Languish.org

:bleeding: :ultra:

https://hamlineoracle.com/10750/news/who-belongs/

Hamline University in Minnesota

QuoteStudent and community's response to classroom incident

Hamline undergraduate students received an email from the Dean of Students on Nov. 7, condemning an unnamed classroom incident as "undeniably inconsiderate, disrespectful and Islamophobic." In the month since, the email and the event it references have reignited discussions about the persistence of such incidents at Hamline.

The email, signed by Dr. David Everett, Associate Vice President of Inclusive Excellence at Hamline, did not identify the nature or date of the incident.

The Oracle has since learned that the event in question occurred on Oct. 6, when a professor shared two depictions of the Prophet Muhammad in class, while discussing Islamic art. One was a 14th century depiction of the Prophet and the other was a 16th century depiction of the Prophet with veil and halo.

Within Islam, there are varying beliefs regarding whether the representation of the Prophet Muhammad is acceptable. The majority of those practicing Islam today believe it is forbidden to see and create representations of Prophet Muhammad.

Aram Wedatalla, a Hamline senior and the president of Muslim Student Association (MSA), was in the class at the time the photos were shared.

"I'm like, 'this can't be real,'" Wedatalla told the Oracle. "As a Muslim, and a Black person, I don't feel like I belong, and I don't think I'll ever belong in a community where they don't value me as a member, and they don't show the same respect that I show them."

Deangela Huddleston, a Hamline senior and MSA member, also shared her thoughts with the Oracle.

"Hamline teaches us it doesn't matter the intent, the impact is what matters," Huddleston said.

After class, Wedatalla spoke to the professor but did not feel that the conversation was productive.

Wedatalla emailed MSA's leadership team and members of the Hamline administration on Oct. 7, the day after the incident. On this same day, she met with President Fayneese Miller. Dean of Students Patti Kersten also called Wedatalla and apologized for her experience.

 
The event and initial response

The professor of the class emailed Wedatalla that Saturday, Oct. 8.

"I would like to apologize that the image I showed in class on [Oct. 6] made you uncomfortable and caused you emotional agitation. It is never my intention to upset or disrespect students in my classroom," the professor wrote in the email to Wedatalla, who shared it with the Oracle.

The professor shared the depictions over a Powerpoint through a Google Meet online class. The Oracle has acquired this recording through a student in the course who wishes to stay anonymous.

In the video of the class, the professor gives a content warning and describes the nature of the depictions to be shown and reflects on their controversial nature for more than two minutes before advancing to the slides in question.

The Oracle was able to identify these two images using video of the lecture. The first was a 14th century depiction of the Prophet receiving his first revelation from the archangel Gabriel, created by Rashīd al-Dīn, a Persian Muslim scholar and historian.

The other depicts the Prophet with a veil and halo. It was created by Mustafa ibn Vali in the 16th century as part of an illustration of the Siyer-i Nebi (the Life of the Prophet), an earlier, Ottomon Turkish epic work on the life of Muhammad.

"I am showing you this image for a reason. And that is that there is this common thinking that Islam completely forbids, outright, any figurative depictions or any depictions of holy personages. While many Islamic cultures do strongly frown on this practice, I would like to remind you there is no one, monothetic Islamic culture," the professor said before changing to the slide that included these depictions.

In the Oct. 8 email to Wedatalla, the professor stated that they "[let] the class know ahead of time" what would be shown and to give students time to turn off their video.

"I did not try to surprise students with this image, and I did my best to provide students with an 'out,'" the professor wrote in the email.

"I also described every subsequent slide I showed with language to indicate when I was no longer showing an image of the Prophet Muhammad. I am sorry that despite my attempt to prevent a negative reaction, you still viewed and were troubled by this image."

And?

I thought the NYT piece was very good on this:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/08/us/hamline-university-islam-prophet-muhammad.html

I found this question from a professor the really interesting angle: "How does something that comes from the very middle of the tradition end up being received later on as something marginal or forbidden?"

Representations of Mohammed are common in the Shia world, but also existed more broadly in the Persian, Mughal and Turkish traditions - created by devout artists for devout rulers for devout purposes in Muslim societies. It seems to be dangerously straying towards a blasphemy rule if somehow Shia Islam and many historical forms of Islam are interpreted as Islamophobic.

There may be devout Sunni Muslims who have a very strong view on any image, so I think the warnings and prefacing of showing the image is a good approach. But in an art history class about representations of the divine in different cultures I'm not sure it's great to exclude very important Islamic cultures because of some contemporary Islamic cultures. Although I have other quibbles with that sort of class and the way it's framed.

Seems pretty dumb to have a class on Islamic art where you can't show such a major part of Islamic art.

Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2023, 08:13:35 AMAnd?

Does that mean you agree this is something the prof really had to apologise for?

QuoteAram Wedatalla, a Hamline senior and the president of Muslim Student Association (MSA), was in the class at the time the photos were shared.

"I'm like, 'this can't be real,'" Wedatalla told the Oracle. "As a Muslim, and a Black person, I don't feel like I belong, and I don't think I'll ever belong in a community where they don't value me as a member, and they don't show the same respect that I show them."

:bleeding: That's the guy who should apologise for trying to enforce his personal religious views on the whole community.

Quote from: Josquius on January 10, 2023, 08:34:30 AMSeems pretty dumb to have a class on Islamic art where you can't show such a major part of Islamic art.

This is where I'm a little less sure around this class. Apparently it was in "global art history" with abundant warnings that it would include images from Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam etc.

I think there's a role for global surveys and I get the desire to show and talk about a more diverse picture of art history than just the Western tradition. But with that, I think there is a risk of effectively quite shallow tokenism if that person isn't able to talk about Buddhist or Hindu or Muslim art.

I'm sure the professor said more but I'm not sure this line in the article, I think from the lecture, does anything. I don't think it points to any views or deeper research or adds much of anything:

Quote"I am showing you this image for a reason. And that is that there is this common thinking that Islam completely forbids, outright, any figurative depictions or any depictions of holy personages. While many Islamic cultures do strongly frown on this practice, I would like to remind you there is no one, monothetic Islamic culture," the professor said before changing to the slide that included these depictions.

That's where I'm less sure. If it's a class on Islamic art or studies in the Ottomans, Persians or Mughals I think it makes absolute sense, similarly if it's in a survey where you are engaging in the issue but also with the art and pointing for where students can delve deeper then I think it's supportable. I'm not sure from the description that that's quite what the class was - even if she seems to have handled it fairly sensitively.

Quote from: Sheilbh on January 10, 2023, 08:42:00 AM

Quote from: Josquius on January 10, 2023, 08:34:30 AMSeems pretty dumb to have a class on Islamic art where you can't show such a major part of Islamic art.

This is where I'm a little less sure around this class. Apparently it was in "global art history" with abundant warnings that it would include images from Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam etc.

I think there's a role for global surveys and I get the desire to show and talk about a more diverse picture of art history than just the Western tradition. But with that, I think there is a risk of effectively quite shallow tokenism if that person isn't able to talk about Buddhist or Hindu or Muslim art.

I'm sure the professor said more but I'm not sure this line in the article, I think from the lecture, does anything. I don't think it points to any views or deeper research or adds much of anything:

Quote"I am showing you this image for a reason. And that is that there is this common thinking that Islam completely forbids, outright, any figurative depictions or any depictions of holy personages. While many Islamic cultures do strongly frown on this practice, I would like to remind you there is no one, monothetic Islamic culture," the professor said before changing to the slide that included these depictions.

That's where I'm less sure. If it's a class on Islamic art or studies in the Ottomans, Persians or Mughals I think it makes absolute sense, similarly if it's in a survey where you are engaging in the issue but also with the art and pointing for where students can delve deeper then I think it's supportable. I'm not sure from the description that that's quite what the class was - even if she seems to have handled it fairly sensitively.

Can you honestly say that if it was a lecture on Christian art and one of the Christian students flipped out over something like that guy I quoted, we'd be analysing it at this level instead of dismissing it as a far-right bigot rambling?

It took us in the developed world a thousand years and a lot of bloodshed to remove blasphemy and other nonsense from our general culture. As the rest of the world demonstrates it regularly, such a secular society is NOT the default state of humanity. It needs guarding, even when it is challenged by minority religions.

Quote from: Tamas on January 10, 2023, 08:40:49 AM

Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2023, 08:13:35 AMAnd?

Does that mean you agree this is something the prof really had to apologise for?

No but I'm also not sure we need a new thread for us to talk about Islamic iconoclasm. Haven't we done that to death?

Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2023, 09:04:49 AM

Quote from: Tamas on January 10, 2023, 08:40:49 AM

Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2023, 08:13:35 AMAnd?

Does that mean you agree this is something the prof really had to apologise for?

No but I'm also not sure we need a new thread for us to talk about Islamic iconoclasm. Haven't we done that to death?

Fair enough.

Quote from: Tamas on January 10, 2023, 08:46:36 AMCan you honestly say that if it was a lecture on Christian art and one of the Christian students flipped out over something like that guy I quoted, we'd be analysing it at this level instead of dismissing it as a far-right bigot rambling?

No, obviously not. But iconoclasm and opposition to images isn't a belief held strongly by a significant number of Christians. It is within Islam.

Given the controversies over education in the US by Christian groups, I think if that was a strong belief by many Christians in the US I think it's unlikely you'd show it.

QuoteIt took us in the developed world a thousand years and a lot of bloodshed to remove blasphemy and other nonsense from our general culture. As the rest of the world demonstrates it regularly, such a secular society is NOT the default state of humanity. It needs guarding, even when it is challenged by minority religions.

Well we only abolished blasphemy laws here in 2008 :P :lol: I think the last successful (individual) prosecution was in 1977 - the famous Gay News and Whitehouse case.

I think education should teach the values the secular(-ish) state espouses and not the beliefs of any faith. So it should teach about LGBT+ rights and how LGBT+ people exist in our society. They should teach evolution. These are things that reflect our society and not teaching them or teaching creationism would impose religious beliefs on our society. Similarly I think you should learn about faith in general and how it works in our society - I always loved those classes on the "big six" religions as a kid :blush: In a faith school I think you can also have education about the values and practices of that faith in particular from a believers' perspective as long as it does not contradict the wider values of society.

I think in the context of teaching about Islamic art or those cultures it's entirely reasonable to show these images in a class - I'm a little unsure about the context here as it sounds potentially like it was a little just tokenism of "here's the Islamic world, which is NOT monolithic". I think it's also right teaching that for most Muslims images of Mohammed are considered blasphemous and not to show them outside of a relevant context.

Similarly with Christianity. I think it'd be wildly inappropriate for a teacher to be teaching against the divinity of Christ. Instead they should teach what Christians, because that's what matters in how it interacts with society. But in the context of some history classes for example you absolutely need to be able to talk about those arguments around the divinity of Christ and to read Arians or whatever - in part because the belief is why the argument matters.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Quote from: Sheilbh on January 10, 2023, 09:17:25 AM

Quote from: Tamas on January 10, 2023, 08:46:36 AMCan you honestly say that if it was a lecture on Christian art and one of the Christian students flipped out over something like that guy I quoted, we'd be analysing it at this level instead of dismissing it as a far-right bigot rambling?

No, obviously not. But iconoclasm and opposition to images isn't a belief held strongly by a significant number of Christians. It is within Islam.


Given the controversies over education in the US by Christian groups, I think if that was a strong belief by many Christians in the US I think it's unlikely you'd show it.

Nah. Imagine a similarly hot topic issue for Christians in a similar university classroom setting, for example historic Christian stance on homosexuals or birth control, implying that the current main trend has not been eternal. If some guy made a big deal out of it in a zealous rage, we WOULD dismiss it outright, and there'd be no apologies necessary.

Quote from: Sheilbh on January 10, 2023, 09:17:25 AM

QuoteIt took us in the developed world a thousand years and a lot of bloodshed to remove blasphemy and other nonsense from our general culture. As the rest of the world demonstrates it regularly, such a secular society is NOT the default state of humanity. It needs guarding, even when it is challenged by minority religions.

Well we only abolished blasphemy laws here in 2008 :P :lol: I think the last successful (individual) prosecution was in 1977 - the famous Gay News and Whitehouse case.

I think education should teach the values the secular(-ish) state espouses and not the beliefs of any faith. So it should teach about LGBT+ rights and how LGBT+ people exist in our society. They should teach evolution. These are things that reflect our society and not teaching them or teaching creationism would impose religious beliefs on our society. Similarly I think you should learn about faith in general and how it works in our society - I always loved those classes on the "big six" religions as a kid :blush: In a faith school I think you can also have education about the values and practices of that faith in particular from a believers' perspective as long as it does not contradict the wider values of society.

I think in the context of teaching about Islamic art or those cultures it's entirely reasonable to show these images in a class - I'm a little unsure about the context here as it sounds potentially like it was a little just tokenism of "here's the Islamic world, which is NOT monolithic". I think it's also right teaching that for most Muslims images of Mohammed are considered blasphemous and not to show them outside of a relevant context.

Similarly with Christianity. I think it'd be wildly inappropriate for a teacher to be teaching against the divinity of Christ. Instead they should teach what Christians, because that's what matters in how it interacts with society. But in the context of some history classes for example you absolutely need to be able to talk about those arguments around the divinity of Christ and to read Arians or whatever - in part because the belief is why the argument matters.

Indeed. And there are no serious forces left challenging the ability to talk about those arguments. But the Muslim religious far-right have found what I thought would be an unlikely ally in the dogmatic left, supporting their efforts of censorship because they are a minority.

And faith schools -no matter the faith in question- should just not exist, period. Indoctrination, pure and simple.

But they're still called Hamline?

Quote from: The Brain on January 10, 2023, 09:38:29 AMBut they're still called Hamline?

 :lol:

Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2023, 09:04:49 AM

Quote from: Tamas on January 10, 2023, 08:40:49 AM

Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2023, 08:13:35 AMAnd?

Does that mean you agree this is something the prof really had to apologise for?

No but I'm also not sure we need a new thread for us to talk about Islamic iconoclasm. Haven't we done that to death?

Seems like the real issue here is that a university in the US appears to be endorsing and enforcing the hardline religious dogma.

Are forensic medicine students in the US still allowed to see disturbing images?

Where does the "teacher fired" in the title come from?

Quote from: grumbler on January 10, 2023, 09:58:44 AMWhere does the "teacher fired" in the title come from?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: It's "professor fired" in the title. L2R

Likely from the same place as the grammar.

Quote from: DGuller on January 10, 2023, 09:51:40 AM

Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2023, 09:04:49 AM

Quote from: Tamas on January 10, 2023, 08:40:49 AM

Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2023, 08:13:35 AMAnd?

Does that mean you agree this is something the prof really had to apologise for?

No but I'm also not sure we need a new thread for us to talk about Islamic iconoclasm. Haven't we done that to death?

Seems like the real issue here is that a university in the US appears to be endorsing and enforcing the hardline religious dogma.

I guess but then they describe themselves as a "church-related university" and "strongly affirm the United Methodist emphasis on ecumenical openness to other faiths."

Quote from: grumbler on January 10, 2023, 09:58:44 AMWhere does the "teacher fired" in the title come from?

Interesting as yeah not even the title of page in the link...

Quote from: Tamas on January 10, 2023, 09:38:12 AMNah. Imagine a similarly hot topic issue for Christians in a similar university classroom setting, for example historic Christian stance on homosexuals or birth control, implying that the current main trend has not been eternal. If some guy made a big deal out of it in a zealous rage, we WOULD dismiss it outright, and there'd be no apologies necessary.

Right but those are social issues about which society has a view.

There were protests in Birmingham around Muslim faith schools not wanting to teach parts of the curriculum about LGBT+ rights and sexuality. The approach that was taken, correctly, was that those rights are part of our society and you can't opt out of teaching them. Same as other bits of citizenship or guidance classes. It might be something Muslims or Christians disagree with but it's not core to their beliefs in the same way.

So I don't think that comparison holds. It's why I also think it's more difficult to think of a Christian example that there's fewer shared concepts of the blasphemous. The one that sprang to mind was doing something with sacramental bread or wine and there's a Catholic in the class which might be similar.

QuoteAnd faith schools -no matter the faith in question- should just not exist, period. Indoctrination, pure and simple.

I think a third of state schools in the UK are faith schools :lol:

I don't personally have an issue with them. Though I mainly went to school in Scotland which has some Catholic schools (none near where I lived) but is otherwise mainly secular/non-denominational. So I don't have personal experience.

Quote from: grumbler on January 10, 2023, 09:58:44 AMWhere does the "teacher fired" in the title come from?

I think he was an adjunct so his contract wasn't renewed.

Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on January 10, 2023, 10:32:38 AM

Quote from: grumbler on January 10, 2023, 09:58:44 AMWhere does the "teacher fired" in the title come from?

I think he was an adjunct so his contract wasn't renewed.

From the NYT article they're a really precarious role and it sounds a little like the gig workers of the academic world.

I think again this is a story about offence and consequences of people taking offence, but could (and I think should) be looked at from the perspective of labour rights and how strong the imbalance of power is in certain industries and states.

I'd already read / discussed this extensively in another forum:

1. The teacher was an adjunct professor and was not fired. Adjuncts receive term-to-term contracts, she was told they would not be offering her a contract for the next term.

2. The adjunct was initially not all that upset--she said she was ready to move on anyway, a lot of adjuncts are kind of cultural nomads and some of the people who actually enjoy the fairly thankless and lower paid work do like that aspect of being able to travel around the country and work different places. She took umbrage not to her contract not being renewed, but to the statements from the university that came out a few days later that essentially phrased her running the class as if she was an anti-Muslim bigot.

3. I defer to the experts here--a tenured Professor of Religion at Hamline wrote an article and gave a lecture basically denouncing the university. He said the art history professor was behaving reasonably, and the university was treating a simple difference in doctrinal opinion that exists among Muslims as a matter of "bigotry" if you don't accept one (admittedly majority) Muslim view.

4. A tenured head of art history in Michigan (can't remember the school), said that showing this painting is considered "standard" part of the curriculum of classes like the one being taught, and it is entirely in the norm and commonly done at almost any school that offers such a class--she even said not showing the painting would basically be out of the norm for an entry level art history class on religious art.

It basically seems like Hamline's administrators just immediately caved to the thinnest bit of student pressure, which in itself I think started from a bad faith conservative Muslim rabble rouser. If the individual involved had real concerns why did they not bring up before the painting was shown, given the huge number of pre-display warnings the professor gave? This is a Muslim activist who wanted to have an incident, the school accommodated them.

CAIR, an Islamic fundamentalist group in America that pretends it is a civil rights group, stood behind the student because they are largely anti-secularist bigots. They also said that "only a few extremist outliers in Islam" are okay with depictions of the prophet, further showing how biased and bigoted CAIR is.

I think the distinction between "fired" and "not renewed" has no practical difference, especially when contract renewal is normally a formality.  There may be a legal difference, and there may be plausible deniability, but the practical outcome of both is that you had a job before and don't have it now.  Both cases are equally problematic if the reason you don't have a job now is because you ran afoul of some religious hadliners.

I don't think the sacking/non-sacking is of much importance. The problem is that we have a university that can now no longer teach the basics of Islamic art due to a complaint by a puritanical fundamentalist.

The university will also need to change its motto "Religio, Literae, Libertas" huh  :glare:

The particulars of sacking vs not, I agree are not important. I was simply clarifying what did actually happen--and the adjunct herself was basically nonplussed over not being renewed, it was her being called a bigot publicly a few days later that she took issue with. FWIW I think the reason she wasn't that worried about not being renewed is it isn't really just a formality, adjuncts are basically treated like temp workers in most respects, if you are a "career adjunct" you likely have cycled through many universities, and it is generally well understood that is how it works. The shittiness of adjunct teaching positions and how universities way over-rely on them is a whole other thread.

This story is concerning for a couple of reasons.

1) The precarious existence of adjunct professors and really all non-tenured instructors at colleges and universities.  I don't think there is any meaningful distinction between a contract not being renewed and employment being terminated.  The end result is the prof is without a job. 

2) University administrators utterly failing in their obligation to assiduously protect and foster academic freedom within their institution.  The issue is not whether the material selected by the prof was normally part of an art history course.  The issue is that this prof is entitled to exercise her academic judgment as to what art history materials should be included in her art history course.  The university administrators should have told the people complaining about the content that one of the reasons a university exists is to expose its students to a variety of views, beliefs and ideas.  If a student wants to be isolated from that experience, choose a different venue for study - like a religious school which conforms to their particular view of the world.

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 10, 2023, 10:51:18 AM3. I defer to the experts here--a tenured Professor of Religion at Hamline wrote an article and gave a lecture basically denouncing the university. He said the art history professor was behaving reasonably, and the university was treating a simple difference in doctrinal opinion that exists among Muslims as a matter of "bigotry" if you don't accept one (admittedly majority) Muslim view.

On this, this section of the NYT article was striking. From a forum that was held by the college:

QuoteMark Berkson, a religion professor at Hamline, raised his hand.

"When you say 'trust Muslims on Islamophobia,'" Dr. Berkson asked, "what does one do when the Islamic community itself is divided on an issue? Because there are many Muslim scholars and experts and art historians who do not believe that this was Islamophobic."

Mr. Hussein responded that there were marginal and extremist voices on any issue. "You can teach a whole class about why Hitler was good," Mr. Hussein said.

During the exchange, Ms. Baker, the department head, and Dr. Everett, the administrator, separately walked up to the religion professor, put their hands on his shoulders and said this was not the time to raise these concerns, Dr. Berkson said in an interview.

But Dr. Berkson, who said he strongly supported campus diversity, said that he felt compelled to speak up.

"We were being asked to accept, without questioning, that what our colleague did — teaching an Islamic art masterpiece in a class on art history after having given multiple warnings — was somehow equivalent to mosque vandalism and violence against Muslims and hate speech," Dr. Berkson said. "That is what I could not stand."

QuoteIt basically seems like Hamline's administrators just immediately caved to the thinnest bit of student pressure, which in itself I think started from a bad faith conservative Muslim rabble rouser. If the individual involved had real concerns why did they not bring up before the painting was shown, given the huge number of pre-display warnings the professor gave? This is a Muslim activist who wanted to have an incident, the school accommodated them.

The other frustrating thing about this story is that it seems like the lecturer thought there would be a complaint, reported everything to the administrators. The chair of the department emailed her afterwards "It sounded like you did everything right [...] I believe in academic freedom so you have my support."

And then seemed it was Islamophobic - which is why I can understand how angry the lecturer must be.

QuoteCAIR, an Islamic fundamentalist group in America that pretends it is a civil rights group, stood behind the student because they are largely anti-secularist bigots. They also said that "only a few extremist outliers in Islam" are okay with depictions of the prophet, further showing how biased and bigoted CAIR is.

The other point on this is that if there's one sector that should be able to make a nuanced, informed decision on this - surely it's a college. I don't see why they needed to outsource their judgement.

I think there's a difference between not getting a contract renewed and getting fired. Assuming that a customer will renew a contract is not The Way. A politician who doesn't get reelected hasn't lost their job.

Of course this doesn't change this particular event from bad (and it is bad in so many ways) to something else, but IMHO it would have been even worse if the teacher had been fired.

Quote from: Sheilbh on January 10, 2023, 12:13:23 PM"We were being asked to accept, without questioning, that what our colleague did — teaching an Islamic art masterpiece in a class on art history after having given multiple warnings — was somehow equivalent to mosque vandalism and violence against Muslims and hate speech," Dr. Berkson said. "That is what I could not stand."

Maybe academia isn't the place for you then.

A particularly egregious thing about the story Sheilbh posted is the CAIR representative literally equates Muslims who don't buy into the iconoclastic view of depictions of the prophet as basically being extremists on the level of Hitler. Which is really crazy--while a majority of Muslims do not believe you should create depictions of the prophet, there is a significant minority who take no issue with it. Additionally, within the majority who hold the iconoclastic view there are extremists who think it is deeply offensive for anyone to display such an image anywhere for any reason (and even more extreme types who believe you can justify violence towards people who do this), but there are plenty who simply hold that they shouldn't make such images, but it isn't really a huge problem for people to analyze historical Islamic art or for non-Muslims to (respectfully) have portrayals of the prophet. CAIR is basically saying anything other than extreme opposition to all depictions = Hitler...which is pretty fucked.

I'll note CAIR has pulled this before--they have offices near Capitol Hill and present themselves as just a broad Muslim civil rights group, but they do not represent Muslim civil rights broadly. They represent as unambiguous religious "truths" a number of positions associated with Saudi-influenced conservative types of Islam. For example they have said in the past that it is an Islamic law all women must veil, which is not at all a view held by a majority of the world's Muslims, particularly ones outside the Middle East.

It's a weird gray area because CAIR has meaningfully stood up in the past against (genuinely bad) instances of anti-Muslim bigotry, but CAIR itself is not a neutral representative of Islam, but a sectarian representative of a very specific school of Islamic thought. They then use their relative acceptability to promote their sectarian views as universal Muslim truths, which is pretty pernicious.

Kenan Malik had a good piece on this in the Guardian :

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/08/an-art-treasure-long-cherished-by-muslims-is-deemed-offensive-but-to-whom

QuoteAram Wedatalla, a Hamline senior and the president of Muslim Student Association (MSA), was in the class at the time the photos were shared.

"I'm like, 'this can't be real,'" Wedatalla told the Oracle. "As a Muslim, and a Black person, I don't feel like I belong, and I don't think I'll ever belong in a community where they don't value me as a member, and they don't show the same respect that I show them."

Deangela Huddleston, a Hamline senior and MSA member, also shared her thoughts with the Oracle.

"Hamline teaches us it doesn't matter the intent, the impact is what matters," Huddleston said.

:bleeding:

OF COURSE intent matters.  It always matters.  I mean this is my bias showing, but legally speaking the same physical act could be either a pure accident, a tort of negligence, or a criminal charge, based only on intent.

This story is 100% about the actions of the school.  The Muslim student group, or CAIR, can say whatever they want to say, but taking actions against this adjunct professor in this circumstance is ridiculous.

I wasn't really a big fan of the Danish Mohammed cartoons from 15 years ago because a significant part of the intent was to deliberately upset certain muslims, but the circumstances here are quite different.

For what it's worth, here's the statement by the Muslim Public Affairs Council:

https://www.mpac.org/statement/statement-of-support-for-art-professor-fired-from-hamline-university/

Quote from: MPACThe painting was not Islamophobic. In fact, it was commissioned by a fourteenth-century Muslim king in order to honor the Prophet, depicting the first Quranic revelation from the angel Gabriel.

My reading is that Hamline described the incident (showing the image in class) as undeniably Islamophobic. Not the image itself.

"Undeniably"

I do not think that word means what they think it means.

Quote from: The Brain on January 10, 2023, 02:02:26 PM

Quote from: MPACThe painting was not Islamophobic. In fact, it was commissioned by a fourteenth-century Muslim king in order to honor the Prophet, depicting the first Quranic revelation from the angel Gabriel.

My reading is that Hamline described the incident (showing the image in class) as undeniably Islamophobic. Not the image itself.

Which is ridiculous. 

Quote from: Oexmelin on January 10, 2023, 01:23:30 PMFor what it's worth, here's the statement by the Muslim Public Affairs Council:

https://www.mpac.org/statement/statement-of-support-for-art-professor-fired-from-hamline-university/

Well suddenly not so undeniably Islamophobic.

Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2023, 09:04:49 AM

Quote from: Tamas on January 10, 2023, 08:40:49 AM

Quote from: garbon on January 10, 2023, 08:13:35 AMAnd?

Does that mean you agree this is something the prof really had to apologise for?

No but I'm also not sure we need a new thread for us to talk about Islamic iconoclasm. Haven't we done that to death?

I don't really understand it to be honest. The intent explained to me was to get the followers of Mohammed to understand he was just a man, and now he was dead and should not be worshipped. So yeah ok I understand how iconoclasm works. But why non-Muslims cannot have images supposed to be representing Mohammed for non-religious purposes (or even Muslims for non-religious purposes) or that having them would be hateful to Muslims or blasphemous in some way is beyond me. I mean if the focus is supposed to be on Allah and the message and Mohammed has long since been wormfood then surely having an image representing Mohammed should be no more blasphemous than an image of any other person, unless it is being used in a religious context. I just don't get it.

I mean in itself, obviously you can create an image of Mohammed for the purposes of attacking Muslims.

Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on January 10, 2023, 02:34:10 PM

Quote from: The Brain on January 10, 2023, 02:02:26 PM

Quote from: MPACThe painting was not Islamophobic. In fact, it was commissioned by a fourteenth-century Muslim king in order to honor the Prophet, depicting the first Quranic revelation from the angel Gabriel.

My reading is that Hamline described the incident (showing the image in class) as undeniably Islamophobic. Not the image itself.

Which is ridiculous. 

I get the impression that the university is a very dysfunctional organization.

Quote from: The Brain on January 10, 2023, 03:03:16 PM

Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on January 10, 2023, 02:34:10 PM

Quote from: The Brain on January 10, 2023, 02:02:26 PM

Quote from: MPACThe painting was not Islamophobic. In fact, it was commissioned by a fourteenth-century Muslim king in order to honor the Prophet, depicting the first Quranic revelation from the angel Gabriel.

My reading is that Hamline described the incident (showing the image in class) as undeniably Islamophobic. Not the image itself.

Which is ridiculous. 

I get the impression that the university is a very dysfunctional organization.

Certainly extremely reactive instead of deliberative.

Quote from: Valmy on January 10, 2023, 02:53:14 PMI don't really understand it to be honest. The intent explained to me was to get the followers of Mohammed to understand he was just a man, and now he was dead and should not be worshipped. So yeah ok I understand how iconoclasm works. But why non-Muslims cannot have images supposed to be representing Mohammed for non-religious purposes (or even Muslims for non-religious purposes) or that having them would be hateful to Muslims or blasphemous in some way is beyond me. I mean if the focus is supposed to be on Allah and the message and Mohammed has long since been wormfood then surely having an image representing Mohammed should be no more blasphemous than an image of any other person, unless it is being used in a religious context. I just don't get it.

I mean in itself, obviously you can create an image of Mohammed for the purposes of attacking Muslims.

That's how taboos work.  Start with some reasonable purpose, like avoiding disease from eating pigs in hot climates, or inbreeding from fucking your family, then it gets all amped and scarified and becomes evil.

And it's not like Christianity has gone through waves of iconoclasm as well.

Quote from: Barrister on January 10, 2023, 04:46:42 PMAnd it's not like Christianity has gone through waves of iconoclasm as well.

Sure. But it wasn't like militant protestants were ransacking through Italy destroying paintings by Caravaggio, they simply removed the images from their place of worship.

Didn't the Dutch go a little extra wild with the art smashing calvanism? Or am I misremebering?

Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 10, 2023, 04:41:58 PMStart with some reasonable purpose, like avoiding disease from eating pigs in hot climates...

An aside on the "avoiding disease from eating pigs in hot climates":

I read some recent work on the topic and it convincingly made some points supporting that this explanation for pork prohibitions is likely a much later just-so story for people to rationalize religious beliefs as being "scientific based" and utilitarian.

The main argument is that there are essentially two main modes of raising pigs in ancient societies.

1) They're raised scavening for natural food in the woodlands. Hunting wild boars is a dangerous and high status activity. Raising pigs requires woodlands, often owned by the upper classes. In those sort of societies (most of ancient Europe, including Rome) pork is an expensive and high status food.

2) They're raised in urban and semi-urban settings, often by marginal people (the poor, especially outsider s). Owning a pig or two is a low-intensity way for the poor to get protein in their food as the pig mostly tends to itself, subsisting on street garbage including human excrement. In those societies, pork tends to be seen as low status - reserved for outsiders and outcasts existing on the margins. Ancient Egypt was one such society (including in the period the Jews were there and traditional Jewish lands were in the Egyptian sphere), but I suspect most of the Mesopotamian empires were similar as well.

Additionally I don't beleive we have any evidence of the theoretical health risks of pork being understood, discussed, or otherwise impact any of those ancient societies.

TLDR: within Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East* pigs are ritually unclean in places they were subsisted on garbage including excrement, while considered high status delicacies in places where they were raised scavening in semi-wild woodlands.

Anyways, I thought it was interesting.

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 07:15:01 PMDidn't the Dutch go a little extra wild with the art smashing calvanism? Or am I misremebering?

Yes and not just the Dutch.

There was very violent iconoclasm generally in the Holy Roman Empire, the Low Countries, Scotland and Switzerland in the most intense period of the Reformation. In France and England there was iconoclasm but it was more localised, later. In France especially during the wars of religion and in England (until the civil war) it very much depended on the whims of the monarch but was ferocious at times, especially under Edward VI.

It wasn't simply removing images from their place of worship. There were huge public bonfires of art. Murals were often hacked and defaced to remove the faces of individuals before being painted over. Wooden statues (really important in Medieval religious art - but, post-Reformation if you want to see examples you need to go to Spain) were chopped to pieces or burned.

Initial English iconoclasm in the Tudor period was fairly restrained. They, uniquely, chopped off the noses and ears of statues and paid carpenters or stone masons to remove them. Even under Edward VI "defacing" was enough. So while there was iconoclasm it wasn't the type of total obliteration of images that you saw in areas with a more popular, less top-down reformation. Also - again reflecting the nature of the English reformation - it is tied to how how often royal visitors are going to parish churches to monitor compliance with the new religion and how strictly they're enforcing those rules. Of course, in practical terms, many of the vicars and more than a few of the royal visitors were in place through most of the phases of the English reformation just trying to do what they needed and get along without attracting attention.

But not always. It's not clear if there seems to have been significantly more iconoclasm in East Anglia and the East of the country more generally because they were hotbeds of popular Protestantism, or that they had a famously radical and effective puritan royal visitor (who recorded his work demolishing "hundreds" of works of art. Probably both - I believe those areas are disproportionate in the numbers of puritans who go to America in the early 17th century. They're Cromwell's home area and parliamentarian stalwarts in the civil war through the Eastern Association. They're also home to the worst witch trials in England - again unclear if it's their popular faith or particularly effective witchfinders operating in the area. In all of England there is one surviving pre-Reformation fresco.

In the Netherlands I think it's part of the start of the revolt against the Spanish and there are a few miraculous examples of some works being saved. But often it's because they were able to dismantle and hide the art from the iconoclasts. There are definitely lost van Eyck altarpieces and religious pieces though. In all of Scotland, there is one small stained glass window that survived the Reformation.

All around art was destroyed - as were religious psalters, book of hours etc that were filled with icons. The internal structure of churches were often torn apart (again - bonfires) and re-oriented in line with the new faith - for example in Scotland no altar and built around the pulpit as preaching was the centre of the religion, not sacraments. Similarly in some reformations choirs were shut down, organs and other musical instruments destroyed - again Scotland, because the only acceptable religious music was metrical singing of the psalms by the entire congregation.

But even away from masterpieces you have the folk art which you still see in some places in Spain, Italy, Malta and the rest of the Catholic world. Little roadside crosses or statues of Mary or some of the saints. These were all over Europe - all of them destroyed in the Reformation. Adding to that there was also - from a Catholic perspective - deliberate desecration of the sacraments. It'd be taken out from behind the altar and trod or pissed on. In England it also plays a role in destroying communal life. Most churches would have local "confraternities" or guilds who would normally raise money through the year for the upkeep of specific altars, chapels, statues. Obviously remove the object and the community that existed to look after it would also fall apart.

They didn't destroy Caravaggio because he's a painter of the Catholic reformation which was very successful in Italy. So there weren't mobs of Protestants in Italy but he also follows the worst outbreaks of iconoclasm. He's in the wrong place and too late. The Reformation was an incredibly violent, radical, revolutionary experience and not a case of disagreement or simple removal of art from places of worship.

Quote from: Jacob on January 10, 2023, 07:26:40 PMTLDR: within Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East* pigs are ritually unclean in places they were subsisted on garbage including excrement, while considered high status delicacies in places where they were raised scavening in semi-wild woodlands.

It is interesting; but what I don't see is how lower status food would lead to being religiously prohibited.

I honestly thought Valmy was being deliberately ironic.

I hope so  :ph34r:

Quote from: Jacob on January 10, 2023, 09:40:29 PMI honestly thought Valmy was being deliberately ironic.

I hope so  :ph34r:

Oh no! You might be right :weep: :ph34r:

I had also read part of it was the sacrificial usage of animals. Most of a sacrificed animal was actually consumed. Getting sheep and cows or birds to the alter is easy, as is the slaughter. Pigs, on the other hand, don't herd easily and don't slaughter easily so aren't a good sacrifice.

Personally I adhere to the pig toilet theory.

*edit* also I don't think you could kosher slaughter a pig. You'd have to brain it first, a big no no.

Medhi Hasan does a good job breaking things down here in a clip just under 7 minutes.

"Islamophobia, sadly, is everywhere. But it wasn't in that art history classroom at Hamline University." My commentary on the firing of a professor who showed students a painting of Prophet Muhammad. "Give that adjunct professor her job back, please."

Here (https://twitter.com/mehdirhasan/status/1613002841978994694)

Quote from: Jacob on January 10, 2023, 09:40:29 PMI honestly thought Valmy was being deliberately ironic.

I hope so  :ph34r:

I kind of resent that.

No. I am hardly some expert on Christian iconoclasm 500 years ago. Just because somebody is Christian doesn't mean I understand them or sympathize with them or have some kind of close cultural connection. The past is a foreign country after all and hell dozens (if not hundreds) of varieties of Christianity that exist today in the United States I find very strange and distasteful and don't really understand how or why they have such a bizarre interpretation of it. I thought plenty of Dutch Masters painted religious images. I wasn't aware they were worried about them being burned by extremist Calvinists.  If I don't know every aspect of the history of literally thousands of varieties of Christianity I must be idiotically stupid? Come on.

So maybe this kind of thing is just something that goes along with Abrahamic Religions. Did the Jews ever have some kind of iconoclasm? They are ones who originally made idolatry such a central aspect of these religions after all.

They did destroy a perfectly nice golden calf :D

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 11:36:51 PMThey did destroy a perfectly nice golden calf :D

Poor Aaron. All that work...

Quote from: Valmy on January 10, 2023, 11:33:01 PM

Quote from: Jacob on January 10, 2023, 09:40:29 PMI honestly thought Valmy was being deliberately ironic.

I hope so  :ph34r:

I kind of resent that.

No. I am hardly some expert on Christian iconoclasm 500 years ago. Just because somebody is Christian doesn't mean I understand them or sympathize with them or have some kind of close cultural connection. The past is a foreign country after all and hell dozens (if not hundreds) of varieties of Christianity that exist today in the United States I find very strange and distasteful and don't really understand how or why they have such a bizarre interpretation of it. I thought plenty of Dutch Masters painted religious images. I wasn't aware they were worried about them being burned by extremist Calvinists.  If I don't know every aspect of the history of literally thousands of varieties of Christianity I must be idiotically stupid? Come on.

So maybe this kind of thing is just something that goes along with Abrahamic Religions. Did the Jews ever have some kind of iconoclasm? They are ones who originally made idolatry such a central aspect of these religions after all.

Well there was old Moses smashing up Baal.

I too was unaware that religious art was destroyed during the Reformation.  I thought it was vaguely related to to crucifixes and weeping Madonna statues, which is not *exactly* the same thing as art.

Protty's forget the bad parts of their history. Takes Catholics or Catholic lites (sheilbh :P ) to remind them. No one expects the inquisition, but everyone forgets how many witches and warlocks were burned outside of catholic countries, for example.

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 11:53:47 PMProtty's forget the bad parts of their history. Takes Catholics or Catholic lites (sheilbh :P ) to remind them. No one expects the inquisition, but everyone forgets how many witches and warlocks were burned outside of catholic countries, for example.

A lot of the bad part is happening right now.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 10, 2023, 11:56:28 PM

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 11:53:47 PMProtty's forget the bad parts of their history. Takes Catholics or Catholic lites (sheilbh :P ) to remind them. No one expects the inquisition, but everyone forgets how many witches and warlocks were burned outside of catholic countries, for example.

A lot of the bad part is happening right now.

Elaborate.

Quote from: The Brain on January 10, 2023, 11:59:12 PM

Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 10, 2023, 11:56:28 PM

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 11:53:47 PMProtty's forget the bad parts of their history. Takes Catholics or Catholic lites (sheilbh :P ) to remind them. No one expects the inquisition, but everyone forgets how many witches and warlocks were burned outside of catholic countries, for example.

A lot of the bad part is happening right now.

Elaborate.

Assume Yi means the US religious right. Are European far right nutters religious, or just secular in their hate?

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 12:03:27 AM

Quote from: The Brain on January 10, 2023, 11:59:12 PM

Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 10, 2023, 11:56:28 PM

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 11:53:47 PMProtty's forget the bad parts of their history. Takes Catholics or Catholic lites (sheilbh :P ) to remind them. No one expects the inquisition, but everyone forgets how many witches and warlocks were burned outside of catholic countries, for example.

A lot of the bad part is happening right now.

Elaborate.

Assume Yi means the US religious right. Are European far right nutters religious, or just secular in their hate?

It doesn't matter. In 17th century Sweden not being Protestant carried the death penalty, and you could (until the 1670s) be executed for witchcraft. Nothing modern protestants in Sweden do could begin to compare.

He didn't say it was worse now, just that bad is being done by Protestant's.

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 12:03:27 AMAssume Yi means the US religious right. Are European far right nutters religious, or just secular in their hate?

Yup.  Prosperity gospel, megachurches.  And that hands in the air trance shit.

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 12:10:15 AMHe didn't say it was worse now, just that bad is being done by Protestant's.

He said "A lot of the bad part is happening right now."

People are intolerant bastards, film at 11.

(BTW... there can be few things more nauseating than reading an English 17th century puritan worrying about the destination of his soul  :P  )

Fundamentalists trying to dictate behaviour is really old stuff, the problem with the Hamline story is the cultural lack of confidence in the university administration, they caved in under the slightest pressure.

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 07:15:01 PMDidn't the Dutch go a little extra wild with the art smashing calvanism? Or am I misremebering?

You're correct. Those fanatics blazed a trail of destruction through Flanders and the Netherlands. Starting in steenvoorde.

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 11:53:47 PMProtty's forget the bad parts of their history. Takes Catholics or Catholic lites (sheilbh :P ) to remind them. No one expects the inquisition, but everyone forgets how many witches and warlocks were burned outside of catholic countries, for example.

:lol: I blame Foxe's Book of Martyrs <_<

But I also think people generally underestimate how radical the Reformation was and how much it transformed people's communities and lives - and how high people believed the stakes were.

I think it's also that "Hollywood films a Medieval village" meme. I think we underestimate not just how colourful Medieval Europe was but also how crowded it was with images and statues tied into confraternities, festivals and people's lives. Possibly because a bit like the "whiteness" of rediscovered classical statues, our taste is still shaped by white-washed, austere Protestant re-design of the world rather than the wildly gaudy and busy world before it. There is, I think, a sense of loss and slight confusion of the world around them in the (few) indications we have of how ordinary people and ordinary clergymen experienced the whole thing. It was revolutionary.

Also, of course, there's a fair bit of overlap between the most iconoclastic, radical and reforming/improving Protestants and the puritans who went to America. People maybe think about it too much in terms of sexual repression and maybe witch trials, but there was lots more going on with them - and I think there is an enduring impact from them (positive and negative).

QuoteSo maybe this kind of thing is just something that goes along with Abrahamic Religions. Did the Jews ever have some kind of iconoclasm? They are ones who originally made idolatry such a central aspect of these religions after all.

Although I find it interesting that it isn't necessarily the Biblical prohibition on images themselves  that's the issue in Protestant (or Muslim) iconoclasm. It definitely is for Orthodox iconoclasts.

The big fear they had was the threat to monotheism. That images of saints (and especially Mary) or Mohammed would cause people (possibly inadvertently) to worship them instead of God. It's why relics and tombs (of saints and, say, Sufi saints or other Muslim holy men) were also trashed. That the mere existence of the wrong images or spaces could threaten the soul of the unwitting.

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 11:53:47 PMProtty's forget the bad parts of their history. Takes Catholics or Catholic lites (sheilbh :P ) to remind them. No one expects the inquisition, but everyone forgets how many witches and warlocks were burned outside of catholic countries, for example.

Is this so?
My impression is that its very much the puritans who are known as the evil 'That woman can count to 11. She's a witch.' ones.

Thing is though, the long list of historical Christian bigots of all denominations causing trouble and suffering is a list of more arguments to not let current bigots of any religion to poison our societies in the present.

Quote from: Tamas on January 11, 2023, 05:40:27 AMThing is though, the long list of historical Christian bigots of all denominations causing trouble and suffering is a list of more arguments to not let current bigots of any religion to poison our societies in the present.

Yes.


I find it quite curious to draw analogues between Islam and Christianity. Islam's year 0 being 600 years after the Christian one and the reformation kicking off 500 years ago after some false starts... There does seem to be a bit of an echo. Though yes, this is very much a correlation doesn't equal causation thing.
You often see white bigots talking about how Muslims need to go through a reformation- neglecting that the entire reason Islamic extremism is a problem IS the 'protestant' elements of Islam.
I do hold out hope they will follow a similar pattern to Christianity and this will burn out- certainly the middle east is due for huge changes with the decline in oil's dominance and climate change. Though which way this will lead things....

Yeah, it wasn't the reformation that did all the good stuff, it was the enlightenment and all that followed from that.

Yeah it's not like Islam needs a flood of breakaway sects going back to the fundamentals, like the Reformation.

Quote from: Threviel on January 11, 2023, 06:50:35 AMYeah, it wasn't the reformation that did all the good stuff, it was the enlightenment and all that followed from that.

I think, for me, there's something to that. But I think it's a little apples and oranges because the enlightenment is the big elite level intellectual project, rather than the revolutionary spread of those ideas.

If there's a comparison the enlightenment is more like humanism. It is an elite project - there are ideas of reform and correctly ordered society etc. But it isn't predictive, Erasmus isn't a leading reformer and enthusiasm for the enlightenment doesn't lead to a society imbued with enlightenment values (Prussia, Russia). I think the Reformation is more like the French Revolution (or the Russian Revolution) which was not averse to a bit of iconoclasm and maybe has mixed results/reception.

I think in part it's about when those ideas that go to the core of who we are, like the route to salvation, intrinsic universal rights, citizenship escape the zoo of elite, intellectual writing and go wild. The ideas that people already have about those issues are fundamental to who they are, so they attract real, impassioned defenders or they are transformative in people's ideas so have radical reformers on the other side. When those forces then intersect with political and state power it is always going to be mixed.

I don't think it's super-relevant to Islamic views on iconography - as I say my view is that's largely just about respecting each other's taboos in a society and not really engaged in this Hamline story where I think the college clearly got it wrong and they outsourced their judgement.

:rolleyes: yeah the Enlightenment abruptly ending the era of peace and tolerance and unleashing zealotry and suffering.

Quote from: Tamas on January 11, 2023, 07:53:45 AM:rolleyes: yeah the Enlightenment abruptly ending the era of peace and tolerance and unleashing zealotry and suffering.

Not sure that's what I said :P

Doesn't matter much now. The lights of the Enlightenment are fading fast.

If the Reformation contributed to the Enlightenment, I would say it would only be because it reduced the role of the Church, even in Catholic countries you started to see the decline of the secular administrative functions of the Church. But there were other forces that were causing that to occur as well with the development of modern State infrastructures. Obviously, the printing press and the increased rates of literacy among the upper classes created a more vibrant class of "thinkers" which I think is key to the enlightenment developing.

I guess I'm saying I do not think most of Reformation ideology contributed to the enlightenment and most of it probably is a barrier to enlightenment thinking, but it did weaken the institution of the Church which was an important step.

The Reformation is largely a negative societally for the West, as it destroyed a pillar of society (the Church and the Priesthood) and replaced it with a culture that was far more open to sectarian extremism and from a religious perspective it really kind of undermined Christianity because now about half the world's Christians are heretical, some to the point I argue they should not be seen as Christian at all (prosperity Gospel, LDS etc.)

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on January 11, 2023, 02:07:49 AMFundamentalists trying to dictate behaviour is really old stuff, the problem with the Hamline story is the cultural lack of confidence in the university administration, they caved in under the slightest pressure.

I think that's inevitable when you adopt the ideology that the "impact is what matters, not intent".  When you adopt that line of thinking, you give yourself no defense against any claim of offense.  In fact, it's offensive to question the claims of being offended, because surely the claimant of the initial offense will feel offended at that as well.

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 08:53:55 AMThe Reformation is largely a negative societally for the West, as it destroyed a pillar of society (the Church and the Priesthood) and replaced it with a culture that was far more open to sectarian extremism and from a religious perspective it really kind of undermined Christianity because now about half the world's Christians are heretical, some to the point I argue they should not be seen as Christian at all (prosperity Gospel, LDS etc.)

T am struggling to see evidence of this if I look at current and previous performance of protestant countries in Europe and the ones which remained strongly Catholic. I think you are projecting America's issues with the various religious extremists into the developed world as a whole.

One of the most important aspects of the Reformation is that it over the centuries has saved A LOT of kids from getting sexually abused.

Quote from: DGuller on January 11, 2023, 09:06:35 AMI think that's inevitable when you adopt the ideology that the "impact is what matters, not intent".  When you adopt that line of thinking, you give yourself no defense against any claim of offense.  In fact, it's offensive to question the claims of being offended, because surely the claimant of the initial offense will feel offended at that as well.

I think in part, also to jump off BBoy's point, there's an elision of individual and institutional standards.

On an individual level I think intent, or to get lawyerly (as BBoy did) recklessness, is relevant. If you're setting out to offend or just don't care then that's the relevant point. Similarly and possibly like recklessness - if something's been flagged to you and it keeps happening then I think that's an indicator. I think of Jeremy Corbyn who was regularly described by Jon Lansman, who set up a campaign group supporting him and is Jewish, as not at all anti-semitic, he "just had a bit of a blind spot". At a certain point if you've been made aware of a blind spot and it keeps happening, that suggests it's more than just a blind spot.

On the institutional or structural level, I don't think intent or any of that is necessarily relevant because it's incredibly rare that institutions or policy operate with a malign objective. I still think the approch taken for the MacPherson Report into the murder of Stephen Lawrence and the policing failures, over 20 years ago, is useful on this. It is: "the collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people." It is very rare that organisations will have intended this, instead the result or impact is how you can assess it.

Part of the problem is obviously individuals are how institutions act in reality and there is an intersection of the individual and the institutional. There's nothing I've seen in this story that really seems to engage either though.

Quote from: Tamas on January 11, 2023, 09:11:44 AM

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 08:53:55 AMThe Reformation is largely a negative societally for the West, as it destroyed a pillar of society (the Church and the Priesthood) and replaced it with a culture that was far more open to sectarian extremism and from a religious perspective it really kind of undermined Christianity because now about half the world's Christians are heretical, some to the point I argue they should not be seen as Christian at all (prosperity Gospel, LDS etc.)

T am struggling to see evidence of this if I look at current and previous performance of protestant countries in Europe and the ones which remained strongly Catholic. I think you are projecting America's issues with the various religious extremists into the developed world as a whole.

You are not aware of all the weird Protestant sects in European history? I think you just don't know much history, at least of the hundreds of years of religious upheaval after the Reformation. A large number of the strange Protestant sects that migrated to North America started in Europe.

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 09:17:54 AMOne of the most important aspects of the Reformation is that it over the centuries has saved A LOT of kids from getting sexually abused.

Eh, there's a lot of sexual abuse in Protestant and Orthodox churches, just not as heavily litigated / advertised.

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 09:36:11 AM

Quote from: Tamas on January 11, 2023, 09:11:44 AM

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 08:53:55 AMThe Reformation is largely a negative societally for the West, as it destroyed a pillar of society (the Church and the Priesthood) and replaced it with a culture that was far more open to sectarian extremism and from a religious perspective it really kind of undermined Christianity because now about half the world's Christians are heretical, some to the point I argue they should not be seen as Christian at all (prosperity Gospel, LDS etc.)

T am struggling to see evidence of this if I look at current and previous performance of protestant countries in Europe and the ones which remained strongly Catholic. I think you are projecting America's issues with the various religious extremists into the developed world as a whole.

You are not aware of all the weird Protestant sects in European history? I think you just don't know much history, at least of the hundreds of years of religious upheaval after the Reformation. A large number of the strange Protestant sects that migrated to North America started in Europe.

What's your point? Protestant and prot-protestant sects pre-dated the Reformation by several centruies. They did not spring up in consequence of it. And the strange sects that migrated to the US were leaving post-reformation England and Scotland.

My point is the lack of an organized Church with an established hierarchy mainstreamed heresy, and massively fractured and diluted Christianity. There's lots of branches of Protestantism that are barely (or sometimes even not) Nicene Christians, and who delve into things like worship of the bible and other insanity.

 I guess where we're going here all leads into the old debate as to what extent the events around the reformation truly were a result of Europe's movers and shakers having deeply helped theological views vs. it all just being an excuse as they jostled for power amidst the changes that were unfolding due to the printing press, gunpowder, the end of feudalism, age of discovery etc...

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 10:01:43 AMMy point is the lack of an organized Church with an established hierarchy mainstreamed heresy, and massively fractured and diluted Christianity. There's lots of branches of Protestantism that are barely (or sometimes even not) Nicene Christians, and who delve into things like worship of the bible and other insanity.

Ok Nietzsche

Quote from: Gups on January 11, 2023, 09:57:27 AMWhat's your point? Protestant and prot-protestant sects pre-dated the Reformation by several centruies. They did not spring up in consequence of it. And the strange sects that migrated to the US were leaving post-reformation England and Scotland.

One of the problems with generalizing "the Reformation" is that there were several "reformations" with very different origins and outcomes.

Quote from: Josquius on January 11, 2023, 10:14:44 AMI guess where we're going here all leads into the old debate as to what extent the events around the reformation truly were a result of Europe's movers and shakers having deeply helped theological views vs. it all just being an excuse as they jostled for power amidst the changes that were unfolding due to the printing press, gunpowder, the end of feudalism, age of discovery etc...

I'm not sure. I think it's clearly both.  There need to be the conditions for it to become a popular movement or a political tool; but you also need the intellectual ferment for it to become a popular movement. As grumbler there were multiple reformations - many of them also pre-date Luther and his theses, some of them were Catholic. I think that ferment is necessary for the "Reformation" which, as I say, is, I think, the process once it escapes its intellectual/theological zoo.

If you've got conditions for popular movement or elite intellectual projects without each other you've got a peasant revolt or something only relevant to intellectual history.

And I think the same is true of other similar, I think transformation and revolutionary moments. The enlightenment is a really good example of both deeply held philosophical views in universities and palaces combining with the conditions that create the French revolution to give it ideological sustenance that makes it more than a simple revolt - and ultimately leads to the terror or Napoleon's attempts to liberate Europe.

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 09:37:12 AM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 09:17:54 AMOne of the most important aspects of the Reformation is that it over the centuries has saved A LOT of kids from getting sexually abused.

Eh, there's a lot of sexual abuse in Protestant and Orthodox churches, just not as heavily litigated / advertised.

It's the difference that matters. And how are Orthodox churches relevant here?

Well my point is that the more Catholic a country has been in Europe, the less developed they are. The Catholic Church was a barrier to the emerging middle class and so where they were strong enough they got rid of it.

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 09:37:12 AM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 09:17:54 AMOne of the most important aspects of the Reformation is that it over the centuries has saved A LOT of kids from getting sexually abused.

Eh, there's a lot of sexual abuse in Protestant and Orthodox churches, just not as heavily litigated / advertised.

Look, anyone who says there's not sexual abuse in Protestant churches is just flat-out lying.  Honestly while I'm familiar with orthodox churches (due to western Canada's high Ukrainian population they're not uncommon) I haven't heard of any abuse there, but I'd be shocked if there wasn't.

But there does seem to be something uniquely different about sexual abuse in catholic churches.  Maybe it just has to do with the fact that Catholics put such an emphasis on education that there are so many catholic schools (and thus young people under the care of catholics).  Maybe it has to do with the unique demands of celibacy the catholic church places on its priests/nuns.  But there's something there.

Quote from: Tamas on January 11, 2023, 11:42:33 AMWell my point is that the more Catholic a country has been in Europe, the less developed they are. The Catholic Church was a barrier to the emerging middle class and so where they were strong enough they got rid of it.

Germany?  France?  Belgium?  Austria?

And remember that such well-developed Protestant countries in Scandinavia were backwater shitholes 100+ years ago.

Quote from: Barrister on January 11, 2023, 11:46:22 AMGermany?  France?  Belgium?  Austria?

And remember that such well-developed Protestant countries in Scandinavia were backwater shitholes 100+ years ago.

Yeah as you say Belgium, France, Catholic regions of Germany, North Italy. That arc from the Alps down the Rhine to the sea is if not the most developed bit of Europe, then some of the most developed - and did well for neighbouring Protestant areas like England and the Netherlands.

Surprised to see Tamas has become a Whig :lol: :P

Quote from: Tamas on January 11, 2023, 11:42:33 AMWell my point is that the more Catholic a country has been in Europe, the less developed they are. The Catholic Church was a barrier to the emerging middle class and so where they were strong enough they got rid of it.

Nah. The most developed countries/regions are generally those on the traderoute that goes from England to North Italy, with Scandinavia as a very efficient latecomer.

Dammit, ninjaed by sheilbh

Quote from: Barrister on January 11, 2023, 11:44:29 AM

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 09:37:12 AM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 09:17:54 AMOne of the most important aspects of the Reformation is that it over the centuries has saved A LOT of kids from getting sexually abused.

Eh, there's a lot of sexual abuse in Protestant and Orthodox churches, just not as heavily litigated / advertised.

Look, anyone who says there's not sexual abuse in Protestant churches is just flat-out lying.  Honestly while I'm familiar with orthodox churches (due to western Canada's high Ukrainian population they're not uncommon) I haven't heard of any abuse there, but I'd be shocked if there wasn't.

But there does seem to be something uniquely different about sexual abuse in catholic churches.  Maybe it just has to do with the fact that Catholics put such an emphasis on education that there are so many catholic schools (and thus young people under the care of catholics).  Maybe it has to do with the unique demands of celibacy the catholic church places on its priests/nuns.  But there's something there.

One factor is the Protestant church groups have been more proactive in settling claims, while many times the Catholic groups litigate and so end up in the news more often.

Quote from: Valmy on January 10, 2023, 11:33:01 PMI kind of resent that.

No. I am hardly some expert on Christian iconoclasm 500 years ago. Just because somebody is Christian doesn't mean I understand them or sympathize with them or have some kind of close cultural connection. The past is a foreign country after all and hell dozens (if not hundreds) of varieties of Christianity that exist today in the United States I find very strange and distasteful and don't really understand how or why they have such a bizarre interpretation of it. I thought plenty of Dutch Masters painted religious images. I wasn't aware they were worried about them being burned by extremist Calvinists.  If I don't know every aspect of the history of literally thousands of varieties of Christianity I must be idiotically stupid? Come on.

So maybe this kind of thing is just something that goes along with Abrahamic Religions. Did the Jews ever have some kind of iconoclasm? They are ones who originally made idolatry such a central aspect of these religions after all

I don't expect you to be on top of all the idiosyncrasies of all the many branches of Christianity and I don't think you're "idiotically stupid" or anything remotely like that, but you stated the fact that Protestants "simply removed the images from their place of worship" with such apparent confidence that I thought you were being uncharateristically ironic :hug:

And to be fair, your statement is pretty correct in the limited sense - protestants did not (as far as I know) ransack Italy specifically, burning religious art. But more broadly speaking Christians have had their own iconoclastic moments in history for sure. And yeah, I believe Christian iconoclasts of refer back to "thou shalt not worship graven images" commandment.

Since we're all history nerds here (I think):

Quote from: from University of Cambridge websiteAt the time of the Reformation and during the English Civil War, church paintings were destroyed in their thousands. Few survive across the UK and of those that remain, many have been defaced. It is believed that up to 97% of English religious art was destroyed during and after the Reformation.

- source link (https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/reformation-recycling-may-have-saved-rare-painting-from-destruction)

Wikipedia has a pretty reasonable article on the topic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_in_the_Protestant_Reformation_and_Counter-Reformation)... it wasn't iconoclasm all the time, but there were definitely some serious outbreaks here and there (and, of course, the brouhaha in Orthodox Christianity in the Byzantine empire).

As for Jewish iconoclasm:

QuoteMany art historians have long believed that there was a tradition in antiquity, with no surviving examples, of luxury illuminated manuscript scrolls of books from the Tanakh among Hellenized Jews. The evidence for this is Christian works of the Late Antique and Early Medieval periods whose iconography is thought to derive from works in this tradition. Examples of the later works include the Joshua Roll and, more controversially, the Utrecht Psalter.

...

Some of these, notably at Naaran in the West Bank, have had the living figures removed, leaving inanimate symbols such as the Temple menorah intact. It has been proposed that this was done by the Jewish community in the 6th or early 7th century, as part of a controversy within Judaism over images that paralleled that within Christianity leading to the Byzantine iconoclasm, leading to a stricter attitude towards images, at least in synagogues.

- source another wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aniconism_in_Judaism).

Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 11, 2023, 12:18:32 AMYup.  Prosperity gospel, megachurches.  And that hands in the air trance shit.

If I were a religious Christian I would consider Prosperity gospel outright satanism.

I'm surprised it took so long for someone to bring up Byzantine/Orthodox iconoclasm.

It was what was in my mind when I brought the whole topic of "Christian iconoclasm" up in the first place. :blush:

Quote from: Jacob on January 11, 2023, 01:46:46 PMIf I were a religious Christian I would consider Prosperity gospel outright satanism.

Yes.

Although admittedly if I was a religious Christian, I'd be really into liberation theology so I suspect the feeling would be mutual :lol:

Quote from: Sheilbh on January 11, 2023, 01:47:57 PM

Quote from: Jacob on January 11, 2023, 01:46:46 PMIf I were a religious Christian I would consider Prosperity gospel outright satanism.

Yes.

Although admittedly if I was a religious Christian, I'd be really into liberation theology so I suspect the feeling would be mutual :lol:

You'd both be right.

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 09:17:54 AMOne of the most important aspects of the Reformation is that it over the centuries has saved A LOT of kids from getting sexually abused.

I think you're kidding yourself if you don't think there's sexual abuse of kids in organized protestant (or secular) institutions where adults have unsupervised power over children with few safeguards.

Quote from: Barrister on January 11, 2023, 01:52:23 PMYou'd both be right.

I cherish the moments when we agree on something :hug:

Wait, what's liberation theology? I'm not as up to date on my heresy's as I used to be :D

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 01:58:22 PMWait, what's liberation theology? I'm not as up to date on my heresy's as I used to be :D

It's Marxism with a thin veneer of Catholic theology.  Came up in the 1960s from Latin America.

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 11:31:29 AM

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 09:37:12 AM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 09:17:54 AMOne of the most important aspects of the Reformation is that it over the centuries has saved A LOT of kids from getting sexually abused.

Eh, there's a lot of sexual abuse in Protestant and Orthodox churches, just not as heavily litigated / advertised.

It's the difference that matters. And how are Orthodox churches relevant here?

We don't really know that there is a difference. No other church has been investigated to the degree the Catholic church has, what I do see is just about every institution in which trusted non-familial adults have relatively unsupervised access to children, if you dig you find systemic abuse. This is teachers, priests, youth sports coaches, boy scout troop leaders etc. We simply don't have the comprehensive information we would need to make the assumptions you are making.

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 09:48:20 PM*edit* also I don't think you could kosher slaughter a pig. You'd have to brain it first, a big no no.

On the contrary, think of the matança do porco, old school-style. No anesthesia and straight to the jugular.
Bonus: hallal too.  :P

Quote from: Tamas on January 11, 2023, 11:42:33 AMWell my point is that the more Catholic a country has been in Europe, the less developed they are. The Catholic Church was a barrier to the emerging middle class and so where they were strong enough they got rid of it.

Eh, simplification I think. A lot of Catholic countries had governing institutions that were more antithetical to the sort of economic and industrial reforms some of the more developed European countries had. I think geography is also a major factor as it intersected with history as to why Southern Europe developed slower than Northern Europe.

Quote from: Duque de Bragança on January 11, 2023, 02:02:35 PM

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 09:48:20 PM*edit* also I don't think you could kosher slaughter a pig. You'd have to brain it first, a big no no.

On the contrary, think of the matança do porco, old school-style. No anesthesia and straight to the jugular.
Bonus: hallal too.  :P

That's a sticking, kosher/halal needs a continuous slicing motion :contract: :P

*edit* and it's hog tied too, can you tie up a kosher slaughter?

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 11:53:47 PMProtty's forget the bad parts of their history. Takes Catholics or Catholic lites (sheilbh :P ) to remind them. No one expects the inquisition, but everyone forgets how many witches and warlocks were burned outside of catholic countries, for example.

Yeah, Spain and Portugal did not need to invent imaginary enemies since witchcraft was deemed not to exist by the Pope.
Cristão-novos were there to keep the Inquisition busy anyways.

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 02:05:06 PM

Quote from: Duque de Bragança on January 11, 2023, 02:02:35 PM

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 09:48:20 PM*edit* also I don't think you could kosher slaughter a pig. You'd have to brain it first, a big no no.

On the contrary, think of the matança do porco, old school-style. No anesthesia and straight to the jugular.
Bonus: hallal too.  :P

That's a sticking, kosher/halal needs a continuous slicing motion :contract: :P

*edit* and it's hog tied too, can you tie up a kosher slaughter?

Precisely.
QED.

By the way, the pig is not necessarily tied, at least from the matanças I witnessed (I only immortalised one sorry).

Quote from: Duque de Bragança on January 11, 2023, 02:08:36 PM

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 02:05:06 PM

Quote from: Duque de Bragança on January 11, 2023, 02:02:35 PM

Quote from: HVC on January 10, 2023, 09:48:20 PM*edit* also I don't think you could kosher slaughter a pig. You'd have to brain it first, a big no no.

On the contrary, think of the matança do porco, old school-style. No anesthesia and straight to the jugular.
Bonus: hallal too.  :P

That's a sticking, kosher/halal needs a continuous slicing motion :contract: :P

*edit* and it's hog tied too, can you tie up a kosher slaughter?

Precisely.
QED.

By the way, the pig is not necessarily tied, at least from the matanças I witnessed (I only immortalised one sorry).

They few (three or four in my youth) were tied, but that might not be the norm. But sticking isn't kosher. You can't jab a blade, you have the slice/draw against the neck and cut the esophagus and trachea in on smooth motion (no sawing). Getting the carotid(s) is just a happy coincidence.

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 02:11:27 PMThey few (three or four in my youth) were tied, but that might not be the norm. But sticking isn't kosher. You can't jab a blade, you have the slice/draw against the neck and cut the esophagus and trachea in on smooth motion (no sawing). Getting the carotid(s) is just a happy coincidence.

Happy coincidence for the animal indeed, putting relatively quickly an end to its misery.  :P
I guess you being a descendant of crypto-Moors/Jews means you want to differentiate the matança do porco from "your" ritual slaughter.  :D
Sawing is a big no AFAIK.

Quote from: Duque de Bragança on January 11, 2023, 02:15:02 PM

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 02:11:27 PMThey few (three or four in my youth) were tied, but that might not be the norm. But sticking isn't kosher. You can't jab a blade, you have the slice/draw against the neck and cut the esophagus and trachea in on smooth motion (no sawing). Getting the carotid(s) is just a happy coincidence.

Happy coincidence for the animal indeed, putting relatively quickly an end to its misery.  :P
I guess you being a descendant of crypto-Moors/Jews means you want to differentiate the matança do porco from "your" ritual slaughter.  :D
Sawing is a big no AFAIK.

Arabic on my dads, Jewish on my moms :D every pig slaughter I've been to (and I've been to dozens, lived around a lot of pig farms, spring stank lol) the pig was "stuck" in the jugular in a decidedly unkosher fashion.  The porkchops (hehe) did it straight, the whites shot it in the head first though.

In the matança up north they slice the neck? If so then you do indeed have kosher slaughtered pork, if not kosher meat :D

Quote from: Barrister on January 11, 2023, 01:59:38 PMIt's Marxism with a thin veneer of Catholic theology.  Came up in the 1960s from Latin America.

Calm down John Paul :P

It's a little back in fashion now with Francis. Saint Oscar Romero and the Pope celebrating mass with renowned liberation theologians. I'd be orthodox :goodboy:

Quote from: Barrister on January 11, 2023, 01:59:38 PM

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 01:58:22 PMWait, what's liberation theology? I'm not as up to date on my heresy's as I used to be :D

It's Marxism with a thin veneer of Catholic theology.  Came up in the 1960s from Latin America.

Well Marx is dad bod Jesus :D

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 02:19:59 PM

Quote from: Duque de Bragança on January 11, 2023, 02:15:02 PM

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 02:11:27 PMThey few (three or four in my youth) were tied, but that might not be the norm. But sticking isn't kosher. You can't jab a blade, you have the slice/draw against the neck and cut the esophagus and trachea in on smooth motion (no sawing). Getting the carotid(s) is just a happy coincidence.

Happy coincidence for the animal indeed, putting relatively quickly an end to its misery.  :P
I guess you being a descendant of crypto-Moors/Jews means you want to differentiate the matança do porco from "your" ritual slaughter.  :D
Sawing is a big no AFAIK.

Arabic on my dads, Jewish on my moms :D every pig slaughter I've been to (and I've been to dozens, lived around a lot of pig farms, spring stank lol) the pig was "stuck" in the jugular in a decidedly unkosher fashion.  The porkchops (hehe) did it straight, the whites shot it in the head first though.

In the matança up north they slice the neck? If so then you do indeed have kosher slaughtered pork, if not kosher meat :D

Neck is sliced sooner or later. ;)

Muslims seeing a matança did describe it as (almost) halal.  :hmm:

Mind you, there are some villages described (never witnessed a matança there), or that used to be, as crypto-jewish, up north. No crypto-moors up north obviously, though.
I'll have to check the Jewish Museum in Bragança next time and inquire there.

https://www.sefarad-braganca.com/pt/visita-virtual/centro-interpretacao-cultura-sefardita/ (https://www.sefarad-braganca.com/pt/visita-virtual/centro-interpretacao-cultura-sefardita/)

It's not like the Alheira de Bragança is not inspired by a Jewish tradition, though as you may know, in Bragança or Mirandela, it's with pork.  :P

https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alheira (https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alheira)

Alheira and farinheira were made to trick the gentiles. But eventually those jews became gentiles too and started adding pig fat since its so tasty haha


You non portuguese people, if you can find them, try them, they're really good.

Then having the matança do porco giving kosher slaughtered pork, as you said, would be the icing on the cake.  :P

Portagee pig slaughtering ranks up with the weirdest hijacks.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 11, 2023, 02:51:13 PMPortagee pig slaughtering ranks up with the weirdest hijacks.

You're welcome :hug: :D

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 02:53:36 PM

Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 11, 2023, 02:51:13 PMPortagee pig slaughtering ranks up with the weirdest hijacks.

You're welcome :hug: :D

 :cheers:

Quote from: Barrister on January 11, 2023, 01:47:37 PMI'm surprised it took so long for someone to bring up Byzantine/Orthodox iconoclasm.

It was what was in my mind when I brought the whole topic of "Christian iconoclasm" up in the first place. :blush:

Yeah but that one was weird. They would take down religious images and replace them with a picture of Apollo or a charioteer or something. And over 1,000 years ago and was eventually settled as the images were fine. And finally we don't even fully understand why it took place, what was the purpose behind it.

Quote from: Sheilbh on January 11, 2023, 02:23:35 PM

Quote from: Barrister on January 11, 2023, 01:59:38 PMIt's Marxism with a thin veneer of Catholic theology.  Came up in the 1960s from Latin America.

Calm down John Paul :P

It's a little back in fashion now with Francis. Saint Oscar Romero and the Pope celebrating mass with renowned liberation theologians. I'd be orthodox :goodboy:

It's interesting that you brought it up in comparison to prosperity gospel, as IMHO they share the same flaw in both being entirely concerned with the everyday world.  Christ was pretty certain about the fact that His Kingdom would be in Heaven, not on earth.

Quote from: Jacob on January 11, 2023, 01:52:42 PM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 09:17:54 AMOne of the most important aspects of the Reformation is that it over the centuries has saved A LOT of kids from getting sexually abused.

I think you're kidding yourself if you don't think there's sexual abuse of kids in organized protestant (or secular) institutions where adults have unsupervised power over children with few safeguards.

:unsure: Why would I think that?

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 02:01:30 PM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 11:31:29 AM

Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on January 11, 2023, 09:37:12 AM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 09:17:54 AMOne of the most important aspects of the Reformation is that it over the centuries has saved A LOT of kids from getting sexually abused.

Eh, there's a lot of sexual abuse in Protestant and Orthodox churches, just not as heavily litigated / advertised.

It's the difference that matters. And how are Orthodox churches relevant here?

We don't really know that there is a difference. No other church has been investigated to the degree the Catholic church has, what I do see is just about every institution in which trusted non-familial adults have relatively unsupervised access to children, if you dig you find systemic abuse. This is teachers, priests, youth sports coaches, boy scout troop leaders etc. We simply don't have the comprehensive information we would need to make the assumptions you are making.

Yeah I'm sure the Knitting Grannies Association is just as bad as La Cosa Nostra when it comes to criminal activity. Since they haven't been investigated as much we simply can't say.

Quote from: Barrister on January 11, 2023, 03:18:27 PMIt's interesting that you brought it up in comparison to prosperity gospel, as IMHO they share the same flaw in both being entirely concerned with the everyday world.  Christ was pretty certain about the fact that His Kingdom would be in Heaven, not on earth.

Yes - liberation theology, though, isn't about making the Kingdom of God on earth. Instead it's the is a preferential option for the poor - that the place to find Christ is the marginalised, the poor, the periphery and that the cause for the existence of the poor is greed which is a sin (even if it has been built into economic systems of exploitation).

Where they move into more controversial territory was that the way to practice as Christians was to participate in the liberation struggles of the poor and to improve their material condition - again because that is where you find Christ and God. And also it's where you break through yourself, your own selfishness, greed, self-absorption. It is a way of reaching beyond that to a community and the divine.

But as Francis (not a liberation theologian) put it "poverty is at the centre of the Gospel."

All of that makes sense to me. I genuinely have no idea how you get to prosperity theology.

Edit: Also think of Francis' line on giving to beggars being "always right" as long as you look them in the eyes, touch their hands rather than just tossing money at them. "Often we enter into a mindset of indifference: the poor person is there but we look the other way [...] stretch forth your hand to the poor: He is Christ."

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 03:25:24 PM:unsure: Why would I think that?

I don't know? But apparently you think Catholicism has something to do with it...?

Quote from: Jacob on January 11, 2023, 03:47:05 PM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 03:25:24 PM:unsure: Why would I think that?

I don't know? But apparently you think Catholicism has something to do with it...?

I don't follow. Do with what?

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 03:50:33 PM

Quote from: Jacob on January 11, 2023, 03:47:05 PM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 03:25:24 PM:unsure: Why would I think that?

I don't know? But apparently you think Catholicism has something to do with it...?

I don't follow. Do with what?

That.

You asked why you'd think that. While it wasn't entirely clear to me what you meant by "that", presumably do?

Quote from: Jacob on January 11, 2023, 03:54:37 PM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 03:50:33 PM

Quote from: Jacob on January 11, 2023, 03:47:05 PM

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 03:25:24 PM:unsure: Why would I think that?

I don't know? But apparently you think Catholicism has something to do with it...?

I don't follow. Do with what?

That.

You asked why you'd think that. While it wasn't entirely clear to me what you meant by "that", presumably do?

As you know, for alternative B to be better than alternative A, B doesn't have to be perfect. It just has to be better than A. It is certainly possible to disagree with "B is better than A", but it makes little sense to assume that I think B is perfect just because I think that B is better than A.

Quote from: The Brain on January 11, 2023, 03:58:31 PMAs you know, for alternative B to be better than alternative A, B doesn't have to be perfect. It just has to be better than A. It is certainly possible to disagree with "B is better than A", but it makes little sense to assume that I think B is perfect just because I think that B is better than A.

Okay. Thank you for clarifying.

Giving pleasure is my life. -_-

It's great to have aspirations :hug:

Most of all, I am offended as a Muslim[/ur]

Don't know if it was posted, but the pov of a muslim professor criticizing the university for acknowledging the extremists. (https://www.chronicle.com/article/most-of-all-i-am-offended-as-a-muslim?cid=gen_sign_in)

On Protestant and Islamic iconoclasm - really interesting Empire podcast today on the Turks and the Tudors.

Lots of interesting stuff/figures - but particularly struck by a brief detour on how Protestant England positioned itself as similarly iconoclastic, just like Muslims, in opposition to idolatrous Catholic Europe.

Quote from: Sheilbh on January 17, 2023, 07:09:03 AMOn Protestant and Islamic iconoclasm - really interesting Empire podcast today on the Turks and the Tudors.

Lots of interesting stuff/figures - but particularly struck by a brief detour on how Protestant England positioned itself as similarly iconoclastic, just like Muslims, in opposition to idolatrous Catholic Europe.

Isn't that pretty well known as one of the Calvinists big things?
What was new in the podcast?- they spun this to show how they were similar to the Ottomans hence lets be friends?
Did King Edward come during a rare spell of Turkish-French enmity?