[ Having devoted so many posts to it already,
I might as well stick to this week's "opinion"
theme in my last post of the week. ]

My recent rant about "reprehensible reporting"
reminded me of my studies into the history of
the Cathars and the Albigensian Crusade and
"Saint" Dominic. And that reminded me of a
resource that I had used earlier in my
research: The Catholic Encyclopedia.

Some years ago, back in Santa Fe, I had occasion
to look up the three subjects above, and was
shocked to find what the official encyclopedia
of the Catholic Church had to say about them. In
each entry they were "toeing the Party Line."

There was a brief, two-line description of the
Cathars that included no mention of the fact that
the Catholic Church created one Crusade and the
Inquisition to "deal with them," and as a result
exterminated a possible quarter of a million fellow
Christians. There was a somewhat longer entry for
the Albigensian Crusade, again portraying the
victims of that Crusade as "heretics" who were
"dealt with swiftly" and after that ceased to be
a problem to the Church. The entry on "Saint"
Dominic failed to mention that he had been one
of the forces that created the Inquisition and
the Albigensian Crusade to exterminate the
Cathars and that he was a certifiable lunatic.

Curious, I just went back to the online version of
the Catholic Encyclopedia today, to see if they
had updated these entries.

They have. There are no entries for any of the
three subjects. One cannot find an entry for the
Cathars, for the Albigensian Crusade, or (and most
interesting) "Saint" Dominic, founder of the
Inquisition and the Dominican Order. Go figure.

Thus the title in the Subject line: "History is
written by the winners."

The Catholic Church "won." And their "history" in
the last eight centuries has been to downplay the
real events of the 12th and 13th centuries and
portray them in the most favorable light possible.
Now, in the 21st century, their approach seems to
be to pretend that these events *never happened*.

That is one of the reasons I like Fairfield Life.

Someday, someone is going to write the history of
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and the TM movement.
If it fails in its goals, that history is going to be
written by people who characterize Maharishi and
those who followed him blindly as well-meaning
but ineffectual fools. If it succeeds in its goals, and
someday everyone really is levitating and living in
a world of peace and prosperity, that history is
going to characterize all of the True Believers as
saints, and all of the critics as heretics and
deluded fools who missed the boat. And one of
these stories will become "history."

At that point, if the Internet still exists and an
archive of Fairfield Life still exists, that may be
one of the only places where people of that future
time can go to see BOTH SIDES OF
THE STORY.

They won't have to read the "history" written by the
"winners," whoever they turn out to be. They can
read the day-by-day discussions here and DECIDE
FOR THEMSELVES what the "story" was.

And -- however it all turns out -- I think that's
a pretty neat thing, and that Rick should be praised
for having created a kind of "living history" that
will preserve both sides, despite the eventual efforts
of the "winners" to preserve only one of them.




Reply via email to