200,000 kids in one gruesome event by itself. To say that all these Christian (and those were "true" Christians) actions were mere folly or simple shennanigans due to cultural stress or uncertainty is demeaning to the value of human life and seems rather callous.

Many find these minimalizations and denials offensive and insulting to the intellect.
On a personal note, it puzzles me that any woman who knows Christians history and reads the bible would want to be involved with Christianity.

Amos

Sorry but I do not understand this. Do you suspect that these children were given toy guns or were the adults the cowards who send their children to die?

Vesica

I do not think Bede or any of the early posters in this thread were trying to deny any culpability of Christianity in the Witch Hunts or the Inquisition. However, I am not about to slink off into the shadows because it happened. I do not hold all white men/those of European descent personally accountable for the centuries of persecution and violence thier ancestors visited on other peoples of the world. I do not hold all Asians responsible for the numerous 'cleansings' different countries conducted on each other. Nor do I look askew at all Germans, Communists, whatevers....

I would turn the charge of 'revisionist history' around on those who want to mis-represent these dark events of the past to be a condemnation of groups/races/whatevers in the present time.

In short: No I do not feel personally shamed and responsible that a huge political/cultural machine espousing the root doctrine I subscribe to ran around killing people hundreds of years ago. When I invent time travel and go back and undo all the atrocity man has ever visited on his fellow man, I'll send you a memo.

Butters

I agree, I ran across a Christian web site awhile back. It was hosted by a Gay, Black, Woman. All I could think was that if I was any one of those, I would want nothing to do with Christianity. (And the poor woman had to deal with attacks by both atheists AND Christians)

Vesica

On the Crusades.....

It should be mentioned that most of the Crusades were an embarrassment at the time they happened...including the 'Children's Crusade' and the 'The-Holy-Land-is-too-far-Let's-sack-Constantinople Crusade'. The scholars at the time recognized the true reason for the Crusades - sacking and pilaging - why convert when you can confiscate from the infidels??