posted 08-17-2005 04:14 PM         

---

how important was religion in the middle ages?
was it more of a political thing than it was spiritual?

was catholicism the only form of christianity found in that time? how influential in the lives of the common people and the ruling class were priests.
and what about bishops and all the other people in the catholic hierarchy.

posted 08-18-2005 03:39 AM            

---

That are by far too many and too complicate questions to be answered in this kind of forum. But I'll try to give you some basics:

Religion was very, very important troughout the middle ages, in politics as well as in the daily life of everyone. But catholicism was, at least in the early middle ages, not the only form to be a christ. There was, for an example, Arianism, the kind of christianity that was most common in the kingdom of the Visigoths and the Burgundians in the 5th and 6th century. They had their own bishops, priests and churches. But in the early 6th century arianic kings became more and more politicaly isolated, and when the mighty king Chlodwig I. of France and king Sigismund of Burgundy converted to catholicism, most of the noblemen followed them. Catholicism then was the official kind of christianity of all western kindoms and empires until the 16. century. This worked together with by the rise of the pope, who became more and more powerfull, changing his role from the bishop of rome to an emperor-like power over europe.

But there were others for sure. Called haeretics, like the Cathars in France. But to have another view of christianity than the official one was never tolerated by the mighty, because it was always understood to be a rebellion not only against the catholic church, but also against the feudal system which depended on the church (and otherwise). The crusade agianst the Cathars, started by the pope and the king of France, lead to thousands of deaths (and many wasted castles too).

If you have specific questions for certain countries and periods of time, feel free to ask more.

posted 08-18-2005 06:57 AM           

---

A bit of a big subject!
http://historymedren.about.com/od/religionphilosophy/

Paul.

posted 08-18-2005 11:57 AM         

---

I'm sorry if the question was a little too general but I didn't know a lot about it except what I'd seen in movies or books.

Is the catholic church that we see today the same as it was back then.
where did the different things come from like worshiping saints and the pope being the head of the church? I thought that Jesus was the head of the church and that saints were just another term for christians, that's at least what I've read. why did they do those things and why do they still do them when I can't find them being done in the biblical church?

posted 08-18-2005 02:41 PM            

---

Well... saints were, shall we, say intermediaries? Because God and Jesus were like the king and prince, common people couldn't even dare imagine talking to them. Plus, different saints stood for different jobs, there was a saint for lost animals, a saint for protection from wild beasts... The story can go on and on... You see priests had to explain the Bible to ignorant people, who couldn't read and still believed in pagan gods. They had to... adapt them. And so they replaced them with Christian people who had sacrificed themselves for their religion. That is, the saints.
Take for eample Saint George. If you read the story of his life, you'll see that he didn't kill any dragon. He was a Roman soldier who became Christian and was sentenced to death. But his image has relpace that of the legendary pagan hero killing the dragon, giant snake, whatever...

[This message has been edited by Maria (edited 08-18-2005).]

posted 08-18-2005 05:36 PM         

---

Oh, it makes sense. I wouldn't have done it that way though. Wouldn't that just change the pagan peoples pantheon from their particular heroes and gods to just another set heroes with one God.
It reminds me of the roman dieties who had different functions. A recent thing that happened that sounds like this is some missionaries I heard about that tried to convert people of the hindu religion they thought that they were teaching them to believe in one God but the hindus simply added God to there pantheon.

I don't think that there is anything wrong with this subject. I wouldn't worry about it, it does have important historical signifigance and is necessary to understanding how the people lived in the middle ages. I expect people to have different opinions and I will only express my own and not force it on anyone else. so I think that we won't offend anybody by talking about religion.

posted 08-19-2005 04:17 AM            

---

The importance of the pope grew slowly from the 8th to the 12th century. At the beginning of it, there was a big lie: The catholic church stated (I'm, not sure if it still does today) that when the roman emperor Constantine I. moved the capital of the empire from Rome to Constantinopolis (Istanbul), he left his political rights over the city of Rome and its suroundings in the hands of the bishop of Rome. And as the emperor was traditionaly also the highest priest in the empire, the later popes took their right to lead the church from this gift, combined with the legend of Saint Peter to have been the first among the apostles and the first bishop of Rome.
The documents that should have proven the famous "gift of Constantine" were false and a product of later times, but it was the first step to power.

The second was the re-invention of the roman empire in 800 AD. The lands of the "gift of Constantine" in Italy, called the "dominium petri", were hold by the kings of the Langobards in the 7th/8th century. They had no interest to hand them of to the pope and even tried to take Rome several times. The pope now called for help in Constantinopolis and north of the Alps. The one to help him was king Pippin of the Francs and later his son, king Carolus I., better known as Charlemagne. After his total victory over the Langobards he was given the titel "protector of Rome" by the Pope and was crowned as new Emperor at Christmas 800 AD.

From now on until the late 15th century the Pope had the privilege to crown the emperors of the holy roman empire of german nation. This gave him a very mighty position, because he could combine a crowning with his political wishes. And if an emperor wouldn't do as he liked, he could always threat to throw him out of the church...
This situation lead to many conflicts between emperor and pope, both sides nominated alternative popes and alternative emerors. With a climax in the late 11th century, the so-called "Investiturstreit" (I don't know the word in english). The question was who could nominate the bishops in the german parts of the empire: The pope or the emperor? This was a crucial question as the bishops then were lords over cities, large areas, castles as well as many people. After a long conflict with emperor Heinrich IV., the pope won, and that was step 3 to his powerfull position in european politics.

posted 08-19-2005 11:54 AM         

---

so you could say that the catholic church started out with good intentions but eventually began using religion as a political tool to control the people. I think that the original christians were still around but because they did not believe in all the stuff that catholicism had invented they were heretics. that made it an easy way to get rid of people that disagreed with you.

very interesting.

posted 08-19-2005 03:18 PM         

---

I understand that there were real heretics because paul wrote about heresies in the church at Collose they thought something similar to what you described that the body was evil could this be where the self beating thing came from?

I'm wondering about what happened to the church that started out in the first century I don't think that they ever completely dissappeared but something had to have happened to them.

posted 08-20-2005 02:12 PM            

---

I guess the answer is, the community changed, just as Marlin said. I mean, try placing yourself in the place of the leaders... So, you're a new religion, with no real text book, just many hebrew texts, written by those who had met Jesus (and you're not sure all of them are authentic). And there are the romans, believing in so many gods... How can you survive? Expand. How? Well, in very mundane way, just like any company. Find what the people want, give it to them. Sadly, Caesar had got that right... people want "bread and circus"...
The idea of the "bad body", one that needs to be punished, comes from a simple observation (it is the body of an animal, with animal needs) and appeared in many parts of the globe.

[This message has been edited by Maria (edited 08-20-2005).]

posted 08-20-2005 06:17 PM         

---

Paul did leave information regarding church structure tit said they were supposed to operate autonomously and although there was a kind of hierarchy between deacons and overseers( or elders or bishops) it was never supposed to be one man controlling everything in the church body.

when did the books of timothy and titus become widespread? they gave instructions about how the church was supposed to operate.

when christianity started out there were several people that were supposed to be eyewitnesses they get mentioned every now and then when paul is trying to prove the authenticity of his message. I imagine that even some of the people jesus healed were still alive. during his 3 year ministry he healed children they could have survived for a long time after Jesus's death.
some roman official had his servant healed so that could've been used as proof at the time.