I'm in doubt non-theologians would understand, first, the very meaning of the word schismatic and, second, the implication. On another note, schismatic may today be a neutral term, but in the middle of the 11th century, excommunication would mean that "the other" is not a member of the one and only Church, i.e. equalling a heathen or, if you prefer, pagan. Differing theological grasps or opinions would be discussed at university, while expulsion from the Church, unless repented, would have to be followed by swords. That is why Latin Christians not only conquered, sacked and burned Constantinople, but also killed her inhabitants.
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the salience of these categories to Mediaeval Christians. As an ordinary Roman Catholic, they were salient to me while growing up in the 20th century. We understood the practical differences between Orthodox Christians, Eastern Catholics, Anglicans, other Protestants, and non-Christians even if we didn't understand the theological underpinnings of these distinctions.
The response of Latin Christians to heathens at the time wasn't to massacre them but to force them to convert. (The time of the Fourth Crusade was also the beginning of the Northern Crusades in Wendland and the Baltics.) They were in the habit of massacring heretics, however, as the Albigensian Crusade made clear.
I think there's much a case to be made for Mediaeval Crusaders seeing schism as a form of heresy. But I think it's even more important to remember that the siege of Constantinople was preceded by a massacre of its Roman Catholic inhabitants. This doesn't get talked about much (the Orthodox Christians certainly don't like to
( ... )
Comments 3
Reply
Reply
The response of Latin Christians to heathens at the time wasn't to massacre them but to force them to convert. (The time of the Fourth Crusade was also the beginning of the Northern Crusades in Wendland and the Baltics.) They were in the habit of massacring heretics, however, as the Albigensian Crusade made clear.
I think there's much a case to be made for Mediaeval Crusaders seeing schism as a form of heresy. But I think it's even more important to remember that the siege of Constantinople was preceded by a massacre of its Roman Catholic inhabitants. This doesn't get talked about much (the Orthodox Christians certainly don't like to ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment