Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!rex!uflorida!gatech!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: math1h3@jetson.uh.edu Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: The Ongoing Inquisition Message-ID: Date: 5 May 91 04:24:54 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of Houston Lines: 92 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article , ldh@eedsp.gatech.edu (Lonnie D Harvel) writes: > > The Inquistion is part of the history of christianity. Though it is > a part we would like to forget, we can never afford to. The continual > persecution which we christians engage in does nothing but harm > the mission which I believe is ours. How can we teach a doctrine of > forgiveness, when we live a doctrine of judgement? How can we > teach truth, if we ignore reason and knowledge? How can we > teach salvation, if all we offer is condemnation? The Inquisition > is not uniquely Catholic it is christian. And it is not a thing > of the past, but continues to rend the body of the Church. It is > the responsibility of every christian to end it. I have to disagree with the notion that all of christianity is to blame for the Inquisition, or that christians in general are involved in continuing persecution. Lonnie is, for one thing, saying that because one kind of 'judgement', the Inquisition, was an evil atrocity, then all forms of judgement are evil and must be ended. Perhaps if Lonnie would give us an example of 'continuing persecution', we might discuss it reasonably. The scriptures indicate clearly that the church must exercise judgement with respect to obvious, persistent, and unrepenant sin. Jesus gave instructions on this topic in Matthew 18, and in 1 Corinthians Paul tells the Corinthians to excommunicate a man guilty of incest. The primary difference between this kind of judgement, and the Inquisition, is that the only punishment given in Scripture (NT) is expulsion from the fellowship of the church. The unrepentant sinner is to be treated as 'a heathen and a tax-collector' (sorry, IRS folks! :-) ). And when this is done, there is always the hope that the sinner will repent and be restored to the church. Again, an example is given in 2 Corinthians, where Paul says that the man guilty of incest, now repentant, is forgiven and to be restored as a member in good standing. The Inquisition, on the other hand, tortured people, and many died. In other places the Catholic church (or the state, acting on the church's request) burned people for heresy, notably John Hus. The Lutherans took a strong stand against such practices in their Augsburg Confession, Article 28, 'The Power of Bishops', or 'Ecclesiastical Power'. They wrote: 'Many and various things have been written in former times about the power of bishops, and some have improperly confused the power of bishops with the temporal sword. Out of this careless confusion many serious wars, tumults, and uprisings have resulted...On this account our teachers have been compelled, for the sake of comforting consciences, to point out the difference between spiritual and temporal power, sword, and authority, and they have taught that because of God's command both authorities and powers are to be honored and esteemed with all reverence as the two highest gifts of God on earth. .... Therefore, the two authorities, the spiritual and the temporal, are not to be mingled or confused, for the spiritual power has its commission to preach the Gospel and administer the sacraments. Hence it should not invade the function of the other, should not set up and depose kings, should not annul temporal laws or undermine obedience to government, should not make or prescribe to the temporal powers concerning worldly matters. .... ... In cases where bishops possess temporal authority and the sword, they possess it not as bishops by divine right, but by human, imperial right, bestowed by Roman emperors and kings for the temporal administration of their lands. Such authority has nothing at all to do with the office of the Gospel.' If you look through Lutheran history, I do not think you will find that Lutheran churches have executed or tortured anyone. Some people blame us for Hitler; while it is true that he used and usurped the churches of Germany, and occasionally quoted Luther's less-than-inspired harangues agains the Jews, the real truth is that the German churches were Hitler's victims and not his collaborators. David H. Wagner a confessional Lutheran My opinions and beliefs on this matter are disclaimed by The University of Houston. [Except for Luther late in life... As he got more temporal power, he found it harder to resist using it to protect the Church. The best evidence I've seen suggested that the German church was split over Hitler. In that sense it was all his victim. However at least some Christians did go along with Nazism, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. I recently saw an estimate that about 1/3 of German Christians were part of churches that actively resisted Hitler. This is actually a fairly good record, I think. Even in extreme cases, not everyone is going to be a rebel. But it's also clear that there were German Lutherans who were Nazis. --clh]