His name was Fr. Lawrence Cassiday a good friend of Al H. Morrison. But what has this to do with the roots of the essential dignities?

Maurice.

Maurice McCann wrote:His name was Fr. Lawrence Cassiday a good friend of Al H. Morrison. But what has this to do with the roots of the essential dignities?

Sue commented on a post of mine to the effect that the Christian Church did not set out to destroy astrology. Tumbling Sphinx commented on her response to the effect that it did. The topic is related to the effects of inessential indignities.

To claim otherwise in an attempt to gild the lily in order to make one's case to the contrary is really just too much. Such arguments would never be seriously considered in reputable and established academic institutions, let alone orthodox institutions of theological studies.

You cannot possibly be serious. I have a room full of books and journal articles that suggest otherwise. These debates abound in reputable academic institutions. This isn't something I am making up for the hell of it. Such discussions have gone on for centuries in universities and continue to do so. There is so much interesting information coming from 'reputable academics' that it is difficult to keep up with it. I'm not particularly bothered that you disagree with anything I say but to suggest that such views are not taken seriously in academia is ludicrous.

Sue wrote:

?Have you ever wondered why d?Ascoli?s name is always mentioned ??

For the same reasons anyone of high profile/note is repeatedly referred to. People of magnitude are the ones whose names travel down through time. In a few hundred years, what names will be recalled from the current crusades?

?D'Ascoli was not burnt at the stake for his astrology regarding Christ. This is a fallacy that is often repeated but it is not true. He was professor of astrology at the University of Bologna when he accused Dante of heresy after defending astrologers from Dante?s hell. .?

As I understand it D?Ascoli was burnt at the stake because he eluded his first conviction of impiety (for a commentary on Sacrobosco?s sphere) and was found guilty for a second time - which carried the death penalty - for defending astrology, ie. Dante?s Divine Comedy and Cavalcanti?s work.

Astrology embodies natural cosmological philosophy ? he was condemned for defending his astrological philosophy which was communicated in his work and killed for being found guilty a second time as was the penalty.

?There were political reasons for his demise that had nothing to do with astrology but were partly related to his attack on Dante.?

This appears to contradict itself and what was mentioned earlier. Political reasons, please share? Political (social) enemies could certainly put one in the hot seat on charges of heresy just as strong political allies could spare one, especially if you held a high station in life.

There seems to be distinctions being made for the sake of argument between politics, philosophy, religion, astrology (focusing on the practice rather than the philosophy - the philosophy held manifesting by way of practice, writings, teachings etc), whereas religion at that time WAS science, philosophy, politics ? not personal preference but universal truth. Heresy struck at the heart of that truth as defined by the Church.

?if there are so many others like him??

How many others existed of D?Ascoli?s standing that were around at that time, and how many dared to offend the Church twice?
Death at the stake occurred after a period of persecution. First time found guilty, depending on the crime and your connections, usually involved a penance, wearing conspicuous symbols on garments, property destroyed, pilgrimage etc. People fled under the threat and/or on being found guilty, the crime being anything ranging from not wanting to swear an oath to having a prohibited book in one?s possession etc. Refuse to recant and handed over to the secular authorities for execution.

?Bruno was not burned at the stake for his astrology.?

He was an astrologer who was burned at the stake for his astrological philosophy (denounced for his heretical theories) ? Copernicanism being a factor ? as well as his theology, and he refused to recant.
Galilei also convicted for heresy, large factor being his Copernican writings (Copernicus himself was said to have delayed publication for fear of the Church) ? he recanted but still sentenced to life in prison and died under house arrest.
The Church rehabilitated him after the Pope?s call in 1998 for an inquiry into the Inquisition.

Nostradamus was accused of heresy and as a result fled.
Jerome Cardan accused of heresy and spent several months in prison for publishing a sacred horoscope.
Kepler?s mother arrested as a witch, imprisoned and released after he intervened, his influential position no doubt of help. Marsilio Ficino accused of heresy. And Pico was also condemned, his disputation and works forbidden (thesis heretical ? he?s said to have advocated studying Hebrew & Talmudic sources). On returning from travels (pilgrimage perhaps? ? which was a penance handed out to certain people) he destroyed his poetical works, gave up profane science (looks like he recanted) and dedicated himself to defending Christianity against Jews, Mohammedans and astrologers.

?Savonarola was one of the most outspoken bishops about astrology. He despised astrology. Didn?t stop him from being burnt at the stake.?

How is Savonarola?s burning at the stake relevant to what happened to astrologers who the Church considered a threat to its interpretation of scripture, a threat to its cosmological view? Savanarola may have been outspoken against astrology, but he was very outspoken in his attacks on the Church in Rome and directly defied it?s orders not to preach, as well as defying his ex-communication.

?People have believed that astrologers were persecuted during the Inquisition and put to death.?

Well, I guess because it?s true. There were astrologers persecuted and there were those put to death.
Those with astrological philosophy that didn?t conform to the Church?s philosophy were persecuted. Their books censored, burned, prohibited from being published, read, retained, sold, translated into other langauages or made known to others in anyway which staunched the flow of learning materials readily available. Repression and censorship. But not all copies of ?heretical? books blacklisted (Index of Forbidden Books as at 1948: http://www.cvm.qc.ca/gconti/905/BABEL/I ... m-1948.htm) were destroyed or deleted from circulation. The ?Dark Ages? ? simply disappeared from public view, went underground, behind closed doors.
?It was the Church alone that Christ commissioned to guard the deposit of faith and to decide the true meaning and interpretation of the devine pronouncements.? Astrology runs contrary to this ? in origins, philosophy and practice.

?Of course they tried to throw it into disrepute, just like scientists do today when they go around signing declarations about astrology or write articles about how wrong it all is.?

Scientists who feel the need to do this today don?t usually harass you personally, incarcerate you, force you to wear symbols attached to your garments, destroy your property, prohibit your writings etc because of your astrological philosophy, your cosmological view. It?s a different story today ? but perhaps what such things do have in common is suspicion, fear and a certain absence of understanding.

?As I said, there is very little evidence to suggest that the Church carried out their threats. If the Christian Church went to all the effort of recording their laws against astrology then surely we would have several records of those laws being enacted. We don?t.?

Well, I guess the evidence/records for the above people had to come from somewhere. Galilei ? enough evidence in the Vatican chamber of secrets for him to be rehabilitated. The original summary of the process [trial] of Giordano Bruno was also buried away in there, uncatalogued. The Vatican?s records, trial records, secular records. Church Councils had secular rulers carry out sentences of death ? heresy was a crime against the state. Records (civil) are still being discovered, not to mention those tucked away in the Secret Archives ? and the Archives have also been looted over time with records lost.

That 1998 inquiry initiated by the Pope stated trials of some 125,000 suspected heretics in Spain, with 1 % [1,250] executed ? no mention made of how many were found guilty and sent to jail, died in jail, served penance, had property destroyed, died from starvation because their property was destroyed as a result of persecution etc or fled ? only the executions. Nor was ?heresy? qualified, there were different reasons for the accusation of heresy ? but that sort of information would require first hand access. In Portugal 5.7% [741] of 13,000 tried had been condemned. It offered a small glimpse into what went on in one area, in keeping with what the Vatican was prepared to reveal.

Pope Paul, V: the doctrine of the double motion of the earth about its axis and about the sun is false, and entirely contrary to Holy Scripture. To teach or even read the woks denounced or passages condemned was to risk persecution in this world ? for scientific and philosophic heresy.

As with any threat, it carries as much weight/power as the person (or institution) who issues it.
The threat was as real as the Church that made it, and it was carried out in keeping with the times.
As with all things like this, the one?s we do hear about represent the extreme tip of the ice-berg. It?s the tip of the ice-berg that alerts us to what lies below. It?s the one?s we don?t hear/know about (who?ve escaped detection/capture, or fled persecution etc) that have operated 'below' who helped preserve the works during such times that we benefit from today in addition to what the Church may have allowed into public release at later times.

Deb wrote:

?But astrology as a natural philosophy wasn?t controversial??

Only insofar as it abided by the Church?s view of truth. I think Copernicus? theory presented something of a problem.

??the facts of history are rapidly being eroded away, and there is a continual need for men and women to search out and make known the truth so that it can be preserved for future generations. ?in a generation or two, it may be commonly believed that hardly any persecution occurred during the Middle Ages, and the stage would be set for a repetition. In fact, such persecutions could begin much sooner than we realize.? David A. Plaisted in his ?Estimates of the Number Killed by the Papacy in the Middle Ages?, 2003.

True, history has a habit of repeating. And sometimes can get so caught up in the rationalizing, quantifying and qualifying of the divisions and determining what criteria be used that we lose sight of the source.

Andrew wrote:

?No, Christians have not always persecuted astrologers? What I have argued is that there has always been, from the very beginning of "orthodox" Christian belief and practise as articulated by the Fathers of the Church Eastern and Western (i.e., PATRISTIC THEOLOGY), a profound philosophical incompatibility between the astrological worldview and the Christian worldview, and consistent theological condemnation of the practise of genethliacal astrology, idiosyncratic exceptions to this condemnation notwithstanding.?

I agree.

Inessential dignities ? and essential dignities (lol!) ? either way I think this thread has been illuminated with dignity!

Deb, just a thought but seeing as this has triggered something of a diversion (sorry about that P.Brown) perhaps relocating it to a new thread as you've done in the past might help restore the topic to its essence?

In appreciation,
TS

PS - and best wishes for a speedy recovery.

Sue wrote:You cannot possibly be serious.

Actually, I am. There is a very fundamental philosophical incompatibility between the orthodox patristic Christian worldview and the astrological worldview. Any ecclesiastical scholar of patristic studies in the Greek (or Russian) Orthodox or Roman Catholic traditions will confirm this, though Protestants (including Anglicans) will invariably beg to differ. The patristic rejection of astrology is virtually overwhelming and to suggest otherwise is churlish and uninformed. Scholars outside the Orthodox or the Catholic traditions may argue all they wish, but the witness of the Fathers is unanimous: whether one refers to Augustine of Hippo in the West or to Gregory of Nyssa in the East, the testimony is irrefutable. The reasons underlying their condemnations are many and varied, but there is no doubt that their condemnations are clear and unambiguous, and there is little reason to believe that they would "revise" their views were they with us to do so. The mystical theology of the Cappadocian Fathers may often include references to "symbolic astrology," but their cosmology completely rejects astral influences and the practise of horoscopy.

Oh, and here is another unreliable, meaningless link and quote from the internet (specifically from the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, yet another dubious organisation populated by anonymous individuals):

http://www.goarch.org/print/en/ourfaith/article7066.asp

"Our Canon law prohibits people from believing in astrology. In fact, Canon 36 of Laodecia in 369, casts out of the Church people who make, sell, buy or wear the zodiac signs."

Is astrology contrary to Christianity? The answer to this question depends on how one defines both astrology and Christianity.

Christianity covers everything from Catholics to Quakers, while astrology covers everything from forecasting the weather to predicting the winners of horse races. The question is far too broad church.

http://www.copticchurch.org/Texts/Spiri ... 20Wars.pdf

His Holiness Pope Shenouda III, Patriarch of the Coptic Orthodox Church, Judge of the Universe, writes: "Among his (the devil's) lies also is what he says through the mouths of astrologers and those who claim the knowledge of the unknown: whether through astrology, palmistry, geomancy, reading coffee-cups, or fortune-telling by various ways and methods."

I have served (in various capacities) bishops of the Orthodox and (once) Coptic churches. If you were to inform them that astrology is compatible with orthodox, patristic Christianity, at best you would be met with gales of laughter and at worst you would receive a stern lecture which you would not likely forget. The Russians would conclude that you might be suffering from prelest (spiritual sickness) and recommend prayer and fasting.

Okay the following is an opinion, mine, one that led long ago to my excommunicating a certain church, its very opinionated, so if you have tender feelings for organized religion, you might want to skip this post...

the Church (and church founders) have been wrong before, are wrong now, and will be wrong again, world without end. Amen...

to blindly follow the prelates of power lead to crusades, cruelty and subjugation. but then I generally find when you get to asking questions about following someone elses rules for life, you're pretty much in trouble to begin with. I do not understand this desire of some to seek unfallable guidance from fallable sources. (namely humans and human teachings) To me it seems a confusion with the simpler more realistic desire to understand your world and your place in it, but it has somehow been twisted. I also find that asking such a question from a church is sort of like Asking McDonalds about the food at Taco Bell, they dont serve the same food, but have the mistaken impression they are competing for business, when in truth, if I want a hamburger I'm not going to a taco stand, etc... Of course going to a church to ask about the weather seems rather odd to me anyway... dunno why this bothered me today, I've been ignoring this thread, but today it kinda got under my skin.

Okay that's my opinion, others may vary. (gee I didn't swear or throw holy water or anything, I must be getting mellow in my old age)

Granny

granny_skot wrote:Okay that's my opinion, others may vary.

Salman Rushdie recently said: "That old-fashioned philosopher Karl Marx used to say that religion was the opiate of the masses. Now it's the crystal meth of the masses."

Is astrology a symbol system or a belief system? Belief systems need to be defended against infidels and heretics, against critics and skeptics. Belief systems have authorities who issue proclamations that cannot be challenged. Belief systems offer certitude, not opinion and hypothesis. I think the question is not "is astrology contrary to Christianity?" but "is astrology contrary to Astrolianity?"

http://gfisher.org/index.htm

Some food for thought: Many of Lilly's judgments remind me of closely-argued, after-the-fact theological commentaries. Gordon McCrea Fisher, Professor Emeritus at James Madison University, in his book "Marriage and Divorce of Astronomy and Astrology," writes:

U12. Geneva asks (p. 71) " ... exactly what was Lilly so good at? ... some of his admirers had studied astrology for as long as Lilly had done. Yet despite their greater ability in subjects like astronomy, mathematics, Latin, physics, languages, geometry, theology, and philosophy, Lilly remained their acknowledged superior in judicial astrology. He obviously had a knack: but for what? If merely a combination of modern intellectual skills, such as historians often claim of astrology --- part psychology, religion, mathematics, physics, sociology, journalism, etc. --- had been required then surely others would have triumphed. If he were alive now, Lilly would be practicing in none of these professions. I finally decided that this was a genuinely obsolete category. Nothing in the twentieth century is comparable. The answer then became self-evident: Lilly was a genius in exactly the category of knowledge which he claimed as his own --- that of judicial astrology. What skills this comprised when stripped of distorting modern contexts was another matter, one which the remainder of this study will try to explicate." If I understand this claim correctly, Geneva is attributing to Lilly possession of a lost art, and one which evidently stands alone, independent of other kinds of arts and sciences, such as those she listed. Does this mean that Lilly had some facility for some kind of direct revelation obtained from arranging and contemplating what Geneva calls the symbols, or symbolic language, of astrology, which presumably was a kind of medium for his prognostications? My reading of Geneva's work leads me to speculate that what she has shown is rather that Lilly's genius lay mainly in his ability to diagnose and predict major political movements of his time, based (as Geneva quotes him as saying) on careful study and attention to political events and processes, and communicated by him in a clever way by means of astrological concepts and terminology. I wonder, too, whether or not he was also a kind of genius at political propaganda, communicating in his symbolic or encrypted way in the face of strict censorship and extreme punishment for disloyalty to the king, and perhaps also influencing the outcomes which he predicted.

U13. I don't find in Geneva's work a study of predictions of Lilly which failed, as compared to those which succeeded. She does note, however, (p. 184) that "when Lilly found the astrological tradition wanting, he did not hesitate to develop a new methodology using existing astrological formulations. He also expressed his intention of passing it on to his astrological inheritors, an ambition in keeping with his more respectable scientific contemporaries. And finally, there is Geneva's quotation (p. 281) of a statement by Lilly: "my arguments are not demonstrative, or can be made so: I acknowledge my Prognosticks to be only grounded upon conjectural probabilitie, and are not subject to the senses, or Geometricall demonstrations; thus I speak to avoyd carping."

Hmm . . .

the 13th apostle in the satire 'dogma', Kevin Smith screenplay, was played by Chris Rock, whose character suggested that people turn to ideas over beliefs, that people will kill and fight and do obscene things for beliefs, but its hard to work up the same level of insanity over an idea. He also suggested giving up beliefs and getting a few ideas.... I'm afraid I have to agree with him on that one. Karl Marx remarks are too much like his arguement, a belief for which people did obscene things in order to defend and enslave people to his beliefs.

though the suggestions of the movie dogma would be much less insightful if it weren't for all those other strange religious ideas that I've had the pleasure and pain of stumbling through over the years. I must say I do appreciate the insanity of organized religion because its allowed me to think, and given me much to consider. Now if I only had the pleasure of raiding the vatican library... Hmmmmmm, and a few others.

About defense, I dont particularly feel a need to defend religion, because it has so many defenders of its own, but I definitely get strong urges to protect other things, like astrology, because there are too many zealots on the loose (some of them alleged scientists) and the works of those past, however much I may agree or disagree wtih them, need to be preserved. Heck I'd even protect Aristotles works if it came down to it, and we all know I loathe him... of course i may use his tomes to surround those of other authors I'm more fond of, but hey! I'd still consider it my duty to protect them from the ignorant masses.... there is a part of me that thinks book burning should be a capitol offense...

Now about Lilly. One may study surgery for 20 years and still not be as good at it as another person who has natural ability that gives them an upper hand with a kinfe, or study law, and not have that same edge as another who has that natural spark of charisma in the court, etc... just because one studied something and might even be rather good at it, people Like Evangeline Adams and William Lilly are not just made, they are also part natural phenomena, just as people like Babe Ruth or Michael Jordon are. Or look at Nicholas Culpepper, his ability with medicine and astrology is rather amazing. I dont see the fact that Lilly was a better astrologer than some of his counterparts as anything but the natural course of things, where some people are better at somethings than others.

dang waxing philosophical today...

Granny
Granny.

This thread has gone from essential dignities to the persecution of Christians (or lack thereof), anything to do with Chrisitanity and astrology, to whether to have McDonalds or Taco Bells for lunch. We seem to have moved away from my original point to the stage where I am now considered to have been defending an entirely different view from the one I first intended.

My original point, and one I stand by, is not that Christians didn't attempt to rid the world of astrology, but that there is no hard evidence that astrologers were persecuted in the large numbers that history has suggested and that astrologers were not always targeted as vigorously as has been suggested.

The philosophical incompatibility between the two is a relatively new derivation of Christianity. We can't be fooled into thinking that the Christianity of today is basically the Christianity of the past. They are polls apart. Read some early Christian cosmology that talks about the heavenly spheres with the earth being surrounded by the primium mobile and the empyrean heaven. This sort of writing can be found in Christian cosmology well into the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The problem with astrology, according to the Christian Church prior to the Reformation, was not that they were incompatible but that they were so similar. Christianity developed from the same worldview as did astrology. They even encouraged this in the early centuries as a way of syncretising the beliefs of those they were attempting to convert. But there came a time when Christianity had to assert its uniqueness. Christianity took a very ancient story and made it literal. To emphasis the literalness of Christianity it had to be seen to be unique. Hence, any belief system that was similar had to be either squashed or subsumed. However, astrologers were often the least of their worries. Far bigger threats came from things such as Arianism and you were more likely to be persecuted for being an Arian than an astrologer.

Sue, the original point made that I questioned was:

?As much as many want to believe, the Christian Churc did not set out to destroy astrology. There were isolated times and cases where certain pockets of the Church tried to discredit it but at no time was there a serious push to punish astrologers or destroy it.?

Which has now been substantially modified to:

?My original point, and one I stand by, is not that Christians didn't attempt to rid the world of astrology, but that there is no hard evidence that astrologers were persecuted in the large numbers that history has suggested and that astrologers were not always targeted as vigorously as has been suggested.?

What are the ?large numbers? of astrologers referred to/suggested? Who?s done a quantitative-qualitative analysis on the number of astrologers persecuted of the total population persecuted at any given time?
To start with, this ?large? number is limited by education.

The Vatican released a figure of 138,000 people (Spain & Portugal) hauled before the inquisition on charges ? do we know what percentage of these were astrologers, charged for possessing astrological literature etc?

What we usually have at any given time are records of those foremost in their field, and the one?s already mentioned were directly impacted by the ?Church?. Including the Roman Inquisition, some of the latest figures suggest somewhere in the vicinity of 5,000 were convicted and killed ? to carry through the Vatican?s conservative percentage of 1% then that offers a toll of 500,000 people accused and persecuted, what percentage of this were astrologers requires deeper, more specific research.

However, for another perspective ? the Jewish Encylopedia [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view. ... nquisition] cites 8,000 killed in a 15 year period during the Spanish Inquisition before looking further afield.

To suggest the ?Church?, as a prevailing power at certain times, did not follow through on it?s threats is little different to suggesting that government today will not follow through on terrorist legislation it enacts. Rules are not written, boundaries not set by upper echelons of certain hierarchies without a purpose that?s also acted upon.

?The philosophical incompatibility between the two is a relatively new derivation of Christianity.?

Relatively new? I?m not sure what?s meant by this ? last century or two? Philosophical incompatibility commenced when one group ? in this instance you raised the Christian Church (for which I turned to the Church in Rome as an example) interpreted and owned a universal truth and attempted to impose that interpretation onto the masses, followed by persecution of those who through their study and practice of astrology etc were seen as a threat to its interpretation. Philosophic incompatibility was there from the start.
Universal truth is not ?owned? by any one organization etc ? it?s universal (all-inclusive). Ownership is exclusive ? it excludes.

?The problem with astrology, according to the Christian Church prior to the Reformation, was not that they were incompatible but that they were so similar. ?

According to the Christian Church? Source? Are we discussing the same ?Church??
As Andrew mentioned, along with the examples he provided: ??there is not a single ecumenical council (either Eastern or Western), nor an episcopal statement, nor a papal magisterial decree, nor an officially sanctioned and approved theological doctrine, which in any way approves or supports the tenets of astrology,??

?Hence, any belief system that was similar had to be either squashed or subsumed.?

Copernicus? systematically developed belief was not ?similar?. It put forward a fundamentally ?new? order. Astrologers were persecuted etc for adhering to this system of belief. Around 1700 years earlier, Aristarchus of Samos was said to face accusations of impiety for the same systematically developed belief, as were other followers of this particular belief system along the way.

The numbers persecuted at any one time are inconclusive ? if it includes ?large numbers? of astrologers, then that large number?s viewed in the context of the total number of astrologers at any one time/place. Do we have that sort of information? What wasn?t inconclusive was the ?Church?s? assertion of proprietary over 'truth'. It was exclusive & final.

?Far bigger threats came from things such as Arianism and you were more likely to be persecuted for being an Arian than an astrologer.?

Leaping back to 4th century? Arius a Christian theologian who?s systematically developed belief was dubbed heresy, not unlike Copernicus?.
What was the system studied that led to his belief?
A conflict over symbolic (astrological) interpretation of the relationships within the Holy Trinity ... 9th(Sag), 1st (Aries) & 5th (Leo) as an example of one trinity residing within the whole (or ?holy?) goings on.
And, in addition to the primary disputes, some contended Jesus became divine through exaltation (the Sun's [son's] exaltation in Aries. From another pov, Capricorn, the sign he was appointed leading/directing in the Piscean age, Saturn as ruler of Capricorn is exalted in Libra ? eg. exalted leader in political debate, the political debate of the times being largely about 'God') ? an echo of the battle between torches (fire/inspiration) and swords (air/words).

So if 'Arianism' was a system of belief developed upon astrological study, how can one separate the two?
Unless of course Arius, as a theologian, was not well versed in the art/science of astrology and didn?t attempt to divine the workings of 'God' through studying the cosmos.
One set of astrological interpretations vs another, which has led to the persecution and death of astrologers who lost the debate ? but they?re not astrologers, they?re priests?
And if they used astrology to practice medicine instead ? it would be one medical opinion versus another, but they?re not astrologers, they?re doctors?
If astrology is what largely informs and directs the practice should it be overlooked or discounted as not being astrology, or the person practicing it in this way not an astrologer but something else?
During certain times it was safer this way, as the proprietary nature of some establishments prohibited a direct line to ?God? ? forced to go through them, do it their way or else.
Truth, if it?s truly universal, is not 'owned' it's recognised, but interpretations are attributed ownership.

Hi Andrew,

Was this:

Is astrology contrary to Christianity??

In relation to the quote I grabbed from a reference and commented on, ie:

?It was the Church alone that Christ commissioned to guard the deposit of faith and to decide the true meaning and interpretation of the devine pronouncements.? Astrology runs contrary to this ? in origins, philosophy and practice.

I don?t believe astrology runs contrary to Christianity (astrology is all-inclusive) but I do think Christianity has run contrary to astrology at times (the exclusive divisions within Christianity which established proprietary rights and excluded ? but this of course not just the sole [soul?sol?] domain of Christianity!)