Research On Religion » Inquisition

James Felak on the Counter-Reformation

tonygill — Sun, 22 Oct 2017 08:00:29 +0000

As we wind down our seven-episode series on the Protestant Reformation, we give the “other side” a chance to make their historical case. Prof. James Felak, a professor of history at the University of Washington (and frequent RoR guest), sits down with Tony to discuss the Catholic response to Luther’s protest. Known popularly as the “Counter-Reformation,” Dr. Felak notes that it really should be termed the Catholic Reformation as we note how Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and others broke with the Church in a schismatic movement. We start the discussion with a look at the religious and political landscape leading up to Luther’s challenge. Fifteenth century Europe was characterized by three key factors that conditioned the Reformation, Felak argues. First was the increasing strength of secular kingdoms relative to the Roman Catholic Church, which prompts a variety of power and financial struggles between the crown(s) and the popes. Growing corruption within the Church presented the second challenge to Christianity during this century, which leads to the third factor — indulgences. Out of curiosity, Tony asks when the Catholic Church began to be called the “Catholic Church,” rather than just the Church given that Catholicism is now used as a term of contradistinction to Protestantism. James mentions that he wonders the same thing too when teaching courses on Christian history, and we more or less agree that the term Catholic Church is put into greater usage in the 16th century. (Listeners are encouraged to weigh in on this question.)

We then move to the early 1500s and the “immediate” (by late medieval standards) reaction of the Vatican to Luther. Tony poses a counterfactual to his historian guest, asking what would the Christian timeline looked like had the Holy See just ignored Martin Luther. There were two popes involved in pushing back against Luther, and times of leadership transition can be difficult. Prof. Felak responds that the Protestant Reformation was a “slow train moving” and it was likely to happen at some point. We talk about how Johann Eck became involved in debates with Luther and how Luther’s pamphleteering left the Vatican no choice but to respond. The printing press made ignoring the issue very difficult. We review the events of the Diet of Worms and then springboard forward to the Council of Trent that sets the “Counter-Reformation” in motion. James points out that Rome was really responding to at least five “reformations” over the first half of the sixteenth century, only one of which was Luther. This included movements spurred on by Zwingli, Calvin, Arminians, other radical reformers, and the breakaway English Church. The Council of Trent — which occurred over several decades (and James explains why) — initiated a two-prong response which was to, first, reform the institutional Church, and second, to answer a variety of doctrinal challenges to the faith. As for the first, there was greater emphasis placed on educating the clergy via rigorous seminary training, incentivize bishops to preach in their own dioceses, and ensure subsequent popes chosen had a strong moral character. There was also a movement to promoting religious orders, which we talk about later. As for the doctrinal pushback, the Catholic Church reaffirmed the seven sacraments, the doctrine of purgatory, and intellectual reasoning regarding the issue of “faith alone or good works.” James spends time to explain the Catholic view of faith and works.

The conversation veers towards a discussion of the religious orders that were promoted to respond to these new institutional and theological challenges. The Jesuits were the most famous of he orders to arise at this time, but Prof. Felak documents a number of other ones, including the shoeless (discalced) Carmelites. He puts this in context of the older orders that emerged centuries before (e.g., Franciscans) and notes the new orders were much more engaged in the world and proselytizing than the earlier ones, including a renewed dedication to education of the clergy and laity. James brings up folks such as Charles Borromeo and Teresa of Avila. Tony asks about the Inquisition, and James responds by pointing out there were four distinct inquisitions including one prior to the Reformation (the Medieval Reformation), the Roman, Spanish, and Portuguese. The latter two had a more political flavor as the Iberian peninsula was not dramatically touched by Protestant reformers and these campaigns were run by kings, not clergy. We finish with some of James’s personal thoughts on how the Reformation affected Christianity and the Catholic Church, as well as how the Reformation has been viewed over the past five centuries. He shares an interesting tale of being in a Seattle bookstore and his thoughts on Lutherans as compared to other Protestant denominations. Recorded: October 6, 2017.

Peter Leeson on Witch Trials and Human Sacrifice

tonygill — Sun, 25 Oct 2015 08:00:16 +0000

During the 16th century, Europe experienced a wave of witchcraft trials that has captured our imagination, and much scholarly attention, up until the present era. But the “wave” of witchcraft trials was not geographically uniform. Prof. Peter Leeson, a professor of economics at George Mason University, focuses the lens of rational choice theory to explain the occurrence, duration, and geographic distribution of this seemingly irrational phenomenon. We also save time to explore an even stranger social trend — human sacrifice — using the basic tools of microeconomics. As usual, expect the unexpected for our annual Halloween episode.

Our show starts with Tony trying to unravel the mystery of how an economist ended up studying a topic such as medieval witchcraft trials, let alone human sacrifice. It should be noted that Dr. Leeson has a penchant for using economics to study phenomena that don’t necessarily suggest an economic approach, including pirates, soccer hooligans, Gypsy law, and vermin trials. Pete notes that economics should not be defined topically (e.g., studying banks or fiscal policy), but rather it is an approach to human behavior that has wide applications. We note the work of Nobel Laureate in taking economics out of its traditional boundaries, and Pete explains how he loves to push the envelope even further.

Journeying back in time, Prof. Leeson lays the historical groundwork that led up to the Great Age of Witch Trials in the 16th and early 17th century. Pete explains that the Vatican refused to acknowledge the existence of witches or witchcraft existed between 900 and 1400, and Pope Alexander the IV issued a decree in 1258 forbidding witch trials. It was in the 16th century, though, that we see a sudden shift in Church policy. Then, over the course of a century and a half, there were some 80,000 people tried for witchery. But this temporal variation isn’t the only thing that is puzzling; witch trials were more likely to occur in some areas of Europe (e.g., close to Strausburg) than in other locales (e.g., Spain or Italy). Pete makes a case that such variation is an open invitation for investigation.

We survey some of the pre-existing hypotheses for witch trials, including the “scapegoat theory,” the “legal centralization” thesis, and the “legal torture” hypothesis. None of these explanations, however, can adequately account for both the timing and geographic distribution of witch trials. Pete introduces his explanation based upon the notion of religious competition. Given that religious goods (e.g., promises of salvation) are not observable, any religious organization needs to find tangible means of asserting the credibility of these goods by creating an observable quality dimension. This is all the more important when a church’s market share is being challenged by rival denominations. The rise and location of witchcraft trials follows a remarkably close pattern to the success of Protestant reformers gaining market share starting in the 16th century and in locations where competition between Catholics and Protestants was most fierce. Pete discusses how he tested this thesis statistically and we then expand his findings to other episodes in history such as Stalin’s show trials in the Soviet Union, the McCarthy communist crusade of the 1950s, and the current purge of House Speaker John Boehner. Pete even tells us about one of the more bizarre episodes in Christian history when the corpse of Pope Formosus was put on trial in the 10th century in the infamous Cadaver Synod. (The latter was not a witch trial, but corresponded to intense rivalry over the papal throne.)

We finish off the last fifteen minutes of the podcast by turning to another seemingly odd topic — the practice of human sacrifice in 19th century Orissa, India that involved the purchase and ritualistic immolation of people. Tony speaks for many when he is amazed that such a horrific act could in any way shape or form be amendable to explanation via rational choice theory, but Pete says not so. He explains how the key to understanding this relates to the social need to secure property rights efficiently. In a rather anarchic environment, it is sometimes necessary to destroy valuable resources in order to signal that other forms of resource re-allocation (e.g., theft or war) are not worth the effort. He uses some contemporary examples related to his apartment complex and 1982 Honda Civic to illustrate his point in a less gruesome manner. But then we talk about how all of this relates back to ritualistic burning of humans back in India during the 1800s.

Our conversation ends with some of Pete’s “Ah ha!” moments in his study of economics. He relays how he has learned to be much less critical of neoclassical economic models over time, particularly when doing applied work. We secure a promise from him to come back at some later date in the future to explain why the Church would put rodents on trial during the medieval era. Recorded: October 1, 2015.