medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
Hi
Just to throw in a thought:
Suppose you are convinced that a certain belief (from whatever religious
point of view - medieval christian or whatever) is necessary for eternal
salvation and that any infidel (again from whatever point of view) is
destined to eternal damnation and hell - are you not duty-bound to do
whatever may be necessary to salvage the immortal souls of your
fellow-humans? Isn't it (if this is your firm belief) necessary even to
apply violence in order to do this? After all you are doing a favor to those
people, aren't you?
And if you can even quote the gospel "Do not think that I came to send peace
upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword," (Mt. 10,34) wouldn't
that be a nice justification for such an attitude?
It is - in my view - besides the point to do here modern exegetic exercises
- some people in the Middle Ages took Mt. 10,34 certainly quite literally. I
am not an expert in Islam - but one might perhaps find similar sentences in
Islamic literature, who knows.
Karl-Georg Schon
-----Original Message-----
From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions of medieval religious
culture [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mariano
Paniello
Sent: Dienstag, 8. November 2005 19:24
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [M-R] Spread of Religion via Conquest
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
Sheesh, Landes! Get in the ring and start throwing punches after the ref has
sounded the bell why dontcha? Nice Rovian bit of stagecraft there!
I exerpt here something I sent Dr. Landes privately, for it is a pertinent
discussion for this list, having to do with the role of military conquest in
the spread of religion:
>The idea that [Islam] was "spread by the sword" is perhaps something you
>should research in detail >before committing to it. Perhaps, as is always
>the case in History, there's more to the picture. Also, >for you of all
>people to ignore the role of conquest in the spread of Christianity
>(Stephen I, Olaf >Trygvasson, Teutonic Knights, the reconquista, et al.)
>seems an inexplicable lapse.
So much for Christianity from 1000 AD onward...but how were the conversions
of entire regions handled by the Roman state bureaucracy? I imagine there
wasn't much conquest involved in those days, since the empire was on the
wane. But was there any coercion involved, or was it more of a bureaucratic
thing?
Thanks,
MP
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|