[Peace-discuss] Moon eclipse vs Church eclipse

[n.dahlheim at mchsi.com]

I think one of the best ways to attack "the liberal" myth is to examine the Enlightenment itself from the 
point of view of Foucault who noted that the Enlightenment severed the head of the king and moved 
sovereign power within the body politik.  New systems of discourse emerged and power replicated itself in 
schools, factories, prisons, clinics, etc.  The discourse of liberalism concealed the extension of power into 
all spheres of life, even as it masqueraded as freedom.
  


----------------------  Original Message:  ---------------------
From:    Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com>
To:      peace discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Moon eclipse vs Church eclipse
Date:    Sat, 8 Mar 2008 17:06:57 +0000

> Ah, the good ole Medieval days, eh?  Cholera, typhus, plague, not to mention the
> Inquisition and a Crusade or two ...
> 
> But seriously, folks.  Most of us in this teapot probably agree that the 
> ‘liberal’
> interpretation of history Carl describes, with the genocidal ‘Age of 
> Exploration’ as
> its high point, is way off.  And we aren’t the only ones.  I haven’t had a 
> Western Civ
> class in awhile, but that view of history has actually been out of fashion for 
> quite a
> few years in academia (they even stopped calling it the ‘Renaissance’ for 
> awhile, in
> favor of ‘Early Modern’, but since people at the time called it ‘Renaissance’ 
> [before
> Burkhart], some folks are going back to that now).  And Medieval folks certainly 
> did
> invent some wonderful things, some very useful tools among them.
> 
> The footnote, that the later ‘Enlightenment’ was and is not all it’s cracked up 
> to be,
> is also pretty clear.  But of course the idea of challenging dogmatic authority
> (including, but by no means limited to, the Church) isn’t married to that
> interpretation, any more than all who criticise Stalin are ‘capitalist running 
> dogs’ or
> whatever. 
> 
> In other words, that outdated ‘liberal’ dogma that teaches, or preaches, the 
> dawn of a
> fresh liberation with the rise of capitalism and the modern age – during a later 
> phase
> of which German racists fabricated the ‘Greek miracle’ – is definitely worthy of
> challenge.  But that's not the whole story.
> 
> The literal witch hunts of the ‘Renaissance’, which Carl suggests are such a 
> telling
> example, are not the only sins of the Church and their ilk.  Various churches,
> Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, etc., are rightly known for persecutions of 
> various
> kinds, against heretics, Jews, Muslims, homosexuals, one another, and so on.  
> Islamic
> authorities have lately become famous for these kinds of things, very 
> conveniently of
> course but nonetheless often with some accuracy.  More humane defenders of these 
> faiths
> can always argue, thankfully, that these crimes are not representative of their 
> real
> religion in some sense.  Fine, and more power to them.  
> 
> Let them speak up for the basic goodness of their communities, and I support 
> them, but
> the fact of people in religious authority advocating such abuses remains,
> unfortunately.
> 
> A handful of Christian and Muslim authorities were fairly recently trying to 
> persuade
> their flocks in the ‘Global South’ not to use condoms, because the prophylactics 
> were
> allegedly laced with AIDS and possibly just as intentionally poked full of 
> microsopic
> holes as part of some vast conspiracy – or at the very least ‘interference’ with 
> the
> natural order, including AIDS.  Better to die of AIDS than interfere with God’s 
> holy
> plan, one of them claimed.  This is of course not to say that such monsters 
> represent
> official Christian or Islamic doctrine, but they are authorities in their 
> respective
> spheres, and as such these proclamations are more damaging than, say, a bunch of
> obnoxious remarks at parties.  People believe them because of who they are.
> 
> Not to mention religious prohibitions against divorce, abortion, masturbation,
> drinking, dancing – music of any kind for some – marriage across caste or racial 
> or
> religious boundaries (a rabbi once told friends of mine they were participating 
> in the
> ‘Second Holocaust’ because one of them is Jewish and the other is not), men and 
> women
> shaking hands in public, women driving, etc. and the longstanding battles over
> evolution (right up to the 20th century and the ‘Scopes Monkey Trial’, etc.), 
> and on
> and on.
> 
> Of course powerful narrowness isn’t just religious.  I mentioned Stalin.  
> Volumes have
> been written about witch hunts by other sorts of thought-control authorities, 
> some of
> whom like Stalinists and Nazis and various Maoists have attempted to suppress
> scientific inquiry as efficiently as the Church in that quote attributed to 
> Magellan. 
> Some of these accounts, as we know, have their own bones to pick, anti-Communist 
> or
> evangelical or whatever.  That doesn’t mean these crimes didn’t happen.  They 
> continue
> to happen.  I’d argue something like it, on a minor scale, went on in Haiti and 
> in the
> Haitian diaspora recently concerning the infallibility of Aristide.  But that’s 
> another
> long argument.
> 
> I think we all probably share a deep distrust of such authoritative controls on 
> the
> workings of the human brain, even if we sometimes miss particular examples.  
> We’ve
> debated on this very list the value of peer-reviewed journals in the scientific 
> world. 
> But, I have to say, conservative as we may believe such institutions can be, I 
> haven’t
> yet heard of anyone burned at the stake for submitting heretical scientific 
> research
> papers.
> 
> Back to the Church and its witches, since Carl brought it up.  Again, literal 
> witches
> were far from the only victims (I mentioned Galileo, who managed to dodge the 
> bullet –
> or the firebrand) – and I think the Inquisition alone is probably sufficient 
> evidence
> of wholly (did someone say ‘holy’?) backward repression, but nevertheless.  
> While it
> may be true or even relevant that Medieval canon law didn’t recognize the 
> existence of
> witches, that’s different than saying the Middle Ages didn’t believe in them, or 
> that
> belief in them was necessary for conviction on charges.  
> 
> First of all, there were accusations and ‘trials’, even executions, in the 
> Middle Ages
> as there had been before the spread of Christianity in Europe.  My understanding 
> is
> that the early Church tried to put an end to witch hunts because the *belief* in
> witchcraft was considered a heresy (witches’ magical powers would contradict the
> absolute power of the Christian god), but the Church also supported laws against 
> the
> *use* of magic for similar reasons.  Altho I think the penalty the Church 
> suggested
> wasn’t orginally death, I think we could argue a prescription like this from the 
> Church
> didn’t exactly help overcome the prejudice.  
> 
> Also, European executions of witches were on the rise by the 9th century, altho 
> not yet
> the kind of mass hysteria that peaked later in the “Renaissance” as Carl 
> mentions.  
> 
> There was of course always the verse in Exodus 22 often cited during the 
> Renaissance
> witch trials (“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live” in the locally familiar 
> King
> James Version.).  The admonition against users of magic or sorcery survives 
> relatively
> intact from the original Hebrew, I understand, and does remain in various and 
> sundry
> versions of the Christian Bible today (along with verses advocating the 
> execution of
> homosexuals, the keeping of slaves, the massacre of anyone unlucky enough to 
> find
> themselves living in someone else’s ‘Promised Land’ [Boy, there’s a history to 
> that
> one!], etc. – why don’t more religious authorities advocate revisions to these 
> by the
> way, preserving the historical texts for reference and study of course?)
> 
> But probably more important, ‘Saint’ Augustine and others influential in the 
> Church
> had, I believe, declared at least some pagan gods to be servants of Satan who 
> could be
> employed by sorcerers, and since so many Europeans believed in witches anyway – 
> and the
> Church was obviously okay with trying and executing heretics (and wasn’t 
> ‘witchcraft’ a
> heresy?), well …
> 
> I tend to think witch-hunts surface when someone needs them.  During the 
> “Reformation”
> in Europe, the English Civil War, or other times of conflict and upheaval, 
> rulers or
> leaders of factions need to motivate and encourage their troops (and here I’d
> definitely include leaders on a lower, more local level who tend to be the 
> ‘grassroots
> organizers’ - so to speak – of the mass hysteria of the moment).  An appeal to 
> old
> prejudices seems to usually work pretty nicely (e.g., the current US wars, the 
> US
> Pacific and Asian wars in the 1940s-1970s, the Nazi Holocaust, the slaughters in 
> Rwanda
> and Sudan and elsewhere, on and on).  
> 
> And that’s why it’s so very  important to challenge not only prejudice but the
> lemming-like obedience to authority, including ideological and religious 
> authority:
> less because it can lead to ‘magical thinking’, which is bad enuf, and not 
> because
> authorities are somehow always wrong (which is not only demonstably false but 
> probably
> not even possible), but because of the brutal, deadly or just plain wasteful or
> inhumane ramifications in the real world that are still very much in effect.  
> It’s a
> centuries-long battle that is by no means over, and it has definitely had its 
> ups and
> downs so to speak, but I think there has been some worthwhile progress and it’s 
> a fight
> worth fighting.
> 
> My 2c.  Thanks for reading this far.
> Ricky
> 
> 
> --- "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote:
> 
> > I meant "liberal" in the sense of the account of Western history that we 
> > all learnt tacitly, in refutation of Marxism (tacit refutation being so 
> > much more effective that open discussion).  The etymological root of 
> > "liberal" is of course "free," and it's been asserted since at least the 
> > 19th century that European history is the history of freedom, of the 
> > progressive emancipation of humanity -- intellectual, at least, if not 
> > so often political or social. (Note how the myth is being used in 
> > justification of killing Muslims these days.)
> > 
> > We all learnt it in Western Civ classes: first there were the benighted 
> > religious ages, followed by the dawn of the Renaissance, and the full 
> > flowering of the Enlightenment, which led on to modern speculative and 
> > practical omniscience in Clinton-Bush America...  (Classical antiquity 
> > is a problem here, as it was in a different way for Marx, but we deal 
> > with it by ignoring it and not learning Latin and Greek anymore.)
> > 
> > In fact, to some extent the opposite is true.  In contrast to the 
> > optimism and intellectual openness that characterized the High Middle 
> > Ages (12th-14th centuries) -- whose typical invention was the university 
> > --  Magellan's age, the Renaissance (15th-17th centuries) was one of 
> > terror, magic and, as a symptom, the fear and persecution of witches 
> > (which the Middle Ages didn't believe in).
> > 
> > I'd suggest the source of the colossal loss of nerve in the European 
> > Renaissance is to be found in the demographic and social catastrophes 
> > that accompanied the break-up of the medieval mode of production in 14th 
> > century, and the concomitant attempt to reestablish European society by 
> > force of will (absolutism).
> > 
> > The liberal myth was well under way by the time Jacob Burckhardt 
> > essentially invented the Renaissance in 19th century Basel with his 
> > great and influential book THE CIVILIZATION OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ITALY:
> > 
> > "In the Middle Ages both sides of human consciousness-that which turned 
> > within as that which was turned without-lay dreaming or held awake 
> > beneath a common veil. The veil was woven of faith, illusion, and 
> > childish prepossession, through which the world and history were seen 
> > clad in strange hues. Man was conscious of himself only as a member of a 
> > race, people, party, family, or corporation-only through some general 
> > category. In Italy this veil first melted into air: an objective 
> > treatment and consideration of the state and of all the things of this 
> > world became possible. The subjective side at the same time asserted 
> > itself with corresponding emphasis: man became a spiritual individual, 
> > and recognized himself as such" -- and much more in the same vein, along 
> > with some good accounts of the age.
> > 
> > A more just account of Magellan's age (which you suggest) comes from 
> > someone often taken to be a prophet of the liberal view -- but Adam 
> > Smith is not the man the WSJ takes him to be. In the year of American 
> > independence he wrote that "The discovery of America [and the work of 
> > other earthbound explorers --CGE] ... certainly made a most essential 
> > [change in the state of Europe].  By opening up a new and inexhaustible 
> > market ... A new set of exchanges ... began to take place which had 
> > never been thought of before, and which should naturally have proved as 
> > advantageous to the new, as it certainly did to the old continent. The 
> > savage injustice of the Europeans rendered an event, which ought to have 
> > been beneficial to all, ruinous and destructive to several of those 
> > unfortunate countries."
> > 
> > On the manifold uses of "liberal," it would take more bandwidth to 
> > connect this liberal myth to Mr. Obama -- but I don't think it would be 
> > hard.  --CGE
> > 
> > Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> > > 
> > > ...why we would assume it's "liberal" myth-making is far from clear.
> > > The original source of the quote is unknown.  Nowadays it has
> > > traction across several political positions that I know of due to the
> > > Church's history of similar dogma in the face of reality, most
> > > notably geocentrism (Earth at the center), which is what got Galileo
> > > in hot water (or nearly did), and more recently other religious
> > > authorities concerning the teaching of evolution in public schools.
> > > Poking fun at such authorities, even inaccurately, is not necessarily
> > > "liberal".
> > > 
> > > Frankly, I still like the quote, whether the source is literary or
> > > historical, for more general reasons: it expresses a basic skepticism
> > > in the face of stubborn authoritarian dogma and/or ignorance, a
> > > sentiment that resonates with many people because dogma and ignorance
> > > of one kind or another is still very real.  (This includes
> > > Flat-Earthers, literal and figurative.)
> > > ...
> > > 
> > > Ricky --- "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote:
> > > 
> > >> Liberal myth-making, I'm afraid (which is not unknown in our own
> > >> time).
> > >> 
> > >> I doubt Magellan ever said any such thing, because educated
> > >> Europeans (including church officials) of Magellan's time (and long
> > >> before) did not think the earth was flat.
> > >> 
> > >> The standard model (as in Dante) was of a round earth at the center
> > >> of a series of concentric spheres, each one (except the ninth)
> > >> holding the the moon, sun, or one of the planets.
> > >> 
> > >> A quite brilliant book on the model of the world from ancient times
> > >>  through Shakespeare and Milton is C. S. Lewis, THE DISCARDED
> > >> IMAGE.  I used to insist my grad students in Renaissance studies
> > >> read it. --CGE
> > >> 
> > >> Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> > >>> Hope you saw it, it was a nice one - and early enuf that even 
> > >>> Catharine stayed up for it.
> > >>> 
> > >>> We were reminded of a quote attributed to a famous, and famously
> > >>>  deeply flawed, earthbound explorer who despite his many
> > >>> barbarous acts and allegiances was able to look up from the muck
> > >>> and blood of brutal history and come up with this one:
> > >>> 
> > >>> "The Church says the Earth is flat, but I have seen its shadow on
> > >>> the Moon, and I have more faith in a shadow than in the Church."
> > >>> - F. Magellan (not the first man to circumnavigate the globe)
> > >>> 
> > >>> Ricky
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> ________________________________________________________________________________
> ____
> Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss