[jennyp]

Also, now that I think about it, in Linnaeus' time in many countries the Catholic Church was still a quasi-governmental institution. If it wasn't explicitly part of the government, in many cases it had a lot of power over the government. So a ruling by the Church often had as much coercive power as a law passed by the King.

So I doubt that a "banning" by the Church meant soley that Linnaeus would be barred from taking communion, or some similarly narrowly defined proscription.

[js1138]

Anytime and anywhere prior to about 1975, being excommunicated or forcibly expelled from one's church would have had far reaching consequenses. It could me getting fired; it could mean failing to get a promotion; it could effectively end a marriage.

We tend to forget how much actual worldly power churches had until recently. Even now presidential candidates are quizzed about their reasons for leaving a church.

Now on the other side, I went to an intensely liberal college, where my thoughts on just about everything were unwelcome. (I was more of a gadfly than a conservative then.) I can sympathise with FReepers who claim they are discriminated against by college professors.

[old-ager]

> now that I think about it, in Linnaeus' time in many countries the Catholic Church was still a quasi-governmental institution

Linnaeus lived in Lutheran Sweden long after the 16th century reformation.