RFC Europe playtesting feedback thread

[kochman]

That's awesome!

 

[TheCzech]

You are right in this, Praha is preferred from Prague (BTW was this the name in Czech 10 centuries ago?). About Zavist....well, I suppose you are right. Yet, Prague would have to spawn around 800-900 AD.

yeah, I guess it might have to. Well to me, whatever works best, but Zavist should not be there. At all.


Another thing, Kievian Rus and Arabia always collapse. It's kind of strange because the Byzantines last forever (exaggerated) and the Arabs just collapse right after the first crusade (sometimes later). Kievian Rus just gets up to a certain point and then collapse, and it's very early too. It's kind of annoying that it happens.

 

[fireclaw722]

and now something that is a funny timing-condition (if not a bug) connected with th reformation.
What happens if you discover the printing press and decide to follow the reformation, at the same turn as you are allowed to divert a crusade?

I can attack any non-catholic, however that includes my own civ.
I'm Austria and you can see Wien, my capital, as a target for the crusade.

I wonder what happens if you attack yourself...

 

[AOS9001]

I wonder what happens if you attack yourself...

That would be... well, either game would explode, nothing would happen, or you'd get a stack of free units.

I demand a save of this be put up, if possible. Wait, you can't get the main menu when other things pop up, can you?

 

[Duke of Awesome]

yeah but theres an auto save every four turns right?

 

[AOS9001]

Ah, you are correct. Let's hope he hasn't played since this event.

 

[civ_king]

Or Germany? Or Scandinavia?
This really is an odd post, and seems a bit under informed on the subject.
First off, Luther doesn't represent Protestantism. He was an important figure that started the Reformation, sure, but Protestantism is much larger than his beliefs. He was a part of Protestantism, Protestantism wasn't a part of him.

The reason for the boost... at least one of them... Protestants allowed women to learn to read (and therefore they were more educated and added to the "brain pool"), whereas in other religions of the time that was pretty much not allowed. Also, with the massive use of the printing press in the north, the exchange of information was more rapid, greater reaching.

Basically, Protestantism led to the empowerment of the individual as opposed to the Catholic empowerment of the group. This led to a huge boom because it opened so many more doors, intellectually speaking, that had only been flirted with before by the likes of Voltaire and Erasmus for example. A whole new philosphy and way of life.
The climax of this was the birth of the USA, which in its earlier days was hugely Protestant, and clearly founded on Protestant principles.

Printing press was only a part of it... more people reading what was printed helped a lot too...

And, regarding projects:

Working harder... prospering on a personal level.

One of the main point of the reformation (helped by the printing press) was that people were allowed to read the bible directly without the mediation of priests.
This was a stimulation to research and think with your own brain instead of accepting the word of the institutional church.
In this sense the reformation stimulated the scientific mindset at the base of scientific revolution and later on illuminism.

so, in my view, a scientific bonus for the protestants is justified.

Can people please separate Protestants and Printing Press?
1) Catholicism never prevent women from reading
2) General literacy was low as books were very expensive, and only the rich could afford them
3) Protestant work ethic eh? Must be why on average Catholic countries were more prosperous...
4) Books were rare enough that typically only a church could afford one, there was a reason the priests lectured on theology to the peasants
5) Q: What group was at the forefront of the scientific Revolution and human rights? A: Catholics!

I will concede that Catholicism struggles to reconcile with capitalism/globalization, after all the brutal exploitation of your fellow man is anathema to Catholicism in both contexts.

oh yeah early Protestantism saw poor people as weak and sinful

yeah, I guess it might have to. Well to me, whatever works best, but Zavist should not be there. At all.


Another thing, Kievian Rus and Arabia always collapse. It's kind of strange because the Byzantines last forever (exaggerated) and the Arabs just collapse right after the first crusade (sometimes later). Kievian Rus just gets up to a certain point and then collapse, and it's very early too. It's kind of annoying that it happens.

Kiev gets killed by Keshiks in my games

Ah, you are correct. Let's hope he hasn't played since this event.

As long as he hasn't started a new game or gone more than 40 turns

 

[Jusos2108]

Can people please separate Protestants and Printing Press?
1) Catholicism never prevent women from reading
2) General literacy was low as books were very expensive, and only the rich could afford them
3) Protestant work ethic eh? Must be why on average Catholic countries were more prosperous...
4) Books were rare enough that typically only a church could afford one, there was a reason the priests lectured on theology to the peasants
5) Q: What group was at the forefront of the scientific Revolution and human rights? A: Catholics!

I will concede that Catholicism struggles to reconcile with capitalism/globalization, after all the brutal exploitation of your fellow man is anathema to Catholicism in both contexts.

oh yeah early Protestantism saw poor people as weak and sinful

You are kidding right? In the Middle Ages catholisim was very conservative, prevented new inventions and persecuted scientist with new ideas. The catholist church was one of the main reasons that the Middle Ages were so 'dark'. For example burning of heretics and 'witches', these were actually just ways to maintain peoples obedience for the church's own benefit. This something that they still do at some level.

I am not saying that protestatism was any better at first, although slowly and steadily protestants decreased their church's influence over them, which eventually lead to free thinking (in a way as catholism didn't allow people to think for themself, the church did it for them), free speech, women rights and to much better overall results than the corrupted (indulgences!!) ways of catholism.

 

[civ_king]

You are kidding right? In the Middle Ages catholisim was very conservative, prevented new inventions and persecuted scientist with new ideas. The catholist church was one of the main reasons that the Middle Ages were so 'dark'. For example burning of heretics and 'witches', these were actually just ways to maintain peoples obedience for the church's own benefit. This something that they still do at some level.

I am not saying that protestatism was any better at first, although slowly and steadily protestants decreased their church's influence over them, which eventually lead to free thinking (in a way as catholism didn't allow people to think for themself, the church did it for them), free speech, women rights and to much better overall results than the corrupted (indulgences!!) ways of catholism.

Council of Paderborn: Witchcraft is BS
Council of Frankfurt: death penalty for those who burn "witches" because witchcraft doesn't exist therefore they are innocent

Religious witch burning picked up drastically in newly Protestant countries, it became state organized too...

The whole "dark ages" thing got debunked by academics 50+ years ago (FYI the History Channel is considered crap by academics)

Persecution of "scientists" didn't happen as most of the learned people of Europe before the printing press were Catholic clergy... Basically you had Galileo on trial for libel and that was about it

Indulgences? Fourth Lateran Council (1215) tried to eliminate the abuses of indulgences,

In 1392, more than a century before Martin Luther published the 95 Theses, Pope Boniface IX wrote to the Bishop of Ferrara condemning the practice of certain members of religious orders who falsely claimed that they were authorized by the pope to forgive all sorts of sins, and exacted money from the simple-minded among the faithful by promising them perpetual happiness in this world and eternal glory in the next.

I've never seen anything close to reputable for

[The Catholic Church prevented] free thinking (in a way as catholism didn't allow people to think for themself, the church did it for them), free speech, women rights

 

[The Turk]

You are kidding right? In the Middle Ages catholisim was very conservative, prevented new inventions and persecuted scientist with new ideas. The catholist church was one of the main reasons that the Middle Ages were so 'dark'. For example burning of heretics and 'witches', these were actually just ways to maintain peoples obedience for the church's own benefit. This something that they still do at some level.

To tell you the truth, it was actually the Catholic Church which kept the small flame of education alive in the darkened West. The reason so many people were illiterate, was because of the serfdom which was placed on them, which had its beginnings in the reign of Constantine the Great, who enslaved pesansts to their land. Ever since then, the literacy rate of the West steadily decreased, and education was almost eradicated, except for the few monasteries were it was kept alive. Even the great universities of Europe, were started off as part of Church institutions. Oxford and Cambridge were setup by the Catholic Church of England.

 

[wolfigor]

That would be... well, either game would explode, nothing would happen, or you'd get a stack of free units.

I demand a save of this be put up, if possible. Wait, you can't get the main menu when other things pop up, can you?

Autosave wasn't active, so I do not have any usable save.
Else I would have posted the save in the first place... heck... I would have used it myself to see what would happen!
I was at war with Kiev, and an additional stack near their capital was a god-given gift.
So my target was quite sure.

In terms of considering it a bug... I wouldn't worry, it's not a condition that can happen very frequently.

 

[Jusos2108]

Sorry I don't watch History Channel. All you have is tried and no dates, so basicly nothing. And as the Turk said, it was a small flame. I might return to this matter after weekend, I am busy until that.

 

[civ_king]

Council of Paderborn: Witchcraft is BS
Council of Frankfurt: death penalty for those who burn "witches" because witchcraft doesn't exist therefore they are innocent

Religious witch burning picked up drastically in newly Protestant countries, it became state organized too...

The whole "dark ages" thing got debunked by academics 50+ years ago (FYI the History Channel is considered crap by academics)

Persecution of "scientists" didn't happen as most of the learned people of Europe before the printing press were Catholic clergy... Basically you had Galileo on trial for libel and that was about it

Indulgences? Fourth Lateran Council (1215) tried to eliminate the abuses of indulgences,


I've never seen anything close to reputable for

Sorry I don't watch History Channel. All you have is tried and no dates, so basicly nothing. And as the Turk said, it was a small flame. I might return to this matter after weekend, I am busy until that.

Council of Paderborn happened in 785, it rendered belief in witchcraft punishable by law
Council of Frankfurt happened in 794, it condemned the persecution of alleged witches and wizards, calling the belief in witchcraft superstitious

Spoiler witch hunts :

Witch-hunts were seen across early modern Europe, but the most significant area of witch-hunting in modern Europe is often considered to be central and southern Germany.[15] Germany was a late starter in terms of the numbers of trials, compared to other regions of Europe. Witch-hunts first appeared in large numbers in southern France and Switzerland during the 14th and 15th centuries. The peak years of witch-hunts in southwest Germany were from 1561 to 1670.[16] The first major persecution in Europe, when witches were caught, tried, convicted, and burned in the imperial lordship of Wiesensteig in southwestern Germany, is recorded in 1563 in a pamphlet called "True and Horrifying Deeds of 63 Witches".[17]
In Denmark, the burning of witches increased following the reformation of 1536. Christian IV of Denmark, in particular, encouraged this practice, and hundreds of people were convicted of witchcraft and burnt. In the North Berwick witch trials in Scotland, over 70 people were accused of witchcraft on account of bad weather when James VI of Scotland, who shared the Danish king's interest in witch trials, sailed to Denmark in 1590 to meet his betrothed Anne of Denmark.
Current scholarly estimates of the number of people executed for witchcraft vary between about 40,000 and 100,000.[1] The total number of witch trials in Europe which are known for certain to have ended in executions is around 12,000.[18]
The Salem witch trials in Britain's Massachusetts Colony were an example of European witch hysteria in the Americas.
Contemporary critics of witch hunts included Friedrich von Spee, Gianfrancesco Ponzinibio, Cornelius Loos, Reginald Scot, Anton Praetorius, Johann Mayfurth and Alonzo Salazar de Frias.

The Church promoted learning

Spoiler :

Early Scholasticism
The first significant renewal of learning in the West came with the Carolingian Renaissance of the Early Middle Ages. Charlemagne, advised by Peter of Pisa and Alcuin of York, attracted the scholars of England and Ireland, and by decree in AD 787 established schools in every abbey in his empire. These schools, from which the name scholasticism is derived, became centres of medieval learning.
The period of early scholasticism coincided with the growth of early Islamic philosophy (in the works of Alkindus, Alfarabi, Avicenna, Algazel and Averroes) and Jewish philosophy (especially in the case of Maimonides and Gersonides). From the 8th Century, the Mutazilite school of Islam, compelled to defend their principles against the more orthodox Ash'ari school, looked for support in philosophy. They were among the first to pursue a rational theology, Ilm-al-Kalam, which can be seen as a form of scholasticism. Later, the philosophical schools of Avicennism and Averroism exerted great influence on scholasticism (see Islamic contributions to Medieval Europe).
During this period, knowledge of the Greek language had vanished in the west except in Ireland, where it was widely dispersed in the monastic schools.[2] Irish scholars had a considerable presence in the Frankish court, where they were renowned for their learning.[3] Among them was Johannes Scotus Eriugena, one of the founders of scholasticism.[4] Eriugena was the most significant Irish intellectual of the early monastic period, and an outstanding philosopher in terms of originality.[3] He had considerable familiarity with the Greek language, and translated many works into Latin, affording access to the Cappadocian Fathers and the Greek theological tradition.[3]
The other three founders of scholasticism were the 11th century scholars Peter Abelard, Archbishop Lanfranc of Canterbury and Archbishop Anselm of Canterbury.[4] Anselm is sometimes misleadingly called the "Father of scholasticism," owing to the prominence accorded to reason in his theology. Rather than establish a position by appeal to authority, he used argument to demonstrate why what he believed on authority must be so.
The period also saw the beginning of the 'discovery' of many Greek works which had been lost to the Latin West. As early as the 10th century, scholars in Spain had begun to gather translated texts, and in the latter half of that century began transmitting them to the rest of Europe.[5] After the Reconquista of the 12th century, however, Spain opened even further for Christian scholars, who were now able to work in 'friendly' religious territory.[6] As these Europeans encountered Islamic philosophy, they opened a wealth of Arab knowledge of mathematics and astronomy.[7][citation needed]
At the same time Anselm of Laon systematised the production of the gloss on Scripture, followed by the rise to prominence of dialectic (the middle subject of the medieval trivium) in the work of Abelard, and the production by Peter Lombard of a collection of Sentences or opinions of the Church Fathers and other authorities.
[edit]High Scholasticism
The 13th and early 14th centuries are generally seen as the high period of scholasticism. The early 13th century witnessed the culmination of the recovery of Greek philosophy. Schools of translation grew up in Italy and Sicily, and eventually in the rest of Europe. Scholars such as Adelard of Bath travelled to Sicily and the Arab world, translating works on astronomy and mathematics, including the first complete translation of Euclid’s Elements.[8] Powerful Norman kings gathered men of knowledge from Italy and other areas into their courts as a sign of their prestige.[9] William of Moerbeke's translations and editions of Greek philosophical texts in the middle half of the thirteenth century helped in forming a clearer picture of Greek philosophy, and particularly of Aristotle, than was given by the Arabic versions they had previously relied on, and which had distorted or obscured the relation between Platonic and Aristotelian systems of philosophy.[10] His work formed the basis of the major commentaries that followed.
The universities developed in the large cities of Europe during this period, and rival clerical orders within the church began to battle for political and intellectual control over these centers of educational life. The two main orders founded in this period were the Franciscans and the Dominicans. The Franciscans were founded by Francis of Assisi in 1209. Their leader in the middle of the century was Bonaventure, a traditionalist who defended the theology of Augustine and the philosophy of Plato, incorporating only a little of Aristotle in with the more neoplatonist elements. Following Anselm, Bonaventure supposed that reason can only discover truth when philosophy is illuminated by religious faith. Other important Franciscan writers were Duns Scotus, Peter Auriol and William of Ockham.
By contrast, the Dominican order, founded by St Dominic in 1215 placed more emphasis on the use of reason and made extensive use of the new Aristotelian sources derived from the East, and Moorish Spain. The great representatives of Dominican thinking in this period were Albertus Magnus and (especially) Thomas Aquinas, whose artful[citation needed] synthesis of Greek rationalism and Christian doctrine eventually came to define Catholic philosophy. Aquinas placed more emphasis on reason and argumentation, and was one of the first to use the new translation of Aristotle's metaphysical and epistemological writing. This was a significant departure from the Neoplatonic and Augustinian thinking that had dominated much of early scholasticism. Aquinas showed how it was possible to incorporate much of the philosophy of Aristotle without falling into the "errors" of the Commentator Averroes.



Scholastic schools had two methods of teaching. The first was the lectio: a teacher would read a text, expounding on certain words and ideas, but no questions were permitted; it was a simple reading of a text: instructors explained, and students listened in silence.
The second was the disputatio, which goes right to the heart of scholasticism. There were two types of disputationes: the first was the "ordinary" type, whereby the question to be disputed was announced beforehand; the second was the quodlibetal, whereby the students proposed a question to the teacher without prior preparation. The teacher advanced a response, citing authoritative texts such as the Bible to prove his position. Students then rebutted the response, and the quodlibetal went back and forth. Someone took notes on what was said, allowing the teacher to summarise all arguments and present his final position the following day, riposting all rebuttals.

Science in late Middle Ages

Spoiler :

Late Middle Ages (AD 1300–1500)
The first half of the 14th century saw the scientific work of great thinkers. The logic studies by William of Occam led him to postulate a specific formulation of the principle of parsimony, known today as Occam's Razor. This principle is one of the main heuristics used by modern science to select between two or more underdetermined theories.
As Western scholars became more aware (and more accepting) of controversial scientific treatises of the Byzantine and Islamic Empires these readings sparked new insights and speculation. The works of the early Byzantine scholar John Philoponus inspired Western scholars such as Jean Buridan to question the received wisdom of Aristotle's mechanics. Buridan developed the theory of impetus which was the first step towards the modern concept of inertia. Buridan anticipated Isaac Newton when he wrote:

...after leaving the arm of the thrower, the projectile would be moved by an impetus given to it by the thrower and would continue to be moved as long as the impetus remained stronger than the resistance, and would be of infinite duration were it not diminished and corrupted by a contrary force resisting it or by something inclining it to a contrary motion

Thomas Bradwardine and his partners, the Oxford Calculators of Merton College, Oxford, distinguished kinematics from dynamics, emphasizing kinematics, and investigating instantaneous velocity. They first formulated the mean speed theorem: a body moving with constant velocity travels distance and time equal to an accelerated body whose velocity is half the final speed of the accelerated body. They also demonstrated this theorem—essence of "The Law of Falling Bodies" -- long before Galileo is credited with this.
In his turn, Nicole Oresme showed that the reasons proposed by the physics of Aristotle against the movement of the earth were not valid and adduced the argument of simplicity for the theory that the earth moves, and not the heavens. In the whole of his argument in favor of the Earth's motion Oresme is both more explicit and much clearer than that given two centuries latter by Copernicus. He was also the first to assume that color and light are of the same nature and the discoverer of the curvature of light through atmospheric refraction; even though, up to now, the credit for this latter achievement has been given to Hooke.
The historian of science Ronald Numbers notes that the modern scientific assumption of methodological naturalism can be also traced back to the work of these medieval thinkers:
By the late Middle Ages the search for natural causes had come to typify the work of Christian natural philosophers. Although characteristically leaving the door open for the possibility of direct divine intervention, they frequently expressed contempt for soft-minded contemporaries who invoked miracles rather than searching for natural explanations. The University of Paris cleric Jean Buridan (a. 1295-ca. 1358), described as "perhaps the most brilliant arts master of the Middle Ages," contrasted the philosopher’s search for "appropriate natural causes" with the common folk’s erroneous habit of attributing unusual astronomical phenomena to the supernatural. In the fourteenth century the natural philosopher Nicole Oresme (ca. 1320–82), who went on to become a Roman Catholic bishop, admonished that, in discussing various marvels of nature, "there is no reason to take recourse to the heavens, the last refuge of the weak, or demons, or to our glorious God as if He would produce these effects directly, more so than those effects whose causes we believe are well known to us." [48]
However, a series of events that would be known as the Crisis of the Late Middle Ages was under its way. When came the Black Death of 1348, it sealed a sudden end to the previous period of massive scientific change. The plague killed a third of the people in Europe, especially in the crowded conditions of the towns, where the heart of innovations lay. Recurrences of the plague and other disasters caused a continuing decline of population for a century.

Dark Ages

Spoiler :

Dark Ages?
In the 19th century, the entire Middle Ages were called the "Dark Ages", expressing contempt for an anti-scientific, priest-ridden, superstitious time. However, a radical reevaluation occurred in the early 20th century, based on the wealth of information from the High and Late Middle Ages. When historians now use the term "Dark Ages" to refer to the Early Middle Ages, it is intended to express the idea that the period seems "dark" only because of the shortage of historical records compared with later times.
The stereotype of the entire Middle Ages as a "Dark Age" supposedly caused by the Christian Church for allegedly "placing the word of religious authorities over personal experience and rational activity" is called a caricature by the contemporary historians of science David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers,[49] who say "the late medieval scholar rarely experienced the coercive power of the church and would have regarded himself as free (particularly in the natural sciences) to follow reason and observation wherever they led. There was no warfare between science and the church".[50] Historian Edward Grant writes: "If revolutionary rational thoughts were expressed in the Age of Reason [the 18th century], they were only made possible because of the long medieval tradition that established the use of reason as one of the most important of human activities".[51]
For example, the claim that people of the Middle Ages widely believed that the Earth was flat was first propagated in the 19th century[52] and is still very common in popular culture. This claim is mistaken, as Lindberg and Numbers write: "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference."[52][53] Dante Alighieri's 14th century religious poem, the Divine Comedy, included a number of scientific themes,[54] such as a spherical earth, and the importance of the experimental method. Misconceptions such as: "the Church prohibited autopsies and dissections during the Middle Ages", "the rise of Christianity killed off ancient science", and "the medieval Christian church suppressed the growth of the natural sciences", are all reported by Numbers as examples of widely popular myths that still pass as historical truth, even though they are not supported by current historical research.[55]

Catholic Contributors to science in Middle Ages

Spoiler :

The Venerable Bede (ca. 672–735), monk of the monasteries of Wearmouth and Jarrow who wrote a work On the Nature of Things, several books on the mathematical / astronomical subject of computus, the most influential entitled On the Reckoning of Time. He made original discoveries concerning the nature of the tides and his works on computus became required elements of the training of clergy, and thus greatly influenced early medieval knowledge of the natural world.
Pope Sylvester II (c. 946–1003), a scholar, teacher, mathematician, and later pope, reintroduced the abacus and armillary sphere to Western Europe after they had been lost for centuries following the Greco-Roman era. He was also responsible in part for the spread of the Hindu-Arabic numeral system in Western Europe.
Robert Grosseteste (1168–1253), Bishop of Lincoln, was the central character of the English intellectual movement in the first half of the 13th century and is considered the founder of scientific thought in Oxford. He had a great interest in the natural world and wrote texts on the mathematical sciences of optics, astronomy and geometry. In his commentaries on Aristotle's scientific works, he affirmed that experiments should be used in order to verify a theory, testing its consequences. Roger Bacon was influenced by his work on optics and astronomy.[60]
Albert the Great (1193–1280), Doctor Universalis, was one of the most prominent representatives of the philosophical tradition emerging from the Dominican Order. He is one of the thirty-three Saints of the Roman Catholic Church honored with the title of Doctor of the Church. He became famous for his vast knowledge and for his defence of the pacific coexistence between science and religion. Albert was an essential figure in introducing Greek and Islamic science into the medieval universities, although not without hesitation with regard to particular Aristotelian theses. In one of his most famous sayings he asserted: "Science does not consist in ratifying what others say, but of searching for the causes of phenomena." Thomas Aquinas was his most famous pupil.
Roger Bacon (1214–94), Doctor Admirabilis, joined the Franciscan Order around 1240 where, influenced by Grosseteste, ibn Firnas and others, he dedicated himself to studies where he implemented the observation of nature and experimentation as the foundation of natural knowledge. Bacon was responsible for making the concept of "laws of nature" widespread, and contributed in such areas as mechanics, geography and, most of all, optics.
The optical research of Grosseteste and Bacon established optics as an area of study at the medieval university and formed the basis for a continuous tradition of research into optics that went all the way up to the beginning of the 17th century and the foundation of modern optics by Kepler.[61]
Thomas Aquinas (1227–74), Doctor Angelicus, was an Italian theologian and friar in the Dominican Order. As his mentor Albert the Great, he is a Catholic Saint and Doctor of the Church. His interests were not only in philosophy; he was also interested in alchemy, having written an important treatise titled Aurora Consurgens. However, his greatest contribution to the scientific development of the period was having been mostly responsible for the incorporation of Aristotelianism into the Scholastic tradition, and in particular his Commentary on Aristotle's Physics was responsible for developing one of the most important innovations in the history of physics, first posited by his mentor Averroes for celestial bodies only, namely the notion of the inertial resistant mass of all bodies universally, subsequently further developed by Kepler and Newton in the 17th century. (See Pierre Duhem's analysis The 12th century birth of the notion of mass which advised modern mechanics. from his Systeme Du Monde at [62])
William of Ockham (1285–1350), Doctor Invincibilis, was an English Franciscan friar, philosopher, logician and theologian. Ockham defended the principle of parsimony, which could already be seen in the works of his mentor Duns Scotus. His principle later became known as Occam's Razor and states that if there are various equally valid explanations for a fact, then the simplest one should be chosen. This became a foundation of what would come to be known as the scientific method and one of the pillars of reductionism in science. Ockham probably died of the Black Plague. Jean Buridan and Nicole Oresme were his followers.

Abuse of indulgences

Spoiler :

ABUSES
It may seem strange that the doctrine of indulgences should have proved such a stumbling-block, and excited so much prejudice and opposition. But the explanation of this may be found in the abuses which unhappily have been associated with what is in itself a salutary practice. In this respect of course indulgences are not exceptional: no institution, however holy, has entirely escaped abuse through the malice or unworthiness of man. Even the Eucharist, as St. Paul declares, means an eating and drinking of judgment to the recipient who discerns not the body of the Lord. (1 Cor., xi, 27-9). And, as God's forbearance is constantly abused by those who relapse into sin, it is not surprising that the offer of pardon in the form of an indulgence should have led to evil practices. These again have been in a special way the object of attack because, doubtless, of their connection with Luther's revolt (see LUTHER). On the other hand, it should not be forgotten that the Church, while holding fast to the principle and intrinsic value of indulgences, has repeatedly condemned their misuse: in fact, it is often from the severity of her condemnation that we learn how grave the abuses were.
Even in the age of the martyrs, as stated above there were practices which St. Cyprian was obliged to reprehend, yet he did not forbid the martyrs to give the libelli. In later times abuses were met by repressive measures on the part of the Church. Thus the Council of Clovesho in England (747) condemns those who imagine that they might atone for their crimes by substituting, in place of their own, the austerities of mercenary penitents. Against the excessive indulgences granted by some prelates, the Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215) decreed that at the dedication of a church the indulgence should not be for more than year, and, for the anniversary of the dedication or any other case, it should not exceed forty days, this being the limit observed by the pope himself on such occasions. The same restriction was enacted by the Council of Ravenna in 1317. In answer to the complaint of the Dominicans and Franciscans, that certain prelates had put their own construction on the indulgences granted to these Orders, Clement IV in 1268 forbade any such interpretation, declaring that, when it was needed, it would be given by the Holy See. In 1330 the brothers of the hospital of Haut-Pas falsely asserted that the grants made in their favor were more extensive than what the documents allowed: John XXII had all these brothers in France seized and imprisoned. Boniface IX, writing to the Bishop of Ferrara in 1392, condemns the practice of certain religious who falsely claimed that they were authorized by the pope to forgive all sorts of sins, and exacted money from the simple-minded among the faithful by promising them perpetual happiness in this world and eternal glory in the next. When Henry, Archbishop of Canterbury, attempted in 1420 to give a plenary indulgence in the form of the Roman Jubilee, he was severely reprimanded by Martin V, who characterized his action as "unheard-of presumption and sacrilegious audacity". In 1450 Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, Apostolic Legate to Germany, found some preachers asserting that indulgences released from the guilt of sin as well as from the punishment. This error, due to a misunderstanding of the words "a culpa et a poena", the cardinal condemned at the Council of Magdeburg. Finally, Sixtus IV in 1478, lest the idea of gaining indulgences should prove an incentive to sin, reserved for the judgment of the Holy See a large number of cases in which faculties had formerly been granted to confessors

As to persecution of Scientists, I can't according to the scientific method disprove a negative by direct reasoning, for example I can't disprove radioactive lunar space cheese monkeys living on Pluto.

 

[AdrienIer]

Not only some scientists were persecuted but the ideas of those who weren't were often refuted by the church (see the Copercicus theory on Heliocentrism which was accepted by the church only 3 centuries after his death). The church used to repress any advance in science, any idea that was not in accord to the bible. The protestants on the other side recommended that every person read the bible and interpret it in its own way, so they did not repress as much.

 

[civ_king]

Not only some scientists were persecuted but the ideas of those who weren't were often refuted by the church (see the Copercicus theory on Heliocentrism which was accepted by the church only 3 centuries after his death). The church used to repress any advance in science, any idea that was not in accord to the bible. The protestants on the other side recommended that every person read the bible and interpret it in its own way, so they did not repress as much.

And he could not present any observational "proof", you are aware that the heliocentric theory is incorrect right?
[citation needed] for "The church used to repress any advance in science, any idea that was not in accord to the bible"

 

[AdrienIer]

At least he was right about the fact that the earth is moving around the sun, not the opposite. Obviously the sun isn't the middle of the universe, but it was a big step towards the understanding of the galaxy.
Astrology is an example of how the church used to repress advances in science that was not in accord to the bible, as god was supposed to have created the earth as the center of the world.

 

[kochman]

Can people please separate Protestants and Printing Press?
1) Catholicism never prevent women from reading
2) General literacy was low as books were very expensive, and only the rich could afford them
3) Protestant work ethic eh? Must be why on average Catholic countries were more prosperous...
4) Books were rare enough that typically only a church could afford one, there was a reason the priests lectured on theology to the peasants
5) Q: What group was at the forefront of the scientific Revolution and human rights? A: Catholics!

I will concede that Catholicism struggles to reconcile with capitalism/globalization, after all the brutal exploitation of your fellow man is anathema to Catholicism in both contexts.

oh yeah early Protestantism saw poor people as weak and sinful

And what did the Catholic church see them as? People to be totally exploited by Rome? How did they treat the poor of the New World?
People are sinful, btw. The Protestant church sees all people as sinful. Doesn't the Catholic Church? If not for that sin, there would be no need for Jesus to have come, which is the basis of Christianity...

I am guessing you are catholic and took offense for some reason to the idea that Protestantism and the Printing Press are completely linked.
I think you need to do some historical research into this though, because you clearly haven't, you just posted a knee jerk reaction.
Let me refresh your memory a little. Luther posted his Theses on the church door in Wittemburg. Ok, someone took this down, mass printed it, and circulated it to other cities, which did the same... again and again. Rome COULDN'T stop it, though it tried. If this was being done on a slower pace, ie pre-Printing Press, it would have been stopped, as it had been many many times before.

You know, I didn't even think it was contested that Protestantism and the Printing Press were linked. I have studied the history of the Reformation specifically, and it was not disputed once by any major historian of the period.

1) Not true, and Protestantism is famous for encouraging women to read. It also allowed people to read the bible in their own language, and ponder it, rather than being spoonfed what it means after hearing it (not reading it) in Latin. I am not talking about the super poor of course, but the merchant class in particular, which led to the upswing in more representative forms of government verses monarchies.
2) That changed with the printing press... right? We can agree on that can't we? OK, now factor in that protestants put the bible into the native language of the country, as mentioned above. What good was it having a bible in latin if you can't read latin?
3) What are you talking about? Let's look at the countries that are considered the most prosperous in Europe... Germany, Scandinavia, Holland, England, France, Italy. All but two of those are protestant nations. Spain was prosperous during the period of discovery simply due to exploiting the gold/silver of the new world...
4) Why do you keep drumming this up? We know that. That is why Protestantism never could get off the ground UNTIL the printing press was around, though the sentiments were there for it well before that point.
What is your point about the price of books?
5) Yes, science approved by the Pope was ok. That darn Copernicus, liar that he was... And, Galileo? Excommunicate him, clearly he worked for the devil.
Human rights? Catholics? Are you kidding me? Do you know what the Catholics were doing in the New World? Have you heard of the Inquisition? It was still going in some Catholic countries until almost 1900. How about the wars Protestants had to fight just to be allowed to worship as they wanted without the thumb of Rome over them? How about all the "Crusades" in E. Europe, lots of human rights there...
I mean, it wasn't even until 1993 or 1996 or something that the Catholic Church officially forgave the Jews for killing Jesus. And, didn't the Vatican turn its head while the Nazis were exterminating people all over the place?

Your "facts" are really off base.
Please, research this stuff, because you are just wrong with many of your statements.

I am not saying that the Catholic Church is bad. Its impact on the world is clearly for the best, but the things you are saying fly in the face of history.

 

[kochman]

The church used to repress any advance in science, any idea that was not in accord to the bible. The protestants on the other side recommended that every person read the bible and interpret it in its own way, so they did not repress as much.

This is pretty much the best, most succinct way to put it.

 

[civ_king]

1) I said "Catholicism never prevent[ed] women from reading" you said not true, where is your proof?

You said "Protestantism is famous for encouraging women to read" when did I claim otherwise?

"rather than being spoonfed what it means after hearing it (not reading it) in Latin" If you could afford a Bible before the printing press chances are you could read Latin

2) The Vulgate was a way to keep the Bible unchanged by the ravages of time, not all languages have the necessary words, In English God is called He or Him because it lacks a way to refer to a third party without gender

3) Transposing modern states on the past isn't effective, for example with Germany Bavaria and the Rhineland were prosperous Catholic areas, Belgium (specifically Antwerp) was prosperous like the Nederlands (specifically Amsterdam), Scandinavia wasn't prosperous, England had access to the factors of industrialization first giving it a head start,

4) Even without Protestantism literacy would have drastically increased. How else do you share one Bible between a thousand people? you read it aloud.

5) The Heliocentric model is incorrect, Copernicus also had no proof at the time to back up his hypothesis. Galileo had quite a bit of libel in his book (which also happened to be horribly wrong factually). Yes I do know quite a bit about the colonies in the Americas, for example in Mexico the uprising was lead by a priest, and priests definitely fanned the flames of revolution in the other countries. The Inquisitions? the Spanish one in particular was all about the monarchy lining their pockets. Nearly until 1900? What country was that? Not France, Italy or Spain (though I must admit in Italy it definitely hung around too long). Crusades in Eastern Europe?

I mean, it wasn't even until 1993 or 1996 or something that the Catholic Church officially forgave the Jews for killing Jesus.

And, didn't the Vatican turn its head while the Nazis were exterminating people all over the place?

The answer is recounted by a former inmate of Dachau, Mgr Jean Bernard, later Bishop of Luxembourg:

"The detained priests trembled every time news reached us of some protest by a religious authority, but particularly by the Vatican. We all had the impression that our warders made us atone heavily for the fury these protests evoked ... whenever the way we were treated became more brutal, the Protestant pastors among the prisoners used to vent their indignation on the Catholic priests: 'Again your big naive Pope and those simpletons, your bishops, are shooting their mouths off .. why don't they get the idea once and for all, and shut up. They play the heroes and we have to pay the bill.'"

Albrecht von Kessel, an official at the German Embassy to the Holy See during the war, wrote in 1963:

"We were convinced that a fiery protest by Pius XII against the persecution of the Jews ... would certainly not have saved the life of a single Jew. Hitler, like a trapped beast, would react to any menace that he felt directed at him, with cruel violence."

The real question is, therefore, not what did the Pope say, but what did the Pope do? Actions speak louder than words. Papal policy in Nazi Europe was directed with an eye to local conditions. It was co- ordinated with local hierarchies. Nazi policy towards the Jews varied from country to country. Thus, although anti-Jewish measures were met in France by public protest from Archbishop Saliege of Toulouse, together with Archbishop Gerlier of Lyons and Bishop Thias of Mantauban, their protest was backed by a highly effective rescue and shelter campaign. 200,000 lives were saved. In Holland, as Fr Michael O'Carroll writes, the outcome was 'tragically different'. The Jewish historian Pinchas Lapide sums it up:

"The saddest and most thought provoking conclusion is that whilst the Catholic clergy of Holland protested more loudly, expressly and frequently against Jewish persecutions than the religious hierarchy of any other Nazi-occupied country, more Jews - some 11,000 or 79% of the total - were deported from Holland; more than anywhere else in the West."

Van Kessel's view is therefore borne out by the experience of Nazi Holland: protest merely made for more reprisals.

What of Rome itself? In 1943 the German ambassador to the Holy See, Von Weizsaecker, sent a telegram to Berlin. The telegram has been cited as damning 'evidence' against Pius XII.

"Although under pressure from all sides, the Pope has not let himself be drawn into any demonstrative censure of the deportation of Jews from Rome ... As there is probably no reason to expect other German actions against the Jews of Rome we can consider that a question so disturbing to German-Vatican relations has been liquidated."

Von Weizsaecker's telegram was in fact a warning not to proceed with the proposed deportation of the Roman Jews: 'there is probably no reason to expect other German actions against the Jews of Rome'. Von Weizsaecker's action was backed by a warning to Hitler from Pius XII: if the pursuit and arrest of Roman Jews was not halted, the Holy Father would have to make a public protest. together the joint action of Von Weizsaecker and Pius XII ended the Nazi manhunt against the Jews of Rome. 7,000 lives were saved.

In Hungary, an estimated 80,000 baptismal certificates were issued by Church authorities to Jews. In other areas of Eastern Europe the Vatican escape network (organised via Bulgaria by the Nuncio Roncalli - later John XXIII) has impressed those writers who have studied the subject, with the effectiveness of the Church's rescue operation. David Herstig concludes his book on the subject thus:

"Those rescued by Pius are today living all over the world. There went to Israel alone from Romania 360,000 to the year 1965."

The vindication of Pius XII has been established principally by Jewish writers and from Israeli archives. It is now established that the Pope supervised a rescue network which saved 860,000 Jewish lives - more than all the international agencies put together.

After the war the Chief Rabbi of Israel thanked Pius XII for what he had done. The Chief Rabbi of Rome went one step further. He became a Catholic. He took the name Eugenio.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/piusdef.html

The Pope did all this with the direct threat of German rifles leveled 200 yards beneath his very windows.


please use sources, if I am so blatantly wrong it should be very very easy

 

[kochman]

Dude, I am not doing your homework for you, I already did it for me when I studied this topic back in college. I opened the door to some truths that you may not be aware of, it is on you to walk through that door. Whether you do or not, I don't really care.

The fact is, you haven't disproved the linkage between Protestantism and the Printing Press. which is the issue. Instead, you spent your time saying how great Catholicism is compared to Protestantism (at first), and then on to a basic defense of Catholicism (now).

I am not here to bash Catholicism, as I said, it has definitely been a net force for the positive on this planet... To continue on that route is to be off topic. All organized religions have faults because they are made up of humans, who are faulty.
However, the fact is, that without the Printing Press the Protestant Reformation (and subsequent Catholic Reformation) would probably died as all previous such movement to threaten the central authority of the Pope would have, as a crusade against heretics and infidels.

Even with the Printing Press, such a crusade was undertaken by the Catholics to exterminate the Protestants (and was successful in France in particular), and those "unprosperous" Scandinavians, led by the Swedes, had to fight for the very right to existence of Protestantism... greatly assisted by the widespread publication and dissemination of its ideas and the subsequent stimulus to critical thinking amongst the populace that resulted from the great application of the printing press.

I think you are confusing the argument... I am saying that without the Printing Press, there would not have been Protestantism as known today.
You seem to be arguing that Protestantism didn't create the Printing Press, which I don't believe anyone would disagree with.
The two are linked...