[Alpha Kodiak]

Originally posted by Unknown_Enemy:
Speaking of it, which church are we speaking of ? High level church ? Or lowly monks in their covent ?
High ranking in the christian church were often coming from noble families. I would suggest everyone to try reading historical report on reign of Hugue Capet (a few years before 1000), and you'll see noble warriors continuously betraying each other, with the help of some of their family members in the ranks of the church. At that time, it was not unknown to have an eveque or such murdered by an enemy noble.

Most of the high church was about politics and power. But for this topics, what is interesting is the low level monks and priest, who has been the true gardians of both the faith and knowledge.

Unknown_Enemy has brought up a very important point. Once the church was no longer oppressed, but rather became the seat of power, it attracted those who seek power, rather than just those who truly followed the teachings of Christ.

To this day there is a dichotomy between those who use the institutional church as a source of political power and those for whom the church is a place of fellowship with others who also seek to follow Christ. It is interesting that the only people that Christ was recorded as having harsh words for were the religious leaders who put extra burdens upon their followers.

Given that dichotomy, my response to this thread is that the power structure of the church did do things that hindered scientific advancement, as well as perpetrate other embarrassments such as inquisitions and crusades. On the other hand, the underlying structure of the church was instrumental in both the preservation of knowledge and education, both of which provided foundations for future scientific advancement. Thus the issue is not really black and white at all, but rather a mix of good and bad. I do not feel qualified to comment on whether the good or the bad is of more significance.