Posted on 07/09/2015 8:03:43 PM PDT by Morgana
Don’t forget to read Salvation’s link to how Catholics and Protestants are ‘net even’ in the slaughter game.
I’m still trying to see how the Jews play “catch up.”
Another screed by vituperative Voris who seems afflicted by a myopic and biased view of history, which see Rome as the victim and longs for vengeance via a return to the "good ol days" under a Roman monarchy. There should be little doubt that under which he would support the means by which Rome acquired much property and goods.
Pope Innocent IV, Ad extirpanda, papal bull, promulgated on May 15, 1252, by Pope Innocent IV, which explicitly authorized (and defined the appropriate circumstances for) the use of torture by the Inquisition for eliciting confessions from heretics....
The bull conceded to the State a portion of the property to be confiscated from convicted heretics.[3] The State in return assumed the burden of carrying out the penalty. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_extirpanda
• Pope Innocent IV, Ad extirpanda:The head of state or ruler must force all the heretics whom he has in custody,{8} provided he does so without killing them or breaking their arms or legs, as actual robbers and murderers of souls and thieves of the sacraments of God and Christian faith, to confess their errors and accuse other heretics whom they know, and specify their motives, {9} and those whom they have seduced, and those who have lodged them and defended them,as thieves and robbers of material goods are made to accuse their accomplices and confess the crimes they have committed...
TThe head of state or ruler must divide up all the property of the heretics that is seized or discovered by the aforesaid officials, and the fines exacted from these heretics, in the form and manner following: one-third shall go to the government of the state or district. The second as a reward of the industry of the office shall go to the officials who handled this particular case. The third shall be deposited in some secure place to be kept by the aforesaid Diocesan bishop and inquisitors,and spent as they shall think fit to promote the faith and extirpate{11} heretics, this policy prevailing in spite of any statute that has been or shall be enacted against this dividing-up of the heretics' property. - http://userwww.sfsu.edu/%7Edraker/history/Ad_Extirpanda.html
Pope Innocent III, Cum ex Officii Nostri of 1207: In order altogether to remove the patrimony of St. Peter from heretics, we decree as a perpetual law, that whatsoever heretic, especially if he be a Patarene, shall be found therein, shall immediately be taken and delivered to the secular court to be punished according to the law. All his goods also shall be sold, so that he who took him shall receive one part; another shall go the court which convicted him, and the third shall be applied to the building of prisons in the country wherein he was taken. - Cum ex Officii Nostri Pope Innocent III, 1207, Inquisition, by Edward Peters, p. 49 review Living Tradition, Organ of the Roman Theological Forum
• Pope Paul IV, Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio of 1559: Thus We will and decree that the aforementioned sentences, censures and penalties be incurred without exception by all members of the following categories:
(i) Anysoever who, before this date, shall have been detected to have deviated from the Catholic Faith, or fallen into any heresy, or incurred schism, or provoked or committed either or both of these, or who have confessed to have done any of these things, or who have been convicted of having done any of these things...
all Kingdoms, Duchies, Dominions, Fiefs and goods of this kind shall be confiscated, made public and shall remain so, and shall be made the rightful property of those who shall first occupy them if these shall be sincere in faith, in the unity of the Holy Roman Church and under obedience to Us and to Our successors the Roman Pontiffs canonically entering office.
Canons of the Ecumenical Fourth Lateran Council, 1215: We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy that raises against the holy, orthodox and Catholic faith ...
Those condemned, being handed over to the secular rulers of their bailiffs, let them be abandoned, to be punished with due justice, clerics being first degraded from their orders. As to the property of the condemned, if they are laymen, let it be confiscated; if clerics, let it be applied to the churches from which they received revenues. But those who are only suspected, due consideration being given to the nature of the suspicion and the character of the person, unless they prove their innocence by a proper defense, let them be anathematized and avoided by all 1-intil they have made suitable satisfaction; but if they have been under excommunication for one year, then let them be condemned as heretics. — http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/lateran4.asp
Both sides? What sides? You mean a king who was more Catholic than Protestant and executed Catholics on one side and Lutherans on the other? For in reality he acted like a pope.
If he did convert at the end (Vorbis provides zero sources) than it was not from a faith many defend here.
So many Catholics don’t recall the Spanish Inquisition.I’m okay with the deaths of those Catholics because Catholics were okay with the deaths of those in Spain.
These kinds of discussions always strike me as a bit off. I am not saying that this side or that side did not do something wrong, or that Galileo wasn't mistreated, or that the Inquisition wasn't bad (perhaps horrible), or that Henry VIII wasn't a lecherous murderer, but it all misses the point a bit. People want so badly to see everything as a religious issue, and in so doing completely forget that they are also just people. History is not moved entirely by faith, or even largely in all honesty. In most events like these politics is the real mover rather than religious belief itself, and this is applicable to both sides. People kill people because they feel threatened by them, and when your religion is also part of the state apparatus, as it was most often back then, that means people will die for preaching "heresy." It happens, and religion is involved, but it hardly means that Protestantism teaches people to kill Catholics, or vice versa. It is just people doing what people do, and we really should keep that in mind. After all, all those Protestants who were killing Catholics in England under Henry VIII and his children were often born and raised as Catholics, and the Catholics returned the favour at the earliest opportunity.
HEY!!!!!
What are you doing on the RF making sense like that?!?!?!?!
Don’t you know that’s not allowed?
It’s in the RF Guidelines somewhere.
I’m sure I read it somewhere there in the past.... at one time.... maybe.....IIRC....
I think it’s this the sort of thing that makes the RF look bad. It’s not discussion about beliefs. or doctrine. It’s the accusations. It’s the “My religion is better than yours” and the “Your ancestors were worst than mine” stuff.
There was evil and inexcusable acts done by both sides and it’s always a power and control thing. And frequently, religion is used for the justification of it.
And it’s WRONG when done by both sides, and both sides need to admit their own culpability in it. Denying that the Catholic church played a role in the Inquisition, doesn’t convince anyone that they were innocent in it. History has that too well established.
It would be refreshing for a Catholic to admit that the church did it and said it was wrong for doing it.
But I thnik the thin that they fear is that by admitting that their church was wrong in one area means that they have to admit that it was wrong in other areas. And some Catholics simply cannot deal with that thought. So they over react and act like the jealous spouse who criticizes their spouse themselves, but heaven help the other person who makes the same criticism. They’ll rip them apart.
I don’t appreciate such language on the Religion Forum.
Heck; who DOES want to face the HORRORS that their chosen church has committed!?!?!
Or does the word DAMN cause a shiver down your spine?
How convenient!
No; it is a indication of the powerlessness of Catholicism to change lives!
When Luther points these sins out, Rome gets 'embarrassed' and creates the Counter Reformation to make it's red face cool off.
DUH!
I'll bet MOST of them would NOT think of using the word EMBARRASSED to describe it!
Why should Citizens in every country be taught to love the Lord and His Church every day. Why is it that some people do not love the Lord and do not study and obey the Magisterium? Because it's a heresy?
The tract was quoted; not the actual words of Jesus.
It was a commentary about the wolves.
SQUIRREL!
So true!
The Catholics HAVE learned the lesson well!
Well; for myself, I consider that my quantity doesn't lessen my quality of posting.
But that would be EMBARRASSING!
I received a lecture from a Catholic priest about Henry as a serial killer while standing in what's left of Glastonbury Abbey. It (the lecture) was pretty funny.
islamist facilitator?
I never cease to be amazed at how some here can go on and on about “Catholic bashing” whenever there is even the slightest bit of disagreement on tenets of the Christian faith, yet never seem to recognize when they do the exact same thing against non-catholic Christians. Apparently, it’s not bashing when they insist ONLY Catholics believe the correct things.
Funny how all that history is so easily swept under the rug.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/vituperative
vituperative
marked by harsh, spoken, or written abuse; abusive, often with ranting or railing
It does appear Voris is missing sight of the forest for all the trees.
What's missing also is the more modern (since Vatican II) Roman Catholic published viewpoints, as in spite of themselves (the Roman Catholic Church) thinking themselves The OTC (up one side and down any and all others -- find a new angle of any worth --- they rush to claim that, too) for the rest of Christianity to be "part of" or else "mysteriously" connected to themselves.
Which would leave Anglican Church property still property of the Church of God if we are to accept RCC definition of what Christ's own Church is comprised of, at least in that one small way, regardless if much of the rest of RC-centric claims are set aside, so what's he talkin' 'bout Willis, I would like to know?
Not really, I'd rather not be told over and again what the po' wittle willy woris-es of the World are blabbering on about, I think we already know all which we need to, of RadTrad parochialism. The near constant reminders do serve as a type of warning though (like the brightly marked creatures of the wild broadcast warning -- don't bite, i'm poison, i might bite you i'm venoumous?)
Dang that Vatican II. just dang it. it get's in the way of perfectly justified(?) rants.
here's a little song for wittle woris
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.