> -----Original Message-----
> From: fred White [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> 
> On Tuesday, January 13, 2004, at 06:51 AM, Johnson, Tracy wrote:
> > Fred White wrote: 
> >> You're probably right. Nevertheless, does either 
> explanation support
> >> burning at the stake for possessing a belief which was 
> different than
> >> the persecutors'? It shouldn't even be a felony.
> >>
> >> People should be punished for their actions; not for their beliefs.
> >>
> >> FW
> >
> > A wonderful sentiment.  Although it probably would not stand
> > on legal ground in 1600!  It is too late to help Sr. Bruno.
> 
> That's because, at that time, the Church was the State.
> 
> FW

Correct, and still attempting to exercise some form of temporal power.
In the past it was heresy, these days it is war crimes:

http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=38019&SelectRegion=WestAfrica&SelectCountry=LIBERIA

Of course in 1600, I imagine the Caholic public understood
heresy with the same distaste as we view war crimes today.
This is not a blanket statement, only a hypothesis.  (That
the church attempts to impose it's will when and where it 
can.)


Tracy Johnson
MSI Schaevitz Sensors 

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *