[Kman]

I disagree. Most of what Europe had become it owns to ancient Greece and Rome. Christianity is one of the catalysts that destroyed those ancient civilizations and led Europe to the 1000 of middle ages. After the renaissance the church has held back scientific progress by every possible mean (i.e. book burning, inquisition). The church was definitely a negative force in Europe.

I disagree, I think christianity saved alot of the knowledge that was discovered in the greek/roman world about how you should treat others, the thing that brought down the Roman Empire was too much statism and oppressive taxes, this caused average roman citizens to start hating the Roman bureaucracy and military establishment and this eventually enabled non-roman invaders to destroy the Roman empire. Just because christianity gained popularity in a period where the Roman Empire was in a decline doesnt mean that christianity is to blame for it.

One of the most fundamental messages in christianity is that you shouldnt trust the state or authorities in general, the state killed Jesus after, this hostility towards the wisdom of the rulers is a very western phenomenon, it is not something which has taken root in Asia, the middle east or africa, they are much more loyal towards authority in those cultures, just look at Japan for example, they voted for the same political party for the last 50 or more years.

While its true that there are some cases of the church inhibiting science, I think at the same time that the church protected scientists since the bible gave moral clout to scientists when they were being persecuted, since they could accuse the tyrannical kings, princes and priests of being similar to Pontius Pilate when they were persecuting them (and back then that was a serious accusation).

[eugenekop]

I don't know Kman, its too far fetched. The church throughout its first 1800 years was extremely intolerant to every form of heresy, the church did everything it could to prevent free thought and questioning of the universe.

If Rome had continued to develop further, and it was very close to that, modernity would have happened 1500 years ago not 500 years ago. You don't need the church for science and free thought, the Greek and Romans have proved that. Any form or religion inhibited progress, and Christianity was of the worst forms of religion, at least back then.

[William_H_Dougherty]

If Rome had continued to develop further, and it was very close to that, modernity would have happened 1500 years ago not 500 years ago. You don't need the church for science and free thought, the Greek and Romans have proved that. Any form or religion inhibited progress, and Christianity was of the worst forms of religion, at least back then.

Err ... the Romans were Catholic at the end.

They founded the Byzantine Empire, which lasted until 1453.

- WHD

[William_H_Dougherty]

Any form or religion inhibited progress, and Christianity was of the worst forms of religion, at least back then.

Really, the average person in Italy was worse off than the average person in Persia?

- WHD

[Fasces]

They don't care, WHD. They have latched unto the meme of Catholic intolerance, ignoring the fact that the vast majority of classical texts were preserved through Catholic monasteries, that Galileo's biggest financers and supporters were the Pope himself (until Galileo released a work publicly humiliating him, that made him fall out favor making him a target for fundamentalist cardinals), that the greatest patron of the arts, activists for peace, and progressive forces (The Catholic Church abolished slavery in the Americas an astounding three hundred years before the Protestants got around to it) could be found in the Church and so forth.

Was the Inquisition bad? Certainly, though you may ignore that the highest estimate from reputable sources for death tolls, over six hundred years, number less than 75,000, that witches burned least in areas like Italy and Spain where inquisitions were strongest. Ask the Salem girls how much better Protestantism worked out for them. Ask those thousands that died in Britain under Anglican and Protestant leaders how much better Protestantism was for them.

All religions have good and bad, regardless of sect, and all religions have been positive influences on humanity, regardless of form.

[eugenekop]

I think this question is too hypothetical. It is impossible to judge now whether a particular religion had positive or negative influence on human development. What I am totally sure of is that religion is not a prerequisite for progress, and it is very likely that it will inhibit it.

[QatzelOk]

NEGATIVE

Like all Abrahamics, Catholicism derives its heaven strategy (the pitch) by separating people from both nature and human nature, in order to construct something that it claims is "better" than nature. A heaven that is better than the savage garden we left behind to pursue control and domination of nature.

Let's see how happy all those Catholic countries will be when the sun bakes their soil bone dry.

[The Immortal Goon]

I don't think a lot of people in this poll have a good grasp of the history of the Church. By far the biggest preserver of works from antiquity is the Catholic Church. You go to the Vatican and there are walls stuffed full of Greek and Roman art along hallways that are so long you can't make out the other end. The Church funded science far more than any other western source for a thousand years. When Darwin wrote Origin of Species, he was proposing that a process the Catholics had codified and discovered in regard to plants could be applied to animals. When it came out, the Church made no comment about the science and its implications for a century - but gathered data. For the most part, the Church has always accepted the idea of evolution.

As Fasces pointed out, though Copernicus has been made by Protestants in to a martyr of science, his work was funded by the Catholic Church. It wasn't until he turned against them that he was turned against. Was that right? No. But it's a mistake to think that the Church was just some backward tyrants that hated progress.

Then there's the whole fact that it was about the only cohesive political unit in western culture for a millennium. They fed the orphans, they negotiated peace with kings, they rallied together the forces that be when the enemies were at the gates.

Does this mean that the Church can be seen as an overall positive force? Impossible to say. But I tend to like the "German school" of philosophy more than the "French school" in that I think that it was an overall success to have an institution such as the church in place.

[Thompson_NCL]

Being British, I pity the Papists. Don't they know the Pope is the Antichrist?!

[Thunderhawk]

It was positive, like most religions that establish order and morals. That the institution played political games and that those games had huge consequences is inevitable with such a large and once powerful organization. I believe religion is unnecessary, but it's effectiveness in maintaining society is remarkable and even more so when all imitators have been poor replacements.

A great detraction of the Catholic church is that it is a large and extremely conservative organization. Such an ideology however is useful if one is looking for long term stability in anything - including progress.

[Oxymoron]

IMO the Pope should be arrested for racketeering and all his cardinals along with him. The Vatican should be invaded, the Swiss guards mutilated, and the library given to Google.

[QatzelOk]

Being British, I pity the Papists. Don't they know the Pope is the Antichrist?!

Being non-British, don't British people realize that obsession with "the antichrist" is a uniquely Catholic ignorance?

Was the Church of England founded ONLY to allow a king to divorce a wife (instead of killing her), and to make English the official language of heaven?

[Xopolis]

Efficient distribution of AIDS and pedophiles leans more towards the negative end of the scale.

[Fasces]

If individuals listened to all of the Church's teachings, and not just the ones on contraceptives, AIDs would not be a problem. It seems wrong to blame the Church for the spread of AIDs.

[Paradigm]

I was just thinking about the Catholic church as it exists today under its current administration, so I picked "Negative." If we're talking about their impact on the course of history, it's hard to quantify, since it's almost inconceivable to imagine what the Western world would look like today without them.

[BassHole]

^ Fair point. It would be interesting to see how the world would have developed under a system run by Paganism.

[CreamDream]

It would be interesting to see how the world would have developed under a system run by Paganism.

Hmmmm. It would be hard to say. I mean intricate foreign relations are really a byproduct of organized religion. However that being said, the dark ages really did hold back technological and intellectual development. Its really impossible to say.

[William_H_Dougherty]

Hmmmm. It would be hard to say. I mean intricate foreign relations are really a byproduct of organized religion. However that being said, the dark ages really did hold back technological and intellectual development. Its really impossible to say.

And we know who to blame for the dark ages. The J...

Pagans. ;0

- WHD

[BassHole]

If Jerry Falwell is to be believed, the Pagans played a large part in provoking God to carry out 9/11.

[eugenekop]

I think Greece and Rome have shown us that paganism is very friendly to progress. I can't say the same for Catholicism.