Do you know what the institution was called under Leo? Did it have a name? I know he really tried to smash Manachaeism, but I was pretty sure he left it up to individual bishops to police their own diocese. I didn’t know there was an organization that had universal overriding authority.
I was not trying to claim that it was named or organized in the fashion that it would be later (and hence its less severe effectiveness), but simply present in practice at the time.
From the Catholic Encylopedia:
And returning to church doctrine on education:
The burning or destruction fo books, libraries, and schools was was carried out by the church during this time. By the 600AD abolished the study of philosophy, math, geography, and medicine.
From an Astronomy Sylibus,
Astronomy was also forbidden to be studied at the same time.
Pope Gregory VII detroyed the Palatine Apollo library (granted, this was later around 1100)
I am doing more research on the details of how widely books, libraries, and schools were tampered with.
I agree, Cyrin. I also disagree with Kirkland’s statements. God has not placed me under the authority of the Catholic church. It’s not an authority in my life at all. God is my authority and His word. Too much trust is put in the Catholic church IMHO instead of in Christ.
Also I don’t consider myself to be religious. I’m a Christian and there’s a big difference.
The words are God’s whether He acually held a pen or not. He used the pens of men but they’re His words.
And I beg to differ with you about the Holy Spirit. Anyone who has accepted Christ has the Holy Spirit and can be guided by Him.
Henceforward, I no longer will use the terms “atheist”, “secular humanist”, or “freethinker” to describe myself; from now on I will use the words “absolutely right”. This also applies to my political opinions (“liberal” is right out), my taste in art or literature, and pretty much all other opinions I may express.
MEBuckner: Well, I say so-and-so.
Some Other Poster: I disagree with MEBuckner, who is absolutely right. My opinion is such-and-such, and I wish to go on record as being totally opposed to the absolutely right views of MEBuckner.
Another Poster: Yeah, I agree with Some Other Poster, the views of MEBuckner are clearly absolutely right! How can MEBuckner get away with saying stuff like that anyway?
A large mob of people with pitchforks and torches: Yes, MEBuckner is absolutely right! Stone him! Stone him!
I’ve got a couple of questions for those who seem to be arguing that a priest, pastor or other religious official should not have more authority than a lay person.
What do you do for a living?
How much of your life have you dedicated to formal study of the Bible and Christianity, including history and commentary?
In my church, a priest must study in seminary for a few years, then, as I understand it, serve the equivalent of an apprenticeship before being assigned to a congregation. The reason I grant a priest authority over me is because he or she has spent years of his life formally dedicated to learning about God, the Bible, Christianity and all that that encompasses. I’ve spent years of my life studying Japanese and computer programming. It would be no more appropriate for me to tell my priest that I know more about God than he does than it would for him to tell me how to design a database or translate a piece of haiku. Also, a priest’s full time job is to serve God which includes ministering to the needs of his congregation. While I do believe that everything I do should reflect my faith and serve God, what the world pays me to do is program computers. Perhaps you could argue that a piece of software that does not leave the user cursing the person who designed it is a good form of witness, but it’s not explicitly serving God.
Also, given my experience with the gentleman I referred to earlier, among other things, I do believe that people should have a higher, human moral authority to answer to, even though I do have problems with Papal Infallibility. People can shut out the voice of God. Hearing your temporal boss say, “That is wrong, and if you do it again, you will lose your job” is a lot harder to ignore. I’ll grant superior authority at writing code to someone who has a higher degree in Computer Science than I do and the experience to back it up; I’ll grant superior authority in spiritual matters to someone who has the years of formal study and preferably a bit of experience.
CJ
For the time being, I am going to withdraw, these… I am finding the sources used on these not completely credible. Though I have found numerous references to this, I want to find a source I am more comfortable with.
The fallacy here is that spiritual wisdom can not be studied or learned in books. One can study doctrine, but doctrine is not the same as knowledge. The Bible is not a textbook with reliable and unambiguous information. There is no “correct” way to interpret it. It doesn’t have an answer key. There is no such thing as a definitive authority.
Your mind is the single most valuble thing you own. It is ridiculous and self-destructive to turn your mind over to somebody else and assume that they know more than you do.
NO THEY DON"T!
Everybody is born with, and dies with, exactly the same knowledge of ultimate truth. It is all guesswork. All of it.
Take responsibility for your own mind.
I would like to present my Church’s view on this issue, although it will be generalized. I belong to the Coptic Orthodox Church which was founded in Alexandria by St. Mark. It is recognized by historians as being the oldest, still-existing-in-its-original-form church.
The idea is that Jesus came to earth and founded The Church. The Coptic Church does not consider itself the only church but a part of The Church. There are a group of denominations we have very strong similarities to and accept as part of The Church. (We have been on the outs with the Catholics and most other churches for a while).
The Church is composed of two parts: The Head (that is Jesus Christ) and the body (the people who are part of The Church). The body needs the head just as much as the head needs the body for survival. The Church, then, is an organism, founded by Christ and headed by Christ, which seeks to improve the world directly through its body, the people. Within any church, the priest is not higher or lower than any other member nor is a bishop or the pope higher or lower than any other member. All members are part of the body and are obligated by their comittment to Christ to live a Christian life. The Church is an apparatus for these individuals to improve themselves and do good (as defined by God) for themselves and the world.
The Church, then, is the ultimate tool for good in the world. cyrin, your OP is very interesting and I agree on some general premises. However, I believe that most of the problems you are thinking about did not come about because of the existence of religion. I believe the biggest problems that occured were a result of the mingling of politics and religion and of man’s corruption of the original message.
I didn’t hear where God took back the free will He granted all men and women. I don’t think He did. The writings are the words and ideas of the men who wrote them. They could not logically be otherwise.
Yes, distortion of Jesus’ teachings were/are the main reason religion has caused so many problems.
I’m not arguing that human beings all have the capacity to study spiritual and doctrinal matters. I’m arguing that not all human beings have chosen to devote a large portion of their time and resources to study such things and that those who have have a claim on more authority than those who haven’t.
Also, I’m not yielding responsibility for my own mind. I think you can find quite a few people around here who might laugh at the thought. I’m acknowledging that there are people who know more about the subject than I do and that I am subject to a higher authority. Of course I reserve the right to disagree with them. I argue with God on a regular basis. I’ve also actively disagreed with my priest on a few issues, and even walked out on one. On the other hand, in a spiritual crisis or if I feel I’ve done serious wrong, I will still turn to him first. I grant very few people authority over me, and I can be incredibly resistant to people who try to impose their authority on me without my consent, but I acknowledge there are a few who may do so.
Diogenes, et al, I repeat, how much real time have you devoted to the study of religion and spiritual matters?
CJ
Kirkland1244,
Where on earth do you get that Jesus founded the Catholic Church?
It was my undersatanding He founded the Church, it didn’t Have a denomination!
All christians are members of the Church, no matter their denomination!
On the inquisition, I don’t think your citation from the Catholic Encyclopedia establishes what you’re trying to assert. It shows that Leo encouraged the persecution and arrest of the Priscillianists, and I don’t dispute that (He did the same thing to the Manicheans of Rome), but what makes the Inquisition the Inquisition was that it was an independent, universal group, only responsible to the pope, that enforced canon law. As far as I know, the persecution of Priscillianists was carried out by secular authorities and local bishops.
The Catholic Church grew directly out of the original 12 Disciples. Traditionally, Simon who Christ named Peter was the first Pope. Basically, until Eastern Orthodox Church split off in 1054, there was only one form of Christianity, and the schisms which led to Protestantism didn’t come about until the 15th century. To this day, the first two definitions Dictionary.com lists for “catholic” are
This, by the way, is why I can pray and state in good conscience, “I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.” even though I’m an Episcopalian. That line is from the Nicene Creed, which was formulated in 325 by the Council of Nicea and which was intended to serve as a comprehensive statement of Christian beliefs.
Basically, for the first several hundred years after Christ’s death, there was only one church which later split into two, then later into many. Here’s a website with more information on the spit between the Catholic Church and Eastern orthodox.
CJ
ooh, thanks.
Its just that the church really doesn’t have one denomination to the exclusion of others.
IMHO
You are probably correct on what I quoted.
I should have provide a link to the whole article. I will fix that now.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm
This is the Catholic Encylopedia entry on the Inquisition.
It gets interesting right about here.
If read as a whole, it seems pretty clear to me that even the Catholic Church recognizes that the ideas and methods of the inquisistion start pretty early. The formal body (that quickly turned corrupt nearly beyond all measure) was established around 1230. While the scale and freqency of the attrocities in the early years do not match what would come later, the pattern of action and thought was in place far earlier, with the exception of the period from 1130-1230 as noted before.
And I would say that it could be fairly safely inferred that if the Catholic Encylopedia entry on the inquisition begins around 300 A.D., they must consider it part of the “informal inquisition” or at least very relevant.
And you know this because?? What? The Catholic church told you so? :rolleyes:
Did you just ues the words “To this day” in reference to Dictionary.com ? :smack:
Maybe, although the reference to “the imperial successors of Constantine” seem to make it clear that it’s referring to the Roman and Byzantine emperors, who, as noted, did make heresy illegal. Maybe I’m being overly picky in distinguishing the Inquisition from earlier heretic hunting. However, if we go back to the earlier question for a moment, how do you think the persecution of heretics lengthened the Dark Ages?
Um, Cyrin, in view of the fact that nobody had come to any kind of agreement as to what the Bible contained until well after the establishment of the body that later split into Catholic and Orthodox, and that there is clear Scriptural warrant for the doctrine of the church as the Mystical Body of Christ guided by the Holy Spirit, there is a lot more to be said for Kirkland’s perspective on the Church as the preserver and caretaker of true belief than a congregationalist perspective like the Baptists follow would normally allow for.
I’ve made some comments on what the guy after whom I assumed my board name had to say on the subject elsewhere within the past couple of months. I’ll be glad to dig them out and repost them if you wish – I don’t want to hijack your thread.