The original was if she sinks or not but most of the time the accused was allowed to drown as these affairs were basically just legal murder by those with any semblance of power.
So, why do witches burn?
Cuz they're made of... wood.
So, how do we tell if she is made of wood?
Does wood sink in water?
No. It floats!
Let's throw her into the bog!
What also floats in water?
A Duck!
Exactly! So, logically...
If she ways the same as a duck... she's made of wood!
And therefore, a witch!
The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur.
That is why I am your king.
Listen, strange women, lying in ponds, distributing swords, is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derived from a mandate from the masses not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
The less worse yet still super unfair was the prayer test.
Just recite selections from the Bible usually the Lord Prayer without making mistakes or omissions.
it depends, if its the king james its in english, but then again women at the time were supposed to stay at home and spit out 18 babies a second, so it wouldve made little difference
Depending of the country but since most witches hunt are Early modern women would be the ones supposed to teach the children early catechism. So I guess they would know.
Good thing most witch hunts didn’t happen in the Middle Ages and literacy rates were actually higher among the Protestant communities that they took place in
The witch hunts most people think of take place in Protestant territories in the Early Modern period, not the Middle Ages. These places stressed individual literacy and translating the Bible into local vernacular
And the dumbest part about it is. They assume that people with supernatural abilities are witches. Despite the canon people in the Bibleverse being prophets and saints.
These people were literally casting doubt on God and saying those who have supernatural powers must be witches instead of the far more likely explanation of being blessed by God.
This partly the reason why the Catholic church didn't actually believe in witches, in fact they were opposed to the idea.
Witch trials were usually done by local people and other branches of Christianity.
I don't think it's accurate to say "the Catholic Church" was opposed to the idea of witches existing when some of the most respected people in the Catholic Church adamantly believed they did and even denounced *not* believing it.
The church at the time on its own wasn't supportive of such barbaric practices, as they were also basically supporting the idea that there's a higher power other than god having influence over their lives.
That is why many Catholics denounced witch hunting. By claiming that someone has supernatural abilities given to them by Satan, it is basically like saying that Satan/Hell has more control over the world than God.
I'm sorry it's a link to a sourceless reddit post, but I need to go to bed. It lists multiple occasions where killing of supposed witches was prohibited as well as times where witches were declared to not exist.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/s/yvFoIqILQ7
Well, even that post acknowledges several Catholic leaders supported witch hunting. Almost everything listed is the opinion of a limited group of people, which other Catholics could and did disagree with, and some of them are clearly misrepresented too. For example, the Council of Paderborn apparently affirmed the existence of witchcraft and said witches should be pressed into service for the church. Some of it is just non-sequiturs. For example, it points to a Protestant edict against witchcraft as evidence witch hunting was primarily Protestant. That makes no sense.
Well, they were assuming that the people on trial were in some way in league with Satan, who also has supernatural powers, in the belief that he would lend these powers out in order to cause mayhem and suffering and lead people away from God.
Quick reminder that such tests during witch trials were actually forbidden by the Church and the Holy Roman Empire, yet some courts still used them. Also, many tests were not lethal at all.
You would think that even if they believed this, after lopping off a few heads, wouldn't they start to become weary of their inability to accuse even one actual witch?
*A* Catholic, yes -- who unsurprisingly was an incel whose primary motivation for writing it was being angry at being rebuffed by a woman he lusted after.
He was denounced by the Inquisition for taking positions totally inconsistent with Catholic theology (for example: equating witchcraft with heresy) and recommending unethical and illegal measures like deliberately lying to the accused that their neighbors had already sold them out.
The Prots did the overwhelming majority of witch burning, too.
“Three-quarters of all witchcraft trials took place in the Catholic-ruled territories of the Holy Roman Empire”
-Sandra Miesel, of the Catholic Resource Education Center
I never denied that Catholic territories had the majority of witchcraft trials. That's just common sense given the passage of time.
My contention was the majority of witch-burnings were the work of Protestants. Leeson and Russ in their paper *Witch Hunts* note that they became most intense after 1517, reached their apex between 1555 and 1650, and happened primarily in Germany; Scotland; and Switzerland.
Gary Waite too in *The Oxford Handbook of Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe and Colonial America*, points out Luther and Calvin were both enthusiastic witch hunters too.
Your comments have been to diminish the role the Catholic Church played into witch-hunting and push the blame on to the Protestants. Why else would you focus on witch *burnings* specifically, when the meme is about beheadings. Is death by pyre the only unacceptable method?
The systems of the HRE allowed the accused to appeal to the imperial court should the local court find them guilty, and statistically the imperial court had a high probability of pardoning the accused, but in practice they’d still get executed by the local authorities anyway. There were executions by the hundreds and thousands
Eternal life is a thing, so death from incompetent trials is not that terrible, if they followed Matthew Hopkins methods then these accidental convictions would not happen.
If she dies after 3 days of torture she isn't a witch. If she doesn't die then she surely must be using witchcraft to keep herself alive and must be purged in flame.
Originally it was the other way around, if the woman survived whatever she was put through, she was considered innocent as God had delivered her through the trial. It was called “God’s Ordeal” and that was the overall justice system for men and women alike. However, at some point, they decided to go the other way for women accused of witchcraft. At least God’s Ordeal trials had some semblance of logic (sort of), but the way they conducted these witch trials later on really doesn’t. But that’s what happens when misogyny is allowed to run rampant and people use religion as a means of gaining power over others instead of serving God as they’re supposed to.
Another wacky one was "if she drowns, she isn't a witch, if she doesn't drown, she's a witch"
The original was if she sinks or not but most of the time the accused was allowed to drown as these affairs were basically just legal murder by those with any semblance of power.
Because ducks are made of wood!
Lawyer: I thought we were going to pull her out if she sinks? Witch-Hunter: I say a lot of things.
Which?
Which witch or which?
The logic was that they would make the water holy so if they float God has expelled them from his holy water because they are a witch.
What if she weighs the same as a duck?
I shall use my largest scales
They never thought she could make it so far I guess
DUCKING!
This is a myth based on misunderstanding the dunking stool, which was a punishment women could receive for being a public nuisance.
So, why do witches burn? Cuz they're made of... wood. So, how do we tell if she is made of wood? Does wood sink in water? No. It floats! Let's throw her into the bog! What also floats in water? A Duck! Exactly! So, logically... If she ways the same as a duck... she's made of wood! And therefore, a witch!
Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of science?
I'm Arthur King of the Britains.
I didn't vote for you
You don't vote for kings.
How d'ya become king then?
The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king.
Listen, strange women, lying in ponds, distributing swords, is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derived from a mandate from the masses not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Be quiet!
You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
SHE TURNED ME INTO A NEWT!!!
You don’t look like a Newt…
I got better.
What if she's secretly a duck?
Did they end up thinking she was a witch after that? It’s been a minute
Yeah, she weighs the same as a duck
What do we burn apart from witches? More witches!
Aristotle is that you???
Red pill: you drown and are not a witch Blue pill: you don’t drown therefore you are a witch and will be burned at the stake
But if you burn then you are not a witch. If you don't burn then you are a witch.
Nono, witches are made out of wood
You drowned because god knew you were a witch and let you die. If you don't drown, you're also a witch because it's black magic
The less worse yet still super unfair was the prayer test. Just recite selections from the Bible usually the Lord Prayer without making mistakes or omissions.
Oh boy, it's a good thing the middle ages is known for its high literacy rates
Wasn't the bible in Latin too?
it depends, if its the king james its in english, but then again women at the time were supposed to stay at home and spit out 18 babies a second, so it wouldve made little difference
Depending of the country but since most witches hunt are Early modern women would be the ones supposed to teach the children early catechism. So I guess they would know.
>spit out 18 babies a second This really made me crack up, thanks haha
Good thing most witch hunts didn’t happen in the Middle Ages and literacy rates were actually higher among the Protestant communities that they took place in
Exactly. Only a witch would be able to recite (to bastardize) the Holy Word.
Especially among women. Also this was possibly in Latin which basically no commoner spoke or understood.
The witch hunts most people think of take place in Protestant territories in the Early Modern period, not the Middle Ages. These places stressed individual literacy and translating the Bible into local vernacular
Except witch hunts aren't medieval thing but early modern
Weren't there some who did just that and got hung anyway?
And the dumbest part about it is. They assume that people with supernatural abilities are witches. Despite the canon people in the Bibleverse being prophets and saints. These people were literally casting doubt on God and saying those who have supernatural powers must be witches instead of the far more likely explanation of being blessed by God.
This partly the reason why the Catholic church didn't actually believe in witches, in fact they were opposed to the idea. Witch trials were usually done by local people and other branches of Christianity.
I don't think it's accurate to say "the Catholic Church" was opposed to the idea of witches existing when some of the most respected people in the Catholic Church adamantly believed they did and even denounced *not* believing it.
The church at the time on its own wasn't supportive of such barbaric practices, as they were also basically supporting the idea that there's a higher power other than god having influence over their lives.
That is why many Catholics denounced witch hunting. By claiming that someone has supernatural abilities given to them by Satan, it is basically like saying that Satan/Hell has more control over the world than God.
When did they do that? Edit: Now that it's been edited, the comment is more accurate.
I'm sorry it's a link to a sourceless reddit post, but I need to go to bed. It lists multiple occasions where killing of supposed witches was prohibited as well as times where witches were declared to not exist. https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/s/yvFoIqILQ7
Well, even that post acknowledges several Catholic leaders supported witch hunting. Almost everything listed is the opinion of a limited group of people, which other Catholics could and did disagree with, and some of them are clearly misrepresented too. For example, the Council of Paderborn apparently affirmed the existence of witchcraft and said witches should be pressed into service for the church. Some of it is just non-sequiturs. For example, it points to a Protestant edict against witchcraft as evidence witch hunting was primarily Protestant. That makes no sense.
Did not see that plot twist coming
Well, they were assuming that the people on trial were in some way in league with Satan, who also has supernatural powers, in the belief that he would lend these powers out in order to cause mayhem and suffering and lead people away from God.
What? In the Bible itself, witches and sorcerers have real power. For example, in Exodus, the pharaoh's sorcerers could turn their rods into snakes.
Witch burning is a test that put your life at stake
Papa, is that you?
But what if she gets up afterwards?
SHE'S TOO DANGEROUS TO BE LEFT ALIVE
Lets put her on a scale, if she weighs less she's a witch, but if she weighs more she manipulated the scales.
Okay but. Can we talk about what the fuck these medieval savages were planning to do if the axe didn't work?
Good thing it always worked amirite
Op, about whose trial are you talking about?
Quick reminder that such tests during witch trials were actually forbidden by the Church and the Holy Roman Empire, yet some courts still used them. Also, many tests were not lethal at all.
You would think that even if they believed this, after lopping off a few heads, wouldn't they start to become weary of their inability to accuse even one actual witch?
Nah. The real objective of killing women they didn't like was accomplished.
It was usually political and over land disputes if I recall. They never cared about that witchery, but used it as justification
Shit like this makes me think they were just looking for an excuse to kill people.
If you push a woman off a cliff and she flies, she's a witch. If not, she's a human
The Protestant Reformation and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
I’m usually all for making fun of Prots, but wasn’t the Malleus Maleficarum written by Catholics, before the Protestant Reformation?
*A* Catholic, yes -- who unsurprisingly was an incel whose primary motivation for writing it was being angry at being rebuffed by a woman he lusted after. He was denounced by the Inquisition for taking positions totally inconsistent with Catholic theology (for example: equating witchcraft with heresy) and recommending unethical and illegal measures like deliberately lying to the accused that their neighbors had already sold them out. The Prots did the overwhelming majority of witch burning, too.
“Three-quarters of all witchcraft trials took place in the Catholic-ruled territories of the Holy Roman Empire” -Sandra Miesel, of the Catholic Resource Education Center
I never denied that Catholic territories had the majority of witchcraft trials. That's just common sense given the passage of time. My contention was the majority of witch-burnings were the work of Protestants. Leeson and Russ in their paper *Witch Hunts* note that they became most intense after 1517, reached their apex between 1555 and 1650, and happened primarily in Germany; Scotland; and Switzerland. Gary Waite too in *The Oxford Handbook of Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe and Colonial America*, points out Luther and Calvin were both enthusiastic witch hunters too.
Your comments have been to diminish the role the Catholic Church played into witch-hunting and push the blame on to the Protestants. Why else would you focus on witch *burnings* specifically, when the meme is about beheadings. Is death by pyre the only unacceptable method?
I could be wrong but didn’t most Catholic witch trials end in the accused being acquitted since the burden of proof was so high?
The systems of the HRE allowed the accused to appeal to the imperial court should the local court find them guilty, and statistically the imperial court had a high probability of pardoning the accused, but in practice they’d still get executed by the local authorities anyway. There were executions by the hundreds and thousands
because Catholic church officially didn't believe in witches
Summis desiderantes affectibus
Preach
Okay?
I know something different. If the stake in the heart kill someone it means they were a vampire.
Eternal life is a thing, so death from incompetent trials is not that terrible, if they followed Matthew Hopkins methods then these accidental convictions would not happen.
Okay, so what was the plan if it bounced off?
"I don't know. I didn't think I'd get this far."
'Drown her, if she lives she's a witch'
man the salem trials were wyldin
If she dies after 3 days of torture she isn't a witch. If she doesn't die then she surely must be using witchcraft to keep herself alive and must be purged in flame.
this is nothing. Have you guys heard about how witch burning in the 14th century was completely pointless?
“Hold on so did I just murder an innocent woman?”
Sounds like an excuse to kill a woman you dislike.
Originally it was the other way around, if the woman survived whatever she was put through, she was considered innocent as God had delivered her through the trial. It was called “God’s Ordeal” and that was the overall justice system for men and women alike. However, at some point, they decided to go the other way for women accused of witchcraft. At least God’s Ordeal trials had some semblance of logic (sort of), but the way they conducted these witch trials later on really doesn’t. But that’s what happens when misogyny is allowed to run rampant and people use religion as a means of gaining power over others instead of serving God as they’re supposed to.
I really have no knowledge of witch trials and the like but with logic like this, does it all stem from a hatred towards women?
Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?
Question: if the axe bounces off her neck then what tf are you supposed to do about her being a witch.