[wqaatwt]

Yet somehow the scientific method as we know it evolved in (and only in) Christian universities.

Of course there were significant regressions but the Roman world wasn’t exactly some pro-science utopia. Where do you think Christians got the idea of burning witches?

Climate change, the plague and extreme political instability (that already was ripping the Roman world apart for centuries) and the resulting societal, economic and demographic collapse pretty much made the dark ages inevitable (and the church was the only thing keeping the lights on however dim they were).

[RupertSalt]

Honestly, we could make a case that witch-hunting and persecutions were pro-science.

Witches and "cunning folk" are people who use metaphysical, occult means of spirituality to influence people and the environment. Witchcraft does not appear, to the dispassionate observer, to be scientific, evidence-based, or empirical at all.

Christendom was in the business of supporting many liberal arts and sciences, in terms of architecture, literacy, mathematics, chemistry/alchemy, exploration, R&D and building of war materiels and sea vessels.

It was the witches who were meddling and using occult means, such as divination, augury, psychological manipulation, and treachery to achieve their ends. It was witchcraft that was chaotic and working against orderly scientific inquiries about the natural world.

The witches were typically working clandestinely, stereotypically in a little hut in the woods, in the shadows. The scientists of Christendom were founding and running universities, seminaries, hospitals, and other institutional centers of learning. They were highly organized and orderly endeavors, and witchcraft threatened the natural and political order of things, which seems to be what science represents, even to the present day.

[wqaatwt]

According to Christian science/theology and worldview witchcraft simple was impossible and belief in it was heretical for most of the middle ages. Witch burnings didn’t become widespread until the early modern period

[RupertSalt]

That isn't true.

Necromancy and divination are practices depicted in the Old Testament. Everyone knows they are real, and dangerous.

The fact of practicing occultism or magic is that it may work by summoning/manipulating evil forces. That it may work by messing with things beyond human control and authority.

The Abrahamic religions uniformly forbid superstitions, occultism, witchcraft and all kinds of magic, not because they "are impossible" but because they're uncontrollable and dangerous, for anyone, anytime.

[wqaatwt]

> not because they "are impossible" but

Well during the “dark ages” and much of the middle ages it was certainly the official position of the Catholic church that witchcraft did not and could not exist.

They tried banning it many times (the belief in witchcraft) and it was certainly considered heretical to think you were capable of performing magic or accusing anyone else of that.

Besides the theological arguments, it just wouldn’t have made any sense to legitimize pagan beliefs (which were still widespread at the time) by admitting that they were anything else that superstition.

Of course that kind of changed in the early modern period. Generally the protestants were quite a bit more into these type of superstitions and paranoia but of course the Catholic Church succumbed to it to.

However e.g. the Spanish Inquisition generally continued prosecuting people who believed in witchcraft or accused others of being witches.

[RupertSalt]

> it was certainly the official position of the Catholic church that witchcraft did not and could not exist.

That is definitely not true and it is impossible that an "official position" would be held and revoked later. This is not something that happens with doctrine or dogma.

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15674a.htm

Supposing that the belief in witchcraft were an idle superstition, it would be strange that the suggestion should nowhere be made that the evil of these practices only lay in the pretending to the possession of powers which did not really exist.

Feel free to cite a refutation. Your assertion means nothing. You've made many assertions about church/European history and you must consider yourself well-read in the topic, so surely you know sources that support your (crazy, unfounded) assertion?

But before you refute anything, I urge you to carefully examine the article I cited, which in turn cites primary sources, and gives a thorough overview of condemnations throughout the "Dark" and "Middle" Ages we're discussing! No impossible or nonexistent practice could be condemned or punished, right?

Christian teaching has always insisted that magic, witchcraft, or occultism was "false" or superstitious and dangerous, but "false" does not mean "nonexistent" or "impossible".

Bottom line. The hostility of science against religion, and the perception of hostility of religion vs. science, is very new. It is completely novel. Christianity (and Islam and Hinduism alike) all encouraged scientific inquiry into the natural world, discover, architecture, engineering, and many projects stood atop the support of church patronage. Many engineering projects in the Middle Ages were accomplished by religious orders (cf. Carmelites built aqueducts in Spain, etc.) and if you ask Wikipedia for a list of scientists who were also clergymen, you'll see just how intertwined were faith and reason for the entire history of religion and science itself.

[wqaatwt]

> That is definitely not true

What can I say.. look up the council of Paderborn and canon law in general during the period.

> impossible that an "official position" would be held and revoked later

You don’t know much about the Catholic church do you? That’s kind of its thing…

> No impossible or nonexistent practice could be condemned or punished, right?

Belief in witchcraft and supernatural was of course widespread.. that’s why the church considered it heresy that they had to crack down on. Since effectively it challenged the legitimacy of Christian faith..

> examine the article I cited

Which you surely did not bother reading yourself.

> does not mean "nonexistent" or "impossible".

Belief in witchcraft is logically incompatible with non Gnostic Christianity, since only God can perform miracles.

> of scientists who were also clergymen

Yes, scientific method as we know it was to a large extent developed by Christian theologians back in those days. Not sure what does that have to do with magic and witchcraft?

[Nevermark]

> Everyone knows they are real, and dangerous.

I suggest not making blanket claims about other people's beliefs.

Also, beliefs are not an argument for or against anything. There are a lot of widespread contradictory beliefs.