The mention of Giordano Bruno by Wallace-Murphy is exposing The Catholic
Encyclopaedia to ridicule. Not fair Wallace-Murphy, not fair. Explain the
excellent ideas contained in Index librorum prohibitorum. Wait a minute
that only enslaved men's minds from 1557 to 1966, only 42 editions were
published by the Church. The list only included such rabble as
Descartes,Pascal, Voltaire, Stendhal, Balzac,Victor Hugo,Anatole France,
Jean Paul Sartre, Erasmus, Nicholas. Machiavelli, John Calvin, John Milton,
Baruch Spinoza,John. Locke,Daniel. Defoe Jonathan Swift. Today the Church
still clings to the moral guide of the index and issues 'admonitum',
warnings that a book might be dangerous.
States the on line The Catholic Encyclopaedia on Bruno
"His attitude of mind towards religious truth was that of a rationalist.
Personally, he failed to feel any of the vital significance of Christianity
as a religious system. It was not a Roman Inquisitor, but a Protestant
divine, who said of him that he was "a man of great capacity, with infinite
knowledge, but not a trace of religion." "
The Catholic Encyclopaedia fails to mention the Bruno was burnt to death, a
cruel death for heretical views. Bruno is the Church's most difficult
explanation. The Roman Church can explain away Galileo with urbane
arrogance. Bruno is another matter. Bruno was not a religious sectarian who
was caught up in the psychology of mob hysteria. He was a sensitive writer,
an imaginative poet, fired with the enthusiasm of a larger vision of a
larger universe. Bruno's idea that the world might be made safe from the
repressions of the ecclesiastic 16th Century terrorists put him in a dungeon
for eight years and then took his life by fire.
No Church, no Encyclopaedia no Holy Father can explain how Bruno's soul was
saved by roasting him to death in a market place. How reliable can a
reference be that fails to mention the insignificant fact of a barbaric
death. Insignificant if it is not your or your loved one's life, I suppose.
More respect would be given the Catholic Encyclopaedia if it were frank and
explicit. It would also conceal it's own mind and confuse the minds of
others rather than give dogmatic statements that can be easily refuted by
fact.
Sinclair
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Wallace-Murphy" <tim@templartim.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <sinclair@quarterman.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: For Glen Cook, demise of the Templars???