M
- Status
S
SFLCatholic
Guest
Where do you get your info? Chick Tracts?
M
Montalban
Guest
What’s a Chick Tracts? Has it anything to do with women?
S
SFLCatholic
Guest
Your cheap “formum” remark makes me think I hit a nerve with you by posting this article. Hmmmm…
As to the other, it has everything to do with the subject at hand. Its all about fighting Protestant bigotry towards Catholics.
I am glad my reaction is typical. Its what I am supposed to do. And I do willingly in defense of the One True Faith.
Makes me think of Paul’s missives to continue in defense of the One True Faith regardless of the persecution. I will take that as a compliment.
I like exposing misinformed Christians like yourself. You are propogating a defective form of Christianity. You lead believers from the One True Faith by doing so.
The saving Grace is that you are here on these forums learning the Truth and correcting your errors. We will help you. Gal 6:1.
Let me be the first to welcome you to becoming Catholic. Welcome aboard!
Whoops…I just noticed you are orthodox…regardless, I still like to expose anti-Catholicism
S
SFLCatholic
Guest
Typos have nothing to do with this postSO if you point out a mistake I make, it’s not mocking. But if I point out your mistakes, it is!
Ouch!
That’s mere projection on your part, as noted above where you react with vitriol when I point out your mistakes. I didn’t do the same, when you pointed out mine
You took much exception to a simple spelling error being pointed out.
You made an issue too, when you felt I hadn’t responded to you in a time you deemed appropriate… noting I’d not replied in something like 10 minutes to your post. You mentioned this on a public forum for all to see. And as I note, you then project that I’m angry!
S
SFLCatholic
Guest
Its a venomous hate-filled cartoon with absurd Catholic falsities passed off as evangelical Christianity.What’s a Chick Tracts? Has it anything to do with women?
chick.com/default.asp
You really don’t know what it is? After all the posts you have put on here?
D
dosdog
Guest
Sure how about the Reformers viewSo you’re another absolutely not interested in debate?
Theodore of Beza wrote: “What crime can be greater or more heinous than heresy, which sets at nought the word of God and all ecclesiastic discipline? Christian magistrates, do your duty to God [speaking in Calvin’s Geneva of 1554], who has put the sword into your hands for the honor of His majesty; strike valiantly these monsters in the guise of men.” He went on to characterize those who demanded freedom of conscience “worse than the tyranny of the pope. It is better to have a tyrant, no matter how cruel he may be, than to let everyone do as he pleases.”
Calvin sought to persecute heretics (particularly Roman Catholics) so as to keep Protestant believers in the lands divided by the Reformation faithful to his new teachings. He viciously persecuted the Spaniard, Michael Servetus, having him burnt alive on October 27, 1553. As early as 1545, Calvin had written, “If he [Servetus] comes to Geneva, I will never allow him to depart alive.” He kept his promise.
Martin Luther also fanned the flames of intolerance, “Whoever teaches otherwise than I teach, condemns God, and must remain a child of hell.”
biblia.com/christianity/inquisition.htm
The Lutherans proclaimed in full synod:
“The Zwinglians . . . we do not even grant to them a place in the church, far from recognizing as brethren, a set of people, whom we see agitated by the spirit of lying, and uttering blasphemies against the Son of Man.” (113;v.1:466)
The Zwinglians believed that the Eucharist was wholly symbolic (probably the majority position of Protestants today). Hence, whoever believes the same would have had the foregoing said about them by Dr. Luther, who firmly held to Consubstantiation, i.e., the actual Body and Blood of Christ is present in the communion along with the bread and wine.
- Luther on Protestant “Heretics”
“Heresiarchs . . . remain obdurate in their own conceit. They allow none to find fault with them and brook no opposition. This is the sin against the Holy Ghost for which there is no forgiveness.” (51;v.6:282/24) “Those are heretics and apostates who follow their own ideas rather than the common tradition of Christendom, who . . . out of pure wantonness, invent new ways and methods.” (51;v.6:282-3/25)
“In his frame of mind it became at last an impossibility for him to realise that his hostility and intolerance towards `heretics’ within his fold could redound on himself.” (51;v.6:283) “We must needs decry the fanatics as damned . . . They actually dare to pick holes in our doctrine; ah, the scoundrelly rabble do a great injury to our Evangel.” (51; v.6:289/26) “I am on the heels of the Sacramentaries (27) and the Anabaptists; . . . I shall challenge them to fight; and I shall trample them all underfoot.” (46:86)
catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/protin.htm
- Conclusion (Will Durant)
P
Petergee
Guest
And faithful Catholics then and now are equally if not more concerned by this conduct which was totally contrary to their mission, deliberately disobedient to the direct orders of the Pope NOT to attack Constantinople or any other Christians, and for which the pope immediately excommunicated them and for which Catholics have been continually apologising for 800 years. Yet for some reason you still demand yet more apologies.
I hope you’re not seriously trying to imply that when EO leaders and their armies fought to liberate Eastern Europe from Turkish rule, that EO bishops and patriarchs did NOT bless their armed struggle and view it as a holy war?
You also seem unaware that for most of history, in addition to its spiritual role, the Holy See played a political role similar to the role which the UN plays today - often ignored, but the only supra-national authority capable of bringing some type or order, control and moral force over the conduct of international affairs, to prevent a chaotic and bloody might-makes-right world order. Thus Urban II’s authorisation of Christian kings and knights to take their troops on the First Crusade to liberate the Holy Land from its oppressive conquerors may be viewed as similar to the UN’s authorisation of its member states to send troops to liberate Kuwait from Saddam’s forces.
You also seem bemused by the fact that military orders like the Templars (so called because their original charge was to protect the site of the Temple in Jerusalem) took religious-type vows of membership. This may seem an odd type of oganisation from the POV of our 21st century culture, but it was probably an appropriate and necessary type of institution for its own time. People of medieval times would probably find the concept of many of our modern Church-affiliated organisations (Opus Dei, the Catholic Worker movement, Teams of Our Lady, to name just a few) very strange from their idea of what a typical “church organisation” is.
Yes I found it very interesting too. I hope you study it carefully. (I hope “interesting” is not a sneaky way of saying you don’t think it’s true, without actually saying it so we can’t call your bluff. I apologise if I have misconstrued you on this.)
As for the rest of your ramblings, I can’t work out what your actual objection to the Church’s conduct is.
J
jpaul
Guest
Brother,
Peace and all-good!
You may open the Catholic Education Research Center (www.catholiceducation.org) for more insights on the Inquisition.
Ave Maria!
jpaul
J
jpaul
Guest
Peace and all-good!
He was Rabbi Israel Zolli. The chief rabbi of Rome. He converted to Catholicism in 1945. According to Rabbi Zolli, "I am convinced that after this war, the only means of withstanding the forces of destruction and of undertaking the reconstruction of Europe will be the acceptance of Catholicism."
Ave Maria!
jpaul
M
Montalban
Guest
Yes, that does say a lot about your thinking!
Which has nothing to do with the Crusades, Inquisition and Jews.
But defending one’s faith by going off on a tangent to attack other people’s is not a good device.
Take it anyway you wish, but up till this point you’ve still added nothing to this thread.
And so you go on, waxing lyrically, you’re own little crusade, and an insight into your thinking (or projecting) and rationalising why you’re attacking others, rather than deal with this thread.
M
Montalban
Guest
Neither do attacks on Protestants.
Weigh up who’s worse, me pointing out a few silly mistakes or someone ranting in what’s at best an attempt at ‘you too’ logical fallacy
M
Montalban
Guest
You’re not debating. Constructing a series of logical stances, based on evidence is different from your posts - which are quote mines.
M
Montalban
Guest
Certainly not. I’ve never heard of Chick Tracts.
M
Montalban
Guest
How were these leaders punished? (for disobeying the Pope). What spoils from Constantinople that adorn St. Marks in Venice are you not aware of?
I don’t demand more apologies at all.
EO bishops may have blessed the armies, I’m not sure, but it seems a thing that they’d do. However saying “I pray for you in your endeavour” is far different from saying “I will organise special fighting units for you…” etc. etc.
The parallel is false. The Vatican was a soverign state. The UN is not. The Vatican (Papal States) fought wars for their own preservation, and for the expansion of their power. The UN (as far as I’m aware) does not. Your Papal States were often agressors.
What I find ‘bemusing’ is your continual down-playing of the involvement in the church - here to one of simply ‘religious-type vows’
No. Hence I juxtaposed this with the Orthodox view AT THAT TIME
This is false. Lay groups have long been in existence.
You call my posts ramblings!
You’re not sure whether your wanting to say the church was involved, or not. You downplay the ivolvement to mere vow-taking! You ignore the fact of the Papal States waging war. etc. 
B
bobzills
Guest
I don’t see how anyone in his right mind could possibly be proud of the Fourth Crusade.
I
Imagine23
Guest
I think Petergee is being facetious.
M
Montalban
Guest
Indeed. It’s a typical apology that they disobeyed the Pope.
What’d the all-supreme pontiff do? Did he excommunicate them all for their disobedience? Did he order the stolen goods (that still adorn St. Marks in Venice) to be sent back?
J
jpaul
Guest
Peace and all-good!
In his own words, Rabbi Zolli said, "I do feel the duty of rendering homage and of affirming that the charity of the Gospel was the light that showed the way to my old and weary heart. It is the charity that so often shines in the history of the Church and which radiated fully in the actions of the reigning Pontiff."
Is anybody’s opinion still necessary for clarity? For sure, the Fundamentalist protestants will distort the plain truth as they always did with the Holy Scriptures and on the facts of Inquisition.
Ave Maria!
jpaul
P
Petergee
Guest
As I have said repeatedly they were immediately excommunicated - the most severe punishment the Church can give.
To the best of my knowledge the Popes have never controlled Venice, and at that time the Venetian Republic was the most powerful country in Christendom. If the popes had asked the Venetian Republic (or the Italian Republic today) to return objects to Constantinople as a token of the Church’s regret about the actions of some Venetian Catholics, we all know what the answer would be. And why you would want these objects “returned” to the Islamic republic of Turkey is beyond me.
Then why are you demanding reparations?
And you think Urban II organised special fighting units for the kings who fought the Crusades? Boy have you been fed some misinformation.
Oh yes it is, according to international law.
True but irrelevant.
False.
False.
I have not downplayed it at all, let alone “continually”.
O…K. So it was evil for the Pope to bless warriors in the 11th-13th centuries, but it was good and right for the EO patriarchs and bishops to bless warriors in the 19th-20th centuries. er, right.
Not anything like the ones I mentioned, or many more modern Catholic organisations. Perhaps you are unaware of the types of organisations in the Church.
Yeah I try to be charitable.You call my posts ramblings!
I’m absolutely sure and as I said I don’t downplay it at all. I don’t know where you get that allegation.
You ignore the fact of the Papal States waging war. etc.
This thread has three subjects, each one of them a massive topic on its own. Yet you condemn me for not bringing in a fourth subject and accuse me of “ignoring” it. I can only conclude you’re just trying to muddy the waters as much as possible.- Status