Talk:Brethren of the Free Spirit

Christianity: Theology / Catholicism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Catholic Church portal This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Mid-importance).

Initial entry[edit]

This entry was made about the Heresy of the Free Spirit to better understand the heresy and the Christian church’s reaction to it. In addition, to point out that the Church's reaction to heresy in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries was connected to the witchcraft persecution of the fifteenth century.

overhaul needed[edit]

We need a rewrite, I think. It's obviously got material mixed up from the Brethren of the Free Spirit. The facts here are out - for instance, the heresy of the Free Spirit was not just about a small group of Bohemians as the article currently states. It was more widespread. For example M.Porete (a french woman) pre-dates Eckhardt, and exctracts from her book were subsequently used by the church in combatting this heresy. The book was also very popular and translated into other languages, e.g. several different fifteenth century English MSS have been found. I am going to put a dispute template on, since "the Heresy of the Free Spirit" is current syllabus at theological colleges and seminaries, and this article is currently very misleading. Oliver Low (talk) 04:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scriptural Justification[edit]

I found this in the First Epistle of St John -

"Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as He is pure. Whosoever commiteth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins: and in him is no sin. Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him."

Perhaps this began the theological position of this movement. There are huge parallels between this Christian movement and the early Christian Gnostics. The idea that the Resurrection had or could happen in this world is found in the Nag Hammadi manucscripts. ThePeg 20:06, 30 December 2006 (UTC) "

In Favor of Merging?[edit]

Yes, this definitely looks like something which should be merged with Brethren of the Free Spirit. This particular article does not seem fully neutral, but could be merged in an appropriately neutral way with the "Brethren" article. Who's up for it? KRhodesian 16:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)KRhodesian[reply]

I think the two articles are quite different. The Brethren of the Free Spirit was a group of people, and the heresy of the Free Spirit is a set of ideas, merging the articles would be like merging the articles Hegelianism and Karl Marx.

I think the problem is that Heresy of the Free Spirit is currently in a poor state, and large chunks of Brethren of the Free Spirit belong in the former article. Oliver Low (talk) 02:39, 24 June 2009 (UTC) After 6 months of nobody disagreerig with my last, I am removing the merge template. Oliver Low (talk) 03:52, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there really that thick a line between the ideas and the movement that follows it? It could be a case-by-case basis, but in this case I don't see enough of a difference to justify two separate articles. Unless there is a major objection, I am probably going to make this an official merge request. (And you don't have to disagree that they should be merged to object to the proposal, only if you object so strongly that you don't think there should be an official discussion). Thanks, Fractalchez (talk) 07:06, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Brethren of the Free Spirit ??[edit]

Merge with Brethren of the Free Spirit ??

- 179.210.192.170 (talk) 18:05, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Closing, given the lack of support over 2 years and no case made (noting also the earlier decision to improve rather than merge). Klbrain (talk) 12:43, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

Requested move 27 September 2018[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved as proposed. After extended discussion, the conversation is not exactly straightforward, but it is clear that most participants agree that a change in title is due. With respect to the concern that the edit history underlying the target page will be lost, I will address that by moving the existing redirect, with its edit history, to the alternative proposed title, Free Spirit (religious movement). bd2412 T 21:09, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Heresy of the Free Spirit → Brethren of the Free Spirit – The Brethren of the Free Spirit were considered a heresy only from the point of view of the Catholic Church. There were two articles, one named "Brethren of the Free Spirit" and another called "Heresy of the Free Spirit." There was a Merge discussion which closed in November 2017. Since then the "Brethren of the Free Spirit" article has been deleted. To conform with Wikipedia Neutral point of view, the article should be renamed as Brethren of the Free Spirit. Epinoia (talk) 21:06, 27 September 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:14, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't been deleted, just merged and redirected. Its history is here. The proposed move, however, will have the effect of deleting it. A better neutral title than that proposed might be 'movement of the Free Spirit'. Srnec (talk) 00:25, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The very first reference indicates that "the so-called “heresy of the free spirit” never actually existed, even in the early fourteenth century, at least not in the form of specific doctrines promoted by any organised body, still less by any sect and least of all by the Beguines or Beghards." Maybe the article should surface this more prominently, but it sounds like there was no such thing as a Brethern of the Free Spirit, and this was solely a term invented by the Church to accuse people they didn't like of - aka it really was strictly a heresy from the Church standpoint, and never a group or a religion. Nobody was standing up and saying "Yes, I really am a Free Spiriter" in other words. That leads me to have some skepticism... unless these two historians are just off the reservation. Is there anything more from sources on this angle? It might affect the article title.... SnowFire (talk) 01:20, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SnowFire, even though the Free Spirits may not have been a defined group, they have been referred to as Brethren of the Free Spirit, and were so at the time. Pope Boniface IX had a report from the Inquisition which mentioned Brethren and Schwestrionen (Schwestern des freien Geistes = Sisters of the Free Spirit) (E.H. Broadbent, The Pilgrim Church, 1931). I believe the article title should conform to the way they are named in the literature. Epinoia (talk) 03:22, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the problem is that the literature in the sources cited includes "The Heresy of the Free Spirit in the Late Middle Ages", which granted, was written in 1973, but. Also, sadly nothing on Google Books for either it or "The Harvest of Mysticism in Medieval Germany", so hard to check myself. Anyway, call it an extremely weak support, suppose we can always move it back later, but the fact that it's entirely possible this really was only a "heresy" and not an actual group should be prominently mentioned in the lede, IMO. SnowFire (talk) 23:56, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good points - perhaps the article should be entitled Free Spirit (Religious movement) to get away from the Brethren problem and disambiguate from other Free Spirit uses - Brethren seems to be an umbrella term applied to many religious groups who sought a return to the purity of the early church, after the "brethren of the Lord" referred to in 1 Corinthians 9:5. The lede could be rewritten along the lines of (just a draft, not a final version):

Free Spirits, also known as Brethren of the Free Spirit, was a term applied in the 13th century to those, primarily in the Low Countries, Germany, France, Bohemia and northern Italy, who believed that the sacraments were unnecessary for salvation, that the soul could be perfected through imitating the life of Christ, and that the perfected soul was free of sin and beyond all ecclesiastical, moral and secular law. The Brethren of the Free Spirit do not appear to have been an organized group, but a set of beliefs deemed heretical by the Catholic Church.^[1]

- Epinoia (talk) 00:54, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(de-indent) I would have no objection to (religious movement) as disambiguator. SnowFire (talk) 13:46, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- ok, then we need someone to close the discussion so the move can be made to Free Spirit (Religious movement) - Epinoia (talk) 15:44, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I object to Free Spirit (religious movement) as a non-improvement over the current title. I do not believe that "heresy" has the POV problems in this historical context that others think it does. Srnec (talk) 03:05, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- check Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch - one of the words in the Contentious labels section is "heretic" - those who held Free Spirit beliefs did not regard themselves a heretics, it is a label applied only by the Catholic Church - to achieve a Neutral Point of View WP:NPOV we need to remove the pejorative label of "heresy" from the article title - other historical religious movements such as the Cathars, Gnostics, Waldensians, etc., were considered heretical by the Catholic Church, but we don't refer to them as the Heresy of Catharism, or the Heresy of Gnositcism, or the Heresy of the Waldensians - in the same way, we should not refer to the Free Spirits as the Heresy of the Free Spirit - none of the other Wikipedia articles on groups considered heretical by the Catholic Church, from Montanism to the Reformation have the word "Heresy" in the article name - to be consistent, we should follow those precedents and remove it from the title of this article as well - noting in the article that the Free Spirits were considered heretical by the Catholic Church is fine, but the word "Heresy" should not be in the article title - Epinoia (talk) 04:04, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We need to stick to reliable sources, and they use "heresy" plenty. I do not object to the original proposal. Alternatives to brethren include 'movement' (as I already said) and 'doctrine'. What I object to is "Free Spirit (religious movement)" since (1) natural disambiguation is available and is to be preferred and (2) "Free Spirit" is not the name of a religious movement. Srnec (talk) 06:11, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– Free Spirit defaults to a disambiguation page Free Spirit – I still prefer Brethren of the Free Spirit as that is how they were known historically and how they are commonly referred to – it is not clear if the modern position that they were not a distinct group is a consensus view among scholars or the opinion of only a few – if “Free Spirit (Religious movement)” is problematic, perhaps we can find some other descriptive term:

Believers in the Free Spirit
Adherents of the Free Spirit
Followers of the Free Spirit
Medieval Free Spirits
Free Spirits (13th Century)
Free Spirits (Medieval religious faction)
Free Spirit (Medieval religious beliefs)
Free Spirit (Medieval religious ideology)
Free Spirit (Medieval religious conviction)
Free Spirits (Medieval religious dissenters) – problematic due to later Protestant Dissenters
Free Spirits (Medieval religious radicals)
Free Spirits (Medieval religious non-conformists) – problematic due to later Protestant Non-Conformists

- cheers - Epinoia (talk) 16:09, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance we can move forward on this and remove the pejorative term "Heresy" from the article's title? Brethren of the Free Spirit would be best as that is how they are most often referred to; the article states, "Adherents were called Free Spirits or the Brethren of the Free Spirit." - Free Spirits (Religious movement) is acceptable - "movement" does not have to imply an organized group, it can be a loose association, like a Grassroots Movement - cheers - Epinoia (talk) 14:57, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

References

^ Both Robert E. Lerner, The Heresy of the Free Spirit in the Late Middle Ages, (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1972) and Malcolm Lambert, Medieval Heresy, 2nd edn, (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992) agree that the so-called “heresy of the free spirit” never actually existed, even in the early fourteenth century, at least not in the form of specific doctrines promoted by any organised body, still less by any sect and least of all by the Beguines or Beghards.

[1] Both Robert E. Lerner, The Heresy of the Free Spirit in the Late Middle Ages, (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1972) and Malcolm Lambert, Medieval Heresy, 2nd edn, (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992) agree that the so-called “heresy of the free spirit” never actually existed, even in the early fourteenth century, at least not in the form of specific doctrines promoted by any organised body, still less by any sect and least of all by the Beguines or Beghards.

[1]