A
AquinasXVI
Guest
Allis:
And you believe this?
in XT.
And you believe this?
in XT.
- Status
K
katewithak
Guest
I see from your profile that you are a baptist. Could you look through your library and find a Catholic source documenting that Catholics should kill heretics? Enough Protestant sources exist already. I really think Baptists should use Catholic sources to back anti Catholic claims. Don’t you?
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
The comparison fails, because they did not claim to be:
- Holy
- the immaculate Bride of Christ
- founded by Jesus Christ
- the “one ark of salvation”
- indefectible
- One
- Catholic
- Apostolic
- the CC did, and does: so, if those claims are true, her behaviour does not exactly suggest that they are; and that is putting it mildly. She claims more - she claims infallibility in believing and in teaching. The Church acted for centuries on the assumption - or principle - that strong-arm tactics against those deemed unorthodox were justified and appropriate: the brutalities of 1400 years can’t be wished away to suit the needs of Catholic apologetics. Or do people not matter, in comparison with upholding theological claims ?
The Church cannot be defended by appeals to a lower moral standard than she claims to be faithful to. That is like defending a priest from accusations of child-abuse by pointing out that he is not a devil-worshipper. It’s a poor defence, because the Church and the clergy - and all Christians - are supposed to be, not simply free of monstrous crimes such as murder or genocide or satanolatry, but positively holy and recognisably like Christ.
And such a defence simply ignores the issue - for either the Church is answerable for her activities, to God if not to man, as much as any other group of human beings is: or she is not. And if she is, then tactics such as saying, “But X is ghastly too”, don’t show that she is innocent of all fault.
If the CC insists that the claims she makes for herself are true claims - and she does - then it makes no sense for her to complain when her teaching is taken seriously enough for her to be judged by it. If we insist all sorts of things are true, we can hardly complain when people treat us as though we believe the truth of what we insist is true. ##
K
katewithak
Guest
Gottle of Geer said:
What you say is true to a point Michael. But when discussing historical abuses, it is good to besure that your history is what it seems to be. That is my point. My point is not to say Protestants are ghastly too. My point is to clarify history as to why things happened and when. Our history books do present the biases of the writers.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
That was not persecution, for two reasons at least:
- The war did not have the support of all the Jews - Josephus, however sceptical one can be of his fairness in detail, does nothing to suggest that the Jews were not sharply divided. A better analogy with Catholic history might be with the sharp divisions between Catholics in Elizabethan England over the prudence or otherwise of encouraging Philip II of Spain to replace Elizabeth on the throne. Some Catholics were spies and traitors by any definition of the word.
- The Jews were rebels - no empire or state can survive if it allows its subjects or subject peoples to rebel, and takes no steps against rebellion. It’s not as though they were being harshly treated: on the contrary, Rome tried very hard to avoid treading on the religious sensibilities of the Jews. It was perfectly justified in taking the severe measures it did, both then, and in 115-117 when there was a massacre followed by a revolt; and then in 132 when the bar Kokhba rebellion began.
The reason I don’t agree, is that the Church is composed almost entirely of the laity. The clergy are simply one small part of it - though an important one; as are the others.
To argue that the laity are not members of the Church, amounts to suggesting that Church on earth is almost entirely invisible. If Catholics commit crimes, members of the Church are responsible - unless, of course, one is prepared to say the Catholic laity who do good, are not members of the Church
- if the laity are not members of the Church when they commit murder in Croatia, why are they members of the Church when they bury the dead in Rwanda ? People cannot be Catholics, or not be Catholics, by turns, in order to make it easier to acquit Catholics of evil-doing. If they are Catholics when they feed the hungry or evangelise unbelievers, they are still Catholics when they victimise Jews or Protestants. We cannot be the Church of St.Francis of Assisi, unless we are prepared to be the Church of Pope Alexander VI ##That is a great evil, because it sets earthly governments above the unity of Christians in Christ - a unity which was unbroken by political considerations in the first two or three centuries. As soon the Church made a devil’s bargain with Constantine, she doomed herself to be split up: for how can a Persian Catholic (say) fighting against the Christian Roman Emperor be said to love his brother in Christ serving in the Roman army, if he kills him ? Since when did love involve killing the one loved ? That is what politics has done for the Church 
How can it possibly be Christian, or even rational, for Catholics to urge on Catholics to kill Catholics ?
I
I_Leatherman
Guest
I suppose thats why we have an infallible Pope to lead the Church, he will not be allowed (literally) to teach false doctrine - since when is political wrangling a Catholic Doctrine that we must accept and believe, or war, oppression, and all the other ‘bad things’ committed in the Churchs name.
None of those evils are part of the Catholic Faith, they are the human solution to the problems of a more or less catholic person - even a Pope.
When St.Peter hacked off the guards ear with a sword it was the human response of one of the first catholics of the time.
But he wasnt beaten up because of it - just quietly corrected, and the human side of the Church is continuously being corrected ever since, quietly or otherwise.
None of those evils are part of the Catholic Faith, they are the human solution to the problems of a more or less catholic person - even a Pope.
When St.Peter hacked off the guards ear with a sword it was the human response of one of the first catholics of the time.
But he wasnt beaten up because of it - just quietly corrected, and the human side of the Church is continuously being corrected ever since, quietly or otherwise.
A
allischalmers
Guest
Hi ALL
Well you asked!
Thomas Aquinas (summa Theologica)
“If forgers and malefactors are put death by sacular power there is much more reason for excommunication and even putting to death of one convicted of heresy”
Pope leo Xlll (1810–1903)
“The death sentence is a necessary and efficacious means for the church to attain it’s end when rebels act against it and disturbers of the ecclesiastical unity, especially obstinate heretics and heresiarchs cannot be restrained by any other penalty from continuing to derange the ecclesiastical order and impelling others to all sorts of crime. When the perversity of one or several is calculated to bring about the ruin of many of it’s childern it is bound effectively to remove it, in such wise that if there be no other remedy for saving its people it CAN AND MUST PUT THESE WICKED MEN TO DEATH.”
convinced?
allischalmers
Well you asked!
Thomas Aquinas (summa Theologica)
“If forgers and malefactors are put death by sacular power there is much more reason for excommunication and even putting to death of one convicted of heresy”
Pope leo Xlll (1810–1903)
“The death sentence is a necessary and efficacious means for the church to attain it’s end when rebels act against it and disturbers of the ecclesiastical unity, especially obstinate heretics and heresiarchs cannot be restrained by any other penalty from continuing to derange the ecclesiastical order and impelling others to all sorts of crime. When the perversity of one or several is calculated to bring about the ruin of many of it’s childern it is bound effectively to remove it, in such wise that if there be no other remedy for saving its people it CAN AND MUST PUT THESE WICKED MEN TO DEATH.”
convinced?
allischalmers
K
katewithak
Guest
Your source please? Or let me make it more clear to you. We would need to read these statements in context, which they are not, and know where you found these statements written so that we may also go and view them. Thank you.
N
NiceFundamental
Guest
I just did a web search and found various links, credible or not I have not determined.
First quote:
ccel.org:5880/search?a=advanced_search&authorID=aquinas&bookID=summa&q=If+forgers+and+malefactors+are+put+death+by+sacular+power+there+is+much+more+reason+for+excommunication+and+even+putting+to+death+of+one+convicted+of+heresy
Second quote:
buffaloatheists.com/quotes.htm
positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/scar_l.htm
kithrup.com/dkm/dkmnonfic/quotd.asc
word-gems.com/tyranny.html
One refers to “Book of Canon Law,” Preface, Volume 2, by M. de Luca, Society of Jesus 1901
Again, I am interested to see if these quotes can be validated or discredited. I look forward to future posts. I could not find any Catholic sites.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
No hits.
No offering of source.
"Pope Leo XIII, advocating death to all heretics and teachers of false doctrine – showing that the end justifies the means even in the twentieth century, in Lloyd M. Graham, Deceptions and Myths of the Bible (1975), p. 468, quoted from Helen Ellerbe, The Dark Side of Christian History.
A review of this book. I can find no rference to papal documents (and there would be one) to show that this is a factual quote.
I searched the Vatican document archive diligently and there is no such document…therefore no such quote.
One refers to “Book of Canon Law,” Preface, Volume 2, by M. de Luca, Society of Jesus 1901I searched all over and there is no such book and no references that can be verified.
Well, you can lay all that pack of lies to rest. Since none of this can be verified, one has to conclude that the assertion is false and that the “quote” is a fabrication.
The question that remains for non-Catholics who have believed this is “Just how much more misinformation have I been fed about the Catholic Church, and why would someone do that?”
Pax vobiscum,
N
NiceFundamental
Guest
Church Militant:
Satan, as we all know, is the master of deception so if these are indeed false, orchestrated by him no doubt.
Thanks for your effort Church Militant. They did not look too credible. Perhaps others can substantiate and if so please do.
Satan, as we all know, is the master of deception so if these are indeed false, orchestrated by him no doubt.
K
katewithak
Guest
N
NiceFundamental
Guest
katewithak said:
Please do not think I supported or tried to provide proof for this position. I just provided links I found on a web search.
K
katewithak
Guest
I’m sorry. It’s just using a site such as postive atheism to back a claim about Catholics:
M
Michael_Francis
Guest
Let’s keep it charitable here people.
NF offered links she had found, which is more than other posters have done. The facts that CM was able to check them and refute them is what this thread is about.
I think perhaps CM’s question is well founded.
It is said that if a lie is repeated often enough and loudly enough, people will come to believe it.
NF offered links she had found, which is more than other posters have done. The facts that CM was able to check them and refute them is what this thread is about.
I think perhaps CM’s question is well founded.
Since that reference didn’t just sprout up out of a blank sheet of paper…someone created it.
It is said that if a lie is repeated often enough and loudly enough, people will come to believe it.
N
NiceFundamental
Guest
Here is a link to Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, second part of the second part, question 11, article 3, under the heading, “Whether heretics ought to be tolerated?”
ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/summa.SS_Q11_A3.html
From where the first quote originated from. Here one can determine context as well.
ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/summa.SS_Q11_A3.html
From where the first quote originated from. Here one can determine context as well.
N
NiceFundamental
Guest
Michael Francis:
I agree.
N
NiceFundamental
Guest
This link is from Christian Classics Ethereal Library at Calvin College.I’m sorry. It’s just using a site such as postive atheism to back a claim about Catholics:
N
NiceFundamental
Guest
I wasn’t trying to “back” any claim. Just provide links from a search of the quotes provided. That is all.I’m sorry. It’s just using a site such as postive atheism to back a claim about Catholics:
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
I Leatherman:
But he wasnt beaten up because of it - just quietly corrected, and the human side of the Church is continuously being corrected ever since, quietly or otherwise.
That does not alter the fact the the Church has supported, or taught, or condoned or done, a great deal of evil - not every wrong done by the Church can be disposed of by saying, “It wasn’t a doctrine”. Encouraging contempt of, or massacring, the Jews might not have been a doctrine - that does make it any less despicable, or any less wicked and opposed to the Will of Christ. If we try to defend our evildoing, we are in effect saying Christ was a murderer, or that Christ taught comtempt of others, or did or taught whatever evil we are trying to defend.
If Catholics don’t face up to these things, there is absolutely why we should be taken seriously when we make theological claims for the Church: because what we as human beings, and what we believe, and how we act, are not separable. That’s why the defence that “X was not a doctrine”, as well as ignoring the issue of the Church’s evildoing, is a failure: it makes an unrealistically tidy separation between three things that are distinct but not separable. ## When St.Peter hacked off the guards ear with a sword it was the human response of one of the first catholics of the time.But he wasnt beaten up because of it - just quietly corrected, and the human side of the Church is continuously being corrected ever since, quietly or otherwise.
- Status