Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: CynicalBear; metmom; boatbums; caww; presently no screen name; HarleyD; Lera; editor-surveyor; ...
I am not sure about stronger, but some will get desperate. i used to debate a zealous RCA who ended up hosting his own radio show, and he threatened vengeance on a certain pastor and others who opposed Rome, as if he was one of the two prophets of Revelation.

Not the norm by any means, yet i think it is also a fantasy that Rome's change of demeanor from the past is mainly the result of superior enlightenment rather than necessity. If powerful Catholic monarchies still were the norm and were free to enforce submission to Rome, and which Rome required under penalty of excommunication and deposition, then believers such us would have about as much freedom as in China, or less.

Note that early Prots had much to unlearn from the world and from Rome. And Baptist-purist Roger Williams had to flee from the very committed Puritans who wanted a new Jerusalem, with no real dissent.

Now we face the problem of becoming too much like this society, while in the past the church much became like empire in which it was found, and later governments, including its means of warfare (in contrast to the NT church), and even expanded upon them, yet it seems ecclesiastical courts were overall considered preferable to secular counterparts.

"The Church has the right,..to admonish or warn its members, ecclesiastical or lay, who have not conformed to its laws and also, if needful to punish them by physical means, that is, coercive jurisdiction." - Catholic encyclopedia, Jurisdiction (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08567a.htm)

Innocent’s Bull prescribes that captured heretics, being "murderers of souls as well as robbers of God’s sacraments and of the Christian faith, . . . are to be coerced – as are thieves and bandits – into confessing their errors and accusing others, although one must stop short of danger to life or limb." — Bull Ad Extirpanda (Bullarium Romanorum Pontificum, vol. 3 [Turin: Franco, Fory & Dalmazzo, 1858], Lex 25, p. 556a.) (http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt119.html)

Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus (of Errors): "[It is error to believe that] The (Catholic) Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect." Section V, Errors Concerning the Church and Her Rights, #24. (http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P9SYLL.HTM)

A History of Christianity by Roman Catholic Paul Johnson

In the 1180s, the Church began to panic at the spread of heresy, and thereafter it took the lead from the State, though it maintained the legal fiction that convicted and unrepentant heretics were merely 'deprived of the protection of the Church', which was (as they termed it) 'relaxed', the civil power then being free to burn them without committing mortal sin. Relaxation was accompanied by a formal plea for mercy; in fact this was meaningless, and the individual civil officer (sheriffs and so forth) had no choice but to burn, since otherwise he was denounced as a 'defender of heretics', and plunged into the perils of the system himself.

The codification of legislation against heresy took place over half a century, roughly 1180-1230, when it culminated in the creation of a permanent tribunal, staffed by Dominican friars, who worked from a fixed base in conjunction with the episcopate, and were endowed with generous authority.

The permanent system was designed as a reform; in fact it incorporated all the abuses of earlier practice and added new ones. It had a certain vicious logic. Since a heretic was denied burial in consecrated ground, the corpses of those posthumously convicted (a very frequent occurrence) had to be disinterred, dragged through the streets and burnt on the refuse pit. The houses in which they lived had to be knocked down and turned into sewers or rubbish-dumps.

Convictions of thought-crimes being difficult to secure, the Inquisition used procedures banned in other courts, and so contravened town charters, written and customary laws, and virtually every aspect of established jurisprudence. The names of hostile witnesses were withheld, anonymous informers were used, the accusations of personal enemies were allowed, the accused were denied the right of defence, or of defending counsel; and there was no appeal. The object, quite simply, was to produce convictions at any cost; only thus, it was thought, could heresy be quenched. Hence depositors were not named; all a suspect could do was to produce a list of his enemies, and he was allowed to bring forward witnesses to testify that such enemies existed, but for no other purpose. On the other hand, the prosecution could use the evidence of criminals, heretics, children and accomplices, usually forbidden in other courts.

Once an area became infected by heresy, and the system moved in, large numbers of people became entangled in its toils. Children of heretics could not inherit, as the stain was vicarial; grandchildren could not hold ecclesiastical benefices unless they successfully denounced someone. Everyone from the age of fourteen (girls from twelve) were required to take public oaths every two years to remain good Catholics and denounce heretics. Failure to confess or receive communion at least three times a year aroused automatic suspicion; possession of the scriptures in any language, or of breviaries, hour-books and psalters in the vernacular, was forbidden.

Torture was not employed regularly until near the end of the thirteenth century (except by secular officials without reference to the Inquisition) but suspects could be held in prison and summoned again and again until they yielded, the object of the operation being to obtain admissions or denunciations. When torture was adopted it was subjected to canonical restraints - if it produced nothing on the first occasion it was forbidden to repeat it. But such regulations were open to glosses; Francis Pegna, the leading Inquisition commentator, wrote:

'But if, having been tortured reasonably (decenter), he will not confess the truth, set other sorts of torments before him, saying that he must pass through all these unless he will confess the truth. If even this fails, a second or third day may be appointed to him, either in terrorem or even in truth, for the continuation (not repetition) of torture; for tortures may not be repeated unless fresh evidence emerges against him; then, indeed, they may, for against continuation there is no prohibition.' ...

Where the system was employed against an entire community, as in Languedoc, it evoked resistance. There were riots, murders, the destruction of records. Many countries would not admit the Inquisition at all. In Spain, however, it became a state instrument, almost a national institution, like bullfighting, a mystery to foreigners but popular among the natives. It is surprising how often admirable, if eccentric, individuals were burned, not only without public protest but with general approval. Thus the fourteenth century breakaway movement of Franciscans, the fraticelli, who opposed clerical property and reasserted the apostolic practices of their founder, were hunted and burned all over Europe but especially in their native Umbria and the Mark of Ancona; the crowds who watched them destroyed were apathetic or inclined to believe antinomianism was rightly punished. In the Middle Ages, the ruthless and confident exercise of authority could nearly always swing a majority behind it. And the victims of the flames usually died screaming in pain and terror, thus appearing to confirm the justice of the proceedings. — More: Paul Johnson, History of Christianity , © 1976 Athenium, pgs. 253-255.

http://baltimore-catechism.com/lesson12.htm:

Q. 539. What do we mean by the "temporal power" of the Pope?

A. By the temporal power of the Pope we mean the right which the Pope has as a temporal or ordinary ruler to govern the states and manage the properties that have rightfully come into the possession of the Church.

Q. 540. How did the Pope acquire and how was he deprived of the temporal power?

A. The Pope acquired the temporal power in a just manner by the consent of those who had a right to bestow it. He was deprived of it in an unjust manner by political changes.

78. “[It is error to believe that] Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship.” -- Allocution "Acerbissimum," Sept. 27, 1852. Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus (of Errors), Issued in 1864, Section X (http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm)

"....Constitutions can be changed, and non-Catholic sects may decline to such a point that the political proscription [ban] of them may become feasible and expedient. What protection would they have against a Catholic state?" -The State and the Church (1922), pp.38,39, by Miller and John A. Ryan, imprimatur of Cardinal Hayes. (http://www.remnantofgod.org/nl990406.htm)

“If counterfeiters of money or other criminals are justly delivered over to death… much more can heretics, after they are convicted of heresy, be not only forthwith excommunicated, but as surely put to death.” – Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 2a, 2ae, qu. Xi, art. III. [but who was himself excommunicated after he died, then later reinstated by high authorities]

In regard to ecclesiastical jurisdiction in criminal matters the Church exercised jurisdiction at first only in purely ecclesiastical offences, and inflicted only ecclesiastical punishments, e.g. excommunication, and in the case of clerics deposition. The observance of these penalties had to be left to the conscience of the individual. But with the formal recognition of the Church by the State and the increase of ecclesiastical penalties proportioned to the increase of ecclesiastical offences, came an appeal from the Church to the secular arm for aid in enforcing the said penalties, which aid was always willingly granted... In punishing offences of a purely ecclesiastical character the Church disposed unreservedly of the aid of the State for the execution of the penalty. — Catholic encyclopedia Jurisdiction (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08567a.htm)

The modern position of Rome can be seen here by way of contrast with the former.

7 posted on 02/01/2013 5:47:08 PM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: daniel1212
Brother Dan- You Okay?

This is about a village or group who are not christian acting. Sad for the victims.

"as if he was one of the two prophets of Revelation. Not the norm by any means, yet i think it is also a fantasy that Rome's change of demeanor from the past is mainly the result of superior enlightenment rather than necessity. If powerful Catholic monarchies still were the norm and were free to enforce submission to Rome, and which Rome required under penalty of excommunication and deposition, then believers such us would have about as much freedom as in China, or less."

You Think thus it is?

Fantasy?

Like your not purveyor of Fantasy?

I think your all Romed Out.

Lions, Tigers and Rome......

What next Vatican issued Rifles?

You lawyered up all your words for this?

Wow!

10 posted on 02/01/2013 10:32:03 PM PST by johngrace (I am a 1 John 4! Christian- declared at every Sunday Mass , Divine Mercy and Rosary prayers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson