|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 3:54 pm
What do you think of the churches treatment of witches? Do you believe they were witches or innocent women.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:51 pm
just to cover bases,
this is a thread for debates not arguments or slander,
Please do not use any rude names or remarks... other then what is true and can be PROVEN
I say this in advance because i know it is a VERY controversial subject...
*the mod is watching wink *
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:11 pm
Well, I believe that they were really innocent women. Especially in the Medieval Ages, it became really simple to cast negative light on women in society. They mostly targeted older women, particularly midwives because they lived alone and were mostly not that involved with the community. So, unlucky for them, if a child died, or if a woman took ill after seeing a midwife or someone who was good with herbs, they would be accused of witchcraft.
For one of my courses we had to read this primary document from the 14th century on how to "detect a witch," and some of the things were a little ridiculous. Also their methods for testing WHO was a witch left much to be desired. For example, in England they would take you to the edge of a cliff, and push you over - if you fell to your death, you were innocent, if you didn't die it meant that you were possessed by the devil and you would be killed for that.
Also - and I know I'm getting long winded here - but they believed women were the weaker sex, so it is only natural that satan was able to over-power them and influence them to do "evil things."
But... this is just my opinion. Did they believe that these women (and sometimes men) were witches? Absolutely. Is it plausible that they actual were? Doubtful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 2:05 am
i think majority of the accused women were innocent of witchcraft. the dark ages was still part of the period in which man still understood little about his surroundings and such things as death, sickness and the likes. therefore, he was likely to put blame on his supernatural and superstitious beliefs such as witches
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 9:59 am
I believe the majority of people accused were innocent. People at the time were very superstitious and if something bad happened it was blamed on a supernatural phenomenon. Witches, sprites, faery folk, everything was up for grabs in the blame game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:46 am
I do feel sorry for the people in that era. Yet even today there are those who claim to be a witch or warlock. People still use the term of becoming 'bewitched' by a woman just as they would claim in that era, of course many believed it to be mainly woman, yet there were also men who were deemed as being a warlock and if one could find the 'source' and rid it from their village they would be free and the womanfolk and young girls would be safe. It is unfortunate that many people back then were very influential, it was something like mass hysteria. Put the fear into you.
But, having prattled on, yes, many people were innocent. Just look at what happened to Joan of Arc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:15 pm
I find the Salem Witch trials very ironic, seeing as Salem means "Peace".
So you're talking about the poor woman who died from doing nothing wrong, not wiccians?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 3:46 pm
Those men and women were innocent.Back then even if there was one thing diffrent about you,you were hated because you weren't like them(just like these days).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Werewolf
|
Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:43 pm
One of my favorite historical topics!
To answer your question- no. I do not believe that a singe woman or man accused of witchcraft during the hysteria was even remotely associated with witchcraft.
These women were so pious that they were willing to be horribly tortured and murdered simply because they refused to lie about their ties with Satan. It's absolutely fascinating to look at that period in time and see how that powder keg erupted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:25 pm
I believe that they were truely innocent women, who were accused for onlikely reasons. Like being left-handed, or using herbal medicines. Also for abnormalties like differnet colored eyes, or unusualy shaped birth marks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:19 pm
I believe they were simple wickens. Wickens are people who believe in homeopathic remedies and they don't exactely believe in God. I think that the church was wrong to kill them. They were normal people like every one of that time. I hate it when people think that the churches were right to do those horrible things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Innocent.
You can't accuse someone of something that doesn't exist. Witches and witchcraft aren't real. Until some church official created said term, there wasn't a word for it.
There is few evidence of what exactly happened between the Church and the pagan religions of the day. However, what we do have suggests that in a play for power, many of the beliefs of said religions became either absorbed into the Church doctrines and practices or became outlawed.
In pagan religions, women were equal or more than men. Why would the pagan women convert to a religion that will demean them and demote them? So, they became the enemy of the church. In an effort to wipe them out, the Church took the myths of the pagan religions, recrafted them to be from Satan and sinful and made "witches" out of the pagan women.
Over time, witches and witchcraft became a game and they were all blamed when a neighbor didn't like them.
Innocent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 11:57 am
Actually Joan of Arc was burned at the stake for heresy- she wore men's clothing- and she was against the king. Both made her a perfect example of what NOT to do as a woman in her time.
Joan had been captured once and was set to be executed in a less cruel way. However, she was rescued and when recaptured, she was almost immediately burned at the stake.
This was the info I came across when I was researching Joan Plantagenet (daughter of King John)- in a nutshell
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 12:02 pm
I believe most accused of witchcraft were innocent. Some were not. History, if it was written correctly, has a few who admitted on their own that they practiced witchcraft. (This is a very small number though.)
I also believe that if you were not a active member of a church, whether it was by choice or illness (yours or you took care of someone) you were much more likely to be called a witch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Werewolf
|
Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:54 pm
Welsh_Princess1188 I believe most accused of witchcraft were innocent. Some were not. History, if it was written correctly, has a few who admitted on their own that they practiced witchcraft. (This is a very small number though.) I also believe that if you were not a active member of a church, whether it was by choice or illness (yours or you took care of someone) you were much more likely to be called a witch. True, some people did admit to participating in witchcraft, but (in Salem at least) the belief was that if you admitted to it, you could be cured by the church and therefore pardoned for your associations with Satan. Those who confessed also probably escaped a good 90% of the torture that unconfessed witches endured.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
