Spero Forum - Baptist, Protestant, and Catholic Discussion
Username: Password: Save Password Forgot your Password?
Spero Forum - Baptist, Protestant, and Catholic Discussion

Was the Catholic Church the real church?

Posted on 02/26/2011 at 05:08:25  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  1
In this discussion, it was recently stated to me that the Catholic Church is the preserver of Christianity and has been preserving Biblical manuscripts for two millennia. However, I have found few are aware just how extensive the number of denominations declared more...
Edited by Jzyehoshua on 02/26/2011 06:36:07
from the community...
Page: of 5
Previous Page | Next Page
Posted on 02/27/2011 at 01:55:50  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:
Originally posted by mikejuli
please provide the sources that mr benedict used... so we know that this is not just another example of a baptist making up numbers.. not to mention it could all have been avoided if the papal legate hadn't been murdered.. so much to trying to deal peacfully... anyway there were casualties on both sides... and very doubtful that it ever came near a mil total...


Certainly. In my original post, I named where in the document the Albigenses were mentioned by Benedict, and the sources used are shown at the bottom of page 29, namely Perrin's History of Albigenses, Book III, ch. 2. Because like Benedict's book, it's over a century and a half old, and possibly closer to 2 centuries, it may be difficult to track down, as I'm not seeing it mentioned online.

Still, I think it crucial to note this research was done on the Albigenses a long time ago, and the Catholic Church is just now trying to rewrite history all this time later to say that many didn't really die. There appears to have been strong consensus otherwise up until the past few decades when Catholic apologists would like to rewrite the facts.

quote:

you mean the crusaded against islam? who already claimed 2 thirds of former christian territory by the sword? was not knocking on constantinoples door? o.k.... still not sure about the "millions" number but again there were casualties on both sides and we did stop islam from taking over europe... heck you may as well blame america for joining ww2 to fight against the nazis... millions were killed, very unchristian.... we probably should have just let them take over the world too.

Catholics also happened to kill whoever they ran across. Jews, 'heretics', that sort of thing. They made a point afterwards to go hunt down those they considered heretics. A number of the Crusades had nothing to do with Muslims at all, e.g. the Albigensian Crusade, Stedinger Crusade, Aragonese Crusade, Hussite Crusade, Swedish Crusades, Wendish Crusades, and Crusades of the Teutonic Order. Then there was the selling of 'indulgences', basically a free pass for Crusaders with money to contribute to the church, to go out and rape and murder whoever they felt like along the way. In some cases it was even fellow Roman Catholics.

quote:

actually the number is probably closer to 5000 over the three hundred years.. but one must first understand the inguisitions to grasp what it was all about. the fact that you use the term "inquisistion" implies that you hold more to the myth than the facts.

And I suppose you believe anything contrary to the Catholic apologists trying to rewrite history is myth, right? That website I cited, the Jewish Virtual Library, is a division of the American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise established in 1993 - they seem pretty legit, in other words. To call a myth the studies done by the major online Jewish encyclopedia in the world, and one of the prominent organizations for American-Israeli ties, I think should take more than the words of a recent Catholic apologist. What are the sources for saying it was closer to 5,000 as opposed to the 30,000+ Israel considers to have died there?

quote:

so? if i find some non catholics that did something wrong shall i then just blanket over all the non catholics with that brush? i mean swaggart was a non catholic and he was masturbating in on hookers... so it must be that all non catholics do that too... gross. not very "christian" if you ask me...

look there is no doubt that some people who claim to be catholic have done bad things... but that isn't a thing particular to catholics... christians or people of any belief.


It was nuns and clergy of the Catholic Church found at fault in the investigation. When over 800,000 people die, that's not something you can write off as an isolated incident, like you're trying to do. Not only were that many people killed, but many were killed seeking haven in churches, and there was some level of participation by Catholic clergy in a primarily Catholic country, as reported on by the BBC in the link I provided earlier. You don't find that just a little incriminating?

Countless more Catholic clergy have committed abuses against children in the past few decades. That in itself should prove evidentiary in recent years of just how unstable the leadership for such an institution is, and how flawed the doctrines on celibacy, which have no Biblical basis.
Edited by Jzyehoshua on 02/27/2011 02:23:09
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/27/2011 at 02:17:45  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:


No, I was not lied to. I did my homework.

You have not provided the source material for that "time line" that you think is authentic. And the History Channel can be very entertaining and occasionally educational, but it also caters to the masses - whatever sells.

The inquisitions, and there were many, were the introduction of a fair legal system where those accused could have a trial with rules of evidence, witnesses and legal defense - did they mention that in any of the popular documentaries you watched? If this was not mentioned, then it was a propaganda piece aimed at selling advertising.

The Church did have control over those tribunals held under its own authority; however, inquisitions were also used under the secular authorities as well.

Spain under successive rules by father and son, resisted the authority of the papacy during the Spanish Inquisition and even went so far as to consider invading Rome. Spain considered Rome to be far too lenient on matters of faith. Did that get mentioned?

Most of what you learned was propaganda. Modern scholars, even non-Catholics, are well aware of the myths that some seem to mistake for facts.

Here is a book that you might want to check out.

The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision by Henry Kamen.

One of the greatest myths of the period are the numbers. Those numbers might work if those events occurred with today's population, but in an era that was a few centuries earlier, after a devastating death toll from the great plagues, the numbers mentioned could not have occurred.

I have read estimates as low as 3 to 5 thousand (not million) died at the stake. In total. Far from the millions invented. Even the higher estimates do not even come close to those invented in the Black Legend.



The inquisitions a 'fair legal system'? They induced confession by torture! You're really trying to defend that statement?

-Torture and Punishment During the Catholic Inquisition
-How the Spanish Inquisition Worked

Famous victims of the Inquisition's torture for eliciting confessions included Galileo and possibly Joan of Arc (who was threatened with it though whether it was imposed is uncertain).
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/27/2011 at 07:03:01  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:

Certainly. In my original post, I named where in the document the Albigenses were mentioned by Benedict, and the sources used are shown at the bottom of page 29, namely Perrin's History of Albigenses, Book III, ch. 2. Because like Benedict's book, it's over a century and a half old, and possibly closer to 2 centuries, it may be difficult to track down, as I'm not seeing it mentioned online.


the problem as i see it is that on the crimeline they note this claim but question whether there were even a million people in southern france at the time let alone albigensians. it is a sad thing but a lot of anti clerics and protestants are very fond of throwing out huge numbers when there is absolutely no way to verify... i suggest too keeping in mind that the albigensian crusade was not just a matter of religious intolerance... it had huge civil implications. i know many churches support out troops today against iraq... so shall we say that this is just a modern crusade because the churches supported it? that is the mentality that your aproaching history with... it's a nitpicking that avoids looking honestly at the situation.

quote:
Still, I think it crucial to note this research was done on the Albigenses a long time ago, and the Catholic Church is just now trying to rewrite history all this time later to say that many didn't really die. There appears to have been strong consensus otherwise up until the past few decades when Catholic apologists would like to rewrite the facts.


that is because modern scholars are getting past the propaganda that was prevalent in protestant europe and from free wheelin freethinkers in the 1900's.. there is no re writing as much as you would like that to be.. but rather a correction... and the funny thing is that a lot of the correction is not coming from catholic apologists but from non catholic scholars...

The truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it.
Flannery O'Connor

www.minmaxsunt.wordpress.com
Go to Top of Page
    • Adminreputation
    • 10529 Posts
    Forum Admin  
    Contact:  Click to see Astralis's MSN Messenger address  PM
    Member since 07/25/2001
    Location: USA
    View Astralis's full profile or recent posts
What I'm reading/watching/listening to now.
Posted on 02/27/2011 at 09:34:51  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
Mike is right. You don't need the Catholic Church to tell you the truth about the Albigensians. Modern scholars make the same claims as the Catholic Church today. The only people who differ with scholars and the Catholic Church on these matters are Protestants whose facts and numbers are always fuzzy and unverifiable.
"Look on the bright side, if this is the best they've got around here, in six months we'll be running this planet." (Planet of the Apes)
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/27/2011 at 11:23:01  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:

Catholics also happened to kill whoever they ran across. Jews, 'heretics', that sort of thing. They made a point afterwards to go hunt down those they considered heretics.


no they didn't. that's just idiocy to make such a claim.


quote:
A number of the Crusades had nothing to do with Muslims at all, e.g. the Albigensian Crusade, Stedinger Crusade, Aragonese Crusade, Hussite Crusade, Swedish Crusades, Wendish Crusades, and Crusades of the Teutonic Order.


true but so what? if there was need for a crusade then it was needed. look if a sect of religious people stood against america and did violence to it... would it be right or wrong to respond and put a stop to it so more people don't get hurt? keep in mind that we are talking about the middle ages too... and among the many wars and conflicts these few are the only ones that were sanctioned by the church... although i'm not sure about the history on some of these. the wendish for instance was part of the second crusade.. the swedish had to do with conflicts between sweden and finland... in the end your hiding behind a "myth" of the crusades and ignoring the real history... and does that history fit or make sense with the times. i believe it does... i believe the reasons for calling them were just and right and if we had it to do over again we probably would have done the same..

quote:
Then there was the selling of 'indulgences', basically a free pass for Crusaders with money to contribute to the church, to go out and rape and murder whoever they felt like along the way. In some cases it was even fellow Roman Catholics.


no again your too caught up in the propaganda dude. the selling of indulgences was an abuse... that was local and corrected,, and had nothing to do with the indulgences given for the crusaders... and they certainly were no meant as a free pass to do whatever... if that is the case you may as well say that osas is a free pass for it's adherents to sin any which way they want to.....

quote:


And I suppose you believe anything contrary to the Catholic apologists trying to rewrite history is myth, right?




well it has nothing to do with catholic apologists.. henry kamen is a jew, tektonics is run by baptists... i could produce some catholic names like edward peters but sadly there good scholarship is always suspect if your a catholic.. whether its accurate or not doesn't matter. and just so you know these conclusions i came to as a born again.. .not even considering returning to the catholic church yet. i learned a long time ago that there are too many conspiracy theories, too much propaganda and urban myths in the evangelical world and too many just take it for gospel without doing research and then they pass it on to others... evangelicalism is rampant with that crap. i turned my attention to trying to verify or support everything... and still do. too often it was too easy to prove wrong.

quote:
That website I cited, the Jewish Virtual Library, is a division of the American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise established in 1993 - they seem pretty legit, in other words. To call a myth the studies done by the major online Jewish encyclopedia in the world, and one of the prominent organizations for American-Israeli ties, I think should take more than the words of a recent Catholic apologist. What are the sources for saying it was closer to 5,000 as opposed to the 30,000+ Israel considers to have died there?


and again it wasn't a catholic apologist. the list there isn't a list of jews only.. and it does say it's an estimated number... apart from that there are great records of the inquisition which is something we can use as data... not "estimates"... and this is where the 5000 number comes from

the inquisition in spain, wasn't an inquisition agaisnt jews.. but conversos.. which were jews hiding in the church and muslims.. the church got involved to prevent the civil authorities from going nuts... it would have been a much worse situation if they hadn't.. they couldn't try jews... only catholics.. .so if you were a jew you were good... if on the other hand you were a jew hiding in the church then they needed to deal with that. the whole thing happened for a reason... and if you look into that you may get a better picture of the real situation.



quote:

It was nuns and clergy of the Catholic Church found at fault in the investigation. When over 800,000 people die, that's not something you can write off as an isolated incident, like you're trying to do. Not only were that many people killed, but many were killed seeking haven in churches, and there was some level of participation by Catholic clergy in a primarily Catholic country, as reported on by the BBC in the link I provided earlier. You don't find that just a little incriminating?


i'm not writing it off as an isolated incident.. what i'm saying is that if those people chose to do something then it is on their head and not on the whole church... again i'll remind you about swaggart masturbating.... shall i just blanket all evangelicals as closet masturbaters? shall i paint the whole group because of the actions of a few? that tends to be the argument that you and others continue to imply but you don't like that argument when it turns against you. the witch trials killed millions of women and were primarily protestant countries.. as the inquisition found the evidence too shabby and quickly avoided the frenzy... so apart from another "exaggerated" number, shall we just leave this crime as evidence against all non catholics? your call buddy...

quote:
Countless more Catholic clergy have committed abuses against children in the past few decades. That in itself should prove evidentiary in recent years of just how unstable the leadership for such an institution is, and how flawed the doctrines on celibacy, which have no Biblical basis.



yes and that problem is even greater in the non denominational world so that tells a lot too. the problem is that it doesn't prove anything other than that those men sinned. you will find sinners in every little sect you go to.. and if your going to play fair then you would have to make the same conclusions for them as you so quickly make for the catholics... but what ends up happening is you hide behind faulty apologists and excuses... your not really looking at facts and your not really dealing with them appropriately.. what you are doing is creating a lot of implications and treating them as if it were truth and it's not. it is par for the course in the evangelical world as i found out when doing my own research on many topics. it didn't matter if you showed them proof they still just kept to their theories and bias. i couldn't do that.
The truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it.
Flannery O'Connor

www.minmaxsunt.wordpress.com
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/27/2011 at 17:26:20  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:
Originally posted by Jzyehoshua

quote:


No, I was not lied to. I did my homework.

You have not provided the source material for that "time line" that you think is authentic. And the History Channel can be very entertaining and occasionally educational, but it also caters to the masses - whatever sells.

The inquisitions, and there were many, were the introduction of a fair legal system where those accused could have a trial with rules of evidence, witnesses and legal defense - did they mention that in any of the popular documentaries you watched? If this was not mentioned, then it was a propaganda piece aimed at selling advertising.

The Church did have control over those tribunals held under its own authority; however, inquisitions were also used under the secular authorities as well.

Spain under successive rules by father and son, resisted the authority of the papacy during the Spanish Inquisition and even went so far as to consider invading Rome. Spain considered Rome to be far too lenient on matters of faith. Did that get mentioned?

Most of what you learned was propaganda. Modern scholars, even non-Catholics, are well aware of the myths that some seem to mistake for facts.

Here is a book that you might want to check out.

The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision by Henry Kamen.

One of the greatest myths of the period are the numbers. Those numbers might work if those events occurred with today's population, but in an era that was a few centuries earlier, after a devastating death toll from the great plagues, the numbers mentioned could not have occurred.

I have read estimates as low as 3 to 5 thousand (not million) died at the stake. In total. Far from the millions invented. Even the higher estimates do not even come close to those invented in the Black Legend.



The inquisitions a 'fair legal system'? They induced confession by torture! You're really trying to defend that statement?

-Torture and Punishment During the Catholic Inquisition
-How the Spanish Inquisition Worked

Famous victims of the Inquisition's torture for eliciting confessions included Galileo and possibly Joan of Arc (who was threatened with it though whether it was imposed is uncertain).



Try expanding your knowledge base. Prior to and outside of the inquisitions it was worse. No rules of evidence, no legal defense. If someone thought you were guilty, you were in trouble.

Look at the Salem Witch Trials - too bad they didn't use the proper methods of an inquisition, had proper methods been used, there would not have been any executions in those cases.

And even during the periods of inquisitions in Europe, it was very clear that the best inquisition to stand before was a Church run inquisition. Secular versions tended to be far more blood thirsty. It was the times.
Pax et Bonum,

Faith_at_Large


"If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or through the teaching of the law, without divine grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema."
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/27/2011 at 17:32:41  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
This doesn't mean that torture wasn't used. Of course it was. Even in places where the Catholic Church held absolutely no authority whatsoever. Even where Catholics would be tortured and killed for professing their faith in Christ.

Do not apply modern standards to the Reformation and pre-Reformation eras. You owe your modern sensibilities to the improvements that came out of the Catholic Church, but they took time to evolve into what we have today.
Pax et Bonum,

Faith_at_Large


"If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or through the teaching of the law, without divine grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema."
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/28/2011 at 06:25:33  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:
Originally posted by mikejuli
the problem as i see it is that on the crimeline they note this claim but question whether there were even a million people in southern france at the time let alone albigensians. it is a sad thing but a lot of anti clerics and protestants are very fond of throwing out huge numbers when there is absolutely no way to verify... i suggest too keeping in mind that the albigensian crusade was not just a matter of religious intolerance... it had huge civil implications. i know many churches support out troops today against iraq... so shall we say that this is just a modern crusade because the churches supported it? that is the mentality that your aproaching history with... it's a nitpicking that avoids looking honestly at the situation.


What is this CrimeLine you're talking about? Do you have any source for this statement that the number of people in France at the time wouldn't have been sufficient for such a figure? It is difficult to find estimates for France's historical population - here's one for example - but it still looks like over 10-20 million people in France in the 12th-14th century, more than enough for the amount required. On what source do you base your objection?

quote:

that is because modern scholars are getting past the propaganda that was prevalent in protestant europe and from free wheelin freethinkers in the 1900's.. there is no re writing as much as you would like that to be.. but rather a correction... and the funny thing is that a lot of the correction is not coming from catholic apologists but from non catholic scholars...


So what are the sources for these scholars then? I've provided a number of sources, what are yours? So far I have yet to hear of a single source contrary to mine given in this conversation.
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/28/2011 at 06:49:00  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
http://www.tektonics.org/af/crimeline.htm

here is the link to the crimeline.. i hope your not as shocked as i was by how many anti catholic accusations made by so called believers are really just rehashed arguments from atheists...

anyway the albigensians were in south france (langeudoc).. which is a very small portion of the entire country.. so showing me a population estimate for all of france really tells me nothing. your page only shows 12 to 16 mil at the time of the crusade, divide that up by 22 provinces and then keep in mind that not everyone in langeudoc was an albigensian...


i already mentioned henry kamen... and tektonics...

i will add edward peters, bedes site http://www.bede.org.uk/university.htm

williston walkers history of the christian church
phillip sampson's 6 modern myths about christianity and western civilization
you could also go through the tektonics site as he deals a lot with the jesus myth, which sadly is mimicked by anticatholics.

on the more wild side... ie "catholic apologists" try hillaire belloc.. europe and the faith, how the reformation happened, the great heresies... though i will admit that belloc is a hardhead, his history is pretty good.

an essay on bede's site that may interest you.
http://www.bede.org.uk/inquisition.htm

The truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it.
Flannery O'Connor

www.minmaxsunt.wordpress.com
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/28/2011 at 06:49:26  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:
Originally posted by Astralis

Mike is right. You don't need the Catholic Church to tell you the truth about the Albigensians. Modern scholars make the same claims as the Catholic Church today. The only people who differ with scholars and the Catholic Church on these matters are Protestants whose facts and numbers are always fuzzy and unverifiable.



Time Magazine in 1961 stated, "From then on, the crusade became a war without mercy, in which almost any southern Frenchman was assumed to be a heretic. Historians estimate the total number of casualties at 1,000,000."

-Religion: Massacre of the Pure

Matthew White (whose research has been frequently cited) also cites the following books as giving a death toll of 1 million for the Albigensian Crusades, several of which are quite recent:

* John M. Robertson, A Short History of Christianity, London: Watts, 1902, p.254 ("It has been reckoned that a million of all ages and both sexes were slain.")
* Christopher Brookmyre, Not the End of the World (New York: Grove Press, 1998) p.39
* Max Dimont, Jews, God, and History, (New York: Penguin, 1994) p.225: 1,000,000 Frenchmen suspected of being Albigensians slain
* Dizerega Gus, Pagans & Christians: The Personal Spiritual Experience (St. Paul, MN: Llewellyn, 2001) p.195
* Helen Ellerbe, The Dark Side of Christian History (Orlando, FL: Morningstar & Lark, 1995) p.74
* Michael Newton, Holy Homicide (Port Townsend, WA: Loompanics Unlimited, 1998) p.117

It seems to be recognized 1 million is not only the traditionally recognized death toll for the Albigensian Crusades, but is still being recognized by major sources even today. Therefore, I would question why you and Mike Juli think the number is far lower. What are your alternative sources? Because so far, the great weight of scholarship appears to be pointing towards a consistent number of 1 million, both from 19th and 20th century scholars.
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/28/2011 at 07:10:39  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:
Originally posted by mikejuli

http://www.tektonics.org/af/crimeline.htm

here is the link to the crimeline.. i hope your not as shocked as i was by how many anti catholic accusations made by so called believers are really just rehashed arguments from atheists...

anyway the albigensians were in south france (langeudoc).. which is a very small portion of the entire country.. so showing me a population estimate for all of france really tells me nothing. your page only shows 12 to 16 mil at the time of the crusade, divide that up by 22 provinces and then keep in mind that not everyone in langeudoc was an albigensian...


i already mentioned henry kamen... and tektonics...

i will add edward peters, bedes site http://www.bede.org.uk/university.htm

williston walkers history of the christian church
phillip sampson's 6 modern myths about christianity and western civilization
you could also go through the tektonics site as he deals a lot with the jesus myth, which sadly is mimicked by anticatholics.

on the more wild side... ie "catholic apologists" try hillaire belloc.. europe and the faith, how the reformation happened, the great heresies... though i will admit that belloc is a hardhead, his history is pretty good.

an essay on bede's site that may interest you.
http://www.bede.org.uk/inquisition.htm



Oh, okay, thanks. You'd mentioned the link before, and I'd forgotten about it. Still, isn't Tektonics, like NewAdvent.org, a purely Catholic apologetics website?

I notice for their note on C-1208-38 they do not give any sources for their statement, "It is doubtful that there were even 1 million people, let alone Cathars, in the south of France at this time. Cheetham [130] mentions the activity but does not note any exorbiant level of casualties."

They fail to mention an alternative population estimate, and again, there appear to be plenty of scholarly works citing a 1 million death toll, as well as recognition of this number by Time Magazine in 1961. Are there any credible sources stating alternative numbers, or even claiming there weren't 1 million people living in southern France at the time? I can't find such a claim mentioned elsewhere.

Also, I just noticed your other sources, includes the Bede website. I would point out just one source, Parker, was cited for the 5,000 deaths during the Inquisition, and that the author of Bede's website is a Catholic apologist. The website is about 'reasonable apologetics' and I found James Hannam has written articles online like "How Catholic Must Fight Back".

Some of your other sources may well be reputable, as I haven't yet looked into them, and it is possible Bede could be correct on the Inquisition number, but I do think it necessary to point out he's a Catholic apologist who will likely cite sources consistent with his worldviews. I would expect the work cited, Parker, to quite possibly be a Catholic apologetics book. In short, I still very much question whether there is any consensus among the broader scientific community to a number of 5,000 deaths for the Inquisition, or opposition to a number of 1 million deaths for the Albigensian Crusades, apart from a few Catholic apologists and apologetics websites.
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/28/2011 at 08:45:01  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:


Oh, okay, thanks. You'd mentioned the link before, and I'd forgotten about it. Still, isn't Tektonics, like NewAdvent.org, a purely Catholic apologetics website?


well first what does it matter? catholic have a right to defend their beliefs and give their own assessment of what happened... and either way it wouldn't have any bearing on what is true or not.. and that is the big issue. i found a long time ago before i ever returned to the catholic church that places like new advent are quite reliable and fair in their treatement of other beliefs. however unless J.P. Holding has converted, he should be a Sackville Baggins,, i mean Southern Baptist. here is the site info. http://www.tektonics.org/JP-Holding.html

quote:
I notice for their note on C-1208-38 they do not give any sources for their statement, "It is doubtful that there were even 1 million people, let alone Cathars, in the south of France at this time. Cheetham [130] mentions the activity but does not note any exorbiant level of casualties."


that is a question you should ask holding.. i've seen these kinds of numbers before, like 9 million witches burned.. etc... it appears to be an easy slide in for exaggeration... it also fails to mention the casualties incurred on the catholic side.. as this was a war and not some blatant act of persecution.

quote:
They fail to mention an alternative population estimate, and again, there appear to be plenty of scholarly works citing a 1 million death toll, as well as recognition of this number by Time Magazine in 1961. Are there any credible sources stating alternative numbers, or even claiming there weren't 1 million people living in southern France at the time? I can't find such a claim mentioned elsewhere.


the only claim i've seen to actual numbers was down in the 15,000 area which is from an actual source..

this page offers several opinions.. http://users.rcn.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#European

not all like up with the 1 mil mark and i suspect that the ones that do are probably basing their claims off of the earliest book written and not on any actual evidence.



quote:
Also, I just noticed your other sources, includes the Bede website. I would point out just one source, Parker, was cited for the 5,000 deaths during the Inquisition, and that the author of Bede's website is a Catholic apologist. The website is about 'reasonable apologetics' and I found James Hannam has written articles online like "How Catholic Must Fight Back".


i suggest that you don't play that game.. otherwise i will have to point out that you are an anti catholic and therefore will suspect you of being dishonest in your apologetics... bedes site is excellent, his forum is excellent, he doens't show favouritism and if your going to toss that out because he is a catholic then that is loss.

did you read the article? or did you just write it off? i have been a fan of bedes for many years, having met him on an atheist site... when i was still very much a fundamentalist.

quote:
Some of your other sources may well be reputable, as I haven't yet looked into them, and it is possible Bede could be correct on the Inquisition number, but I do think it necessary to point out he's a Catholic apologist who will likely cite sources consistent with his worldviews.


if that is your concern the i hope you are considering what non catholic apologists might be pushing to support their worldview. i too once felt the same way... but i don't think it is honest... or fair. i have read a lot in my day, and it hasn't been just catholic sources. but because i'm a catholic i often get accused of believing because i've only read books that the church wants me too or i only read this and that because it's catholic. not only is it a false claim but it's a very shallow argument.


quote:
I would expect the work cited, Parker, to quite possibly be a Catholic apologetics book. In short, I still very much question whether there is any consensus among the broader scientific community to a number of 5,000 deaths for the Inquisition, or opposition to a number of 1 million deaths for the Albigensian Crusades, apart from a few Catholic apologists and apologetics websites.



i'm sure that is your hope.. my thought is that he is just a historian who is trying to be fair with the actual facts. if bede is citing him he most likely is not an apologist but has to have some repute. i would suspect that if he has written any books they will most likely surround the middle ages in some area.
The truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it.
Flannery O'Connor

www.minmaxsunt.wordpress.com
Go to Top of Page
    • 35reputation
    • 2716 Posts
    Fourth Member  
    Contact:  PM
    Member since 01/26/2008
    Location: USA
    View michael's full profile or recent posts
Posted on 02/28/2011 at 08:52:40  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:
Originally posted by baby3

I woud like Nicene to try to explain this in his own way. Also this was what i herd in hostory books but they took them out of schools and the old books are in used book stores but allot were burned when found.Also, there is a descrepency in the time table i told YOU GUYS about a way back to investagete this. His time table is the right one i have seen it before this.Also a priest that is Catholic did come on tv and explained the massacares of people back then that they were bad rulers.Sometines certain people in power abuse thre power to hurt others. Faith th Church was in full control during the inquistion and it had been proven on the History channel. Is it opssible you have been liedto? Why not?What if you really were lied to??B3

The History Channel is not proof. They can be wrong at times. The History Channel has no real authority to interpret books of the Bible. The History Channel leans toward Protestantism.
Through bigotry prejudices false assumptions & false premises Protestants are protesting a catholic church made up by Protestantism that does not actually exist.
Go to Top of Page
    • Adminreputation
    • 10529 Posts
    Forum Admin  
    Contact:  Click to see Astralis's MSN Messenger address  PM
    Member since 07/25/2001
    Location: USA
    View Astralis's full profile or recent posts
What I'm reading/watching/listening to now.
Posted on 02/28/2011 at 09:09:21  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  0
quote:

Time Magazine in 1961 stated, "From then on, the crusade became a war without mercy, in which almost any southern Frenchman was assumed to be a heretic. Historians estimate the total number of casualties at 1,000,000."


Time also reported in the 70s that we were entering an Ice Age. Then in the 80s reported that we're entering an age of Global Warming.
"Look on the bright side, if this is the best they've got around here, in six months we'll be running this planet." (Planet of the Apes)
Go to Top of Page
Posted on 02/28/2011 at 09:26:18  |  Reply  |  Report Abuse |  1
quote:
Originally posted by mikejuli
quote:

Oh, okay, thanks. You'd mentioned the link before, and I'd forgotten about it. Still, isn't Tektonics, like NewAdvent.org, a purely Catholic apologetics website?

well first what does it matter? catholic have a right to defend their beliefs and give their own assessment of what happened... and either way it wouldn't have any bearing on what is true or not.. and that is the big issue. i found a long time ago before i ever returned to the catholic church that places like new advent are quite reliable and fair in their treatement of other beliefs. however unless J.P. Holding has converted, he should be a Sackville Baggins,, i mean Southern Baptist. here is the site info. http://www.tektonics.org/JP-Holding.html

They do have a right to defend their beliefs. I'm not saying otherwise. But this conversation drifted into discussion of whether 5,000 or 30,000 people died during the Inquisition, and whether 1 million people died from the Albigensian Crusades.

More importantly to me at least, it drifted into discussion of which was the mainstream, generally held figure with consensus; and I was hearing a lot of statements writing off the 1 million and 30,000 figures as just protestant propaganda.

What I was objecting to were statements like:

-"There were a lot killed, but no where near the numbers that the propagandists fabricated to make the Church look bad"
-"it is a sad thing but a lot of anti clerics and protestants are very fond of throwing out huge numbers when there is absolutely no way to verify..."
-"that is because modern scholars are getting past the propaganda that was prevalent in protestant europe and from free wheelin freethinkers in the 1900's.. there is no re writing as much as you would like that to be.. but rather a correction... and the funny thing is that a lot of the correction is not coming from catholic apologists but from non catholic scholars..."
-"Modern scholars make the same claims as the Catholic Church today. The only people who differ with scholars and the Catholic Church on these matters are Protestants whose facts and numbers are always fuzzy and unverifiable."

My concern was that the discussion here wasn't recognizing these numbers are the typically acceptable numbers, and seeking to portray them as just 'propaganda'. If it's recognized as an alternative view exclusive to Catholic apologists that's one thing, but seeking to portray it as the mainstream when it's not would be cause for concern.

I cited the Discovery Channel's pages showing torture was a part of the Inquisition, and now people are accusing the Discovery Channel of being protestant-biased (I'd never heard that one before). I cited Time Magazine to show the 1 million figure death toll has been cited prominently in the news, and cited the New York Times to show it had claimed Galileo had been tortured during the Inquisition. These can't all just be protestant propaganda and bias, can they?

quote:
quote:
I notice for their note on C-1208-38 they do not give any sources for their statement, "It is doubtful that there were even 1 million people, let alone Cathars, in the south of France at this time. Cheetham [130] mentions the activity but does not note any exorbiant level of casualties."

that is a question you should ask holding.. i've seen these kinds of numbers before, like 9 million witches burned.. etc... it appears to be an easy slide in for exaggeration... it also fails to mention the casualties incurred on the catholic side.. as this was a war and not some blatant act of persecution.

Still, for that many authors, scholars, and historians to consider 1 million the established number, there must be good reason, right? I'd be interested in knowing more about the methodology myself, but Time Magazine cited the statistic as having consensus, so I would think it shouldn't be discredited lightly. While it could be wrong, I'd say at this point from sourcing at least there appears to be enough weight of evidence for reasonable belief that's the correct estimate, and that the methodology must be solidly disproved to show otherwise.

quote:
quote:
They fail to mention an alternative population estimate, and again, there appear to be plenty of scholarly works citing a 1 million death toll, as well as recognition of this number by Time Magazine in 1961. Are there any credible sources stating alternative numbers, or even claiming there weren't 1 million people living in southern France at the time? I can't find such a claim mentioned elsewhere.

the only claim i've seen to actual numbers was down in the 15,000 area which is from an actual source..

this page offers several opinions.. http://users.rcn.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#European

not all like up with the 1 mil mark and i suspect that the ones that do are probably basing their claims off of the earliest book written and not on any actual evidence.

This last comment is a good point. They could just be going off previous research as established, rather than re-examining it each time. I don't know if that's the case one way or the other.

From what I can tell, they're using vatican archives released in recent years to determine exact counts by city, in some cases at least. Specific numbers were provided for Toulouse and St. Nazair, probably in relation to documents in the Vatican archive where those were provided. So a bare minimum should be establish-able.

What's interesting to me though is that the numbers could very well be LOWER since much of the numbering depends on Catholic documents which were likely edited over the centuries to cover up some of the worst abuses. The Catholic Church did all it could to burn the books and documents of Cathars and others it considered heretical, so very little of what we know is from their point of view.

quote:
quote:
Also, I just noticed your other sources, includes the Bede website. I would point out just one source, Parker, was cited for the 5,000 deaths during the Inquisition, and that the author of Bede's website is a Catholic apologist. The website is about 'reasonable apologetics' and I found James Hannam has written articles online like "How Catholic Must Fight Back".

i suggest that you don't play that game.. otherwise i will have to point out that you are an anti catholic and therefore will suspect you of being dishonest in your apologetics... bedes site is excellent, his forum is excellent, he doens't show favouritism and if your going to toss that out because he is a catholic then that is loss.

did you read the article? or did you just write it off? i have been a fan of bedes for many years, having met him on an atheist site... when i was still very much a fundamentalist.

I did read the article. I didn't just write it off. And as I said Bedes could be correct in his numbering. I just don't think it should be provided as proof, per my original point above, that his support for the number is evidence of this being a mainstream view. I don't mind reading the articles, but I have shown that Time Magazine and a large quantity of books support the 1 million figure, both for the 19th and 20th centuries. I don't object to his website per se, just its application as evidence of mainstream support for such claims.

For me, the topic was which was the mainstream, generally accepted view. Per my first paragraph above, what I was objecting to were the statements that the 1 million number was just protestant propaganda, and that the scholarly community now considers it incorrect. So I was trying to provide more recent research to show this is an accepted view for recent decades as well as the 19th century.

I'm not knocking Bede or saying he's incorrect, but the apologist factor means I question whether it's mainstream, as opposed to it being cited by Time Magazine. To me, it seemed like the equivalent of my using a protestant website citing the 1 million figure to say that's the mainstream number. That's why I was trying to cite major 3rd party news publications like Time Magazine rather than one side or the other.

quote:
quote:
Some of your other sources may well be reputable, as I haven't yet looked into them, and it is possible Bede could be correct on the Inquisition number, but I do think it necessary to point out he's a Catholic apologist who will likely cite sources consistent with his worldviews.

if that is your concern the i hope you are considering what non catholic apologists might be pushing to support their worldview. i too once felt the same way... but i don't think it is honest... or fair. i have read a lot in my day, and it hasn't been just catholic sources. but because i'm a catholic i often get accused of believing because i've only read books that the church wants me too or i only read this and that because it's catholic. not only is it a false claim but it's a very shallow argument.

Yeah, that's possible too. I still think the Time Magazine reference is strong evidence the 1 million figure death toll is the generally accepted number by the scientific community, which was all I was trying to show. Whether that could have come about due to protestants or anyone else pushing it in the 19th century is a possibility I suppose, but one that would have to be proven, as well as why the mainstream view is incorrect in its methodology.

quote:
quote:
I would expect the work cited, Parker, to quite possibly be a Catholic apologetics book. In short, I still very much question whether there is any consensus among the broader scientific community to a number of 5,000 deaths for the Inquisition, or opposition to a number of 1 million deaths for the Albigensian Crusades, apart from a few Catholic apologists and apologetics websites.

i'm sure that is your hope.. my thought is that he is just a historian who is trying to be fair with the actual facts. if bede is citing him he most likely is not an apologist but has to have some repute. i would suspect that if he has written any books they will most likely surround the middle ages in some area.

Mainly I am just skeptical because there seems to be so much attestation that the 1 million figure is a mainstream view, and recent authorship is behind a push to have this changed. Could they be correct? Yes, but without a strong argument for this with historical/manuscript evidence of some kind I just won't get convinced.
Edited by Jzyehoshua on 02/28/2011 09:46:35
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 5
Previous Page | Next Page

Newest Topics

by Jzyehoshua...

 

Recent Topics

0 replies
33 replies
 

Newest Updates

33 replies
0 replies
Jump To:
Spero Forum - Baptist, Protestant, and Catholic Discussion © 2002-2014 Spero Subscribe by Email RSS Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000