The Catholic Church: An Organisation of Evil

[Nationalist State of Knox]

Eh. I think you're making a mistake with that post. It's kinda like saying that the modern German government is evil based on Nazi crimes, except that's all quite a bit more recent.

If you really want to make a case that the catholic curch is an organization of evil, you need to see at the wrongs they're doing today (and there's quite a few) but then you also have to juxtapose it with the good they do (and that exists as well).

Sorry if the title is a little misleading; the topic is about how the Church was a negative force.

[Synaxis]

Eh. I think you're making a mistake with that post. It's kinda like saying that the modern German government is evil based on Nazi crimes, except that's all quite a bit more recent.

If you really want to make a case that the catholic curch is an organization of evil, you need to see at the wrongs they're doing today (and there's quite a few) but then you also have to juxtapose it with the good they do (and that exists as well).

Sorry if the title is a little misleading; the topic is about how the Church was a negative force.

It seems this is an over-generalization; it is almost impossible for something to be entirely good or entirely bad. As I said before, the Church has, admittedly, behaved wrongly in the past. But to overlook the uncountable benefits it has given Western society is failing to give credit where it is due.

[Risottia]

..., only the most notable examples.
....

I'd like to add the genocides of the haeretics, such as the Cathars/Albigenses, the Hussites (well, more of an attempted genocide), the persecution of the Walser, the genocide and persecution of the Spanish Muslims and Jews, the approvation and collaboration in the genocide of the South American natives...

[Nationalist State of Knox]

Sorry if the title is a little misleading; the topic is about how the Church was a negative force.

It seems this is an over-generalization; it is almost impossible for something to be entirely good or entirely bad. As I said before, the Church has, admittedly, behaved wrongly in the past. But to overlook the uncountable benefits it has given Western society is failing to give credit where it is due.

I'm not saying that it was a wholly negative force, merely that it was negative in many aspects.

..., only the most notable examples.
....

I'd like to add the genocides of the haeretics, such as the Cathars/Albigenses, the Hussites (well, more of an attempted genocide), the persecution of the Walser, the genocide and persecution of the Spanish Muslims and Jews, the approvation and collaboration in the genocide of the South American natives...

Many of which are actually mentioned in the OP.

[Aggicificicerous]

What also needs to be addressed is that the Church provided useful guidance and services during the Dark Ages, especially in the west. The Church managed to keep some semblance of stability in place in light of the barbarian incursions into the former Western Roman Empire, and was responsible for the collecting and maintaining of classical literature at a time when knowledge was not considered a premium.

Moreover, the Church provided educational opportunities when there was no other method of acquiring one in the shifting uncertainties of the 6th, 7th, and 8th centuries A.D., and indeed the first major western universities were sponsored and run by churches (see Cathedral Schools). Although we will never know for sure, had the Church not been in the position it was in at the time, it could have led to a serious lag in development in Western civilization.

It would be intensely hypocritical to suggest that the Church was not at fault during its 2000-year existence, but this is due to the inherent imperfection of mankind rather than the Church itself. Since it was the dominant religious organ in the west until the Protestant Reformation, it held immense power, and it should have been obvious that unscrupulous individuals would attempt to abuse that power. Indeed, most behavior of the Church that-as some that have suggested-was ignoble was the result of poor leadership and partisan politics at work.

Not to mention 300+ years ago, the Catholic Church was the greatest funder of science and learning. Perhaps the modern Catholic Church has not progressed enough, but to say the Catholic Church has held humanity back is a gross misunderstanding of history.

What people don't realise about the Spanish Inquisition is that compared to other courts of the day, it was not unusually cruel or harsh. It was also independent, so blaming Spain's attempts to stamp out heresay on the Catholic Church is quite unfair. Here is an explanation of how the Spanish Inquisition actually led to the end of witch hunts in Spain (Yes, I realise this isn't the best source, but it is reviewed and sourced, the information is accurate, and I am unable to get a hold of the sources I would most like on the internet.). http://www.aquinas.edu/history/pdf/dear ... df#page=65

What you may not realise about Copernicus, is that the pope at the time, far from condemning him, liked his ideas. The deciding factor for Galileo was, the Thirty Years War, which, although not exactly a "Catholics versus Protestants" affair, was certainly a time for the Catholic Church to worry about the potential for Protestant heresay. As a result, an inquisition was set up in Italy, and set about repressing anything that went against the current Catholic teachings (Think about how strongly many Americans reacted to criticism of the administration when the War on Terror was launched; nationalistic fervours always run higher during a war.). Galileo was merely at the wrong place at the wrong time, and the fact that his dialogue took a few shots at the pope didn't help his case. Of course what the inquisition did to him was wrong, but to conclude from this that the Catholic Church has been repressing progress for thousands of years over this one incident is extremely unfair.

On the whole, the Catholic Church has reflected the ideas and norms of the time, and its support of scientific progress and preservation of knowledge is to be commended. The only shame is that it hasn't kept up with the rest of society recently.

[New Chalcedon]

While I appreciate the sheer effort you went to, if I might make a point of correction:

The Spanish inquisition was created by and under the control of the King and Queen of Spain, not the church

The Spanish Inquisition was created by the Pope, but ordered to follow strict rules of due process, including the provision of counsel for the accused and the option to appeal the rulings.

This ended when Ferdinand of Aragon & Castile (i.e., King Ferdinand of Spain) ordered the Inquisition to disregard the Papal instructions. But I note that this doesn't stop the OP from blaming the Church - wholly and completely - for every bad thing does by the Inquisition.

[Valcouria]

On the whole, the Catholic Church has reflected the ideas and norms of the time, and its support of scientific progress and preservation of knowledge is to be commended. The only shame is that it hasn't kept up with the rest of society recently.

What is a shame is that the abhorrent practices of modern society are considered 'progressive' and 'acceptable.'

[Nationalist State of Knox]

While I appreciate the sheer effort you went to, if I might make a point of correction:

The Spanish inquisition was created by and under the control of the King and Queen of Spain, not the church

The Spanish Inquisition was created by the Pope, but ordered to follow strict rules of due process, including the provision of counsel for the accused and the option to appeal the rulings.

This ended when Ferdinand of Aragon & Castile (i.e., King Ferdinand of Spain) ordered the Inquisition to disregard the Papal instructions. But I note that this doesn't stop the OP from blaming the Church - wholly and completely - for every bad thing does by the Inquisition.

The Portuguese Inquisition was authorised by the Church, and believe it or not the Roman Inquisition was instigated by the Church. True, the Spanish Inquisition might not have been performed entirely under Papal jurisdiction, but that doesn't mean that the other three weren't as well.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

While it might be interesting to live in a world of black and white, I, personally, like my grey. It gives things much more definition and depth.

The Catholic Church may have done some wholly reprehensible and evil things, but that does not make the entirety of the organization wholly reprehensible and evil. The Church has also done many good things throughout its history, most notably being the fact that it held Europe together after the fall of Rome and prevented the people from falling back into uncivilized barbarism. They kept knowledge, science, and literacy alive until the Renaissance. The fact that they are staunchly opposed to all things science today does not mean that was always their position.

In short, the Catholic Church has historically been a great force for good in Europe. However, it has fallen far since then, and it's probably time to put them to sleep. Then smother them with a pillow. The Church is no longer doing good things and is only holding society, social progress, science, and technology back.

This. That Catholics NEED to go the way of the Nazis and KKK - and those who survive need to be maligned like the criminals they are IMHO.

And you need to step back from the over-the-top 'solution' suggestions. *** Warned *** for the trolling there. Let's not suggest that an entire religion deserves to be treated like monsters over the actions or inactions of individuals within it.

[North Stradia]

On the whole, the Catholic Church has reflected the ideas and norms of the time, and its support of scientific progress and preservation of knowledge is to be commended. The only shame is that it hasn't kept up with the rest of society recently.

What is a shame is that the abhorrent practices of modern society are considered 'progressive' and 'acceptable.'

Morality is subjective, and yours is outdated.

[Arkinesia]

Oh my god now the antitheists are getting on the myth that the Catholic Church suppressed science too.

Fuck's sake people. How much more are we going to politicize the most inane parts of history?

[Genivaria]

Any organization which actively protects pedophiles is a criminal organization in my book.

[Farnhamia]

Any organization which actively protects pedophiles is a criminal organization in my book.

No, it's an organization that is breaking the law. The Church was not organized for the purpose of breaking the law. That some persons in authority in the Church break the law by sheltering these people makes them criminals, not the entire Church. If you know me, you know I'm no fan of theism, organized or otherwise, but I'm even less a fan of hugely sweeping generalizations.

[Arkinesia]

Three of your four bullet points are flawed on the basis of humanity being inherently flawed, not being inherent flaws of religion itself. The fourth is a flat out fucking misrepresentation of the case that borders on a lie that would get you laughed out of any history seminar worth its salt.

So let's recap your OP.

The Crusades — Humanity is shitty. Deal with it. People make up stupid fucking reasons to go to war. Shocker, I know. I mean, it's not like that's happened recently or anything, right?

Suppression of Science: Copernicus and Galileo — Now while I can almost grant you Copernicus, I cannot in good conscience credit Galileo. You have misrepresented the case of Galileo in the OP to the point that I'm tempted to call you a liar. Galileo was not punished severely by the Inquisition for his scientific views, indeed, the Pope Urban supported and defended Galileo and his right to express his views until Galileo wrote a book in which a character which clearly represented the Pope portrayed Urban as a bumbling retard. It's not like there was a First Amendment in this day and age, and indeed, it would be in modern times grounds for a libel suit. To claim that Galileo was placed under house arrest because of his scientific views is fucking ludicrous, and you should feel ashamed of yourself for so grossly misrepresenting the fields of astronomy and history.

The Inquisition — Shocker alert inbound—humans do shitty things.

Medieval Corruption: Indulgences, Relics, and the Manipulation of the Masses — You should already know what I'm going to say. But I'll say it again. Humans do shitty things in the name of anything accessible.

For the record I wrote this out while listening to Judas Priest and Rage Against the Machine.

Also I would like to qualify that I think the RCC is a pretty bad organization all in all.

[Nationalist State of Knox]

Three of your four bullet points are flawed on the basis of humanity being inherently flawed, not being inherent flaws of religion itself. The fourth is a flat out fucking misrepresentation of the case that borders on a lie that would get you laughed out of any history seminar worth its salt.

I wasn't trying to show that religion is flawed, I was trying to show that the Church (as an organisation) was. That makes three of your points completely irrelevant, as these actions were still committed by the Church, flawed humanity or not.

Suppression of Science: Copernicus and Galileo — Now while I can almost grant you Copernicus, I cannot in good conscience credit Galileo. You have misrepresented the case of Galileo in the OP to the point that I'm tempted to call you a liar. Galileo was not punished severely by the Inquisition for his scientific views, indeed, the Pope Urban supported and defended Galileo and his right to express his views until Galileo wrote a book in which a character which clearly represented the Pope portrayed Urban as a bumbling retard. It's not like there was a First Amendment in this day and age, and indeed, it would be in modern times grounds for a libel suit. To claim that Galileo was placed under house arrest because of his scientific views is fucking ludicrous, and you should feel ashamed of yourself for so grossly misrepresenting the fields of astronomy and history.

You're the liar here. The Pope never encouraged Galileo to express his views; he issued an injunction that forbade him to write on the topic.

[New Chalcedon]

Three of your four bullet points are flawed on the basis of humanity being inherently flawed, not being inherent flaws of religion itself. The fourth is a flat out fucking misrepresentation of the case that borders on a lie that would get you laughed out of any history seminar worth its salt.

So let's recap your OP.

The Crusades — Humanity is shitty. Deal with it. People make up stupid fucking reasons to go to war. Shocker, I know. I mean, it's not like that's happened recently or anything, right?

Suppression of Science: Copernicus and Galileo — Now while I can almost grant you Copernicus, I cannot in good conscience credit Galileo. You have misrepresented the case of Galileo in the OP to the point that I'm tempted to call you a liar. Galileo was not punished severely by the Inquisition for his scientific views, indeed, the Pope Urban supported and defended Galileo and his right to express his views until Galileo wrote a book in which a character which clearly represented the Pope portrayed Urban as a bumbling retard. It's not like there was a First Amendment in this day and age, and indeed, it would be in modern times grounds for a libel suit. To claim that Galileo was placed under house arrest because of his scientific views is fucking ludicrous, and you should feel ashamed of yourself for so grossly misrepresenting the fields of astronomy and history.

The Inquisition — Shocker alert inbound—humans do shitty things.

Medieval Corruption: Indulgences, Relics, and the Manipulation of the Masses — You should already know what I'm going to say. But I'll say it again. Humans do shitty things in the name of anything accessible.

For the record I wrote this out while listening to Judas Priest and Rage Against the Machine.

Also I would like to qualify that I think the RCC is a pretty bad organization all in all.

Also, the Inquisition - particularly the Spanish Inquisition - made at least one notable contribution to jurisprudence. The latter days of the Inquisition introduced the concept of "due process", as well as that of standards of evidence.

You're the liar here. The Pope never encouraged Galileo to express his views; he issued an injunction that forbade him to write on the topic.

From The Galileo Project (online; pro-Galileo):

Upon Barberini' s ascendance of the papal throne in 1623 [as Pope Urban VIII], Galileo came to Rome and had six interviews with the new Pope. It was at these meetings that Galileo was given permission to write about the Copernican theory, as long as he treated it as a hypothesis. After the publication of Galileo' s Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Systems of the World, in 1632, the patronage relationship was broken. It appears that the Pope never forgave Galileo for putting the argument of God's omnipotence (the argument he himelf had put to Galileo in 1623) in the mouth of Simplicio, the staunch Aristotelian whose arguments had been systematically destroyed in the previous 400-odd pages.

(Emphasis mine)

The Pope of the day had six meetings - I'm sure I need not tell you how precious his time would have been, as the Pope then was both a spiritual leader and a temporal prince - and then specifically gave him permission to publish his work, conditional upon treating it as a hypothesis. This permission was never revoked, and relations between Galileo and the Church only re-soured when he lampooned the Pope in terms that, had he done it to a King, would have gotten him executed for treason. And the penalty the Church exacted for a 400-page book that repeatedly insulted the Pope was.....house arrest.

So no, I'm afraid that the evidence (as opposed to your own prejudiced anti-Catholic fantasies) indicates that you, and not Arkinesia, are the liar in this conversation.

[North Stradia]

Oh my god now the antitheists are getting on the myth that the Catholic Church suppressed science too.

Fuck's sake people. How much more are we going to politicize the most inane parts of history?

They did. They also harbored pedophiles.

[Nationalist State of Knox]

Three of your four bullet points are flawed on the basis of humanity being inherently flawed, not being inherent flaws of religion itself. The fourth is a flat out fucking misrepresentation of the case that borders on a lie that would get you laughed out of any history seminar worth its salt.

So let's recap your OP.

The Crusades — Humanity is shitty. Deal with it. People make up stupid fucking reasons to go to war. Shocker, I know. I mean, it's not like that's happened recently or anything, right?

Suppression of Science: Copernicus and Galileo — Now while I can almost grant you Copernicus, I cannot in good conscience credit Galileo. You have misrepresented the case of Galileo in the OP to the point that I'm tempted to call you a liar. Galileo was not punished severely by the Inquisition for his scientific views, indeed, the Pope Urban supported and defended Galileo and his right to express his views until Galileo wrote a book in which a character which clearly represented the Pope portrayed Urban as a bumbling retard. It's not like there was a First Amendment in this day and age, and indeed, it would be in modern times grounds for a libel suit. To claim that Galileo was placed under house arrest because of his scientific views is fucking ludicrous, and you should feel ashamed of yourself for so grossly misrepresenting the fields of astronomy and history.

The Inquisition — Shocker alert inbound—humans do shitty things.

Medieval Corruption: Indulgences, Relics, and the Manipulation of the Masses — You should already know what I'm going to say. But I'll say it again. Humans do shitty things in the name of anything accessible.

For the record I wrote this out while listening to Judas Priest and Rage Against the Machine.

Also I would like to qualify that I think the RCC is a pretty bad organization all in all.

Also, the Inquisition - particularly the Spanish Inquisition - made at least one notable contribution to jurisprudence. The latter days of the Inquisition introduced the concept of "due process", as well as that of standards of evidence.

You're the liar here. The Pope never encouraged Galileo to express his views; he issued an injunction that forbade him to write on the topic.

From The Galileo Project (online; pro-Galileo):

Upon Barberini' s ascendance of the papal throne in 1623 [as Pope Urban VIII], Galileo came to Rome and had six interviews with the new Pope. It was at these meetings that Galileo was given permission to write about the Copernican theory, as long as he treated it as a hypothesis. After the publication of Galileo' s Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Systems of the World, in 1632, the patronage relationship was broken. It appears that the Pope never forgave Galileo for putting the argument of God's omnipotence (the argument he himelf had put to Galileo in 1623) in the mouth of Simplicio, the staunch Aristotelian whose arguments had been systematically destroyed in the previous 400-odd pages.

(Emphasis mine)

The Pope of the day had six meetings - I'm sure I need not tell you how precious his time would have been, as the Pope then was both a spiritual leader and a temporal prince - and then specifically gave him permission to publish his work, conditional upon treating it as a hypothesis. This permission was never revoked, and relations between Galileo and the Church only re-soured when he lampooned the Pope in terms that, had he done it to a King, would have gotten him executed for treason. And the penalty the Church exacted for a 400-page book that repeatedly insulted the Pope was.....house arrest.

So no, I'm afraid that the evidence (as opposed to your own prejudiced anti-Catholic fantasies) indicates that you, and not Arkinesia, are the liar in this conversation.

I'll grant you this, but my focus wasn't so much on the fact that Galileo was punished: it was that his and Copernicus' books were placed on one of the Inquisition's Indexes for challenging geocentrism.

[Typhlochactas]

Don't forget about contraceptives and the holocaust.

[Nationalist State of Knox]

Don't forget about contraceptives and the holocaust.

No.

[Typhlochactas]

I'll grant you this, but my focus wasn't so much on the fact that Galileo was punished: it was that his and Copernicus' books were placed on one of the Inquisition's Indexes for challenging geocentrism.

Many important people in the church at the time were geocentrists, and were not persecuted.

[Typhlochactas]

Don't forget about contraceptives and the holocaust.

No.

Feel free to ignore the church's support, at some points, for the holocaust.

[Nationalist State of Knox]

I'll grant you this, but my focus wasn't so much on the fact that Galileo was punished: it was that his and Copernicus' books were placed on one of the Inquisition's Indexes for challenging geocentrism.

Many important people in the church at the time were geocentrists, and were not persecuted.

Ugh. Please stop.

[Saruhan]

No.

Feel free to ignore the church's support, at some points, for the holocaust.

Which is why the Pope hid Jews in Vatican owned buildings, sure

[Ganos Lao]

That Catholics NEED to go the way of the Nazis and KKK - and those who survive need to be maligned like the criminals they are IMHO.

Isn't that rather a hasty generalization? Not all Catholics are "criminals".

There are Catholics out there who are just trying to live a life in accordance with their beliefs. Honest, good folk who just happen to believe in Jesus and live accordingly. People who don't believe in the more hardcore strains of their faith. I know a Catholic girl, and she's hardly at all a 'criminal'.

If you're going to talk about getting rid of negative influences on society, at least do it properly. What you're saying seems to me to be the equivalent of "all them black people are criminals" or "all gay people have the AIDS" or whatever else.