meaning cat worshipers, because the Church insisted that Cathars kissed the anus of cats. Cathars also were said to eat the ashes of dead babies, hold orgies, even with family members, and practice anal intercourse. They were, according to the Church, strange, perverse, evil heretics. Those who did not want to use the slanderous label called them Albigensians, from the town of Albi, a name rejected by most historians because they came from a much wider area. Almost lost to time was their own name for themselves, “good Christians.”
In 1209 the Church unleashed a crusade against the good Christians. It is impossible to say what would have happened had the Cathars held to their beliefs and refused to take up arms. Surely many would have been killed. But what would have been the impact of “soldiers of Christ” slaughtering unarmed good Christians? How long would this have been able to continue as a “holy war”? Instead the Cathars divided into the “pure” and the “fighters,” who took up arms. By defending themselves, the Cathars gave an appearanceof legitimacy to Pope Innocent II's claim that some wars were just. The campaign took exactly one hundred years, but every last Cathar, both armed and pure, was killed. The moment they engaged in the fight, thereby capitulating to the pope's values, the Cathars had lost.
History teaches over and over again that a conflict between a violent and a nonviolent force is a moral argument. The lesson is that if the nonviolent side can be led to violence, they have lost the argument and they are destroyed.
For centuries, unending, almost uninterrupted warfare raged throughout Europe. The priests, noblemen, statesmen, and generals who made the wars filled the pages of history, while those small, persistent, persecuted sects that said, “This is wrong and we will not participate,” were slotted for small footnotes. If, as Napoleon was to assert, history is on the side with the biggest artillery, it certainly has little time for those with none, most of whom, for centuries, were powerless commoners.
In 1170, saying he was following the teachings of Christ, a wealthy merchant in Lyons, Pierre Valdes, suddenly gave all his material wealth to poor people, and persuaded others to do the same. Originally the movement was called “the Poor Men of Lyons,” but as it spread, the French began referring to its members as Vaudois, which came into English as Waldenses or Waldensians. In the thirteenth century, they seem to have become influenced by the Cathars and, like the Cathars, rejected all killing, including capital punishment and warfare, and refused all military service. They taught that patient suffering was the Christian way to resist and that fighting back was an urge that came from Satan. They stated that the fourth-century alliance between the emperor Constantine and the Church was the origin of a complete corruption of Christianity. Waldensianism spread throughout Western Europe, mainly among the poor, which should not be surprising for a group that required giving up wealth. They survived and became part of the Protestant Reformation.
Another movement, called the Taborites, rose up in the Czechlands of Bohemia and Moravia in the fifteenth century. Inspired by Jan Hus, a Prague priest of peasant origin who, in turn, was inspired by Waldensians, the Taborites also rejected militarism, war, and capital punishment. Hus, burned at the stake for heresy in 1415, was exalted as a martyr for the cause of Czech nationalism. The Taborites were certain that a better world, without violence, was arriving, and they did not have to do a thing to promote it but wait for the second coming of Christ. Some grew impatient with this passive approach but did not seem to know how to turn their pacifism into nonviolent action. And so Jan Zelivsky, a Taborite leader who often invoked the commandment “Thou shalt not kill,” became an advocate of violent revolution. Like the Cathars, the
In 1209 the Church unleashed a crusade against the good Christians. It is impossible to say what would have happened had the Cathars held to their beliefs and refused to take up arms. Surely many would have been killed. But what would have been the impact of “soldiers of Christ” slaughtering unarmed good Christians? How long would this have been able to continue as a “holy war”? Instead the Cathars divided into the “pure” and the “fighters,” who took up arms. By defending themselves, the Cathars gave an appearanceof legitimacy to Pope Innocent II's claim that some wars were just. The campaign took exactly one hundred years, but every last Cathar, both armed and pure, was killed. The moment they engaged in the fight, thereby capitulating to the pope's values, the Cathars had lost.
History teaches over and over again that a conflict between a violent and a nonviolent force is a moral argument. The lesson is that if the nonviolent side can be led to violence, they have lost the argument and they are destroyed.
For centuries, unending, almost uninterrupted warfare raged throughout Europe. The priests, noblemen, statesmen, and generals who made the wars filled the pages of history, while those small, persistent, persecuted sects that said, “This is wrong and we will not participate,” were slotted for small footnotes. If, as Napoleon was to assert, history is on the side with the biggest artillery, it certainly has little time for those with none, most of whom, for centuries, were powerless commoners.
In 1170, saying he was following the teachings of Christ, a wealthy merchant in Lyons, Pierre Valdes, suddenly gave all his material wealth to poor people, and persuaded others to do the same. Originally the movement was called “the Poor Men of Lyons,” but as it spread, the French began referring to its members as Vaudois, which came into English as Waldenses or Waldensians. In the thirteenth century, they seem to have become influenced by the Cathars and, like the Cathars, rejected all killing, including capital punishment and warfare, and refused all military service. They taught that patient suffering was the Christian way to resist and that fighting back was an urge that came from Satan. They stated that the fourth-century alliance between the emperor Constantine and the Church was the origin of a complete corruption of Christianity. Waldensianism spread throughout Western Europe, mainly among the poor, which should not be surprising for a group that required giving up wealth. They survived and became part of the Protestant Reformation.
Another movement, called the Taborites, rose up in the Czechlands of Bohemia and Moravia in the fifteenth century. Inspired by Jan Hus, a Prague priest of peasant origin who, in turn, was inspired by Waldensians, the Taborites also rejected militarism, war, and capital punishment. Hus, burned at the stake for heresy in 1415, was exalted as a martyr for the cause of Czech nationalism. The Taborites were certain that a better world, without violence, was arriving, and they did not have to do a thing to promote it but wait for the second coming of Christ. Some grew impatient with this passive approach but did not seem to know how to turn their pacifism into nonviolent action. And so Jan Zelivsky, a Taborite leader who often invoked the commandment “Thou shalt not kill,” became an advocate of violent revolution. Like the Cathars, the
Similar Books
