I wanted to post a webpage that will hopefully provide some insight as to how the Old Religion came to be considered "evil", and open a discussion on why Witchcraft is still kept mainly in the "broomcloset" even today:

http://www.paganteahouse.com/malleus_maleficarum/index.html

------------------
An ye harm none, do what ye will.

Aaah ... the Hammer.

Forgive me if I comment now and read later. Suffice to say that the Malleus is perhaps the greatest book my (Catholic) high school library ever had the misfortune of offering me. (Don't get me wrong, I also picked up Neil Simon and thus a discomforting sense of humor about Polish-Jewish families; hey, Simon doesn't mind, judging by his introductions, but it doesn't mean people don't look at me strangely when I laugh at an obscure joke.)

Um ... right. Anyway, back to the Hammer. I've never really come across an explanation of the Inquisitions that really offers any proper insight into how it developed. Accusations of illiteracy and superstition burning like wildfire through the masses doesn't explain how those dangerous superstitions came about. Even wonderful Armstrong, and Burton, with whom I've tortured Exosci's posters for months, can't get a full grip on it.

But, as I recall, the Malleus is brilliantly insightful reading. A theory I'll have to bear in mind when I pass through it this time--which I've encountered since my last foray into these evil pages--is an extreme case of sexual repression gone bad on a mass-hysteria level. For the record, I'm laughing as hard as anyone else, but who says love isn't lethal? :D

The overriding sense of authority Kramer and Sprenger bleed all over the page is amazing in its own right. While I expect some sense of affirming confidence of any philosophical writer, this is certainly an absurd zenith in the history of Catholic-sponsored cruelties.

What kills me even more (if you'll forgive a sick metaphor) is the amount of assumption necessary to float that quality of pretentious authority. I don't recall a single logical argument making sense; I couldn't (and, of course, with degrading memory, still can't) imagine any of my schoolmates daring to approach this level of superstitious pretense, and thus could not even begin to sympathize with the Hammer's extremity.

I'm blathering excessively. :rolleyes: Whoops.

Okay ... I must confess, before I go, that I'm feeling almost dreamy with a sense of youth; if nothing else, I get a ton of nostalgia dumping down on me. It's been almost ten years since I've seen this book ....

thanx much,
Tiassa :cool:

------------------
We are unutterably alone, essentially, especially in the things most intimate and important to us. (Ranier Maria Rilke)

I found a copy of the Hammer at a local Barnes & Noble. I didn't have any money, but I grabbed a coffee while I flipped through it.

The early witch/church conflict stemmed, I believe, from the witches' herb gardens. rather than pray to God or the saints for cures, the villagers would go to the witch who would whip up a healing tea and send the villagers on their way. She represented an alternative, which was a major threat to a fledgling institution such as the church was. Through systematic propaganda, the witch was turned into something evil.

With witches now the accepted bad guys, people would accept any notion that these lonely old women (and men) were plotting against them daily, and soon would believe that anyone could be a witch.

Enter the rich. Some wealthy landowners didn't approve of this terrible treatment of innocent people and dared speak out. The only answer the church had was to denounce the landowner as being in league with the witches. The church and state were not separate, and with a few bribes the landowner was brought up on charges of witchcraft, tried and either excommunicated or executed. At any rate, his lands now fell to the church. That's when the dollar signs popped up in the Pope's eyes.

The Inquisition became a convenient way for the church to get property. When poor people were accused, the church had to allow it to happen even if it meant they would only gain a few coins and a cow for their trouble. By not regulating it too closely, nobody asked questions when Gilles deRailles, who fought heroically alongside Joan of Arc, was brought up on such outrageous charges. By applying it acros the board, a lot of unnecessary questions were avoided.

Well, that's my opinion, at least. Gotta go, the office is calling!

Yucky. M.M. is a terrible book, I've read part of it and if I didn't know how many innocent lives were lost due to those pages I'd find it funny. I suppose I should read the whole thing, it's probably an important thing for any witch to arm her/himself with - insight into "witch haters". Sad, so, so sad. :(

I recommend reading it. Ignoring an ugly part of the past won't make it go away, and we certainly don't learn anything from forgetting. It's also a terrific (and I mean that in the original definition of terrifying) sociological study of how the minority can easily control the majority by playing on fear. Compare it to the Red Scare of the 1950s as well as the current tactics used by the EPA and the UN.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.-Santayana, Life of Reason

Good points, everyone!

A theory I'll have to bear in mind when I pass through it this time--which I've encountered since my last foray into these evil pages--is an extreme case of sexual repression gone bad on a mass-hysteria level.

Tiassa,

I believe you have a very valid point here. I would like to quote a paragraph from Question 15, Part III:

The third precaution to be observed in this tenth action is that the hair should be shaved from every part of her body. The reason for this is the same as that for stripping her of her clothes, which we have already mentioned; for in order to preserve their power of silence they are in the habit of hiding some superstitious object in their clothes or in their hair, or even in the most secret parts of their bodies which must not be named.

The Inquisition became a convenient way for the church to get property.

Oxygen,

No doubt this was a big part of it, but mostly I think the Church was trying to gain power by destroying the opposition at every opportunity. And certainly, the more tithing members they had, the more rich and powerful they became.


I suppose I should read the whole thing, it's probably an important thing for any witch to arm her/himself with - insight into "witch haters". Sad, so, so sad.

MoonCat,

I agree wholeheartedly. It is sad, and we should read it. We can't enlighten anyone else if we remain in the dark ourselves.


The Malleus Maleficarum was prefaced by the Bull of Innocent VIII. I would like to copy the last portion of this papal endorsement here for your convenience:

At the same time by Letters Apostolic We require Our venerable Brother, the Bishop of Strasburg (Albrecht von Bayern, 1478-1506 - ed.), that he himself shall announce, or by some other or others cause to be announced, the burthen if Our Bull, which he shall solemnly publish when and so often as he deems it necessary, or when he shall be requested so to do by the Inquisitors or by one of them. Nor shall he suffer them in disobedience to the tenor of these presents to be molested or hindered by any authority whatsoever, but he shall threaten all who endeavour to hinder or harass the Inquisitors, all who oppose them, all rebels, of whatsoever rank, estate, position, pre-eminence, dignity, or any condition they may be, or whatsoever privilege or exemption they may claim, with excommunication, suspension, interdict, and yet more terrible penalties, censures, and punishment, as may seem good to him, and that without any right of appeal, and if he will he may by Our authority aggravate and renew these penalties as often as he list, calling in, if so please him, the help of the secular arm.
Non obstantibus . . . Let no man therefore . . . But if any dare to do so, which God forbid, let him know that upon him will fall the wrath of Almighty God, and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
Given at Rome, at S. Peter's, on the 9 December of the Year of the Incarnation of Our Lord one thousand four hundred and eighty-four, in the first year of Our Pontificate.

To my knowledge, this Vatican edict was never rescinded.

------------------
An ye harm none, do what ye will.

To my knowledge, this Vatican edict was never rescinded.


Prove it!