WolfpackN64 said:
The church acted in many ways as a mediator in many conflicts. Often banning weapons they thought cruel (usually that only delayed their use). The church kept a lot of records, including classical works in enviroments that were considered untouchable (abbeys), without which much knowledge would have been lost. Many advancements in measurement of time, philosphy and even mathematics were done by the clerus. In the cities, poor relief often only came through the church and in time of war, many people found safety in abbeys. In the early colonial period, the church often acted to temper cruelty towards natives (something that is often overlooked). Even prompting Isabella of Span to give orders to the conquistadors to treat the natives with respect (they often didn't of course). |
I won't say that the Church did no good during the Middle Ages (or before, or after). Of course they did. And in my opinion, the focus on charity and the elevation of women (if, in many respects, temporary) were genuine advancements attributable to Christianity. But on the other hand, Western Europe (especially) was brought extremely low during the Middle Ages, in a number of respects. Much of the cruelty of the age was done as much in the name of God as otherwise: the treatment of heretics; attacks and prohibitions against pagans and Jews and other minority religious groups; the Crusades (among other religious wars); the Inquisition; etc.
Many of the records that had to be preserved by the clergy (and thank goodness they were) was necessitated because the overall state of education was abysmal, and I think that's accountable in part due to Christian animus against ancient/traditional philosophy and debate (seeing as how such debate led to heresy, and etc.). The cultural focus had shifted from questioning and investigation to faith and obedience. That's not a good environment for scientific advancement. And while there were advancements in some areas at the time, it's hard not to believe that the rate of advancement was slowed, compared to the times before and after the Middle Ages.
And finally, the record of contact with native populations during the colonial period (though not, strictly speaking, during the Middle Ages) is nothing to be proud of, I don't think. Was Christianity a mitigating force against cruelty? Or did it inspire the conquistadors to do essentially as they pleased with the "heathen" natives, believing God to be on their side? I'm sure both were true, in different scenarios, but overall I don't think atheist conquistadors would have been worse...
