Talk:Cathar Perfect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Christianity (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


I've added a little extra detail. I will add some references soon. ThePeg 18:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


There's not much in the Perfecti article which isn't in this one. Would a redirect be appropriate? I'll add the detail about the demi-angelic status of the Perfecti to this one. ThePeg 10:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


Merging sounds like a good idea. I believe that this article twice introduces a mistake. I don't believe that there was anything such as a "spritual prefecture", they were priests full stop. I doubt that the roots of perfecti and prefecture are the same. Merging or not, I propose to delete:

or member of the spiritual prefecture
into the prefecture of his or her fellow Perfecti

Or can someone point me to a reference to the "prefecture"?--Joel Mc 10:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Where does this article mention 'prefecture'? And the Cathar 'Parfaits' or 'Good Christians' were never Priests as well as never Prefects. ThePeg (talk) 15:59, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

It was in this draft: [1] I deleted it as I mentioned above.--Joel Mc (talk) 16:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes I see. I didn't write that draft. What exists now is pretty much my overhauling of that version. Thanks for the clarification. ThePeg (talk) 12:52, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Elite is a problem[edit]

There seems to be an irrational insistence upon referring to the "Parfaits" in this entry as "elite". That is an oxymoron, and I think the Cathar community would be aghast at the use of that term. Why not replace it with the correct term, monks?

To be monks they would have had to live in monasteries, which they didn't. They would have been closer to Friars, but they weren't those either, as Friars emerged in the wake of the Cathars. Parfaits were not contemplatives only, as monks are, but also actives, following the instructions of the Gospels to go among the people and heal them. I don't see how 'monks' can be regarded as 'the correct term'. It was not used by them and has never been used in this context in any historical source I have ever encountered.

In the end, all attempts to define the Cathars in terms of conventional Christianity are doomed to failure as they simpler were not like that, the parallels are not there. People have a tendency to refer to Cathar Bishops, for instance, which is also completely misleading and has quite the wrong connotations. They Parfaits were 'elite' in the sense of having acheived a form of spiritual perfection, but this does not mean that they regarded themselves as 'superior' to the Credentes. Far from it. They followed the Christian teachings of John's Last Supper and placed themselves at the foot of the table, as it were, regarding all humanity as equal. They never demanded the privileges we usually associate with elites.

We know that, like the Manicheans and the Valentinian Gnostics that the Cathar movement was differentiated between its Inner Circle and the majority of followers who were not expected to follow the austerest tenets of the faith. Those were arrived at after years of spiritual work and initiations, whether one was a Pneumatics (Valentinian Gnostic) a Speaker (Manicheanism) or a Parfait (Catharism). I don't see what is wrong with calling these 'elites', unless one only thinks of the term as referring to something contemptuous of anything that is not at the same level as itself, which is not true of the Parfaits." ThePeg (talk) 12:39, 6 June 2010 (UTC)***