Talk:Brethren of the Free Spirit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] The Cathars

Factual error: The Cathars were pretty much a done deal as a social movement by the 14th century; their last big hurrah was in the 1240s. See entry on them. I'd edit the page directly, but I don't quite know how to fix the containing sentence if I did. Could someone with more clue about the religious landscape of 14th c. France take a look at this? -—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.245.97.10 (talk • contribs).

I tend to agree that the conglomeration of Free Spirits with Bretheren of the Free Spirits is not correct. I Just listened to Prof. Teofilo Ruiz, chairman of the department of history at UCLA, lecture # 11 "The Birth of the Inquisition" where he discusses the Free Spirits and he doesn't even mention the Brethren of the Free Spirits as one of the groups he mentions. The term as used by historians is much broader than the Bretheren and by the way does not include the Cathars as part of the movement at all, as the Brethren of the Free Spirit article seems to imply. Ref: The Teaching Company (Audio book) Teofilo Ruiz, UCLA - The Terror of History - Mystics, Heretics, and Withches in the Western Tradition -{{unsigned|67.161.243.188

Another questionable sentence is the alleged link to early Protestantism in the last para. Is there evidence that suppression was the actual reason for the disappearing of the movement? This is not "mandatory": Waldenses exist today, despite heavy medieaval suppression, and other movements merged into something else or just disappeared. --Irmgard 21:23, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

that is not the passage's intention. The fact is that the Roman Catholic church was busy fighting mystical heretic movements in the 1300s, and it was busy fighting Protestantism from the 1400s. Meaning that the prevalent flavour of dissent with mainstream Catholicism shifted. They were certainly repressed out of visibility, it is not disputed that these sects morphed into other forms or continued an underground existence for some time. dab (ᛏ) 12:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bias

The author of the article continuously refers to the movement as "heretical" or a "heresy". To me this smacks of a pro-catholic orthodoxy bias. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shadowlance (talk • contribs).

take a look at heresy: the term means "not catholic". I do not think it can be reasonably disputed that the Brethren lay well outside mainstream Roman Catholic theology. dab (ᛏ) 08:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Heresy doesn't mean "not catholic", it means outside of orthodox dogma. Lots more religions than just Catholocism have heresy, the Doctrines of Religion of Anglicanism specifically mention it. -—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Littlebitsofpaper (talk • contribs).

I'll have to find a reference to it (I know I have one) but eventually the Brethren of the Free Spirit were assimilated into the Religious Society of Friends - Quakers. I'd have to say that within the stated times, periods and persons involved - it is heresy. -—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Littlebitsofpaper (talk • contribs).

• Heresy by definiton is a relative term, which means not just against a teaching but also to a degree that is considered intolerable, grounds for severe anctions such as excommunication (under canon law) and in context -before the separation of state and religion- persecution (usually by the secular authorities, in defence of the official religion). Fastifex 02:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

This article seems to just be a recounting of myths propagated by the movements enemies. -- Kendrick7^talk 03:05, 2 November 2006 (UTC)