The Catholic Church eventually banned the book entirely, placing it on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum. Nevertheless, Kramer inserted an endorsement from the University into subsequent editions. Instead, the faculty condemned it as both unethical and illegal because the demonology it contained was inconsistent with Catholic doctrine. Kramer and Sprenger submitted the Malleus Maleficarum to the University of Cologne’s Faculty of Theology on May 9, 1487, hoping for its endorsement. Kramer used the papal bull as the preface for the Malleus, giving the false impression that Innocent VIII had endorsed the Malleus when in fact the bull had endorsed Kramer as an inquisitor and not his (then unwritten) work. He drew on earlier sources like the Johannes Nider's treatise Formicarius, written 1435/37. However, after local authorities still blocked his attempts, Kramer directed his energies to the composition of the Malleus. He talks about both authors requesting a papal bull.
#The witchcraft sourcebook citation full
Kramer requested papal support and attained it via the papal bull Summis desiderantes affectibus, which recognized the existence of witches and gave full papal approval for the Inquisition to prosecute witchcraft. In 1484, Kramer had tried to prosecute witchcraft in the bishopric of Trent but was blocked by local ecclesiastical authorities. He says Kramer was the chief author and that Sprenger's role was "minor". However, most modern scholars believe that Jacob Sprenger contributed little if anything to the work besides his illustrious name. I include the parts I have removed and my comments on them. I have rewritten a lot of the Genesis part. 50 Proposal to ignore time-wasting edits on this article.49.7 Paragraph with successors in lead (C03).49.2 Wolfgang Behringer Malleus Maleficarum (S01).49 WARNING about blatant propaganda also new proposals.48.2.2.1 Notification and link to authorship argument.48.2 Conditional Proposal - lead section only.48 Working copy with additions by Ryn78 highlighted.47 SOURCES: Broedel and Mackay are best secondary sources accessible for this topic.46 Removal of It was a bestseller, second only to Bible in terms of sales for almost 200 years statement.45 Exaggerations(?) of the kind "extreme misogyny".44 Ryn78 edits 29 October 2016 (my date).41 Request for proper sourcing of Behringer, Wolfgang.38 Recent attempts to undo the longstanding consensus.37 Aquinas about witchcraft 13th century.36 Community ban of the Joan of Arc vandal.30 Incorrect comments in major themes section?.29 Removal of inappropriate section IV in "Contents".27 Malleus Maleficarum, a humanistic work?.24 Recursive Reference & Genesis Section in General.22 Supposed Banning of Malleus Maleficarum.20 Objections to the use of the adjective "medieval".17 discuss the English translations in the article?.8 Not supported by the catholic church?.2 Community ban of the Joan of Arc vandal.
0 kommentar(er)
