Talk:Catharism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Old discussion archived See the article on how to archive a talk page

/Archive 1: start of page – May 2006.
/Archive 2: 5 May 2006 – 16 May 2006.

1 Catharsis
2 Claims of groups to Cathari lineage
3 A few changes
4 Proposed changes for discussion
5 Cathars and shared beliefs with Buddhism and Hinduism
6 Cathars, Troubadors & Eleanor of Aquitaine,
7 Consolamentum
8 Antonin Gadal
9 Accessibility.
10 When did Catharism appear?
11 I am a Modern Day Cathar
12 New section
13 Suicide
14 Yellow Cross
15 New Links
16 Languedoc cut

[edit] Catharsis

I find it tremendously funny that we could've accumulated a page on the Cathars without ever once using or discussing the words 'cathartic' or 'catharsis'. Anyone with a reliable sense of this want to add a little remark on it? I may not be the appropriate expert on etymology, but I'll give it a shot if noone else does in a few days. --Penumbra 2k 17:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Since there is considerable debate about the etymology of the word Cathar (does it come from the Greek meaning "pure ones" or from a German word meaning "cat"?), making an assumption of a connection between "cathar" and "catharsis" wouldn't really be terribly appropriate. Alaraxis 01:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC) Alaraxis

From what we know the first recorded use of the word Cathar comes from a German source - A German Catholic commentator talking about the phenomenon in his home country rather than the French expression of the Heresy. He described the Heretics he saw - who never called themselves Cathars - as Cathars. What is complex is that the two meanings - the Cat and the Pure One - were implicit in the word even then. The Cathars, who called themselves simply 'Good Men and Good Women' were accused of performing 'the Kiss Of the Cat' ie kissing the anus of a Cat in an effort to defame them. However, they were also referred to as 'Pure Ones' or 'Perfects' not in a complimentary way but to suggest they were absolute heretics and sinners. Ironically, the idea that they were 'Pure' links with their own view that their Christianity was genuinely Pure, hence, I think, the adoption of the word Cathar as a badge of honour, perhaps in the same way that gay people have adopted the words Gay or Queer as a term of pride. The fact is that the Cathars valued spiritual and physical Purity very highly so to be accused of being 'Pure Ones' was a good thing. Whatever the case the word Cathar has its roots in the Greek words for Purity (Catharsis means Purification) as well as the German word Katz, or Cat. When we use it now we tend to feel that its etymology as Pure is more appropriate I think in this context. ThePeg 22:23, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Claims of groups to Cathari lineage

I removed the section Claims of groups to Cathari lineage because there are no sources conforming to WP:V. Dominick ^(TALK) 15:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Dominick or his administrator are free to contact us directly for the contact coordinates of the independent Medieval scholar whose bona fides even Dominick would be hard pressed to criticize. She has agreed to monitor and assist in providing editing for the purposes of ensuring neutrality.

As for your rationale for removing the section Claims of groups to Cathari lineage because there are no sources conforming to WP:V. That is not quite precise.

This page really does need editing for neutrality. Perhaps our contribution can be to ensure that this is the case.

Agreed.

Agcweb ^(TALK) 15:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC))

There appears to be a multitude of misinformation concerning the Cathars including their doctrines as well as their history. It is written on several web sites that the Roman Catholic Church started the Inquisition and burned heretics at the stake. When in fact it is recorded "neither the bishops who met at Toulouse, nor Pope Innocent III, nor St. Dominic, as has sometimes been incorrectly stated, were the founders of the Inquisition" (Church History, John Laux). It was the civil authorities NOT the Church itself that condemned and burned at the stake. The only involvement of the Church was the proclamation that an individual or group was or was not heretical. The civil authorities did the rest.

This isn't true. The Inquisition was set up by the Catholic Authorities to hunt down and exterminate the Cathar faith. The Dominicans were the masterminds of it. Deeply sinister fugures like Conrad of Marburg were undoubtedly Church Apparatchniks. THe Dominicans have a lot to answer for. It was Dominican Priests who were behind the notorious Malleus Malleficium (or whatever its name was) which led to the deaths of thousands of innocent women. Their traditional enemies were the Franciscans who, to my mind, were much closer to the spirit of Christ. ThePeg 22:26, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

( Of couse the Catholic church never burned a single heretic: mani puliti. Is there any reader unaware of the expression "relaxed to the secular arm"? From the very first (Priscillian, fourth century), obstinate discontents were remanded to the secular authorities. The intentionally misleading quibble here cannot be let stand. I just hate being played for a fool. --Wetman 12:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC) )

Although as previously mentioned there were Cathars that became very orthodox in time we must not lose sight that there were indeed some VERY heretical and devious doctrines that were promoted by the Cathars. They weren't burned at the stake simply because they were not Roman Catholic. For instance their stance on the teaching that the Old Testament God was actually the devil who created all matter as well as the marriage institution. This doctrinal twist made way for sexual abuse by various Cathars who claimed marriage was not sanctioned by God and could result in reproducing more evil matter into the world (children) but sexual relations outside of marriage with individuals or concubines was acceptable. As this opened the door to moral decadence the Church procliamed this as a heresy. There is a multitude of other doctrines and practices that were integrally a part of Catharism. The surface has yet to be touched. CA

On this page, nothing of the sort has been said, unless you are reading something differently. Dominick ^(TALK) 16:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

No one said it was on this web site. Do a google search. I feel Wikipedia can be an instrument in clearing up common misconceptions by quoting verifiable sources. CA

Please read what wikipedia is not. Sorry. Dominick ^(TALK) 18:18, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I read what Wikipedia is not then I read what Wikipedia IS. It stated "Wikipedia is an online Encyclopedia". Webster says an Encyclopedia is a collection of "articles on various topics...covering all branches of knowledge or all aspects of one subject". An article that does not attempt to provide different aspects of this subject is not a complete encyclopedic article. People go to an online encyclopedia to learn the true history or information about that subject. If there is much misinformation available on the net one should be able to go to an encyclopedia to verify if this is indeed true or false. If something is verifiable information then it should be recorded and made available to the public. This is just my opinion but it is a good one. CA

This is absolutely not the case with the Cathars. They did not preach sexual licentiousness at all. In fact exactly the opposite. Their belief was that sexual activity was wrong as through procreation more souls were trapped in the world of matter. Cathar Perfecti took an extraordinarily strict vow of celibacy. It was the representatives of the Catholic Church who were famed for their sexual hypocrisy at the time. A story which typifies this is the famous one of a Cathar girl being exposed by a Catholic clergyman when he made sexual advances on her. Her response was to absolutely resist him on the grounds that it would endanger her soul. His suspicions were immediately aroused (clearly not the only thing that was aroused!) and he began to question her, trying to find out if she was a Cathar. They were joined by another, higher up Catholic who, on hearing the story, had her arrested as a Cathar (she was). The records show that the first clergyman was not rebuked for making sexual advances on her. As for the other charge, that the God of the Old Testament was Satan - the Cathars believed that Man was exiled in the World of Matter which the rebellius angel, Satan, had created in order to prevent him from remembering his place in the bosom of God. The Cathars believed that each of us contained with him or her a shard of God's Light - the Divine Spark - which was trapped in the Flesh. The hope was that through Christ this Divine Spark could be set free to return to God (hence the vow of celibacy, sex being to do with Matter). The Cathars therefore did not recognise the Creator God as being the true God as the true God would not have created anything material. Cathar doctrine only acknowledged the New Testament God of Love as the true Divinity, the wrathful and tyrannical God of the Old Testament was to be rejected. This was not a new idea. Marcion had a similar view. As Gnostics, the Cathars were interpreting the Old Testament God as being equivalent to the Demiurge figure of the Gnostic Gospels, Yaldaboath. In fact the doctrines the Catholic Church really hated were the Cathars' denunciation of the Church as the 'Synagogue of Satan' and the Pope as Anti-Christ, the fact that the Cathars believed that no vows to Feudal Authorities were valid and that they went around offering absolution of Christian ministration for nothing. In so doing the struck at the very foundations of the power of the Church. As ethical Christians even the noble Bernard of Clairvaux could not fault them and found himself in a quandary as to how to deal with them. Even St Dominic recognised their purity and adherence to the austere piety of Christ's teachings. The accusations of sexual licentiousness were part of the propaganda aimed at them by the Church which, in the end, proved itself not to have the moral high ground by using the bloodiest methods possible to destroy this sect. ThePeg 23:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A few changes

Great to see so many people taking an interest in this page.

I made a few changes which I hope are OK with everyone.

The area did not get annexed to France until the end of this period (and as a result of the Crusade). It is misleading therefore to talk about the area as being Southern France (unless qualified, as in "what is now part of Southern France".)

Simon de Montfort did not take over leadership of the crusade until after the fall of Carcassonne - so he was not responsible for what happend earlier at Beziers.

I rephrased some observations which had a POV - eg it is always POV to refer to any group as heretical. Cathars and Catholics thought of each other as heretical. Who are we to say who was right?

I also added a comment about Catholic priests who adopted Cathar ideas - mainly because it's so surprising to modern minds. Happy to provide citations if needed - or if anyone else wants to just look up the 11 cannons at Orleans who were burned alive or the events at Montaillou.

I think the order of the article could be looked at, and there's a bit of duplication - but this is as much as I can do today. A section on Cathar Castles might be useful too. Congratulations everyone on making such an interesting article.

Springald 15:34, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Medieval Cathars varied in their views but tended to think of the Church of Rome as apostates. There were no Cathar 'castles" as such, simply refuges owned by nobels within which Cathars retreated to and were martyred. But commentaries on the relationships between the Cathari, nobility and local villages would be useful. Agcweb ^(TALK) 15:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC))

(rm personal discussion; put it on your talk pages, but not here thank you.) Dominick ^(TALK) 23:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

==Slay all (AKA "Tuez-les tous; Dieu reconnaitra les siens." ("Kill them all; for the Lord knoweth them that are His.")==

It is said the monstrous words, "Slay all; God will know his own", alledged to have been uttered at the capture of Béziers, by the papal legate, were never pronounced (Tamizey de Larroque, "Rev. des quest. hist." 1866, I, 168-91) For such a serious charge to remain in the article and thus be further propagated as fact it should be accompanied by verification, citations, or removed. Don

I guess thats a counter reference. Dominick ^(TALK) 18:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Not precisely. "Don" plagiarized the statement verbatim without citation from New Advent, the online Catholic Encylopedia. [1] Even then, the correct citation should read Ph. Tamizey de Larroque, "Revue des quest. hist." (Paris, 1866), I, 179-186).

The quote is attributed to Arnaud-Armaury, the Cistercian Abbot of Cîteaux, and "spiritual advisor" (Papal Legate) to the Albigensian Crusade. That over over 20,000 women, children and men were slaughtered, either burned or clubbed to death for the approximately 200 good Christians living in the town was obviously a coincidence. The reference back to Tamizey de Larroque is frequently cited by apologists for Roman Catholicism. Previously they relied on "The large numbers of burnings detailed in various histories are completely unauthenticated, and are deliberate inventions of phampleteers..." The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1917, III pg. 34 until even this was discarded by Romanists in the face of overwhelming historical documentation to the contrary.

It is precisely to avoid these problems of citations so they may be placed in context that we again encourage Dominick or his administrator to contact us directly for the contact coordinates of the independent Medieval scholar whose bona fides even Dominick would be hard pressed to criticize. She has agreed (as time permits during the academic year) to monitor and provide editorial assistance for the purposes of ensuring neutrality and historical accuracy with clear citations. Agcweb ^(TALK) 20:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC))

With all the foolishness, if it isn't in a reference that I can get I am apt not to believe it. If you produce a reference showing that's what he said, then it should go in, if there is not a verifiable reference then it does not go in. Wikipedia does not publish original work, if you have something to publish find a journal or write a book. I am tired of two signatures from the same web address arguing with each other, and other irragularities. If you have something to say, back it with black and white. Dominick ^(TALK) 02:16, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Sir, you are the one that has refused to contact us to allow entry of an impartial scholar. We have peacefully called your bluff. You are an ardent supporter of Roman Catholicism. You say: "I am tired of two signatures from the same web address arguing with each other, and other irragularities."

Then prove this statement. We have a fixed IP address and you have allowed crimimally libel against us from one person under mutiple names.

belief in the Romanist faith is private to yourself. Your free will in this matter is also private to yourself. But clearly you are a supporter of Rome, and here you are, the editor of the foremost opponent of the Cathars.

You do need to understand that the AGC will have an independemt scholar here and that your continued failure to allow this or contact us betrays not only your weakness as an editor, but also a weekness in your faith.

Did you not mention that you prevented us from writing on your talk page?

Do you not think it a contradiction that someone so pre-disposed to the Romanist Church should be the main editor?

Have your administrator contact us and we can put this to rest. We beg you.

Agcweb ^(TALK) 013:05, 23 May 2006 (UTC))

You can do that yourself I am not interested. You, or the "cast of thousands" here have been making this talk page useless long enough. I am interested in an article that reports what is published on the topic. I am not in need of a scholar, I have my own contacts for people of impeccable reutation who loan or refer me to texts when I ask. You do need to understand that your people can easily supply references here, and since you are being snippy, they will be checked.

Frankly the farther I am from people who cause this kind of drama the better. If you post personal attacks on CW or anyone else, they will be removed. If you post on my talk page for the most part is is my right to remove it. I do not want to deal with people who seem to be promoting a hoax. I don't have time or inclination to deal with you.

Anyone can edit a wikipedia article. I have a familarity with the Cathars and Albegensian Heresy, and I was willing to work on a long neglected article. This is an article about a medieval sect. There are no modern Cathars, and I find no evidence of your organization beyond a web presence. I think with the people here, and my own checking, I conclude this is a game on your part. Please find something else to do, or contribute constructively. Have a nice life. Dominick ^(TALK) 12:09, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed changes for discussion

We apologize in advance if this long insertion does not conform precisely to the Wikipedia protocols or in-house jargon. We were dragged into Wikipedia and it is somewhat confusing to us. We are making a sincere effort to contribute in a positive way and hope our suggestions are received in that same spirit.

Suppression

Existing text: "Other separate heretical movements, such as the Waldensians and the pantheistic Brethren of the Free Spirit survived into the 14th and 15th century, until they were gradually replaced by, or absorbed into, early Protestant sects, such as the Hussites.."

Proposed change: Other separate heretical movements, such as the pantheistic Brethren of the Free Spirit survived into the 14th century and were gradually replaced by, or absorbed into, early Protestant sects, such as the Hussites, while the Waldensians continue to this day as an independent body.

Sources are multiple, specifically www.waldensian.org and the information there is easily referenced and verifiable.

Beliefs

Existing text: "The Cathars proclaimed there existed within mankind a spark of divine light."

Proposed change: The Cathars believed there existed within humanity a spark of divine light. Given that the good Christians (Cathari) of that time held to an equality of sexes, in the debate over mankind vs. humankind; humanity seems appropriate.

Use of the word heretical

It seems appropriate in the introduction, but less so in the above quote. Possibly "Other movements..." or "Other religious movements, independent of Roman Catholicism...." might be more neutral.

Spell Check and Use of accent signs

May we suggest an overall spell check of text? Most are minor mispellings or tpyos easily rectified. There is much that can be accomplished and cleaned up in the article if we work together and adhere to the Wikipedia common standards and protocols. Also, when reference is made to a French city, town or person, the correct accents should be used e.g. Béziers not Beziers. The same would be applied to locations is other parts of Europe where Catharism flourished.

Bibliography

The article should have a comprehensive bibliography of verified scholarly manuscripts. We have one on our web site. It includes multiple points of view.

External links

Based on the criteria issued by Dominick in archived pages, the continued inclusion of Blessed Yohanne and Site of German Cathars (Katharer) should be discussed to a common understanding. Since the AGC website has pre-existed all of the present links is has merit on that basis. It should be noted for clarity - as the posting history shows, we did not post the link to our site, and we are indifferent to the matter. The relevant question is common criteria for the acceptance of such links. All links or none at all unless they are scholarly should be the policy. Our preference would be that External Links reflect academic or scholarly links. Maybe a subsection entitled Miscellaneous Links might break the impasse?

References vs Reference

Reference can be merged happily and seamlessly within References. Otherwise it seems confusing.

[edit] Cathars and shared beliefs with Buddhism and Hinduism

I've seen sections that compare different religions in some articles. The similarity between Hinduism and the beliefs of the Cathars is very evident in this article. Perhaps a comparative section should be added.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.32.246.162 (talk • contribs) .

I agree this similarity really struck me as well - might be worth someone with a more scholarly knowledge adding their thoughts on this. all the best, Anit

We will be providing that scholar to review and contribute to this article very soon. In theory there are and were commonalities with Hindu belief. On balance however, there was/is much more in held in common between Buddhism and Cathar Christianity in terms of theology, spirituality, life practice and world view. A section on Catharism and Eastern religions has merit. Agcweb ^(TALK) 1800, 25 May 2006 (UTC))

Anyone can edit a wikipedia page, A "scholor", a doctor, Wonder Woman or Captain America all have the same weight. Like it was said before, no person has a claim to a link to this group, as it died out in the middle ages. Dominick ^(TALK) 00:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

What no-one talks about are the huge links between Catharism and Kaballism. People forget that the region was hot-bed of Kaballistic faith (the Languedoc was very tolerant of the Jews, much to the Church's fury) and the two doctrines definitely overlap. Both believe in reincarnation and the belief that Man has fallen from Eden, contains the Divine Spark and needs to be reunified with God. Both also believe that Fallen Man is exiled in the Material Realm (for the Kabbalist, Malkuth) and needs the intercession of the Divine to bring him back. Light imagery is common to both and the Kabbalistic idea of the Shekinah is very similar to the Gnostic idea of the Sophia. Now- here's the fun bit - are all these parallels to do with the fact that everyone was talking to each other or because they are all describing the same objective spiritual reality through different lenses? :-) ThePeg 22:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cathars, Troubadors & Eleanor of Aquitaine,

Since this Cathar biz was all over the Southwestern portion of what is now France, in a changing time when the 'Romans' were the last Model of civilization, learning of their beliefs would give us a clue to the family from whence Eleanor sprang.

Thru I-net research, I have learned (and I know someone will correct me if they think this is wrong) that the Cathars believed in equality of sexes, reincarnation and practised birth control. Also; no capital punishment, no extraordinary means to sustain life, no taking of life. Also, the Mary Magdalene faction seems to be stuck in the middle of this somewhere. Why else would they attack Beziers on her feast day?

The troubadors/court of love add the concept of 'Technical Virginity' which could explain a great deal of the reputation of her whole family.

I do always try to fit all the pieces together like a puzzle, and am just trying to get the big picture here.

Good luck! Don't quite see how the Romans come in: the Arabs were a much nearer and more visible model of civilization. On Mary Magdalene, no comment.

Equality of the sexes: in some ways they were closer to it than others at the time, but they hadn't reached it. Birth control? That depends. Their views tended towards disapproval of sexual reproduction, in animals and humans, with various consequences one of which might be fewer children. Is that what you mean? Andrew Dalby 08:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Andrew is right. Also Roman = Occitan in this context. For more background on the above questions, take a look at this page and this page. gcp ^(talk)16:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

From what I understand, the Cathars believed that women could be as close to the Christian Mysteries as men. There were female Perfecti (known as Perfectae) as much as there were male. In this they were in the tradition of the Gnostic Churches of old who freely embraced women as preachers etc. One of the things the Catholic Church really hated about the Cathars was their integration of women into their ranks. The Cathars did believe in reincarnation, hence the idea that anyone should be excluded from the Godhead was ridiculous. If one was a woman in one life and a man in the next why would you deny the woman incarnation the rights of the male? In the same way the Cathars didn't recognise social distinction as a factor in how one should be treated spiritually. This again incensed the Church and the Temporal Authorities as it upset the whole class system of the period. As for birth control, the Cathar Perfecti abstained completely from all sexual contact. As they believed that the material was the domain of Satan the idea of sexual activity as abhorrent. Procreation was even worse, as it trapped more souls in the world of Satan. So the issue of Birth Control didn't even come into it. We tend to forget that the Cathars were Christian. We like to recast them as Hippies or Liberals or proto-Buddhists, New Age Pagans or whatever. The truth was that they were Christian, their ideals were based on the teachings of Christ, right down to how they travelled around the region in twos staying with people who took them in, healing the sick and spreading the Word - just as Christ enjoins his apostles to do. What is true is that their brand of Christianity truly tried to reconnect to the pure essence of Christ's teachings - hence the tenacity with which they held on and were protected by the populace with whom they were very popular. Even the Catholic Authorities found it very hard to unearth facts to denigrate them with. They had to make do with slander and feeble accusations of sexual perversity. But the bottom line is that the Cathars were not happy-clappy modern liberals but Christians first and formost. ThePeg 22:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Consolamentum

I took out "power to bind and loose", just added to the list of things that the consolamentum is, because I don't understand what "power to bind and loose" is supposed to mean here. If the editor wants to put it back and explain what it means, fine. Andrew Dalby 17:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

The power to "bind and loose" on earth and in heaven is referred to in the NT. According to RC's it was given exclusively to Peter (and is now enjoyed by the Pope). According to others it was given to all the apostles (and is now enjoyed by all bishops). I don't know if the Cathars ever made the claim for themselves, but they have a form of "apostolic succession" that had been practiced by early Gnostic sects before the "orthodox" Church invented their own version of it in the fourth century. Nostick 19:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed the ancient Cathars claimed to have a succession of ordination. The line of this succession most probably merged uncharted into another group or groups. The Apostolic succession of the early catholic Church also merged uncharted into other groups. There can be no doubt that there were legitamate successions from the early Church. As a matter of fact it would be literally IMPOSSIBLE for a succession NOT to exist. There were too many Christians branching off into too many directions with direct connections stemming from one another. It would be a MIRACLE to prove that there was NOT an Apostolic succession. With this view the succession is more like a web then a line. On another note...Blessed Yohanne in Russia , called King of the Cathars, is said to have both a Cathar and an Eastern Orthodox succession. The Cathar succession was alledgedly hidden in Russia until handed down to Yohanne. He received another line of succession at Montsegur in France. He received his Apostolic succession from the Eastern Church in Russia. All of this is interesting material but in the end the ordination that counts the most is the one that bypasses the hands of man and comes straight from God himself. CoWinn

[edit] Antonin Gadal

I've added a link to a website dedicated to Antonin Gadal, a historian of the twentieth century who did a vast amount of exploration of the Cathar caves of the Ariege and had strong theories about the mysteries of Cathar faith. This was clearly a very interesting - and largely unknown - man. Worth a look.

Its very interesting that the beginnings of Catharism in the Ariege region correspond to some of the most ancient megalithic sites in Europe. Gadal explored many caves in this region of the Pyrenees. Some people think that the Cathars could be traced back to the Essenes. Certainly according to Zoe Oldenbourg who wrote Massacre At Montsegur they saw themselves as heirs of the Primitive Church and thus connected to a tradition much older than the Catholic Church of Rome which persecuted them son. ThePeg 2006 (UTC)

This is very similar to what I have so far discovered. I have traced the Cathars back through the Paulicians and back further to the Antiochan Church. Also I have discovered their connection with the Ebionites which had a lineage to the Essenes. The link you provided is tremendously interesting. Thank you. CoWinn

CoWinn - in fact the Cathars trace their lineage back further than even the dawn of Christianity to the Persian Zoroaster, although they may well not have known or acknowledged this. The centreal dualism of Light vs Darkness and the role of Man in this battle was first conceived of as a cosmology by Zoroaster. We know from the Bible and Historical accounts that Judaism was influenced by and influenced Zoroastrianism (cf Book of Daniel and, historically, Cyrus' release of the Jews back to Israel) and in the New Testament this is tacitly acknowledged by the story of the Magi, Magi being a Persian word for Priest-King. Like Christianity Zoroastrianism has a concept of a Messiah who will come to restore the Light to the world. The Prophet Mani who was also Persian who came after Christ and Buddha was also a huge influence on the Cathars. He introduced some of the more ascetic ideas which became part of the Cathar Perfecti modus vivendi - vegetarianism, sexual abstinence and an end to procreation. The Zoroastrians didn't believe that Creation was from Darkness and Evil, as Mani and the Cathars did. They believed that the Light created everything and that this Creation was perfect. It was the attack of the Dark and thus the corruption of Creation which had to be fought. Mani made Zoroastrianism more austere. The Cathars adopted some of these beliefs which also linked with some of the ideas of the Essenes. If one is a Christian one might find the idea that the Persian faith is at the root of one's belief hard to take. If one sees Christianity as the highest form the central Revelation of the Universe has taken one can be calm. As mankind develops, its understanding of the Truth evolves. The development of Christianity - or the kind of Christianity the Cathars were on to - was that the Divine Light could be incarnate in Man. If we'd based Christianity on that idea we might have got somewhere. Instead we turned that idea on its head and decided Man was inherently corrupt and couldn't live up to Christ in the least. Had we believed in the idea of the Divine Light in every man and woman - as all the Christian Mystics from Eckhardt to Hildegard von Bingen, Evelyn Underhiill tp Carl Jung did - then we might be living in a very different world. We haven't taken proper care of the message. ThePeg 11:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Mmmmm. Not really sure about this link - seems a bit thin on hard fact and pretty heavy on POV. For the moment I just tidied it up. Does anyone else have any views ? Springald 10:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not impressed with the website either -- all innuendo, and absolutely no documentation to back any of it up (references to Gadal's own books really aren't going to cut it). No serious historian of the Cathars takes any of this stuff seriously as history, and it seems absolute absurdity to put this on the same plane as Pegg's and Lambert's books. I'd be in favor of removing it -- or of creating a separate section that contains sites related to modern Cathars and/or neo-Cathars. Alaraxis 00:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I included the link because it opened up a different perspective on the Cathars, not because I agreed with it. If you explore Gnostic literature - the Pistis Sophia etc - all of which has links with the Primitive Church, the Valentinian and Marcionian movements which the Cathars identified themselves with you will see that not all of Gadal's conclusions are foolish. Anyway, links are there to enlarge debate. I have seen many more POV links all ove the Wikipedia. If you go to Tarascon you will see how revered Garrigou is - Garrigou being the man who mentored Gadal. Garrigou is not regarded as a charlaton. Much of what Gadal came up with started with Garrigou who was a very well respected historian. ANyway, I am much gratified that people looked at the link, anyway! ThePeg 22:47, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Accessibility.

Just a small point — a matter of taste, really:

The following first line of the Theology section struck me as somewhat heavy for a popular encyclopedia:

The Catharist concept of Jesus might be called docetistic — theologically speaking, it resembled modalistic monarchianism in the West and adoptionism in the East.

I'm reasonably well educated, but that meant nothing to me; and at that moment I didn't feel in the mood to go chasing links. It wouldn't have mattered if the next section explained these terms sytematically, but it seemed to veer into other terms of reference.--qp10qp 20:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm reasonably well educated on these issues, too, and I'm mystified as well. Docetism was the belief that Christ did not actually have a human body or die on the cross, but only had the *appearance* (Gr.: dokesis) of a body. Modalistic monarchianism, put forward by Sebellius and others, claimed that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are three different modes of the same being, seen at different times; roughly, that God puts on three different faces at different times. Adoptionism was the view that Jesus was adopted as the Christ when baptized by John the Baptist and the Holy Spirit "descended on Him as a dove." These views appear to be incompatible to me, so I can't account for the synonymy in the article. jrcagle 18:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] When did Catharism appear?

Reading this page without much knowledge of the subject, I absorbed the opening statement in good faith:

"Catharism was a religious movement with dualistic and Gnostic elements that appeared in the Languedoc around the middle of the 12th century . . ."

Further down the page I was then jarred by the following:

"The first known Occitan Cathars appeared in Limousin between 1012 and 1020. Several were discovered and put to death at Toulouse in 1022."

Apart from the term "Occitan" coming at me out of the blue, the suggestion that there were Cathars in the area in the early eleventh century struck me as contradicting the opening statement of the article. --qp10qp 20:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

This seems a fair point - as does the one above. I'll make the appropriate changes. Gcp 17:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I am a Modern Day Cathar

Some people might consdier this faith werid, and the work of the devil. But when I was in france for a class trip my class walked into an ancient cathar church, And I went Inside and felt someone strange inside my heart I got this same powerfull feeling in other parts of france where the cathars were When I got back to my country I felt inclined to study catharism and I saw how simular they are to stuff I have belived my whole itnire life. Treat men and women eqauly, that both heaven AND rencarnation exist, that their is more than one god, and that sexaulity is not an evil thing. So Guess what call me strange but I consdier myself a modern day cathar. it's my religion and no one can tell me otherwise. Even tho I know for a fact I am a rare breed of people that use to be living a long time ago.

[edit] New section

In their quest to discredit the Cathars, the Catholic church successfully associated their name with sodomy. Cathars in Europe were called Bulgres (French Bougre, English Bugger) since many came from Bulgaria. Cathars were against procreation, so Catholics reasoned that they must prefer sodomy to other forms of sex, although there is no evidence that this accusation by the Catholic church was true. The word bugger now refers to a sodomite and buggery to sodomy, and has now become a general expletive.

The statement is basically valid but, 1, I don't think it could be proved that the "Catholic church" did this (rather than popular rumour in a highly religious society), 2, there is a sudden switch in the paragraph from medieval Europe to modern England (bugger is not a general expletive elsewhere, so far as I know!) I might edit this, if someone else doesn't. Andrew Dalby 08:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

bougre in French. The connection with Bulgar is a familiar one. --Wetman 13:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

The quoted section has now disappeared again. Andrew Dalby 11:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Dalby, come to Australia. You hear the word all the time! reinthal 23:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suicide

Is it just me or is the ritual suicide practiced by the Cathars almost unmentioned in the article? Lostcaesar 10:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

You could usefully add something about the Endura, but do a bit of research first - there is no evidence of "ritual" suicide. Gcp 11:40, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

In the latter stages of Catharism when an individual was close to death (and death was very certain) the dying person would fast from food until he expired. This was to purge him/her self from the taint of this material world before they passed on.

CoWinn

The Endura was not a ritual suicide. It happened as one was dying already. The aim was to purify oneself before death. It wasn't a form of voluntary euthanasia which would have been anathema to a Christian movement such as the Cathars. ThePeg 22:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yellow Cross

Shouldn't the yellow cross have some sort of description attached to it, like underneath it or something?

I am not exactly sure how to do this.

jptdrake 07:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

If you look at the code for the image, it has between double braces the image file with a vertical bar and then the word right, then another vertical bar then the word framed then another vertical bar and the caption. If you want to change the caption to something else, just replace 'Cathar Cross' with something else, then. SquirleyWurley 01:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Links

I added the link to the Assembly of Good Christians and also the link to the Apostolic Gnostic Church. Both of these are Cathari. I have been in contact with both groups and now consider them to be honest people in their belief and worth looking into if you are interested in learning non-biased information about Catharism. CW

I'm a little confused as to how external links should be handled. A list of blogs on the Gnosticism page, some of which in my view were very well focused on the ancient Gnostic texts and research, though by modern people walking a gnsotic path today, were deemed not appropriate by 999, I was directed to WP:EL external links page. SquirleyWurley 05:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed! The external links and references need to show more clarity and focus. We will offer specific suggestions next week for discussion. Agcweb ^(TALK) 3:17, 15 September 2006 (UTC))

Assembly of Good Christians has a bona fide medieval historian that has done much to add some good historical information to this article. I think these links should stay for people seeking info on modern day Cathari. CW

I wonder, in general, maybe these Gnostic, Cathar, and other pages, should just have a 'modern Cathars' or 'modern Gnostics' section with links to significant modern groups. I certainly think the blog list on the Gnosticism page deserved to stay. Now that it's gone, someone came in and added some groups in to an external links section of modern gnostics. Instead of having a never-ending game of remove and add, remove and add, why not just have a section specifically for it, since there are modern people and groups who sympathize and consider themselves on the path? I could use your insight on the Talk:Gnosticism page, if you don't mind. SquirleyWurley 06:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I will try to do that. By the way I noticed the link I added for the Assembly of Good Christians was deleted by somebody. In the past I had a problem with trying to contact this group and the person I finally got hold of had some problems understanding the English language. We had quite a conflict between us that was very heated and somewhat bizarre but I later found out he was in no way a spokesperson for this group and in way of emergency was just temporarily manning the computer. I hope the link was not deleted because of this past conflict. My goodness, every denomination has a kook or two in it, including the one I am in, however, that should not cast light on everyone in that group. I have since found persons in this group to be highly intelligent and credible with an anstonishing amount of history behind their claim to Cathar succession. These are not fly by nights. Extensive research on my part has shown them to be legit. I think the public should have knowledge of their site since it seems to be the most credable in the midst of a plethoria of noncredible groups on the net. What do you think? CW CW, after reading most of this, it reveals that the information is not accurate and reveals to me , that you must be an american. don't take offense , take a leap in history. Why do you want to relate cathari with american religion ? To determine who has made changes, click the 'history' tab on the top right. Agcweb ^(TALK) 3:17, 15 September 2006 (UTC))

Understood. According to a friend of mine that visited the AGC community the Assembly of Good Christians more resembles the Amish way of life as opposed to New Agers (which most people think of when they hear the word "Gnostic." ) I suppose having a link on this page would tend to draw New Agers on frivilous pursuits which is exactly what the AGC would want to avoid. CW

[edit] Languedoc cut

Have cut the following text from the article. It all seems largely irrelevant but am pasting here for the author to clean-up and move to other pages or otherwise address. reinthal 00:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

And even more common mistake is calling the region Languedoc- langue/language of occitan and France. It was not to be so until nearly the 14th century...This name Languedoc came from the king of France while it was NOT YET part of France. And long after it finally did become part of France , the population were certainly not accustomed to calling it languedoc. Its former name was septamanie and might of been changed by the visigoth when the region septamanie was ceded by the Romans to them, for aiding them in the fifth century. The buildings,churches and castles are all over Aude from roman to visigoth to cathar and finally French periods.

Also , one needs to remember what church was built WHEN, for there our many that were used to torture the Cathar, so i rather doubt they would seek refuge in them.

That the word inquisition was created especially to deal with the Cathars and in later centurys spread elsewhere.

So, the Cathar came from the land of Septamanie, unless the visigoth had decided to change the name. Charlemagne was next after the visigoth and could of as well changed the name, but it was not languedoc either.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/a/t/Talk%7ECatharism_8bdc.html"