• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should the Catholic Church Acknowledge the Destruction of Classical Pagan Culture?

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
Lest we forget.

"I recently read an article that offered a Christian apology to Jewish people for the wrongs committed against them. The author also acknowledged the way that Christianity was “built” on Judaism. That’s great; however, there’s a glaring omission here. Christianity was also largely “built” on the destruction and desecration of Greco-Roman polytheistic culture.

To be sure, Christians suffered under the early Empire. This was partly due to their beliefs and partly due to their behaviour. The Christian cult took root in a Roman world that was remarkably tolerant of most religions and in which co-existence was the norm; however, Christians were unique in their assertiveness to position their god as the “one true god,” their willingness to renounce their family for their god and their frequent apocalyptic predictions.

It was all too strange and disruptive for the Romans who never hesitated to take harsh action against agitators or troublemakers of any kind (including pagan ones).

Nonetheless, by the late 4th century and early 5th century CE, Christianity had gained considerable political power; however, the majority of Romans of all classes were still pagan. They continued to honor the gods and goddesses that they had honored since the dawn of their civilization.

To solidify Christianity as the sole religion of the Empire, early Christian leaders legalized brutal policies that persecuted pagans. This gave Christians the legal green light to commit atrocious acts of vandalism that destroyed centuries of Classical art, history and culture.

Christian vandals smashed the heads and limbs off statues of beloved gods and goddesses that had been venerated for generations. They knocked the noses off the faces, and carved crosses into the foreheads, of deities, heroes and emperors. They burned ancient texts, obliterating centuries of knowledge, literature and heritage.


Aphrodite. The “love manifestation” of Christians.
These acts of vandalism robbed our Western civilization of a beautiful and important part of our own art history and culture. We’ll never know what monuments or statuary were smashed to dust, or what masterpieces of literature or learning were turned to smoke.

Pagan temples were closed and demolished, stripped of their marble to build churches. This included the oldest temple in the Forum, the Temple of Vesta, whose order of Vestal priestesses was forcibly disbanded after having kept the sacred fire burning in the temple for 1,000 years.

To usurp the importance of the Vestals, the Catholic church eventually created its own version of priestesses — nuns. Like the Vestals who were married to Rome, the nuns would be married to their god. Like the Vestals were celibate, the nuns would be celibate. Yet where the Vestals had power and privilege, the nuns would live in poverty and subservience.

To further Christianize resisters, the church usurped indigenous pagan festivals with Christian ones, the most obvious being the Saturnalia in late December which became Christmas. They created an arsenal of saints to replace the rich diversity of pagan gods and goddesses.

Symbolism and ritual from pagan traditions were also claimed to have Christian origins. The flame of Vesta became the flame in Mary’s immaculate heart. The wafers the Vestals made for offerings became the wafers of the Eucharist. The pagan temples that were still standing had crosses placed atop them. The list goes on.

Forced conversions to Christianity were common, as was the seizure of property or assets belonging to pagans. And in an unprecedented move of religious tyranny, it became illegal – upon pain of torture or death to honor Vesta or other gods and goddesses even within the sacred privacy of one’s own home.

It isn’t pleasant to hear — especially for those who hold their religion dear — but forced conversions and cultural destruction, done on a massive scale, played a significant role in the way Christianity established itself as the dominant religion. This approach set the tone for the fear and oppression of the “Dark Ages” when anything that wasn’t Christian — including science, medicine and free thought — was deemed heretical and violently suppressed.

With the advancement of humanism and secular law, Christianity has lost most of its ability to impose its beliefs on others. And now, owing to the spiritual and intellectual freedom that exists in our society, more and more people have rediscovered Vesta and other ancient traditions, most of which have evolved to reflect 21st-century humanist values and are therefore well-suited to those who identify as spiritual but not religious.

It goes without saying that I’ve had to gloss over 2,000 years of history here (and haven’t even touched on the fact that the Romans committed their share of atrocities). The impact of this period had far-reaching effects on many faiths and cultures.

My goal has been to illustrate how one world view gained dominance through the destruction of another and how, in the process, priceless works of Classical art, knowledge and culture — so relevant to the human experience for all of us in the Western world — were lost forever.

We’ll never know how our society might have developed, especially in terms of scientific and social advancement, had one androcentric religion not held exclusive control of so many and for so long. The ancient world was brutal, but it had its forward thinkers and rays of light.

But back to the beginning: Should the Catholic church acknowledge the harms it did so long ago to Greco-Roman pagan culture? Of course, I don’t believe it will. Anti-pagan propaganda and a denial/whitewashing of history is still too prevalent for that to happen. Others have asked for this apology — pagans and Christians alike — to no meaningful avail.

Yet to me, there’s something to be said for acknowledging past harms. From the internment of Japanese Canadians during WWII to the mistreatment of First Nations children forced to endure the residential school system, an acknowledgement is as much about spreading knowledge and preventing future injustice as it is about mending fences.

For as the ancient Roman statesman Seneca the Younger tells us, errare humanum est, sed in errare perseverare diabolicum. To err is human, but to persist in error is diabolical."

Should the Catholic Church Acknowledge the Destruction of Classical Pagan Culture?

I think apologies are definitely in order from all denominations who were involved in destruction of other cultures and those currently involved in it.
 

EverChanging

Well-Known Member
Some of the attributions of Christian customs to pagan ones are too sweeping and broad in the original post. Some customs were simply carried on into Christianity by pagans who never gave them up. Naturally they became recontextualized. Other similarities are not necessarily borrowings or thefts and are too nebulous to make an attribution to paganism, such as artwork portraying a flame in Mary's Immaculate Heart. The eucharist can be traced to Jewish origins.

That said, I would prefer the Catholic Church to acknowledge its role in destroying so much classical pagan culture. It grieves me that the ancient Greek and Roman religions were not allowed to continue evolving into the modern age.

But apologies are cheap, especially from the Catholic Church. As an institution she apologizes for policies and doctrines, softens her stance a bit, and carries on with business as usual with the presumption that she is the one divinely established religion to which all peoples everywhere owe submission. How much is an apology worth from such an organization?

If such an apology is given it should not be directed only to neo-pagans, though, but to all of us who have been deprived of part of our cultural heritage.

One thing I have noticed among some neo-pagans is a victim mentality. Just because you identify as a witch does not associate you with the trauma and persecution of those who were burned at the stake. Just because you identify with Canaanite gods does not make you a victim to what those cultures experienced. Many neo-pagans, after all, come from privileged, white, middle to upper class Christian backgrounds and have more in common with the dominant paradigm than oppressed ancient or current cultures.

Any genuine apology in this regard would then more aptly be directed to Europeans deprived of certain elements of our historic cultural heritage, not just neo-pagans.
 
I don't see any great point in this 'apology culture' (unless perhaps in some situations where there are people living who have a close connection to those directly oppressed).

Otherwise we would need everyone to apologise to everyone else for something that happened hundreds or thousands of years ago. But that's never what is called for, only the group that was on top when the music stopped is seen a being 'bad'.

Should Norse Pagans and contemporary Scandinavians apologise for desecrating and stealing lots of gold from churches and monasteries?

99% of the cultures that have ever existed have died out and most because of some form of 'cultural imperialism'.

No point in believing in inherited guilt or applying contemporary morality to things that happened in the past, or people who lived in the past.
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
I don't see any great point in this 'apology culture' (unless perhaps in some situations where there are people living who have a close connection to those directly oppressed).

Otherwise we would need everyone to apologise to everyone else for something that happened hundreds or thousands of years ago. But that's never what is called for, only the group that was on top when the music stopped is seen a being 'bad'.

Should Norse Pagans and contemporary Scandinavians apologise for desecrating and stealing lots of gold from churches and monasteries?

99% of the cultures that have ever existed have died out and most because of some form of 'cultural imperialism'.

No point in believing in inherited guilt or applying contemporary morality to things that happened in the past, or people who lived in the past.
Definitely could not have said it better myself.
 

The Emperor of Mankind

Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
While you'd think I'd be all for it, I really don't see what the point is. None live now who kept the Old Gods before. @Augustus is right. And, to be honest, apologising won't give us our temples back; I seriously can't see the Vatican relinquishing the Pantheon building back to Pagan hands. If any such apology were offered and they wanted it to be taken seriously, I'd suggest the Church stop standing in the way of
  1. People wishing to return to Paganism;
  2. Social progress generally speaking.
Honestly, I'd much rather the Church apologise for some of the crimes it's committing today and make genuine restitution.
 

Alea iacta est

Pretend that I wrote something cool.
To whom will they apologize to? Don't forget the destructions of the cultures of the pre-Columbian Americas. The victims are dead long time ago. It's as weird as living Americans will apologize for the slavery when not even the grandchildren of the freed slaves are alive, or that Germans who were born post-1945 or were too young then, would have to apologize for crimes committed by their parents or their grandparents did. And the guilty ones were still a minority.
 

The Holy Bottom Burp

Active Member
Lest we forget.

"I recently read an article that offered a Christian apology to Jewish people for the wrongs committed against them. The author also acknowledged the way that Christianity was “built” on Judaism. That’s great; however, there’s a glaring omission here. Christianity was also largely “built” on the destruction and desecration of Greco-Roman polytheistic culture.

To be sure, Christians suffered under the early Empire. This was partly due to their beliefs and partly due to their behaviour. The Christian cult took root in a Roman world that was remarkably tolerant of most religions and in which co-existence was the norm; however, Christians were unique in their assertiveness to position their god as the “one true god,” their willingness to renounce their family for their god and their frequent apocalyptic predictions.

It was all too strange and disruptive for the Romans who never hesitated to take harsh action against agitators or troublemakers of any kind (including pagan ones).

Nonetheless, by the late 4th century and early 5th century CE, Christianity had gained considerable political power; however, the majority of Romans of all classes were still pagan. They continued to honor the gods and goddesses that they had honored since the dawn of their civilization.

To solidify Christianity as the sole religion of the Empire, early Christian leaders legalized brutal policies that persecuted pagans. This gave Christians the legal green light to commit atrocious acts of vandalism that destroyed centuries of Classical art, history and culture.

Christian vandals smashed the heads and limbs off statues of beloved gods and goddesses that had been venerated for generations. They knocked the noses off the faces, and carved crosses into the foreheads, of deities, heroes and emperors. They burned ancient texts, obliterating centuries of knowledge, literature and heritage.


Aphrodite. The “love manifestation” of Christians.
These acts of vandalism robbed our Western civilization of a beautiful and important part of our own art history and culture. We’ll never know what monuments or statuary were smashed to dust, or what masterpieces of literature or learning were turned to smoke.

Pagan temples were closed and demolished, stripped of their marble to build churches. This included the oldest temple in the Forum, the Temple of Vesta, whose order of Vestal priestesses was forcibly disbanded after having kept the sacred fire burning in the temple for 1,000 years.

To usurp the importance of the Vestals, the Catholic church eventually created its own version of priestesses — nuns. Like the Vestals who were married to Rome, the nuns would be married to their god. Like the Vestals were celibate, the nuns would be celibate. Yet where the Vestals had power and privilege, the nuns would live in poverty and subservience.

To further Christianize resisters, the church usurped indigenous pagan festivals with Christian ones, the most obvious being the Saturnalia in late December which became Christmas. They created an arsenal of saints to replace the rich diversity of pagan gods and goddesses.

Symbolism and ritual from pagan traditions were also claimed to have Christian origins. The flame of Vesta became the flame in Mary’s immaculate heart. The wafers the Vestals made for offerings became the wafers of the Eucharist. The pagan temples that were still standing had crosses placed atop them. The list goes on.

Forced conversions to Christianity were common, as was the seizure of property or assets belonging to pagans. And in an unprecedented move of religious tyranny, it became illegal – upon pain of torture or death to honor Vesta or other gods and goddesses even within the sacred privacy of one’s own home.

It isn’t pleasant to hear — especially for those who hold their religion dear — but forced conversions and cultural destruction, done on a massive scale, played a significant role in the way Christianity established itself as the dominant religion. This approach set the tone for the fear and oppression of the “Dark Ages” when anything that wasn’t Christian — including science, medicine and free thought — was deemed heretical and violently suppressed.

With the advancement of humanism and secular law, Christianity has lost most of its ability to impose its beliefs on others. And now, owing to the spiritual and intellectual freedom that exists in our society, more and more people have rediscovered Vesta and other ancient traditions, most of which have evolved to reflect 21st-century humanist values and are therefore well-suited to those who identify as spiritual but not religious.

It goes without saying that I’ve had to gloss over 2,000 years of history here (and haven’t even touched on the fact that the Romans committed their share of atrocities). The impact of this period had far-reaching effects on many faiths and cultures.

My goal has been to illustrate how one world view gained dominance through the destruction of another and how, in the process, priceless works of Classical art, knowledge and culture — so relevant to the human experience for all of us in the Western world — were lost forever.

We’ll never know how our society might have developed, especially in terms of scientific and social advancement, had one androcentric religion not held exclusive control of so many and for so long. The ancient world was brutal, but it had its forward thinkers and rays of light.

But back to the beginning: Should the Catholic church acknowledge the harms it did so long ago to Greco-Roman pagan culture? Of course, I don’t believe it will. Anti-pagan propaganda and a denial/whitewashing of history is still too prevalent for that to happen. Others have asked for this apology — pagans and Christians alike — to no meaningful avail.

Yet to me, there’s something to be said for acknowledging past harms. From the internment of Japanese Canadians during WWII to the mistreatment of First Nations children forced to endure the residential school system, an acknowledgement is as much about spreading knowledge and preventing future injustice as it is about mending fences.

For as the ancient Roman statesman Seneca the Younger tells us, errare humanum est, sed in errare perseverare diabolicum. To err is human, but to persist in error is diabolical."

Should the Catholic Church Acknowledge the Destruction of Classical Pagan Culture?

I think apologies are definitely in order from all denominations who were involved in destruction of other cultures and those currently involved in it.
Interesting post Franky, my personal view is that whatever religion made it as the dominant one, death and oppression was likely to follow for the people devoted to beliefs that differed with it. Your post put me in mind of the development of Islam, which is as knee deep in blood as Christianity/Roman Catholicism. Islamists fighting under the banner of ISIS have been destroying ancient religious sites because of their hateful backward religious beliefs. As a man once said, only religion can make people do horrible things and consider it "righteous" (I'm paraphrasing).

What religion, if it became the dominant one in the world wouldn't result in the violent oppression of the infidel? I can only think of Jainism, all the others (to the best of my knowledge) have resulted in the slaughter of unbelievers at some point or other. Interested to hear of any other contenders that might have changed human history for the better if anyone can think of one (secular humanism is not a religion, you cant have that one!).
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
I don't see any great point in this 'apology culture' (unless perhaps in some situations where there are people living who have a close connection to those directly oppressed).

Otherwise we would need everyone to apologise to everyone else for something that happened hundreds or thousands of years ago. But that's never what is called for, only the group that was on top when the music stopped is seen a being 'bad'.

Should Norse Pagans and contemporary Scandinavians apologise for desecrating and stealing lots of gold from churches and monasteries?

99% of the cultures that have ever existed have died out and most because of some form of 'cultural imperialism'.

No point in believing in inherited guilt or applying contemporary morality to things that happened in the past, or people who lived in the past.
I think the Catholic Church is a special case. Because it claims that its doctrines haven't ever changed, there's the potential for anything the Church ever did - especially major, deliberate acts endorsed by senior Church officials - as an indication of what's allowed now: "we're still under the same rules, so if the Northern Crusades were okay back in the day, then something similar is okay today."

If the Catholic Church doesn't want something from any of its nearly 2000-year history to be taken as precedent, then it has to make it clear to everyone that the act wasn't okay when it was committed... i.e. admit wrongdoing by people within the Church.

Most other groups have more common sense than to assume that societal standards and rules should never change, so they don't need to wrestle with the past in the same way as the Catholic Church does.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Interesting theme for reflection.

Roman Catholicism, of course, oficially describes itself as a spiritual successor of the Torah's revelation. There is no comparable link to any pagan tradition, so the situations will of course not be completely alike.

On the one hand, sure, there is a lot to repent and to avoid repeating in the history of Roman Catholicism.

However, we should consider, first, whether an apology is useful. And we should certainly avoid the trap of mistaking apologies for after-the-fact permits.



But what interests me most here are the questions connected to the subject matter, such as:

- When an authority that presents itself as religious encourages and supports attitudes that invade the worship rights of other beliefs, how is the blame distributed among clergy and adherents exactly, and why?

- How exactly are clerics and laypeople expected to deal with the conflict between the moral obligation of exercising respect towards other people's freedom of belief and the doctrinary obligation of attempting to encourage conversion to their own faith?

- From a doctrinary level, how exactly can a proselitist Abrahamic Monotheism deal respectfully with diversity of beliefs without undermining its own precepts?

- More specifically, how are Abrahamists to explain to themselves that there is diversity of beliefs without concluding that the other beliefs are in the wrong? Are they?
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
What religion, if it became the dominant one in the world wouldn't result in the violent oppression of the infidel? I can only think of Jainism, all the others (to the best of my knowledge) have resulted in the slaughter of unbelievers at some point or other. Interested to hear of any other contenders that might have changed human history for the better if anyone can think of one (secular humanism is not a religion, you cant have that one!).

Sigh.

Nothing personal, but posts like this, being so common, always make me wonder if we don't need a new word to separate ourselves from Christianity and Islaamic-created expectation for a "religion".
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
I don't think they could, at this point, because it would draw parallels to how IS and Taliban have focused on destruction of culturally significant artifacts. There's also not enough "pagans" that they would care about their opinions either. I'm not sure if pagans are that big into asking for apologies either.
 
If the Catholic Church doesn't want something from any of its nearly 2000-year history to be taken as precedent, then it has to make it clear to everyone that the act wasn't okay when it was committed... i.e. admit wrongdoing by people within the Church.

Most other groups have more common sense than to assume that societal standards and rules should never change, so they don't need to wrestle with the past in the same way as the Catholic Church does.

In case the military orders of the HRE and the King of Poland decide they should invade Estonia to convert the population?
 

The Holy Bottom Burp

Active Member
Sigh.

Nothing personal, but posts like this, being so common, always make me wonder if we don't need a new word to separate ourselves from Christianity and Islaamic-created expectation for a "religion".
Not sure what you mean Luis, the Christian and Islamic religions exist in many forms, but exist they do and we have to deal with them. Sure you may ask with good reason"what is a Christian/Muslim", to which I'd say "I don't know." Still, the religions are real, they impact on other people's lives and freedoms, feel free to expand on your point. I can be a bit slow sometimes!
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Not sure what you mean Luis, the Christian and Islamic religions exist in many forms, but exist they do and we have to deal with them. Sure you may ask with good reason"what is a Christian/Muslim", to which I'd say "I don't know." Still, the religions are real, they impact on other people's lives and freedoms, feel free to expand on your point. I can be a bit slow sometimes!
I should have been more clear.

Christianity and Islaam are very much unlike most other beliefs in that they presume to decide what others should believe in. It is not fair to extrapolate from them to religion as a whole, common as such a mistake is.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
In case the military orders of the HRE and the King of Poland decide they should invade Estonia to convert the population?
In case any missionary organization looks at those incidents and says, for instance, "well, if was okay for knights to slaughter non-believers outright, surely it's okay for us to coerce them a bit into converting."
 
In case any missionary organization looks at those incidents and says, for instance, "well, if was okay for knights to slaughter non-believers outright, surely it's okay for us to coerce them a bit into converting."

I'm pretty sure there are far more explicit statements regarding forced conversions than 800 year old legitimations of specific historical conflicts.

If this is indeed the most relevant statement on the issue then they should clarify the situation, but I'm 99.9999% sure that it isn't.

Anyway, matters of church policy are not the same as an apology, which is what the OP is about. I agree that they have a responsibility for modern, active doctrine and should be held accountable for that. Apologising for ancient history though is pointless and probably counterproductive.
 

Mister Silver

Faith's Nightmare
Roman Catholicism, of course, oficially describes itself as a spiritual successor of the Torah's revelation. There is no comparable link to any pagan tradition, so the situations will of course not be completely alike.

I have to disagree. I have read religious based archaeological type books which compare the Virgin Mary to ancient goddess deities and the saints to polytheistic reverence.
 
Last edited:
Top