The Catholic Church 's Stance On Peaceful Conversion

In the source “The Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas,” the narrative of a few early Christians who died for their beliefs is told. The two martyred women, named Perpetua and Felicitas, along with a few other followers of the religion were imprisoned because they identified themselves as Christians and refused to offer sacrifice to the Roman Emperor. The Christians were sentenced to death by beast for this. The source illustrate the problems Christians had in navigating the cultural realities of life in the Roman empire. This can be observed along with the struggles involved in class, family, and gender.

Christians “became more depraved, more prone to every vice and more inclined than before to evil and wickedness” furthermore, “Preists, little weighing the sacrifice of a contrite spirit, betook themselves to where they could get larger stipends than in their own benefices.” These quotes offer an addition to reasons why Islamic behavior were claimed to be poised during this time compared to the rebellious actions of the

Overall, there are a number of similarities in the two faiths’ treatment of minority religions. Still, an examination of Medieval Christians' inter-faith relations finds a history of religious diplomacy much more fragmented than that of the Muslims. In Christianity, tolerance and persecution were part of the ebb and flow of the passage of power from one ruler to the next, as well as the power struggle between the church and the state. On the other hand, Muslims had no such struggle; their church and state were one and the same. Unlike Christians, they did not have separate laws for the sacred and profane, the secular and religious. The passage of power from one Islamic ruler to the next rarely brought with it radical amendments in the treatment of infidels, although exceptions did exist.

From the third to the fourth century, the Roman Empire witnessed a widespread attempt to stop the spread of Christianity. Initially, leaders of the church were predominately targeted, but later anyone admitting to Christianity became a target. The persecutions hit a climax during Diocletian’s reign. These persecutions actually helped the spread of Christianity by glorifying Christians and beginning a tradition of martyrdom that shaped the Church, and the strength that Christians displayed shows that the persecutions could not have possible stopped the spread of Christianity.

These two views do not contradict each other, but they do look at the shift in thought differently. Schwartz takes the idea that, “each person can be saved in his own religion, “and develops a study of Christian perspectives on Islam and Judaism through the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisition documentation and trials. Schwartz analyzed cultural attitudes and thoughts towards religious differences from the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries in Spain and Portugal (Schwartz, pg. 6). Spanish and Portuguese inquisitional records captured the stories from unknown common folk and what they thought about the world they lived in, and their feelings towards what was right when dealing with religious tolerance (Schwartz, pg. 6). By not only questioning individuals but also looking at the people around that individuals and how they interacted and practiced their beliefs, Schwartz uncovered evidence for religious toleration over a course of a few centuries. These views varied from different religious individuals such as Jews, Christians, and Muslims throughout his whole book. It is important for readers of this book to decipher between “tolerance” and “toleration.” Schwartz’s book is about “the history of religious toleration, by which is usually meant state or community policy, but rather of tolerance, by which I mean attitudes or sentiments” (Schwartz, pg. 6). European leaders believed unity of religious beliefs facilitated political stability, showing religious tolerance advocates were the protagonists in this book. People during these centuries were still eager to discover how to gain salvation. Salvation began to play its own role in the spiritual and political atmosphere of society. This change in roles started to challenge the churches views of the natural world and how much

It is a widely held belief that the Church did not aid Hitler’s regime and were innocent bystanders. Others say that the Church indirectly contributed to Hitler’s agenda with their anti-Jewish doctrines. The Jews, however, were not only victimized by Nazis but also Christians. Christian authorities’ reactions to the Holocaust and how they reacted to accusations of blame are very vague. This topic is important because it explores how the people of a major religion abandoned the most basic teachings and morals of that religion. Christianity’s and Pope Pius’ role in the Holocaust still remains to this day remains very controversial.

Constantine, a Roman Emperor, converted to Christianity which was very advantageous to the religion (312 A.D.)

The book, communities of violence: Persecution of the minorities in the middle ages, written by David Nirenberg, examines violence between the Christians, Muslims, Jews, and Lepers, primarily in the Crown of Aragon. Nirenberg focuses on the history during narrow time period of the first half of the 14th century. Through analyzing the history during this period, Nirenberg makes the argument that persecution of minority groups were politically or economically motivated and not completely driven by hatred or prejudices.

Raymond of Aguilers on the fall of Jerusalem, is a first-hand account on the siege of Jerusalem which reveals an insight into the war-tactics of the Christians, the overall violence of the event that took place, and the religious fanaticism of the Crusaders. While the text supplies many details on these features, from the perspective of Raymond of Aguilers, a chaplain who participated in the event,1 this paper will argue that the text overall is inaccurate as a historical account, and rather simply an exaggerated interpretation of what occurred. Based on the notion of the Crusader’s superiority as Christians, and the belief that their actions were sanctioned by God2 this paper will attempt to prove that the description is un-objective and biased.

The Crusades hold a place in the canon of Western history as valiant wars against the infidel in the East, motivated by an unparalleled pious zeal. Whilst revisions to this history have considered more mundane and ordinary motives, such as a want for land or an attempt to reinforce the Peace of God movement, there is something to be said of the religious motivations of the crusaders. The words ‘conquest’ and ‘conversion’ seem ideologically charged – with conquest being what is done by temporal rulers to physical land and people, and conversion being what is done to the spiritual self, by someone who does not have anything material to gain from the action. However, it can be argued that these lines can be blurred; I wish to present the case of conquest being religiously charged, and the idea that any subsequent conversion is of little importance. By examining the geographical targets of various crusaders, I will conclude that they were more interested in conquest than conversion: but this was not necessarily for earthly reasons alone.

As of today, Christianity and Islam are the world’s two largest and rapidly growing religions. They share an estimated 3.6 billion followers, more than half of the world’s population. Initially the two religions may seem to have nothing in common, but when you go beyond the surface and examine the rituals, beliefs, and founders, as well as the spread of both religions, they share many similarities. In many ways, there is irony in tension between Christianity and Islam, given the extremely similar history and nature of their religions. It is perhaps lost on many people who subscribe to these religions that there is no more truth to one than the other. But when observed from an objective viewpoint it is undeniable that both Christianity and Islam are remarkably similar in origin and ideology. In order to see and understand their similarities, it is important to look back to the birth and rise of both religions.

This paper is going to discuss the Crusades’ religious meaning as a cleansing, the religious motivations to defeat the enemies of Christendom, the religious manifestations of sewing the sign of the Cross on clothes, and role of religious institutions, more specifically the Papacy. I will use the sources given to me to explain the different topic I listed before. I will use both primary and secondary sources. The Crusades’ had many different religious meanings. One of which was a Crusade as cleansing.

Over a thousand years ago, Europe experienced one of its greatest periods of cultural enlightenment.Islam in Spain has had a fundamental presence in the culture and history of the nation. The religion was present inmodern Spanish soil from 711 until 1492 under the rule of the Arabs and Moors of al-Andalus.Islamic Spain was a multi-cultural mix of the people of three great monotheistic religions: Muslims,Christians, and Jews.For more than three centuries in Medieval Spain, Muslims, Jews and Christians lived together and prospered in a thriving multicultural civilization. Here, remarkable individuals of different faiths made lasting contributions in such areas as poetry, art, architecture, music, dining etiquette, science, agriculture,

During the 1500’s, the conflict and tension between Catholics and Protestants brought about new levels of violence in Paris and surrounding areas. Despite the authorities of Paris’ attempts at maintaining peace and order, Catholics were determined to rid the streets of unwanted Protestants. On August 24th, 1572, a day known to Catholics as “St. Bartholomew’s Day”, thousands of Protestants were murdered by Catholics. From then on, this day was known as “The St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre.” Authors Barbra Diefendorf, and Philip Benedict both wrote about this devastating time in history with contrasting approaches to the issue. Though sharing in some similarities, the approaches in which Diefendorf and Benedict take on the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre are significantly contrastive. The authors provide different theories to why the massacre occurred, as well as disclose information about important events that occurred during different times.

The accounts of the actions by the 'enemies of true religion' throughout the ten year period of