Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: SoothingDave; CindyDawg
For the record, and it's a shame that it has come to this, I would not throw any of you to the Inquisition for your "crimes" of heterodoxy. I think all decent people like to think that we would hide some Jews in our attic. I am among them.

At the risk of being called a pedant I must point out there is a big difference between "heterodoxy" and "heresy" insofar as doctrine, dogma, and practice is concerned.

The RCC has always allowed a certain amount of heterodoxy in practices while it has always condemned heresy.

You haven't explained how you could, and did, defend the position of a compatriot of yours that in a "Christian Monarchy" the execution of "heretics" would be an allowable practice.

I can understand you wishing to wash your hands of this subject. And, for the record, I believe you when you say you would protect a "heretic".

I do not expect you to retract your defense of the theoretical "Cristian Monarchy" and the execution of heretics.

1,624 posted on 04/01/2004 10:53:47 AM PST by OLD REGGIE ((I am a cult of one! UNITARJEWMIAN) Maybe a Biblical Unitarian?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1607 | View Replies ]


To: OLD REGGIE
At the risk of being called a pedant I must point out there is a big difference between "heterodoxy" and "heresy" insofar as doctrine, dogma, and practice is concerned. The RCC has always allowed a certain amount of heterodoxy in practices while it has always condemned heresy.

Now, I'm gonna be the pednat. Heterodoxy has to do with thoughts, beliefs. Practice that is wrong would be called "hetereopraxis."

I used the word heterodoxy as a softer and more accurate term for most of the folks here. They are not formal heretics. I was just trying to say that I wouldn't cooperate with the oppression of anyone for having different beliefs.

You haven't explained how you could, and did, defend the position of a compatriot of yours that in a "Christian Monarchy" the execution of "heretics" would be an allowable practice.

It's quite simple. In any monolithic society, like those in olden times, there was no seperation of church and state. Heresy and treason are not only the same thing, they are intellectually indistinguishable.

The Jews and Christians were a problem for the pagan Roman Empire because they would not give even token worship to the Roman gods. The Romans, being good polytheists, didn't care what gods you worshipped at home or in your own community. But the Roman gods were part and parcel of the unifying factor for their entire world.

To not give sacrifice to the gods was to rick their wrath and such wrath would befall all of the citizens, not just the obstinate ones.

So a Jew or Christian who refused to pay homage was in fact putting all of his fellow citizens in jeopardy. This is treason.

I am not saying this is rational today or then. And I'm not saying that I think that is a higher way to organize a society, or that I hope society becomes that way again.

But it is absolutely true that in a state such as that, heresy is treason. And treason has always been a capital offense.

SD

1,627 posted on 04/01/2004 11:15:07 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1624 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson