Contemporary Witch Trials
Posted by Cesar Baldelomar on October 31, 2009
One of the Salem Witch Trials Victims. Photo by Yolanda Baldelomar
I recently went to Salem, Massachusetts with my wife and mother. When we arrived in Salem, it felt like we were transported to colonial times. People were wearing costumes that were eerily similar to the fashions of the colonials, original cottages remained, and horses and carriages filled the streets. Salem celebrates Halloween throughout the entire month of October with daily presentations, good food, and peculiar attractions from 3-D haunted houses to authentic “witch trail” recreations.
Yet, while I undoubtedly enjoyed these attractions and especially the food, I went to Salem primarily to visit the Salem Witch Trials Memorial Park, where the names of the victims were inscribed on concrete slabs. This Memorial Park is adjacent to Salem’s ancient cemetery, where, ironically, some of the individuals who accused and perhaps persecuted the “witches” are buried.
Thanks to books like Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, some of us may be familiar with the historical and fictional accounts of the Salem witch trials. According to historians, it all began when two girls were having “fits.” The townspeople believed someone was casting spells on these children. Immediately, they charged three women as witches. These women were older and marginalized within the town (one was a slave). This then spiraled into a frenzied witch-hunt that lasted nine months and resulted in many deaths. When it was all said and done, 200 innocent people were accused, 19 hanged, 1 pressed to death, and at least four died while in jail awaiting trial. Countless others fled to neighboring towns to escape persecution, so many homes were broken in the process.
While the reasons behind the hysteria at Salem are numerous, religion undoubtedly played a significant role. For these puritans, according to Gretchen A. Adams in her book The Specter of Salem: Remembering the Witch Trials in Nineteenth-Century America, “charges of witchcraft separated the godly from the ungodly in the mind of the community.” The ungodly, of course, were seen by the community as demonic and capable of inflicting spiritual and physical harm on others. Thus, the community felt it was their duty to eliminate these threats. Judges and ministers used religion and the Bible to rouse the community to accuse anyone suspected of witchcraft. Usually, people accused neighbors who possessed something they did not have, or a neighbor whose relationship with his or her wife or husband caused jealousy in the accuser, or a neighbor they simply did not like.
What a shame that God and the Bible were thrown around to justify the execution of innocent people. Thank God these events are in the past. Or are they? Still today people from all over the world marginalize, oppress, and kill others over religion or a narrow interpretation of Scripture.
In the United States, conservatives and progressives constantly fight over whose God is better. Around the world, Muslims, Jews, and Christians battle over whose religion and scriptures are superior. Within Christianity itself, the different denominations constantly battle over correct doctrine. And within Catholicism, there are qualms over dogmas and correct interpretation of church documents and the Bible.
These fights over religion, God, scriptures, dogmas, and doctrines are counterproductive and have already claimed too many victims. (There is no doubt, however, that religions have also led to much good, but we must also recognize what happens when religion is misused – lest it continues to be used for oppression.) While individuals are fighting over correct interpretation or belief, children are dying of hunger, illnesses, and violence. While theologians and the laity discuss whether contraception is morally evil, the earth’s species are disappearing at alarming rates. These suffering individuals are the indirect victims of religious battles. But how about the direct victims of religious violence?
Women, homosexuals, and countless others have been and continue to be oppressed by the incorrect use of the Bible and/or by churches and religions that have and still do count some as unworthy of inclusion in the community. They, like the witches, are seen as a potential threat to the community’s welfare. These oppressed individuals are the contemporary “witches,” and the churches that oppress them are the witch hunters.
And I thought I left the troubled legacy of Salem when I left the town. What a foolish thought.
César J. Baldelomar, a graduate student at Harvard Divinity School, is the executive director of Pax Romana Center for International Study of Catholic Social Teaching and blogs at www.holisticthoughts.com. You can also visit his website at www.cesarjb.org
LarryD said
Let’s not forget the Christians and Catholics who are being killed and martyred today, this very day, by militant Hindus in India and Muslims, as well as Catholics in Viet Nam and China.
“While individuals are fighting over correct interpretation or belief, children are dying of hunger, illnesses, and violence.”
Children will die of hunger, illness and violence regardless. To imply otherwise seems disingenuous to me. Are you implying that those problems will magically disappear if only we would stop talking about beliefs? Or are you implying that all beliefs are equal, so there’s no reason to argue and fight in the first place?
In my humble opinion, the only thing worth arguing, disagreeing and fighting for (in the arena of ideas, and not physically) than Truth. And the fullness of the Truth resides in the Catholic Church, founded by Christ. What else is there worth arguing over, really, than the question asked by Pontius: “What is truth?”
Let me ask you a question: Would you be willing to die for your faith? Would you be willing to be a martyr for Christ?
Cesar Baldelomar said
Dear Larry D,
Thanks for your response. Yes, there is no doubt that all religions contribute to some violence at some level all across the world. I do mention in the article that “Around the world, Muslims, Jews, and Christians battle over whose religion and scriptures are superior.”
Also, I challenge your notion of Truth. What is “Truth?” How do you know it exists, if it does in the first place? And, what do you make of different “Truth” claims by different people at different times and contexts? Which one is the “Truth” among “Truths”? Since your answer is Jesus and Christianity, than I cannot respond, for this suggests a colonial spirit of religious superiority which is what I criticize in the article as the cause of much suffering, oppression, and death. How do you reconcile that this “Truth” has led to horrible crusades, exploitation of the Native Americans during the conquest of the Americas, and brutal crimes throughout the Inquisition? The “Truth” has also been used to justify an unjust war in Iraq, which the late Pope John Paul II condemned. The “Truth” seems to be what fits one’s needs at a particular time and place.
And lastly, no, I would not die for religious beliefs, but I will challenge anyone who tries to impose them on me or others without logical recourse. Often, imposition leads to violence, oppression, and exclusion — not what Jesus demanded! Less talk about dogmas and beliefs and more about helping our neighbors will show the true power of Jesus.
Best,
Cesar
Cesar Baldelomar said
I forgot to add that Jesus was never a Christian or a theologian. He was not concerned with dogmas as much as he was with how religious and political power merged to oppress the already oppressed!
LarryD said
You wrote: “Also, I challenge your notion of Truth. What is “Truth?””
Truth is a person – Jesus Christ. He said “I am the Way, the Life and the Truth.” So it is not my notion of truth – it is not something I have come up with on my own. I humbly submit to the Truth.
You wrote: “Since your answer is Jesus and Christianity, than I cannot respond, for this suggests a colonial spirit of religious superiority…”
Since you don’t see Jesus Christ as the Truth, then I cannot respond, for this suggests a relativistic spirit of religious syncretism.
You wrote: “How do you reconcile that this “Truth” has led to horrible crusades, exploitation of the Native Americans during the conquest of the Americas, and brutal crimes throughout the Inquisition?”
Simply – we are all sinners. Sin makes people do stupid things. Individuals throughout time have done things in the name of “truth” (with a small “t”), which was often and most times in opposition to the Truth, that I’m sure saddened our Lord. They had a malformed view of ‘love of God’. But that in no way detracts from the Truths (with a big “T”) the Church proposes for our belief. The Church does not recognize forced Baptisms (infant baptism is not ‘forced’, btw – it’s requested by the parents who speak for the child), for example. I’d argue you have a difficulty recognizing the difference between Church teaching and the improper use of authority on the part of individuals and groups.
You wrote: “And lastly, no, I would not die for religious beliefs, but I will challenge anyone who tries to impose them on me or others without logical recourse.”
Christ said there is no greater love than to lay one’s life down for a friend. Is not Jesus Christ your friend, and if forced with the choice to deny Him and live, or refuse to deny Him and be killed, you would choose the former? Really?
You wrote: “Often, imposition leads to violence, oppression, and exclusion — not what Jesus demanded!”
Show me where the Church teaches we are to impose our faith on others. Documented.
You wrote: “I forgot to add that Jesus was never a Christian or a theologian. He was not concerned with dogmas as much as he was with how religious and political power merged to oppress the already oppressed!”
Right – Jesus was a Jew. And the son of God, the second Person of the Trinity. But he was a teacher. And he founded a Church to preserve His teachings as handed down by the apostles. He commanded us to love God and love our neighbor. That sounds like a dogma to me. He came to fulfill the commandments, not abolish them. The Ten Commandments seem rather dogmatic to me.
Dogma and doctrine are important. Without it, we would not recognize that Jesus is God. We would not recognize that Jesus is the Truth.
Is the world groaning due to lack of love? Undoubtedly yes. Heart-breakingly yes. But the world is also groaning due to lack of hope – authentic hope, not a touchy-feely woe-is-us-oppressed we-wish-people-were-nice kinda hope. Hope exists even in the midst of oppression. Hope exists in the bog and mire of a sinful life – and that hope is Jesus Christ. We show our love of God – which MUST come first – by how we love our neighbor. Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta is a perfect modern-day example of this. She was not concerned with overturning an unjust caste system. She had compassion for the poor and indigent – which is why her missions are throughout the world, even here in the US. She was a religious, not a social worker. Jesus was first in her life, and through the grace and love of Christ, she was able to then love the unlovable.
Jesus wasn’t concerned with the political power – He came to save us from sin – our personal sin. Sin is the true oppressor.
Lacey Louwagie said
Thanks for your brave reflection, Cesar. It never ceases to unnerve me that, while we have more or less “universally” condemned the witch trials as a culture, we still participate in the same blaming and scapegoating — usually of those within our culture who are already oppressed, as you pointed out. And unfortunately, most of this oppression is justified and perpetuated by religious dogma, rather than the other way around (religion further oppressing those who are marginalized/oppressed in the greater culture).
I don’t intend to put words into Cesar’s mouth, but my interpretation is that Cesar argues for a redirection of focus. What if all the energy put into arguing over theology were instead put into feeding the poor, or fighting violence? Yes, the poor and suffering will always be among us, as Jesus Himself told us, but if there is a finite amount of energy and focus in the world, one might assume that focusing that energy on helping others rather than squabbling amongst ourselves would at the very least reduce the human suffering in the world.
Cesar Baldelomar said
Thank you, Lacey, for your response. Actually, you are right on by saying that we need a shift of focus from dogmatic discussion to more important issues, such as poverty, global climate change, and equal rights for all! Thank you for clarifying my words!
LarryD said
I wonder if during the fifth century, the time of the Arian heresy, where the divinity of Christ was challenged and fought over, there were people who thought “you know, we should not be arguing over this dogmatic stuff and just take care of the poor and oppressed.” I contend that the Church was doing both simultaneously. These need not be mutually exclusive. I can easily defend Church teaching against those seeking to distort it while helping the poor. The Church has been doing this since the beginning. If you recall in the Acts of the Apostles, the early Church was helping widows and orphans and spreading the Gospel, while at the same time, working out the issue of circumcision before baptism for Gentiles amongst other doctrinal points (the council of Jerusalem). This is really nothing new.
Truth and Love are the same person – Jesus Christ. You can’t focus on one aspect of Christ and deny another at the same time. You’ll end up in trouble.