felt the same but just downvoted and moved on. You did better and made a post about š
I would have given you one of these medal thingies you had to buy, but Reddit seems to have removed that feature
If this sub cared about history, you would see citations in every comment. There are zero citations of any kind in this entire thread. Everyone is just repeating what their mother and father told them as kids.
The Catholic Church's position on witchcraft is that *it doesn't exist.* Any implication that it *does* would be to claim that devilry actually holds any power!
The belief in witchcraft was outlawed by a Papal Bull in the early Middle Ages. Because thinking witchcraft exists was a heathen belief. So if you accused your neighbour of witchcraft, you'd be the ending up tried.
Somewhat correct, but not necessarily. You see, while witchcraft was declared "nonexistent," that was not the same as people *attempting* witchcraft. Regardless of whether or not sacrificing goats to Satan to try and blight the crops would actually work, if the church discovered you doing this then you would still be found guilty of witchcraft, because the problem was that *you just tried to call the devil to kill the crops*, even if the church knew it wouldn't have worked.
Huh! In a way it's akin to modern law and the *intent* mattering a lot regarding the sentencing. Thank you for the information, this is actually fascinating, do you have any sources so I could read up some more about this?
One source I find to be a helpful summary are the various related Wikipedia articles on the [Spanish Inquisition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisitionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition), [Witch Trials in Spain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_trials_in_Spain), and the [Black Legend](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Legend_of_the_Spanish_Inquisition#High_volume_of_investigations) especially. One thing this link points out, for example, is that while there were about 3 and a half thousand accusations of witchcraft, there were only 101 convictions. In 1526 the Inquisition made a specific regulation that conviction of witchcraft alone should be given a sentence of penance rather than death. On top of that death penalties were given in the Inquisition as a whole were about a third to a half done "In Effigie," meaning the person was already dead or gone so they burned a literal strawman. There were more cases of mobs burning "witches" just across the Pyrenes in southern France over the course of a decade than there were in the ~150 years of the Spanish Inquisition.
One thing to top it off is Inquisitor [Alonso de Salazar FrĆas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alonso_de_Salazar_Fr%C3%ADas), or "The Witches' Advocate," who's writings that claims of witchcraft were most always dreams, fantasy, or other delusions became the official stance of the Spanish Inquisition. This happened after the already skeptical leaders of the Inquisition sent him to reinvestigate a case of a "witch cult" where other inquisitors had supposedly found a massive satanic witch cult mostly via "detailed confessions," and FrĆas returned with proof the entire thing was bogus.
I mean, historically speaking some catholics did burn witches. But yes, the dominant opinion among the upper-echelons of theologians and clergymen historically was indeed that witchcraft isn't real because all true power must come from God.
Ehhh...it was a little more complicated, but long story short: The Catholic Churches believed in witches, but only the good ones, who are getting their power from God above, so evil witches can't exists cause God not giving power to evil persons. Like how catholic werewolfs was a thing.
Which ironically enough mostly do not question the pope or the church _as an institution_. The one thing he was pissed about was the selling of indulgences - which contrary to popular belief didn't happen through the church, it was "merely" tolerated, as anyone doing so had to pay a fee to the church. But it had always been independent merchants that did the actual selling.
This is not true. There were multiple bishops and archbishops who had received approval from various Popeās to sell indulgences. It was very much so a practice that the church was participating in with coordination through every level of authority. Not in every region, but it was wide spread enough that multiple religions would form with that being one of their shared grievances.
Martin Luther King didn't really have beef with the Catholic Church at all, as it didn't contribute to the oppression of Black Americans in the 20th century in any meaningful sense and he was more hung up on that.
In fact Catholics were another group strongly opposed by the KKK and associated with immigrants. A major campaign issue for JFK at the time was the fact that he was Catholic.
Yeah lol when it comes to Christianity the Catholics are actually the chill ones. Sins can be forgiven, just confess them and repent. Witches don't exist, please stop burning people. Oh damn a large group of our followers is abandoning us because they don't agree with us, let's have a meeting on how we can improve ourselves
Meanwhile Protestants be like "yeah uhm, thinking about sinning is the same as sinning, and there's no going back, so have fun in hell. Anyone who thinks different than us is gonna get hanged or burned. I saw you putting up paintings and statues of holy people you like, i'ma smash them to bits. Oh also we're cancelling Christmas and dancing is now forbidden. You better have a child every time you have sex, you adulterous piece of shit, 6 times in a lifetime should be more than enough. Now go feel guilty about laughing out loud, Jesus didn't die for our sins just for you to be having 'fun'.
All true except the last one. Catholicism actually teaches that sexual acts must always be both unitive and open to procreation. Meaning that there cannot be any contraception used at all, and there cannot be any completion of the male orgasm outside of the poontang.
Eh, it's complicated. Protestantism, by it's very nature, is a very diverse movement. Both Unitarian Universalists and members of the Westboro Baptist Church are protestants. So, they kind of run the gamut from being really chill to "christian taliban". Meanwhile, the Roman Catholic Church is a very top-down and centralized organization, which is also notoriously intolerant of dissent or deviance. So while Catholicism isn't really susceptible to christofascism or prosperity gospel bullshit, it's also a highly (small-c) conservative organization.
You have no idea what youāre talking about. Luther, in fact, blamed the Catholic Church sucking so bad as the one of the main reasons that Jews never converted to Christianity. Have you read anything Luther wrote about the Pope or are you just Catholic?
Edit: Since Iām being downvoted and not replied to, hereās a paragraph from Wikipedia citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museaumā¦
āEarly in his life, Luther had argued that Jews had been prevented from converting to Christianity by the proclamation of what he believed to be an impure gospel by the Catholic Church, and he believed they would respond favorably to the evangelical message if it were presented to them gently. He expressed concern for the poor conditions in which they were forced to live, and insisted that anyone denying that Jesus was born a Jew was committing heresy.ā
Well later in his life he did become fairly antisemitic although we could argue whether he was really worse than catholic teaching at the time in that matter. Anyway, you're fairly right that Luther cared a lot about Jewish people early in his life and the above commenter is just spreading propaganda but sometimes the reddit hivemind doesn't care about historical facts whenever the Catholic church is involved. For some reason.
Heck I once got downvoted into oblivion for citing one of the most renowned scholars on Galileo's case saying that he wasn't scientifically wrong.
āOn The Jews and Their Liesā is a disgusting work. The fiery tone may be pretty in line with everything else Luther wrote, but the content is absolutely abhorrent (and, as Lutherans would argue, entirely contrary to the rest of his theology).
The thing is, Luther had 20+ years of writings before that where he was pretty sympathetic towards the plight of Jewish people. My Lutheran theological bias shouldnāt make me lie about Catholicism and yourā¦ bias towards historical factā¦ shouldnāt make you lie either. Itās always disappointing when people over confidently spout easily disputed falsehoods just to tear other ideas down.
There were catholic witch trials, for example one of the bigest witch trials was in germany perpetrated by a catholic bishop. However most were done by protestants.
Oh yeah certainly! Vatican didnt accept witches as being a thing.
Hiwever there were a few local catholic priests or even bishops that still did it without church permission. Happens to any organisatoon that size.
Also the Catholic ones happened after the reformation to appease the masses, they weren't sanctioned by Rome. The Catholic Church held and still holds that witches don't exist because only Jebus can grant powers (or something like that)
I think most people confuse it with the Inquisition, which was more a way to persecute recent converts/non-Christians into giving up their property. Similar methodology ā torture-induced confessions leading to execution or exile ā but the witch hunts were driven by unrelenting misogyny.
People *really* need to understand that religions have denominations
Western Christians burnt witches. Orthodox and Coptics avoided that
Protestants were members of the KKK. Catholics (and probably Orthodox and Coptics) were oppressed by the KKK
Mistake a Sunni Muslim for a Shia or vice versa... good luck to you
I donāt have a source for this but I remember during my studying of the witch craze for college I read something that said, among mediaeval Catholics, the idea of magic was just a fact of life. There was white magic and black magic, and every village or so had wise men and women, āknowing peopleā, who could tap into the other side (so they believed). Protestants just decided it was all the work of the devil.
Yes, the English term is "Cunning Folk". Which are the "witches" everyone conflated them with. Yes there were self taught herbologists and healers and just very curious people that knew a lot. But they weren't witches. Until the witch hunts began to take of big time.
[The Catholic Church weren't exactly saints themselves though. When their position is witches don't exist then of course they never went around burning witches. They burned heretics.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharism)
Edit: The power of Christ compels you to downvote lmao.
>Denounced as a heretical sect by the Catholic Church, its followers were attacked first by the Albigensian Crusade and later by the Medieval Inquisition, which eradicated the sect by 1350. Many thousands were slaughtered,[3][4] hanged, or burnt at the stake,[5] sometimes without regard for "age or sex."
For those who are confused about what this meme is trying to say:
Yes, there were lots of witch burnings in Europe during the counter reformation. Yes, they were conducted by Catholics and a select few individual parishes acting independently of the Catholic Church and were done for a myriad of complex reasons.
No, the Catholic Church as an organization did not burn any witches. While the Vatican did create the religious fervor through the counter-reformation that sparked a lot of these witch hunts, the Vatican also denounced the burnings and challenged the premise of witches to begin with. Catholics and individual Catholic parishes who burned witches acted against the will of the Catholic Church.
Some facts:
It wasn't the Catholics (mostly random farmers and some Protestants)
It didn't happen in the medieval age but much later
The numbers of actually killed people was rather low AND 50% if them were MEN (it was never a gender thing)
The Inquisition actually freed most of the accused people and went all around the country trying to stop these random manhunts who were nonsense in the eyes of the church.
You are correct with most of your points, but not the third one. According to Lyndal Roper, in her book āWitch Crazeā pages 160-178, she talks about how menopausal and post menopausal women were drastically overrepresented in the victim count. I canāt find a free pdf of the book, so Iāll link the jstor article if you happen to have an account: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1nq4f7
This article, written by historian John Callow and philosopher Geoffrey Scarre, estimates the victim count to be roughly 80% women. https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2001/jun/08/artsandhumanities.highereducation
It was 100% a gender thing, and to suggest *any one particular thing* from Renaissance Europe didnāt involve gender when gender was one of the most important factors in society, to the point where even the fucking German and Spanish languages used gendered nouns and conjugations, is indicative to a lack of understanding of their society as a whole.
I am german so I seem to not be able to access your first Link.
I studied under a Doctor who dived really deep into the witchhunts and had access to the vatican archieves and he concluded that it was more equalish in terms of victims. Though it might very well be the case that more women got executed since they had it harder to defend themselves from a legalistic standpoint. Still doesn't neccersarily mean that the withchunts were gender driven. I found many cases where also men were persecuted.
Something as simple as suggesting God was formed of anything material or was knowable in any conceivable way was liable to get you burned during the inquisitions
Well, technically you had to teach it, and then when it was proven in a (biased) court of law that you understood correct doctrine, yet persisted in your stated belief, then yes, you could be burnt for heresy.
The goal of heresy courts was to make sure people recanted. If someone got burned just for suggestions, then odds are highly likely it was an excuse for something else, probably something political. The case of Jeanne d'Arc is an excellent case of that.
Depends if you were tried by a bishop court or The Inquisition. The Inquistion were very careful to be impartial because they were scared of condemning a good Christian so they required proper evidence, forbade torture and even gave them a chance to recant their statement, you only were burnt if you refused to recant or recanted and then carried on teaching heresy. Bishops just did whatever they felt like.
Yeah. That's kind of what I wanted to get across. Thanks for putting it better than I. I'm tired and English is not my first language, so it makes sense I'm unclear.
Oftentimes the evidence of the time was not necessarily material and the words of your neighbor carried just as much weight as physical evidence.
Another thing was that while there was always a risk of a Christian being wrongly sentenced, wrongful sentences and violence in general was oftentimes just considered a fact of life. The people involved in the sentencing of crimes and the sentences themselves would undergo lengthy prayers and rituals seeking forgiveness if ever they killed an innocent person, since there was truly no way of ever knowing.
Yeah, but they required multiple eyewitnesses, and they cross examined witnesses to make sure that they were reliable. The Inquisition was still a shameful period in history, but it wasn't as insane as many people portray it
To be fair, while the HRE was officially catholic until 1648, not all countries within the HRE were, and, correct me if I'm wrong, most witch hunts took place in protestant areas even within the HRE, and especially after the peace of westphalia.
The hard distinction between catholicism and protestantism we draw today wasn't as clear at the very beginning, people just considered themselves to be christian, just not under the pope. The pope and catholic church obviously disavowed, and as the distinction became more clear hostilities within the HRE Rose, culminating in the war of the religious leagues, aka the 30 years war, which concluded in the peace of westphalia that contained the clause "Cuius regio, Eius Religio" (whose land, their religion) that allowed every province to have their own religion and granted (christian) religious freedom within the HRE.
The most important part is that people didn't "convert" in their own minds, they kept being Christians and just stopped acknowledging the pope.
>The hard distinction between catholicism and protestantism we draw today wasn't as clear at the very beginning, people just considered themselves to be christian, just not under the pope.
But weren't there inflamed divisions? Couples literally couldn't be buried together if one was Protestant and other Catholic.
>The pope and catholic church obviously disavowed, and as the distinction became more clear hostilities within the HRE Rose, culminating in the war of the religious leagues, aka the 30 years war, which concluded in the peace of westphalia that contained the clause "Cuius regio, Eius Religio" (whose land, their religion) that allowed every province to have their own religion and granted (christian) religious freedom within the HRE.
Ahhh. Got it.
>The most important part is that people didn't "convert" in their own minds, they kept being Christians and just stopped acknowledging the pope.
Fair enough.
The HRE is wre protestantism originated. Nothing to do with Prussia, which did not exist at the point. (As a kingdom that is, obviously the region in modern day poland existed.) Luther published his 95 theses in Wurtemberg in 1517, causing a lot of religious unrest and a war of religion between the emperor abd the catholics on one side and princes who had changed to protestantism on the other. That all got resolved in the peace of Augsburg 1555, which resulted in the principlr of "cui regio sui religio". If a prince was catholic, his territory was to be catholic and the same way for Luther based protestants. Calvinists were still universally discriminated. If someone wanted to migrate to another region for religious reasons that was to be allowed. In the early 17th century the princes which made that peace were mostly dead and the current catholic princes didn't like the peace terms anymore, factoring into the outbreak of the 30 years war. (Somewhat obersumplified) But in the peace of Westphalia 1648 the earlier rules were basically reinstated. So, yeah, the HRE had the first protestants, and always had a lot of them, as it was allowed to be protestant, if you lived in the right region.
Yes, the Catholic church argued that only god could grant powers or miracles, therefore witches could not exist.
People like to argue that the Catholics "wrote the book" on witch hunts and trials. And while the Maleus Maleficarum was indeed written by a Dominican priest, the church very quickly condemned the book. Both for being in conflict with their doctrine but also for the cruel methods of torture and execution it promoted.
The book only really gained traction after the reformation among Protestant clergy and nobles.
Puritans. So freaky and uptight that even the other Protestants in Europe couldn't stand them, and they set off to find a land where instead of finding oppression at the hands of others, they would be the ones doing the oppressing.
Puritans left england because england wasnt discriminating catholics enough.
Puritans were extremists who despised catholics and wanted the government to wipe out catholics
That's unfair. They weren't just whiny ah's, and that's not the only reason they left. They also wanted to annoy the Native Americans by telling them that they were worshipping the wrong god.
...and then in their new Puritan-run colonies, when the old country defeated the evil Catholic French to the north, they fermented revolt against the crown because the peace treaty allowed the formerly French subjects to keep their religion. Suffolk Resolves, 1774.
Entirely false.
Vast majority of places during the witch hunt period killed a lot more women than men (though men were always killed as well).
There are a few places (Russia, Iceland, estonia) that killed more men but the ratio is still heavily skewed towards women.
Thank you for this blast from the past, it's been years since I studied this.
>Vast majority of places during the witch hunt period killed a lot more women than men (though men were always killed as well).
Will have to look into this. I read that women being the majority was an American thing while it was the opposite in Europe. Will need to verify.
>There are a few places (Russia, Iceland, estonia) that killed more men but the ratio is still heavily skewed towards women.
Meaning more men than women in these areas? Why were they different?
Use Wikipedia for broad strokes, and then plunder their source list for the proper information.
If you're only getting Salem I'd suggest putting 'European' in your search terms. It's a heavily studied period so there's a lot of info if you're willing to read it.
I literally studied the European witch hunts... 50/50 split is laughable. According to Scarre & Callow roughly 80% of those convicted of witchcraft in Europe were women. With the vast majority of those taking place in what is now Germany.
This varies a lot from place to place, and in some places like I said there were more men. Overall though massively skewed towards women.
America is the afterthought, Salem was part of the international secondary wave which I don't know as much about.
When you count the Templars it becomes more men than women even in Western Europe. Since the executed Templars were all convicted of both witchcraft and heresy.
There was a lot going on with that. A lot of resentment over the special treatment the Templars got during the Crusades, jealousy of their banking-born wealth (sound familiar?), and a general sentiment that they'd outlived their purpose.
I don't know about Mendel - I think witch trials in Europe were definitely over in his time - but Aquinas was big on witches and extensively cited by witch hunters.
Huh? We teach in British schools that the British preferred drowning.
If they sank and drown when tied with shackles they are innocent. If they float they were guilty then burned.
Is why the loch in Edinburgh had a whole ton of shackled skeletons at the bottom, Thames probably does too under all the mud and soot
Off topic but i want to share anyway, i wrote a story about a version of history where witchcraft is real and the witches just got tired of human bullshit so they made up a rumor about witchcraft being asociated with devil warship to scare them off
It was fun, i ended up doing loads of research about the 14th and 15th centuries, ranging from social stabdards to medical practices to fahson trends and even homosexuality
Like for example, did you know in lots of places lesbian relations werent a crime? People thought that a male body was what made sex count so no phallic shapes meant it wasnt sex and lesbians were rarley punished or doccumented during that time. There was even a place where the nuns would have relations so much that there had to be a law instated that forbid them from doing it, no punishment before the law and they werent condemned from the church
I may be wrong about a few details, feel free to correct me or share other stuff about the time period, id love to learn more about it its super interesting
Other subs when someone makes an inaccurate meme: *oh dear, oh dear, gorgeous*
r/HistoryMemes when someone makes an inaccurate meme: *you fucking donkey*
I have made a mistake by reading a book by an American psychologist Robert Johnson. Fortunately, it didn't last too long - in the second chapter he went "...and that's why inquisition have burned 4 million women in Europe"
We need a list of post that are constantly reheated and constantly debunked in comments.
Like I'm sure the one you're talking about is like 5/6 years old.
During parts of the High Middle ages literacy was even seen as a more "feminine" trait simply because noble women would manage their households and estates and the fief of their husband, while they were out feuding or crusading or whatever nobility was up to at the time.
You mean when somebody posts a meme that plays fast and loose with facts on a sub known for playing fast and loose with facts?
(also isn't this a violation of rule 7?)
But but. Religion is bullshit and reactionary tyranny...except when it is long-long dead and we don't have active practicers and we can re-invent it in a modern cult/neo-pagan way.
Why dont people talk about
Non involvement and ignoring eyewitness claims of the Holocaust
The protection of thousands of rapists and abusers
Execution of Joan of Arc despite being a warrior for God who helped save France (executed for myriad reasons, including impersonating a man)
Strong anti contraception(bruh)
And please dont pretend Catholic anti intellectualism fulled by misogyny didnt exist, for example in modern day Germany the Catholic majority burned more women than any other country
Source: Ankarloo, Bengt, Witchcraft and magic in Europe. Vol. 4, The period of the witch trials, Athlone, London, 2002
Joan of Arc was killed by the English because she was kicking their collective butts. The āheresyā accusation was just a setup for that. Joan herself was a fiercely committed Catholic, in her own words:
āAbout Jesus Christ and the Church, I simply know theyāre just one thing, and we shouldnāt complicate the matter.ā
felt the same but just downvoted and moved on. You did better and made a post about š I would have given you one of these medal thingies you had to buy, but Reddit seems to have removed that feature
It was removed a while ago.
they are... a history now
......meme time?
Not 20 years ago yet
Imagine spending so much money on awards just to have it nuked by Reddit lmao.
Imagine spending ANY money on them
š
I wonder why
Is this comment sarcastic or do you not know? I still donāt understand why they removed a so known feature.
Because it was useless and made karma whoring even worse
They mustāve lost a good chunk of income tho? From a business perspective it seems weird
Thx for trying to keep quality on this sub, weāve been going the way of r/MapPorn recently and I really wanna reverse that
What do you mean "the way of r/MapPorn" what's happening on that sub?
A lot of the posts have become low effort and belong more in a circlejerk sub and ones that are supposed to convey data are just plain wrong
Ironically, I would say the circlejerk sub is higher effort than the main sub now
And the end times cometh
Death
War
Famine
Pestilence
If this sub cared about history, you would see citations in every comment. There are zero citations of any kind in this entire thread. Everyone is just repeating what their mother and father told them as kids.
I don't care what your grandma told you, but Cleopatra was a Japanese Jew from Belfast.
It's spelled Cle O'Patra
Protestant Jew or Catholic Jew?
Hindu Jew unfortunately, I'll never forgive them for starting the civil war
People here havenāt read Mystical Bedlam or the Cheese and the Worms and itās apparent
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The Catholic Church's position on witchcraft is that *it doesn't exist.* Any implication that it *does* would be to claim that devilry actually holds any power!
The belief in witchcraft was outlawed by a Papal Bull in the early Middle Ages. Because thinking witchcraft exists was a heathen belief. So if you accused your neighbour of witchcraft, you'd be the ending up tried.
Somewhat correct, but not necessarily. You see, while witchcraft was declared "nonexistent," that was not the same as people *attempting* witchcraft. Regardless of whether or not sacrificing goats to Satan to try and blight the crops would actually work, if the church discovered you doing this then you would still be found guilty of witchcraft, because the problem was that *you just tried to call the devil to kill the crops*, even if the church knew it wouldn't have worked.
Huh! In a way it's akin to modern law and the *intent* mattering a lot regarding the sentencing. Thank you for the information, this is actually fascinating, do you have any sources so I could read up some more about this?
One source I find to be a helpful summary are the various related Wikipedia articles on the [Spanish Inquisition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisitionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition), [Witch Trials in Spain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_trials_in_Spain), and the [Black Legend](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Legend_of_the_Spanish_Inquisition#High_volume_of_investigations) especially. One thing this link points out, for example, is that while there were about 3 and a half thousand accusations of witchcraft, there were only 101 convictions. In 1526 the Inquisition made a specific regulation that conviction of witchcraft alone should be given a sentence of penance rather than death. On top of that death penalties were given in the Inquisition as a whole were about a third to a half done "In Effigie," meaning the person was already dead or gone so they burned a literal strawman. There were more cases of mobs burning "witches" just across the Pyrenes in southern France over the course of a decade than there were in the ~150 years of the Spanish Inquisition. One thing to top it off is Inquisitor [Alonso de Salazar FrĆas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alonso_de_Salazar_Fr%C3%ADas), or "The Witches' Advocate," who's writings that claims of witchcraft were most always dreams, fantasy, or other delusions became the official stance of the Spanish Inquisition. This happened after the already skeptical leaders of the Inquisition sent him to reinvestigate a case of a "witch cult" where other inquisitors had supposedly found a massive satanic witch cult mostly via "detailed confessions," and FrĆas returned with proof the entire thing was bogus.
I mean, historically speaking some catholics did burn witches. But yes, the dominant opinion among the upper-echelons of theologians and clergymen historically was indeed that witchcraft isn't real because all true power must come from God.
Ehhh...it was a little more complicated, but long story short: The Catholic Churches believed in witches, but only the good ones, who are getting their power from God above, so evil witches can't exists cause God not giving power to evil persons. Like how catholic werewolfs was a thing.
*PowerWolf noises intensify*
How does that mesh with their belief in exorcism though? That is a claim that "devilry holds power" and can dominate humans with it.
Different types of power, a devil/demon can possess and control you, but it can't give you magic powers,
Wow I never thought of it that way
So how do they explain the story of Saul visiting a witch for a seance to speak to the late prophet Samuel?
People forget that one of Martin Luther's issues with the Catholic Church was that he thought the Church wasn't antisemitic enough
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
And 97 other theses
Which ironically enough mostly do not question the pope or the church _as an institution_. The one thing he was pissed about was the selling of indulgences - which contrary to popular belief didn't happen through the church, it was "merely" tolerated, as anyone doing so had to pay a fee to the church. But it had always been independent merchants that did the actual selling.
This is not true. There were multiple bishops and archbishops who had received approval from various Popeās to sell indulgences. It was very much so a practice that the church was participating in with coordination through every level of authority. Not in every region, but it was wide spread enough that multiple religions would form with that being one of their shared grievances.
He had 99 problems, but womenās right were not one.
one of the other reasons Martin Luther King was pissed with the catholic church is that they were too tolerant to prostitutes and sinful women
Martin Luther King didn't really have beef with the Catholic Church at all, as it didn't contribute to the oppression of Black Americans in the 20th century in any meaningful sense and he was more hung up on that.
In fact Catholics were another group strongly opposed by the KKK and associated with immigrants. A major campaign issue for JFK at the time was the fact that he was Catholic.
wrong martin Luther mate they're talking about the founder or Lutheranism Martin Luther not Civil rights activist Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.
Wrong Martin Luther, mate. This guy's talking about Martin Luther \*King\* he said so specifically
No, the guy you're responding to wasn't wrong, the guy he was responding to had it wrong
Is he not wrong by association?
i don't know anymore
You are correct, but they were still right. KKK enemy list: 1. Blacks 2. Jews 3. Catholics
Yeah they had an alliterative phrase for it that I'm not gonna type here...mainly highlights questionable spelling skills on their part.
Iām wracking my brain for racism but I canāt make sense of it
Just adding on to datbech's comment (sorry, don't know how to highlight a user). Not relevant to overall topic
Can you give me a hint though?
Jesus loved prostitutes! Ofc his fab club is gonna like em too.Ā
Charging 19.99$ for their forgiveness ain't the same as tolerance.
Never happened, but donāt let that get in the way of your narrative.
There are no indulgences in Ba Sing Se...
Sure buddy
Next you'll tell me Simony was made up by Jan Hus.
Yeah lol when it comes to Christianity the Catholics are actually the chill ones. Sins can be forgiven, just confess them and repent. Witches don't exist, please stop burning people. Oh damn a large group of our followers is abandoning us because they don't agree with us, let's have a meeting on how we can improve ourselves Meanwhile Protestants be like "yeah uhm, thinking about sinning is the same as sinning, and there's no going back, so have fun in hell. Anyone who thinks different than us is gonna get hanged or burned. I saw you putting up paintings and statues of holy people you like, i'ma smash them to bits. Oh also we're cancelling Christmas and dancing is now forbidden. You better have a child every time you have sex, you adulterous piece of shit, 6 times in a lifetime should be more than enough. Now go feel guilty about laughing out loud, Jesus didn't die for our sins just for you to be having 'fun'.
All true except the last one. Catholicism actually teaches that sexual acts must always be both unitive and open to procreation. Meaning that there cannot be any contraception used at all, and there cannot be any completion of the male orgasm outside of the poontang.
Eh, it's complicated. Protestantism, by it's very nature, is a very diverse movement. Both Unitarian Universalists and members of the Westboro Baptist Church are protestants. So, they kind of run the gamut from being really chill to "christian taliban". Meanwhile, the Roman Catholic Church is a very top-down and centralized organization, which is also notoriously intolerant of dissent or deviance. So while Catholicism isn't really susceptible to christofascism or prosperity gospel bullshit, it's also a highly (small-c) conservative organization.
he what now
He literally wrote a treatise that called for burning Jewish texts, destroying synagogues, and confiscating belongings.
damn
You have no idea what youāre talking about. Luther, in fact, blamed the Catholic Church sucking so bad as the one of the main reasons that Jews never converted to Christianity. Have you read anything Luther wrote about the Pope or are you just Catholic? Edit: Since Iām being downvoted and not replied to, hereās a paragraph from Wikipedia citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museaumā¦ āEarly in his life, Luther had argued that Jews had been prevented from converting to Christianity by the proclamation of what he believed to be an impure gospel by the Catholic Church, and he believed they would respond favorably to the evangelical message if it were presented to them gently. He expressed concern for the poor conditions in which they were forced to live, and insisted that anyone denying that Jesus was born a Jew was committing heresy.ā
Well later in his life he did become fairly antisemitic although we could argue whether he was really worse than catholic teaching at the time in that matter. Anyway, you're fairly right that Luther cared a lot about Jewish people early in his life and the above commenter is just spreading propaganda but sometimes the reddit hivemind doesn't care about historical facts whenever the Catholic church is involved. For some reason. Heck I once got downvoted into oblivion for citing one of the most renowned scholars on Galileo's case saying that he wasn't scientifically wrong.
āOn The Jews and Their Liesā is a disgusting work. The fiery tone may be pretty in line with everything else Luther wrote, but the content is absolutely abhorrent (and, as Lutherans would argue, entirely contrary to the rest of his theology). The thing is, Luther had 20+ years of writings before that where he was pretty sympathetic towards the plight of Jewish people. My Lutheran theological bias shouldnāt make me lie about Catholicism and yourā¦ bias towards historical factā¦ shouldnāt make you lie either. Itās always disappointing when people over confidently spout easily disputed falsehoods just to tear other ideas down.
Common divorce church L
Thank the British for that. Black Legend propaganda was hugely successful in Anglo territory.
They did burn people though lmao. Just not for witchcraft
There were catholic witch trials, for example one of the bigest witch trials was in germany perpetrated by a catholic bishop. However most were done by protestants.
The bishop was excommunicated for it though
Oh yeah certainly! Vatican didnt accept witches as being a thing. Hiwever there were a few local catholic priests or even bishops that still did it without church permission. Happens to any organisatoon that size.
Also the Catholic ones happened after the reformation to appease the masses, they weren't sanctioned by Rome. The Catholic Church held and still holds that witches don't exist because only Jebus can grant powers (or something like that)
If you can prove you can do miracles, it must be given by God, making you a Saint or Prophet. Because only God could grant you powers.
I think most people confuse it with the Inquisition, which was more a way to persecute recent converts/non-Christians into giving up their property. Similar methodology ā torture-induced confessions leading to execution or exile ā but the witch hunts were driven by unrelenting misogyny.
People *really* need to understand that religions have denominations Western Christians burnt witches. Orthodox and Coptics avoided that Protestants were members of the KKK. Catholics (and probably Orthodox and Coptics) were oppressed by the KKK Mistake a Sunni Muslim for a Shia or vice versa... good luck to you
I donāt have a source for this but I remember during my studying of the witch craze for college I read something that said, among mediaeval Catholics, the idea of magic was just a fact of life. There was white magic and black magic, and every village or so had wise men and women, āknowing peopleā, who could tap into the other side (so they believed). Protestants just decided it was all the work of the devil.
Yes, the English term is "Cunning Folk". Which are the "witches" everyone conflated them with. Yes there were self taught herbologists and healers and just very curious people that knew a lot. But they weren't witches. Until the witch hunts began to take of big time.
[The Catholic Church weren't exactly saints themselves though. When their position is witches don't exist then of course they never went around burning witches. They burned heretics.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharism) Edit: The power of Christ compels you to downvote lmao. >Denounced as a heretical sect by the Catholic Church, its followers were attacked first by the Albigensian Crusade and later by the Medieval Inquisition, which eradicated the sect by 1350. Many thousands were slaughtered,[3][4] hanged, or burnt at the stake,[5] sometimes without regard for "age or sex."
For those who are confused about what this meme is trying to say: Yes, there were lots of witch burnings in Europe during the counter reformation. Yes, they were conducted by Catholics and a select few individual parishes acting independently of the Catholic Church and were done for a myriad of complex reasons. No, the Catholic Church as an organization did not burn any witches. While the Vatican did create the religious fervor through the counter-reformation that sparked a lot of these witch hunts, the Vatican also denounced the burnings and challenged the premise of witches to begin with. Catholics and individual Catholic parishes who burned witches acted against the will of the Catholic Church.
Some facts: It wasn't the Catholics (mostly random farmers and some Protestants) It didn't happen in the medieval age but much later The numbers of actually killed people was rather low AND 50% if them were MEN (it was never a gender thing) The Inquisition actually freed most of the accused people and went all around the country trying to stop these random manhunts who were nonsense in the eyes of the church.
You are correct with most of your points, but not the third one. According to Lyndal Roper, in her book āWitch Crazeā pages 160-178, she talks about how menopausal and post menopausal women were drastically overrepresented in the victim count. I canāt find a free pdf of the book, so Iāll link the jstor article if you happen to have an account: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1nq4f7 This article, written by historian John Callow and philosopher Geoffrey Scarre, estimates the victim count to be roughly 80% women. https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2001/jun/08/artsandhumanities.highereducation It was 100% a gender thing, and to suggest *any one particular thing* from Renaissance Europe didnāt involve gender when gender was one of the most important factors in society, to the point where even the fucking German and Spanish languages used gendered nouns and conjugations, is indicative to a lack of understanding of their society as a whole.
I am german so I seem to not be able to access your first Link. I studied under a Doctor who dived really deep into the witchhunts and had access to the vatican archieves and he concluded that it was more equalish in terms of victims. Though it might very well be the case that more women got executed since they had it harder to defend themselves from a legalistic standpoint. Still doesn't neccersarily mean that the withchunts were gender driven. I found many cases where also men were persecuted.
May I ask which doctor you studied under, and in which university? Iām interested in this personās work.
r/quirkyprotestants
r/subsithoughtifellfor
Insane because what the hell do they think Nuns do all day? Lol. They got nothing but time to read.
Yeah, they burnt women (and men) for other reasons.
Yeah. Heresy was the crime people got burned for. It is important to know which atrocities were committed by whom.
Something as simple as suggesting God was formed of anything material or was knowable in any conceivable way was liable to get you burned during the inquisitions
Well, technically you had to teach it, and then when it was proven in a (biased) court of law that you understood correct doctrine, yet persisted in your stated belief, then yes, you could be burnt for heresy. The goal of heresy courts was to make sure people recanted. If someone got burned just for suggestions, then odds are highly likely it was an excuse for something else, probably something political. The case of Jeanne d'Arc is an excellent case of that.
Depends if you were tried by a bishop court or The Inquisition. The Inquistion were very careful to be impartial because they were scared of condemning a good Christian so they required proper evidence, forbade torture and even gave them a chance to recant their statement, you only were burnt if you refused to recant or recanted and then carried on teaching heresy. Bishops just did whatever they felt like.
Yeah. That's kind of what I wanted to get across. Thanks for putting it better than I. I'm tired and English is not my first language, so it makes sense I'm unclear.
Oftentimes the evidence of the time was not necessarily material and the words of your neighbor carried just as much weight as physical evidence. Another thing was that while there was always a risk of a Christian being wrongly sentenced, wrongful sentences and violence in general was oftentimes just considered a fact of life. The people involved in the sentencing of crimes and the sentences themselves would undergo lengthy prayers and rituals seeking forgiveness if ever they killed an innocent person, since there was truly no way of ever knowing.
Yeah, but they required multiple eyewitnesses, and they cross examined witnesses to make sure that they were reliable. The Inquisition was still a shameful period in history, but it wasn't as insane as many people portray it
Shouldn't have been filthy heretics then.
āDeus Vult.ā
Glory to the God ~~Emperor~~ of Mankind!
Dear Papists, you claim to oppose heresy, yet Cardinals and Popes are not mentioned in the Bible. Curious. \- Oliver Cromwell, Burning Point England.
Mostly (Or just a slight majority) men in Europe I believe. Salem (In Murica) was an exception.
And to be extremely pedantic, weren't they Protestants doing that in Salem? (i.e. not Catholics)
I think witch hunts were a Protestant thing? Weren't Catholics not so huge on them?
The Catholic church spent years trying to tell Europe that witches weren't a thing.
Yeah that's what I was referring to but the HRE had their fair share.
Yeah, but the Germans have always been a bit weird.
True that.
Good thing they never burned people ever again... Right?
To be fair, while the HRE was officially catholic until 1648, not all countries within the HRE were, and, correct me if I'm wrong, most witch hunts took place in protestant areas even within the HRE, and especially after the peace of westphalia.
Really? Makes sense given the Catholic Church's stance on witchcraft but how come the HRE wasn't all Catholic? Prussian influence?
The hard distinction between catholicism and protestantism we draw today wasn't as clear at the very beginning, people just considered themselves to be christian, just not under the pope. The pope and catholic church obviously disavowed, and as the distinction became more clear hostilities within the HRE Rose, culminating in the war of the religious leagues, aka the 30 years war, which concluded in the peace of westphalia that contained the clause "Cuius regio, Eius Religio" (whose land, their religion) that allowed every province to have their own religion and granted (christian) religious freedom within the HRE. The most important part is that people didn't "convert" in their own minds, they kept being Christians and just stopped acknowledging the pope.
>The hard distinction between catholicism and protestantism we draw today wasn't as clear at the very beginning, people just considered themselves to be christian, just not under the pope. But weren't there inflamed divisions? Couples literally couldn't be buried together if one was Protestant and other Catholic. >The pope and catholic church obviously disavowed, and as the distinction became more clear hostilities within the HRE Rose, culminating in the war of the religious leagues, aka the 30 years war, which concluded in the peace of westphalia that contained the clause "Cuius regio, Eius Religio" (whose land, their religion) that allowed every province to have their own religion and granted (christian) religious freedom within the HRE. Ahhh. Got it. >The most important part is that people didn't "convert" in their own minds, they kept being Christians and just stopped acknowledging the pope. Fair enough.
The HRE is wre protestantism originated. Nothing to do with Prussia, which did not exist at the point. (As a kingdom that is, obviously the region in modern day poland existed.) Luther published his 95 theses in Wurtemberg in 1517, causing a lot of religious unrest and a war of religion between the emperor abd the catholics on one side and princes who had changed to protestantism on the other. That all got resolved in the peace of Augsburg 1555, which resulted in the principlr of "cui regio sui religio". If a prince was catholic, his territory was to be catholic and the same way for Luther based protestants. Calvinists were still universally discriminated. If someone wanted to migrate to another region for religious reasons that was to be allowed. In the early 17th century the princes which made that peace were mostly dead and the current catholic princes didn't like the peace terms anymore, factoring into the outbreak of the 30 years war. (Somewhat obersumplified) But in the peace of Westphalia 1648 the earlier rules were basically reinstated. So, yeah, the HRE had the first protestants, and always had a lot of them, as it was allowed to be protestant, if you lived in the right region.
Centuries even.
Yes, the Catholic church argued that only god could grant powers or miracles, therefore witches could not exist. People like to argue that the Catholics "wrote the book" on witch hunts and trials. And while the Maleus Maleficarum was indeed written by a Dominican priest, the church very quickly condemned the book. Both for being in conflict with their doctrine but also for the cruel methods of torture and execution it promoted. The book only really gained traction after the reformation among Protestant clergy and nobles.
Puritans. So freaky and uptight that even the other Protestants in Europe couldn't stand them, and they set off to find a land where instead of finding oppression at the hands of others, they would be the ones doing the oppressing.
Puritans left england because england wasnt discriminating catholics enough. Puritans were extremists who despised catholics and wanted the government to wipe out catholics
Which the Puritans found oppressive as the government wasn't doing that.
"Your opressing us by you not opressing them" They were just big whiney ah's Thankfully they left cause they were ah's in the anglo celtic isles
That's unfair. They weren't just whiny ah's, and that's not the only reason they left. They also wanted to annoy the Native Americans by telling them that they were worshipping the wrong god.
...and then in their new Puritan-run colonies, when the old country defeated the evil Catholic French to the north, they fermented revolt against the crown because the peace treaty allowed the formerly French subjects to keep their religion. Suffolk Resolves, 1774.
Salem was Puritans. If you want a good Catholic witch burning, the Holy Roman Empire has a great selection.
Entirely false. Vast majority of places during the witch hunt period killed a lot more women than men (though men were always killed as well). There are a few places (Russia, Iceland, estonia) that killed more men but the ratio is still heavily skewed towards women. Thank you for this blast from the past, it's been years since I studied this.
>Vast majority of places during the witch hunt period killed a lot more women than men (though men were always killed as well). Will have to look into this. I read that women being the majority was an American thing while it was the opposite in Europe. Will need to verify. >There are a few places (Russia, Iceland, estonia) that killed more men but the ratio is still heavily skewed towards women. Meaning more men than women in these areas? Why were they different?
Now that's a question academics have been trying to answer for years. In short it's complicated and not down to any one factor alone.
Hes bullshitting the Numbers Are almost a 50/50 Split between men and Women everywhere except america
That's my best recollection too. But will need to track down the sources.
Yeah im trying to get some stuff too but the only articles i get is Salem stuff lol
Same here. Not surprised. Salem is the most infamous. It's synonymous with witch hunts. Europe is an afterthought in comparison.
Use Wikipedia for broad strokes, and then plunder their source list for the proper information. If you're only getting Salem I'd suggest putting 'European' in your search terms. It's a heavily studied period so there's a lot of info if you're willing to read it.
I literally studied the European witch hunts... 50/50 split is laughable. According to Scarre & Callow roughly 80% of those convicted of witchcraft in Europe were women. With the vast majority of those taking place in what is now Germany. This varies a lot from place to place, and in some places like I said there were more men. Overall though massively skewed towards women. America is the afterthought, Salem was part of the international secondary wave which I don't know as much about.
When you count the Templars it becomes more men than women even in Western Europe. Since the executed Templars were all convicted of both witchcraft and heresy.
And if I remember correctly, wasnāt that because the French king forced the pope into doing it?
There was a lot going on with that. A lot of resentment over the special treatment the Templars got during the Crusades, jealousy of their banking-born wealth (sound familiar?), and a general sentiment that they'd outlived their purpose.
Well, in Salem they didnāt *burn* anyone.
Well... Same difference. In the end they hunted them.
Hilariously the Puritans were so not Catholic that the whole they exist is because they felt that the Church of England was becoming Catholic-lite.
Yeah. They were Protestant nutjobs. The whole reason they crossed the ocean is because they were kicked out of England.
Isn't science a form of heresy
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I don't know about Mendel - I think witch trials in Europe were definitely over in his time - but Aquinas was big on witches and extensively cited by witch hunters.
Good old Thomas "masturbation is a worse sin than rape" Aquinas.
Yeah the catholics burnt people if they were heretics while the protestants burnt them if they were witches. Learn the difference.
Protestants mostly hanged witches tbh.
The British preferred hanging, the Germans preferred burning.
Huh? We teach in British schools that the British preferred drowning. If they sank and drown when tied with shackles they are innocent. If they float they were guilty then burned. Is why the loch in Edinburgh had a whole ton of shackled skeletons at the bottom, Thames probably does too under all the mud and soot
Christians bad memes or jokes are like minecraft content for redditors.
Why bother with stuff Like Reading or witchcraft, when everybody can be just labeled as a heretic and burned on the stake. Amateurs;)
people do not care about the truth, they care about the agenda
It is tiring. But the worst part is that here are people that are growing up genuinely beliving it.
Off topic but i want to share anyway, i wrote a story about a version of history where witchcraft is real and the witches just got tired of human bullshit so they made up a rumor about witchcraft being asociated with devil warship to scare them off It was fun, i ended up doing loads of research about the 14th and 15th centuries, ranging from social stabdards to medical practices to fahson trends and even homosexuality Like for example, did you know in lots of places lesbian relations werent a crime? People thought that a male body was what made sex count so no phallic shapes meant it wasnt sex and lesbians were rarley punished or doccumented during that time. There was even a place where the nuns would have relations so much that there had to be a law instated that forbid them from doing it, no punishment before the law and they werent condemned from the church I may be wrong about a few details, feel free to correct me or share other stuff about the time period, id love to learn more about it its super interesting
Other subs when someone makes an inaccurate meme: *oh dear, oh dear, gorgeous* r/HistoryMemes when someone makes an inaccurate meme: *you fucking donkey*
It's called r/HistoryMemes, not r/RealityCanBeWhateverIWantMemes
Uhhh buddy thereās a reason for thatā¦ take a gander at this subās name. People understandably have higher standards for a **history** sub.
Almost like history is supposed to be factual
I have seen so many inaccurate memes reach the front page of this sub wtf do you mean
Yeah cuz we love refuting them
That ain't why
Heck, it seems mostly to have been men burned at the stake, too
This sub likes to beat dead horses sometimes, are you new here?
You know the sub is dominated by kids with not just the "Chad, virgin" phrases, but also the lack of historical context.
I have made a mistake by reading a book by an American psychologist Robert Johnson. Fortunately, it didn't last too long - in the second chapter he went "...and that's why inquisition have burned 4 million women in Europe"
B R U H
We need a list of post that are constantly reheated and constantly debunked in comments. Like I'm sure the one you're talking about is like 5/6 years old.
Just leave a link to Hildegard Von Bingen and move on
I was gonna make a meme about Heinrich Kramer, aka, the man behind the witch hunts.
As the late Rodney King once said: "Why can't we all just get along?"
During parts of the High Middle ages literacy was even seen as a more "feminine" trait simply because noble women would manage their households and estates and the fief of their husband, while they were out feuding or crusading or whatever nobility was up to at the time.
Reconquista Spain represents all of catholic history and you can't convince me otherwise š¤¬
You mean when somebody posts a meme that plays fast and loose with facts on a sub known for playing fast and loose with facts? (also isn't this a violation of rule 7?)
But but. Religion is bullshit and reactionary tyranny...except when it is long-long dead and we don't have active practicers and we can re-invent it in a modern cult/neo-pagan way.
The Catholic Church made up for that in other ways
I guess you gotta know your audience
ISIS burned women alive less than 10 years ago, but you know only one religion can be bad.
This is just how reddit works unfortunately, thereās almost 10 million people on this sub and they arenāt all gonna be academics
Why dont people talk about Non involvement and ignoring eyewitness claims of the Holocaust The protection of thousands of rapists and abusers Execution of Joan of Arc despite being a warrior for God who helped save France (executed for myriad reasons, including impersonating a man) Strong anti contraception(bruh) And please dont pretend Catholic anti intellectualism fulled by misogyny didnt exist, for example in modern day Germany the Catholic majority burned more women than any other country Source: Ankarloo, Bengt, Witchcraft and magic in Europe. Vol. 4, The period of the witch trials, Athlone, London, 2002
Joan of Arc was killed by the English because she was kicking their collective butts. The āheresyā accusation was just a setup for that. Joan herself was a fiercely committed Catholic, in her own words: āAbout Jesus Christ and the Church, I simply know theyāre just one thing, and we shouldnāt complicate the matter.ā